Posts
David B. Capes, Rodney Reeves, and E. Randolph Richards. Rediscovering Paul: An Introduction to His World, Letters, and Theology. Second edition. IVP Academic, 2017. See here to purchase the book. See here to buy the book.
The authors are professors of biblical studies. Rediscovering Paul is about the life, beliefs, letters, and impact of the apostle Paul.
The book is lucid and concise in terms of its writing style, but do
not let that deceive you. It is a meaty book. It gets into such topics
as how letters were produced in antiquity, scholarly ideas about how
Paul’s letters came to be organized into a collection, the relationship
between I Thessalonians and II Thessalonians, the old and the new
perspectives, different perspectives on the center of Paul’s message,
and the list goes on. Like a lot of conservative scholars, the authors
maintain that Paul wrote Colossians, Ephesians, and the pastorals, and,
while there are issues that they leave largely unaddressed (i.e., the
question of whether Colossians differs from Paul’s letters on
ideological matters), their arguments do not appear to be much of a
stretch. They adroitly address some of the objections to the idea that
Paul did not write the pastorals, offering suggestions as to why Paul
could have written the pastorals as he did.
The book not only addresses technical issues, but it also allows the
historical context to shed light on what Paul says in his letters. The
authors situate Paul’s letters within the context of the patronage
system, which entailed seeking and returning favors from social
superiors. Paul did not hesitate to challenge social superiors, and,
when he thanked them, he framed his appreciation in a manner that would
not imply that he was beholden to them. The book also discusses how the
armor of God in Ephesians 6:10-18 relates to the superstitious fear of
spirits that existed in first century Ephesus. The book also has a
religious content, as it proceeds through Paul’s letters, commenting on
sections. The book is rather comprehensive, in that it has a
historical, a theological, a spiritual/religious, and a practical
element.
I read the authors’ Rediscovering Jesus a while back. Rediscovering Paul
is much better. The authors provide more support for their positions,
cover more historical context, and survey more scholarship, while still
managing to create an easy read.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher. My review is honest!
Monday, May 14, 2018
Thursday, May 10, 2018
Book Write-Up: Blind Betrayal, by Nancy Mehl
Nancy Mehl. Blind Betrayal. Bethany House, 2018. See here to buy the book.
Blind Betrayal is the third book of Nancy Mehl’s “Defenders of Justice” series. I read the first book of the series, Fatal Frost, but not the second book. One can follow the plot of Blind Betrayal without having read the previous books. At the same time, Blind Betrayal contains some of the characters who were in the previous books, so one can perhaps follow it better after reading the first two books.
In Blind Betrayal, there is a wealthy Saudi oilman, Ali Al-Saud. He is using a U.S. Senator, Senator Warren (who is a man, not the progressive Senator from Massachusetts), to stop an oil pipeline in the U.S. Ali Al-Saud does not want the U.S. to become energy independent, as that can cut into his profits. There is an environmentalist, Martin Avery, who catches wind of this plot, and he talks to a reporter, Valerie Bennett. Avery has been kidnapped, and two Deputy U.S. Marshals, Casey Sloane and Doug Howard, are transporting Valerie to Washington, D.C. so she can testify. As they make their way towards D.C., they are pursued by the menacing Ben Mattan, who is Ali Al-Saud’s hit-man and (it is rumored) his son.
Accompanying Casey, Doug, and Valerie is E.J. Queen, Casey’s former partner. E.J. long had an attraction towards Casey, but she was dating his friend, Jared. It turns out that Jared was physically abusive towards her. In addition, Casey is dealing with feelings of guilt.
Overall, this was a good book. Its prose was light, but it dealt with heavy personal subjects and the question of what psychological considerations motivate people to do what they do. The political suspense was also rather interesting: Was Ali Al-Saud truly connected with terror, or would that interfere with his own agenda of power? Ben Mattan and Ali Al-Saud are intimidating. Ben Mattan is like the villain in No Country for Old Men, and Ali Al-Saud is like the Godfather. Senator Warren is a bit of a crook, but he started out idealistic, and he still loves his ex-wife. E.J. is a noble person who tries to be a good influence to those around him. He is baffled that his friend is abusive, and that Casey, a strong woman, endured the abuse.
Although this book is “Romantic Suspense,” it rarely left me on the edge of my seat. The time when the secret agent was about to shoot one of the main characters came close to doing so, however.
There are some lighthearted moments in the book: E.J. telling his co-workers what the “E.J.” stands for comes to mind.
The book is rather light in the spiritual-religious department. Martin Avery is skeptical about God, but he remembers his mother telling him that God is near, so he prays. And Casey decides to get therapy so she can heal. The book ends with a slight swipe at Ben Mattan’s religious beliefs: Ben “cursed the Marshal and the god who had turned his back on him.” The book perhaps could have used some sympathetic Muslim characters. It was more balanced on the issue of environmentalism: Ali Al-Saud co-opts environmentalism for his own financial wealth, yet Martin Avery is depicted as a sincere person, committed to protecting the environment.
I enjoyed this book more than I did Fatal Frost. Blind Betrayal presented a more intriguing plot. It was also more complex: some of the flawed characters had good in them, and the primary characters were dealing with their complicated motives. There was also more going on, which made the book interesting.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher. My review is honest.
Blind Betrayal is the third book of Nancy Mehl’s “Defenders of Justice” series. I read the first book of the series, Fatal Frost, but not the second book. One can follow the plot of Blind Betrayal without having read the previous books. At the same time, Blind Betrayal contains some of the characters who were in the previous books, so one can perhaps follow it better after reading the first two books.
In Blind Betrayal, there is a wealthy Saudi oilman, Ali Al-Saud. He is using a U.S. Senator, Senator Warren (who is a man, not the progressive Senator from Massachusetts), to stop an oil pipeline in the U.S. Ali Al-Saud does not want the U.S. to become energy independent, as that can cut into his profits. There is an environmentalist, Martin Avery, who catches wind of this plot, and he talks to a reporter, Valerie Bennett. Avery has been kidnapped, and two Deputy U.S. Marshals, Casey Sloane and Doug Howard, are transporting Valerie to Washington, D.C. so she can testify. As they make their way towards D.C., they are pursued by the menacing Ben Mattan, who is Ali Al-Saud’s hit-man and (it is rumored) his son.
Accompanying Casey, Doug, and Valerie is E.J. Queen, Casey’s former partner. E.J. long had an attraction towards Casey, but she was dating his friend, Jared. It turns out that Jared was physically abusive towards her. In addition, Casey is dealing with feelings of guilt.
