Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Peter Kirk on Bible Deists

    Peter Kirk has an interesting post on Bible Deists, those who believe that God spoke only through the Bible and has basically been out of touch in the intervening time. He quotes extensively from Jack Deere’s Surprised by the Voice of God. Deere makes many of these points.

    One of the elements I emphasize in the participatory Bible study method is the importance of prayer and listening to the Holy Spirit (See the pamphlet I Want to Study the Bible!). In addition, I emphasize the importance of continuing revelation and the broader nature of the word of God as God’s expressed will throughout creation (What is the Word of God? and Seven Barriers to Hearing the Word).

    Peter Kirk makes some excellent points in his post, and I recommend reading it. One can indeed stray from hearing the God of scripture in either direction–fundamentalist or scholarly.

  • Isaiah 24

    I used Isaiah 24-27 over on Threads from Henry’s Web as an illustration for use of the various critical tools. In addition, current events in the middle east have predictably started a great deal of discussion of end time events, and of apocalyptic literature.

    As I discussed in those earlier posts, many see Isaiah 24-27 as a sort of mini-apocalypse. If one looks at related literature, I would suggest it is quite logical to see these chapters as an early form. As we go through them, we will see many elements that are alluded to in later literature. It will be helpful to use these chapters as a starting point for understanding the various Biblical passages related to the end-times.

    Chapter 24 Composition

    I’m going to be brief in discussing the critical issues in each chapter, both because I discussed the critical tools earlier, and because I prefer to get to exposition as quickly as possible. For more information on critical issues, I suggest Isaiah by Brevard Childs as a balanced approach.

    Chapter 24 is in two basic sections: 1-13, which is an oracle of judgment, and 14-23, which is a prophetic disputation. In this, I’m accepting both the traditional division of the chapter, and the particular analysis of Seitz as cited by Childs (op cit). These identifications should suggest something about how we understand the passage. Grabbing any single verse, for example, could be dangerous. In the judgment oracle, we are getting only one part of the picture. We will have promises of blessing in later pictures. No single element gives the complete picture. In 14-23, we have a dispute, so we have two views. The question that is asked poetically is this: Is God really going to do this?

    Draft Translation

    So here is my draft translation with some commentary. Note that this is a draft translation. I use it to hang comments. You should always study from a translation produced by a committee to avoid theological biases–even or especially my theological biases–or simple errors.

    Isaiah 24

    1Take note! YHWH is devastating the land,
    and laying it waste.
    He twists it,
    and scatters those who live there.

    Note carefully that the starting point here is a clear statement that God is the one who is bringing judgment. We will discuss why God is bringing judgment as this section of Isaiah (24-27) goes forward, but there is no attempt to pretend that there is any other cause for the destruction. God’s sovereignty is strongly affirmed in apocalyptic literature, as in prophetic literature generally. At the end of the chapter we’ll see this again, as our author or redactor regards “God is going to judge” as a sufficient answer to the question of whether anything good can really come out of the destruction.

    I’m translating Hebrew ‘erets as “land” throughout. While I think there is a broader focus, the starting point of the imagery is the destruction of Judah. Other lands are brought in, but we are not talking cosmic destruction of earth as a planet here, but the devastation of inhabited countries.

    I will use color coding to indicate allusions to this passage in other apocalyptic literature, with red text indicating an allusion as indicated in the UBS IV Greek New Testament, and blue text indicating concepts that I believe appear in later literature.

    2Here’s how it’s going to be:
    As with the people, so with the priests;
    As with the servant, so with his master;
    As with the maid, so with her mistress;
    As with the buyer, so with the seller;
    As with the creditor, so with the debtor;
    As with the one who receives interest, so with the one who pays.
    3The land will be completely deserted,
    Totally plundered!
    For YHWH has given his word.

    The destruction is nationwide and indiscriminate. One of the regular questions about God’s judgment was asked by Abraham with reference to Sodom and Gommohra: Will you truly sweep away the righteous with the wicked (Genesis 18:23)?

    The answer in this case is yes, and at the end of verse three we have the reaffirmation that YHWH is the one who is doing all of this.

    4The land decays mournfully!
    The land dries and dwindles!
    Those who were important diminish.
    5The land is defiled under the rule of those who live there.
    Because they have violated the covenant,
    Altered the statutes,
    Put aside the eternal covenant.
    6That’s why a curse has consumed the land,
    Those who live there have felt their guilt,
    That’s why those who live in the land are burned up,
    And those remaining are few.

