'Post-Apocalyptic' Theology

Tim Challies' Ordo Salutis

2012-01-15T22:28:00.000+11:00

Tim Challies' recently produced this chart of the Ordo Salutis, which is somewhat useful because it reminds the viewer that salvation has a linear pattern but not so useful in communicating the relationships between the different doctrines. For example, Regeneration is a through-theme that intersects several other doctrines. Another example where the chart doesn't communicate the shape of the doctrine is Adoption, which when you look at the biblical evidence isn't a distinct stage between Justification and Sanctification, as the chart below suggests. It's also interesting to see which doctrines got chopped. Union with Christ, Faith, Redemption, Reconciliation and Mortification all seem like important aspects of salvation that don't get mentioned.

I've been and continue to be a longstanding fan of Challies' blog but I think this chart (or a causal google search) shows a lack of thinking visually, coherently and comprehensively about the Doctrines of Grace. Charts like this are useful in conveying a general sense of how Salvation works but we need a diagram that represents the relationships between the various doctrines in a way the traditional numerical list failed to do.

The Epistle to the Romans

2012-01-10T09:00:00.000+11:00

At SOUL church we'll be doing a massive series in 2012 working our way through the book of Romans. (Broken up by Easter and a mini-series between chapters 8 and 9 on Ecclesiastes.) It's ambitious and I'm worried about keeping the momentum up. So I thought breaking it down into five sub-series', each with their own focus would help sustain our interest:

1 The Gospel
1-5 The Bad news and then the Good news
6-8 Living as a Christian
9-11 God's big plan
12-16 Living with One-Another

This is a slightly more detailed breakup of Romans into themes and sections with proof-texts showing roughly why I think it should be broken down into those sections.

Romans Layout

What's the purpose of Romans?

2012-01-05T09:00:00.001+11:00

It is this total reorientation in the religious relationship which Paul, in the Philippian passage cited above [3:4-9], formulated with such definitive clarity, "not by my own righteousness which comes by the law, but by the righteousness which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God."
In that expression, “the righteousness from God,” the very foundation thought of the Epistle to the Romans is encompassed. That is affirmed by Paul himself when in 1:17 he states the theme for his letter. He does so with the following word, "The righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is written, 'He who through faith is righteous shall live.'" And the whole epistle, as it proceeds, is nothing but a clarification of the contents of this "righteousness from God," and the consequences for the Christian life of the new righteousness of God which was revealed through Christ, and which is shared by him who believes in Christ.

(Anders Nygren, Commentary on Romans. SCM: London 1952, p 15.)

Carson recommends Nygren for understanding the big picture of Romans and even though Nygren's commentary is over half a century old and originally translated from Swedish (!), it still presents the main ideas and structure of Romans in a lucid and careful style. I think Nygren's right, the overall purpose of the Apostle Paul in his letter to the Romans is to explain this righteousness that is from God.

Israel 2011 - Part Five

2011-12-31T11:30:00.000+11:00

Archaeology:

Here's a small snapshot of Archaeology in Israel. Interactivity is a big feature of Israeli archaeology; good signage, models, reconstruction, reenactments and even participation at an ongoing dig. While the valuable artefacts are displayed in various museums a lot of the emphasis is on experiencing the actual sites.

Two photos from the the Nazareth re-enactment village. Not entirely perfect, notice the steel legs of the modern table but the site put you in the mood in a way visiting a church or a stone wall didn't.

One of the best features of Israeli Archaeology, was the way they marked the line of reconstruction. So on the left hand-side a raised line runs through the lower third of the wall, everything above it is reconstruction, everything below is in-situ, as it was found. (Tel Megiddo)

This metal sculpture represents where the edges of the altar at Tel Dan may have been.

Mosaics form a beautiful remnant of the Roman and Byzantine periods. (Zippori)

This is Qumram, the Essene settlement near where they found the Dead Sea Scrolls and possible temporary home of John the Baptist. (Mostly reconstructed.)

One of the caves where they found some of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

A large wine press, preserved intact because of it's remote desert location at Tel Avedat. (Generally the exposed stone was looted to build other buildings.)

The well at Tel-Be'er Sheva partially reconstructed so you can see how animals would have drunk from it. (That's our guide sitting on the step with members of our tour group in the background.)

The chambers of the gate, where the King and his officials made their judgments. (Tel-Be'er Sheva)

The store houses, long and narrow for ventilation and access, newer materials come in the far side. (Tel-Be'er Sheva)

The very interesting remains of a duplicate, mini-temple in the Negev at Tel Arad. This is the site's Holy of Holies, but notice the two stones at the rear of the room: the two pillars of the law or Yahweh and his consort?

A little hard to see, but four civilisations have used this well at Tel Arad.

Many sites are a work in progress, this the part of the Wester Wall Tunnel.

A display (at the beginning of the Western Wall Tunnel) showing how Mount Moriah become the Temple Mount.

This is a massive model of 1st Century Jerusalem at the Israel Museum.

Everything was signposted and wherever possible with pictures, usually in a style that some how reflected the mood of the site.

It was unusual at first to see Bible verses as a natural part of the signage. (Tel Dan)

The Muslim authorities in charge of the Al-Aqsa Mosque excavated an underground section of their mosque ("Solomon's Stables") without an Archaeological survey and then dumped the debris in a nearby valley. The dig is basically a sifting through the tons of rubble left in the valley, you pay a small fee, get a quick seminar and then help the Archaeologists sift through the dirt and rocks.

Israel 2011 - Part Four

2011-12-30T09:46:00.000+11:00

Judaism:

Judaism is far from monolithic, there are several different denominations and various shades of belief. For example while at the Western Wall I saw groups of Orthodox Jews swaying together in prayer (a way of keeping the rhythm of their chants) fully kitted out in their old-world coats and hats. While other groups of casually dressed men (the wall is segregated into sections for men and women) marked their observance by wearing a kipper while praying. These photos give you a brief idea of Judaism in modern Israel as it appears to the observer.

Above a picture of a model of the Temple (at the Israel Museum) and below a sign at the Western Wall.

A group of Orthodox Jews praying next to someone's grave on the Mount of Olives.

Friday evening (the beginning of Shabbat) was marked (to varying degrees) at all the places we stayed, for example here at a Kibbutz by the Galilee with these candles, bottle of wine and prayer book.

Most of Israel (we didn't go to Tel Aviv) shuts down for Shabbat, reminds me of Hobart on a Sunday night.

In some places the Kosher laws are taken more seriously than in others, for example here's a sign from the Jewish quarter of the old city.

The Western Wall is the focal point of much of Judaism, partly for its symbolic value, it signals the survival of Judaism and partly because it's the closest point to where the Temple once stood.

A section of an open library of prayer books by the Western Wall, if my Hebrew was good enough I could've just picked one up and joined the crowds at the base of the wall.

In most places, there's a tiny copy of the Pentateuch tucked inside a small canister (their format varies considerably) on the inside of a doorway. This is a slightly larger one from inside Jaffa Gate.

Israel 2011 - Part Three

2011-12-28T09:00:00.000+11:00

Ancient and Modern

One of the remarkable things about Israel is the close juxtaposition of ancient ruins and the various parts of modern civilisation.

Camels from our Bedouin experience parked next to our tour bus.

Renovations inside the old city.

The Lion of Judea reused as the emblem of the city of Jerusalem.

Inside Jaffa gate during the day, busy with cars, pedestrians, touts, money changers, guides, police, soldiers, tour groups, monks, nuns and I imagine locals.

The same gate, taken looking almost in the exact opposite direction, the next night for the inaugural Tour-de-Jerusalem.

Christmas 2011

2011-12-25T09:00:00.007+11:00

“Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the east and have come to worship him.” (Matthew 2:2)

Israel 2011 - Part Two

2011-12-23T09:00:00.000+11:00

Re-enactments:
We were a thoroughly Protestant tour group and found most of the churches at most of the sites baffling and neither were we absolutely keen to find the very exact spot for various Biblical stories. But a member of the tour was putting together a sunday school program and so we enthusiastically participated in the re-enactments she organised. What we were excited by, was the reality of these places, it was exciting to think about how these significant biblical stories would have unfolded in these locations.

David is about kill Goliath (with his shield bearer) in dry stream bed in the Valley of Elah.

In the hills above the Dead Sea at a Bedouin encampment we reenacted God visiting Abraham.

Here Abraham is told that he'll have an heir while Sarah laughs off screen.

Since we were only a short drive from where Sodom may have been, we reenacted Abraham pleading for Lot's life.

Israel 2011 - Part One

2011-12-21T09:00:00.000+11:00

In the next couple of blog posts I wanted to share a few photos from my recent journey to Israel. Many of them were taken by my travelling companion Devan Foster. (Thanks Devan!) I enjoyed almost every aspect of the trip. What's fascinating about Israel is the blend of ancient ruin, geography, modern politics and everyday life. For example on the side of the Herodian there was a bus stop and toilet block above a small Army base which was next to a Palestinian village, this is all within a stone's throw of the tomb of the King who tried to kill Jesus as a baby! Biblically I realised just how useful historical context and cultural tradition can be but also how little remains, how little has been discovered so far and much must have been destroyed. I loved the careful conjecture of Archaeology, using a few scraps and just a few clues to create a plausible reconstruction. Probably what was most moving was the continuity between the ancient Jewish Kingdom the modern Israeli state. For example as we stood on top of Masada hearing about the Jewish zealots fighting the Romans two Israeli fighter planes swooped overhead.

My Favourite posts from 2011

2011-12-20T09:00:00.024+11:00

Although my fuzzy Pauline Baynes map of Narnia remains the favourite page for the general viewing public, these are my top-ten favourite posts from 2011.

2011 was also the year of the Blogger, because throughout the year I've enjoyed a number of blogs from friends who seemed to have found their blogging voice.

Radagast: several amazing series' this year including ones about colour, maths and culture
Marc: his detailed series about riding around Hobart has made me want to get back into cycling
Wilderness Life: Laura has burst back into blogging with a whole collection of posts, even inspiring me to read Pride and Prejudice!

Law and Gospel - From the Bible to Theology

2011-12-15T09:00:00.000+11:00

I love discussions and I love learning from a discussion where each of the protagonists has a good grasp on their particular viewpoint. These two books have been very helpful on two very vexing topics: Five Views on Law and Gospel and Four Views on Moving beyond the Bible to Theology.

Does the Law continue today? How does Jesus fulfil the Law? What's the value of the Law and what's it's ultimate purpose? The relationship between the Old and New Testaments can be a tricky topic and although they are bound together by an overarching meta-narrative and a common author, the Law and it's New Testament impact is a significator factor in the link between the two canons. Basically it seems there are two camps, continuity versus discontinuity, roughly VanGemeren, Bahnsen and Kaiser versus Stickland and Moo. But secondary questions about salvation, fulfilment and purpose really muddy the waters of this debate. After reading it all I think, "the Law's changed, it now serves us, we no longer serve it."

How do we turn Bible verses into theology? Kaiser suggests that there is always an underlying principle to be gleaned and then applied. Vahoozer says we reconstruct the world of the text while Webb says we compare what was said in the text with what's going on today. Kaiser can oversimplify, Vahoozer is vague on details and Webb overvalues the present. Each author assumed Scripture contained an overarching meta-narrative. (Somewhat naughtily I took what made the most sense from each and put together a chart based on John Frame's hermeneutical triangle; existential, normative and situational.) However the three concluding essays, where three other authors made observations about the debate, were very useful especially Al Wolters', which was both a pleasure to read and gave lots of useful insights.

Travelling

2011-11-15T09:00:00.010+11:00

I'm overseas for three weeks, so enjoy the archives! I'll blog about where I've been when I get back.

11.11.11

2011-11-11T09:00:00.020+11:00

Nearly one hundred years ago today, the first world war came to end. A brutal war, characterized by it's stagnent style of trench-warfare and also made almost pointless by the horrendous bloodshed just two decades later. [Western Front, 1918]

Westminister Confession: Assurance

2011-11-05T09:00:00.002+11:00

I sometimes feel that I haven't done enough or that I haven't stopped sinning enough to be saved. I know that I am no longer condemned (Rom 8:1) but I also don't want to live carelessly (Rom 6:1-2). Assurance is a feeling of confidence that you are indeed saved; We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. (Heb 6:19-20). It's also personal feeling because the Holy Spirit testifies to God from inside you, giving you inward evidence of God's saving activity (Eph 1:13-14).

In a chapter about Assurance the Westminster Confession has two very encouraging paragraphs:

True believers may have the assurance of their salvation shaken, lessened and interrupted in different ways, such as by -
neglecting to preserve it
falling into some special sin that wounds the conscience and grieves the Spirit
some sudden and violent temptation
God withdrawing the light of his face, and allowing even those that fear him to live in darkness and to have no light.
Yet they are never completely deprived of -
that life of God, and life of faith
that love of Christ and the christian family
that sincerity of heart and conscience of duty
out of which, by the working of the Spirit, this assurance may in due time be reived. By this, in the meantime, they are kept from complete despair.

The WC also gives a warning about nominalism (James 1:23-34 & 2:18-19), for which there is no assurance. (A classic example of nominalism is in the closing montage at the end of the first Godfather movie.) But then the WC says:

Yet those people who truly believe in the Lord Jesus, and love him sincerely, aiming to live in all good conscience in his sight, may be certainly assured in this life, that they are in the state of grace, and may rejoice in hoping for the glory of God, (this hope will never disappoint them).

2012

2011-11-01T09:00:00.000+11:00

In a move that I believe is right but strange, I'm jumping denominational boats. In January 2012 I'll stop being an Anglican priest to become a Presbyterian preacher. In the midst of trying to figure out my next Anglican appointment I was approached by SOUL (Presbyterian) Church, a recent church plant of Cornerstone (the church Amy and I attended before I went to Ridley!) to become their new minister. I agonised for a while not wanting to burn my bridges but also wanting to be in the right location and role to serve God. I have to jump through some Presbyterian study hoops before my ordination is recognised and I'm inducted as a Presbyterian minister. These last couple of years have worn me out and so I'm feeling a little flat and nervous about it all but I'm in God's hands and what place could be better than that!

