Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • The Old Testament: Serious Illness, Strong Medicine

    The Old Testament: Serious Illness, Strong Medicine

    9781893729902I ran across this while looking for something else. Dr. Alden Thompson was the author of the first book sold by Energion Publications, though it was published before I bought and renamed the company. We’ve now published a 5th edition, and this is overall our best selling book.

    In this presentation Alden using a number of Adventist specific references, but I think the message comes through. There are a variety of responses to the violence in the Old Testament. One of the keys to Alden’s approach is his insistence that it is all inspired, even the parts we don’t like very much, and he makes that claim in the video. Alden’s teaching at Walla Walla University was quite formative of my theology and I still enjoy working with him. We’ll be releasing a second edition of his book Inspiration: Hard Questions, Honest Answers later this year, as the publisher of the first edition allowed it to go out of print.

  • Thoughts from the Energion Tuesday Night Hangout: Stewardship and Worship

    Thoughts from the Energion Tuesday Night Hangout: Stewardship and Worship

    books tuesday 020216I enjoyed interviewing three different Energion authors last night. The first was Rev. Steve Kindle who talked about stewardship and the importance of starting from an understanding that everything belongs to God. Steve provided some practical steps that a church can use in caring for all of God’s creation. Steve’s book goes into this somewhat more: Stewardship: God’s Way of Recreating the World.

    At about 7:30 pm, a half hour into the program, Dr. Jon Dybdahl joined us. Jon is the author of a newly released book Hunger: Satisfying the Longing of Your Soul. When he experienced this longing as a young missionary he started to pursue the presence of God and co-taught a class in college in spirituality. Jon’s PhD is in Old Testament, but he has a passion for serious worship.

    For the last 15 minutes, he was joined by Dr. David Moffett-Moore. Dave is author of Pathways to Prayer, and has two doctorates, both a PhD and a DMin. It was interesting and challenging to hear two men with so much education of the mind nonetheless tell us that the intellectual paradigm of religion was not enough. Prayer is an essentially. Coming to know the reality of God’s presence and power is essential.

    When I asked Dr. Jon Dybdahl how one would start this in a church as a pastor or other church leader he said the best way was to see your own need and start practicing it yourself. People will sense when your activities in leadership are powered by prayer and time with God whether you’re telling them all about what you’re doing or not. He also suggested a change in terminology that struck me, suggesting we might use “lead worshipper” rather than “worship leader” to take away the separation of the one on the platform from the ones in the pew.

    The video is embedded below:

  • Stirring the Pot over on EDN

    EDN = Energion Discussion Network.

    Today’s post is by yours truly and titled In the Embrace of Change.

    As owner of Energion Publications, I’m putting a great deal of the company marketing efforts and dollars into building up that site, it’s sister site Nurturing Creativity, and our social media this year. We’re working hard to post high quality content there and we’re inviting discussion. Watch for the Giveaway emblem there, as every comment earns you a chance to win a free book.

  • The Relevance of Atonement Theories

    The Relevance of Atonement Theories

    Discussion Ahead traffic sign in woman's hand on a white background
    Discussion Ahead traffic sign in woman’s hand on a white background

    On the Energion Discussion Network we have two essays posted in answer to the question “Do atonement theories continue to speak to the human condition?” The “yes” answer, written by Dr. Allan Bevere appeared yesterday. The “no” answer appeared today, written by Rev. Steve Kindle. I find both of these articles well worth reading.

    In the past I have been accused of rejecting penal substitutionary atonement because of the fact that I don’t see it as central, or as the explanation of the atonement. In fact, I don’t see any theory of the atonement as a single explanation of the atonement. Our theories of the atonement are metaphors, used to carry across some of the meaning to us.

    As does Allan Bevere, I do find pretty much all theories of the atonement relevant in one way or another. Where I tend to be concerned is where a metaphor begins, in some people’s minds, to become the reality, i.e. that rather than believing in the cross of Christ we believe in our particular metaphor, the one that may best speak to us. I recall a professor from whom I took a class in exegesis of Romans from the Greek text. What was remarkable about the class was that his favorite theory, or metaphor, for the atonement as the moral influence theory. Now I have a bit of a liking for that metaphor myself, but it is not the metaphor Paul uses in Romans. There is some overlap. But this professor, because that was his very most favorite metaphor, taught nothing but, twisting Paul considerably in the process.

    I’d add one more caveat. Relevance is a word that points both ways. A metaphor, to be relevant must communicate to one who hears. If it doesn’t, it isn’t working as a metaphor. I think quite often we need to correct the presentation of some metaphors to make them function better. If they don’t carry something over, they aren’t relevant in that case, however great they might be otherwise.

  • Reading for Election Year

    Reading for Election Year

    politics booksThe day after the Iowa caucuses I’m left to wonder how I could have gotten so uninterested in politics. I have been fascinated by government as long as I can remember, and when I turned 18 and could vote I not only registered immediately, I also started working as a precinct worker for a presidential campaign. Now I can read a couple of articles on an election and my appetite is more than satisfied.

    What has really happened, I think, is that I have gotten more perspective on politics. I have lived through eight years of my friends to the left despising President George W. Bush, and then another eight years of my friends on the right despising President Barack Obama. In both cases it was very difficult to conduct a civil conversation on topics of policy. I have problems with both of these presidents, I might note, and almost all of the problems I have with them are the same for both, primarily an extension of executive power and an excessive willingness to resort to force.

