Grace & Peace

Donald Miller on The Diane Rehm Show

2010-06-18T00:04:00.006-05:00

Donald Miller, bestselling author of Blue Like Jazz, was on The Diane Rehm Show today talking about his new book, Father Fiction. The interview was excellent. He did a great job. His book is about his life growing up without a father. He talks about his issues, and the healing brought about by learning to forgive. My favorite part was hearing him speak courageously and positively (without being weird at all) about the church--the first place he says he received really positive affirmation. He's started a mentoring program for youth, and he's using the infrastructure of the church to pull it off. He speaks warmly of his pastor who taught him how to forgive his Dad. It made my day to hear the church spoken of so warmly on the radio. He's articulate, nuanced, and representing very well. Thank you, Don.

Kevin M. Watson, A Blueprint for Discipleship

2010-06-12T20:56:00.009-05:00

This is our seventh summer in Dallas. Until this point, I have not been a big fan. It's just too dang hot. Now that I have children however, and we have moved to a different apartment, my attitude is changing. We're having a blast. It's so fun to watch the kids having such a good time with bikes, pools, and ice cream. We've especially enjoyed getting to know our neighbors, the Watsons.

We've hit it off. We have a lot in common: little kids, a love for ice cream, and the Christian faith. Kevin is working on his PhD at Perkins Seminary at Southern Methodist University. So, we love chatting theology while we laugh our heads off at the hilarious things our kids do.

One of the many running gags as been about our little Ecumenical movement. Though barely, since we are both Protestants (he's a Methodist, and I'm a Baptist), it's been fun to compare notes and discuss issues from our different perspectives.

Kevin gave me a copy of his book, A Blueprint for Discipleship: Wesley's General Rules as a Guide for Christian Living. It's a short work, 128 pages including the appendices. It's set up in nine chapters and is designed to be used in a small group setting. Kevin is an excellent writer with a gift for clarity and accessibility. You could totally hand this book to a brand new Christian without worries that he or she would be lost in the concepts or vocabulary. Each chapter has a nice review of the previous ground, which is especially helpful if you are going to use this over the course of nine weeks.

Watson's goal is to introduce and recommend John Wesley's method for Christian discipleship which is summarized in Wesley's essay entitled The Nature, Design, and General Rules of the United Societies (often referred to as "The General Rules") The essay is printed in its entirety in Appendix A.

Watson begins by giving the reader some historical background to Wesley and the Methodist tradition. He talks about Wesley's system of tiered meetings of small (band), medium (class), and large groups (Society). He continues by unpacking the General Rules of which there are three: (1) Do no harm; (2) Do all the good you can; and (3) Attend upon the ordinances of God. Watson shows the Biblical basis for these rules, restates them in contemporary lingo, and includes plenty of interesting illustrations to captivate the reader and to show the relevance of Wesley's outline to our present-day context.

Though Watson's intended audience is obviously the Methodist tradition of which he is a part, there are plenty of take-aways for Christians of other stripes. Wesley was an organizational genius, and a brilliant theologian. His wisdom still applies today. Though Protestants of other traditions won't agree with everything, the principle thesis should be universally accepted: Christian discipleship occurs best in gracious, but deliberate and disciplined community. It is not enough to fill our heads with Bible knowledge or drift from worship service to worship service. We must be intentional about asking one another the critical question in the context of loving relationships: "How is it with your soul?"

This book is challenging and convicting. And now that I'm getting to know its author, I appreciate it even more. He loves the Lord and His Church. Thanks, Kevin.

Hero Spotlight: Paul & Becca Gray

2010-06-12T00:07:00.003-05:00

One of my best big brothers is Dr. Paul Gray. We had the privilege of meeting about seven years ago, attending the same church in Dallas, TX. He and his wife Becca (along with their two gorgeous children) have since moved to Ethiopia to serve as medical missionaries. Paul is a surgeon and Becca is a dietitian. You can read about their adventures here.

Paul and Becca are a constant source of encouragement to me. That may seem a bit backwards, since it is we the stateside "supporters" and "prayer partners" that are supposed to be the constant encouragement, right? Hardly.

