… fully demonstrated by Jacob Cerone at ἐνθύμησις (Jonah 1:4c). Just the one clause!
Bravo! Write more!
Author: henry
-
Of Resources and and Mission Priorities
I received two requests for help today. One was from a pastor overseas. He didn’t ask for money. He asked for prayer. I happen to know he needs money. But his most earnest desire is that Jody and I pray for him.
I also got another request in the mail. It comes from an organization that does much good. They are raising money for a substantial building project that will make things more convenient, even much more convenient, for people in this country who are preparing to be missionaries. The amount is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, maybe a thousand times the amount that would relieve the pastor’s need.
What am I to do? I am not naming any organizations, because I don’t want to criticize them. I don’t know what the needs are or whether the kingdom will be built by this particular expenditure. But I do have to look at where I put my very limited resources. (In case you’re wondering, being in the Christian publishing business, at least in the manner in which I practice it, is not the road to great personal wealth!)
But it’s not just this particular project that concerns me. It’s the proportion of our resources that go to providing for our comfort, for making it easier for us to do whatever we do, as opposed to the amount we put where it’s needed. I think of this when I see large recreation centers attached to churches that are empty most days of the week. Now I understand the need for places for sports and social interaction. In fact, a great deal of ministry can be carried out by providing a place for young people. But I know of more than one church that closes its facilities to outsiders. They want to avoid “those people” getting in there and perhaps damaging things or causing an increase in their insurance rates.
I understand liability issues. I really do. But I don’t recall Jesus saying to do good to the least of these only when there was no risk. As a matter of fact, the gospels record that Jesus did it at a rather great risk. So many times we have facilities built that are just to entertain those who are already in the church.
Again, I understand that people need rest and recreation. The church does need to provide for its members. But the ultimate purpose of providing for members is building the kingdom, and that means getting those members to go out and serve others.
And so we come to church sanctuaries. In many churches the only use of the sanctuary is for a worship service on Sunday morning. That has to make it the most wasted piece of architecture around. One or two additional meetings a week may make it a little bit better, but it’s still underutilized space, space we pay a great deal of money to have.
This isn’t the complaint of someone who doesn’t appreciate church architecture. I really like a majestic church sanctuary. I enjoy being in it. I enjoy sitting in the pews. If it has stained glass, it’s even better. A pipe organ? I’m in ecstasy. Just play it and let me look at the windows.
But that’s the problem. I like it. It’s for me. The question is, just how much money should go to pipe organs and stained glass as opposed to feeding the hungry. I’m not saying we should put an end to all church music, or eliminate all church architecture, but what are the priorities? Where is the balance?
In doing ministry in southern Mexico in the 1960s, my parents lived in a building with rough concrete floors (just try to sweep them), with a tin roof and walls that were not solid, so rain could blow in. My dad was a doctor (MD), and my mother a registered nurse. They could have had a great deal more, if they’d chosen to go to work in Canada (their home) or in the United States. But most of the time they didn’t, and when they did, they sought underserved areas. There were many things they wanted that they could not have. My own life is not without its problems, but I keep comparing it to theirs. What were their priorities? What are mine?
I have had wonderful times of worship in fine church buildings, but I’ll never forget worshiping with a small Gypsy congregation in eastern Hungary on the first mission trip I led there. I was to speak. I had been a bit disoriented, because while I had been overseas before both as a child and young person with my parents and on mission trips, I had never been to a country where I couldn’t speak a word of the language. My Hungarian was such that the couple of words I had learned were potentially dangerous. I didn’t understand what people were saying.
The room was small, too small for the number of people. The floor was concrete. The building was not beautiful. They had a small electric keyboard that would have been discarded had it been in one of our churches here, or probably even in a home as a child’s toy. Someone started playing it, and the people started singing. I didn’t know the words, but I felt the Spirit that was in that place. In fact, I have rarely felt the presence of the Spirit more than in that particular meeting.
They didn’t need the things that we all think we “need.”
Do we?
-
Let’s Get Critical
It’s amazing to me how frequently we are do biblical criticism, but are not sufficiently critical in evaluating the results.
Now don’t take this as the complaint of someone who is afraid that biblical criticism will undermine the scriptures. I think the Bible can handle it. It’s not that I don’t think there will be issues. I just don’t think those issues are what the story is about, but that’s another post. I believe that we Christians can benefit from hearing the views of non-Christians about the meaning of our religious texts as well.
But it’s rather simply to find the holes in an existing theory, and much more difficult to build and defend a new one. The argument often becomes one of making a false dichotomy.
Take, for example, the authorship of the Pentateuch. I’m fairly thoroughly convinced by the nature of the text itself that the first five books of the Bible were not written by one man at one time, or even during one time period. I find the evidence for this quite convincing. Now I lean strongly toward a version of the documentary hypothesis, though my dating of the sources would be unorthodox. But I am much less certain of my beliefs about how the Pentateuch came to be than I am that it was not written by one person at one time.