A new stage in already unusual journey.

An updated "Ordo Salutis" diagram

2011-10-25T09:00:00.005+11:00

This is an updated version of my visual 'Ordo Salutis', complete with proof texts and two more events from Jesus' ministry. It's timely because the "Ordo Salutis" has come up in the some of the discussion surrounding Scott McKnight's latest book, The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News revisited. McKnight is challenging the current Christian terminology of "gospel" and it's generally an appropriate critique, as I've blogged about before. "Gospel" means a number of things (story, announcement and theology) including but not limited to personal salvation, through faith in Jesus, from sins.

There are lots of interesting and important aspects to this discussion but focusing for now on just one comment by Michael Horton and a response from McKnight. McKnight argues in The King Jesus Gospel against making "the gospel" simply about a "plan of personal salvation." Horton thinks that means "McKnight is wrestling here with the relationship of the ordo salutis (salvation applied to individuals here and now) to the historia salutis (the history of redemption)" but McKnight responds by saying:

"the ordo salutis is not the same as what I call the “plan of personal salvation” but is instead that doctrinal debate about the order of the various elements in the doctrine of salvation (e.g., regeneration and faith and justification and calling). I’m not sure why so many use ordo salutis for how one gets saved but I see it in more than Michael’s statement above."

While "the gospel" can't be reduced to a "plan" (I imagine McKnight is critiquing some sort of 3 step recovery process version of Christianity) it definitely is at essence about "personal salvation." Clearly the 'Ordo Salutis' doesn't equal salvation, that's the result of a personal act of faith, you dear reader, put in Jesus. But the 'Ordo Salutis' (aka doctrines of grace) is a theological explanation of how salvation works and a vital one at that.

Confucius vs Homer

2011-10-20T09:00:00.003+11:00

A fundamental aspect of our approach to reading and understanding Scripture is the assumption that the entire Bible has a larger, coherent meta-narrative. In other-words all the parts are understood in the light of a coherent linear whole.

However I've discovered during church ministry in parish-land, many people approach the Bible either consciously or, as is more-often the case, unconsciously, in a episodic fashion. They read it as though it were a whole collection of sayings and stories all coincidently contained in a single book. A classic example of this approach is represented by that chart purporting to show all the contradictions in the Bible.

As Christians we approach the bible in much the same way most people approach the Odyssey by Homer, the adventures of a man returning from war. We read all the sub-plots in the light of that one overarching journey. This core Christian presupposition is not like way many in the west treat the work of Confucius, a chocolate-box full of sayings, where we pick and choose between proverbs.

Making the Most of the Cross by John Chapman

2011-10-15T09:00:00.008+11:00

This is John Chapman's second book since he retired to a nursing home! The old evangelist is still active; dedicating the book to the nursing home bible study. This makes his chapters about the Resurrection and our death all the more poignant. While the book itself is simple, short chapters and a direct writing style, I found being reminded of the theological consequences of Jesus' death and resurrection very refreshing.

Primarily it was good to see reinforced the idea that while the Crucifixion and the Resurrection "are two aspects of the same event" (9) there are a number of different consequences from each. The book is basically a survey of those consequences. Jesus' death saves us from the "wrath that is to come" (1 Thess 1:10). It's a substitute for our death (1 Peter 2:24). The metaphor of ransom (Mk 10:45), echoing the imagery of the kinsmen redeemer, illustrates our powerlessness and the high cost of this substitution. God is propitiated by the Crucifixion of Jesus (1 John 2:1-2). An added consequence of Jesus' death is that the Devil is defeated (Col 2:13-15), in a sense filling out the rest of redemption metaphor, "we're free" (39). The tension between God's justice and our guilt is resolved by God's declaration of righteousness because a substitute has redeemed us from bondage.

Although Chapman doesn't explicitly frame the next two chapters in this way, they are the relational and emotional consequences of the crucifixion. In chapter seven he writes: "If God accepts me because of the death of Christ then I expect you to accept me on the same basis. It is not that we are naturally drawn to each other, but that we are made acceptable to each other because of Christ" (48). Then in the next chapter Chapman describes the interchangeable images of the Crucifixion resulting in our forgiveness/cleansing, our sin being cancelled or erased.

For the Resurrection to make any sense, Jesus needed to be really dead. An obvious point it seems but the one on which Christianity turns. Returning from the dead is highly unusual says Chapman and it'd be odd to concoct such a story, "what would you gain?" (60) Many people die for various causes, but why would that original cohort die for a known falsehood? The first consequence of Jesus' return to life is that reveals him to be the eternal King (Acts 2:36 & 1 Chron 17:4-14). A King brings justice and judgement, and a living Jesus makes that a certainty. Resurrection is also proof Jesus paid the price of sin, death. In a very sharp observation from a man not far from death Chapman then writes in chapter thirteen: "The fear of death can lead us to do all sorts of wrong and evil thing. But Jesus tells us not to fear ... He has walked the path of death that we too must walk" (79). He concludes with an expression I hadn't considered, we live in the twilight between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection, upset by the Cross and not yet astonished by the Resurrection (90).

[Making the Most of the Cross by John Chapman. 2011, Available from Matthias Media]

Dad's poem

2011-10-10T09:00:00.049+11:00

Jesus Bloody Christ by Steve Isham

Long ago we abandoned

the Jewish carpenter.

Strangely he still has power

to put force in our words

as we strengthen our point

with a slap to his face.

[Quadrant, September 2011, 119.]

Paradoxes and Contradictions

2011-10-05T09:00:00.003+11:00

I've been listening to a podcast recommended to me entitled "The History of Philosophy without any Gaps". It's great fun and the episode about Heraclitus, a pre-Socartic Philosopher from fifth century BC Ephesus, made me think a little more about Paradoxes in theology. Heraclitus was interested in the relationship between change and unity and had an unusual, proverbial, way of writing. For example:

Sea is the purest and most polluted water: for fish drinkable and healthy, for men undrinkable and harmful.

But this "proverb" caught my attention:

The road up and the road down are the one and the same.

"Paradox" is a controversial concept in Philosophy, but because it's often an important concept in understanding theology I thought Heraclitus could help us out a little. Jesus the Son of God, is both human and divine, a paradox similar to the one about the road expressed above by Heraclitus, two different things in unity. On the other hand an antinomy (a synonym for 'paradox') at the heart of Christian Theodicy is a contradiction, three opposite things (God's power, his love, and evil) held in tension. Previously I'd used "paradox" as a catch-all expression. But I think it's important to distinguish between a paradox, two or more different things in unity and a contradiction, two or more opposite things in tension.

[Heraclitus by Hendrick ter Brugghen, 1588]

Socratic Logic by Peter Kreeft - Basics

2011-09-30T09:00:00.002+10:00

Thinking, says Peter Kreeft in Socratic Logic, is a three part process; understanding, judgement and reasoning. Kreeft's main focus here is the deductive process, from the general to the particular (whereas inductive is from the particular to the general).

Part of Logic	-	outcome	& colloquial expression
Terms	must be	... clear	Words or phrases
Premises	must be	... true	Sentences
Arguments	must be	... valid	Paragraphs

(True= corresponding to reality)

Update:

Kreeft gets to syllogisms later in Socratic Logic, but for a great introduction check out the latest post from Radagast's blog.

Counterfeit Gods by Tim Keller

2011-09-25T09:00:00.000+10:00

Instead of sport analogies Keller, quotes CS Lewis, Malcolm Galdwell and Robespierre. While I like Keller's preaching I actually think he's best at answering questions or expressing concepts, in this case idolatry. Counterfeit Gods, is a book length fleshing out of idolatry, it's definition (xxii) it's nuanced forms (24, 100 or 104) and how to deal with it (170 or 174).

"Dutch-Canadian philosopher Al Wolters taught that in the biblical view of things, the main problem in life is sin, and the only solution is God and his grace. The alternative to this view is to identify something besides sin as the main problem with the world and something besides God as the main remedy." (100)

"What is operating in the place of Jesus Christ as your real, functional salvation and Savior?" (174)

In the book Keller works his way through various biblical characters illustrating different aspects of Idolatry with an analysis of each character. God's call to sacrifice Abraham, the humbling of Naaman, the way in which our departure from Eden is us waking up to Leah, Nebuchadnezzar; "to be your own God leads to bestial behaviour" (121) and Jonah "shouldn't your love be like mine" (152). I felt his chapter on Jonah was the weakest because he over-exagerated the theme of idolatry. Then in the chapter on Jacob Keller points out that God feigns weakness "for no other reason than because Jacob held on desperately" (162).

Resurrection

2011-09-20T09:00:00.003+10:00

The Resurrection of Jesus shows that the consequence of sin as being defeated, its sting removed (1 Cor 15:54-55). While the Atonement shows us the condemnation of sin is taken away in the death of Jesus, the story is incomplete without Jesus coming back to life. It's interesting that the Apostle Paul makes the Resurrection explicitly Apologetic, if Jesus was not raised then Christianity is just another form of moral turpitude (1 Cor 15:3-7 & 32).

['The Garden Tomb', Jerusalem]

The Resurrection is the culmination of a long Old Testament trajectory. Through his original act of rebellion Adam causes death to reign over humanity (1 Cor 15:22). The emphasis on lifespans (Ecclesiastes) and the number of years we live (Genesis 5) underscores this reign. But God continually gives promises about an abundant life that without life after death seems grandiose and hollow. Tantalising glimpses are given of our eternal future (Ezekiel 37:1-10) but it's not until Daniel ushers in the new Hellenistic epoch (Daniel 12:1-4) that we start to realise the shape of Resurrection.

The doctrine of Glorification depends entirely on the Resurrection and doctrines such as Sanctification or Regeneration only make sense if the Resurrection is true because they are progressive, they are going somewhere, eternal resurrected life with Jesus.

Atonement

2011-09-15T06:46:00.000+10:00

There's a messiah shaped gap in the Old Testament. Most of the New Testament epistles are about Jesus, or the consequences of the things he did and said. The four gospels are about Jesus and in each, the crucifixion is the climax of the narrative (with the Resurrection as the denouement). This makes the crucifixion, and the doctrine that describes what happened theologically the one of the most important aspects of Salvation.

A substitutionary sacrifice: the Last Supper echoing the first Passover

God tells the Jews just before their escape from Egypt that "the blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are; and when I see the blood, I will pass over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt" (Exodus 12:13). At the Last Supper Jesus says that the wine represents his blood which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins (Matt 26:28).

[The Sacrament of the Last Supper by Salvador Dali, 1955]

The Garden of Gethsemane: an insight into the spiritual cost and pain of the Atonement

Jesus prays to his father to "take this cup" (Mark 14:36) from him, alluding to the cup of wrath he was about to drink, clearly the Atonement is about more than physical suffering.

[Agony in the Garden by Harmenszoon van Rijn Rembrandt, 1657]

The Crucifixion - an innocent person is sacrificed

Caiaphas the high priest declares: "You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish" (John 11:50) but Pilate's wife knows that Jesus is innocent (Matt 27:19) and a Roman centurion observes that Jesus was a righteous man (Luke 23:46-48).

[Vere, hic homo iustus erat by Salvador Dali, 1964-67]

Theological Implications

The central theological implication of the Atonement is described in Romans chapter three: Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. (Rom 3:25) "Propitiation" says Leon Morris "signifies the removal of wrath by the offering of a gift" (New Bible Dictionary, IVP, p975). The end of condemnation in this way fulfils the ancient prophecy in Genesis that while the serpent will strike the descendant of Eve his heal would crush the snake (Gen 3).

The long war, ten years since Sept-11

2011-09-11T09:00:00.000+10:00

The attacks on New York and Washington DC were very dramatic both because of the power these cities represent and because many of us around the world watched them unfold. Eventually it turned out that Al-Qaeda, based in Afghanistan and sheltered by the Taliban organised the attacks. This lead directly to a lengthy and ongoing war there and, indirectly, to a war in Iraq. The benefits of these wars are relative, while there haven't been major Islamic terrorist attacks recently the in West, religious-based violence continues to a degree across the Islamic world and Christians continue to face persecution. No doubt the American economic malaise is exacerbated by the military spending, a strange echo of the way military spending contributed to the breakdown of the Soviet Union.

There's currently saturation coverage of the anniversary but here are five links that I found interesting:

I like this roundup from The Australian because of the respectful blend of analysis and reflection.
I'm still shocked and surprised by the 9/11 conspiracy theorists, but Popular Science sets the debunking benchmark in this special edition.
The New York Times published this story about recently released audio recordings of pilots, air traffic controllers and even a couple of the hijackers on the morning of September 11.
Christopher Hitchens writes in the Slate that we shouldn't make the attacks more complex than is necessary.
The sad story of an unsolved New York murder from September 11, 2001.

Schooling: elite, religious, secular or home?

2011-09-04T16:00:00.000+10:00

Schools (or homes for that matter) like all institutions are ideological places. For example my friend Jono, himself a school teacher says most good teachers are "influencers", they want to shape minds, direct learning. Children are also ideological sponges and one of the responsibilities of parenting is to ensure your children is educated and has adequate life skills. How do balance the two, if we want our children to adopt our ideology (in the case of Amy and me, we want Evangeline to grow in faith and godliness) and get an education within our means, what path is best? I was prompted to think more recently about this by a book review from Tim Challies, which affirmed sending Christian kids to a public school. Schools also come in different flavours and can also depend on who the teachers, principal, chaplain and surrounding community are.What do my readers think either by comment or anonymously in this survey below?

&lt;p&gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;Loading...&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&lt;/p&gt;

Israel Trip - planned

2011-09-01T19:03:00.049+10:00

My parents, who publish children's books, are releasing a new graphic novel in November called Digger's Code. It's set in modern Israel and the plot involves links to the ANZACs who played an important part in defeat of the Ottoman Empire during World War One.