(I know I'm going to get in trouble for this--Paul is not a fan of people singing his praises. He's one of the humblest men I've ever met, which makes me want to sing his praises even more. Sorry Paul, I'm not a very good friend.)

They walked away from the so-called "American Dream" for the sake of the advancement of the Gospel in Ethiopia. This made absolutely no sense at all to his surgical colleagues here in Texas. Why waste your life? It's a great question. And it's one that Paul has wrestled with in gut-wrenching honesty, an honesty that I deeply appreciate. He'll be the first to tell you he's no super-Christian. The thing that seems to motivate him to work countless hours "peeing in the ocean" is a rare and inspiring, tenacious faith in the Call of God for the sake of the Gospel. He sees some pretty horrible stuff over there. Sometimes, I can barely read his posts (which should tell you something, since I'm a surgical nurse myself. I'm supposed to be able to stomach this stuff). He works on--doing the best he possibly can with the resources he has to heal bodies and souls. Additionally, he is training and discipling Christian surgeons who will continue to extend their ministry of redemption to Ethiopia and other countries in Africa.

So they come to Texas a few months ago to have their daughter. They make the rounds, and we get to spend an afternoon visiting. Paul asks me how I'm doing (crazy doctor, won't let you get off with "I'm fine." He really wants to know and will continue asking diagnostic questions until he knows the state of your soul--because he cares and loves like Christ). I tell him it's tough being out of seminary, yet still working in the hospital, with no full-time church ministry. Worse, after the hours spent at the hospital, church, and family, I feel like I have no time to continue learning (and retaining) the things I learned in seminary. The fear of attrition and stagnation has me by the throat, with no end in sight. He asks, "What is it you'd like to be reading?" I tell him I've been thinking about this volume on church history that has been taunting me from the bookshelf for months. So he's like, "So read it. You've got to make the time." I'm like, "Paul there is no time." He's like, "Dan, there's never going to be time." He's right. Dang surgeon.

Haunting words. True words. Encouraging words. Good brother. I'm reading. I'm writing. I still have a lot of balls in the air, and I drop a few sometimes. But he's right. There's never going to be time. Of course, he'd acknowledge that life has seasons of ebb and flow. The time right after a new baby is not the same as the time when that baby is finally sleeping through the night, and is toilet trained. But the point still stands. Good intentions must be actualized by hard work and discipline. And sometimes you need a good brother to say, "Read the book." Thanks Paul. I love you. May the Lord bless your work and give you strength.

John H. Blosser: A Man of Hope

2009-12-02T20:41:00.003-06:00

My Grandpa died Sunday, November 22. I flew home Monday the 23rd to be there for the viewing and funeral. My Dad's Dad, Grandpa was a career missionary. He spent thirty years in India, seven in Sri Lanka, and one in Guam. In his retirement he was active in his church, serving as a pastor to senior citizens among various other ministries, including a writing ministry through which he published two books, The Call of Net and Johnnie's Little Potato. He is survived by his wife of 64 years, Helen, along with four adult children, six grandchildren, and six great-grandchildren. I had the privilege of saying a few words at his funeral. I felt impressed upon to share the distinctly Christian concept of grief and hope in the face of death. Here's what I read:

As a Children’s Pastor, I like things that are easy to remember. The great truths of Scripture are easier to remember in groups. And, as Trinitarian Christians, of course we like things to be grouped in threes. So, when I ask the kiddos who the three persons are in the One True God I want them to answer: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. If I ask “What is the threefold office of Jesus Christ?” The answer, hopefully, is “Prophet, Priest, and King.” When we ask, “Who are the three great enemies that Christ has conquered?” The answer is “Sin, Death, and the Devil.”