    Note the beginning of verse 6: “That’s why a curse has consumed the land.” The author doesn’t have a problem with regarding judgment as an act of God and at the same time the result of the actions of the people that bring an inevitable curse upon them.

    7The new wine is crying,
    The grapevine is withered,
    Even joyful people are sighing.
    8The joyful sound of timbrels stops.
    The sound of those who shout for joy ceases.
    The harp’s joyful sound cuts off.     [Revelation 18:22]
    9No one sings as they drink wine.
    The beer is bitter to those who drink it.
    10The deserted city is shattered,
    All the doors are and windows are barred.
    11In the streets people mourn over their wine.
    All joy becomes dark,
    The land’s mirth is gone.
    12What remains in the city is desolation,
    Destruction has smitten the gate.
    13For this is the way it will be
    in the midst of the land,
    among the people:
    Like shaking an olive tree, [Revelation 6:13, though the allusion is weak]
    Like the gleanings when the grape-harvest is over.
    [The “time of trouble” or tribulation.]

    The oracle of judgment is unrelievedly bitter, and does not make any promise of restoration or blessing. The start of this scenario is dark.

    Now we come to the prophetic dispute. To clarify what’s going on, I’m going to put one side of the dispute in normal text, and the other in italics.

    14These will raise their voice!
    They will shout!
    At YHWH’s majesty they will cry out from the sea!
    15So glorify YHWH in the east,
    Among the islands of the sea the name of YHWH.
    16From the farthest parts of the earth we hear songs.
    Splendour to the righteous!
    But I said, I’m vanishing! I’m vanishing! Woe!
    The treacherous have dealt treacherously;
    Indeed, the treacherous have dealt very treacherously.
    17Terror! The pit! The Snare!
    They’re all after you!
    18Here’s what’s going to happen:
    One who flees from the fearful sound will fall into the pit.
    And the one who comes up out of the pit will be caught in the same.
    For the windows in the heights are open,
    and the foundations of the earth tremble.
    [Looks back to the fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven in the flood, Genesis 7:11]
    19The land is completely shattered.
    It’s totally wiped out!
    It has been shaken vigorouoshly.
    20The land will stagger like a drunkard.
    It will sway back and forth like a temporary shelter.
    Its trangression will lie heavy on it.
    It will fall, and won’t rise again.

    21This is what will happen that day:
    YHWH will punish the high host in heaven,
    And also the kings on the land.
    22And they will be gathered together
    as prisoners are gathered together in the pit.
    They will be locked up in prison.
    [Devil bound for the thousand years, Revelation 20:1-3]
    And they will be punished many days later.
    [End of the millenium, Revelation 20:7-10]
    23Then the moon shall be abashed,
    and the sun ashamed,
    for YWHW of hosts will rule in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem,
    And glory will be before his elders. [Revelation 4:4]

    As we move forward through chapters 24-27 we will see more types of literature, but already we have at least two concepts that are common in apocalyptic. These are the starting point of divine judgment and the expectation of ultimate resolution by God. The final verses of chapter 24 serve to emphasize the inevitability of God’s final victory by framing it as part of a dispute.

  • What the Greek Really Says

    There’s a moment in sermons that makes me cringe and my wife grin. She kind of enjoys seeing me squirm.

    What is this important moment? It’s when a pastor says, “What the Greek really says is . . .” Sometimes it’s worded a bit differently, but I believe that when you hear or read that phrase or something similar, the vast majority of the time you’re about to get misinformed. This week our pastor used the phrase “knowingly and with full intent” just to get the laugh out of us, which is all in good fun.

    There are several reasons for this. First, most pastors are not well enough trained in Greek or Hebrew to make such a statement with confidence. Unfortunately, this is often also true about writers who are not specialists in the language. I have found significant errors–not differences of opinion, but demonstrable errors–in books written by famous writers and published by well-known publishing houses. In one book I found a case where a Hebrew word was cited, and not only was the definition or the suggested glosses (English words suggested to translate it) questionable, but the word itself was simply not in the verse in question.

    (more…)

  • Literal Belief is not the Only Belief

    Newsweek currently has an interview with Tim LaHaye in which he discusses current events in the middle east and their relationship to the end times. I find myself in pretty nearly complete disagreement with LaHaye on his interpretation of Revelation, but that should be no surprise to anyone. But he emphasizes one point in his interview that I think needs to be examined, and that’s the attempt to interpret things literally whenever possible.

    When the interviewer asks him about Biblical scholars who might disagree with his viewpoint, he says:

    These are usually liberal theologians that don’t believe the Bible literally.

    When asked whether Revelation should be interpreted as a polemic against Rome, he says:

    That’s what they say. We believe that the Bible should be understood literally whenever possible. [Emphasis in original.]