Overall, this was a good book. Its prose was light, but it dealt with heavy personal subjects and the question of what psychological considerations motivate people to do what they do. The political suspense was also rather interesting: Was Ali Al-Saud truly connected with terror, or would that interfere with his own agenda of power? Ben Mattan and Ali Al-Saud are intimidating. Ben Mattan is like the villain in No Country for Old Men, and Ali Al-Saud is like the Godfather. Senator Warren is a bit of a crook, but he started out idealistic, and he still loves his ex-wife. E.J. is a noble person who tries to be a good influence to those around him. He is baffled that his friend is abusive, and that Casey, a strong woman, endured the abuse.
Although this book is “Romantic Suspense,” it rarely left me on the edge of my seat. The time when the secret agent was about to shoot one of the main characters came close to doing so, however.
There are some lighthearted moments in the book: E.J. telling his co-workers what the “E.J.” stands for comes to mind.
The book is rather light in the spiritual-religious department. Martin Avery is skeptical about God, but he remembers his mother telling him that God is near, so he prays. And Casey decides to get therapy so she can heal. The book ends with a slight swipe at Ben Mattan’s religious beliefs: Ben “cursed the Marshal and the god who had turned his back on him.” The book perhaps could have used some sympathetic Muslim characters. It was more balanced on the issue of environmentalism: Ali Al-Saud co-opts environmentalism for his own financial wealth, yet Martin Avery is depicted as a sincere person, committed to protecting the environment.
I enjoyed this book more than I did Fatal Frost. Blind Betrayal presented a more intriguing plot. It was also more complex: some of the flawed characters had good in them, and the primary characters were dealing with their complicated motives. There was also more going on, which made the book interesting.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher. My review is honest.
Monday, May 7, 2018
Church Write-Up: Love, Forgiveness, and Struggling and Growing Churches
Time for my Church Write-Up for this week.
A. The pastor at the Missouri Synod church preached about love. He introduced his sermon with a personal anecdote. Back when he graduated from seminary, he thought he would change the world! But it turns out that one-third of his graduating class are no longer pastors. This anecdote fit into his larger message in that his point was that love for others, empowered and motivated by Christ, can change the world.
The pastor referred to Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s exhortation that believers live in such a way that unbelievers see them and doubt their own unbelief.
The pastor said that we are tempted to withhold love from the unlovable, but he asked if we can envision Jesus deciding not to love us on such-and-such a day because we were unlovable at that time. The expected answer is “no.”
The pastor said that, if our limited love is all we can draw on, then we can only go so far. That is why we need Christ to help us to love.
B. The church started a Sunday school class on forgiveness in II Corinthians 1-7.
The teacher offered a number of interpretations of Scriptures. God affirms in Isaiah 55:8 that God’s thoughts are not your thoughts, and God’s ways are not your ways. The immediately preceding verse concerns God’s forgiveness. God’s ways are alien to ours in that God forgives, whereas we are hesitant to do so.
Jacob in Genesis 33:10 states that seeing Esau’s face is like seeing the face of God. The teacher said that Jacob meant that Esau was like God because Esau had forgiven Jacob; God is forgiving.
Matthew 6:14-15 states that God will not forgive us if we do not forgive others. Not only does this demonstrate that forgiveness is mandatory, but it also highlights that, when we deem others to be unforgivable, we are essentially saying that we ourselves are unforgivable.
Galatians 2:20 talks about Christ being inside of the believer. The teacher said that it is not a matter of us obeying a rule to forgive all by ourselves, but Christ forgives through us.
The teacher asked us what forgiveness is. People replied with “putting away bitterness” and “being reconciled with the other person.” The teacher said those were effects of forgiveness, but he asked what the mechanics of forgiveness are. He said that forgiveness was a metaphor: in the ancient world, it referred to cancelling debts, and that concept is being applied to what God does, and what we are called to do. The teacher denied that forgiveness is even forgetting: rather, one can remember the offense and the pain, yet still forgive. Forgiveness is saying that Christ died for that person’s sin.
This class will be interesting. I myself have wondered how to define forgiveness.
C. The teacher showed a picture of a typical Lutheran service, and most of the people in the picture had gray or white hair. He mentioned a Lutheran church that now only has five people and is about to close. He wondered how we can attract young people to church. On a related note, a lady told me that I was welcome at a particular Bible study because the church needs young blood!
I went to the “Word of Faith” church afterwords. It has elderly people, but it has a lot of young people. The announcements at the end ordinarily announce birthdays, but the announcer said that he may discontinue that practice because the church is growing and there are too many birthdays to mention.
It makes me wonder: why does one church struggle, while another grows? Some of the usual answers do not satisfy me. The Rachel Held Evans-types say the church needs to become more liberal, but liberal mainline churches are declining. Then conservatives say the evangelical churches are thriving because they are conservative. But conservative mainline churches, like LCMS, struggle in terms of numbers.
Are evangelical churches hipper? Well, some of the mainline churches that I have attended either offer a contemporary service, or their only service is a contemporary service.
I’ll leave the comments on in case anyone wants to chime in.
A. The pastor at the Missouri Synod church preached about love. He introduced his sermon with a personal anecdote. Back when he graduated from seminary, he thought he would change the world! But it turns out that one-third of his graduating class are no longer pastors. This anecdote fit into his larger message in that his point was that love for others, empowered and motivated by Christ, can change the world.
The pastor referred to Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s exhortation that believers live in such a way that unbelievers see them and doubt their own unbelief.
The pastor said that we are tempted to withhold love from the unlovable, but he asked if we can envision Jesus deciding not to love us on such-and-such a day because we were unlovable at that time. The expected answer is “no.”
The pastor said that, if our limited love is all we can draw on, then we can only go so far. That is why we need Christ to help us to love.
B. The church started a Sunday school class on forgiveness in II Corinthians 1-7.
The teacher offered a number of interpretations of Scriptures. God affirms in Isaiah 55:8 that God’s thoughts are not your thoughts, and God’s ways are not your ways. The immediately preceding verse concerns God’s forgiveness. God’s ways are alien to ours in that God forgives, whereas we are hesitant to do so.
Jacob in Genesis 33:10 states that seeing Esau’s face is like seeing the face of God. The teacher said that Jacob meant that Esau was like God because Esau had forgiven Jacob; God is forgiving.
Matthew 6:14-15 states that God will not forgive us if we do not forgive others. Not only does this demonstrate that forgiveness is mandatory, but it also highlights that, when we deem others to be unforgivable, we are essentially saying that we ourselves are unforgivable.
Galatians 2:20 talks about Christ being inside of the believer. The teacher said that it is not a matter of us obeying a rule to forgive all by ourselves, but Christ forgives through us.
The teacher asked us what forgiveness is. People replied with “putting away bitterness” and “being reconciled with the other person.” The teacher said those were effects of forgiveness, but he asked what the mechanics of forgiveness are. He said that forgiveness was a metaphor: in the ancient world, it referred to cancelling debts, and that concept is being applied to what God does, and what we are called to do. The teacher denied that forgiveness is even forgetting: rather, one can remember the offense and the pain, yet still forgive. Forgiveness is saying that Christ died for that person’s sin.
