Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Christian Carnival CCLXII

    Welcome to Christian Carnival CCLXII.  I could always call this the “I’m too tired to think of a theme” edition, but I’m really just presenting the posts in order this time.

    There are several really good ones, so check them out.

    GP presents The Circle of Life « Manely Montana posted at Manely Montana, saying, “The circle of life”

    Travis presents Our Plans or His Purpose posted at Your Everyday Christian, saying, “Sometimes God’s purpose means changing our plans.”  (Oh no!  Hate it when that happens!)

    Roy Twogood Jr. presents About Plans and Planning… posted at OLIN e-Book e-Publishing.  He got a lesson from God on the subject and he’s passing it on!

    Ronnica presents I Trust You, Lord posted at Ignorant Historian.

    Chris Brooks presents A Non-Religious Case Against Same-Sex Marriage posted at Homeward Bound, saying, “An argument that same-sex marriage is unhealthy for our society that we can take into the public square.”

    ChristianPF presents How to be a Biblically responsible investor posted at Money in the Bible | Christian Personal Finance Blog, saying, “We are stewards and have a responsibility to invest in appropriate companies. These are some tips to help us…”

    Allen Scott presents Give me, Give me, and then give me Some More posted at Journey Across the Sky.

    Vickie Sloderbeck and Faith Janes presents Do Your Children Know Who You Really Are? posted at Sidetracked Moms.

    Josanne Anthony presents Dolls **some adult content** posted at Brilliant Babblings.  No, don’t worry.  We’re not starting to link to adult content, though the post does ask you just what you want to put in front of your pre-teen children.  On another blog, she presents Jesus Picks Up Pennies posted at The Radiant View.

    Diane R presents The Three Dialectics posted at Crossroads: Where Faith and Inquiry Meet, saying, “Adult Sunday School classes can use one of three dialectics. One should probably be ditched; one should be used at times and the third one is the one that will release the class from boredom and bridge the generations.”

    Richard H. Anderson presents Pyramid Scheme posted at dokeo kago grapho soi kratistos Theophilos.

    Andy Deane presents Pastor Andy Deane’s New Book – Learn to Study the Bible posted at How to Study the Bible – 40 Bible Study Methods!, which tells about a new book on how to study the Bible.

    Raffi Shahinian presents Stick Your Systematic Theologies… posted at parables of a prodigal world.

    Frances presents Two Questions posted at Christianity Lived Out, saying, “I would love some help answering two questions.”

    Bob MacDonald presents Is faith a leap? posted at Sufficiency, in which he discusses the relationship between faith and science.  On his other blog he presents Rarely Used Words in the Psalter – 17.  I must personally note that Bob’s work on the Psalter is well worth reading, though not for the faint of heart.

    David presents Intimacy With Christ, Taking Thoughts Captive, Day Two posted at TransformSA Blog, saying, “God Bless!”

    Annette presents True Woman – Reflecting God’s Glory posted at Fish and Cans.  Do you think of modesty of dress from a Biblical perspective?

    Chasing the Wind presents Walking Together posted at Chasing the Wind, saying, “What do the Pittsburgh Steelers and a good church have in common? Paul’s letter to the Thessalonians can teach us how to play nice together.”

    Danny presents What Do We Pray For? A Look at the Sermon on the Mount posted at Boston Bible Geeks, saying, “A short look at Matthew 7:7-11 in the context of the rest of the Sermon on the Mount.”

    Michelle presents Ephesians 5:22 – Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. posted at Thoughts and Confessions of a Girl Who Loves Jesus….  Oh no!  Taking on that long “s” word.  Check out what she has to say!

    Rani presents Jabez’s Prayer posted at Christ’s Bridge, saying, “Enjoy learning about an important person who only had two verses in the Bible.”

    Wickle presents The view from the rear posted at A True Believer’s Weblog, saying, “Wickle works as a graphics tech at his church, and loves to see the congregation at worship.”

    Mark Olson presents On Celibacy posted at Pseudo-Polymath, saying, “I’ve heard the phrase “celibacy is a calling which only few of us can answer.” I think this is exactly wrong. Celibacy is a universal Christian calling. Do you agree or not?”

