Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Quote of the Day: God’s Word and Our Words

    Creation: The Christian DoctrineI’m working on editing Creation: the Christian Doctrine by Edward W. H. Vick. It’s quite an enjoyable task. I regularly learn new things while reading Dr. Vick’s work. In this case he’s talking about knowledge of God. He has already contrasted this with knowledge of the natural universe. We, as finite creatures, cannot by normal means understand the transcendent. Only as God acts and reveals himself can we attain such knowledge.

    It is because God has expressed himself and continues to express himself that God is known. A clear distinction is to be made between the divine reality, the form by which God is expressed, and the knowledge human beings acquire of him.

    …

    So we, the human creatures, cannot by observation, sensation
    and deduction, arrive at a knowledge of God. We use such methods in our successful search for knowledge within the cosmos, but they are not the ways that we can come to a knowledge of God. But as God reveals himself and the Word is grasped, the human can understand the expression by which the revelation is made possible and expressed. We never transcend the limitations of our language, even in speaking of the revealing act of God. We are creatures and our language is anthropomorphic. But that does not mean that there are not poorer and better ways of using our language! The very use of language should remind us that God is transcendent.
    He is Creator. We are creatures. Without the Word, we would know nothing of the transcendent God.

    (Creation: The Christian Doctrine, pp. 54-55, forthcoming from Energion Publications.)

    Vick develops these ideas further in his earlier books History and Christian Faith (distributed by Energion) and From Inspiration to Understanding: Reading the Bible Seriously and Faithfully.

  • Witnessing and Friendship (Again)

    Some time back I wrote a post titled Witness without Being a Pest. There are a number of things that make Christians pests when they witness, but I think the most important is when we think witnessing is a separate activity that we “do” as opposed to something that happens when we live. If you take the name of Christ (Christian), then you are a witness. You might be a very bad witness. You might even be driving people away, but you can’t not witness.

    So when I caught wind of an article in Outreach titled My Jehovah’s Witness Broke Up with Me (HT: John Meunier), it drew my interest. I find the story and the article interesting and helpful, yet I can’t help but question certain things.

    These two men got together for the purpose of converting one another. Was it ever likely that this friendship would last? How much “friendship” is produced by questioning one another’s faith for an hour each week? I don’t have a problem with such discussions when both parties want to be involved. But when you meet for the purpose of changing someone’s religion, I think trouble is around the corner. One problem is that doubtless someone will eventually detect the fact that you are in the conversation to change their religion.

    Friendship can only be friendship when you’re not trying to get something out of it. I don’t mean the general mutual things friends do for one another. What I mean is a situation where one person is “friends” solely for the purpose of accomplish some goal. I suspect some Christians will object that in trying to change this other person’s religion, they are not trying to accomplish some personal goal. They’re trying to save the other person’s soul! It’s for their own good!

    This reminds me of a Bible study group I led during a time of disunity in the congregation. At one point members of the group were complaining how the people of the other party in the church put them down, questioned their salvation, whether they “had” the Holy Spirit (who on earth can “possess” the Holy Spirit?), and so forth. After listening to the complaints, I asked them if they had not, perhaps, done many of those same things to non-Christians they encountered. Everyone was very honest and acknowledged that they had done precisely that. I had to confess that myself. It was an important lesson to us.

    It’s not my job to save people. It’s simply my job to be a witness. Let God take care of the rest. If you’re getting nervous and thinking you have to push your friends into a decision, or if you feel that you need to make an end of an unfruitful friendship, then you need to do two things. First, check your motivation. If you find a friendship unfruitful, perhaps you were only there for what you could get. Second, check whether you truly trust God to do God’s work.

    Just be who you are (a Christian) and be a friend. Sometimes talk will happen. Sometimes it won’t. Somebody might express great interest in your faith, and then again they might not. It’s not your problem, and it shouldn’t change your friendship.

     

  • Have You Ever Crossed the Street?