This coincides with a study tour I'm taking in mid-November to early December. It's being organised through my alma mater, Ridley College. I'll have to leave Amy and Evangeline for three weeks but because you can claim the ~~junket~~ "study tour" on HELP fees it seems like too good an opportunity to miss. Hopefully the printers will have finished in time and I'll bring a couple of copies across to give to people who helped my parents while they researched the book in Israel.

[The picture is a snap I took of one of their draft pages.]

More Andrew Wyeth

2011-08-25T09:00:00.001+10:00

The Sweep by Andrew Wyeth, 1967

Off at Sea by Andrew Wyeth, 1972.

Faith

2011-08-20T09:00:00.000+10:00

Faith, "confidence or trust in a person or thing" (Dictionary.com).

As a doctrine of grace it's a theme that runs through a person's journey from Predestination to Glorification. Faith is intangible, like justice and causation; faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen (Heb 11:1). It's mysterious and spiritual only insofar as the things that are trusted or believed are mysterious and spiritual.

That's the way a Friday should end!

2011-08-19T20:24:00.000+10:00

I came home to a tasty birthday cake from Amy and I received this landscape 'North Hobart Restaurants' by Caroline Amos, as a birthday gift from my parents, I love the colorbond roof, the overcast sky and the way the mountain looms up over the city.

Universalism?

2011-08-12T23:21:00.000+10:00

I've assembled a document which forms a page in the tab above. It's aim is to provide short answers to the major questions and statements Universalism raises. The document isn't designed to win back Universalists to protestant orthodoxy by sheer argument alone but contribute to the debate, to show that for all the questions Universalism raises there exist good traditional answers! My prayer is that those who are Universalists will come round, and that this pamphlet contributes positively to that turnaround because ultimately it is the Holy Spirit who brings people to the truth of who Jesus is and what he's done.

What is the gospel?

2011-08-10T09:00:00.009+10:00

Trevin Wax who blogs at Kingdom People, has put together an interesting survey of gospel definitions. He says they seem to fall into three categories, story, announcement, community. I think "gospel" like "love" or "faith" is a broad term, with different nuances. So depending on the context, both scripturally and historically, the gospel has these three meanings:

The five part story of Jesus: conception, birth, ministry, death and resurrection, as presented in the four gospels (Eg Luke 1:1f or 2 Timothy 2:8).
The announcement of good news about who Jesus is and what he has done (Eg Phil 2:6-11 or 1 Peter 3:18).
The core-theology of the Church which is centred around the crucifixion and resurrection but includes the bad news of sin, the mercy of the cross and a hope for the future (Eg Isaiah 53 or Rev 5:6-10).

I've been meaning to blog about this for a long time but was prompted to post when Arthur posted a video by Scott McKnight on Facebook. In that video Scott McKnight provokes us rightly to think about what "the gospel" actually means, although with rhetoric I wouldn't agree with. I also think it's important to discuss our definition of the gospel because it's a key phrase in our church vocabulary but one that through frequency has lost some of it's specificity. Sometimes when we talk about "the gospel" we really mean:

The mechanics of salvation, the doctrines of grace (aka the Ordo-Salutis) how God's saving grace works in all it's parts (Eg Rom 8:30).
The story of salvation, the grand meta-narrative of Scripture: creation, fall, redemption and restoration (Eg Hebrews 11).
A world view or behaviour that's shaped by Scripture (Eg Acts 17:11).
A particular aspect of salvation such as justification (Eg Rom 3:24).

Scott McKnight says 'that if we make the gospel mean everything then it means nothing' and this is correct. I applaud McKnight for asking great questions and provoking me to think but reject his assumption from the video that personal salvation is over-empahsied. The gospel (in either of it's three forms) creates a personal reaction and requires a personal response (Rom 10:9-10)

Mad Men, Spin and Hype

2011-08-05T09:00:00.084+10:00

Mad Men is a nihilistic show specialising in representing the edge of social and cultural change through the lens of an Advertising agency during the 1960s. Apparently millions are spent every episode getting costumes and props exactly right. It's centered around the tragic excess of Don Draper, a self made executive and creative genius. Mad Men is also part of a larger but looser contemporary genre of shows and movies centered on a protagonist who is the anti-hero, an up market Philip Marlow.

One of the themes of the show is the use of spin, both professionally as the ad agencies sell products and personally as characters attempt to make and keep particular personas. Today we wince at the blatant self-promotion and the kitsch of Hollywood hype but it's sister is the slicker New York 1960's Mad Men version. And I think while we'd frown on the spin doctors from The Hollowmen and generally disdain Hollywood style self-promotion, those of us who deal regularly with intangibles are prone to spin. A farmer points to his field or a nurse to their patient but how do politicians, academics, Generals, managers and ministers quantify what they do let alone present their particular solution as more favorable than another?

This isn't to say ideas, stratagems, feelings and conversations aren't valuable, they are, because they shape where and why the ditches should be dug and the fire preserved. However I think those of use who deal in intangibles need to be continually aware of the dangers of misusing promotion, of buying into a society that is often unconscious of the way culture works, the way a city nurtures people, animals and ideas together.

Pilgrim Hill Association

2011-08-01T09:00:00.058+10:00

We formed the Pilgrim Hill Association on Saturday 30 July, 2011. I'm one of the founding members and the secretary of the committee. Pilgrim Hill, to loosely paraphrase the Phantom, for those who came in late, will be a Christian hostel nestled in the foothills of the Mount Wellington and overlooking Hounville, Tasmania. It'll be a sort of bush L'Abri, a place for both regular travellers who'd like to stay somewhere a little exotic and a haven for spiritual travellers who'd like have to a discussion over a meal. The plan is also to have an Artist residency which will include accommodation and workshop space. Peirce and Christina Baehr will be the first managers of Pilgrim Hill and will live onsite. They'll report to the association whose membership is open to anyone who supports the ethos of Pilgrim Hill. We're about to contract 1plus2 Architects to build a self-sustaining complex on the hill and now have the ambitious task of raising the funds to build the hostel and begin operations.

How much historical context?

2011-07-30T09:00:00.013+10:00

Mastered By the Book from The Gospel Coalition on Vimeo.

Historical context is a very useful tool as Carson argues in this short clip. The historical context of a passage will allow the main idea of the passage to be better preached, understood and applied. In other-words historical context is the servant of the passage. Carson and Piper, who are both theologically conservative, offer differing nuances to the role of historical context but neither would support the idea that historical context is essential in determining the main idea of a passage. This is an important distinction.

Not-so-helpful Ordo Salutis diagrams

2011-07-25T09:00:00.046+10:00

Here are two diagrams that I found on the interwebs that aim to visually represent the Ordo Salutis. While I applaud both the effort to represent theological concepts visually and the desire to show how the different doctrines of grace relate to one another on one page, they both fail in a number of important aspects.

Visually the design above, from this blog, is cluttered and it's unclear if the diagram is relating the Doctrine of Salvation to the believer or simply representing the doctrines in abstraction. Theologically it's missing some important elements, no mention of Forgiveness, Union with Christ or Mortification. Regeneration is also incorrectly presented as a stage rather than a through-theme.

Then there is this diagram, that didn't copy across well from this blog, which goes for the simple approach. However it suffers from the same problem, does the "past, present and future" relate the doctrines of grace to the believer or the doctrines as they relate to each other in abstraction? It too misses Forgiveness, Union with Christ and Mortification along with Preservation and Adoption. It also misrepresents the doctrines as being simply sequential and strangely places the Atonement early in the diagram.

The Lord's Supper, as a meal

2011-07-20T09:00:00.060+10:00

This new book by Tim Chester seemed at first to me to be a little fadish, but he's been posting extracts on his blog and this one about the Lord's Supper stood out as a succinct summary of both the theology and practice of Communion.

But firstly some context; John Frame says the Reformation was essentially about salvation and worship; salvation accomplished through work of Jesus and our worship of Christ (not salvation through ecclesiastical means or our worship of parts of Jesus during Communion). I'm convinced that Communion is a spiritual meal but not because of something peculiar to the bread and wine or unique in the words that are said but because of who participates, God and man at table together, re-enacting the gospel message. It's spiritual both because the stakes are so high, 'substitutionary atonement' celebrated in a meal (someone else's body broken and blood shed on our behalf) and because God has stepped into history and delineated a special celebration; passover-communion.

Tim Chester (who often writes like fellow Englishman Melvin Tinker) gently reminds us of the obvious New Testament precedent, Communion should be celebrated as part of a meal:

What we call “the Lord’s Supper” is a foretaste of “the Lamb’s Supper” in Revelation 19. It’s a beginning of the feast we eat with Jesus and his people in the new creation. It’s not just a picture. It’s the real thing begun in a partial way. We eat with God’s people and we eat with the ascended Christ, present through the Holy Spirit. It should be a meal we “earnestly desire” to eat. We should approach it with anticipation. With longing. With excitement. With joy. The Lord’s Supper should be a joyous occasion. A vibrant meal with friends. A feast. That must surely affect how we celebrate it. Today the Lord’s Supper has commonly become ritualized. We’re the group in town whose central meal involves a fragment of bread and a small sip of wine. The bread and wine in the New Testament are part of a meal.

The use of "rehabilitative" and "retributive" in relation to universalism

2011-07-18T13:22:00.003+10:00

While not exhaustive, this google book search for the terms "rehabilitative", "retributive" and "universalism" show us that in the post-Puritan hey-day of early evangelicalism "retributive" was a term more commonly employed than the "rehabilitative" but then almost in parallel with the Industrial Revolution "retributive" fell out of favour and rehabilitative became more common. But what's most fascinating is that "universalism" has a similar upward trajectory to "rehabilitative" and then peaks shortly after "rehabilitative" peaks! This correlation is no doubt due to the fact that Universalism emphasises God's rehabilitative judgement. (Only printed material is included in the search.)

Repentance

2011-07-15T09:00:00.061+10:00

While conceptually it's sometimes good to talk about faith and repentance separately, it's generally more healthy to acknowledge that they occur together (Mark 1:15), that as you turn from something you put your trust in something else. However today I'll focus on repentance. Unlike Glorification, which is a sequential stage, repentance is an ongoing through-theme in the Ordo Salutis. From the moment we first respond to God's call and turn from our initial rebellious orientation we continue to turn from all of sin's manifestations in all the parts of our life. So for those who become Christians as adults it's an initial stage (2 Cor 7:10 or Heb 6:1) but for those who grow up as Christians and those who perserve as Christians it's an ongoing attitude, an ongoing activity. Daily repentance is the motion of turning to face the flickering flame of the candle in a dark room (Acts 26:20 or Heb 6:6), instead of cherishing the darkness.

Welcome South Sudan!

2011-07-12T17:37:00.000+10:00

Carbon Tax

2011-07-11T09:00:00.002+10:00

The ideological argument for the carbon tax, is that we need it for the sake of global politics, to be seen to making an effort and for the sake of the planet, to be doing something albeit only a little. This could be labelled 'the per-capita argument'. On the other-hand the sobering reality of 'the share of the total emissions argument' is that a carbon tax will do little if anything to change the actual environmental reality. This is demonstrated by this graph from the ABC.

Let's assume the science of human induced global warming is roughly true, that there's a correlation between increased carbon and increased global temperatures and we need to do something sensible to manage it. The current Australian government has decided to introduce a carbon tax, it's personal effects can be roughly measured here.

My difficulty is with human nature and while I acknowledge the difficulties of governing in a fallen world surely there are schemes that could be created to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that didn't require a clumsy tax? (What about a radically comprehensive train system and targeting the three dirtiest power stations?) Speaking broadly, some nations, even lovely ones like Russia may simply say "yes we have a carbon tax" while not making any changes. Other nations like say China may say "at this point a carbon tax isn't in our national interest for the next ten years." Australia instead of leading a global revolution is left to hang out to dry economically. Then on a national level a large bureaucratic system is open to fraud and mismanagement. Practically the ideological aim of the carbon tax is negated by it's implementation both globally and locally.

[My prediction is that the carbon tax is here to stay. There'll be some token global scheme and some future global crisis; such as a war or a disaster that reduces emissions and people will assume the scheme has caused the reduction. Then a future conservative government facing a rising cost of living and whatever unpleasantness is on the horizon will nationalise the carbon trading market and reduce the price of carbon.]

A useful set of goals for ministry

2011-07-10T09:00:00.036+10:00

Being a minister is difficult because it's a vocation that deals with qualities that difficult to measure such as relationships and spirituality. So it can be fairly discouraging without a direction and difficult to set goals but I like this checklist I found on the interwebs:

Pastoral ministry requires far more courage than I ever dreamed.
Expositional preaching is a far more effective medium than I ever imagined.
The temptation to quit the church or quit pastoral ministry all together is rather frequent, but perseverance is worth it.
Neglecting important ministries is terribly easy but also deadly in the long-term.
If there is a strong love-bond between the pastor and his flock – the congregation believes that I love them and I believe that they love me – that will cover a multitude of sins.

[h/t 'What should I expect to learn my first 5 years as a pastor?']

Mitt Romney: Mormonism

2011-07-05T09:00:00.005+10:00

Mitt Romney has been campigning for republican nomination for about a month, his campaign focus has mainly been the economy. Although his Mormonism and it's associated 'clean family values' has got some traction with those on the right of American politics who are concerned with morals, what I'm most interested is the way in which his campaign brings Mormonism and it's relationship to Evangelical Christianity to the fore again. In Australia, the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are probably represented by similar sized but small populations and don't interact with Australian Evangelical Christians at all. But in America, the sheer size of Mormonism and it's demographic concentration around Utah makes it's relationship with Christianity more complex. For example Richard Mouw (Calvinism at Las Vegas Airport) has been involved in trying to find common ground with Mormonism. If Romney stays in the race either the theological differences will be brushed over in effort to focus on common moral values or his campaign will have the unintended side effect of bringing the Mormon-Christian differences into the limelight. Whatever the case I hope theology gets some media airtime!