Today we are witnesses at the funeral of an amazing life, a heroic life. A life saturated with the Graces of Christian virtue. When attending Christian funerals we are reminded that we do not grieve like others who have no hope. For Christians, our grief is mingled, even eclipsed at times by a profound hope––our loved one is with the Lord. This hope brings joy, and allows us to celebrate the fact that our loved one is no longer suffering, that he is in the presence of the Savior, that the sacrifices of his life are being rewarded in glory, and that his death will, someday, be undone when Christ returns and raises the dead.

But the Christian does still grieve. Not as one who has no hope, but grieve they do, nonetheless. Why? Because Death is one of the three great enemies. It reminds us that all is not well in the world. That Man, created out of the ground to rule over the ground should die, and be placed back under the ground he was created to tend is an unspeakable tragedy––one of the consequences of humans rebelling against our benevolent King––the Creator of the Universe, the world, and of Human beings. God warned our first parents in the Garden “the day you eat of it you shall surely die.” Here, a twofold separation is threatened: spiritual death––that is, a separation in the harmonious relationship between humans and God––making enemies out of intimate friends; And physical death, the tearing apart of our bodies and our souls. So, as Christians, we do not speak of death in friendly terms. Death is not our buddy. Death is not our pal. Death is not salvation, or release from the “prison cell” of the human body. Indeed, it is offensive to refer to our physical bodies, which our Creator called, “very good” as a “prison cell.” No, death, if we are to speak distinctly Christianly is one of the three Great Enemies. Paul says in his famous resurrection passage in 1 Corinthians chapter 15:

20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

Grandpa has succumbed to death--a great enemy. But the reason we do not despair in our grief is that our Savior and our God, Jesus Christ, conquered death. Spiritual death, by providing reconciliation with God by taking the punishment for our rebellion on the cross. And physical death by coming back to life. His resurrection body proves that he can and will resurrect the dead when he returns: physically, materially, hair, toenails, all of it will come back to life. Not saggy, not frumpy, but glorious, and beautiful.

So we may grieve. We hate death. Death is our enemy. We miss Grandpa. His seat is empty, and it makes us sad. Our grief is appropriate. But we do not despair in our grief. Because Grandpa is with the Lord, and because Grandpa’s body will one day be reunited with his soul and he will come back to life, as a beautiful immortal, physical Grandpa. This is Resurrection Hope. This is Christian Hope.

Grandpa exuded hope––he was so incredibly optimistic. Always whistling, always thankful, rarely, if ever, complaining. This hope fueled an incredibly generous life of self-sacrifice for the sake of advancing the Gospel. Going to his house meant entering into a world of hope.
Grandpa & Grandma’s house, especially as a young child was a bit magical. Grandpa’s enthusiasm and love for us was expressed in all kinds of creative adventures. He had a workshop next to his study down in the basement. This workshop was crammed full of all kinds of tools he would use to create special times for us. From making enormous kites with personalized reeling spools to handcrafting a chess set––He made things for us, and we were captivated by his creativity.

Going to his house also meant getting a glimpse of what made Grandpa tick. No, I’m not talking about his undying love for licorice, jelly beans, cherry pie, and all manor of sweet treats. No, I’m talking about his hopeful love for the Savior. During the cold months you could set your clock by the sounds of crumpled newspaper, the gentle thud of firewood and the scrape of an iron poker as he built his fire in his wood burning stove. Then you’d see him in his chair by the fire reading the Scriptures. In the evenings before bed we always had family worship which consisted of a Bible story, prayers, and songs. So from an early age, he instilled an idea of consistent and disciplined practices that expressed a love for the Savior––a love he very much wanted his grandchildren to embrace. Never weird, never pushy, just fun, optimistic, creative love for us, and for His Lord.

Later, in my own life, as I considered a long move down to Texas, contemplating his life gave me courage. For Grandpa, the call of the Gospel meant steaming away on a ship, leaving close family for five years at a time without airplanes, email, or affordable telephone to shrink the distance. His calling also meant saying goodbye to his children for significant periods of time as they went off to boarding school. Comparing our move to Texas, (a mere thousand miles away––and with all the conveniences of air travel, email, cell phones, and now Skype) to his journey to India helped me to gain an appropriate perspective on what it means to follow one’s calling for the sake of the Gospel. He lived a beautiful life of courageous sacrifice. I want to be like him. I want my son to be like him. I would call John Henry Blosser a good man, worthy of honor, and acclaim. But his consistent, humble spirit, would always deflect such accolades to the Savior he loved, not in a manor smacking of false humility, but in gentleness and authenticity. I love him and I miss him. I look forward with confident hope that I will see him again, whole and glorious, and hopefully with a kite in hand and a playful grin on his face.