This class will be interesting. I myself have wondered how to define forgiveness.
C. The teacher showed a picture of a typical Lutheran service, and most of the people in the picture had gray or white hair. He mentioned a Lutheran church that now only has five people and is about to close. He wondered how we can attract young people to church. On a related note, a lady told me that I was welcome at a particular Bible study because the church needs young blood!
I went to the “Word of Faith” church afterwords. It has elderly people, but it has a lot of young people. The announcements at the end ordinarily announce birthdays, but the announcer said that he may discontinue that practice because the church is growing and there are too many birthdays to mention.
It makes me wonder: why does one church struggle, while another grows? Some of the usual answers do not satisfy me. The Rachel Held Evans-types say the church needs to become more liberal, but liberal mainline churches are declining. Then conservatives say the evangelical churches are thriving because they are conservative. But conservative mainline churches, like LCMS, struggle in terms of numbers.
Are evangelical churches hipper? Well, some of the mainline churches that I have attended either offer a contemporary service, or their only service is a contemporary service.
I’ll leave the comments on in case anyone wants to chime in.
Saturday, May 5, 2018
Church Write-Up: Acts 10:34-48; I John 5:1-8; John 15:9-17
Here is my write-up about last Wednesday’s Bible study at the
Missouri Synod Lutheran church. Next week, we will not be meeting. My
understanding is that we will not meet until the last week of May, then
we will meet again in August.
Here are some items:
A. One of our texts was Acts 10:34-48. It is within the chapter about the Gospel going out to the Gentiles. V. 34 affirms that Peter opened his mouth and spoke. The pastor said that this phraseology is unique in Acts, and it serves to highlight that what Peter was about to say was divinely-inspired and reflected God’s will. Indeed, the Gentile centurion Cornelius asks Peter in the previous verse to speak what God has commanded him. God wanted to highlight that the inclusion of the Gentiles into God’s Kingdom was God’s will. That was controversial, as the prophecy in Joel 2:28 about God’s Spirit being poured out on all flesh was initially believed to apply only to Israel. The Samaritans experienced their own Pentecost in Acts 8, but the Samaritans at least were deemed by Jews to be quasi-Jews due to their acceptance of the Pentateuch. But Gentiles being accepted, and as the equals of the Jews in God’s eyes? That was revolutionary. Yet, there the Gentiles were, speaking in tongues. The pastor said that Gentiles were still accepted by Jews into the Court of the Gentiles in the Temple, and that there were Gentile God-fearers, but Roman centurions were despised on account of their cruelty. Cornelius, by contrast, was a kind centurion.
B. Another text that we read was I John 5:1-8. The pastor talked a lot about agape love, a challenging subject for me, spiritually. He asked how Christians can avoid getting sucked into false doctrine, and his answer was that they should walk in love. That reminded me of something that I read in a book by Kevin Vanhoozer: that, in the New Testament, false doctrine is often contrasted with sin, not doctrinal heresy. I am not entirely sure how that works: cannot a heretic show kindness to others? Yes, but Christians do so, motivated by Christ coming in the flesh, dying for our sins, and rising again bodily. By walking in love, Christians presumably reinforce those concepts, in their own minds and before others.
C. The pastor discussed justification and sanctification. Justification is when God gives us faith. Sanctification is when we live that faith out. Justification is about what God does, while sanctification is about what we do with what God does; yet, God’s love flows through us, enabling us to love and to give. According to the pastor, faith and love are the same gift, two sides of the same coin.
D. The pastor talked before the presentation about his past estrangement from his siblings, and how that hindered his parents years ago from having one big party where they could celebrate their wedding anniversary. He expressed regret about that, for that was a time when all of the bridesmen and bridesmaids were still alive.
E. The pastor contrasted Christ’s active obedience with Christ’s passive obedience. Jesus in John 15:10 refers to his obedience towards his Father’s commandments. The pastor said this was Jesus’ passive obedience: his fulfillment of the Law in Christians’ place. Christ’s active obedience, by contrast, refers to his going to the cross and dying in place of Christians. Some sites (see here and here) say it is actually the other way around: the passive obedience is Christ suffering the penalty of sins in our place, whereas the active obedience is his obedience of God’s law. That latter link addresses the question of which righteousness is imputed to believers, responding essentially that they are two sides of the same coin.
Here are some items:
A. One of our texts was Acts 10:34-48. It is within the chapter about the Gospel going out to the Gentiles. V. 34 affirms that Peter opened his mouth and spoke. The pastor said that this phraseology is unique in Acts, and it serves to highlight that what Peter was about to say was divinely-inspired and reflected God’s will. Indeed, the Gentile centurion Cornelius asks Peter in the previous verse to speak what God has commanded him. God wanted to highlight that the inclusion of the Gentiles into God’s Kingdom was God’s will. That was controversial, as the prophecy in Joel 2:28 about God’s Spirit being poured out on all flesh was initially believed to apply only to Israel. The Samaritans experienced their own Pentecost in Acts 8, but the Samaritans at least were deemed by Jews to be quasi-Jews due to their acceptance of the Pentateuch. But Gentiles being accepted, and as the equals of the Jews in God’s eyes? That was revolutionary. Yet, there the Gentiles were, speaking in tongues. The pastor said that Gentiles were still accepted by Jews into the Court of the Gentiles in the Temple, and that there were Gentile God-fearers, but Roman centurions were despised on account of their cruelty. Cornelius, by contrast, was a kind centurion.
B. Another text that we read was I John 5:1-8. The pastor talked a lot about agape love, a challenging subject for me, spiritually. He asked how Christians can avoid getting sucked into false doctrine, and his answer was that they should walk in love. That reminded me of something that I read in a book by Kevin Vanhoozer: that, in the New Testament, false doctrine is often contrasted with sin, not doctrinal heresy. I am not entirely sure how that works: cannot a heretic show kindness to others? Yes, but Christians do so, motivated by Christ coming in the flesh, dying for our sins, and rising again bodily. By walking in love, Christians presumably reinforce those concepts, in their own minds and before others.
C. The pastor discussed justification and sanctification. Justification is when God gives us faith. Sanctification is when we live that faith out. Justification is about what God does, while sanctification is about what we do with what God does; yet, God’s love flows through us, enabling us to love and to give. According to the pastor, faith and love are the same gift, two sides of the same coin.
D. The pastor talked before the presentation about his past estrangement from his siblings, and how that hindered his parents years ago from having one big party where they could celebrate their wedding anniversary. He expressed regret about that, for that was a time when all of the bridesmen and bridesmaids were still alive.
