Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Neil Armstrong Dies at 82

    The first man to set foot on the moon has died at the age of 82 (source). At the time of that first mission to the moon we didn’t have television, and we went to a friend’s place to watch the pictures.

    I was already a supporter of the space program (and back then very much involved in astronomy). I no longer have a telescope, but I’m still a strong supporter of the space program. I think we generally underestimate the value of doing basic science and pushing the boundaries of discovery and of the technology we have. The space program does both and I think it’s worth every cent.

     

  • Ken Schenck Reviews Wayne Grudem

    I’ve been following Ken Schenck’s review of Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology, and starting with the second post (Word of God), he is discussing material that I find fascinating. I am not trained as a theologian. Despite having an MA in Religion, I must note that my concentration was Biblical and Cognate Languages, and practically all my courses involved language study and not theology. But one can’t really discuss the Bible as a Christian and not deal with the theology involved.

    I should further note that I am obviously much more likely to agree with Ken Schenck than with Wayne Grudem. I’m somewhere around the Arminian territory in theology, not Calvinist if nothing else.

    After describing Grudem’s discussion of the Word of God as “anemic” and “implicitly circular” (and I agree), he continues to discussing the Old Testament Canon and then the New Testament. I’m skipping discussion of the nature of the Word of God, even though it is extremely interesting. Ken Schenck provides some excellent pointers to questions that need to be answered if one is to cure the anemia and escape the circularity. (I outline my views on this in my pamphlet What Is the Word of God?)

    There is a basic issue here that has troubled me for some time, and that is the starting point. I grew up with a form of evangelism that started by trying to convince people of the truth of the Bible, at least whenever we weren’t just assuming that people accepted the Bible as true already and just needed either to get busy following it, or needed to have their understanding corrected. There was a certain arrogance in the latter part of this approach; we always had to approach people as though they couldn’t really read and needed us to find the texts for them. (I refer to my early experience as a Seventh-day Adventist.)

    But my observation is that many Christians have precisely the same approach, and often have very little success. They can revive the belief of someone who grew up with it, but are very rarely successful at talking to someone who is truly not Christian in either background or belief about the authority of the Bible.

    But when the early church starts talking to people, I don’t hear anything about the authority of the Bible. Rather, I see testimony to their encounter with the risen Christ. In the modern church we try to convince people of the reliability of the Bible, and get them to believe in the resurrection based on that. The disciples testified to the resurrection and all else followed from that.

    I’m sure someone will object that we cannot possibly testify to the resurrection personally. But we can testify to our own experience of the risen Christ and to our own incorporation into the Body of Christ.

    So what does this have to do with the canon? I sponsored a panel discussion a few years back that related to the reliability of the Bible. Two members of the panel discussed the topic based on dealing with the reliability of the texts and their transmission. The third started with the church’s creeds. At first that was hard for me to follow.

    But it seems to me that it’s difficult to have a robust theology of canonization without having a robust ecclesiology, and in turn this requires a robust pneumatology. I admit to really disliking systematic theology, but it is obviously critical if you’re going to discuss the Bible as a Christian, because the Christian Bible is defined by the Christian church.

    Now I don’t mean that the church gets to choose what is in Scripture. That’s where the work of the Holy Spirit comes in. The church recognizes the things which are to be of authority in the church. Without that connection, there is no canon of Scripture, because the canon defines what has authority.

    So I would suggest the order of discussion being one’s personal experience of the risen Christ, then the way in which that personal experience brings one into the community, and from the community to the role of the Bible as the community’s authority.

    (I discuss this further in my book When People Speak for God and I recommend the discussion of the same topic in From Inspiration to Understanding, [Edward W. H. Vick] especially chapter 2.)

  • Yet Again The Voice and Italics

    I know I’m beating this topic to death, but I can’t help it. Really I can’t. Or at least I won’t.

    I was reading Hebrews today, and I ran into some interesting examples, both of positive and (in my opinion) negative uses of italics. Before I look at a couple of cases, however, I do really like the flow of this translation of Hebrews. For the most part they don’t get too wordy in trying to make the text clear in English, but they do clarify a number of points. Other than the standard problem with a clear translation–often the translators must make large numbers of interpretive decisions and then cut out the alternatives in their rendering–this translation is quite good.