Now I’ve heard the false dichotomy handled from both directions. Someone pokes a few holes in the documentary hypothesis—and heaven know there are holes to be poked—and then expects that one accept the alternative, authorship by Moses at one time. On the other hand, I’ve encountered people who poke a few holes in the singular authorship by Moses—and heaven know there are holes to be poked there too!—and then assumed that one would accept the documentary hypothesis as the only alternative.
But those are not the alternatives. One simple option is to question the sources and dates. There are plenty of options for dating the sources of the Pentateuch, if one accepts that there are sources. There are not just two alternatives.
My point is not to argue for some particular solution, but to point out that making the positive case for a particular solution is much more difficult.
Then we have the question of where we apply critical methodologies. Many people would have no problem considering how reliable a report of a battle from an Assyrian inscription or tablet was, but would not apply the same criteria to a story from Kings. There are Christians who would apply critical study to the Qur’an, but who would be very angry if the same methodology to the Bible. There are Muslims and Jews who find New Testament criticism very convincing, often heading straight to a minimalist or even mythicist position. But don’t go applying the same standards to the Qur’an or the Hebrew Bible. Then there are Christians who apply criticisms to evolutionary theory that no historical study, including the New Testament (resurrection anyone?) could possibly withstand.
This is natural and human. We tend to defend the things we believe. We even tend to defend the things we want to believe. But if we are going to claim to be critical—and I think that’s a good thing to be—then we need to be critical all the time. That will mean that many of the theories that we espouse must be espoused tentatively, with the knowledge that we could be wrong, and the expectation that in many cases we will be.
Can you apply a critical approach to the doctrines and beliefs of your own faith? Have you?
-
Your Heart Messing with How You Read Scripture
There’s a thought provoking post by Morgan Guyton (Mercy not Sacrifice) discussing this issue. While I have some problems with the interpretations proposed when considered from an historical point of view, as Christian application of scripture, I think this is a good thing.
We should not forget, however, that the scriptures came to violent people in violent times. What does that say about how we should interact with them? I recall recently disturbing a group of people by noting that in some cases when the Spirit of God came upon a person, that person killed a bunch of other people (Samson, Judges 15:14-17).
We don’t want the violence to guide our lives, which is a good thing, but what happened, happened. Even if the story of Samson is fictitious, or perhaps somewhat embellished, there was a time when the people of God thought that was encouraging stuff. And for those fighting the Philistines, I doubt the lesson was, “Let’s have sympathy for the Philistines. That’s a lesson we (should) learn later.
Though we haven’t.
-
Depending on Others and Understanding
I frequently encounter people who are afraid of depending on scholars for their knowledge of the Bible. I understand this fear. One thing that got me into studying biblical languages was the desire to know for myself, without having someone else translate.
But when I had learned the languages, I found that one had to depend, to some extent, on textual critics for the text. When I studied textual criticism (not to the extent of becoming an expert), I found that textual critics depend on people who preserve and transcribe manuscripts in many cases. It’s not possible for the individual student of the text to examine the original manuscript for every variant, though imaging is making this somewhat easier.
But in studying the language itself, the individual student is somewhat dependent on lexicographers, on those who have researched the history of the languages and relationships between various texts, on historians, and on and on. You just can’t get away from depending on someone else’s work.
Nonetheless, I still urge people to study for themselves, and not just accept the word of others about what a text or passage means.
The issue here is just where one places scholars and other sources in the process of study and in deciding what one believes.
In study groups, I’ll often ask someone: “What do you think this passage means?” Frequently, the person looks at the notes in their study Bible and reads that as the meaning. One lady took me aside and said that she was concerned. When she read the notes in her study Bible they didn’t make sense. She didn’t think the passage meant what the note said.
I said, “How can you be sure the note is right? Maybe you are right.” Then I suggested looking at notes from other study Bibles or from commentaries to compare. They might not agree, but they would give her ideas of how people had developed their understanding. This comparison of ideas would help her develop her own view and look at the logic behind it.
In another group I was asked to follow a particular book on Revelation in teaching the class, because the author of the book indicated that Revelation was really not that hard to understand and he had made the contents simple. He knew the key, so to speak. I had to tell them that I disagreed with the author of the suggested book at the most fundamental level, meaning that I disagreed with almost every conclusion in the book. Those conclusions I might agree with were accidental, as I came to my conclusions via different logic. But further, I had a shelf full of books on Revelation, most of which claim to have figured out the interpretation, and no two of which agreed. (I wrote a study guide to Revelation, for what it’s worth, but I don’t answer even a tiny fraction of the questions you’re likely to have. I probably just ask more!)