E. The pastor contrasted Christ’s active obedience with Christ’s passive obedience. Jesus in John 15:10 refers to his obedience towards his Father’s commandments. The pastor said this was Jesus’ passive obedience: his fulfillment of the Law in Christians’ place. Christ’s active obedience, by contrast, refers to his going to the cross and dying in place of Christians. Some sites (see here and here) say it is actually the other way around: the passive obedience is Christ suffering the penalty of sins in our place, whereas the active obedience is his obedience of God’s law. That latter link addresses the question of which righteousness is imputed to believers, responding essentially that they are two sides of the same coin.
Friday, May 4, 2018
Book Write-Up: Echoes of Exodus
Bryan D. Estelle. Echoes of Exodus: Tracing a Biblical Motif. IVP Academic, 2018. See here to purchase the book.
Bryan D. Estelle teaches Old Testament at Westminster Seminary California. His Ph.D. is from Catholic University of America. In Echoes of Exodus: Tracing a Biblical Motif, Estelle examines the motif of the Exodus as it appears in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.
Here is a summary of the chapters, though some of my summaries of the chapters will sometimes draw from things in the book outside of the particular chapters.
In the “Introduction,” Estelle offers personal biographical information about his academic interest in the Exodus motif in the Bible. He summarizes what the coming chapters are about, but he also brings up an issue that he will revisit a few times. This issue is the debate over whether Christian salvation is primarily forensic (God legally and judicially declares believers righteous) or participationist (believers are in Christ). Estelle believes that both are true, yet he feels a need to emphasize individual salvation when discussing Paul’s writings. Estelle also depicts God’s deliverance of Israel as legal: God had a right to deliver God’s firstborn, Israel, from Egypt. Still, Estelle acknowledges a communal dimension to God’s work, for the theme that God created a people through the Exodus also occurs in this book.
Chapter 1 concerns Estelle’s “Hermeneutical Foundations.” Estelle discusses intertextuality and how texts can echo other texts, in the minds of authors and readers. Estelle seeks to value what the biblical writings meant in their original contexts. At the same time, he believes that how subsequent biblical authors interpreted previous biblical motifs is important, as well. Moreover, he maintains that there is ultimately a divine author of Scripture, and that the divine intent may go beyond the intent of the Old Testament authors. Typology will play a significant role in this book, as Estelle frequently asserts that the Promised Land is a type of the World to Come. On what basis does Estelle assert this? Well, for one, there is a synchronic dimension in Estelle’s biblical interpretation, as he holds that there is a divine author of the Old and New Testament; such an approach is conducive to interpreting the Old Testament in light of the New. Second, Estelle believes that the promises inherent in the original Exodus and the new Exodus described in the prophets are too grand to be confined to historical events: they depict a restored relationship with God and, in the case of the new Exodus, paradise. For Estelle, they exert a pressure on the New Testament authors, who interpreted them in light of Jesus.
Chapter 2 is entitled “The Past is Prologue: Creation and Exodus.” For Estelle, there are themes in Genesis that are pertinent to the Exodus. In Genesis 1, God creates the world amidst chaos after dividing the waters and makes human beings, who have covenant obligations towards God. The culmination of creation is rest. In Genesis 2-3, Adam and Eve serve in God’s Edenic sanctuary but disqualify themselves. God cleanses the earth of wickedness through the Flood and reinforces two things in God’s covenants with Noah: common grace and a godly people. Common grace is the order that God establishes so that society is peaceful enough for God’s salvific activity to occur there. Legal systems are a significant feature of common grace. But Noah’s family was also God’s people, set apart on account of their righteousness. What do these themes have to do with the Exodus? Well, in the Exodus, we see God separating waters and creating a people for God-self, leading them to a place of rest (the Promised Land). The goal of the Exodus was the establishment of God’s sanctuary, in the wilderness and ultimately in Zion. Themes of creation out of water, a holy people, and a sanctuary occur in Genesis and Exodus.
Chapter 3, “The Exodus Motif: A Paradigm of Evocation,” discusses the Song of the Sea in Exodus 15. Estelle presents arguments for a twelfth century date, while acknowledging that there are arguments out there for a later date (which he does not engage). What Estelle notices in Exodus 15 is that the goal of the Exodus is worship at Zion.
Chapter 4, “The Psalms and the Exodus Motif,” concerns the theme of the Exodus in the Psalms. The Exodus comforts the Psalmist that God will defeat the chaos in Israel’s world, even though Israel is sinful.
Chapter 5, “Isaiah’s Rhapsody,” focuses on Isaiah 40-55. Estelle believes that Isaiah 40-55 depicts Israel’s restoration from the Babylonian exile as a new Exodus, yet he also maintains that the Servant Songs envision an Exodus even greater than that: the Exodus that Christ shall bring.
In Chapter 6, “Exile and Post-Exile: The Second Exodus Revisited,” Estelle mentions allusions to the Exodus in the Book of Ezekiel. He also shows that, in Ezra-Nehemiah, there was a sense that Israel was still in exile, even after her restoration from Babylonian captivity. Do the prophetic promises have a later fulfillment?
Chapter 7 is about “Jesus as the New Exodus in Mark and Matthew.” Jesus came offering Israel forgiveness and a new beginning, and Exodus themes played a key role in his life. He was proclaimed to be God’s Son at baptism, as Israel was God’s firstborn son. He went into the wilderness as Israel did, only he was faithful to his divine mission. Yet, Jesus’ mission reinterpreted the Exodus, in that Jesus would travel the path of death in delivering people.
Chapter 8 concerns “The Exodus Motif in Luke-Acts.” In Luke-Acts, Jesus delivers people from the power of Satan, by delivering them from disease, the impossible burden of seeking salvation through the Law of Moses, and idolatry. This echoes God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt.
Chapter 9 is about “The Exodus Motif in Paul.” Paul talks about deliverance from sin, death, and the law. Paul also appeals to the Exodus in discussing the Christian’s spiritual journey, which is individual and communal.
Chapter 10 concerns “The Exodus Motif in 1 Peter.” I Peter regards Jesus as the Passover lamb delivering people, and he sees the church as a holy people, as Israel was to be holy after the Exodus.
Chapter 11 focuses on the Book of Revelation, in which the saints are delivered from the world and the Beast’s tyranny, as Israel was delivered from Egypt.
I liked this statement by Estelle in the “Conclusion”: “Knowing that one is forgiven, completely and freely, matters greatly for demonstrable, grateful obedience in the Christian life. Demonstrable holiness is necessary for entitlement in the world-to-come, but this should not be construed in such a manner as to endanger the doctrines of free grace.” (Page 325)
Some of Estelle’s parallels are stronger than others. In some cases, the New Testament explicitly appeals to the Exodus-Wilderness-Inheritance. Sometimes, language is used that may echo those things, such as the concept of leading (as God through Moses led Israel). And one has to admit: the theme of deliverance from slavery, a key feature of the Exodus, recurs in the New Testament. The idea that this theme in the New Testament echoes the Exodus is not far-fetched.