    Crossing the StreetNo, I don’t mean this in the very literal sense, but either in the spiritual sense or in terms of affiliation. One of the defining experiences of my life involves crossing the street in this sense. I grew up as a Seventh-day Adventist. That involves quite a number of things, including keeping the Sabbath (Saturday) as a day of rest and worship, accepting certain ideas regarding the last days (eschatology), and rules for dressing, eating and drinking.

    In my case, I can easily see my life experience as multiple street-crossings. Most of my younger years were spent in the self-supporting organizations in Adventism. These formed, at the time, a sort of subculture within Adventism that was stricter in adherence to many of the teachings of the church. I moved from that to a more mainstream Adventism before I left the church entirely. I then spent time outside of any church and quite determined I would never be involved again. Finally, I found my way into a United Methodist congregation, where at first my feeling was that I had found a place of comfort. Then I got active and engaged in the work of the church again. Each of these experiences involved some aspect of “crossing the street.”

    Bob LaRochelle has just written an essay for Energion.net regarding the current controversy in the Catholic church regarding American sisters religious (nuns). It’s well worth checking out.

    I’m getting the crossing the street metaphor from a book my company recently published, titled—you guessed it!—Crossing the Street. That book, by Dr. Bob LaRochelle, describes his personal journey of crossing the street, moving from the Roman Catholic Church to the United Church of Christ. In it, he gives two reads of the metaphor “crossing the street.” The first is a negative one, in which one crosses the street to avoid what one believes is evil. “Don’t get too near the Catholics!” the protestant might say, or vice versa. But crossing the street can, as Bob makes clear, also be a positive experience.

    I have encountered the negative view of crossing the street many times in negative reactions to my own street crossing. Seventh-day Adventists find it hard to understand that I could leave their church. The more conservative of them regard me as an apostate, more to be avoided than even the ordinary non-believer. (To some SDAs, non-believers include most non-SDA Christians.) Others express understanding that I had problems with the church organization, but can’t imagine how I could have problems with the doctrines. Others assume that I’ve found a kinder, gentler organization in the United Methodist Church, and that must explain everything.

    Non-SDAs who know my background often wonder why I don’t go hammer and tongs against the horrible heresies perpetrated by the Adventist church. Surely I should use my extensive knowledge of Adventism (I’m a graduate of an SDA college with an MA from the graduate school at Andrews University, earned in conjunction with the SDA Theological Seminary) to rip apart all those wrong people.

    My approach is different. I value my experiences growing up as an SDA. I can reject certain elements of what I was taught without decided that the entire experience (or those I experienced it with) are horrible, without value, and not deserving of respect. In fact, I like to encourage SDAs to get into more dialog with the larger church and the larger church to get into dialog with them. There are things we can learn from the SDA experience. There are things they can learn from us.

    This street crossing is very much a part of who I am. It forms a lifelong defining experience.

    So when I got a proposal for a book titled Crossing the Street and discovered what it was about, I was excited. At the same time, I figured this experience would be different, because the author was moving from the Roman Catholic Church to mainline Protestantism. And, as I had learned thoroughly in growing up, there really is no organization less like the SDA Church than the Roman Catholic Church.

    Wrong! Bob’s experiences in crossing the street were very similar to my own. The authority issues in the Catholic church were similar to those I found in the SDA church. What was more, Bob had moved from the Catholic church to the United Church of Christ and still saw great value in his former tradition. Instead of seeing it as a change of sides in a war, he saw his move as a new opportunity to improve dialog.

    One of the things I like to emphasize to my SDA friends is that if you leave the SDA church, don’t do it because you think you’re going to find the perfect church, one without the problems in SDA churches. There are many things in the SDA church that I’ll criticize. I follow the news. I see some of the things being done currently, such as the rejection of the La Sierra University Choir by an SDA academy in Michigan, and they make me angry.

    But the United Methodist Church doesn’t get everything right either. Not even close! Many of these things are based on the same human emotions as those in the SDA or the Roman Catholic churches.