    Now to the use of italics. In Hebrews 1:1, the word “Hebrew” is added before prophets. This seems to be quite a likely clarification. I do question the necessity. But in 1:13-14, the italics provide some valuable clarification of the text. After “at My right hand,” “in the seat of honor” is added. It is quite possible that modern readers may not recognize that  fact. Then in 14, beginning the answer to the question that opened verse 13, we have “No, of course not.” It’s clear from the context that the answer to the question is going to be “no,” but again, what might be missed is made explicit.

    But in chapter 2:2, we have a note that I believe is entirely unwarranted. Verse 2 reads:

    For if the words of instruction and inspiration brought by heaven’s messengers were valid, and if we live in a universe where sin and disobedience receive their just rewards, … (note: italics/non-italics reversed)

    I believe that this verse refers to the Mosaic law and to the punishments under it, which tradition held was mediated by angels, and not to general instruction and inspiration of angels and the nature of the universe. What we’re being prepared for is the idea that the punishment for rejecting the message of Jesus (“imprinted with God’s image”–The Voice) would be greater, not less than, the punishment for rejecting Torah, brought by angels to Moses.

    I’m guessing there’s a desire here not to accept the idea that the author of Hebrews might believe that the Torah was mediated by angels, since that is extra-biblical. But interpreting this otherwise loses some of the emphasis of the message the author is intending to convey.

    In summary, thus far I’ve found the use of italics in The Voice as inconsistent as it is in the various formal equivalence versions. There’s no bright line between words that are justified by the source text, and words that constitute additional explanation. Readers will differ on this point and it’s hard to be consistent and also appear to be consistent.

  • For Gospel Preachers

    Scot McKnight has some excellent advice.

  • Trouble at My Alma Mater – Walla Walla University

    Over the last few weeks I’ve been following events at my undergraduate alma mater, Walla Walla University, largely via the Spectrum Magazine blog, starting with the news that Pastor Alex Bryan of the Walla Walla University Church had been recommended as president by a search committee. Now it has been a number of years since I was a student at WWU and I don’t know the players personally. But as the story developed (you can follow it by using the search box at the link shown above and searching for either Bryan or McVay), various groups got together to campaign against Dr. Bryan, and the board, while considering him sound enough theologically to pastor the university church, decided they didn’t want him as president of the university.

    If I had been leaving the SDA church for personal reasons, this would have been one of them, “this” being the tendency of various small groups to get together to guarantee the total orthodoxy of all selections. My lifelong missionary parents even saw their membership blocked at a local SDA church.

    But wait a minute … I said “if”.

    The reason I bring this story up is as the backdrop for saying quite clearly: If you’re thinking of leaving your church for personal reasons (solely or even primarily), don’t!

    If I had left the SDA church for personal reasons, I would long since have found an equal number of reasons for leaving every church in which I have held membership since. The specific issues are different, but human nature remains the same. It is so easy to start a rumor campaign. One doesn’t even have to plan it. But when you add a little fear, such as people thinking “maybe our church won’t be the same as it always was,” and you can have a full campaign going before you know it. Fight it where you are, because it may well happen elsewhere.

    Perhaps this is why gossip is considered such a serious sin in Scripture. Paul often includes it with his “sin lists.” It’s right there in Romans 1:28-32, but for some reason I’ve never heard a sermon preached from that passage that concentrated on gossip as a sin. If we have any sin in the church that we refuse to give up and that we tolerate openly in contradiction to Scripture, I’d suggest gossip for the title. And just because gossip is spread through Facebook groups or on Twitter doesn’t make it any less gossip.

    But this is the other side of the coin. I said don’t leave your church if your reasons are personal, including this one. I’d suggest that one’s choice of a church home should be based on where you can carry out your call to ministry as a member of the body of Christ. All of us are called to ministry, and our faith community should be helping us carry out that call. You may have to leave a more gossipy church for a less gossipy one, assuming you can find one. But consider that God may be calling you to stay where you are and try to make things better.

    I have doctrinal disagreements with the SDA church that make it impossible for me to be a member. But I continue to be a member of a very imperfect church, just an imperfect church where God is working through the efforts of many imperfect people–like me.

    If we’d think more about service and less about our own comfort and safety, I think things would go much better.

  • Finding the Sound of the Bloody Cross Gospel

    Russell Moore looks at some comments by Pat Robertson. There’s everything here including a response to the prosperity gospel. Make sure to read right to the end. (HT: Unsettled Christianity.)

  • Permalink Problems

    Over the last 24 hours there was a problem with permalinks on this site, as in they didn’t work. I’ve fixed it now, so all individual posts are accessible. I apologize for any problems readers may have had.