There was territory that Estelle did not cover. Elijah and Elisha split the water in II Kings 2:8, 14, for example, which is probably an echo of the Exodus. What is the significance of that? Can that be tied into Estelle’s larger scenario? The Exodus motif also occurs prior to Isaiah 40-55, in First Isaiah. In Isaiah 11:15-16, there is a prediction of an Exodus from Assyria. Did that historically happen?
The book may be edifying reading for Christians or Messianic Jews during the Passover season. A lot of its conclusions were not earth-shakingly new to me, but there were some scholarly tangents that made the book interesting. Estelle’s discussion of intertextuality was also very lucid. As someone who had to read dense, abstruse articles on intertextuality for a class years ago, I appreciated Estelle’s discussion. His sections would be useful for students who have to engage this topic.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher. My review is honest.
Bryan D. Estelle teaches Old Testament at Westminster Seminary California. His Ph.D. is from Catholic University of America. In Echoes of Exodus: Tracing a Biblical Motif, Estelle examines the motif of the Exodus as it appears in the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.
Here is a summary of the chapters, though some of my summaries of the chapters will sometimes draw from things in the book outside of the particular chapters.
In the “Introduction,” Estelle offers personal biographical information about his academic interest in the Exodus motif in the Bible. He summarizes what the coming chapters are about, but he also brings up an issue that he will revisit a few times. This issue is the debate over whether Christian salvation is primarily forensic (God legally and judicially declares believers righteous) or participationist (believers are in Christ). Estelle believes that both are true, yet he feels a need to emphasize individual salvation when discussing Paul’s writings. Estelle also depicts God’s deliverance of Israel as legal: God had a right to deliver God’s firstborn, Israel, from Egypt. Still, Estelle acknowledges a communal dimension to God’s work, for the theme that God created a people through the Exodus also occurs in this book.
Chapter 1 concerns Estelle’s “Hermeneutical Foundations.” Estelle discusses intertextuality and how texts can echo other texts, in the minds of authors and readers. Estelle seeks to value what the biblical writings meant in their original contexts. At the same time, he believes that how subsequent biblical authors interpreted previous biblical motifs is important, as well. Moreover, he maintains that there is ultimately a divine author of Scripture, and that the divine intent may go beyond the intent of the Old Testament authors. Typology will play a significant role in this book, as Estelle frequently asserts that the Promised Land is a type of the World to Come. On what basis does Estelle assert this? Well, for one, there is a synchronic dimension in Estelle’s biblical interpretation, as he holds that there is a divine author of the Old and New Testament; such an approach is conducive to interpreting the Old Testament in light of the New. Second, Estelle believes that the promises inherent in the original Exodus and the new Exodus described in the prophets are too grand to be confined to historical events: they depict a restored relationship with God and, in the case of the new Exodus, paradise. For Estelle, they exert a pressure on the New Testament authors, who interpreted them in light of Jesus.
Chapter 2 is entitled “The Past is Prologue: Creation and Exodus.” For Estelle, there are themes in Genesis that are pertinent to the Exodus. In Genesis 1, God creates the world amidst chaos after dividing the waters and makes human beings, who have covenant obligations towards God. The culmination of creation is rest. In Genesis 2-3, Adam and Eve serve in God’s Edenic sanctuary but disqualify themselves. God cleanses the earth of wickedness through the Flood and reinforces two things in God’s covenants with Noah: common grace and a godly people. Common grace is the order that God establishes so that society is peaceful enough for God’s salvific activity to occur there. Legal systems are a significant feature of common grace. But Noah’s family was also God’s people, set apart on account of their righteousness. What do these themes have to do with the Exodus? Well, in the Exodus, we see God separating waters and creating a people for God-self, leading them to a place of rest (the Promised Land). The goal of the Exodus was the establishment of God’s sanctuary, in the wilderness and ultimately in Zion. Themes of creation out of water, a holy people, and a sanctuary occur in Genesis and Exodus.
Chapter 3, “The Exodus Motif: A Paradigm of Evocation,” discusses the Song of the Sea in Exodus 15. Estelle presents arguments for a twelfth century date, while acknowledging that there are arguments out there for a later date (which he does not engage). What Estelle notices in Exodus 15 is that the goal of the Exodus is worship at Zion.
Chapter 4, “The Psalms and the Exodus Motif,” concerns the theme of the Exodus in the Psalms. The Exodus comforts the Psalmist that God will defeat the chaos in Israel’s world, even though Israel is sinful.
Chapter 5, “Isaiah’s Rhapsody,” focuses on Isaiah 40-55. Estelle believes that Isaiah 40-55 depicts Israel’s restoration from the Babylonian exile as a new Exodus, yet he also maintains that the Servant Songs envision an Exodus even greater than that: the Exodus that Christ shall bring.
In Chapter 6, “Exile and Post-Exile: The Second Exodus Revisited,” Estelle mentions allusions to the Exodus in the Book of Ezekiel. He also shows that, in Ezra-Nehemiah, there was a sense that Israel was still in exile, even after her restoration from Babylonian captivity. Do the prophetic promises have a later fulfillment?
Chapter 7 is about “Jesus as the New Exodus in Mark and Matthew.” Jesus came offering Israel forgiveness and a new beginning, and Exodus themes played a key role in his life. He was proclaimed to be God’s Son at baptism, as Israel was God’s firstborn son. He went into the wilderness as Israel did, only he was faithful to his divine mission. Yet, Jesus’ mission reinterpreted the Exodus, in that Jesus would travel the path of death in delivering people.
Chapter 8 concerns “The Exodus Motif in Luke-Acts.” In Luke-Acts, Jesus delivers people from the power of Satan, by delivering them from disease, the impossible burden of seeking salvation through the Law of Moses, and idolatry. This echoes God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt.
Chapter 9 is about “The Exodus Motif in Paul.” Paul talks about deliverance from sin, death, and the law. Paul also appeals to the Exodus in discussing the Christian’s spiritual journey, which is individual and communal.
Chapter 10 concerns “The Exodus Motif in 1 Peter.” I Peter regards Jesus as the Passover lamb delivering people, and he sees the church as a holy people, as Israel was to be holy after the Exodus.
Chapter 11 focuses on the Book of Revelation, in which the saints are delivered from the world and the Beast’s tyranny, as Israel was delivered from Egypt.
I liked this statement by Estelle in the “Conclusion”: “Knowing that one is forgiven, completely and freely, matters greatly for demonstrable, grateful obedience in the Christian life. Demonstrable holiness is necessary for entitlement in the world-to-come, but this should not be construed in such a manner as to endanger the doctrines of free grace.” (Page 325)
Some of Estelle’s parallels are stronger than others. In some cases, the New Testament explicitly appeals to the Exodus-Wilderness-Inheritance. Sometimes, language is used that may echo those things, such as the concept of leading (as God through Moses led Israel). And one has to admit: the theme of deliverance from slavery, a key feature of the Exodus, recurs in the New Testament. The idea that this theme in the New Testament echoes the Exodus is not far-fetched.
