January 31, 2009

Peter Rollins explains what I would call “true orthodox theology”:

Without equivocation or hesitation I fully and completely admit that I deny the resurrection of Christ. This is something that anyone who knows me could tell you, and I am not afraid to say it publicly, no matter what some people may think…

I deny the resurrection of Christ every time I do not serve at the feet of the oppressed, each day that I turn my back on the poor; I deny the resurrection of Christ when I close my ears to the cries of the downtrodden and lend my support to an unjust and corrupt system.

However there are moments when I affirm that resurrection, few and far between as they are. I affirm it when I stand up for those who are forced to live on their knees, when I speak for those who have had their tongues torn out, when I cry for those who have no more tears left to shed.

I wish more “orthodox” Christians would understand that their theology is demonstrated more in the conduct of their lives than in their words and statements of faith.

(HT: Jonathan)

January 31, 2009

Not really… but I had to say that after reading this from Dave Black (Friday, January 30 at 8:26 am) about the upcoming seminar “Developing a Biblical Ecclesiology“:

Here’s yet another reason to attend the Developing a Biblical Ecclesiology (.pdf) seminar in March: the only book you’ll need is the Bible. As I told my students last week, whatever position you hold on divorce/remarriage, or tongues, or female elders/deacons, or church organization, you had better base your convictions on the exegesis of specific texts of Scripture and not on anything Dr. So-and-So says. I am honestly worried about this generation of students because I see in them (as I saw in my generation) a tendency to follow this or that teacher rather than the Scriptures. This is nothing but a form of modern-day Gnosticism. The Gnostics loved to claim that their special teaching came directly from God. They believed that all kinds of special knowledge were needed for salvation and sanctification. They taught that the Word of God was not sufficient. Men and women needed a special knowledge beyond that which Jesus could give. So if you had gnosis (special knowledge) and knew the right formulas and used the correct passwords you could escape the ignorance of the world. But Paul taught it was only in Christ that the full divine nature dwelt, and that is was only through Him that the believer could find truth and wisdom.

What does modern-day Gnosticism look like? One sure sign is whether the Bible is preeminent or not. This truth alone should make us rethink the value of any seminar or conference that packages biblical truth in a way that elevates the package above Christ. As the Gnostics saw it, the simple truth of the Gospel, written down in the Bible, was not enough. It had to be supplemented by an elaborate system of philosophical thought. The resulting system was too difficult for simple Christians to understand. Only insiders — intellectuals — could understand. It is amazing to me how quickly we Christians run after this system or that system today. There is too much of the Christianity that says “I’ve got the answer” and too little of the Christianity that says “In Him are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” Supremely it is so today with all of our “networks” and “ministries” that promise freedom in Christ (if you’ll only attend my seminar) or how to discern the true marks of the church (if you’ll buy my book) or how to become a “New Testament” congregation (by following our ministry model). I am not saying that any of these ideas are necessarily unbiblical or wrong. It is the packaging that threatens the life of the church for, I believe, the packaging raises questions about the total adequacy of the Scriptures and the unique supremacy of Christ.

So please do not attend our seminar if you think you need something more than the Word of God to understand the mind of God. Please do not attend our seminar if you believe that Christ is not adequate to deal with your questions. Please do not attend our seminar if you are seeking a Gospel that needs to be supplemented by human ideas. Please do not attend our seminar if you want to join an intellectual aristocracy. Please DO attend our seminar if you are drawn to the unsearchable riches of Christ, if you believe that the foolishness of God is wiser than the wisdom of man, if you believe that “truth is in Jesus,” and if you are ready to listen to a man who is as eager to learn from others as he is to instruct them.

(Note: My opinion will change very quickly if our speaker ever decides to incorporate and form “Assembling of the Church Ministries” and take his system on the road for a fee.)

So, no, I’m not incorporating or forming “Assembling of the Church Ministries”. Didn’t Jesus already form that ministry? And, no, I’m not hitting the road – no speaking circuit – no fee.

However, I am very excited about getting know and interact with brothers and sisters in Christ from Roxboro, NC and the surrounding area. I’m excited about sharing some of the things that God has taught me, and I’m excited to hear what God has taught them.

This will be a different kind of seminar for me, for many reasons. I plan to write about that soon.

January 30, 2009

As most of my readers know, I’m in the PhD program at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. My program of study is Biblical Theology. For my dissertation, I plan to research and write about an aspect of ecclesiology (the church) from the context of Scripture; that is, I want to answer the quest, “What does Scripture say about the church?”