    From Pastoral Musings we get Bibilical Manhood: Man The Crown of Creation, Not The All – A call for men to remember that humanity is God’s crowning work of Creation.  Man, the individual male, is not, but should be a servant-leader in his home.

    Weekend Fisher of  Heart, Mind, Soul, and Strength offers Grace over meals – for troubled times especially, an original prayer for grace in troubled times, based closely on the Sermon on the Mount.

    That concludes this edition. Submit your blog article to the next edition of christian carnival ii using our carnival submission form. For past posts, see the Christian Carnival Archive.

  • The Internet Monk is Believing Stuff

    … and not believing other stuff. I found his whole list pretty interesting and thought provoking. Check it out!

  • Epiphany 5B Preliminary Thoughts

    In trying to write these lectionary notes I have found that it is so much easier to get notes into my Bible margin, or on sticky notes marking the pages as I read, than it is to write them up for others.  I hope some of you will be patient enough to stick with me until I can get to the point of getting more of my thoughts actually posted.

    There were several things that struck me as “first thoughts” in my lectionary reading this week.

    1.  The focus seems to be on healing.  I even see healing as Jesus retreates for prayer (Mark 1:35ff).  Those who do the work of ministry need to rest and also receive ministry.

    2.   There is a time when even speaking the truth can be demonic.  Note how Jesus silences the demons in Mark 1:34, not because they are lying, but because they know him and are speaking at what is apparently the wrong time.  I would like to expand on this later if I have time.

    3.  Just because ministry is bustling in one place doesn’t mean we need to stay there.  In fact, our tendency is to stay with success until it stops being success and becomes just repetition.  We need to move on to other calls (Mark 1:38-39).

    4.  Healing and restoration go together.  Look at both Isaiah 40 and Psalm 147.

    5.  Some of the things Paul says he is willing to be in order to reach people are frightening!  (1 Corinthians 9:22).

    6.  It is because God is creator that he is also redeemer (Isaiah 40).

    7.  Why do you imagine that the demons reacted when Jesus showed up and those in need of healing flocked to him?  Jesus never seems to need any instroduction or hype–people just come to him.

     

  • Christian Carnival by Tonight

    I’m going to be posting it some time in the evening.  Thanks for all your submissions!

  • Review – Life Application Bible Studies: Acts

    I’ve had this booklet for some time and have been intending to review it.  Procrastination works, however, so it hasn’t risen to the top of the pile of things to write about until now.  That’s not because it isn’t interesting or useful–not at all!

    In fact, this book falls right into the center of my work–getting the folks in the pews to study the Bible more.  My short summary:  This is a valuable addition to the arsenal, and I hope the remainder of the Life Application Bible Studies are done in much the same mold.

    I always approach books with certain expectations.  It may be the person who recommended them, the author, the publisher, the series, or some other hint along the way.  In this case, I had high expectations because the study is based on the New Living Translation (NLT), and the Life Application Study Bible.  Now that combination is not exactly five star material for my personal study, as it is too direct in application, and too light on the detailed exegesis and theology for my personal taste.  But to judge it in that fashion would be wrong, as it does what it intends to do rather well, both in the translation and in the notes.

    The study guide includes all of the relevant material for the book of Acts.  While I like this material, I suspect this may actually be the least useful part of the study guide.  How can I say that after what I’ve just said?  Well, in my experience most class members have their own Bibles and they generally tend to want to use them.  This can be a bad thing, when the study group gets too scattered because of different notes used, or a very good thing as people get exposed to different ideas.  How valuable the included translation and notes are will depend on your particular group.

    The actual lessons and notes, however, are simply outstanding for a fairly average church group.  They tend to start simple and factual, and grow to more thoughtful and direct questions.  For example, in Acts 4 we go from asking what opposition the people of the early church experienced, to opposition that people you know have experienced, to the much more personal question 11 (p. 97) “When were you afraid to speak up for Christ?”  In the “MORE” section we get down to church unity with questions like how unified your church is, and what you can do.

    Because many of the questions can overwhelm the small group leader and the time for a small group, you will need to go through them and decide what you will emphasize.  There are suggestions for this in the introduction.

