Be Done With It

Ok…so I’m not going to have time to write about all my thoughts on the book Why We Love the Church, so here they are in brief bullet-points:

-Healthy critique of people who are forsaking Sunday gathered
-Helpful explanation of oft-maligned events in church history
-Conviction regarding some of my own thoughts toward institutions
-Humility
-Love for God’s people
-Healthy critique of certain prominent (poisonous) authors
-Accessible language
-Pastoral heart

One critique: As the authors discuss the church, they frequently refer to it as a place. Granted, Christians exist in places (cities, houses, countries, continents, etc.), and Christians gather together in places. However, I think it’s potentially harmful when defining what the church is to say, “Church is supposed to be a place…” — that just communicates the wrong thing from the get-go. I think our definition of the church has to begin with “A church is a people…”.

Done.

Review: Why We Love the Church

I should have called this post “Why I Love This Book”. Because I do. The Lord was good to give me this book at this particular time for many reasons. My review will just be a recounting of some of these reasons I’m thankful for these authors and what they put into the pages of this book. And this post may stretch into three or four separate posts…so stay tuned.

1. Gospel-centered: The opening chapter contains a critique of how we understand the “progress” of the church in America. Deyoung correctly assesses that when it comes to our judgment of the American church’s rise or demise, we pin our arguments mostly on church attendance. Read church-planting books and you’ll see this straightaway, as we are told we should plant churches because our numbers are down. The church is being defeated because it grows smaller! Deyoung, I think, is right in saying that while numbers may say something, they sure as heck don’t say everything.

For instance, if attendance numbers are the main criteria we use to assess the progress of the church, what happens when numbers are up? Are we then being truly faithful to our calling? Deyoung’s point is that there are much better questions to be asking alongside these other stats. Questions like:

-Are we believing the gospel?
-Are we relying on the power of the gospel?
-Are we getting the gospel out?
-Are we getting the gospel right?
-Are we adorning the gospel with good works?
-Are we praying for the work of the gospel?
-Are we training up our children in the gospel?

How we answer these questions seem more along the lines of what biblical churches should be most concerned about. I dig it.

Any thoughts?

A Gospel Primer

“This book is offered as a handy guide to help Christians experience the gospel more fully by preaching it to themselves each day. It is also offered as a correction to a costly mistake made by Christians who view the gospel as something that has fully served out its purpose the moment they believed in Jesus for salvation. Not knowing what to do with the gospel once they are saved, they lay it aside soon after conversion so they can move on to “bigger and better” things (even Scriptural things). …God did not give us His gospel so we could embrace it and be converted. Actually, He offers it to us every day as a gift that keeps on giving to us everything we need for life and godliness” (5).

That statement from the introduction of Milton Vincent’s short book, A Gospel Primer for Christians: Learning to See the Glories of God’s Love (2008), was only an appetizer to the gospel feast he prepared in the following four chapters. The first provides thirty-one brief (paragraph-sized) meditations on the gospel, paying special attention to its present effect for life, joy, godliness, the pursuit of holiness, etc. The second provides a brief-though-sweeping narrative of the gospel followed by the same narrative retold in a poem. Both of these chapters serve as memorization tools to help store up within our hearts all that God is for us in Jesus, so that these truths might be used mightily by the Spirit throughout our daily walk. Scripture verses also appear as footnotes on each page. In the final chapter he gives his testimony of God’s triumph in suprising him with the power of grace in the gospel.

What I appreciated and thought was rather unique was that Vincent uses the first person (“I,” “my,” “me”) throughout the first three chapters, so helping his readers already to preach to themselves the infinite riches of God’s love. Overall, Vincent’s book serves as a very practical tool that cultivates ongoing love for the gospel itself and fruitful reflection on the gospel’s effects. Young believers and seasoned believers would do well to read through this book (or at least carry out the preaching found in its pages). If more Christians lived out what Vincent encourages, the gospel would cease to be viewed as merely a class to get through, and instead be seen as the school we enter as Christ’s disciples.

Learn About God

Luke is now almost eight months old! This also means he is beginning to comprehend a bit (though a small bit) of what I am communicating to him through certain words (e.g. “no” or “good” or “mamamama…”). Before I know it, I will be making some of my first attempts at explaining big truths about God to my little boy who will then be able to understand me (I pray). Teaching the Desiring God Children’s curriculum to the three-year-old Sunday School class at church has helped me greatly in this area of articulation. Still, I am always excited when other God-centered resources are published to help parents saturate their children with lessons about God, Sin, Cross, Scripture, Grace, Faith, etc.