Still Life

2009-10-09T23:34:00.009-05:00

My wife and I share a growing interest in photography. Over the past eight years of our marriage, we've owned several cameras. Each time one "dies" usually after considerable use, we modestly upgrade as our budget allows. Our current camera, a Canon S5 IS has served us well as we continue learning the basics of photography.

Recently some friends asked my wife if she would be willing to shoot some pictures of their musical instruments. They want to make enlargements to do some interesting photo-decor in one of the rooms in their house--the practice room. My wife volunteered, "Well Dan can do it--he's more of the still-life guy. He has more patience with the tripod." This gave us both a chuckle, as neither of us has ever actually vocalized this distinction. It's true that she takes most of the people pictures, and I take most of the "thing" pictures. Anyway, I thought it would be fun to post a couple of our favorites. I'll post the originals and the "photoshopped" edited versions. You may think this is "cheating," but the truth is that most (if not all) professionals do some simple things in some sort of photo editing software to make their pictures "pop." We currently use iPhoto, but plan to upgrade to Photoshop Elements in the near future.

Original

Edited

Original

Edited

Original

Edited

Church Discipline

2009-10-07T23:50:00.003-05:00

This is always a sticky subject. No one likes doing it, but as Calvin points out, church discipline is an absolute necessity to maintain the health of the church:

Accordingly, as the saving doctrine of Christ is the soul of the church, so does discipline serve as its sinews, through which the members of the body hold together, each in its own place. Therefore, all who desire to remove discipline or to hinder its restoration––whether they do this deliberately or out of ignorance––are surely contributing to the ultimate dissolution of the church. For what will happen if each is allowed to do what he pleases? Yet that would happen, if to the preaching of doctrine there were not added private admonitions, corrections, and other aids of the sort that sustain doctrine and do not let it remain idle. Therefore, discipline is like a bridle to restrain and tame those who rage against the doctrine of Christ; or like a spur to arouse those of little inclination; and also sometimes like a father's rod to chastise mildly and with the gentleness of Christ's Spirit those who have more seriously lapsed. When, therefore, we discern frightful devastation to threaten the church because there is no concern and no means of restraining the people, necessity itself cries out that a remedy is needed. Now, this is the sole remedy that Christ has enjoined and the one that has always been used among the godly.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Chapter XII, I.

Prolegomena

2009-10-06T23:47:00.008-05:00

My Greek prof at DTS, Dan Wallace, has a heart for fundamentalists who tend to put all doctrines on equal footing, such that, for one to disagree with a particular theory of Bible translation, for example, is to disagree with all subsequent categories of doctrine. He's known too many students who were raised in strict fundamentalism walk away from the faith when they found that their particular theory of Bible Translation was untenable.

So, in Greek III, he spends a good amount of time talking about the importance of developing one's "Doctrinal Taxonomy" while in seminary. This is essentially a prioritization of doctrines. In other words, through your studies with your guides and peers, you will learn that the doctrine of the Trinity is much more important than one's beliefs about spiritual gifts, etc. (As an aside, if you're thinking about going to seminary, having wise people guide you through the process of thinking out this taxonomy is worth the trip. Before I went to DTS, I had a very vague notion of how to sort out the important questions/issues, from less important or even inconsequential matters. EVERYTHING seemed equally important, which after a lot of reflection, simply isn't the case.)

My close friend and fellow pastor, John Gram, has written an eloquent and succinct post outlining the difference between "Domino Theology" and "Archery Theology." It's Wallace's illustration for being savvy and wise when it comes to "keeping the main things the main things." And/or "How not to despair and give up on Christianity when some postmodern PhD asks you a hard question about the Problem of Evil." The post is easy to understand, and quite helpful. Click here.