    Speaking as a person who has written Bible study guides, even though mine are aimed at a more theologically oriented study, I could easily see myself choosing this as a guide for a group that I would teach.  I recommend it highly.

  • They Really Do Believe the Earth is Stationary

    Occasionally when I mention “geocentricity” people will roll their eyes and let me know that nobody is believes that any more, nobody is that stupid, and comparing the rejection of overwhelming amounts of modern science in favor of young earth creationism with similar rejection of science by geocentrists is silly, because there aren’t any such people.

    I’ve previously linked to the Geocentricity web site to show that there really are such people. Yes, they do exist, and they really are just that far out.

    Today in the mail, however, I got further proof. Not only are they capable of producing web sites (using modern science to attempt to destroy it), but they are capable of producing and mailing brochures as well. I received a brochure titled “Have Scientists Been Wrong? For 400 years?” In the pamphlet they argue that “the mobility of the earth is the only place where science and the Bible have come into real conflict, and is the starting point for all churches that have compromised the authority of scripture.”

    Gotta love all that rejection of compromise! Can’t allow even one iota of fact to pervert our doctrinal systems!

    They even advertise a free book (one doubts very many people would pay for such drivel, but there it is–The Geocentric Bible–freely available to all with time to waste and a brain to fry.

    Here is your brain; here is your brain after reading the book through.

    (Imagine the pictures!)

    Question: Is this much more brain frying than Kurt Wise’s claim that he believes in young age creationism even though the evidence is against it because of his beliefs as to the literal understanding of Genesis? (See my notes on his book Faith, Form, and Time.) I’d like to think not, but it seems to me that with the young age view, he is flying pretty vigorously into the face of reams of scientific evidence.

  • Setting the Proper Priority for Tolerance as a Value

    Every so often I have a conversation with someone who knows I value tolerance that goes something like this:

    Q: So you believe in tolerance?
    Me: (Heroically resisting the urge to tear apart the phrase “believe in x”) Yes, I value tolerance.
    Q: But then you have to tolerate intolerant people.
    Me: No, actually I don’t.
    Q: But then you’re not really tolerant, because you don’t tolerate intolerant people.
    Me: (Resisting pointing out the difference between not being logically required to do something, and actually not doing it.) ….

    That one is easy to answer, simply because I don’t “believe in” tolerance as a type of absolute, but rather I value tolerance. One must, in addition, define tolerance, because many people seem to define tolerance as “believing everybody is equally correct” rather than something like “favoring freedom for people to hold ideas I regard as incorrect and take actions I think are stupid.” I mean something more like the latter. I value a broad range of tolerance. My value of tolerance, does not trump my value of private property, however, so I don’t favor toleration for stealing. It doesn’t trump my valuing of human life, so I don’t wish to tolerate murder.

    All that is pretty clear, I think. I think it’s good to find limits to tolerance in our values, i.e. to find out where tolerance stands in our scale of values, and to make sure that it is placed in the proper order. Personally, on the question of tolerating intolerance, while I do not feel logically impelled to tolerate intolerance, since I could treat it like murder, I do try to tolerate intolerant expression. I’m thus strongly opposed to government hate speech restrictions (private organizations can do as they wish), and I question a great deal of hate crimes legislation. Thus my tolerance protects certain people who are intolerant, but not others, depending on their actions.

    But there is another set of limits to our tolerance, ones that we may not even be aware of. I’m going to start by looking in church, and then take a look at Washington, D.C. In the United Methodist Church, I have found some very interesting limits on our tolerance. Now don’t get me wrong here. I’m not complaining of how I personally have been treated. I am noting how people have suggested others should be treated.

    We can, for example, tolerate people who are, by their own admission, either not Christian or barely Christian in United Methodist congregations I’ve known, and even let them teach. I hear occasionally about people who are too liberal feeling they are suppressed, but I also hear about many evangelical candidates for ministry who feel that they are being pushed out of that envelope of tolerance. It’s really a hard set of limits to see, but I get the distinct feeling that our candidacy program is not designed for boat rockers.

