Christianity: An Unfolding Drama

Horton:

The Christian faith is, first and foremost, an unfolding drama. Geerhardus Vos observed, "The Bible is not a dogmatic handbook but a historical book full of dramatic interest."[1] This story that runs from Genesis to Revelation, centering on Christ, not only richly informs our mind; it captivates the heart and the imagination, animating and motivating our action in the world (The Christian Faith, 19).

---

[1] Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948), 17.

The Gospel of John and Resurrection Joy

I recently finished reading through yet again the Gospel according to John, for something like the thirtieth time since I came first to know the Lord. And what strikes me most this time is how the passion and resurrection narrative of John—if you enter into it and feel what the disciples must have first felt—obviously intends to produce gladness and freedom and relief and amazement.

The Gospel at its heart is full of joy and peace and liberty and wonder! So come on in. Take up and read. And enjoy the joy of the Lord! Freedom—at last! Peace—like no other! Happiness—guaranteed! Life indeed—forevermore! The Lord is risen! He is risen indeed!

What Is Narrative?

Vogt:

A narrative is a selective record of a series of events that uses shared conventions to convey the author's communicative intention in an engaging manner. In the case of the biblical narratives, this communicative intention is usually a theological one, and the author understands the events described as having actually taken place.

—Peter T. Vogt, Interpreting the Pentateuch: An Exegetical Handbook (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2009), 48.

Legitimate Mastery and Control of Creation

In his fine book—Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible—Stephen Dempster breifly surveys the Old Testament's wisdom literature: Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. About this literature he says:

[Wisdom literature] develops the theme of human mastery of the world. 'Wisdom' signifies the mastery of a skill in a particular domain. The word is first used in the Tanakh to describe the skill of individuals entrusted with the responsibility of making priestly garments (Exod. 28:1-3) and constructing the tabernacle at Sinai (Exod. 31:1-3). People skilled at various tasks, whether singing (Jer. 9:16-17) or sailing (Ps. 107:27), metallurgy (1 Kgs. 7:14) or military ability (Is. 10:13), shipbuilding (Ezek. 27:9) or snake-charming (Ps. 58:6), could be described as 'wise.' 

Dempster avers that Solomon virtually personifies Old Testament wisdom as he "had the ability to rule effectively over the kingdom of Israel." Commenting on Solomon, he says:

He as the teacher disseminates wisdom—not for any particular skill or limited technical domain, but for life itself. Consequently, Solomon in part embodies what it means to fulfill the call to be human in Genesis 1:27-28, namely, to rule the creation and to exercise dominion over it. Wisdom literature specifically deals with this concern for legitimate mastery and control of creation.

—Stephen G. Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2003), 202.

Dating the Gospels and Spiritual Warfare

Peter Leithart:

As with the synoptic problem as a whole, the issue of dating is ultimately a spiritual battle. Consider: If the gospels are written shortly after Jesus dies and rises again, by eyewitnesses, are you inclined to believe them? What if they are written fifty years after Jesus, by people who never knew Jesus Himself? Are you as likely to believe the gospels then? The further away the gospels are from the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, the less reliable they seem.

—The Four: A Survey of the Gospels (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2010), 104.

The Synoptic Problem, Questioning Q, and Satan

Peter Leithart:

If the view of the church fathers explains the gospels, and does so fairly simply, why do scholars have to invent a complicated "synoptic problem" and resolve it with a mythical document called "Q"? 

There are many answers to that question, but at base the answer is that much of modern New Testament scholarship is a Satanic attack on the truth and reliability of the gospel of Jesus. . . . This is not to say that New Testament scholars themselves are demonic. They aren't. But New Testament scholarship is an arena of spiritual battle, where we fight not against flesh and blood but against principalities and powers and rulers of wickedness. 

—The Four: A Survey of the Gospels (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2010), 101.

Outstanding Sermon Series on Ecclesiastes

If you were looking for a good sermon series on Ecclesiastes, look no further. Pastor Doug O'Donnell, senior pastor of my local church, wrapped up today a 17-part sermon series that will find its way in due course into the Reformed Expository Commentary series published by P&R.

Pastor O'Donnell demonstrates care and sensitivity with this difficult to interpret book, and provides many good contemporary applications from the wise words of "Pastor Solomon." As a man of literature, one of O'Donnell's great strengths is his sensitivity to the literary dimensions and devices of the sacred text. So his handling of Ecclesiastes models rather well how to preach the genre of wisdom literature for those who want to hear how it might be done.

Have a listen!

Debating as a Christian Duty

Here Doug Wilson ably, biblically, and persuasively argues that debating is a Christian duty. Well, if the man Jesus is to be the believer's model, of course he's right. And of course it can be done in the wrong spirit, too. Wilson also addresses that nicely.

I fear the main reason Christians and Christian leaders (who are called to it) shrink from this duty is cowardice, plain and simple. Cowardice is the biblical word for refusing ever "to get into it." But Jesus "got into it" all the time. Shouldn't we follow him? Or should we be the "Jesus, meek and mild flower child" of 21st century evangelicalism, rather than the real Jesus of the Bible? I mean, just read the gospels. As Wilson rightly points out.

This cowardice, this fear of man and fear of the loss of status and possessions can be cloaked under all sorts of good reasons to "just stay out of it, and be a gospel witness." But it's not really a gospel witness if doesn't imitate Jesus. And it's cowardice nonetheless, and we know where cowards go (Rev. 21:8).

The Centrality of Christ's Resurrection

It is not uncommon in Protestantism to hear preachers and teachers say that the cross of Christ is the center of the faith and the Gospel. If all that is meant by this is that the cross is essential and supremely important, fine. No quibbles here. But often the cross is spoken of as so central that the resurrection of Christ and other elements of the Gospel are made peripheral. At least this is functionally, if not confessionally, all too often the case. And it is an error.

Michael Bird says this good word about this error:

One of the benefits of the NPP has been to demonstrate that Jesus Christ's resurrection is far more integral to God's saving righteousness than is often supposed. N.T. Wright in particular sees Paul's theology constructed in such a way so as to emphasize that the resurrection of Christ is the apex of God's plan to redeem Israel from exile and to renew creation from the bondage of sin and death. This is a helpful corrective since Protestant theology has traditionally emphasized the cross as the immediate basis of justification and unfortunately marginalized the significance of the resurrection in Paul's gospel and soteriology. Accordingly, theologians have located justification as occuring primarily through the atoning and redemptive death of Christ. . . . The problem is that Paul's gospel knows no divorce between the cross and the resurrection and their ensuing effect. The resurrection figures equally prominently in Paul's most concise summaries of the gospel (The Saving Righteousness of God, 40-41). 

The resurrection is every bit as fundamental as the cross. Bird is right. Wright is right. And here is one of those places where the Church should thank God for Wright and embrace his teaching. And I'm convinced that the first Christians thought about these things far more organically than we tend to do in the West, we who divide things into bits and separate things God intends us to hold together.

Is Wright Right?

Here's an assertion made by N. T. Wright regarding common readings of the gospels: "Many 'Christian' readings of the gospels have screened out the political overtones of Jesus' proclamation of the kingdom. . ." (The New Testament and the People of God, 149). I believe Wright is right on this one.

Too Close to Home?

This bit of satire was well done.  Em and I got a good laugh from it.  Upon further reflection, we wept.

The Ultimate Youth Pastor

Check out Ignatius, the ultimate youth pastor. When Emily and I first watched this some months back, we enjoyed many belly laughs and rolls on the floor. Unfortunately, there is too much truth to this satiric piece as relates to American youth pastors. Hit the title of this post for the link. And enjoy.