Cool Pic

2009-09-26T20:31:00.004-05:00

I like this photograph my wife took on our recent trip to Indiana. She's getting better both at shooting, and at editing. We're thinking about investing in "the next level" in equipment and software. We'll see....

Now in iTunes

2009-08-05T21:15:00.002-05:00

The HBC Podcast is now available in the iTunes Music Store. Do a search for "Highland Baptist Church" and look for the orange art.

We're Live!

2009-07-08T18:03:00.000-05:00

Check us out!

www.highland-baptist.org

N.G.F.L.

2009-06-11T10:01:00.001-05:00

Joy

2009-06-10T00:00:00.002-05:00

Speculation

2009-06-09T08:30:00.000-05:00

Commenting on Genesis 12 tonight, Larry asked, "Is this a case where we have a mountain of Mishnah out of a molehill of Torah?" I thought that was a brilliant way to ask the question. Larry modestly said he didn't come up with it, which is probably true (though he's quite witty enough to have come up with it on his own). The image refers to extra-biblical Jewish literature that comments on the text including laws and tradition.

Genesis 12 has generated a lot of scholarly literature. Some of it excellent, a lot of it highly speculative. We talked briefly of the proper role of speculation in theological method. There is a time and place where it is appropriate, principally for testing the rational coherence of an interpretation. However, it is wise to make sure hypothetical and speculative interests don't outweigh the more important questions the text is asking and answering. The point is well-illustrated in a proverbial story in which a student asked his theology professor, "What was God doing before He created the world?" The professor made his point by replying, "Creating Hell for the overly curious!"

Good theological method works to "keep the main thing the main thing"--properly prioritized, and well-disciplined when faced with the temptation to speculate.

Matthew Moore

2009-06-08T00:18:00.000-05:00

Matt's got a new space for his theological writing. He's an insightful friend. I hope you enjoy.

Anthological Prolegomena

C.S. Lewis's Space Trilogy

2009-06-07T00:21:00.003-05:00

I just finished reading C.S. Lewis’s space trilogy. For years I was unaware that C.S. Lewis had a space trilogy. His most famous fiction writing is most certainly The Chronicles of Narnia, perhaps with The Screwtape Letters in second place.

Monday nights I meet (and have been meeting for years now) with a group of guys. We enjoy studying the Bible together and praying for one another. Most of us share a love for Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings as well the works of our friend, Mr. Lewis. It was in this fellowship that I first heard of the space trilogy, and one of the members lent me the paperbacks. One of the others asked me Monday if I might put down some of my thoughts, so here we go:

I enjoyed the books. They are interesting, well paced, and contain brilliant sentences. The world, or better, universe that Lewis explores is fascinating. The first of the three, Out of the Silent Planet explores (besides life on another planet) human nature. Here is played out Lewis’s theological anthropology as we see the hero able to appreciate and love the diverse nature he encounters, while the villains are ever-bent toward greedy exploitation. Like Uncle Andrew they see only the hideous in the beautiful.

The second work, Perelandra takes place on a different planet, one much earlier in its history. Lewis allegorically presents the story of Genesis in a new world. The central conflict is the temptation of the innocents by a satanic villain (introduced in the first book). Like Milton he imagines a more protracted wrestling match with greater appetites and cunning than our desensitized eyes glean from the Genesis narrative. This conflict held my interest strongest of the three works—I was turning pages and staying up far too late. To be sure, the descriptive sections would most certainly be shortened by “today’s standards.” But I found the imagery rather stunning in places—especially those that best displayed Biblical parallel.

The third, That Hideous Strength, was good, but not best. I felt the plot fizzle in places. And the story itself seemed to be more of a transport vehicle for his theological/political/philosophical ideas/essays than a narrative gem. Definitely worth reading, though, as Lewis’s ideas on all of these subjects are fascinating, and most are quite helpful.