    I see much more clearly that while various theological views are tolerated, provided they are expressed in proper theological language by people with the proper credentials, certain types of behavior are much less tolerated. For example, you would get less reaction in some congregations if you said Jesus was not divine than if you raised your hands during a song in the worship service.

    As a sideline, I note that in my experience I can get by with saying things that my wife cannot. She is an RN (graduate of a three year program) author of three books, with 12 years experience in hospice care, ending as a director of education for a regional organization. I have an MA degree in religion (concentration–Biblical languages, which earns respect in many quarters!). If I were programming Sunday School classes, I would find more opportunities for her to teach than for me. There are more people who need her expertise. Yet she is heard much less, which is frankly a tragedy.

    But where I have seen a consistent lack of tolerance is for the charismatic movement. I can see this when I teach about different streams of Christian thought. Presbyterians and Baptists are fine. A bit weird, maybe, but they’re respectable neighbors. But mention Charismatics and Pentecostals, and resistance starts in. Aren’t those the crazy people who speak in tongues? I can feel the discomfort.

    The bottom line seems to be that we can tolerate any level of theological disagreement, but we can’t handle odd behavioral differences. We can’t tolerate being embarrassed. I think that is a line that we need to examine. Which is more important? Which is more substantial. The limits of our tolerance need to be chosen wisely, according to our values. If an embarrassing level of enthusiasm is really that important, then we need to be honest about it.

    There is plenty there for people to question, because I’m speaking subjectively. But I see this in Washington, D.C. all the time as well. What kind of behavior should we tolerate in a politician? In a nominee for cabinet or the courts? I think that our politicians are showing their partisan stripes. Remember that partisanship is not just displayed in opposition; it is also displayed in support, based on party, of something that one wouldn’t otherwise support.

    If we had a Republican president, would the Democratic Senate tend to respond in the same way to nominee problems? I’m guessing that we would have a reversal. Some Republicans and some Democrats would be consistent, but the proportions in each party would change. Tolerance, in that case, is based on party loyalty. We allow things in people of our own party that we would reject in the other one.

    We tend to respond most negatively to things that embarrass us. The embarrassment is more important than any moral or legal issue. Our tolerance is determined not by our values, but rather by what is socially acceptable in our own circle.

    While I value tolerance, I think that it can be extremely dangerous. It can, if it is not properly defined and positioned, provide me the excuse to allow things that I should not allow. At the same time since we all know, instinctively if not consciously, that tolerance can’t really be absolute, we have an alternative excuse to allow ourselves to be intolerant–when it suits us.

    Making the choice to be tolerant or not from anything other than a conscious, well-chosen set of values is dangerous to each of us, and to our society.

  • The Orthodox Study Bible: Wrap-Up (For the Moment)

    I received the Orthodox Study Bible free from Thomas Nelson in their blogger book review program, and as I have been using it in my personal devotions and study for my lectionary notes, (which notes have languished during a very busy period), I have already written about it substantially.

    But just what does it mean to “read” a study Bible.  Should it mean to read through it from cover to cover, to use it as you normally read a study Bible, or perhaps to read certain relevant portions?  I don’t know how Thomas Nelson will interpret this, and I have no intention to argue with them should they interpret it differently than I do–after all, they sent me a free book!–but I have chosen to take it in the second way.

    Now in using it in that fashion it would probably be another year or so before I would have read all of the book introductions and notes, at which point I would simply note that I have previously read the entire NKJV text of the Bible, which covers the New Testament, and I would have seen most of the Old Testament.  But such a long wait hardly serves the purpose of a review program either.

    Thus, having gone through a number of weeks worth of lectionary readings, sampled the translation in quite a number of areas and compared it to the text of Rahlf’s LXX (from which it is said to be translated in the case of the Old Testament), checked out the book introductions, and read the major articles, I’m going to write a review, and one which will be substantially longer than 200 words.  I’ll extract 200 words or so to post on Amazon.com, and then let the folks at Thomas Nelson know so they can respond as they will.

    Had this book lived up to my hopes, I would likely have been willing to read it through from cover to cover, just like an ordinary book, though presumably spending much longer.  My hopes were that there would be substantial quotations from the eastern church fathers and from Orthodox theologians, and that the translation of the Old Testament (I already was aware that the New Testament was NKJV) would also prove enlightening regarding the use and usefulness of the LXX in the life of the church.