There was territory that Estelle did not cover. Elijah and Elisha split the water in II Kings 2:8, 14, for example, which is probably an echo of the Exodus. What is the significance of that? Can that be tied into Estelle’s larger scenario? The Exodus motif also occurs prior to Isaiah 40-55, in First Isaiah. In Isaiah 11:15-16, there is a prediction of an Exodus from Assyria. Did that historically happen?
The book may be edifying reading for Christians or Messianic Jews during the Passover season. A lot of its conclusions were not earth-shakingly new to me, but there were some scholarly tangents that made the book interesting. Estelle’s discussion of intertextuality was also very lucid. As someone who had to read dense, abstruse articles on intertextuality for a class years ago, I appreciated Estelle’s discussion. His sections would be useful for students who have to engage this topic.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher. My review is honest.
Thursday, May 3, 2018
Book Write-Up: The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers
Abner Chou. The Hermeneutics of the Biblical Writers: Learning to Interpret Scripture from the Prophets and Apostles. Kregel Academic, 2018. See here to purchase the book.
Abner Chou teaches biblical studies at the Master’s College and Seminary.
Did the New Testament misinterpret the Old Testament? Was Matthew 1:23 wrong to relate Isaiah 7:14 to the virgin birth of Jesus, when the context of Isaiah 7:14 was the destruction of the Syro-Ephaimite alliance in the time of Isaiah? Did Matthew 2:25 err in applying Hosea 11:1 to Jesus’ departure from Egypt as a child, when the passage was originally about Israel’s Exodus from Egypt? The examples go on.
Christian scholars have proposed various solutions to this apparent problem. One solution is sensus plenior, the idea that there is deeper meaning to the Old Testament passages, of which even their authors were unaware. Another solution is to say that the New Testament approached the Hebrew Bible like rabbinic Judaism or Qumran: in a manner that disregarded the passages’ original contexts and applied them to their own situations. One can then inquire: Is interpreting the Bible out of context is acceptable, since the New Testament authors did so? Some Christians claim that it was all right for the New Testament authors, since they were divinely-inspired, but it is not all right for you and me.
Chou disagrees with these proposals. He maintains that the New Testament authors actually were faithful to the authorial intent behind the Old Testament passages. That does not mean that the Old Testament authors had a perfect understanding of how their eschatological prophecies would be fulfilled in the New Testament. It does mean, however, that the New Testament interpretations of these passages were consistent with those passages’ authorial intent, even if they built on it. According to Chou, such an approach to Scripture was not new to the New Testament authors, for within the Hebrew Bible itself one can observe a process of passages building on earlier passages or drawing forth implications from them. An implication to this, for Chou, is that the New Testament authors did not always have a single passage in mind when they interacted with a text from the Hebrew Bible, but a network of biblical texts. Moreover, unlike many historical-critics of the Bible, Chou contends that the Old Testament authors themselves believed that their eschatological prophecies related to the future, not merely their own historical contexts.
A lot of the time, Chou argues his case effectively. There were a many occasions when I was wondering how Chou would get out of a problem, then he would present his case and I thought to myself, “Hmm.” To cite my favorite example in Chou’s book: Isaiah 7:14-16. Many historical-critics argue that Immanuel was a child in Isaiah’s day, and that he was a sign that the Syro-Ephraimite alliance that was threatening Judah would be destroyed before Immanuel reached a certain age. Chou, by contrast, interprets Immanuel as Jesus. Chou states that Isaiah 7:14-16 can be translated and interpreted to mean that Jesus would experience poverty due to the events that were being set into motion in Isaiah’s day. The Assyrians would destroy the Syro-Ephraimite alliance, but they would also devastate Judah and mark an early example of foreign subjugation of Judah, which would last until Jesus’ day. In the midst of this darkness, Jesus would be light, a la Isaiah 9:1-2. This interpretation was not entirely new to me, but Chou was the first I read who presented it in a manner that was lucid, without making it appear like a convoluted stretch.
Obviously, Chou had his assumptions. He believes that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, and that the prophets were later than the Pentateuchal writings. He thinks that David believed in a coming Messiah and that there would be a resurrection of the dead, whereas many scholars would place these ideas later in Jewish thought. What Chou says may still be relevant to how the New Testament authors interpreted the Hebrew Bible, for the New Testament authors did not know about the historical-critical method; still, they may have believed that they were interpreting the Hebrew Bible in accordance with its original meanings. Chou offers ideas about what may have been going on in their minds when they did so. Moreover, Chou’s assumptions lead to intriguing possibilities, as when he argues that Moses in the “Thou shalt not covet” command was alluding to Eve’s coveting of the forbidden fruit in Genesis 3.
There were some occasions when Chou’s argument was somewhat of a stretch. In Luke 10:25-28, a lawyer asks Jesus how he can obtain eternal life, and Jesus asks the lawyer what the law says. The lawyer quotes the Torah’s passages about loving God and neighbor, and Jesus replies, “This do, and thou shalt live” (KJV). Chou goes out of his way to argue that Jesus is not promoting salvation by works, that Jesus has in mind an intertextual web of texts that includes the idea that God must graciously circumcise people’s hearts for them to obey God. That is not explicit in Luke 10, though. Who is to say that, just because a New Testament author interprets a certain passage, he must have in mind the intertextual web of the Hebrew Bible’s interpretations of those passages? Even Chou acknowledges that Second Temple Judaism arrived at a variety of interpretations of the Hebrew Bible, so the existence of the intertextual web does not necessitate that an interpreter would make particular interpretive moves.
There is also the question of whether the New Testament is always consistent with the Hebrew Bible, as Chou argues. Even if Chou is correct that Hosea depicts a Davidic king leading Israel in a second Exodus, is that not different from Jesus leaving Egypt as a child? Chou perhaps should have been clearer about how Jesus’ fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies relates to Israel, which is often a key figure in those prophecies. Moreover, while Chou argues that the Old Testament itself predicts the nullification of a number of laws in the Mosaic covenant, in predicting the circumcision of the heart, what about passages that seem to indicate otherwise? There is Jeremiah 33:21-22’s promise that the Levites will minister to God perpetually, after Judah is restored, and Ezekiel 40-48’s picture of an eschatological Temple with animal sacrifices and the Zadokite priesthood. How can that be reconciled with what Hebrews says about the nullification of the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices?
I am still giving this book five stars, though. It is orderly, methodical, and lucid, even if it requires some concentration to absorb the author’s arguments. The author has definite views, but he approaches the topic with a tone of humility.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher. My review is honest.
Abner Chou teaches biblical studies at the Master’s College and Seminary.