Both Lewis and Tolkien saturate their fiction writing with values consistent with the Christian tradition. (The principle reason, in my view they are quite different than other fantasy fiction, i.e., Harry Potter or The Golden Compass). I think that Lewis is more blatantly allegorical. Where Tolkien colors the waters, so to speak, with Christian ethics and religious imagery, Lewis floats them more obviously on the surface. This makes it easier to understand your point, but doesn’t necessarily give you higher marks for storytelling. Nonetheless, they are both giants––two of my heroes. To cling to the faith, and challenge so many of the philosophical and theological assumptions of their context, yet to do so with such grace, and creative skill is a courageous and beautiful feat.

On Generosity

2009-06-06T00:26:00.000-05:00

I came across this prayer the other day in a book I was reading. It's attributed to St. Francis, but can't be tracked back further than the early part of the twentieth century. Anyway, I thought it was helpful.

Lord, make me an instrument of Thy peace;
where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master,
grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood, as to understand;
to be loved, as to love;
for it is in giving that we receive,
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned,
and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life.

Amen.

HBC Podcasting

2009-06-03T15:07:00.006-05:00

We're getting closer to launching our new and improved website for Highland Baptist Church. Today I was setting up the podcast feature. If you want to access some of the sermons, just click on the title of this post.

If you'd like to subscribe to the podcast in iTunes, you need to click on the "Advanced" menu, and then choose "Subscribe to Podcast." When it asks you for the URL, paste this link in the field:

http://highland-baptist.nextmeta.com/podcast.cfm

Hit "okay" and you should be set up.

He is Risen!

2009-04-12T13:27:00.000-05:00

He died eternal life to bring,
And lives that Death may die.

Maundy Thursday

2009-04-09T12:08:00.006-05:00

In keeping with the tradition of Maundy Thursday, this morning we read our daughter the appropriate stories from her Storybook Bible. We talked about "outside poopy" and "stinky feet," and how Jesus washed Peter's feet. We also read about the Last Supper. As I was musing over the story, I remembered an old post that I thought worth dusting off and posting here. And here is Sally Lloyd-Jones:

Then Jesus picked up some bread and broke it. He gave it to his friends. He picked up a cup of wine and thanked God for it. He poured it out and shared it.
"My body is like this bread. It will break," Jesus told them. "This cup of wine is like my blood. It will pour out."
"But this is how God will rescue the whole world. My life will break and God's broken world will mend. My heart will tear apart--and your hearts will heal. Just as the passover lamb died, so now I will die instead of you. My blood will wash away your sins. And you'll be clean on the inside--in your hearts."
"So whenever you eat and drink, remember," Jesus said, "I've rescued you!"
Jesus knew it was nearly time for him to leave the world and go back to God.
"I won't be with you long," he said. "You are going to be very sad. But God's Helper will come. And then you'll be filled up with a Forever Happiness that won't ever leave. So don't be afraid. You are my friends and I love you."
Then they sang their favorite song. And walked up to their favorite place, an olive garden.

Grace and Peace to you, this Holy Week.

Dispensationalism: A Brief Introduction

2009-03-28T01:04:00.013-05:00

I was recently invited to give a talk on Dispensationalism for a local Bible study. So, if you're bored and have fifty minutes to kill, or you're having trouble sleeping, or just happen to be curious about the subject, click on the title of this post.

A Bit of Coloured Paper

2009-03-11T11:53:00.003-05:00

I remember once when I had been giving a talk to the R.A.F. [Royal Air Force], an old, hard-bitten officer got up and said, 'I've no use for all that stuff. But, mind you, I'm a religious man too. I know there's a God. I've felt Him: out alone in the desert at night: the tremendous mystery. And that's just why I don't believe all your neat little dogmas and formulas about Him. To anyone who's met the real thing they all seem so petty and pedantic and unreal!'