It is exciting to me to read articles and blog posts from people who are doing a similar study. For example, here are two:

1) Douglas at “Douglas Weaver Ministries” examines tithing in his post “You Have Heard It Said #4“.

2) Arthur at “the voice of one crying out in suburbia” examines the concept of church membership in his post “A Call for a New Reformation in the church: Membership, schmembership“.

I appreciate that fact that these men – and many other men and women – are examining the church from Scripture. They are not questioning modern understandings of the church simply to question tradition or authority, but because they want to understand what Scripture reveals about the church.

I offered this warning to Arthur: “Be careful how closely you look into church practices… it might lead you to decide that many of the things we do aren’t found in Scripture. People won’t like that.”

January 30, 2009

I wrote a post called “Walking through difficulty… together” about a year and a half ago. It was originally published on a group blog called “Life in the Journey“. Unfortunately, like many group blogs, that one didn’t work out, although there are some very good posts there. In this post, I examined one of the many benefits of true fellowship and relationships which occurs when believers live through difficult times in community with one another.

—————————————————————

Walking through difficulty… together

I almost did not write this post. Honestly, compared to many people and the struggles that they are going through, it is hard for me to call my struggles “difficulties”. But, there are difficulties in my life. Everyone goes through difficulties, trials, struggles, whatever we want to call them.

Lately, our difficulties have included spiritual struggles, health problems, financial strains, and emotional trials. We’ve had relationship problems without our family and with those outside our family.

Struggles are universal. Comparatively, some have more difficult lives; some have less difficult lives. But, every life comes with its share of problems. Every person suffers in some way.

There is a difference for us though: we are not suffering alone. For some reason, explainable only as the grace of God, we have been surrounded by people who have helped us walk through difficulties. Only in the last few weeks, God has used (in no particular order) Maël and Cindy, Dan and Kate, Stan and Renata, Theron and Cheryl, Lew, Gary, Glenn, Dusty, Rodney and Denise, Jim and Kirstie, Anthony, and many, many other people to speak words of encouragement, to lend helping hands, to ask difficult questions, to offer support, to pray, to listen, to teach.

Recently, I was talking with a good friend who spent some time in another country. This time was difficult for him and his family. But, he also recognized how God provided certain people at just the right time to help them through these struggles.

Talking to my friend reminded me of how often I take these fellow travellers for granted. We are all walking in the journey. God allows us to cross path with many people. Sometimes, we cross paths with people so that we can help them. Sometimes, we cross paths with people so that they can help us. Sometimes, we cross paths because we need one another. Whatever the reason, I never want to take for granted the children of God that he chooses to bring into my life. Many times I find that God gives me the strength to make it through trials through these fellow travellers who humbly and gently choose to walk through difficulties with us. Sometimes, it is through these fellow travellers that God demonstrates his love, mercy, grace, and justice.

I thank God for the brothers and sisters that he regularly sends to walk with us through difficulty. I thank my brothers and sisters for giving so generously of yourselves, your time, your resources, and your energy.

Perhaps you would like to thank God for some people who are walking or have walked through difficulty together with you.

January 29, 2009

Matthew McDill is a fellow PhD student at Southeastern who is studying elders in Scripture. He occasionally shares some of his insights, such as in his post “Leadership Principles from Acts, Part 1” and “Leadership Principles from Acts, Part 2“.

Also, in a post called “Sufficiently in Touch with Ordinary People“, he recently quoted Calvin concerning the phrase that elders should be “able to teach”:

There are many who, either because of defective utterance or insufficient mental ability, or because they are not sufficiently in touch with ordinary people, keep their knowledge shut up within themselves. Such people ought, as they saying goes, to sing to themselves and the muses—and go and do something else. . . . Paul is commending wisdom in knowing how to apply Gods’ Word to the profit of His people.

Matthew comments:

Calvin observes that some may have knowledge but “because they are not sufficiently in touch with ordinary people,” they are unable to be of any benefit to others. I have met such knowledgeable people. I often emphasize with my public speaking students the importance of understanding and connecting with one’s audience. As ministers, it is critical that we listen to the people we seek to serve, that we know their thoughts and needs and meet them where they are.

What do you think? Is it enough to know teaching methodology, or must you know and be in touch with people also?

January 29, 2009

One of the best books that I’ve read on topics related to New Testament interpretation is Interpreting the New Testament, edited by David Alan Black and David S. Dockery. I think I’ve read this book twice, and now I’m reading it again for my mentorship with Dave Black. We meet regularly to discuss the issues raised in the book.