    Asked about support for Israel amongst Christians, he says:

    I think those two things are related. Christians who take the Bible literally are generally supportive of Israel because God promises to bless those nations that are a blessing to Israel and curse those nations that are not. And the history of America bears that out.

    It is clear that he regards the issue of whether one interprets the Bible literally as of central importance. I agree with him. But literal vs. non-literal is only one way of dividing Biblical interpreters, and he is not correct in suggesting that it is mostly liberals who would disagree with his position. There are, in fact, numerous interpretations of Revelation that are supported by people who take a very conservative view of the inspiration of the Bible, and many of these are directly contradictory to LaHaye’s interpretation.

    (more…)

  • 1 Corinthians 14

    (Note:  Restored post 8/28/2010.  I’m not sure when part of it was lost, but presumably during a database upgrade.)

    1Pursue love. Be zealous about spiritual things, but even more that you might prophesy.

    Greek pneumatika (pneumatika) = spiritual things.

    Again I suggest “spiritual things”? or “spirituality.”? A thought by thought translation would be:

    “Pursue love, strive for spirituality, but especially that you may prophesy.”?

    One may object that “prophesy”? moves from the general (spiritual gifts) to the specific and thus completes a sequence, but since “love”? begins the sequence I don’t think that is Paul’s point at all. He has just said that love is the greatest gift and he has pointed out that the presence of spiritual gifts do not successfully distinguish the spiritual person (13:1-3). He has proceeded to point out visible characteristics which distinguish love (13:4-7). He then points out the limitations of gifts and knowledge in showing true maturity and places love at the top of the list. I believe it is at the top of the list in helping to discern who is the spiritually mature person.

    Then in chapter 14, he illustrates using spiritual gifts. You need to pursue spirituality, he is saying, but spirituality in itself will show nothing. What one needs to do is pursue the gifts that build, and he uses prophecy as the key example gift in his point. Note that he doesn’t compare it to other gifts in general; he compares it to another “speaking”? gift in order to show how one discerns the spiritually mature person. The spiritually mature person is the one who uses the gifts to build the church because that is the way that love (which we are to pursue) would behave.

    2For the person who speaks in a tongue doesn’t speak to people, but to God, because nobody can understand. Rather, he speaks mysteries in the Spirit. 3But the person who prophesies speaks words that build, encourage, and console.

    Verses 2 & 3 establish the contrast between tongues and prophecy, but Paul is not solely intent on comparing these gifts, but on applying the love principles of chapter 13 to discerning spirituality. Tongues is personal and does not build up the church as a whole. Prophecy builds, encourages and consoles.

    Since he has established already that love is not just above prophecy, but is actually of a completely different order, he will now show how prophecy (or any other gift properly used) can be used in such a way as to conform to and produce love, and thus be a “greater”? (12:31) gift.

    4The person who speaks in a tongue builds himself up, but the one who prophesies builds the church.

    Verse 4 now makes this explicit. Tongues build up the individual; prophecy builds the church. The body metaphor in 12:12-26 has shown that building the whole body is the better plan.

    5I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you could prophesy, because the one who prophesies is greater than the one speaking in tongues, unless there is someone to interpret, so that the church can receive a constructive (building) message.

    6But now, brothers and sisters, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what good is it to you unless I speak some revelation, or knowledge, or prophecy, or teaching? 7Similarly, when musical instruments are played, whether a flute or a harp, how can one distinguish what is being played unless the notes are played distinctly? 8For if the trumpet gives an uncertain sound, who will prepare for war? 9Thus also in your case, when you speak in a tongue that is not intelligible, how can anyone understand what is said? You’re speaking to the air!
    10There are many different sounds in the world, and none of them are without some intent.

    Greek afwnon (aphonon) = without sound

    There is some controversy over translation of verse 10. I suggest the REB: “There are any number of different languages in the world; nowhere is without language.”? Or the CEV: “There are many different languages in the world, and all of them make sense.”? I think the CEV translation can be justified if you compare it to 12:2, and see it as a link between the introduction to chapter 12 and the discussion in chapter 14.

    11So if I don’t understand the intent of the sound, I will be a barbarian to the one speaking and the one speaking will be like a barbarian to me. 12It’s the same way in your case, since you are zealous for spiritual things, aim to grow in a way that builds up the church.