     

  • Primary and Local Voting (Ramblings)

    I headed out to the polls today to vote in the primary. Since I’m registered independent, it was a short ballot, but nonetheless an important one.

    One of the things that bothers me in the discussion of politics is the extremely limited discussion of local campaigns and issues. The information available is always limited, and very few people seem to want to discuss it. My wife and I scour the web and then we each report our results to the other. But we both find the lack of information annoying.

    When the issues are only local, the turnout is also generally fairly low. Yet a great deal of the things that impact our lives are decided by these local bodies chosen by a tiny minority of the voters, many of whom are poorly informed.

    It was interesting to note that the local elections here got pretty dirty as well. We had a candidate for county commission in our district who had a DUI on his record from when he’d been quite young, and someone mailed out flyers to make sure we were all aware of it. Our race for Public Defender got pretty tense as well, with accusations and counter-accusations. Why on earth is a public defender elected in any case?

    As I approached the polling place, there was a forest of signs.

    Lots of political signs

    Is there some purpose to all these signs? Are people supposedly still making up there minds at this point? I suppose they are. And if they make up their minds based on these signs or the waving people at the polling place, could that be regarded as an informed vote?

    Some people speak and act as though the only important issue is the election of the president. But our constitutional system doesn’t give the president absolute power. What about congress?

    All our votes are important. The performace of our current government is the result of a Democratic president a Republican House of Representatives and a Democratic (but not filibuster proof) Senate. When you go to the polls you need to consider the performance of all those elements.

    I hope the people of this country will give serious consideration to their votes for people at all levels of government.

     

  • A Monopoly on Healing?

    I’m enjoying editing Bruce Epperly‘s new book, to be released this fall, Healing Marks. Here’s an excerpt:

    A Monopoly on Healing? Quite satisfied with their orthodoxy and ability to maintain the purity of Jesus’ healing ministry, the disciples come to Jesus with what they assume is good news: “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.” They expect a pat on the back for maintaining decency, order, and clarity in Jesus’ healing lineage. Imagine their surprise when the Healer retorts:

    “Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterwards to speak evil of me. 40Whoever is not against us is for us. 41For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.” – Mark 9:39-41

    The one who opened the floodgates to divine healing and hospitality to all people by welcoming sinners, social outcasts, diseased women, lepers, tax collectors, foreigners, and persons possessed by demons, adds one more scandalous footnote to his healing ministry, divine healing is not restricted to his direct followers or even to Christians. God wants everyone to live abundantly and will use any healthy means to bring us to well-being (page 138 in advance copies).

    Yep! I’m enjoying this …

  • Update on The Way Sunday School Class

    Philippians: A Participatory Study GuideWe’ve completed our study of Philippians using Bruce Epperly’s study guide (Philippians: A Participatory Study Guide). This is the second time I’ve taught Philippians using that guide, and I’d like to compare the two experiences. This will tell you something of the nature of the guide.

    The first time I used this, it was in advance copies, and with a class that was much more interested in the facts (or perhaps data) and discussing the theology of the book and how it applied. They appreciated substantial sections of the book, but were not interested in what I consider the main feature, which is the spiritual exercises/activities. I don’t mean this as a critique of that class–a class or small group can be formed for many purposes, and they definitely found enough of the material they were interested in the book and in the discussion questions. We ran out of time on every lesson.

    In the more recent study, the class group was much more interested in spirituality and spiritual disciplines. Members repeatedly commented on how they normally don’t like printed prayers, but that the prayers were exceptional and right on target. We used the prayers and the accompanying meditations or actions in every class session, even to the exclusion of time to complete all the questions. And if you’re being serious with this guide, you won’t have time to discuss everything that is offered.

    Used in this way it is a transformative study, and that is the greatest strength of this particular study guide. I really enjoyed working through the book myself.

    For those who may decide to use this guide I do recommend following the suggestions for readings. In several cases we read passages from The Voice during the time in class. One might use The Message instead (in fact, I still prefer it), but there was a good deal of discussion of The Voice online during the course of our class. But simply reading the passages from the different versions in class time often opened enlightening discussions and times of meditation.

    The Journey to the Undiscovered CountryWe’re taking a brief interlude now in this class before we start another Bible book. The group has chosen to read the new book by William Powell Tuck, The Journey to the Undiscovered Country. There will be an opportunity to let more people in the church know about our class and invite them to join us on August 26, and then we’ll start a new study, probably using Ephesians: A Participatory Study Guide by Bob Cornwall.

    Note: This class was formed with the intention to use the participatory method and guides and continue regularly studying Bible books and passages.