This week, we discussed the first two chapters which deal with introductory and historical issues of interpretation. Primarily, in this post, I want to discuss the first chapter by Peter H. Davids: “Authority, Hermeneutics, and Criticism”.

First, discussing authority, Davids makes a distinction between the intrinsic authority of Scripture (the authority possessed by someone or something due to what they are – p. 3) and the extrinsic authority of Scripture (the authority that someone or something possesses because people ascribe authority to them). Davids suggests that discussions of the intrinsic authority of Scripture fall into the area of the doctrine of Scripture, while discussions of hermeneutics and interpretation deal with the concept of the extrinsic authority of Scripture. He says:

Given, then, that Scripture has God’s authority [i.e. intrinsic authority], there is still the issue of extrinsic authority. That is, from the human point of view, we first must recognize that Scripture is authoritative and then must understand and respond to it appropriately – with obedience… If there is no obedience, then all the discussions about authority are no more than abstractions. (3-4)

Moving on from authority, Davids discusses the relationship between authority and hermeneutics, pointing out that people who agree on the authority of Scripture will often disagree on its interpretation. We cannot assume that someone who interprets Scripture differently than us does so because they do not think that Scripture is authoritative.

He also addresses the issues of critical methodology (“higher criticism”) and how we often interpret Scripture based on what we want it say instead of what it actually says. Everyone (yes, including myself) can be guilty of this. How do we help ourselves and others avoid this error in interpretation?

Hermeneutical discussion assists one in discovering how one is interpreting Scripture and thus what one might be filtering out of [or adding to] Scripture… [O]ne further aid to biblical authority is helpful, and that is working with Christians in a variety of churches [traditions] and cultures. (16)

I think these points are difficult for many believers. I’ve heard from so many believers who attach interpretation to authority, such that, if your interpretation does not match theirs, then you do not believe that Scripture is authoritative. Similarly, I think the church has lost the ability to interpret in community with other believers. Oh, we listen to those who already agree with us. But, when we read or listen to the interpretation of someone with whom we disagree or who comes from a different tradition, we do not do so in order to learn, but in order to disparage or debate or disagree.

What do you think? Do we need to listen to brothers and sisters with different interpretations? Can we truly live in unity despite our differences of understanding? Is it possible to accept the objectivity of God’s communication [in Scripture, for instance] along with the subjectivity of our interpretation?

January 28, 2009

This post is part of my “stories” series. In this series, I share stories of how people live their lives in response to the gospel and as a demonstration of God’s love in order to teach us and to provide an example to provoke us to love and good works. (See “stories: A New Series” for more information about this series.)

Last month, my father-in-law had quadruple bypass surgery. As you can imagine, this was a tense time for our family.

While he was in surgery and we were all in the waiting room, several friends of my in-laws joined us. One set of visitors surprised us. I’ll call them Mr. and Mrs. B. Since we lived in the same city as my in-laws until about 10 years ago, I know this family, but I didn’t know they were good friends with my in-laws.

They sat in the waiting room with us during the surgery, and rejoiced with us when we heard that the surgery went well. They didn’t just sit quietly though; they struck up conversations with many of the family members, both with those they knew (like us) and with family member that they had never met before.

After surgery, when they were leaving the hospital, I heard Mrs. B say that she was going to work at the local crisis center that afternoon. The crisis center provides food and clothing to families that are in need. The food and clothing are provided by people from the various churches in the county, and are distributed by volunteers to people who come by the center. So, besides giving up their morning spending time comforting our family, they were giving up their afternoon serving others in need – mostly people that they did not know.

At dinner that night, I asked my mother-in-law about this family. I said, “I didn’t realize you were good friends with Mr. and Mrs. B.” She said, “We’re not. We’re in the same Sunday School class with them, but we don’t do anything else with them.”

Then, my mother-in-law said the following: “But, that’s just the way they are. They are always the first people to visit whenever someone is in the hospital. When Frank (my father-in-law) was taking chemo treatments for his prostate cancer, they were the only ones who brought us food. We didn’t ask for it; they just brought it on their own.”

I said something like, “Well, those are the kind of friends we all need.” And, its true! Not only that, but that’s the kind of friend we all need to be to others.

Mr. and Mrs. B do not wait for others to ask for help before they being serving. And, they do not only serve those with whom they are close friends. When they see a need, they meet that need if its in their ability. They are willing to give up time and resources for people that they do not know, and who cannot pay them back or serve them back.

By the way, this family is part of a very traditional church organization. They have probably never heard the word “missional”. But, they know how to share their lives with others, both within the structure of the church organization and outside that structure.