    Greek zhlwtai (zelotai) = those who strive, cf 12:31.
    “You are, I know, eager for gifts of the Spirit; then aspire above all to excel in those which build up the church”? (REB)
    “If you really want spiritual gifts, choose the ones that will be most helpful to the church.”? (CEV)

    13So let the one who speaks in tongues pray that he might interpret. 14For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is not fruitful. 15So what shall I do? I will pray in the (my) spirit, but I will also pray in my mind. I will sing in the (my) spirit, but I will also sing with my mind. 16Because if you praising in the spirit, how will the one who doesn’t know what’s going on be able to say, “Amen!” to the praise, since he doesn’t know what you’ve said? 17You may have been praising quite well, but the other person is not built up. 18I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.

    Compare the CEV translation for 16 & 17: “Suppose some strangers are in your worship service, when you are praising God with your spirit. If they don’t understand you, how will they know to say, ‘Amen’? (17) You may be worshiping God in a wonderful way, but no one else will be helped.”?

    This translation catches the strong contrast Paul is making between spirituality which is for yourself and that which is designed to build the body.

    Paul acknowledges the gift of tongues and some value in personal spiritual life, but subordinates it to the building activities which are the theme of chapter 14. The building activities are the manifestation of love through the characteristics given in 13:4-7. In particular love does not seek its own way, so how could it be zealously seeking greater gifts? How could it tell what were the greater gifts except in terms of how they build others?

    19But in the church I would rather say five words with my mind, so that others could lean, than 10,000 words in a tongue.

    20Brothers and sisters, Don’t be children in your thinking, but be babes in terms of evil; with your minds be mature.

    Greek paidia ginesqe (paidia ginesthe) = become childish
    Greek nhpiazete (nepiazete) = act like children

    21It is written in the law:

    In other tongues
    and with other sounds
    I will speak to this people
    And thus they will not listen to me,
    says the Lord. 22Thus tongues are a sign not to those who believe, but to those who do not believe, but prophecy is a sign not to the unbelievers, but to the believers. 23If then the whole congregation comes together, and all of you speak in tongues, and someone unacquainted with you, or an unbeliever comes in, won’t he say that you are crazy? 24But if you are all prophesying, and an unbeliever or a person unacquainted with you comes in, he’ll be rebuked by all and examined by all, 25the hidden things of his heart will become open, and thus he will fall on his face and worship God, proclaiming, “Surely God is among you!”

    Isaiah 28:11 & 12. In order to follow Paul’s logic I think it is necessary to follow Isaiah’s logic. Isaiah says that God will speak in nonsense syllables to those who are unwilling to obey. These nonsense syllables will lead the people to “go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.”? This is followed by the admonition to hear the word of the Lord. Isaiah is presenting this speaking in a foreign or incomprehensible language as something done to the disobedient or unfaithful, not to the faithful.

    In fact, to make sense of Paul’s use of this passage, we need to see a bit of a play on words in the Greek.

    “So tongues are a sign not to those who are believing (pisteuousin) but to the faithless (apistois) and prophecy not to the faithless, but to those who are believing.”? The present participle here should be taken with a strong continuous element, to include “those who are coming to believe.”?

    Compare, however, the more detailed discussion by Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT) on this passage.

    (Verse 24) Greek apistoi (apistoi) = faithless or unbelievers

    Here Paul switches on us the focus of apistoi from those who are faithless in receiving the message to those who simply lack belief, or the seeker. I consider this shift of focus to be the weakest point in my exegesis of verses 21-23, but it seems to me still the best explanation of a very difficult passage which has caused commentators to spill barrels of ink. I think the logic is no more difficult than Isaiah’s “God’s going to talk to you in foreign languages so you can’t understand, so listen!”?

    Words which apply will confirm to the listener that God is present. This will lead to conviction and change.

    Paul now distinguishes between different ways of using even those gifts he has already identified as positive and building.

    26So what then, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a psalm, a teaching, a revelation, something in a tongue, an interpretation. Let everything be done for building!

    Greek: oikodomhn (oikodomen) = building, a key word in Paul’s argument in chapter 14.

    Some may have been wondering what to do about interpretation of tongues. If tongues are only for private use as Paul seems to be indicating above, then what is interpretation for? I believe this reinforces my hypothesis that Paul is not just talking about tongues and prophecy in this chapter; rather, he is taking prophecy as an example of a building gift, and tongues (without interpretation) as a personal gift. When one uses the gift of tongues (without interpretation) in a public place (where it doesn’t belong) that is simply pride and not building. Starting with verse 27 Paul apparently includes tongues with interpretation as a building gift.

    We also find an occasion when prophecy is not a building gift, i.e. when it is self-seeking prophecy. To be building, any gift must be used in a way such that the gifted person “insist on its own way.”?