Effectual Calling

2011-06-30T09:00:00.003+10:00

God, through Scripture, says he has called you out of darkness into his wonderful light (1 Peter 2:9). The idea is very similar to that moment in the Matrix when Neo gets the package with the ringing phone and a series of amazing events unfold. The doctrine of effectual calling should be kept separate from the doctrines of Apologetics and Evangelism because it's personal, because it's about the election of particular people, those he predestined, he also called (Rom 8:30). "Effectual calling" is also ultimately successful, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable (Rom 11:29). It's not as though God makes someone an offer and they decide whether or not to buy Amway but God brings supernatural force to bear on their situation and the person begins a radical new direction in their life's journey. The most useful aspect of this doctrine is the way it describes the pull God exerts and introduces into your life. For some it's as simple and dramatic as hearing someone else ask them to become a Christian, for others it's more of a series of small events, circumstances and comments that nudge you towards repentance and faith. Finally this doctrine is useful for Christians thinking about and describing how they became Christians.

Winter's Bone [Spoiler Alert]

2011-06-25T09:00:00.038+10:00

While this story of a young woman's defence of her family is tough, set among the rural poor of The Ozarks in southern Missouri, it's not an example of Miserablism! It's a thriller and very gritty in places but it's not gratuitous and the story arc is very satisfying. The heroine, Ree Dolly, has to find her father so he can appear in court and so they won't loose the house which he put up as bond. However the dad brews Meth in an illegal lab and is mixed up with the family of the local big man, Thump Milton. So it's difficult for Ree to untangle the story and confront the crime family. A striking moment occurs when Ree's uncle saves her and "stands for her" to take vicariously whatever consequences the Milton clan might dish out. I like the way this movie weaves story with daily life. Having a daughter also made me think about the dynamics of the father-daughter relationship, Ree's resilience and the formation of her character in such a gloomy context.

John Bunyan's Ordo Salutis

2011-06-20T09:00:00.026+10:00

Over at the Resurgence blog, someone posted a copy of John Bunyan's detailed flow-chart style Ordo Salutis. While a little hard to decipher ( a larger version) and written in an older english style, it's detail is fascinating, relating many of the doctrines of grace personally to the reader. This reflects Bunyan's wider concern seen in the Pilgrim's Progress to place the believer correctly within his or her spiritual journey.

However, the diagram is a somewhat unwieldy and wordy. I'm not against written Ordo Salutis, for example this 'Plan of Salvation' forms an introductory chapter to the paperback ESV, but like Bunyan's lacks a way of tying all the doctrines of grace together succinctly and visually.

John Dickson interviews Diaa Mohamed

2011-06-14T09:00:00.022+10:00

St. Eutychus reports the wonderful way the Sydney Anglicans have responded to a recent Muslim advertising campaign about Jesus. In the clip below John Dickson from the Centre for Public Christianity interviews Diaa Mohamed the man behind the campaign. But go check out the original billboard and the subsequent response.

Jesus a prophet of Islam? from CPX on Vimeo.

'Riders on the Storm'

2011-06-10T09:00:00.001+10:00

Although the lyrics are bit of a mish-mash of concepts and you need to be patient through the long instrumental piece in the final third, I often return to this song. Part of the gospel is acknowledging the extent of our helplessness and depravity.

"If Bell is wrong shouldn't we condemn McDonald?"

2011-06-05T09:00:00.012+10:00

Doug Wilson makes a good observation, McDonald was wrong but his context is different to Bell's. Wilson says that McDonald, while believing something in error was determined to be godly and orthodox while Bell panders to the spirit of the age.

Regeneration

2011-06-01T09:00:00.003+10:00

Regeneration is, to steal a phrase of John Calvin's, "the secret work of the Holy Spirit." What motivates us to repent of our wrong doing and to trust the historical Jesus with our lives? Regeneration is the doctrine that describes the work that the Holy Spirit does, behind the scenes, through all the various aspects of our salvation. Instead of deciding off our own bat to follow Jesus, the Spirit prompts us to respond to the call of the gospel.

A representative verse is Romans 8:9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ, linking it interestingly to the other through theme, union with Christ. But the concept is best explained by Jesus in the gospel of John were he says to the interested Nicodemus; “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." (John 3:3) Not a physical rebirth but an inward work of the Spirit explains Jesus, who then in the following verses links this to a synopsis of the good news.

There are synergistic aspects of our salvation, for example faith, repentance and mortification. This means God uses secondary causes, such as trust, turning or putting-sin-to-death, as part of his saving action. But Regeneration is out of our control, it's monergistic, we don't summon up the Holy Spirit like a witch, he works in inside us like sap inside a tree. This is because our sinful inability prevents us from responding positively to God. But your iniquities have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden his face from you, so that he will not hear. (Isaiah 59:2)

Worldview movies: 'Notes from the Tilt-a-Whirl'

2011-05-30T09:00:00.000+10:00

This could be very interesting, looks well done. Regardless of how it turns out, I like the new genere that's being formed here, 'worldview movies'. Although admittedly all movies are ideological (eg Eat Pray Love), but most are ideological either inadvertently (eg Babies) or secretly (eg Four Lions).

A new diagram

2011-05-25T09:00:00.011+10:00

The older diagram represents the Doctrines of Grace, in abstraction, so I thought it'd be helpful to represent the Ordo Salutis as it related to someone's life. I've used my own life as an example, I grew up with Christian parents and so in a sense was being "called" via my parents and my church community from my very earliest moments. There was also in my life no moment of crisis where I turned from unbelief to belief but instead repeated instances of repentance and a growth in awareness of what God had done. But tell me readers, what do you think, does this diagram represent the Doctrine of Salvation any better?

'Miracle' by Seamus Heaney

2011-05-20T09:00:00.000+10:00

Not the one who takes up his bed and walks
But the ones who have known him all along
And carry him in -

Their shoulders numb, the ache and stoop deeplocked
In their backs, the stretcher handles
Slippery with sweat. And no let-up

Until he's strapped on tight, made tiltable
And raised to the tiled roof, then lowered for healing.
Be mindful of them as they stand and wait

For the burn of the paid-out ropes to cool,
Their slight lightheadedness and incredulity
To pass, those ones who had known him all along.

(Human Chain, 'Miracle' by Seamus Heaney)

Union with Christ

2011-05-15T09:00:00.131+10:00

Union with Christ, isn't a mystical state you reach after mediating or something that occurs during the Lord's Supper or a particular stage in salvation. Instead it's more of a category that runs through whole Ordo Salutis, a way of considering how we are connected to Jesus in each of the separate aspects of Salvation. This is why I've shown it as a red arrow in the slide below rather than a symbol.

Because 'Union with Christ' turns up in so many places (Justin Taylor's accessible little summary gives you a sense of how often the concept appears) through the different doctrines of grace it's hard to name a single representative or summative verse. Essentially it's our spiritual connection to the person of Jesus that matters because it's by his work we are saved. It's not that we become absorbed into God in some sort of Buddhist eternity sense or that it's only a token connection, like being a member of the Wilderness Society but as a spiritual aspect of our identity which of course as Christians is dominated by the saving work of Jesus.

Clearly what this doctrine means is that we don't blunder through salvation like a runner on an orienteering course, marking-off our checkpoints saying: "Predestination, done, now on to Justification, wave to Jesus on the way, (I'm glad he made this course, that I now have to run by myself!)." No, if predestination is God at work through all history and regeneration is the Holy Spirit at work behind the scenes and Sanctification is God making us holy, Union with Christ keeps us close to Jesus throughout the whole process.

A three-fold theodicy

2011-05-10T09:00:00.118+10:00

"Against these three temptations [solution by universal order, solution by autonomous freed and solution by dialectic reasoning], Scripture raises the triple affirmations: that evil is evil, that the Lord is sovereign and that God is good, his creation also being good with similar kind of goodness." (Henri Blocher, Evil and the Cross, 85)

These three affirmations form a "T" says Blocher, or in my mind they a triangular boundary ▲ surrounding our Biblical theodicy (Which is the classic moral and apologetic problem; "If there is a good God why is there evil in the world?"). The centre of which is an "opaque enigma" (p102), a sad mystery unlike the joyful mysteries of the Trinity or the Incarnation. Blocher goes on to give the following warning: "water down one of the three affirmations, and evil to some extent becomes excusable" (p102). So although a Scriptural theodicy doesn't provide an answer to why evil is present in the world, we are able to affirm, in the light of Blocher's ▲ the following four statements about the presence of evil.

What we able to say about Evil in this world:

It is always denounced
It tends to non-being
It flows from Freedom
It enters into the plan of God

But a Scriptural theodicy isn't just about defining the extent of the problem, it's also about finding a solution; answering the next question: "what should we do about evil?" Blocher writes this:

God battles with evil, and will conquer it. Or rather, God has battled with it and he has conquered it. We have kept the supreme consideration to the end: that the other 'T' formed by two small beams of wood on the hill called Golgotha, Skull Hill. There the darkness of the mystery deepened, from the sixth hour until the ninth, the place from which shines forth the light [✝]. (p103)

The solution is three-fold:

The Lord Jesus suffers for my evil
The Crucifixion could only take place within God's control
The death of Jesus reveals a pure love, it's basis is the unadulterated goodness of God

For those who are interested in the detail behind my summary I've included the relevant (and annotated!) chapter of Evil and the Cross by Henri Blocher. (Thankfully I fall five pages under the (Australian) 10% limit for research.)
Chapter 4 'Scripture on Evil' by Blocher

How does Christian faith enrich Art?

2011-05-07T11:35:00.000+10:00

"Christians do see a hierarchy of value and beauty that is external to themselves. Nobility and craft have esteem. That does not mean devotion to pretty pictures or despising humble stuff but quite the opposite would be true, some Christians want to produce confronting pictures because they want to speak truth. But at some point in the spectrum of Christian Art, there would have to be celebration because history has meaning it's going some place."

My dad, the poet and artist, Steve Isham, at a recent forum about Art and Christianity organised by the University Fellowship of Christians, Ben Walter (poet) added "Christianity provides meaning" and Nick Gross (graphic designer) said: "Telling the truth is the role of an Artist and a Christian."

Plotting artistic merit and spiritual benefit on a grid

2011-05-07T09:52:00.001+10:00

This graph from Radagast's blog plots 'Art' across a matrix showing both spiritual benefit and artistic quality. While not intended as a representative survey it shows, interestingly, that popularity, quality and benefit are different and important aspects of Art. So you have the Lord of Rings (book) being popular, very good and excellent, while Star Wars (movie) while also being popular is neutral and poor. This chart is not intended to be definitive but it's an excellent starting point in making us think about Art and it's value.

CBE 2011: 'A Biblical Perspective?'

2011-05-06T09:00:00.004+10:00

The Rev Matthew Williams, a friend from my time at Ridley and now a minister at St James Old Cathedral, Melbourne recently presented a paper at the 2011 Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE) AGM. It's entitled 'What does it mean to be a Christian man? A Biblical Perspective' and was given as part of a panel on 'masculinity'!

A summary of Matt's argument

What is the "normative" version of a Biblical man, asks Matt. He rejects a survey of "normative descriptions of masculinity" because this would slant results in favour of "the images of manliness we already have." Instead Matt suggests we should focus "on what it means to be a Christian man, "biologically or sociologically. Matt then suggests beginning the definition of a 'Christian man', eschatologically, in the opening verses of Colossians chapter 3. Our definition of masculinity should be shaped by the future; "Kingdom-shaped goal in all things."

Later in the chapter, the Apostle Paul gives some instructions about slaves (Col 3:22), which sounds, according to Matt, like being conformed to this world instead of being renewed. "Is this asymmetry, this power imbalance another mandate, a creation mandate that stands over against the kingdom mandate?" This is only a problem says Matt if we read the household code (Col 3:18-24) as "law" instead of ethical applications. In the second part of his definition Matt adds "cross-shaped means" because of the Apostle's dual Cross-Resurrection emphasis. The Atonement, should be our ethical starting point. Therefore says Matt, "Paul is not self-contradicting nor is he inadequately developed in his grasp of the gospel, he rather understood the full implications of the gospel." Matt then argues that the cross should prompt us to be more egalitarian now because of the egalitarian future, rather than "make our relationships asymmetrical again."

While Matt affirms "egalitarianism" as a gospel ethic over and above "patriarchalism", the process of implementation should be slow because we are still in the world, with all it's varying power structures. Matt then concludes by stating that a Christian man does not need any particular characteristic, except godliness. Matts' final words are: "Because I think perhaps one of the distinctives of being a Christian man is that you are in a particularly good position to look exactly like the gospel, looking not to your own interests but to the interests of others; exercising a cross-shaped means to a kingdom-shaped end - precisely by encouraging women and helping them to flourish by standing up against institutionalised and baptised sexism and giving women the space to become all that God has given them to be in our households, in the world, and in the church."

1. A biblical basis for masculinity and femininity?

Matt rejects the need to "survey" Scripture for a normative description of Biblical masculinity. Given that Scripture is both the philosophical starting point and the epistemology of any theological comment it is very odd that Matt writes the following:

It is tempting to focus on the word 'man', to survey the bible looking for normative descriptions of masculinity or examples of men or actions by men we deem particularly manly. But in fact, if we do that, we find that our arguments are really circular, because we are likely to select and use those passages according the images of manliness we already have.

Later Matt does indeed select a Biblical passage (Col 3:1-3) as a starting point for his definition of what a Christian man should be, but one can't help but wonder how even that selection is protected from bias. (Clearly everyone suffers from bias and it's simply a matter of ensuring our interpretations are consistent with church tradition. (Viva Sola Scriptura!)) The more troubling aspect of this first problem is Matt's a priori rejection of a normative biblical definition. I recall a speaker from a seminar at the 2008 CBE conference claiming Scripture "could not / should not" provide us with definitions of masculinity and femininity. Matt's argument seems to reflect this worrying trend, an implication that Scripture, the basis of our Christian worldview, should not provide the basis of our definitions of masculinity and femininity.