Just recently, a brother at Redeemer introduced me to a small box-set of cardboard books published by Christian Focus Publications that is titled Learn About God. Six small books are included in this set. Their titles are God Knows Everything, God is Everywhere, God is Kind, God Has Power, God Never Changes, God is Faithful. Carine Mackenzie authors these short reads, and on each page includes a big truth about God and how it relates to the world, themselves, or the people they see everyday and then provides a text of Scripture from which these truths have been gleaned.

For example, the second page of God Has Power teaches, “God has power. He can make the wind blow very hard. He can make the wind blow gently.” Besides these words are pictures which fit the catechetical statements and there is also provided this text below: “Its in the Bible: Jesus got up and rebuked the wind and the raging waters…and all was calm” (Luke 8:24).

I look forward to reading them to Luke as he grows. For those of you at Redeemer Church, I have ordered them for the Book Nook as well; so stop by if you are interested. I would like to point others to order this box set from Westminster Book Store here.

Boyce College DiaBLOGue

Just calling students’ attention to the new Boyce College DiaBLOGue,

a forum for the faculty of Boyce College and of Southern Seminary and for other invited guests. The ‘Diablogue’ is both a blog and a podcast that publishes content related to the Bible, theology, philosophy, and culture. In addition to traditional blog essays, the ‘Diablogue’ will also include various audio resources.

An interview with Thomas R. Schreiner concerning Scot McKnight’s new book, The Blue Parakeet: Rethinking How you Read the Bible, is already available there. They provide a critical assessment of McKnight’s hermeneutical principles, comments about biblical authority, and conclusions on manhood and womanhood. You can also now access Schreiner’s first two parts of his five part review of McKnight’s book at the Gender Blog of CBMW: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V.

Seven Pillories of Wisdom

Critical scholarship of the Bible over the last few centuries has built itself quite a castle for interpretation, whose objective foundation has been set by the best of human reason, and whose walls’ stones have been well hewn by scientific analysis and reconstructed with historical precision, and whose inner rooms serve as safe-havens for those running from the dogmatic sword of a distant king’s servants. From the outside looking in, this towering fortress looks intimidating and inpenetrable. However, having peered through the portcullises to see the insides of this castle, David R. Hall has found its fortifications wanting. Indeed, from the inside looking out, it is nothing but painted cardboard.

This illustration may be too simplistic in communicating all that Hall presents in The Seven Pillories of Wisdom (1990), but it does justice in portraying how he dismantles the loose thinking of much critical scholarship in the past century and a half (both ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’). With seven chapters of sharply perceptive argumentation, clear illustrations from an assortment of literature (fiction and non-fiction), coupeled together with honest humor, Hall critiques the seemingly ’settled’ results of much modern criticism that has pilloried wisdom in understanding the New Testament. Nevertheless, in each section Hall moves well beyond mere criticism of the critics. Based on his breadth of knowledge in New Testament studies, he shares needed warnings for the naïve acceptance of the latest fads, addresses the proper place of presuppositions in research, and cultivates prudent judgment for the future of biblical interpretation.

His seven pillories of wisdom could be summarized briefly as follows. A quote succeeds each.