    I find an additional point of interest in verse 26. In the modern church we use this chapter as a corrective to disorderly conduct in the church congregation. But this verse shows that we aren’t dealing with the same problem in most modern churches as they were in Corinth. Most Sunday mornings we don’t have people showing up at church bubbling over with what they have heard from the Lord during the week. Generally we come not with psalms, songs, or messages from the Lord but with a desire to relax in a comfortable seat and let someone else do all the work. We should wish we could have the problems of Corinth!!

    27If someone speaks in a tongue, let them do it by turn, two or at the most three, and let one interpret. 28But if there is no interpreter, let that person keep silent in the congregation, and let him speak to God by himself.

    This principle of building is illustrated in verses 27 and 28. If there is interpretation, there will be building, and it’s alright to use it. If not, keep silent. This basic principle is the touchstone. Paul says to “pursue love”? in 14:1, and then establishes the visible test of whether one is pursuing love as the “building”? test. Those pursuing love build.

    29As for prophets, let two or three speak, and let the others discern. 30But if something is revealed to another who is sitting down, the first one needs to stop speaking.

    Again, prophecy can be abused just as tongues can. If prophecy is presented in such a way that it doesn’t build up the church, then it too is not in accordance with love.

    31For you can all prophesy one by one, so that everyone can learn and be encouraged. 32And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33For there is no rebellion with God, but rather peace.

    Verse 31 challenges the common view that when the prophet has a message from God he or she cannot hold back, but must speak it out immediately. There are those who hold that this verse means that prophecies should be judged by other prophets. Some carry this further to suggest that those who are not prophets cannot “discern”? prophecy. In fact what Paul is saying is that each prophet has control of how he or she uses that gift. You are not forced to do disorderly things by the Holy Spirit. Again, the building test is used to discern love in action.

    As in all the churches of the saints, 34Let the women be silent in the congregation. For it is not appropriate for them to speak, but rather to be in submission, just as the law says. 35And if women want to learn, let each ask her own husband at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in the congregation. 36 (Or did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it’s gotten to?)

    The issue here is order again. This is a case when wives ask questions of husbands while the church service is going on and not a matter of whether or not a woman could speak in the normal order of service. I suspect that women were also not a normal part of the Corinthian church service, but that only establishes the situation of the Corinthian church. The principle involved, as demonstrated in verse 35, is one of order leading to building.

    Gordon Fee (op cit), on the other hand, believes that this passage is an interpolation, and he has some fairly substantive arguments in favor of his position.

    37If anyone claims to be a prophet or a spiritual person, he should acknowledge the things I am writing, because they are a command of the Lord. 38And if anyone ignores it, let him be ignored! 39So, my brothers and sisters, be zealous to prophesy, and don’t forbid speaking in tongues. 40Let everything be done properly and in good order.

    Since Paul is speaking under the guidance of the Spirit it is natural that he would expect others speaking under the Spirit’s guidance to agree with him.

  • Notes on 1 Corinthians 13

    Chapter 13 is placed between 12 and 14 to show the better way, specifically that one doesn’t discern the presence of the Holy Spirit by the visible manifestation or by the level of power that is displayed, but by way in which those gifts are controlled by the Holy Spirit. I’ve used a red font for the names of gifts or any items closely related to gifts of the Spirit. (I’m treating “give away all my possessions”? as a form of assistance.) Chapter 14 will explicitly apply the principle of love to how one manages the worship service.

    1If I speak in languages both human and angelic, but do not have love, I have become like a clanging gong or a clashing cymbal. 2And if I have the gift of prophecy, and know every mystery and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so that I can remove mountains, but have no love, I am nothing. 3And if I give up all my possessions and hand over my body so I can boast, but have no love, it doesn’t profit me anything.

    The Corinthians were looking for the Spirit to be manifested amongst them either through powerful gifts, through extraordinary freedom, or through something the looked important. Love manifests itself through rejecting those sorts of things as values. Love demonstrates the presence of the Spirit in turn, so spirituality is also displayed through a life lived through love.

    4Love is patient, love is kind. It’s not jealous or boastful. It’s not self-important. 5It doesn’t behave indecently, nor does it seek its own way. It doesn’t get provoked. It doesn’t plan evil. 6It doesn’t rejoice in injustice, but it rejoices with the genuine. 7It endures all things, believes all things, hopes all things, is patient through everything.

    Greek pisteuw (pisteuo) related to faith.

    Greek elpizw (elpizo) hopes, related to “hope.”? Notice how Love subsumes the two other elements of the “three things that abide.”?