Did the New Testament misinterpret the Old Testament? Was Matthew 1:23 wrong to relate Isaiah 7:14 to the virgin birth of Jesus, when the context of Isaiah 7:14 was the destruction of the Syro-Ephaimite alliance in the time of Isaiah? Did Matthew 2:25 err in applying Hosea 11:1 to Jesus’ departure from Egypt as a child, when the passage was originally about Israel’s Exodus from Egypt? The examples go on.
Christian scholars have proposed various solutions to this apparent problem. One solution is sensus plenior, the idea that there is deeper meaning to the Old Testament passages, of which even their authors were unaware. Another solution is to say that the New Testament approached the Hebrew Bible like rabbinic Judaism or Qumran: in a manner that disregarded the passages’ original contexts and applied them to their own situations. One can then inquire: Is interpreting the Bible out of context is acceptable, since the New Testament authors did so? Some Christians claim that it was all right for the New Testament authors, since they were divinely-inspired, but it is not all right for you and me.
Chou disagrees with these proposals. He maintains that the New Testament authors actually were faithful to the authorial intent behind the Old Testament passages. That does not mean that the Old Testament authors had a perfect understanding of how their eschatological prophecies would be fulfilled in the New Testament. It does mean, however, that the New Testament interpretations of these passages were consistent with those passages’ authorial intent, even if they built on it. According to Chou, such an approach to Scripture was not new to the New Testament authors, for within the Hebrew Bible itself one can observe a process of passages building on earlier passages or drawing forth implications from them. An implication to this, for Chou, is that the New Testament authors did not always have a single passage in mind when they interacted with a text from the Hebrew Bible, but a network of biblical texts. Moreover, unlike many historical-critics of the Bible, Chou contends that the Old Testament authors themselves believed that their eschatological prophecies related to the future, not merely their own historical contexts.
A lot of the time, Chou argues his case effectively. There were a many occasions when I was wondering how Chou would get out of a problem, then he would present his case and I thought to myself, “Hmm.” To cite my favorite example in Chou’s book: Isaiah 7:14-16. Many historical-critics argue that Immanuel was a child in Isaiah’s day, and that he was a sign that the Syro-Ephraimite alliance that was threatening Judah would be destroyed before Immanuel reached a certain age. Chou, by contrast, interprets Immanuel as Jesus. Chou states that Isaiah 7:14-16 can be translated and interpreted to mean that Jesus would experience poverty due to the events that were being set into motion in Isaiah’s day. The Assyrians would destroy the Syro-Ephraimite alliance, but they would also devastate Judah and mark an early example of foreign subjugation of Judah, which would last until Jesus’ day. In the midst of this darkness, Jesus would be light, a la Isaiah 9:1-2. This interpretation was not entirely new to me, but Chou was the first I read who presented it in a manner that was lucid, without making it appear like a convoluted stretch.
Obviously, Chou had his assumptions. He believes that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, and that the prophets were later than the Pentateuchal writings. He thinks that David believed in a coming Messiah and that there would be a resurrection of the dead, whereas many scholars would place these ideas later in Jewish thought. What Chou says may still be relevant to how the New Testament authors interpreted the Hebrew Bible, for the New Testament authors did not know about the historical-critical method; still, they may have believed that they were interpreting the Hebrew Bible in accordance with its original meanings. Chou offers ideas about what may have been going on in their minds when they did so. Moreover, Chou’s assumptions lead to intriguing possibilities, as when he argues that Moses in the “Thou shalt not covet” command was alluding to Eve’s coveting of the forbidden fruit in Genesis 3.
There were some occasions when Chou’s argument was somewhat of a stretch. In Luke 10:25-28, a lawyer asks Jesus how he can obtain eternal life, and Jesus asks the lawyer what the law says. The lawyer quotes the Torah’s passages about loving God and neighbor, and Jesus replies, “This do, and thou shalt live” (KJV). Chou goes out of his way to argue that Jesus is not promoting salvation by works, that Jesus has in mind an intertextual web of texts that includes the idea that God must graciously circumcise people’s hearts for them to obey God. That is not explicit in Luke 10, though. Who is to say that, just because a New Testament author interprets a certain passage, he must have in mind the intertextual web of the Hebrew Bible’s interpretations of those passages? Even Chou acknowledges that Second Temple Judaism arrived at a variety of interpretations of the Hebrew Bible, so the existence of the intertextual web does not necessitate that an interpreter would make particular interpretive moves.
There is also the question of whether the New Testament is always consistent with the Hebrew Bible, as Chou argues. Even if Chou is correct that Hosea depicts a Davidic king leading Israel in a second Exodus, is that not different from Jesus leaving Egypt as a child? Chou perhaps should have been clearer about how Jesus’ fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies relates to Israel, which is often a key figure in those prophecies. Moreover, while Chou argues that the Old Testament itself predicts the nullification of a number of laws in the Mosaic covenant, in predicting the circumcision of the heart, what about passages that seem to indicate otherwise? There is Jeremiah 33:21-22’s promise that the Levites will minister to God perpetually, after Judah is restored, and Ezekiel 40-48’s picture of an eschatological Temple with animal sacrifices and the Zadokite priesthood. How can that be reconciled with what Hebrews says about the nullification of the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices?
I am still giving this book five stars, though. It is orderly, methodical, and lucid, even if it requires some concentration to absorb the author’s arguments. The author has definite views, but he approaches the topic with a tone of humility.
I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher. My review is honest.
Wednesday, May 2, 2018
Church Write-Up: Whatsoever You Ask; Prayer to Action; Manifestation
A. At the Missouri Synod Lutheran church, the pastor preached about
John 15, in which Jesus compares himself to the vine and his disciples
to the branches. V 16 states: “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen
you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and
that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the
Father in my name, he may give it you” (KJV).
The pastor said that the promise in that verse does not suggest that God will give us, say, a pony if we ask for it in Jesus’ name. Rather, it should be read in light of the themes in John 15: abiding in Christ, bearing spiritual fruit, and love for one another. The pastor also brought up John 20:21, in which Jesus affirmed that, just as the Father sent him, so he is sending the apostles, as the apostles are to carry forgiveness. Jesus’ point is that God will grant the disciples’ requests so long as they are the sorts of things Jesus would ask for, and this occurs as they abide in Christ and have Christ’s mind. God will grant them what they need to produce spiritual fruit, to love one another, and to perform their mission as Christians. This is important because, apart from Christ’s empowering, an institution could fall apart due to irritability, unforgiveness, and ego. We may prefer to receive a pony, the pastor said, but what Jesus offers is far more important.
The pastor also talked about how God’s Word prunes us, cutting away our dead branches that we might produce more fruit. It does so by challenging us, and in some cases cutting us, as it confronts our selfish mindsets.