Now in a sense I quite agreed with that man. I think he had probably had a real experience of God in the desert. And when he turned from that experience to the Christian creeds, I think he really was turning from something real to something less real. In the same way, if a man has once looked at the Atlantic from the beach, and then goes and looks at a map of the Atlantic, he also will be turning from something real to something less real: turning from real waves to a bit of coloured paper. But here comes the point. The map is admittedly only coloured paper, but there are two things you have to remember about it. In the first place, it is based on what hundreds and thousands of people have found out by sailing the real Atlantic. In that way it has behind it masses of experience just as real as the one you could have from the beach; only, while yours would be a single glimpse, the map fits all those different experiences together. In the second place, if you want to go anywhere, the map is absolutely necessary. As long as you are content with walks on the beach, your own glimpses are far more fun than looking at a map. But the map is going to be more use than walks on the beach if you want to get to America.

C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

Am I a Liberal?

2009-02-20T00:39:00.005-06:00

I had a good friend tell me a story a few months ago about a painful experience she had while serving in her church. She was a leader in the children’s ministry. This particular Sunday, one of the teachers was planning on having the kids sing one of the older songs that highlights the Atonement, and of course, the blood of Christ. (By now, I’ve forgotten which particular song it was, but something like, There is a Fountain). My friend expressed her concern about singing this song, especially with a group of children who, along with their parents, were new to church, and who would have almost no foundation upon which to understand lyrics regarding the cleansing properties of the Savior’s blood. (Not to mention age-appropriateness….You can almost hear the barrage of questions after the song, “Teacher, is there really a fountain filled with blood?!”) I digress….

Anyway, the trap was sprung, and my poor friend had the impossible task of proving, on the spot, that she was not, in fact, a liberal.

You see, this teacher had been reading a book by a very well-meaning evangelical who was explaining how the liberal movement made inroads into major American Denominations, how these inroads are alive and well, and how these erosions typically occur. This sweet, well-meaning, children’s teacher suspects her leader of being one, and when she finds resistance to singing the song, her worst fears are confirmed.

And so my friend, after telling me this story, asks with pain, “Am I a liberal?”

It’s a good question. What is a liberal anyway? Growing up, it was a codeword for them. For all the people that don’t believe like us. Who don’t read the Bible, who don’t preach the Bible, who don’t believe the Bible. They’re also Democrats. We heard, on an annual basis, how our church split off from the Brethren Denomination when the denomination told our church that we should no longer be singing about “the blood.” We said, “Yes we will.” And so they locked our building. We had to buy the property twice. Because of “liberals.”

This language was reinforced at my private Christian college. We heard, in chapel, about how the “liberals” don’t believe the Bible--and immediately thereafter learned in our civics class that they also like raising taxes. Nasty folks. All the while, confusingly, we were being told that we were receiving an excellent liberal arts education.

The word is difficult to define. The Random House Dictionary lists about fifteen different definitions. We use it all the time when referring to politics, theology, education, giving, etc. I’d like to take a stab at defining the word strictly in its theological sense. The Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms says it’s:

A movement in nineteenth and twentieth century Protestant circles that builds from the assumption that Christianity is reconcilable with the positive human aspirations, including the quest for autonomy. Liberalism desires to adapt religion to modern thought and culture. Consequently, it views divine love as realized primarily, if not totally, in love for one’s neighbor and the kingdom of God as a present reality found especially within an ethically transformed society (72).

With the rise of science and the optimism it produced preceding the devastating world wars of the twentieth century, the miraculous accounts recorded in the Scriptures became a bit difficult. Since we know now that the earth revolves around the sun, and not the sun around the earth, we also know that the miraculous accounts in the Bible must be explainable as primitive peoples trying to describe things they did not fully understand. However, the Bible is still useful as a source of ethics and inspiration. “Salvation” is education, spiritual enlightenment, and compassionate love for one’s neighbor. “Resurrection” is not so much dead flesh and blood coming back to life as it is the rebirth of a high ideal. So, Theological Liberalism is really a salvage job––an attempt to recast the Bible and the Christian Religion in terms palatable to an enlightened culture, essentially redefining the miraculous in order to keep the beautiful ethic.

Are you a Liberal?