    8Love never fails. But prophecies will fail, tongues will cease, knowledge will vanish.

    Love is superior and even in a different category than spiritual gifts. It is the test of the true use of all of our gifts.

    9Because we know partially and we prophesy partially.

    Our spirituality, whether displayed in knowledge or in gifts is limited.

    10But when what is complete comes, what is partial will vanish.

    Greek teleio” (teleios) = perfect or complete cf 14:20 with reference to what Christians should strive to be.

    Because this passage is about spiritual people or how one can be spiritual, the reference to “that which is perfect” must have to do with spirituality. Those who make this a reference to the completed canon of scripture, so that the “perfect” is the completed Bible, ignore the context of the passage. Paul has not brought the issue of the scripture into play, and our imperfect knowledge of, and inability to interpret the scriptures makes the Bible no more precise or accurate a source of knowledge than was the active gift of prophecy. Both spoken prophecy and the written scripture record are given to us so that we can ascertain God’s will while we are still less than perfect.

    That which is perfect comes with the kingdom, with the resurrection, and is an anticipation of the resurrection state descried in 1 Corinthians 15.

    11When I was a child I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child. When I became a man, I put aside childish things.

    Greek nhpio” (nepios) = child; see 1 Cor. 3:1 and 14:20 where the verb form (nhpiazw) is used.

    12For now we see dimly in a mirror, but then face to face. Now I know partially, but then I will know in the same way that God knows me. 13And now these three remain: Faith, Hope and Love. But the greatest of these is love.

    Love is the touchstone by which to discern.

    For reference information on the Greek words cited, see 1 Corinthians 12-14: Greek Terms. Draft translation is from my Totally Free Bible Version project, and is just a draft.

  • Suzanne McCarthy on Complementarianism

    Suzanne McCarthy has been blogging on complementarianism over on the Better Bibles Blog. I have been following her posts with interest, and I would like to commend them to my readers. The entries to date are: Modes of Communication I, Modes of Communication II, Modes of Communication III. Suzanne obviously doesn’t subscribe to the “snazzy but inaccurate title” school of thought–just tell them what you’re talking about. 🙂

    I’ve written about this topic a few times myself, largely out of my frustration with the number of women I see in the church who are gifted and called from my observations and yet are not being used to their full potential. Even amongst those who claim to affirm leadership roles for women in the church there is often an inertia, or perhaps a sort of default that suggests that women must be exceptional to be in leadership.

    What Suzanne has done in these last several entries is point out some of the inconsistencies in how one applies the complementarian position, and I think she makes some good points. I’m not sure I’m going to get the time or the tolerance any time soon to read her complementarian source material.

    Nonetheless, it seems to me that the key here is that the wrong principles are being used. We’re setting up the category of “women” as a spiritual entity, with a prescribed set of spiritual roles. That ignores the reality that while women and men are truly different–and I’m not egalitarian in the sense of saying women and men are somehow interchangeable!–women differ from women and men differ from men as well.

    The principle I would suggest is that we observe both the men and the women, as well as our children and young people, and simply choose for leadership roles those whom God has gifted for those roles. If we do so honestly, I think we will find that God is, in fact, calling many women to leadership and wonderfully gifting them for it.

    When we ignore the call and gifts of God, we’re putting God in a box and we are a barrier to the building of the kingdom. Let’s not do that!

  • Van Till a Freethinker?

    With a hat tip to Dispatches from the Culture Wars, I’d like to call attention to the text of a speech given by Howard J. Van Till (The Fourth Day) to the Freethought Association of West Michigan. Van Till’s work on evolution in general and intelligent design in particular is amongst my favorite reading, and he provides some excellent insights into working with truth, and our view of what truth is, in the context of a religious institution.

    While I experienced some hostility as a graduate student in a Seventh-day Adventist institution, I never experienced this degree of hostility, but I did reject the idea of signing a doctrinal statement in order to be able to teach. That was one of the things that led me away from even seriously seeking work in an Adventist institution. Now as a member of the United Methodist Church, I often actually seem quite conservative.

    Readers who come from my current side of the aisle–mainstream Christianity outside the Calvinist or Catholic traditions–may find it hard to empathize with Van Till. Calvinism tends to be much more creedal, and thus to be much more explicit.

    But I am no less subject to having an ODoR (operational description of reality) than anyone else, and often being less explicit about it simply makes it harder to examine, rather than meaning that one is actually more open minded. I think Van Till has again provided some excellent insight into the nature of the controversy over creation and evolution, and the relationship of science and religion.