B. At the Missouri Synod Sunday school class that I attended, we watched another Rob Bell video. Bell was talking about anger, and how we get angry at personal inconveniences, while we are not angry over larger world problems, such as death from hunger. Jesus, by contrast, was angered over the hard hearts of his critics, who did not care for a man with a withered hand, whom Jesus would heal on the Sabbath (Mark 3:5). Bell suggested that we channel our anger into worthwhile endeavors.
We talked about our struggles with anger, and how we can work at least to make a dent in societal problems. One lady said that all she felt she could do about certain societal problems is pray. A couple, which is planning a mission trip to an orphanage in Romania, said that one should not sneeze at prayer! It was when they prayed about a problem that concerned them, that God placed on their hearts something that they could do about it.
C. At the “Word of Faith” church, the pastor talked about the part in Ephesians 4:8 about Christ giving gifts to people. These are spiritual gifts, and they entail Christians going out and helping to renew the world: the world is crying out for them to do this, a la Romans 8:19. In pursuit of this, God has given people gifts. Some are apostles, who are entrepreneurs. Some are prophets, who have a vision. Some are teachers, who point out the practical things that need to be done to fulfill that vision. Some are evangelists, who remind the church and those outside of the church that one does not earn God’s favor through merit but has it by grace. The pastor said that Christians are a new humanity, whom God is freeing from the strongholds of thought that enslave the world, strongholds such as unforgiveness. Yet, the pastor also said that he would like to see the church as a place where everyone, good and bad, feels as if he or she matters.
D. This item will include some of my reservations about what was said above, and I hope that does not imply to anyone any negativity or nit-picking on my part.
On John 15:16, I have heard similar things to what the pastor said, although the pastor stressed more the relationship of bearing spiritual fruit to things that we request. I would not be surprised if abiding in Christ does lead us to ask for things for which Christ would ask. My question is, though, why God would not answer certain prayers for healing. Are not those consistent with Christ’s character, since they reflect love? Plus, Christ healed people. Incidentally, one interpretation of John 15:16 that has long intrigued me is one that states that it related to the apostolic miracles in the Book of Acts: God answered the apostles’ request for miracles, as a way to confirm their message about Christ. I have encountered this interpretation among classic dispensationalists and Church of Christ people. They make that point from a cessationist perspective, claiming essentially that John 15:16 applied to the original apostles, but not to Christians since then, as, according to them, the time of Christians performing miracles was over after the apostolic age.
On Romans 8:19, Romans 8 appears to me to concern the saints’ eschatological glorification, not their attempts to improve the world in the here and now. Paul himself did not appear to promote community service, per se. He encouraged Christians to love and to serve one another. He still cared about non-Christians, as he preached the Gospel to them. But I cannot recall any Pauline passages about Christians going out into their towns and cities and serving people. I do think that such a concept is consistent with the Bible, though. Jesus promoted such a concept when he healed people and encouraged the giving of alms. There are Old Testament passages about the pursuit of justice.
The pastor said that the promise in that verse does not suggest that God will give us, say, a pony if we ask for it in Jesus’ name. Rather, it should be read in light of the themes in John 15: abiding in Christ, bearing spiritual fruit, and love for one another. The pastor also brought up John 20:21, in which Jesus affirmed that, just as the Father sent him, so he is sending the apostles, as the apostles are to carry forgiveness. Jesus’ point is that God will grant the disciples’ requests so long as they are the sorts of things Jesus would ask for, and this occurs as they abide in Christ and have Christ’s mind. God will grant them what they need to produce spiritual fruit, to love one another, and to perform their mission as Christians. This is important because, apart from Christ’s empowering, an institution could fall apart due to irritability, unforgiveness, and ego. We may prefer to receive a pony, the pastor said, but what Jesus offers is far more important.
The pastor also talked about how God’s Word prunes us, cutting away our dead branches that we might produce more fruit. It does so by challenging us, and in some cases cutting us, as it confronts our selfish mindsets.
B. At the Missouri Synod Sunday school class that I attended, we watched another Rob Bell video. Bell was talking about anger, and how we get angry at personal inconveniences, while we are not angry over larger world problems, such as death from hunger. Jesus, by contrast, was angered over the hard hearts of his critics, who did not care for a man with a withered hand, whom Jesus would heal on the Sabbath (Mark 3:5). Bell suggested that we channel our anger into worthwhile endeavors.
We talked about our struggles with anger, and how we can work at least to make a dent in societal problems. One lady said that all she felt she could do about certain societal problems is pray. A couple, which is planning a mission trip to an orphanage in Romania, said that one should not sneeze at prayer! It was when they prayed about a problem that concerned them, that God placed on their hearts something that they could do about it.
C. At the “Word of Faith” church, the pastor talked about the part in Ephesians 4:8 about Christ giving gifts to people. These are spiritual gifts, and they entail Christians going out and helping to renew the world: the world is crying out for them to do this, a la Romans 8:19. In pursuit of this, God has given people gifts. Some are apostles, who are entrepreneurs. Some are prophets, who have a vision. Some are teachers, who point out the practical things that need to be done to fulfill that vision. Some are evangelists, who remind the church and those outside of the church that one does not earn God’s favor through merit but has it by grace. The pastor said that Christians are a new humanity, whom God is freeing from the strongholds of thought that enslave the world, strongholds such as unforgiveness. Yet, the pastor also said that he would like to see the church as a place where everyone, good and bad, feels as if he or she matters.
D. This item will include some of my reservations about what was said above, and I hope that does not imply to anyone any negativity or nit-picking on my part.
On John 15:16, I have heard similar things to what the pastor said, although the pastor stressed more the relationship of bearing spiritual fruit to things that we request. I would not be surprised if abiding in Christ does lead us to ask for things for which Christ would ask. My question is, though, why God would not answer certain prayers for healing. Are not those consistent with Christ’s character, since they reflect love? Plus, Christ healed people. Incidentally, one interpretation of John 15:16 that has long intrigued me is one that states that it related to the apostolic miracles in the Book of Acts: God answered the apostles’ request for miracles, as a way to confirm their message about Christ. I have encountered this interpretation among classic dispensationalists and Church of Christ people. They make that point from a cessationist perspective, claiming essentially that John 15:16 applied to the original apostles, but not to Christians since then, as, according to them, the time of Christians performing miracles was over after the apostolic age.
On Romans 8:19, Romans 8 appears to me to concern the saints’ eschatological glorification, not their attempts to improve the world in the here and now. Paul himself did not appear to promote community service, per se. He encouraged Christians to love and to serve one another. He still cared about non-Christians, as he preached the Gospel to them. But I cannot recall any Pauline passages about Christians going out into their towns and cities and serving people. I do think that such a concept is consistent with the Bible, though. Jesus promoted such a concept when he healed people and encouraged the giving of alms. There are Old Testament passages about the pursuit of justice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)