I concede of course that Matt may not have sought to create this implication but his paper does little to mitigate the problem his initial statement creates. I also concede that creating biblical definitions of masculinity and femininity is a difficult task, but that 'difficulty' alone shouldn't be a logical barrier to using Scripture as both the springboard and the basis of our definition. One would hope the controversy should be about the content of biblical definitions of masculinity, not the more foundational question of whether or not Scripture can provide a definition of masculinity!

2. An over-realised eschatology?

I admit that this particular critique is, to a degree, subjective, because of the legitimate range of eschatological positions within Christian tradition. However, I do believe that Matt, in an effort to create a currently applicable egalitarian ethic strays into over-realised eschatology. An eschatology that isn't over-realised anticipates the return of Jesus (Rev 22:20), our future glorification (Rom 8:30) and the transformation of all things (Rev 22:1-2). But it also acknowledges that while our hearts may be set on heaven (Col 3:3), we're still only seeing our eternal future with Christ from a distance (Heb 11:13-16), like strangers in a strange land (KJ Ex 2:22) and we're, for better or for worse, ordained to live in this world until our time is up (Ps 90:10).

Matt writes:

It's a wonderful picture, and a powerful ethical paradigm, to simply think of heaven, of the kingdom of God, and to seek to be conformed to its reality; to set before ourselves a kingdom-shaped goal in all things. We are being renewed according to God's image, a renewal in which our distinctions fade away, distinctions of race and social standing (and he says in Galatians, of gender) and we are all simply people sharing that same divine image, and therefore treat one another accordingly.

The eschatology Matt suggests here isn't the hopeless (an earthly Kingdom of God) and pragmatic (work hard now) over-realisation of Schweitzer, but a problematic version nonetheless. Ethical instructions such as the household codes shouldn't be modified in the light of a still undiscerned future. Furthermore, the household codes have a particular and unique place in the larger and longer economy of God's action in the world, that isn't superseded by a still un-occurred future. (Oscar Cullerman's model of living between D-Day and V-Day doesn't (and shouldn't) account for time travel!) Lastly the model of Egalitarian ethics Matt presents calls for current and precise certainties, based on a eschatological future that is painted in deliberately broad and tantalisingly mysterious brushstrokes.

3. So what actually is a "Christian Man"?

Matt closes his paper by noting that apart from godliness there is no outstanding characteristic of biblical masculinity. At the beginning of the paper Matt mentioned in passing, biology and sociology as contributing to our definition of masculinity. However at the end of Matt's paper one is left with the impression that an Egalitarian definition of masculinity is sexless, there is nothing except maybe biology ("a Y chromosome") that makes a man or a women.

This is a little disappointing, the promise it seems at the beginning of the paper or at least on reading the title is that there is something to being a male, something uniquely Biblical, something that makes a male well male. Although Matt nods at biology and sociology, nothing it seems distinguishes men from women. It feels as though the entire CBE AGM panel was a setup; 'Actually, Egalitarianism is true, there's nothing different about men and women.' Now again, I don't think Matt intended it to land like this but that's the distinct impression I get from his paper.

Conclusion

Matt's paper is both readable and interesting and in critiquing it I appreciated the way it sharpened my own thinking. In addition, although Matt obviously takes a polemical line in his paper, he personally is a champion of discussion and making-a-place for 'Complementarians' even when 'Egalitarians' are in the ascendency! I don't think Matt makes makes a convincing egalitarian case for what it means to be a Christian man, but I wonder how representative his line of arguments are and how applicable my critique would be to the wider CBE movement in Australia?

Suspicion and Faith: Nietzsche

2011-05-02T09:00:00.010+10:00

In the final third of Suspicion and Faith, Westphal uses the suspicion of the third member of his triumvirate: Nietzsche, to critically examine the use of power as it's covertly or even overtly expressed in piety. (Previous sections: Freud and Marx.) Nietzsche is the most anticipated of the three, in part because his master-slave system of morality is the most destructive analysis of the three (p232-235). Freud goal is constructive; deeper psychological analysis and Marx while breaking the capitalist system envisages a better one (socialist) to replace it. Nietzsche however, "regards the most basic human drive as 'the psychical extravagance of the lust of power!'" (p222) A "will to power" that permeates all human activity, either in the attempt to take it, by the 'slaves' or the exercise of it by the 'masters'. Nietzsche's critique therefore "focuses on the discrepancy between the religious affirmation of altruism and the will to power he detects at its origins" (p224).

A great summary by Westphal (p229)

Freud: ontological weakness seeking consolation
Marx: sociological power seeking legitimation
Nietzsche: sociological power seeking revenge

Nietzsche's critique

Although Nietzche was the most fascinating of the three, the critique Westphal presents doesn't feel as sharp, perhaps the element of surprise has been lost by working through previous two sections or perhaps the role of religious leaders in our Modern Western culture has been diminished in recent times? "It comes as no surprise that Nietzsche interprets the priest as an expression of the will to power" (p240). But the lack of sting makes Westphal's observation no less true or important:

"When Nietzsche argues that physical, political, or spiritual incapacity to do evil is not virtue but rather, when it pretends to be, sheer hypocrisy, it may well be that he is doing something very much like what Jesus and the prophets did, protesting against a corruption of the spiritual life that disguises itself with a veneer of spirituality" (p251).

Essentially Nietzsche's obsession with the "will to power" reveals that "we can easily be fascists, for example, in the manner we apply or extend non-fascist values" (p255).

Treme [some spoilers] - post apocalyptic?

2011-05-01T09:00:00.088+10:00

From the creators of The Wire, comes Treme set three months after Hurricane Katrina nearly destroyed New Orleans (with many of the same actors, a few surprisingly cast against type). As in The Wire some of the sexual allusions are difficult to cope with but there is less violence. Similar to Generation Kill, it's a shorter series and like Generation Kill (second invasion of Iraq) more of a snapshot of a significant period (post Katrina) rather than an extended exploration of a location (the city of Baltimore).

Again the central device is following several loosely connected stories that, while quite different, explore similar themes. One of the themes seems to be living in a post-apocalyptic landscape (patrolling National Guard units, the abandoned cars, the broken houses and damaged societal fabric): who survives, who thrives and who succumbs. On the one hand, Jeanette the restaurant owning chef is defeated by the broken city, closing up and leaving for New York on the other hand Davis the musician thrives, partly because of his joie de vivre, and willingness to embrace the chaos of the broken city.

I wonder where David Simon will go next? The Wire so powerfully explored the broken dynamics of institutions. While Generation Kill and Treme were great snapshots of important periods in recent American history, the first serious the second relatively more lighthearted. Strangely I also like each of the show's inconsistencies (although Generation Kill was the least like this, in this regard). For example in The Wire a few of the subplots were boring and fairly immaterial narratively or thematically. It's the same in Treme, for example the professor Creighton's lectures are cringingly [sp] lightweight given the pathos of his particular story. But I like this because it's emblematic of our fallen condition, a funny mixture banal normality and intensity and beauty.

Easter Sunday

2011-04-24T09:00:00.001+10:00

['The Supper at Emmaus' by Diego Velazquez via the Artchive]

Good Friday

2011-04-22T09:00:00.000+10:00

['Christ Carrying the Cross' by Hieronymous Bosch via the Artchive]

Maundy Thursday (The Last Supper)

2011-04-21T09:00:00.002+10:00

[Byzantine Last Supper fresco in the church of San Giorgio, Venice, via Paradoxplace]

MONA

2011-04-18T17:15:00.000+10:00

David Walsh, in creating MONA, said he was creating a "subversive adult Disneyland". Although what's being subverted isn't clear, I gather he wants to deconstruct various traditional expectations of aesthetics, sexuality and morality. I remember visiting the previous museum of antiquities, with it's small carefully labeled exhibits and wondered if Walsh's big project would led to an improved experience. I expected to be impressed and shocked but was underwhelmed and somewhat annoyed. The smell of pooh (from the 'Cloaca a machine' exhibit) while viewing Nolan's massive 'Snake' was disconcerting. I was impressed by the 'Kyptos' installation but surprised by the amateurishness of some of the pieces but this is probably more of a comment on the pathetic state of modern Art and culture then Walsh's ability to choose fine pieces to display. Some of the pornography was predictably off-putting and often misogynistic. The lack of explanatory labels was both annoying and confusing, leading me to photograph what I thought was some sort of modern Art installation but could of been light fittings or climate control devices. However, the lack of labels is also Walsh's most cunning cultural maneuver. People will be temporarily impressed then forget the Mac-truck stuck in the hallway or feel momentarily that they were in some sort of Twin-Peaks-inspired nightmare after some of the exhibits. But it's this phenomenon represented also by the National Museum in Canberra of confusing or deliberately ambiguous exhibits that's the most morally dangerous thing about MONA. The presentation, communication and explanation of culture and history is vitally important for a civilisation. Most of Walsh's exhibits aren't very subversive; for example the Koran with a stone inside is carefully tucked away in a corner on one level (and don't expect to see an exhibition of the Mohammed cartoons any time soon). Clearly it's the overall cultural impact of chaotically displayed and deliberately ambiguous Art work that is most subversive.

Palm Sunday

2011-04-17T09:00:00.000+10:00

[Detail from a medieval fresco from Georgia via WikiCommons.]

The Arethusa

2011-04-16T16:10:00.002+10:00

[Via WikiCommons, courtesy of the Queensland State Library Archives.]

"Morality is simply a function"

2011-04-15T09:00:00.187+10:00

I've recently discovered the ABC Religion and Ethics section (I'm a slow learner!). In this article from the 5 April, Russell Blackford editor of the Journal of Evolution and Technology and a professor at University of Newcastle argues that morality can be measured. Startling at first until you realise he's simply suggesting that morality, "good" and "bad" are functions. So for example says Blackford the function of a *good* hammer is that it is;

"solidly constructed so that its head won't come off the handle. Furthermore, its head is of hard metal that won't dent, has enough weight to deliver adequate force, but is not so heavy as to be difficult to lift and use for the purpose."

His aim, he says, is to "demystify" moral judgments not to "debunk" them. No doubt because moral judgements, in this world, are inescapable. However as tidy as this all seems, his argument of morality as functionality is part reductionism and part avoidance of larger issues. He neglects (deliberately?) to explain the place of ultimate functions eg of humans or an individual's life and doesn't deal with the concept of 'evil'. For example is killing simply the function of a serial, furthermore why does functionality seem to fail as such as useful guide at this point? Somewhat unsurprisingly Blackwell has no answers.

The Archibald Prize 2011

2011-04-11T09:00:00.000+10:00

I regret missing last year's Archibald Prize and so it's exciting to see this year's line up, but like 2009 it's a varied set. The packing room prize winner: Matt Moran by Vince Fanauzzo.

Most annoying: Artist and family by Rodney Pople.

Best stylistically: Portrait of a Seated Woman by Marcus Cullum.

Most surrealistic (think René Magritte) : Self Portrait - For A Change by Pam Tippett.

Most pretentious title but most interesting background:, Self portrait as Quong Tart's Contemporary (After John Thomson) 2011 by Jiawei Shen.

Best overall (with allusions to Giorgio de Chirico): Professor Penny Sackett: Astronomer and Physicist by Andrew Mezei.

An Evangelical Universalist theodicy?

2011-04-07T09:00:00.002+10:00

I've become an occasional contributor at the EFAC (Evangelical Fellowship in the Anglican Communion) blog. For my first post I outlined my concerns about the theodicy presented by Bell (Love Wins) and Parry (The Evangelical Universalist). (This is the second major problem facing Universalism that I alluded to in a previous post.) However I've been prompted to outline my case against Parry in some more detail.

Although clues about Parry's theodicy could be gleaned from the book overall (it frustratingly lacks an index) he directly address the problem of evil at the beginning of chapter seven. Parry suggests an Irenaen theodicy, called a "solution by autonomous freedom" by Blocher in Evil and the Cross, is made more preferable by Universalism. He then goes on to give the example of a mother suffering the death of her daughter. Parry says traditional theology (of the type Blocher would represent I guess) devalues both the mother's suffering the girl herself but on the other hand;

"Now this problem is easily removed on universalism, because the daughter's suffering and death can also be used by God for her own salvation after death. Thus God can use the suffering of any person to contribute not simply to the good of others but also to their own good. It is no coincidence that John Hick, one of the chief contemporary exponents of Irenaean theodicies, is a universalist." (page 158)

Parry doesn't commit himself entirely to this theodicy. Instead he seems to slid in the next passage into what Blocher labels the "solution by universal order." Parry writes that "God knows how to defeat evil by weaving it into many good and creative plots. ... So by integrating horrendous evil into one's relationship with God, one confers a positive aspect upon such experience." (page 159)

Although Parry appears approving of both alternatives he seems undecided about which his universalism commits him to; which lead me to describe him in my EFAC blog post as "teetering" between the two options. However, as Blocher points out, neither is ultimately the option presented by Scripture. The "solution by autonomous" freedom limits God's sovereignty to make space for independent human action. The "solution by universal order" makes evil part of God. But evil is evil, distinct and morally separate from God. God is also sovereign, with human responsibility part of the way he works in the world not a separate activity.

Kitsch and Christian sub-culture

2011-04-06T09:00:00.003+10:00

A friend of ours took this photo of us parodying American Gothic, (Margate style!) at the end of a photo-shoot. The original occupies that strange space of being both "Art" and a recognisable symbol of Kitsch. We shouldn't be too harsh with Kitsch as long we identify it for what it is; recognising that it occupies a legitimate place in our culture and affections while not over-emphasising it's artistic value or ideological significance.

I think it's the same with Christian sub-culture, "sub-culture" is unavoidable when humans gather regularly. Sometimes Christian sub-culture contains elements of Kitsch or things that aren't as smooth or trendy as the surrounding world of fashion, technology and architecture. This is OK, as long as we identify it correctly, own up to it and don't over-value it. Hymns, photocopied newsletters, bad-coffee, someone with a funny voice, old people and clip art. If the ideology is true, noble and beautiful then the rest of Christian sub-culture will fall into place as God irons everything out. If we're being honest we'll recognise the place for both 'Kitsch' and beauty.