    Unfortunately, I was disappointed, so that my use of the volume has become a duty rather than a joy.  I will link to my previous blogging about using this book at the end of my post, and will simply summarize here.  I’m going to start with the negative points, continue with the ordinary (though acceptable) ones, and end with the points I approved.

    Negatives:

    1. The translation.  I dislike the NKJV in the first place, but was trying to overcome that in light of the fact that the eastern church uses the Byzantine text.  Unfortunately, that proved to be more difficult than I thought.  In the New Testament, the NKJV is what it is, which is a fairly accurate, but not very engaging or readable translation.  I recall once when reading through Daniel in the NKJV (yes, I know I switched to OT, but it illustrates my point) that I actually consulted the Aramaic to discover just what was meant by an English phrase.  In the Old Testament, the translation itself does not improve, even though there was work to bring it into agreement with the LXX.  The quality is variable and wooden.  It reads approximately like an exercise by 2nd year students of Biblical Greek.  I’m sure there were many much more highly skilled persons involved, but somehow the translation style doesn’t reflect it.  It’s not that they were inaccurate in undestanding the Greek.  Rather, they appear afraid to actually write down the result in English.
    2. The verse-by-verse notes.  These are not entirely bad, but rather so variable, that one does not know what to expect.  One might find an enlightening note from a church father, or an extremely inane summary of the text in question.  I provide examples in one of my prior blog posts, all linked below.

    Ordinary things:

    1. The book introductions.  These are not bad, but are not precisely exciting.  I think they are mostly adequate given the space constraints.  At the same time, I am very glad that this is not my only study Bible, because there is simply too much missed.  I would note that while I personally want access to modern critical study, I am not criticizing this volume for a lack of that material.  I can get that elsewhere.  It’s in developing theological themes that I think these introductions could be improved.
    2. The general layout.  This is pretty good, but could well be improved in order to better use space and to make notes more easily related to the content.  I did appreciate the liturgical material in the inset notes.

    Positive:

    1. The christological focus.  Some might quibble that this could occur in a much better volume, and so it could.  But the western churches, especially protestant churches, often tend to see Christ in the Old Testament primarily as a chain of fulfilled prophecies.  I really appreciate the distinctively Christological understanding of scripture, even where I actually disagree with it.  This emphasis is quite clear in the essay “HOW TO READ THE BIBLE”, which starts on page 1757 and particularly in the section subheaded “Christ, the Heart of the Bible” that starts on page 1763.  This also shows in the notes from time to time.
    2. The liturgical references in articles and notes.  Where these are present, they are very helpful to me.
    3. The organization of the books.  It’s hard to get a picture of the Bible of the eastern church from western study Bibles that include the apocrypha, such as the New Oxford Annotated Bible, because the material is scattered.  The book order does have an impact on how the Bible is read.  The organization here is a genuine product of church history and the eastern communion.

    I think I have made enough specific points, and if you want particular examples, you will find them in my linked posts below.  There is much promise in the idea behind this Bible, and part of my negative reaction is due to excessively high expectations which were not met.  At the same time, I cannot honestly recommend this Bible, unless one looks at the negatives and decides that those are worth enduring for the positives.

    Here are my previous posts regarding the Orthodox Study Bible, one of which is on a different blog:

  • Christian Carnival CCLXII Coming Here!

    Neither does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but rather puts it on a lamp stand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.  In this way let your light shine before people, so they can see your good deeds, and give glory to your Father who is in heaven. — Matthew 5:15-16

    So why not submit your best post for the last week (since last Tuesday at midnight) and let your light shine?

    Here are the basics:

    I’m hosting this week, and I’m looking forward to your entries.

  • Today at the John Webb Winter Golf Tournament

    I will be spending most of the day at the golf tournament, or doing preparation or cleaning up. As I have time, I will tweet from there or do a little live blogging, and even possibly post some pictures.

    We’re raising money for the child life program at Sacred Heart Hospital here in Pensacola. Check it out!