My point here is that while you are dependent on scholars and other Bible students, there are useful and profitable ways of using their work, while there are also unprofitable ways. It is unprofitable to simply accept the conclusions that someone comes to about scripture, and then say that it must be so because that person is an expert. No matter what the topic, you will likely find an expert who disagrees. That’s why scholars do so much footnoting when they write for one another. Scholars check each other’s work.
There are several ways you can use the work of others that will be profitable:
1) Check multiple sources from multiple perspectives. Many people use only study Bibles, commentaries, handbooks, and study guides written from their own (or their church’s) theological perspectives. Branch out. Sometimes the logic will become clearer when you see how two (or more) different views are derived.
2) Check recognized experts on topics for which you lack background. For example, if you know Greek and can look up sources in the literature, you can double check the work of lexicographers yourself. If you don’t know Greek, you’re going to be better off using standard lexical definitions (or people who do). Does this limit you? Yes, it does. I have come to the conclusion before, based on my own study, that the definitions in a lexicon were not adequate. But just because I came to that conclusion doesn’t make it so. If you can’t check my work, you should treat it with caution.
3) Check conclusions by comparing them with other expert opinions. Don’t go straight to the conclusion. Look for the logic. Various study Bibles will confidently assert widely varying dates for a book of the Bible, but how did the writers of the notes come to those conclusions? If you only use one study Bible you will not realize how the process works.
4) Check your own conclusions and thoughts by sharing them. Share both with peers and with those who may be able to correct you, such as pastors or teachers in the church. Listen to what they say in response. Sharing is a form of accountability. If you cannot make your view sound compelling to someone else, re-examine it carefully.
You are dependent on experts, but you can make that an asset, rather than a liability, by making expert use of your experts!
-
60-year-old Baseball Rookie
As I move on inexorably toward 60, I am encouraged by this. Of course, I couldn’t play baseball at 20, and won’t be able to at 60, but there are other things!
-
Greek and Ministry
Thomas Hudgins is teaching Greek, and he thinks students should study with the intention of actually using their Greek in ministry (HT: Dave Black).
I’m delighted to see more and more effort put into this type of teaching. I was very frustrated as a graduate student when I saw how students in the MDiv program were merely trying to get by in their Greek course. The structure of their course work helped foster this particular attitude, because basic Greek was largely an effort to get enough knowledge of the basic vocabulary and grammar to slip through the test so Greek could be ignored from there on. The same applied to Hebrew.
Since my undergraduate degree was in Biblical Languages, and I was in the academic MA program rather than the MDiv program, I got tapped to help tutor Greek students. (My undergraduate program involved the equivalent of five years of Greek, with two year-long courses taken simultaneously, as well as textual criticism.) These students would try to catch me a few hours before their tests so I could drill them on the things they would have to regurgitate on a test paper. They had no patience for any of my efforts to help them understand the material.
Starting with a mastery of grammar actually works well for me. I learn languages fairly easily, but more importantly, I was already convinced of the value before I started my first Greek class, and I was willing to put in the effort necessary to learn the language well enough so I could use it. But for someone who is not planning to specialize, the focus needs to be a bit different.
One of the major differences is simply attitude, both on the part of teacher and of student. Are we acquiring data in order to check off a box on our list of requirements, or are we acquiring a tool?
I think linguistic concepts should be introduced right at the beginning. How does language work? Why do you have a hard time with pronouncing certain sounds? How does etymology help you learn vocabulary, and how can that in turn lead you astray? How can you study deeply, yet share with the people in the pews or in Sunday School classes in a way that is accessible?
I like Dr. Hudgins’ approach and his brochure. I’m sure his students will be blessed. As Dave said, may his tribe increase!
-
Bruce Epperly on the Lectionary, Pentecost + 8 (C)
This is a very interesting Adventurous Lectionary.
-
Avoiding Self-Centered Hermeneutics
This shouldn’t be a surprise. We tend to interpret everything according to our vested interests. It’s no surprise that we do the same thing with the Bible. In churches, we tend to hear texts in ways that support our traditions. That, again, is not surprising. We are much more likely to interpret the Bible in ways that mean that we haven’t been wrong for generations.
How do we avoid this?
Well, I doubt we can completely avoid it. We can be aware of it. We can try to correct for it. We can do our best to examine our beliefs and our behavior openly. That’s better than not doing so. But we won’t become truly objective.
What I have suggested, and what I try to practice, is to always read any Bible passage first looking for things that correct and convict me. Only after I’ve aimed a Bible passage at myself can I aim it at others, if then.
Of course, I’m far from perfect. Even as I’m writing this I can think of people I wish would pay more attention to this issue.
And so it goes …
-
Next Steps on Hebrews Outline
I’ve been thinking about the Hebrews outlines, but not posting them. I’ve printed out a copy of my outline and translation and I plan to color code the text according to major themes that I see in the book of Hebrews. It will be interesting to see how well that works. One test of the major themes will be what the color coding looks like, I think.
I’ll post more on this soon.