[Photography by Sarah Kirton, © 2011]

The Carbon Tax debate

2011-04-02T20:58:00.000+11:00

Let me try and untangle some of the hoopla surrounding the 'Carbon Tax', more to identify what's going on in the public discourse then push a particular barrow. So, the Labor government in concert with the Greens wish to introduce a Carbon tax for these reasons:

1. It will encourage other nations to sign up to the global system of emissions reduction using some sort of mechanism of carbon trading
2. This will also mean Australia will have system in place early in order and so benefit from the introduction of a global system.
3. A carbon tax will reduce (ever so slightly) global carbon emissions.

This is because

1. A (reliable) global system is rapidly on it's way
2. And reducing global carbon emissions will prevent environmental catastrophes.

Therefore

It is good to introduce a Carbon Tax now even if it means increasing the cost of living.

However even if anthropomorphic climate change is real, there seems to be three substantial and unresolved problems. Firstly isn't there a cost benefit problem here, the cost of living increase being sought won't seem to have much of an impact on global carbon emissions. Furthermore where are the predictions of environmental catastrophes that will result if carbon emissions aren't reduced by a certain amount within a certain time frame? Finally for every global system designed to regulate human behaviour, there's one that's failing, why will this system be any quicker or better?

Tradition

2011-04-01T09:00:00.001+11:00

Gerald McDormott, in this First Things article, makes some interesting observations about the place of Church Tradition in modern Protestantism. It's a long article with a lot to think about and interact with but essentially he's noting a conflict within Evangelicalism about our relationship with Church Tradition. The "Meliorists" (E.g. Olson etc) wish to revise tradition while the "Traditionalists" (E.g. Carson etc) hold we might need to adjust our approach to Church Tradition. For the Meliorists, 'sempa reforma' means that everything is up for grabs except the bible, all tradition is open to revision. For the Traditionalist it's more of a matter of emphasis; Augustine's doctrine of Grace over his doctrine of Church, but not the question of should we follow Augustine or not.

This debate has hermeneutical consequences. The Meliorists, says McDormott, see Scripture as functional, communicating God's words. Often the Meliorist position is characterized by emphasising the place of experience in communicating theology, yet McDormott's response is a good one.

"In these ways and others, Vanhoozer shows in a post-foundationalist way that experience and doctrine are intrinsically tied up in one another, and that the Bible’s words (not just concepts) are given by God just as He gives them afresh every time they are read or preached. The Meliorists’ exaltation of experience over doctrine is a false dichotomy, and their dissociation of revelation from biblical words slights God’s work of revelation in history."

In the next paragraph it's fascinating to see, for a journal that's been heavily influenced from the other side of the Tiber, an almost Protestant view of Sola Scriptura affirmed!

"Traditionists also affirm sola scriptura, but in a manner that is really prima scriptura: Scripture is primary, but the Great Tradition is the authoritative guide to its interpretation."

McDormott, who favours the 'Traditionists' concludes by predicting that the gap between the two groups will only widen.

[Still from Fiddler on the Roof, © 1971 United Artists]

The noetic effects of sin

2011-03-26T21:46:00.005+11:00

Radagast, who usually blogs at a fairly sedate pace has decided to spend the month of March in an amazing and almost daily series on, broadly, the relationship between Science and Faith, but more specifically on both a meta-commentary on colour and, most fascinating of all, the Platonic nature of mathematics. Platonism, as philosophical system, carries a lot of baggage, and so it'd be great to see Radagast provide some pointers in untangling the good and the bad aspects of it.

However most interesting of all was Radagast's reminder of the noetic effects of sin.

Emil Brunner suggests that such a noetic effect “reaches its maximum in theology and its minimum in the exact sciences, and zero in the sphere of the formal. Hence it is meaningless to speak of ‘Christian mathematics’” (Revelation and Reason: the Christian doctrine of faith and knowledge, 1946). Three kinds of noetic effect seem apparent from experience, however ...

For those who watched Collision, the documentary about a series of debates between Hitchens and Wilson, you might remember one of their between-debate conversations where Wilson briefly explains this idea to Hitchens. In this diagram I want to explore the idea that theology (or ideology for non-Christian readers) which is at the heart of knowledge and thought, is the most likely to be corrupted and most influential when corrupted with the effects of sin working it's way out through the different areas of civilisation.

What's interesting is that divisions between concrete and abstract or between perception and epistemology don't necessarily correspond to the successive levels of sin's influence. I guess the centrality of theology/ideology says something about the way humans organise civilisation. What are my readers thoughts, questions and comments about the noetic effects of sin?

[Update] The circle above I think brings together four different measurements for which I've created two info-graphics below.

Note that these two graphs (h/t Radagast) aren't a comment on either the value or the efficiency of things plotted.

Bell, Bashir and Bird

2011-03-25T20:49:00.000+11:00

It's a fierce interview, but no ruder than say the Australian political talk show, Q and A. At one level there are debates about the place of universalism in the church, does it have a valid interpretative tradition and should it have a place in contemporary orthodox theology? Then there are discussions about a whole swag of Scriptures, both those that seem to support the idea of Universalism and those that seem to leave no room at all for Universalism. But beyond both those lines of thought are the two most important questions, the first one big and philosophical, the second one practical.

The first is about the ultimate nature of God and evil, 'is evil ultimately part of God', but I'll unpack that one more fully in a later blogpost! The second is asked by Martin Bashir, the host in the clip above; "does my response to Jesus in this life matter?" An acquaintance from my old church said to Dad recently that his newfound universalism meant he no longer cared about evangelism. But God's organization of the cosmos means that both our destination and what we do along the way matters. Thankfully Christ's sacrificial death and obedient life are counted as ours, otherwise they'd be slim pickings on the tree when it came time to harvest. This in turn made me think of what Michael Bird pointed out a little while ago:

"we should avoid ragging on these with the charge of "synergism" because any soteriology that includes a human response is in some sense synergistic. A better way to evaluate soteriologies (ancient or modern) is to look at the type of divine action, its efficacy, and the human response that makes it effective in a particular scheme."

Bird explains it better than I but basically God's made it so our response is significant, it's not that he's trying to cope with our choices or guess them but that they matter because he made it so they'd matter.

7 Billion People

2011-03-24T12:51:00.000+11:00

The leading article of the January edition of this year's National Geographic was about this population milestone. The article made some interesting observations, higher levels of industrialisation correlated with lower birthrates, although they noted that the more industrialized nations consumed more resources. I was impressed by this byline: "People packed into slums need help, but the problem that needs solving is poverty, not overpopulation." (National Geographic, Jan 2011, 61)

This byline from National Geographic sums up for Christians the correct ethical focus, the problem is not 'too many people' but 'too many people being sinful in their use of resources'. The difficulty is coming up with political, personal and communal ways of sensibly using our resources without buying into a 'Green' ideology.

'Evil' by Lance Morrow

2011-03-15T09:00:00.000+11:00

Lance Morrow, essayist and TIME magazine journalist somewhat optimistically tackles the topic of evil in Evil: An Investigation a sort of modern moral survey of evil. I was going to say 'ambitious' but he concedes very early that "my conclusion is that it is ultimately not possible to understand evil" (p3), instead I think the book is 'optimistic' because his philosophical outlook is detached but upbeat. For example, most of his, often depressing, anecdotes, are explained or set in some sort of context. I think Morrow's taxonomy of evil is accurate, even if overall he isn't able to make sense of a world with evil but without God.

Evil: a definition

Morrow recognizes that evil cannot be simply an adjective of novelists or a term for aberrant behavior for sociologists. His dismissal of post-modern subjectivity, as a "dangerous fantasy" (p136), shows that for him evil despite being a moral and metaphysical category is nonetheless very real. Morrow in his stories about modern crime, Balkan atrocities or ancient criminality always puts people front and centre. Evil is disturbing because it is, correctly, for Morrow quoting the poet W. H. Auden "unspectacular and always human" (p16).

The most useful part of Morrow's investigation is his definition of evil. While the term is slippery, it's not impossible to pin down. Morrow intriguily extends Justice Potter Stewart's iconic definition of pornography "I know it when I see it" to "I know it when I feel it. Evil registers itself on the deepest, most primitive faculty of the brain, upon some obscure moral equivalent of our sense of smell." (p28) He then goes on to say it's a sort of "vibration" (p31) constant through history and circumstances, not a part of the world but a distortion, a degradation of us and the world.

Evil is indeed a metaphysical moral category: "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" (Genesis 2:17). We knows it's there because we see it, we recognize it. "your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil" (Genesis 3:5). But also unrecognizable in another sense, alien to creation: "What is this you have done? [asks God]" (Genesis 3:13). Morrow goes on to correctly note that evil is a usurpation of God. "Evil is an imitation of God - of God's inscrutable, peremptory mysteriously smiting self. This, again is the evil of a usurping pretender: the insurrection of the negative" (p37). This seems to me to echo the Apostle Paul: "[Jesus] did not consider equality with God something to be grasped." (Philippians 2:6)

Why is there evil?

Morrow is clear when describing the horns of our human dilemma, 'evil exists but why?' "Do people choose to do what they do, or are even manifestly evil acts (such as serial killing) predetermined - the wires of slaughter and atrocity and genocide, for example manipulated by other forces? By heredity? By brain chemistry? By God?" (p35) He understands the dimensions of theodicy: "How can there be a God who is 1) all powerful and 2) all good, while 3) evil exists in the world. You can have any two of those propositions, but not all three" (p176).

Perhaps it's an extreme form of rage, he ponders, as demonstrated by the festering emotion of Hitler's Mein Kampf eventually exploding into the Final Solution. Often he notes it is accompanied by and is feed by self deception. When he meets Serbian soldiers during the Balkan wars of the 1990's Morrow wonders "How did the Serbs keep on? How did they explain themselves to themselves" (p60)? Clearly "evil is usually an exercise of power" (p109), the abuse of the vulnerable, the children, those in poverty.

Is there a solution?

If there is place where Morrow stumbles it is in providing a solution. The anecdotes become confusing, for example the closing one about former South African President de Kock, offers little solace in a chapter designed to bring moral closure and hope. He knows he has a problem on his hands; "The academic's story [about a young American soldier killing German prisoners] haunts me a little" (p82). But the solutions are hopelessly inadequate. For example evil is more than just "a story" (p39), and a "learning experience" (p47). Yes, "shame" (p69) and "more information" (p69) are important parts of resorting justice, love and honor but they cannot staunch the wound he's opened. I was very interguied by the way he suggested literature could be some sort of healing balm, a constant during Job-like storms (p170).

(I've cross-posted this book review on Amazon.)

Was Rob Bell just misunderstood? "No", says Tim Challies.

2011-03-10T11:46:00.004+11:00

A number of bloggers it seemed jumped the gun, condemning Rob Bell for hersey before the book was released based on some preview chapters, a video and Bell's previous track record for confusing theological statements. There are two questions: was Bell just misunderstood and is he wrong? Tim Challies reviews his latest book Love Wins: A book about Heaven, Hell and the fate of every person who has ever believed, and finds that no, he wasn't and yes he is. I think it's good to think about the questions Bell raises, because they go to the heart of several topics I'm interested in such as the nature of sin, the scope of salvation and the question of theodicy.

Tim Challies notes that Rob Bell over-realizes his eschatology, the focus says Bell, of Heaven and Hell are now. This is no doubt in reaction to those who keep Heaven and Hell as completely separate to our present reality. But the truth is somewhere in the middle, as Oscar Cullerman correctly noted, the battle of Normandy is won but VE-day hasn't taken place yet. According to Challies, Bell wants to raise the questions and then slide away into ambiguities and confusion. There's nothing wrong with asking good questions but what's wrong with making a clear case? As Challies notes the book's tag line, "love wins" is misguided. "God's holy love wins", otherwise love is reduced to a Jedi-like force in the universe.

[Update] I think I jumped the gun on the reviews; Challies' review is supeceded by a much more comprehensive and clearly outlined review by Kevin DeYoung, about as far from Bell on the ecclesiastical spectrum as you can get. In many ways this controversy highlights the diverging streams of Evangelicalism more than anything else. There is Bell setting up shop outside the traditional church and DeYoung seeking to transform things from the inside. In some ways Bell is to be applauded for provoking such a controversy, these questions need to be discussed and so I'm grateful for DeYoung's response.

[Second Update] Bird conforms something I predicted about this controversy and teaches me something. Bird says Bell's book will ultimately be "a flash in the pan". Not the deeper, larger more potent issues of salvation, but Bell's method of presenting them. (I think if anything Bell's method highlights growing fragmentation within Evangelicalism.) But Bird's observations highlight the value of taking the time to consider something, he finds criticisms of Love Wins that both Challies and DeYoung overlooked: for example Bell overlooks Jesus first century Jewish context.

Suspicion and Faith: Marx

2011-03-08T09:00:00.002+11:00

Westphal continues his exposure of our religious hypocrisy, this time using the suspicion of Marx. (Westphal's purpose is to use their suspicious critique, but not their skepticism, to find the blindspots in our spirituality.) If Freud views religion as semi-conscious internal adaption of the morality of civilization in order to regulate psychological forces, then Marx view religion as purely an external tool of subjection, albeit one that is often disguised.

Marx is famously recorded as saying "religion is the opium of the people." He means as Westphal explains that when people endure deprivation they create gods to cope but that also the ruling class uses religion to legitimize their rule. Marx rightly notes that religion in some senses is both a mirror and a protest, however he is more interested in the way religion is abused by the ruling elites. Westphal notes that Marx's critique of religion is in one sense exploring the "cognitive dissonance" (p139) between ideology and reality. Is God "an enemy or ally of injustice" (p153)?