This is a great demonstration of love – the love of Christ! This is an example that we can all follow, regardless of our giftedness, talents, resources, or lack thereof. God loved us by giving. We can only respond to his love by giving of ourselves to others.

January 27, 2009

I’ve recently come across Steve’s blog “From the Pew“. Steve has written several very good series, including “Re-Thinking Church Membership” and “Re-Thinking the Sunday Church Service“. In that last series, one post in particular caught my eye (“Disconnectedness“):

It is possible to feel loneliness, disconnectedness and a sense of helplessness in a large crowd of people. Many who live in the big city can attest to this. Some even find anonymity in large crowds. When one is in a group of people where they are supposed to be intimately connected – and yet aren’t – the disconnectedness can be amplified. A bad marriage can be an example of this. Or a marriage where the two simply go through the motions. The marriage is supposed to be a close relationship, and when it isn’t, it is much more obvious than if the two were mere roommates.

So it is with church. We are supposed to love one another, to bear one another’s burdens, to fellowship with one another, to stimulate one another to love and good deeds. When this doesn’t happen, the feeling of loss is increased. Something big should be happening here but it isn’t.

Through my own experience, the experiences of family and friends, and from the testimonies of many other people that I’ve talked with personally or through email, I know that Steve is correct. Many, many, many, many, many people sit through “church services” every Sunday with a feeling of loneliness and disconnectedness. These are not unbelievers, but people who believe in Jesus Christ – are filled with his Spirit – and are desiring fellowship with other brothers and sisters.

So, what’s the problem? I think one of the main problems is that the way we have structured and organized our church organizations (including the Sunday church service) fuels loneliness and disconnectedness and hinders fellowship and relationship.

January 27, 2009

In Matthew 14-15, two of the accounts that mention faith are very interesting and thought-provoking to me.

First, in Matthew 14:22-33 (immediately following the account of Jesus feeding more than 5000 people with five loaves of bread and two fish), Jesus sends his disciples out onto the sea in a boat. In the middle of the night – in the middle of a storm – Jesus comes out to them, walking on the water. The disciples think that Jesus is a ghost, but he assures them that he is not a ghost. Peter asks if he can walk out to Jesus, and Jesus tells him to come. Peter steps out of the boat, and walks out to Jesus on the water – just as Jesus is walking on the water. Peter becomes afraid because of the wind and begins to sink into the water. He asks Jesus to save him, so Jesus grabs his hand and lifts him out of the water. Then, Jesus says to Peter:

“O you of little faith, why did you doubt?” (Matthew 14:31 ESV)

Next, in Matthew 15:21-28 (just a few paragraphs later and following Jesus’ declaration that a person is not defiled by what goes into the body), we find the account of a Gentile woman coming to Jesus. She asks Jesus to help her daughter who is possessed by a demon. Jesus said that he came for the “lost sheep of the house of Israel”. The woman continues to beg for help, and Jesus said that it is not right to give the children’s bread to dogs. The woman says that even the dogs eat scraps of food that fall from the table. Then, Jesus says to the woman:

“O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire.” (Matthew 15:28 ESV)

A man who walks on water but begins to fear the wind and doubt demonstrates “little faith”. A woman who continues asking Jesus for help, even when he initially refuses, demonstrates “much faith”.

I don’t really have much more to say about these two passages. They are fairly straightforward. I want to be one with “much faith”, but I’m not sure that I would even step out of the boat like the one with “little faith”.

Faith is important in Matthew. I want faith to be an important aspect of my life, too. Every time I think I’m starting to understand faith, I realize how little faith I actually have.

Perhaps one of the first steps of faith is realizing just how little faith we actually have, so that we can honestly call out, “I believe; help my unbelief”.

January 26, 2009

I’ve enjoyed reading some of the blog posts from Michael at “Love Broke Thru“. Here is one snippet from his post called “How We Do Church: To Preach or Not to Preach?“:

The modern rhetorical sermon is at once both effective and ineffective. It is effective in that it usually does what it is intended to do quite well. It is intended to be a convincing and commanding argument that persuades its listener to certain actions or convinces its listener of certain truths. In the hands of a skillful and powerful orator, the rhetorical sermon is very effective at accomplishing its mission. It is ineffective in that it does little to foster spiritual maturity a deeper grasp of Scripture in its listeners.

Instead of the rhetorical sermon, Michael suggests discussion as a means of teaching and discipleship during the church meeting (see his post “How We Do Church: Discussion, the Fast Track to Ministry“).

So, what do you think? Which is more effective in helping people grow toward maturity in Christ: monologue, dialogue, a combination, something else?

(HT: Dave Black)