  • Notes on 1 Corinthians 12

    Note: I’m using a loose phonetic transliteration of Greek terms throughout. This is just intended to give the reader some guidance as to pronunciation.

    For reference information on the Greek words cited, see 1 Corinthians 12-14: Greek Terms. Draft translation is from my Totally Free Bible Version project, and is just a draft.

    1-3: Character of God’s Spirit

    1Now brothers and sisters, I don’t want you to be ignorant about spirituality.

    This could also be translated “spiritual matters.”? The neuter and masculine forms are identical. A number of commetators agree, but very few translations. I also prefer this translation in the first verse of chapter 14, where I haven’t been able to find anyone that agrees with me. Nonetheless I believe quite strongly that “gifts” is not correct in either place. I’ll discuss 14:1 more in my notes on that chapter.

    2You know that when you were gentiles, you were led here and there by idols that could not speak.

    Greek: aphona = without voice or without meaning. Ties to 14:10 which uses the same term.

    3So I’m letting you know that nobody speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed” and nobody can say “Jesus is Lord” except by the Holy Spirit.

    This should not be taken as a magical formula, but rather as the introduction to Paul’s idea of discerning spiritual things.

    Greek anaqhma (anathema) = cursed

    Paul is here primarily creating categories rather than providing a test. The test is coming up in chapters 13 & 14 as Paul discusses the use of the gifts.

    The following section describes the variety of gifts and emphasizes that all gifts come from the same spirit. It is more a continuation of the statement of the problem than of the solution. The “phanerosis”? of the spirit is not how one discerns between the Holy Spirit and false spirits. Rather, it is the visible part of the action of the invisible Spirit. Paul is simply emphasizing what is seen in order to develop his concept of discernment.

    A Variety of Everything, but One Spirit

    4There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit.

    Greek carismata (charismata) = gifts. See “Greek Terms” on both carisma and pneumatiko” (pneumatikos).

    5And there are different kinds of service, but the same Lord.

    Greek diakonia (diakonia) = service

    6And there are different kinds of activities, but the same God who accomplishes everything in everyone.

    Greek energhma (energêma) = activity

    7The visible action of the Spirit is given to each one for the common good.

    Greek fanerwsi” (phanerosis) = bringing to light or disclosure. This is normally translated as “manifestation.” I’ve chosen “visible action” as a translation. This is the action that can be seen, but not the sign that distinguishes the action of the Holy Spirit from that of another spirit or from the absence of spirit.

    8To one is given the a message of wisdom, but to another a message of knowledge by the same Spirit.

    Greek logo” (logos) = word, message, with emphasis on underlying thought

    I think it would be better not to regard these gifts as a single word or small number of words heard through revelation as it is often used. Doubtless God can speak through that means, but this would be better thought of as a gifting of understanding or wisdom to the person, while the revelation of one word, or any number of words is covered by the gift of prophecy.

    One problem that comes through misunderstanding this type of revelation is that some treat words of knowledge as a sort of “prophecy lite” in which we can claim to have received revelation and spoken without undertaken the duty or burden of a prophet. It would be better to see all speech which claims its source in God as prophecy, no matter how the revelation is received.

    9To another faith by the same Spirit, but to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit.

    10To another is given the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another recognition of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another interpretation of tongues.

    11But one and the same Spirit accomplishes all of these things, dividing them up as He wills.

    CEV: “11But it is the Spirit who does all this and decides which gifts to give to each of us.”?

    Emphasis is again placed on the “one”? spirit and on the spirit’s choice. We still have not seen any development of the idea of discernment or of ranking the spirits.

    The body metaphor is commonly seen as illustrating how the various gifts are to work together in the church. I would suggest that instead, Paul is using the necessity of the various gifts as an illustration of how the body should work together. Part of the intention is correction of how the Corinthian believers regard and use the gifts, but the larger issue at hand is believers who claim different levels of spirituality for whatever reason. Paul is here building a basis for discernment and for unity of the church, whatever the source of divisions may be.

    The Body Metaphor

    The topic here is unity. As the body has many parts, differing in apparent honor, yet all necessary, so the church has many members with a variety of gifts, and all need to work together.

    12Because just as the body is one but has many parts, and all the body’s parts are one body, so it is with Christ.

    13For you were all baptized by one Spirit into one body, whether you were Jews or gentiles, slaves or free before, and all of you have drunk of one Spirit.

    Note that when Paul discusses who is brought into the body it is not their gifts that he emphasizes but their physical and spiritual origin. All, no matter where they came from become one body.

    Verses 12-26 deal with our starting point, rather than with our gifts.