    I wish I had read Crossing the Street before I crossed the street. It wouldn’t have prevented the crossing, but it would have saved me time in terms of finding my balance. Yes, this book talks about a change from the Roman Catholic Church to the United Church of Christ, but it would have facilitated my own move from SDA to United Methodist just as well. In fact, I commend this to my SDA and ex-SDA friends as an example of a healthy attitude to take to such changes. I suspect that others will find similar help.

     

  • Free Copies of The Jesus Paradigm

    My company Energion Publications is offering five free copies of The Jesus Paradigm by David Alan Black. All you have to do is comment on the post and you’re on the list from which five recipients will be selected.

  • What Makes a Doctrine (of Creation) Christian?

    I put “of creation” in parentheses, because the question might be answered in similar ways for other doctrines. What follows is a short quote from a book, Creation: The Christian Doctrine by Edward W. H. Vick, my company is about to release. I’m doing a number of “final” things on it right now. This caught my eye.

    The Christian doctrine of creation is not simply an explanation of the origin of the universe. It holds that God is transcendent and free, that the creatures are contingent and free, that the ongoing world of history and events in the world are purposive, that within that human history the purpose of creation is being revealed, that the Redeemer is the Creator. It also teaches that the creation reaches its fulfilment at the end, at the eschaton.

    All statements of faith are statements about God and his activity.

    Christian statements about God are at the same time statements about Jesus Christ.

    The Christian doctrine of creation results from addressing these questions: What is the meaning and significance of Christian faith? How are we to understand that faith? What is entailed in the fellowship with God that constitutes Christian faith?

    Note that Dr. Vick continues in great detail. The whole book is a bit over 130 pages (it may vary by a page or two once formatting is complete), and is intended as a companion volume to Creation in Scripture by Herold Weiss.

    What do you think?

  • About Not Blogging

    I’ve been even more irregular than usual in my blogging over the last couple of months. My excuse is that my company, Energion Publications, has been going through a transition which has kept me incredibly busy.

    The transition is a good one. We were in a position to improve some of our equipment and tools and to add a couple of people as contractors to do some additional work. We now have a new copy editor, and we confidently expect great improvement in the editorial process as well as in final quality assurance. In addition, someone is working on Kindle conversions and will be moving to epub conversions for Nook, Google Editions, and the iBookstore. I had been trying to catch up with those, but with the production schedule, I was unable to do so. We saw the first release of the new Kindle editions yesterday, Rite of Passage for the Home and Church.

    New tools include this new laptop I’m using to post this, as well as an upgraded desktop. Both items were very essential, as their predecessors were getting very old. In terms of tools, while we’re still using open source software, such as OpenOffice, GIMP, and Scribus for some things, I now have InDesign and Photoshop available to speed the process in many cases. I’ll be posting something about working with these tools over on my computer services blog. Don’t get the idea that I dislike any of the open source options. For what they do, they are good, but anyone who has had to lay out entire books (with footnotes!) will know the benefits of InDesign, I suspect. We’ve had contractors who have these items. Now I have them on my desktop as well.

    My hope is that having both the tools and the people will give me time to work more on my own writing and also to blog more regularly. Speaking of which, I feel a couple of blog posts coming on.

     

  • Book Review: She’s Got Issues by Nicole Unice

    Note: You may be asking why a guy is reviewing this book. The reason is that I’m not. This post is a guest post from my wife Jody, who decided to review this book after seeing on the list from Tyndale Blog Network. I am crossposting it her from her Jody Along the Path blog as the Tyndale folk expect it to appear on my blog.

    Maybe we know we often create our own messes, so we assume we should clean them up. – Nicole Unice from She’s Got Issues (ISBN#: 1414365101)

    Wife, mother, ministry leader, and counselor, Nicole Unice brings her giftings, knowledge, and life experiences into a book that will peel you like an onion and reveal the source of your issues. It did mine.

    I frankly did not think I needed Mrs. Unice’s help. I am very aware of my issues but I also thought they were my “messes” and mine to clean up. And I have tried to do so for many years. It hasn’t been working very well for me so to continue with my present plan would seem like a definition in insanity.