1. The Argument from Up-to-dateness: Do not assume that because an argument is modern it should be preferred to the ancient: “…our ignorance always exceeds our knowledge, and the latest opinion on any subject is just as limited, and just as likely to be wrong, as any that have preceded it” (18-19).
2. The Argument from Probable Certainty: Do not treat matters that are uncertain as if they were certain on the grounds of their probability: “Motive hunting is like hang gliding: it lifts us from the firm ground into the pure air of academic speculation; where we land depends on how the wind is blowing” (35).
3. The Argument from Primitive Culture: Do not assume that those who lived in the New Testament times were primitive in the sense that they could not understand the world properly: “We need to realize that the apostles were people who thought and reasoned much as we do today. Moreover, they were priveleged to witness some of the most exciting events the world has ever known–the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and the explosion into life of the early church. If we can be delivered from our feeling of cultural superiority and our fond belief that, compared to us, the early Christians were primitive, we can become free to sit at their feet, and to learn from them things that we in the twentieth century desperately need.” 
4. The Argument from Silence: Do not look for all the things you think the author should have included, note which ones did not appear in his work, and then deduce conclusions from these omissions: “…since we never know the reason why [something has been left out], and often have no solid grounds even for guessing it, it is better to follow the simple rule, ‘Respect with your own silence the silence of others’” (64).
5. The Argument from Creative Background: Do not assume that in order to understand an author’s thought, you have to study the background from which that author came: “Jesus and the apostles were not related to their background as a chicken is related to an egg. They were the creative agents of a creative God. The New Testament is not a mechanical response to external influences; it is the record of people inspired by God to see new things, and to see old things in a new way” (82).
6. The Argument from Consistency: Do not assume that an author must always use the same style of writing, or the preacher always the same style of proclamation: “These [New Testament] authors used words as a composer uses a musical instrument, taking advantage of its full range, and where necessary making creative use of discord” (86).
7. The Argument from Specialization: Do not bank on the so-called ’specialist’; use some common sense: “When scholars lay down what early Christians were capable of doing, they are really stating what they themselves are capable of believing. …Those who declare which of these events are possible and which are impossible tend to reflect the ‘internal limits of human belief’ in theological circles in the twentieth century rather than inside knowledge of what happened in the first century” (118-19).

Hall closes rather cleverly in his appendix parody, where he, having employed a form critical appraisal of Rudolf Bultmann’s works in their own Sitz im Leben, concludes they must be “masterpieces of twentieth-century comedy” (126).

Though written eighteen years ago, Hall’s contribution speaks wisdom for today, and I presume that his thoughtful assessment of trends in modern criticism and urgent plea for careful scholarship in biblical interpretation will remain a helpful resource for many years to come. With others who have spoken well of this book (e.g. I. H. Marshall, John I Durham, B. Paul Wolfe), I highly recommend it for students of both Testaments.

Owned by Owen

I finished reading the part of Overcoming Sin and Temptation, The Mortification of Sin, and learned some invaluable things. Although, I’ll admit, the things I read need to become more a part of my everyday life. It’s too easy — way too easy — to finish reading something and leave much valuable information trapped within the pages. It’s entirely possible that what is read never leaps off the page into our hearts. I feel this has happened to a good degree with Owen. Nonetheless, there are some things that have stuck with me thus far that have helped me already in the fight against indwelling sin.

1) This first one I had heard about previously, but reading what Owen actually wrote was much more helpful: “God says, ‘Here is one, if he could be rid of his lust I should never hear of him more; let him wrestle with this or he is lost.’” Owen was writing about how, in certain instances, some sins plague us for a long time, and we wonder why. In answering said conundrum, Owen explains that many times we plead with God to take away a certain sin merely because that sin is a bother to us, not because it prevents us from knowing God. Thus, instead of hating sin for what it is and how it keeps us from knowing Christ more fully, we hate it because it cramps our style. If God were to deliver us while we are in such a state, we would no longer seek God. God would become just a means to rid us of a bothersome habit, as opposed to being the reason why we want to be rid of the sin in the first place.

2) This will sound familiar to anyone who has read or listened to John Piper: When fighting sin, threats of consequence and hell (referred to as “restraining grace”) are not sufficient. Indeed, we should heed the warnings of Scripture concerning perseverance and not continuing in sin. However, Owen argues that if punishment is the only thing keeping us from sin, then our heart is in a much worse state than we thought. Rather the message of the gospel and the riches of Christ should be what we employ against temptation. Owen calls this “renewing grace.” Perhaps one of the more haunting statements I’ve read so far has been in relation to this very topic. Owen says, “Rest assuredly in this, that unless you recover yourself with speed from this condition, the thing that you fear will come upon you.” I find this to be absolutely true. How many times have you railed against sin by convincing yourself only of the punishment that comes along with it, only to end up falling headlong into it?

3) “Do not speak peace unto yourself until God speaks it.” Now, the Christian might wonder at such a statement. After all, peace with God is a cross-purchased gift from Jesus. Why would we not want to speak peace to ourselves? But this is not what Owen is referring to. His explanation is that many Christians, in fighting sin, speak a word of peace to themselves in such a way that they stop fighting the sin. Thus, there is a false peace. The battle rages about them, but they posture themselves as if their enemies were their friends.

