Threads from Henry's Web

Category: Links

  • Review of Evidence for the Bible

    I sent a free review copy of Elgin Hushbeck’s book Evidence for the Bible to Christopher Smith of Mild-Mannered Musings, and he has begun his review. It is fairly negative but is also very substantive, and it’s my policy to post a link to any substantive review, negative or positive. In fact, I will be going to the official Energion Publications blog and posting a link as well as soon as I’m finished this post.

    I’m not going to enter the debate myself, but I do continue to invite bloggers who will review the books or blog on reading them in response to debates by others to ask for review copies. I send the books on a case by case basis, but the vast majority of those who request will get books. The only reason I would not send books at this point would be if someone had requested free books before and then never said anything. The main reason for me staying out is that I am myself somewhat more liberal than Elgin Hushbeck, and I think a man shouldn’t have to debate his publisher.

    I will also take a hit specifically on the German citation noted in the review. Mr. Hushbeck does not read German, but I do. The errors hit me in the face on first glance today, but I confess I missed them in dozens of passes through before. I can only claim that I must have seen what I expected to see. My company is a small publisher (19 titles so far) and this is an area that will improve as we grow. Right now I personally have to take responsibility for all the proof-reading in foreign languages because I’m the only one in the company who can. On the other hand, when alert readers catch things and tell me, I can add them to an errata list.

    In any case, I expect to read this series of posts with interest.

  • I Posted on Prescriptive Grammar

    . . . over at my Jevlir blog.

  • Rounding Up My Blogs

    I’ve written two posts that might interest readers of Threads. The first is on how we listen and read, and the second is on capitalization in translation of the Hebrew scriptures. (And no, the Hebrew doesn’t have capitalization, so what gives?)

  • Christian Carnival #202 and My Highlights

    … has been posted at Lo-Fi Tribe.

    As usual, I want to highlight some posts from the carnival.

    • Since I’m an egalitarian, I read this post from Pseudo-Polymath with interest. The discussion that follows is also substantial and interesting. I hope I can find time to respond in a post. I hate making comments that are several pages long. Mark is always worth reading, especially when I disagree.
    • Rewriting Daniel 7 is definitely worth a read, but be prepared to spend some time thinking about it.
    • I’m not inclined to agree with this post, but since when has one’s inclinations had any value in determining the truth? Frankly, Jeremy is quite correct. I, an ardent free-willer, regard everything that happens as ultimately part of God’s will so that one can use both the terms “chance” (largely from our point of view) and “providence” to refer correctly to the same event. If God left it to chance (not to say that there necessarilyis any chance from God’s point of view) then the result is still God’s will. So much for inclinations!

    That will have to do for today!

  • Christian Carnival #201 Posted

    . . . at Thinking Christian.

  • Links for 12/7/07

    Here a just a few things I think my readers might find interesting, but that I won’t get much time to comment on:

    • Human events has an article on intelligent design by a conservative who doesn’t think much of it. In fact, he thinks the main stream media cover it because it’s embarrassing to conservatives. “The Left believes, correctly, that Intelligent Design is a political loser, and so they gleefully attempt to hang it around the neck of every right-of-center movement from libertarian neo-conservatism to isolationist populism — shouting all the while ‘See, the American Taliban has come for your children! Elect a Democrat before it’s too late!’” — It’s an interesting perspective! (HT: Panda’s Thumb)
    • It’s not really about evolution, but Carl Zimmer has his 100th picture of a science tattoo
    • Steve Martin has the fourth in his series of articles on Polkinghorne quotes, in which we find this quote (from Martin, not Polkinghorne): “Many Christians, I think, put too much stock in the implications of scientific discoveries.” Hmmm! It leads one to think!
    • I’m just getting all my RSS subscriptions updated on my new computer or I would have gotten this one earlier, but this post by Dr. Steve Matheson is too good to miss. He looks at a Discovery Institute showcase piece by Jonathan Wells, and shows it’s serious problems. The answer seems to be that there was a testable hypothesis in the article, but it proved wrong, and didn’t have anything to do with ID in the first place. In addition, any article that calls Jonathan wells “a former developmental biologist” can’t be all bad!
    • And in the obligatory link to something I wrote, my fictional God-Talk Club gets into ID while discussing homeschooling in my latest post. Remember that those posts are for fun and practice, though I do welcome responses either to presentation or to content.

    There are very few things that haven’t been moved to the new computer, imported, or otherwise sorted out. For those who my have missed the post I switched not only to a new CPU but to a new operating system. I’m now using Ubuntu Linux, after trying it on a separate machine for a few months. I’m thus far very happy with the results. Having the old machine on the same network has made moving stuff pretty easy.

  • Keeping up with the Justification Debate

    I am doing some reading before I respond to a couple of posts, but I did want to link to some interesting stuff.

    Both Mark Olson (Pseudo-polymath) and Anne (Heart, Mind, Soul, and Strength) have written posts discussing justification from a perspective other than the judicial/penal substitution approach. Their posts simply confirm to me that there are many, many valid ways to talk about the sacrifice that Jesus made on our behalf, and that penal substitution is just one of those. Unlike some, I do not wish to discard it, but I also will not make it the one and only metaphor.

    Adrian Warnock has posted twice, first Legalism, Racism, and the First Century Jew, to which I will respond later at some length. I find much to object to in that short post, but I’m also working through Piper’s comments in their context before I blow off steam.

    The second one is 2 Corinthians 5 and Romans 5 – Two Critical Passages on Justification in which he links an article that I had linked earlier, and says:

    If you are interested in seeing an example of this, there is an article by Wright on 2 Corinthians 5:21 [PDF-HN] that I must say I found wholly unconvincing.