    Whether through simple assessment questions or group discussion or her astute observations, the author took this “control freak” and spoke straight truth to me, much like I suspect Jesus did when He met various people along the path, looked straight into their hearts and answered, not the question they asked, but the question they needed to have answered.

    I laughed as I identified with many of those whose stories are related in this book which only made me dig in to learn what I could do to make a change in my life and come out in a different place than where I have been landing.

    Great book and I highly recommend it for all my fellow control-freaks!

  • In Which I Discover that I Am Not a Thinking Person

    I just made this discovery this morning.

    I mentioned Jerry Coyne’s site in an earlier post Five Sites I read Because I Disagree, and I still read it. I get some good information about evolutionary science and great cat pictures and videos. But Jerry Coyne is not particularly friendly to believers.

    Now I want to be clear. I’m not one to be terribly upset by vigorously expressed viewpoints, so I’m not offended by the new atheists. I’m more concerned with Christians who use excessive rhetoric. After all, we’re supposed to be on the same team. So the new atheists are proud and open about their atheism and their objections to religion, and I have no objection.

    So today I read Coyne’s latest on Bart Ehrman’s new book in which he presents evidence that Jesus existed. Now one has to be careful in stating Ehrman’s thesis. Ehrman doesn’t mean that the divine savior of the world of Christian doctrine existed. He means that there was a man Jesus who existed in history and about which certain things can be said with reasonable historical validity. (I haven’t yet read the book, but I think this much is clear from the reviews. Further, it’s an unsurprising thesis.)

    Coyne is concerned that people will misunderstand Ehrman, and that Christian believers will take comfort from the book. Coyne says, “I’m hoping he isn’t being deliberately ambiguous to cater to believers.” Probably not. Ehrman hasn’t really been known to cater to believers, though his book jackets seem to be designed to annoy them. Compared to the relatively tame content, the jackets manage to stand out as shocking. (I previously blogged through Misquoting Jesus [link to the summary and conclusion with links to the parts].)

    Then his penultimate sentence:

    But what is important, and all those Christians who buy the book should know this, is that both Ehrman and atheists see not a scintilla of evidence that Jesus was the son of God or divine in any way, was born of a virgin or resurrected, or is the way to salvation.

    Really? I would have thought that the important issue was whether Ehrman had done his historical work with any accuracy. Not having read the book yet, I can’t comment in detail, but I suspect he has. I can certainly understand his annoyance with the mythicists who use very poor historical methodology. I see the annoyance that Ehrman seems to be expressing as the the annoyance of a scholar at the use of unscholarly methods and approaches. Coyne would doubtless be quite annoyed were the methods of mythicists used in science. (See James McGrath on this issue–for example, Creationists, Mythicists, and Schroedinger’s Scholar Fallacy.)

    But then there’s the last sentence:

    That remains fiction to all thinking people.

    I am, of course, aware that Coyne regards this as fiction. I’m aware that Ehrman does as well. But that wasn’t the point of Ehrman’s book.

    It’s an interesting form of attack. If you think Jesus was divine in any way, then you are not a thinking person. Not You are a person whose thinking is faulty. Not even You are a thinking person who is mistaken on this point. If you disagree, you are just not a thinking person.

    I think Christians should be forthright and open about what they believe. But when I hear a Christian say something like “You have to be stupid to see the universe, and not believe in God,” I will tend to point out that there are definitely very intelligent atheists, those who are able to think clearly on issues about which we agree. Why would one assume they are suddenly stupid because they disagree on one point? My preference would be for one to simply say, “It is not sensible to assume that something came from nothing.” That may simply push the issue back a level, but it is an attack on the idea, and by implication on the person’s thinking in that particular area, but not an attack upon the person.

    But since I confess that I regard Jesus as divine, not to mention savior of the world, something that is not really an historical question as such, I guess I am not a thinking person.

    Oh well!