Sex, Romance, & The Glory of God

Mahaney, C. J. Sex, Romance, and the Glory of God: What Every Christian Husband Needs to Know. Wheaton: Crossway, 2004. 139 pp.

Husbands often forsake or ignore the delightful duty of romance God has ordained for them to share often and well with their wives. As far as intimacy goes, sex is often the primary concern of many husbands to the neglect of both the romance God has designed her to receive and perhaps even the celebration God has intended it to be for his glory. In Sex, Romance, and the Glory of God, C. J. Mahaney, president of Sovereign Grace Ministries, promotes a biblical understanding of not only the intimacy shared in the bedroom (glorious as God has created it), but also the romance that ought always and persistently to precede it. As he susinctly repeats throughout the book, “Before you touch her [your wife's] body, touch her heart and mind.”

Mahaney begins with a biblical understanding of sex, being sure to highlight that it is part of God’s good creation and a result of his wise design for the marriage relationship. For this reason, it ought to be celebrated to his glory and used often to both serve and strengthen the marriage relationship. With repeated reference to the Song of Songs, and explanations accompanied by good Christian scholarship, he shows how this book both aides in and grants hope for the fruitfulness of biblical intimacy in the husband’s relationship to his wife.

Before Mahaney tackles the “sex chapter”, however, he first emphasizes the role and responsibility of the husband in learning, leading, and loving his wife. To put it plainly, great sex is the result of a healthy, intimate, covenant relationship that is cultivated long before a married couple enter the bedroom. With some of the most godly wisdom, practical suggestions, and humble exhortations, Mahaney devotes several chapters to ensure husbands are aware of their responsibilities in studying their wife (i.e. deliberately being interested in, knowing, and understanding all aspects of their physical and spiritual well-being), leading her in a godly marriage relationship (e.g. in theological knowledge, with spirtual disciplines, and toward closer levels of intimacy), and loving her with biblical affections (e.g. by kindling romance or winning her with “carefully composed words”).

His book concludes with an exhortation for husbands to “let the unifying, unquenchable power of covenant love continually strengthen your marriage in every way, that you and your wife mighty testify to the world and to one another the goodness of God” (104). An added bonus for the wife is also included at the end. This short chapter is titled, “A Word to Wives from Carolyn Mahaney” (which is also called “The Purity of Pleasure”, chapter 5 in her book Feminine Appeal: Seven Virtues of a Godly Wife and Mother).

Overall, Mahaney’s work is well worth every Christian husband’s read. It is biblical, thoughtful, and practical. It is also a fairly quick read, one well worth repeated readings throughout the marriage (I just finished my second.). It supplies husbands with a biblical understanding of sex, romance, and their design to glorify God in marriage intimacy, and provides excellent advice/ideas that will cotinually strengthen the relationship.

Interpreting the Historical Books

 

Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. Interpreting the Historical Books: An Exegetical Handbook. Handbooks for Old Testament. Edited by David M. Howard, Jr. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2006. 231 pp. $19.99.

One of my assigned readings this weekend for my ”Hebrew Exegesis of Joshua, Judges, and Ruth” class was Interpreting the Historical Books: An Exegetical Handbook, by Robert B. Chisholm, Jr. His chief goal is to help students of the “Historical Books” of the Old Testament (Josh, Judg, Ruth, 1-2 Sam, 1-2 Kgs, 1-2 Chr, Ezr, Neh, Est) comprehend the nature of their narrative literature, derive theological conclusions from such discourse by using various interpretive tools, and apply the books’ authoritative truth to the contemporary covenant community.

He divides his book into six chapters each of which build upon the other. Chapter one answers the question, “What is narrative literature?” Here, he discusses how the narrative genre works in communicating God’s redemptive purposes through his people, Israel. Steps for the interpreter include (1) analyzing the basic elements of the story such as setting, characters, and plot; (2) identifying the text’s discourse and dramatic structures; (3) paying attention to the kind of discourse and the varying speech function(s) within each; (4) respecting the narrator’s authoritative interpretation of the events; (5) observing each story within its larger canonical “macroplot”; and (6) being sensitive to matters of meaningful intertextuality.