    “Drink of one spirit”? means that though we come from diverse backgrounds we become one body with one spirit and collectively receive the gifts necessary for the body.

    I recommend reading the latter part of this chapter from the CEV for an overview: 1 Corinthians 12:12-27.

    14For the body is also not one part, but many.

    15If the foot should say, “Because I am not the hand, I am not part of the body, that wouldn’t make it not a part of the body, would it?

    16And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am not part of the body, that wouldn’t mean it was not part of the body, would it?”

    17If all the body was an I, what would happen to hearing? If the whole body was hearing, what about smell?

    18But now God has placed each of the parts one by one in the body in just the way he wanted to.

    19But if all were one part, where would the body be?

    20But now there are many parts, but one body.

    21The eye can’t say to the hand, “I have no need of you!” or again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you!”

    22But the parts of the body that are weaker are so much more necessary,

    23And the ones that are thought of no honor are treated with even greater honor, and those that are least attractive are given greater attractiveness,

    24but our more respectable parts don’t need this honor. But God has so arranged the body so that those parts that lack it get greater honor.

    25He does this so that there might not be any factions in the body but that the various parts might care for one another as themselves.

    Verse 25 declares part of the purpose of the whole. This will be expanded in 13 and 14.

    26And if one part suffers, all the parts suffer along with it. If one part is given special glory, all the parts rejoice with it.

    Nobody has All Gifts

    In the background here is the idea that nobody is independent, nobody is purely spiritual so as to be able to ignore the rest of the body. Those who claim all offices and all gifts should take note. I do not regard it as impossible for God to call someone to all the offices at once, though I regard it as extremely unlikely. One person carrying all the gifts or all the offices contradicts the way in which god wants to work with his church.

    27Now you are the body of Christ, and members of it.

    28And God has placed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, help and guidance, varieties of tongues.

    Greek tiqhmi (tithemi) = put or placed

    Here Paul reintroduces the topic of gifts, these members, who come in from different backgrounds and with different spiritual standing are brought into the unity of the body, and then God appoints

    I prefer the translation “placed” as opposed to “appointed” in verse 28, because it emphasizes that it is God who is bringing together the gifts. Due to the nature of Paul’s criticism, I believe that some members of the body in Corinth were determining their level of spiritual maturity by the level of their gifts. Paul is saying here that God brought people of all different ranks and stations, whether spiritual or temporal, and then that God put certain gifts in the body as he chose. The level of gifts should be divorced from the level of spirituality.

    29Not all are apostles, are they? Not all are prophets, are they? Not all are teachers, are they? Not all work miracles, do they?

    30Not all have gifts of healing, do they? Not all speak in tongues, do they? Not all interpret, do they?

    The mixture of ministries, activities and gifts is intentional, showing that none of these lists are intended to be exhaustive.

    These questions again emphasize the God-given nature of the gifts. If gifts were indicative of spiritual stature, then one would expect all those of a particular spiritual stature to attain certain “higher” gifts. But if the gifts are given by God as needed by the church, then this would not be the case. So not everyone gets any particular gift, but all are gifted as needed.

    31But you are seeking the better gifts.

    Compare NRSV: “31. But strive for the greater gifts.” This translates as an imperative, rather than indicative, which is the majority view. However, I disagree.

    Paul is not suggesting that they should strive for the greater gifts. There is a certain amount of sarcasm. Paul has just shown no ranking of gifts. He has detached gifts from spiritual standing. He has detached all the visible activities of the Spirit from spiritual standing. What exactly could he mean by “Strive for the greater gifts”? In fact he is pointing out that despite the fact that God gives these according to his will, and that they are there according to the need of the body and not according to various peoples’ spiritual standing, the Corinthian believers are striving for them. So now Paul has to show them how to truly discern spirituality.

  • Paying for Education: Class Size

    In 2002 Florida voters approved an amendment ordering the state to reduce class size. As with so many such amendments, the state was left to look for a way to provide the teachers and pay them. The story in my home county, Escambia, and in neighboring Santa Rosa county is in today’s Pensacola News-Journal. In a fit of journalistic optimism, it’s titled New teachers filling void, but the bottom line is that the local schools have a bit of a problem filling the necessary teaching slots with qualified people.

    Some of the available solutions are good, such as providing an accelerated pathway for people with degrees, but who are not certified in education. But a great deal will have to be done to fill these classrooms with teachers who will help prepare our young people to be productive citizens.

    And that puts the burden back on the voters. Will we pay for this? It’s a good thing; we voted to mandate it. Will we be as responsible when we find out that smaller classes cost more money?

    I’m firmly convinced that the results will be worth it.