    I see a great deal of “finding unconvincing” but I see remarkably little actual exegetical argument. The primary form of argument appears to be theological. If the question is whether the new perspectives on Paul differ from prior theological statements, then we can cheerfully answer yes, and go on. But for me the question is whether the new perspective gets us closer to correctly understanding Paul and what he has to say.

    One of the keys here is to understand the paradigm shift that several interpreters have taken. If you do not accept that paradigm shift, you are likely not to accept Wright’s specific exegesis of 2 Corinthians 5:21. That is not surprising, since he is dealing with that verse in the context of that new paradigm. (I am not overly fond of “paradigm shift,” as a term, or at least I don’t think I am, but it seems to me that the new perspectives on Paul do justify that term.)

    Peter Kirk blogged on this same topic, and brings up a number of points. I have to say that anyone who implies that Augustine was a theological pygmy is likely to get my favorable attention! But more importantly, Peter points to one side issue, and that is the way in which (some?) reformed theology can make God look like he is a bit veracity-challenged, and can’t truly tell whether people are righteous or not.

    Meanwhile, the view that I am working towards is a rejection of the “Reformed” idea that Christians remain sinners in actual fact but are nevertheless, by a legal fiction, counted as righteous in Christ. Instead of this, the picture I have, based on various biblical passages such as Ephesians 4:22-24, is that the Christian consists of two separate persons or personalities: the “old self” (in some versions “old man”, but to be understood of course in a gender generic sense) born by natural birth who is a sinner, guilty, condemned to death and destined to die; and the “new self” born of the Spirit and into Christ, who is righteous, holy, free from condemnation, will not die, and indeed is already living eternal life in God’s kingdom. . . .

    Just so. Like Peter, I continue to be in flux on some of these issues. There are boundary lines that I’m fairly certain of, but others I’m studying a great deal, but Peter’s paragraph is one of those that strikes me as promising. When I read it, I feel that he is “with” Paul in a significant way. Perhaps he’ll have to adjust some, as he says, but he’s going the right direction.

    I will be blogging a bit more on 2 Corinthians 5 from an exegetical point of view, hopefully in the next few days.

  • Reading 11/12/07

    Update: Edited to correct the date in the header from 10/12/07 to 11/12/07. I truly have not invented a time machine!

    Here’s some things that caught my attention:

    • Richard Rice Discusses Open Theism
      20 years ago I read his book The Openness of God when it was first released. I was intrigued by its ideas of open theism then, and I continue to be intrigued now. I appreciated the summary of key issues provided in this post by David Larson. (From the Spectrum Magazine blog/Association of Adventist Forums).
    • Hard and Soft Legalism
      OK, I’m a legalist, but so was Jesus. If the point of this series is to show that N. T. Wright isn’t 100% in the reformed camp, then I suppose it’s succeeding. As a matter of Biblical studies, not so much.
    • “What is at stake is the very nature of Anglicanism” (from Gentle Wisdom) and Romans and Rhetoric Again. (Hat tip: Lingamish on the second post.)
      The key arguments are about the Bible statements regarding homosexuality. This is a particularly contentious topic, of course, and I would urge charity on all who participate in it. None of the participants have taken their stands lightly, in my view, and all deserve serious consideration.

    Such are the varied topics of which I read with interest!

  • Friday Reading 11/9/2007

    I’ve found a way to make short comments on some of the blog posts I read, but either don’t have time to comment on, or have only a very little bit to say. The result: these link posts.

    • I think I’m supposed to leave more time between agreements with Joe Carter but even though he is addressing this post to conservatives, I think it is applicable elsewhere as well. Television and radio news especially contribute to a lack of connection and actual understanding of events.
    • Carl Zimmer of The Loom, and author of many books on science, writes this column on climate change. He explains some things that seem odd at first glance. This emphasizes the need for careful study and examination of all the factors. If you haven’t read any books by Carl Zimmer, you’re missing something!
    • I linked earlier to two views on the upcoming movie, The Golden Compass. Here’s another one.
    • I want to call attention to a piece of my own writing, as my fictional God-Talk Club takes on the subject of tornadoes destroying churches. Note that this is largely an exercise for me in writing dialogue, but I’m enjoying it, so why not inflict some on my friends, not to mention enemies?
    • My wife has a post announcing the upcoming 6th John Webb Winter Golf Tournament, which is a major event for our family, through which we join with many friends in raising money for the children’s hospital where our son was treated. We raise the money for the child life program, which provides games, reading, and other entertainment and support for the children. If you’re within striking distance of the Pensacola area, consider playing. We also take donations. Since the tournament pays for itself, all donated money will end up buying stuff for the kids.

    Well, that’s a variety for today. On to the next thing …

  • My Highlights from Christian Carnival CXCVII

    I like to highlight three or four posts from the Christian Carnival when I have the time. I usually do so in the post linking to it (if I remember to do so at all), but I forgot today, so here comes another “link” post.

    My first highlight is host Diane R’s Yes, We Can, in which she is saying yes to the possibility of putting the social gospel together with proclaiming the atoning work of Jesus. It’s a good challenge.

    Second, I noticed this post on discipleship, in which I read: “A true relationship with the Living and Holy God is not a one-time event or prayer, it’s a lifetime commitment.” Yep, that’s it!

    Finally, Kevin at Everyday Liturgy talks about what it is like to experiencing the world after a reutrn from a monastery. I have a friend who is pastor at a local church who visited a Benedictine monastery, and he couldn’t stop talking about it. Some of what he said is much like this post. I wonder what the needs of our lifestyles do to our spiritual growth?

    Well, there are others, but those caught my eye.