Having explained the function of narrative literature in chapter one, Chisholm then provides a thematic and theological overview of each Historical Book and their own contribution to the macroplot of the Old Testament in chapter two. Chapter three attempts to set the Historical Books within their proper historical situation in the Ancient Near East, while also giving direction to the exegete in difficult matters of textual criticism. On the latter, Chisholm offers two basic principles: (1) “One should not automatically assume that the traditional Masoretic text preserves the original text;” and (2) ”One should base text critical decisions primarily on internal considerations” (146-48). Scattered throughout chapter three is also a helpful selected bibliography for the interpretation of each Historical Book.

Chapter four addresses the question of whether interpretation of the Historical Books should be more diachronic (i.e. focused on the origins, sources, and development of the text [167]) or synchronic (i.e. focused on the meaning of the text in its final canonical form [178]). His conclusion seems fair: “We propose an interpretive method that is essentially synchronic, but that is also sensitive to the historical and cultural background of the text and respectful of the narrator’s authority. …we prefer to focus on the text in the form in which we have it and to assume an editorial unity.” (184). For the most part, Chisholm encourages interpretation that is sensitive to macroplot and canonical context.

Included in his synchronic approach is also the identification of the “implied readers”, that is, the audience the author envisioned to be impacted by his books’ message (181). Since the Historical Books span the pre- and post-Exilic periods, and the corpus eventually was considered in its final canonical form, Chisholm concludes that both communities are in mind. Such a conclusion allows him to make an easy jump in chapter five to how one should handle proclaiming the narrative texts to the community of faith. In his words, “The text is Scripture and has meaning and relevance beyond its original context” (187, emphasis mine). Communicating the truth of the Scripture’s historical narratives in a contemporary setting, therefore, means allowing the text to establish the interpreter’s theological foundation, upon which he or she must make “homiletical trajectories” that will provide personal application. Chisholm himself then provides two examples of such a task in chapter six, one from 2 Kings and another from Ruth.

Chisholm’s book is helpful overall because it provides the exegete of the Historical Books with the right questions to ask in interpreting a narrative, at least initially. He does a good job summarizing the themes of the Historical Books, and better enables one to understand the Books’ theological relevance to the covenant community, both then and now. Chisholm does offer an interpretation of the Historical Books that ultimately points us to Christ through his understanding of the promise to David’s throne and the testimony of the entire canon. I would have liked to see how more of this Christological (yes, Christological) emphasis played out in his exegesis, especially within his discussion of the implied readers/covenant community, but this would be hard to elaborate much more in so few pages. In the end, I have found much of Chisholm’s interpretive method very useful and would recommend it as a guide to those in the beginning stages of exegesis and interpretation of Old Testament narrative.

Paul: Follower of Jesus Or Founder of Christianity?

Recently, I just finished reading another great book for my New Testament Theology class by David Wenham. I highly recommend reading it. Wenham does a wonderful job showing Paul’s own familiarity with Jesus’ teachings, so that we see Paul’s epistles as the continuation and interpretation of Jesus’ theology found in the Gospel traditions. It is not a difficult read, but an extremely important one for New Testament studies and the contemporary problems of various church leaders who are rather bitter with Paul, as if he taught something contrary to Jesus. The following is a brief on Wenham’s book [and by the way, I would also commend to you a shorter book he wrote with the same goal, but presented from a little different angle: Paul and Jesus: The True Story (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 195 pp.].

Wenham, David. Paul: Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. 452 pp.

Since the days of F. C. Baur (1792-1860), who argued that significant variations existed between Paul’s theology and the beliefs of the Jerusalem church, NT scholarship has been rather suspicious of any affirmations of continuity in the teachings of Jesus and the Apostle to the Gentiles. Scholars arguing along the same lines as William Wrede (1859-1906) have insisted that Paul’s “innovative” ideas, theological commitments, and pioneering mission work wrecked the original intentions Jesus had for his followers. Consequently, today’s Christianity would be better off without Paul’s emphases. In his Paul, Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity?, David Wenham finds such claims about Paul’s dissimilarity to Jesus unwarranted. On the contrary, he argues that Paul was not so much an innovator of Christianity as he was a follower of the Christ, who died and rose again on his behalf. Although his epistles make few explicit references to Jesus’ life and ministry, Paul provides plenty of theological connections that bear witness to his own awareness and embrace of the historical traditions of Jesus (11). For Wenham, “Paul is much better described as ‘follower of Jesus’ than as ‘founder of Christianity’” (33).