In this section I was interested by Marx's observations about the use of ideology in political rule. Marx writes: "The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas" (p 161). (Westphal tangentially and correctly notes at this point that ideology and religion are functionally identical.) Westphal seeks to use Marx's critique to untangle Christianity from its often abusive position of power because as "Jacques Derrida is aware 'a project can always be kidnapped, so to speak, or exploited for different political and cultural purposes'" (p172). Wesphal gives the example of Luther's support of the brutal suppression of the German presents revolt in the early 1500's. Westphal then explores how religion specifically Scripture is used by the ruling class to legitimate their rule. For example over-spiritualizing or maintaining a 'sinful silence'.

(Three part review of Suspicion and Faith: The Religious uses of Modern Atheism by Merold Westphal)

'Climate Change and the Communion of Saints'

2011-03-03T09:00:00.001+11:00

Professor Michael Northcott, of Edinburgh University, School of Divinity gave a public lecture, which I attended, entitled 'Climate Change and the Communion of Saints', at the church where I work, St George's Battery Point. It was organized by the Diocese of Tasmania and ISCAST. I have to confess I am a global warming skeptic was looking forward to hearing his talk, he had a lively manner and I enjoyed seeing a wide variety of people attend. This post is a reflection on his talk and the issues it raises.

Positive Points

Environmental activism as Northcott observed has a long recent history. Clearly with more people consuming more things, ensuring there is fresh food, clean water and shade for everyone is becoming very difficult and discouraging. As I remarked several weeks ago we have a biblical responsibility to care for the environment, it's created by God and we are commanded to manage it responsibly, anticipating it's full restoration in the new heavens and the new earth. Northcott correctly noted this trajectory, although he raced through his talk and the nuances were difficult to catch. I agree with his assessment that the harvesting of fossil fuels isn't undertaken in a strategic manner, we're gobbling it up without thinking about future needs. I also liked his assessment of carbon trading as a form of indulgences, burn a forest in one place and plant some trees elsewhere.

Negative Points

Northcott's two greatest errors lay at the beginning and end of his talk. Firstly, he presented the science of climate change as obvious and settled. This is difficult because on the one hand the majority of scientists recognize a pattern of global warming, in other words increasing temperature. For example our own Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) produced this graph:

It's difficult as a layman to evaluate this data, with all the factors of collection and analysis to consider. However I'm aware that correlation does not necessarily equate to causation. Increased carbon and methane may be part of larger trends well beyond the scope of human industrialization. Also science is primarily about measurement and prediction. Pattern recognition is perfectly legitimate but it's not prediction to say after the fact this or that event was caused by global warming. Interestingly when predictions have been made on the assumption global warming will effect our climate negatively they've sometimes proved to been dramatically wrong, here BOM (on the left) predicted less rain and higher temperatures but as we know the results were different (on the right).

If we are faced with larger power bills on the basis of these predictions, they need to be accurate. But the stakes are higher, Northcott wants a fundamental change to our civilization, far less flying, far less car travel, phasing out of fossil fuels etc. These are dramatic changes, worthwhile if the theory is true, but we can't make them just based on pattern recognition alone or vague predictions about our grandchildren. That's why I didn't like the way Northcott made it seem the science was settled, I was thinking about causation and correlation, about historical data and about the importance of accurate predictions but these lines of argument weren't addressed. Neither did I think that 'climate change' was obvious. There have been worse floods, droughts, cyclones and bush-fires than the ones in recent years, granted we now follow them in graphic real time detail but have they really increased in ferocity because of human industrial activity?

Secondly, Northcott, towards the end of his talk said that radical changes to our lifestyle, perhaps even civilization were needed because of human caused climate change. This is wrong, radical changes in our life style and civilization are needed because of the good-news about Jesus. Human greed and self-indulgence is the true cause of our lack of environmental stewardship and only the gospel will fix that. Northcott, while clearly well meaning and motivated by a godly concern for biblical stewardship, seems to have become disproportionately consumed by the issue, he opened with a strange comparison with zealous climate change skeptic Viscount Monckton. There is a strange irony to the way Northcott flies around the world advocating radical changes to civilization, perhaps it's the latent rebellious Marxist in me but I resent the being told "what's good for me is not necessarily good for you." The science may be proved right and Northcott's argument may be vindicated but I found this implication unsettling.

Current Political Implications

Norhcotte's talk came at an important time, just as Prime Minister Gillard announces the introduction of a new carbon tax. (Itself a disappointing reinforcement of the idea that politics is a game of deceit with a sort of Orwellian double speak, although it seems few Politicians are immune to it.) I also wonder how the committee that Flannery heads up will explain the science of climate change and then make the case for a carbon tax.

Thinking Theologically

Basic environmental stewardship isn't up for grabs, there's no moral reason to hurt people or God's creation in order to make a profit. However the use of resources seems to be more of an opinion. Managing them seems more subjective, I might want to visit an overseas country or sleep in an air-conditioned room. Northcotte wasn't clear at this point but the implication seemed present that the only moral/godly choice was to radically change our civilization. There was the insinuation that not to do so was "a sin". For example a slide flashed up at one point quoting Bp Chartes [sp?] saying that "flying was a sin." I agree that not being good stewards is a sin but Northcotte seems to be shifting the boundaries and that seems unwarranted.

Conclusion

Northcott was by no means offensive, definitely amusing and very easy going. It's just that I expected a more careful analysis taking into account common counter-arguments and a suggested change that was more grounded in the good news about Jesus rather than the good news about saving the planet. Lionel Windsor over at the Sola Panel sets out a great biblical primer for approaching this issue, I recommend that.

Blog previews of Rob Bell's new Book: Love Wins

2011-02-28T13:41:00.003+11:00

I think "we're facing a classic storm-in-a-teacup-scenario." Rob Bell of Mars Hill church, once the nice ('nicer' than Driscoll anyway, of a different Mars Hill) young face of the now defunct Emerging Church movement and now a mega-church leader in his own right is about to release a book about universalism: Love Wins.

Based on a few pre-released chapters, a promotional video and the publisher's blurb blogger Justin Taylor sounds the alarm. "Don't be so suspicious and judgmental" clammers some in the blogeshphere. The storm in the tea-cup has been partly created by John Piper's breathless condemnation of Bell on Twitter, hardly the location for in-depth analysis or calm reaction. However Justin is a careful blogger, a real American-evangelical-standout and if you read his article carefully you notice he gives his suspicions but reserves his judgment for the full release later in March.

[Update] Then again come March, I suspect Trevin Wax who blogs at Kingdom People may be right:

Until the book comes out, I don’t think we can accurately label Rob a “universalist.” Based on Rob’s tendency to ask edgy questions and then pull back, I expect that somewhere in the book, Rob will affirm that people who don’t want to be part of God’s kingdom won’t be forced to. In the end, Rob will land somewhere between optimistic inclusivism (most everyone will be saved) and universalism (all will be saved).

This is probably accurate because Bell is often frustratingly fuzzy, Gandalf would not have been impressed!

Suspicion and Faith: Freud

2011-02-25T09:00:00.006+11:00

Merold Westphal in Suspicion and Faith uses Freud, Marx and Nietzsche to uncover religious, speficially Christian hypocrisy. Instead of focusing on their skepticism, he uses their "suspicion" to "uncover the duplicity of persons" (p13). Westphal writes about the "hermeneutics of suspicion, the deliberate attempt to expose the self-deceptions involved in hiding our actual operative motives from ourselves, individually or collectively, in order not to notice how and how much behavior and our beliefs are shaped by values we profess to disown." (p13) While it sometimes hurts, Westphal's desire for self-examination is helpful if our ultimate aim is to serve God honestly. As a reader it is important to observe that Westphal's guided critique is focusing on the function of Christian beliefs more than their truthfulness or morality.

The first section concentrates on Freud. Freud, says Westphal, sees religion as a psychological solution to an internal conflict. For the sake of a greater societal good we sacrifice a degree of personal happiness or pleasure. Remember that Freud conceived of a person with several competing forces, the Id (desire-instinct), Super-ego (internalized culture) and the Ego (the mediating force between the two). Through the analysis of dreams Freud shows that objectionable motives are concealed or through dreams we represent the world to ourselves as either our egoistic or erotic desires would have it. "This is the kind of distortion Freud finds in religious illusions. We represent God to ourselves, not in accordance with the evidence available to us but in accordance with our wishes; in other words, we create God in our own image, or at least in the image of our desires" (p62).

Westphal then seeks to use Freud's analysis on the role of sin in religious life. In describing the three he makes this powerful observation: "They bring to light the workings of what theologians call sin in the full concreteness of everyday life and they show how even religious life gets drawn into the service of the sin whose enemy it is supposed to be." (p77) The three notes Westphal have an uncanny resemblance to the Old Testament prophets in their denunciation of religious hypocrisy. Westphal brings the section about Freud to a close with this statement: "While Freud hopes that the hermeneutics of suspicion will lead to the collapse of religion, prophetic consciousness hopes that it will lead to a collapse of irreligion posing as religion, creating a space wherein true faith might flourish" (p119).

Sola Scriptura Redux

2011-02-20T09:00:00.051+11:00

Kevin deYoung, a blogger over at that American megaplex T4G wrote recently about Sola Scriptura. I wanted to blog on the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, both to aid my own thinking, remark on an important distinction and remind my readers, in a sort of sequel to the last post about the role of 'bias'.

Sadly as deYoung reminds us and as Keith Mathison has pointed out previously, Sola Scriptura does not mean Solo Scriptura as many evangelicals mistakenly think. No-one's neutral, so the question is what shape should our bias take? Sola Scriptura rightly suggests the history of church tradition correctly shapes our bias. DeYoung doesn't explain this, but as Mathison observed the Reformers were not arguing against church shaped bias but giving the church equal authority with Scripture. The Modern Roman Catholic church seems to have merged the authority of Scripture with the authority of the church, which is neither the position of the Medieval Catholic church or the early church.

Importantly the Sufficiency of Scripture is about the content of Scripture, is the Bible enough for faith and godly living? The doctrine of Sola Scriptura is about the interpretation and authority of the Bible. Of course both doctrines are related but it's important to note the distinction. In practical terms the doctrine of Sola Scriptura is a cycle, you can jump in at any point but you need to be aware it's a cycle. We interpret the Bible based on bias --> We acknowledge the Bible has authority over church tradition --> We allow church tradition to shape our bias.

This means that the hermeneutical debates should take place on different three fronts: 1. What does Church History say or not say about a given portion of Scripture? 2. What topics does Scripture speak to (Sufficiency of Scripture)? 3. Have we been clear about the entirety and scope of our biases?

Bias

2011-02-16T15:55:00.001+11:00

A recent article from the New York Times about the possibility of a politically-liberal bias among social scientists reminded me of a pattern I've observed in arguments on and off line over the years. Eventually the argument will reach some-sort of foundational issue or boundary where the matter turns on the bias/assumptions/worldview of the interlocutors.

In this particular article, 'Social Scientist Sees Bias Within', the author, John Tierney, notes that political liberalism was becoming the dominate moral framework of the majority of social scientists. Interestingly he notes how bias can effect research:

“If a group circles around sacred values, they will evolve into a tribal-moral community,” he said. “They’ll embrace science whenever it supports their sacred values, but they’ll ditch it or distort it as soon as it threatens a sacred value.” It’s easy for social scientists to observe this process in other communities, like the fundamentalist Christians who embrace “intelligent design” while rejecting Darwinism. But academics can be selective, too, as Daniel Patrick Moynihan found in 1965 when he warned about the rise of unmarried parenthood and welfare dependency among blacks — violating the taboo against criticizing victims of racism."

Clearly there can be more said about the way a person's bias or the assumptions of the group they belong to can affect their arguments but often I find people assume they are operating without bias from a neutral worldview. I'm not suggesting a degree of limited neutrality cannot exist but it's odd that it seems a widely held view that one's own view/interpretation/explanation is without bias and free from underlying assumptions. I believe admitting we have biases and then identifying them is a good thing!

[Photo from NYTimes © 2011]

True Grit [Spoiler Alert]

2011-02-07T18:55:00.000+11:00

I think my last film review was also a Coen brothers movie, No Country for Old Men, a well-crafted modern western with supernatural overtones and a disappointing conclusion. True Grit a remake and an old school western is played very straight by the Coen brothers. The dialogue is great and the cinematography doesn't get in the way of the story, no peculiar Coen twists.

Mattie's father is killed by a criminal, Sam Chaney who disappears into Indian territory. Mattie (Elizabeth Marvel) after collecting her father's body to send back East sets out to get revenge by hiring Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) without being precocious in the process. Mattie and heavy-drinking Cogburn set out with the bouffont LaBoeuf (Matt Damon) in tow. There are some some funny moments of rivalry between Cogburn and LaBoeuf and it's great watching Bridges play the grizzled and canny Cogburn. However Cogburn gets drunk on a stash of whiskey and Mattie is captured by Sam Chaney's gang. In the final battle Cogburn and LaBoeuf rescue Mattie and she shoots Chaney. Unfortunately she stumbles and falls into a snake bit and is bitten before being rescued. In a brutal but strangely poignant scene Cogburn makes a desperate trip to a nearby outpost in order to save Mattie.

Mattie survives and then there is an awkward montage showing Mattie as an old maid trying to track Cogburn down and then visiting his grave, the closing shot of the movie. Now admittedly this isn't as horrible as the conclusion to No Country for Old Men but it's so emotionally incongruent with the rest of the film, lacking the rest of the film's pathos and even cinematic quality. Perhaps the end of story is meant to show that revenge has a sour aftertaste but I expected higher stakes, Cogburn dying as he carried Mattie to the outpost.

Now I appreciate the fact that the Coen brothers played it straight and they are undoubtedly aware of some this world's deeper patterns, aware of the emotional power they can produce cinemantically. However they inhabit a strange moral universe, it's as though they are aware of a metaphysical world around them but they don't want to commit to direction, they don't want to give a clear verdict. Why can't they let Cogburn make a sacrifice, why is he and LaBoeuf pulled suddenly from the story and is this really how revenge works? Again I'm left admiring the story but shaking my head.