    I have not decided politics is not important. I will definitely vote every time I’m eligible. I will always research the candidates thoroughly once it is time to make my choice.

    What I have decided is that politics is not as critical as I once thought. I have other priorities now.

    And with that, a link. Dave Black found a list of five books one should read during an election year, and proposed one of his own.

    I would add to that list The Politics of Witness by Allan R. Bevere, Ultimate Allegiance by Robert D. Cornwall, and Rendering unto Caesar by Chris Surber. Self interest is here no doubt evident. I publish them all!

  • Eschatology: Prophets, Symbols, and Time

    Eschatology: Prophets, Symbols, and Time

    Some Eschatology SourcesTonight I’ll be finishing my preparatory studies for eschatology as I look at a few more visions, especially from Zechariah, and then at a bit of chronology in preparation for studying the book of Daniel on a more verse by verse basis starting next week.

    Google+ Event Page

    YouTube:

  • The Importance of Little Things

    The Importance of Little Things

    Source: OpenClipart.org
    Source: OpenClipart.org (thenanobel)

    I’m working on a programming project for the IT side of my business today and I was reminded of the importance of little things.

    When I’m programming and something goes wrong, my tendency is to look for big things. For example, there was a problem in this program with handling time zone data. Time codes were coming out different processed through different systems. My first thought, which I followed, was to look for bad settings in the overall system, and then for subtle differences in the way different functions handled this data.

    But no, none of the above was correct. The actual error was a one character problem in the way I was formatting some text—the simplest element of the code involved. Because I was looking for the big things, none of which were causing the problem, I wasted considerable time. Once I saw the actual problem, a couple of keystrokes fixed it.

    Might this not apply to our lives at times? We’re looking for the big changes when we just need to change something small, but which will have a big result?

  • Tuesday Night Hangout on Air

    Salvation: Who and How? You can get more details by following the link.

  • Thursday Night Eschatology Study – Isaiah Part 2

    I’m starting in about 15 minutes. Tonight I’m going to be looking at Revelation 21 & 22 and their use of 3rd Isaiah (chapters 56-66). I want to look at how imagery is used and reused and how this impacts the way we interpret.

    Google+ Event Page

     

  • Identifying Extremes – Examining Everything (An Example)

    Identifying Extremes – Examining Everything (An Example)

    book cross-hatchThis morning Dave Black posted some things about reading Hebrews from the Good News Bible (TEV) and also on authorship and canonicity. I’m not posting to enter into a debate on this point, but rather to note an attitude.

    Dave says:

    The undeniable reality is that questions of canon and authorship matter. Of course, both sides demonize the other. Proponents of Pauline authorship are dismissed as obscurantists, while proponents of Hebrews’ non-Paulinity are accused of succumbing to the spirit of the age. But why should we tolerate this kind of judgmental divisiveness? Maybe we need another conference on campus to discuss the issue!

    Good points! I am deeply concerned when people who are treated with intolerance by one group, move to another, and then treat their former group with intolerance. Is there justification for some reaction? I know many people personally who have been treated badly and many of them have been deeply hurt. There’s some justification here for anger. I publish books by authors who have lost their jobs over theological positions.

    But is the justification enough? I don’t think so. Our response to intolerance needs to be greater tolerance. That doesn’t mean we have to accept and approve behavior. What it means is that we need to look for a freer exchange of ideas and better treatment of people.

    There are those who wonder why I publish a book like Dave’s The Authorship of Hebrews. Not only do I publish that book, but I requested it. Dave didn’t push it on me. I don’t accept Pauline authorship of Hebrews. I don’t believe we can know the author’s name with any confidence. Yet Dave’s work on this topic shifted my position from one that excluded Paul from the list of possible authors to accepting that his authorship is a possibility. More importantly, Dave demonstrates how to challenge an academic consensus—with detailed, careful scholarship.

    Now let me provide a contrast and a comparison. In the lower right of my little graphic today we have the cover for the forthcoming book from Dr. Herold Weiss, Meditations on the Letters of Paul, which I’m currently editing. First, the contrast. Contrary to Dave Black’s acceptance of Pauline authorship of Hebrews, not to mention the pastorals, Dr. Weiss accepts a minimal Pauline corpus. He even rejects Colossians. So his meditations are on a substantially smaller set of writings that Dr. Black’s would be. Now for the similarity: Besides the fact that I enjoy and have learned much from both writers and both books, neither of these men has ever asked me to accept something because it’s in their tradition, or just because they said so. They are both willing to debate and discuss.

    I can give you numerous reasons why I publish books from a variety of perspectives, and I’ve done so before. But there’s a personal reason. I like them and I benefit from them. I have published some books that I really wish had been better. I do not claim any sort of editorial infallibility. In fact, I would claim feet of clay. But I have learned from and benefitted by reading each and every book I have published.

    Let me suggest a response to Dave’s little book. How about looking at some of the vocabulary comparisons excluding the pastorals, or even working from a minimal Pauline corpus? I’d like to play with that. I don’t know if it would be meaningful, but somebody could look at it.

    Just a thought …