Measuring Disasters

2011-02-03T21:57:00.000+11:00

I ask this very respectfully and genuinely. How do we measure disasters? By their destructive power, casualties, economic losses or spiritual impact? All around the world, there are fires, riots, miscarriages of justice, landslides, storms and the persecution of Christians. Even a secular philosophy needs to make a judgement call on which disasters are worth reporting on, fixing and responding to. So as Christians, in our churches, thinking about where to send our money, direct our attention and pray about, which disasters merit our attention?

[Picture of a church on the coast of Northern Queensland, © 2011. The Australian]

Predestination

2011-01-29T09:00:00.053+11:00

Predestination ("predestined" Rom 8:30) is the best way to start an Ordo Salutis because it correctly implies God planned salvation from the earliest moments of Creation. ("God chose you from the beginning to be saved" 2 Thess 2:13) Interestingly the letter to the Ephesians shows that it is the Father who initiates predestination ( "he [v3 the Father] chose us in him before the foundation of the world" Eph 1:3-4). The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit each have a different focus in God's work of salvation. Salvation takes place in Christ ("in him we have the redemption through his blood" Eph 1:7), quite literately in his body as he lives and dies and lives again in his human nature. Then the Spirit comes in to carry us along on the way to our divine inheritance ("with the promised Holy Spirit who is the guarantee of our inheritance" Eph 1:13-14).

Tangents

The Apsotle Paul while broadly discussing the place of Israel in God's plan of salvation in the letter to the Romans, employs the concept of election and reprobation, the idea that God chooses some and condemns others. ("Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated" Rom 9:13) A concept reflected throughout the entire biblical narrative of Israel from Abraham to Nehemiah. Even the exceptions such as the story of Jonah only serve to highlight the dominate theme of predestination, God choosing a particular people for his particular purposes, while the pagan gentile nations are condemned. God can choose but does he condemn? In the letter from Jude, it mentions those "who were designated for this condemnation" (Jude 4).

There could also be tangents about the place of free-will but that's more of a discussion in the context of God's sovereignty. Anyway, predestination is the natural corollary of God's sovereignty. Also elsewhere some have argued that election is corporate. But Scripture slips deliberately and frequently between the corporate and the individual, so it's saying to little to say God only predestines a group of people.

Visually

I choose the hand writing symbol to echo the image of God having the names of those people he'd chose to save in the "book of life" (Rev 20:15). The entire blue box represents that predestination is a plan, it's the way God has decided Salvation will play out.

My visual Ordo Salutis, is a work in progress, for example in the slide above I still have an envelope but I'm merging the 'deposit of the Holy Spirit' with 'Regeneration.' The original slide show, showing how these doctrines unfold and relate to each other is at the Ordo Salutis tab on the top of the page.

Bavinck

All God's decrees, even election and reprobation, are made visible to us in the progress of history. They are, however, rooted in God's eternal foreknowledge and foreordination, which stands forever and will come to pass. While Romans 9 most certainly speaks of God's action in time, the ground for action lies outside of time, in the will and good pleasure of God alone. (Reformed Dogmatics: God and Creation, 337)

Calvin

Augustine (In Psalmum 31 and 33) compares the human will to a horse preparing to start, and God and the devil to riders. "If God mounts, he, like a temperate and skillful rider, guides it calmly, urges it when too slow, reins it in when too fat, curbs its forwardness and over action, checks its bad temper, and keeps it on the proper course; but if the devil has seized the saddle, like an ignorant and rash rider, he hurries it over broken ground, drives into ditches, dashes it over precipices, spurs it into obstinacy or fury." With this simile, since a better does not occur, we shall for the present be contended. Those whom the Lord favors not with the direction of his Spirit, he, by a righteous judgement, consigns to the agency of Satan. (The Institutes of the Christian Religion, 191)

Ditch all kids ministry after creche?

2011-01-27T18:32:00.002+11:00

In a trends-to-watch post, Trevin Wax makes this very interesting observation about the future of congregational ministry.

Evangelicals are already divided on the issue of ministry philosophy. I suspect these lines will become more defined in the next decade. The attractional model will lead many churches to adopt incredibly entertaining children’s church programs, youth group experiences, etc. The attempt is to hold on to an evangelical culture that is increasingly bored with church. Mega-churches will continue to compete with one another for a decreasing number of “regular church-goers.” Other churches will react to the attractional model by upholding family-centered churches and dismissing event-based evangelism.

I remember Mum and Dad keeping us in church during the service while most of the other kids trooped out for Sunday School. (As a concession, we were allowed to draw or read during the sermon.) It's a model I generally prefer but what so often tends to be the case is that a 'family service' is designed along attractional lines with a "fun" kids church to keep all the kids out of mischief during the service. However what then tends to happen is that the teenagers have been conditioned to be out of church during the sermon and so they have to have something special just for them and on it goes until people rejoin the main service when they're ninety.

I'm all for creche, if my infant daughter is screaming one of us scoops her up and takes her out. But the moment you think we should be teaching these little tackers is the moment they should be back with the rest of the congregation. However in our modern world of broken families, family-discipline can be very lax so maybe the cost of having everyone in the same room is a changed service dynamic.

A map of Narnia: just because!

2011-01-27T15:17:00.003+11:00

This is the original map of Narnia composed by the original illustrator Pauline Baynes, if you can lay your hands on a paper version, it's well worth it. However a copy of reasonable resolution on the Internet is hard to find. Even the notable Into the Wardrobe site lacks a clearer digital copy.

The Christian View of Ecology

2011-01-17T15:43:00.002+11:00

I started reading Pollution and the Death of Man: The Christian View of Ecology by Francis Schaeffer last year and blogging chapter by chapter, but other things came up, so I thought I'd combine them and the rest of my thoughts into one review.

I've grown up in a family that's always been in favour of caring for our environment. But the whole global warming thing has prompted me to reexamine my views on ecology and I believe Schaeffer, a traditional theologian who was tuned into the patterns of culture is the best place to turn. In the opening chapter he suggests Christianity as a whole has lost delight in the natural creation and sometimes the mandate of stewardship has been abused. However he warns against overemphasizing the natural in our efforts to care for it. Schaeffer correctly states that the modern environmental approach "wants a moral base on which to deal with the ecological problem" (p20). That there is an ecological problem is clear; "Modern man has seen that we are upsetting the balance of nature and the problem is drastic and urgent. It's not just a matter of aesthetics, nor is the problem only future - the quality of life has already diminished for most modern men" (p22).

Schaeffer then lays the basis for a Christian view of ecology. "The material and the spiritual are not opposed. The fact that our bodies are going to be raised also speaks of this." (p56) Schaeffer notes that there is a biblical pattern to redemption and resurrection, that the animals of the Israelites were also spared the angel of death at the Passover. Although Schaeffer correctly notes that "real spirituality lies in the existential, moment-by-moment looking to the blood of Christ seeking and asking God in faith for a substantial reality in our relationship with Him." (p67) But "substantial" healing of all of sin's ruptures exists now because of the promised complete healing. This healing comes from exercising stewardship ("dominion") but not tyranny, treating our fellow created things with dignity.

In application the Christian view takes longer and is more expensive says Schaeffer. Mining, harvesting or building means restoring something afterwards, even if it takes extra time and money. A "self-imposed" (p87) limit to our activities is best argues Schaeffer, because the natural world has a God-created value. At the time he wrote, 1970, environmentalism wasn't a mainstream, government-endorsed movement. He rightly noted the correction it offered to Christianity. Schaeffer makes such a point of having a correct theological view of the natural world and caring for it that he would be frustrated by the 'top-down' legislating approach of our contemporary world. Christians should be theologically motivated to care for the environment, it's not part of rendering to Caesar what is Caesar's.

Colt+Rane and 22 Words

2011-01-15T21:14:00.001+11:00

Colt+Rane is a great visual blog, lot's of white space, fascinating images (and so far no nudity) and interesting videos. Although it reminds me that good art requires context and beautiful patterns are pleasing only because objective order exists.

Abraham Piper over at 22 Words does something similar but with more context and with the intention of "curating for your entertainment. I spend time online, so that when you spend time online, you find better stuff." Here's a recent video he found:

Facebook

2011-01-13T13:28:00.000+11:00

I've noticed a trending down among my facebook-friends. Yeah I know Facebook is conquering the social media world but I've noticed that the numbers of people's facebook-friends are decreasing. Although there are several who have over or near a thousand facebook-friends, there are many whose numbers are dropping quietly, where once my five hundred facebook-friends seemed small it's now larger than average. While there would be exceptions this maybe be a trend, a tightening. Facebook is revolutionary in that people are not anonymous, they use their real names, their antics and activities easily identifiable. So I think what has happened is that people are realizing this and tightening their social circles accordingly.

I discovered this recently when I starting pruning my facebook-friends and noticed other people's facebook-friend counts. My blog and twitter feed is where I want to discuss and think about things publicly, where someone might go who wanted to know what I thought about a particular event or idea. I don't necessarily want to share all the photos of my wife and daughter with the wider online world or let the world know that there are ants in my house for example. So I've been pruning facebook-friends. Ultimately I'd like my facebook-friends to made up of four categories: extended family (75), local friends (50), interstate and overseas friends (50) and people who I don't want to loose track of (25). Sociologically they say it's difficult to interact with groups larger than about 150 and I like the idea of a smaller tighter non-work related group.

Facebook has made it easier to interact socially in 'groups' and 'pages' without having to be facebook-friends. This is useful for ministry where online social interaction forms apart of people's wider lives.

Queensland Floods

2011-01-12T10:55:00.002+11:00

There are a number of appeals running at the moment for the current Queensland floods. Bush Church Aid, an organization that funds church ministry in rural and regional Australia has an appeal if your thinking of how best to help. Also Anglican Aid, run out of Sydney has an appeal.

Sudan

2011-01-07T22:48:00.002+11:00

In a couple of days the Sudanese who live in the southern part of Sudan will vote in a referendum for their independence. (I'm surprised by the lack media attention, although that could be the lack of focus from the news outlets I read: NYTimes, ABC & Jpost.) Christians form a large minority in the south, a fact AlJazeera overlooks in it's report on the referendum. Things seem stable although I do wonder if the north will recognize southern independence. I do hope the creation of this new country (rich in oil deposits) means that Christianity will flourish without persecution and that it won't join the ranks of other dysfunctional nations, although this report of a renegade Southern general isn't very encouraging. Has there been anything on TV about the referendum?

[Update] Growing media traction, #Sudan on Twitter is producing some linkage, although it's hard to figure out from this distance what's reliable information and anyalsis. For example I'm not sure whether to trust this discouraging report from Ghana showing that President Omar al-Bashir says the South won't be able to create a viable nation-state. For a fairly reliable news stream Reuters: Sudan seems like a good start. There doesn't seem to much violence at this stage and the polls have opened, so that's a good sign.

[Colour map of Sudan © 2011 BCC ]

Pastor-Theologians?

2011-01-05T22:35:00.000+11:00

Over at First Things, someone argues that pastors should be at the forefront of doing theology, guarding orthodoxy and applying Scripture across the broad range of human experience. This makes sense if the focus of Christian activity, this side of eternity, is the church. I trained as a high school teacher before entering the ministry and generally this idea of leaving theology to the ministers has a parallel with teaching theory and teachers. Those in the academy sometimes produced powerful and useful resources, but at other times their trendy theories had little bearing on the reality of the classroom and the ordinary student experience. The article says rightly:

"Historically, the church’s most influential theologians were churchmen—pastors, priests, and bishops. Clerics such as Athanasius, Augustine (indeed, nearly all the church Fathers), Anselm, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Edwards, and Wesley functioned as the wider theologians of their day—shaping not only the theological vision of their own parishes, but that of the wider church. In their day, the pastoral community represented the most influential, most insightful, and most articulate body of theologians."

Christmas 2010

2010-12-25T09:00:00.053+11:00

A picture of Evangeline, our daughter who was born earlier this year, getting some of the blue light treatment right after she was born. I'm reminded when I hold her and squish her with kisses that God's Son took on a human nature and was born all vulnerable like Evangeline in the picture and probably under less hygienic conditions. Christianity is built on the miraculous life of Jesus, the first half of which we celebrate on Christmas Day and the second half which we celebrate on Easter Sunday. There's lots of mystery about God but it's interesting how he reveals himself through the Incarnation. The Journey by Peter Kreeft is a metaphysical exploration of meaning and truth and it begins in Plato's Cave with it's inhabitants watching the shadows on the wall. Then, just as it says in Isaiah 9, there is a light in the darkness, a child is born, and like in Chile earlier this year, a rescuer enters the cave, a man like us, and he will be called "wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." Our King returns, the Kingdom begins! Merry Christmas dear Readers. (See/read you in 2011!)

The Trinity: a working model

2010-12-24T14:59:00.000+11:00

While preparing my Christmas Eve Sermon I got side tracked when I started thinking about the Incarnation and decided to pull together my thoughts, using The Doctrine of God by Gerald Bray, Father Son and the Spirit: The Trinity and John's Gospel by Kostenberger and Swain, The Trinity by Olson and Hall and some of my carefully hoarded notes from Early Church History at Ridley. Tell me what you think of this slide show:

The Trinity

View more presentations from lukeisham.

Celebrating seven years of marriage!

2010-12-14T10:47:00.000+11:00

Ridley: The class of 2009

2010-12-09T20:06:00.000+11:00

This is a photo taken in our last week of 2009 of those in the Anglican ordination stream at Ridley College. From left to right: Sam, Luke, Bryan, Hamish, Steve, Kim and James, with Glen, Amanda and Ivy along the front. [h/t Bryan whose made an interactive version of the photo that you can run your cursor over to get more biographical information.]

Church Music brought to you by Bifrost

2010-12-02T21:38:00.001+11:00

This is where we should be headed with church music (h/t Justin Taylor), theologically and musically! Many of my readers probably know about our local Emu Music and their American counterparts Sovereign Grace Music. But if you haven't already you should definitely check out Red Mountain Music (h/t Nick Gross) some of their hymn re-mixes are great. (Another musical resource in this genre is Craig Schwartz's simple but innovate 'Guitar Cords for Hymns'.)