Dr. Daniel B. Wallace reserves the term for those who go so far as to deny the physical resurrection of Christ. That’s a decent test. Most people who deny the Resurrection, yet maintain that they are Christians, will most likely share a set of assumptions that mirrors the tradition of Theological Liberalism. He argues, and I agree, that it is unwise to use the fundamentalists’ various litmus tests used for sniffing out “liberals”––typically theological fine points such as the timing of the Rapture in relation to the Tribulation, which English Bible is most inspired, or whether or not we should sing There is a fountain to concrete-thinking, unchurched pre-schoolers at church (okay, Dr. Wallace never mentioned that last example, but you could see where this was going).

Save the “l-word” for those who claim it. And let’s keep the conversation going with those who disagree on finer points by refusing to demonize them. I responded to my friend’s question by asking her, “Do you believe that Jesus was dead, buried, and actually came back to life––I mean that his body truly came back to life?” She said, “Of course!”

“Then you’re not a Liberal.”

UPDATED: Kelly brought up an excellent point in the comments that deserves mention on this main page. Things may get confusing if someone is describing themselves as a liberal politically. I in no way mean to imply that we should assume that this person is automatically also a liberal theologically. Those are two different animals entirely (similarly, my "liberal" arts education at a conservative Christian college says nothing about the school's politics or its theology). This post is about asking better questions about people's religious beliefs before categorizing them with a bad label.

Goodbye, Dr. Hoehner

2009-02-14T09:55:00.003-06:00

I was sad to learn of the sudden passing of Dr. Harold Hoehner, professor of New Testament at Dallas Seminary. Apparently in excellent health, he collapsed after his regular three-mile run. It's a shock not only to his immediate family, but to the seminary family and the evangelical community. Though I did not have any classes with Dr. Hoehner, there is no way any of us would have survived Greek III without his excellent commentary on Ephesians. Please pray for his family.

McKight on Emergent

2009-02-11T22:00:00.004-06:00

Recently, the men in my Bible Study started asking questions and doing a bit of research on the "emerging church." It's an interesting subject that has sparked no little debate in the wonderful world of evangelicalism. Scot McKight wrote a piece a couple years ago that is helpful in understanding some of the larger themes. If you're interested, the article is here.

Is My Child Too Sick for Church?

2009-01-21T11:55:00.004-06:00

Flu season is here in full force. Many have already experienced seasonal sickness associated with the colder weather. Some parents have asked, “How do I know if my child is too sick to go to church?” Great question.
The following guidelines come from an excellent resource, Your Child’s Health, by Barton D. Schmitt, M.D.:

Transmission
Diseases are mainly spread by touching something (e.g., a toy, doorknob, or child’s hand) that is contaminated with viruses or bacteria and getting them on your fingers. The second step in transmission is touching your nose or mouth, giving the germs a chance to move in and start a new infection. Here are some specifics:
Nose, mouth, and eye secretions are the most common sources of respiratory infections. These secretions are usually spread by contaminated hands or occasionally by kissing. Toddlers are especially prone to spreading these infections because of their habits of touching or mouthing everything.
Droplets in the air spread by coughing or sneezing is a less common means of transmission of respiratory infections. Droplets can travel up to 6 feet.
Fecal contamination of hands or other objects accounts for the spread of most diarrhea.
Contaminated utensils such as bottles and dishes can occasionally be a source of respiratory or intestinal infections.

Prevention
Encourage hand washing. This is the mainstay in preventing the spread of disease.
Discourage habits of touching the mouth and nose. This is extremely helpful in preventing the spread of respiratory infections. Clean contaminated areas with disinfectants. These products kill most bacteria. Disinfecting the diaper-changing area, cribs, strollers, play equipment, and food service items is effective in limiting intestinal diseases at home and in day-care centers.
Don’t share cups.
Don’t share towels.

When to Stay Home
If your child is displaying any of these symptoms, it would probably be wise to stay home:
Active fever (child should be fever-free for 12 hours)
Green or yellow mucous discharge from nose or eyes.
Vomiting and/or diarrhea
Obvious discomfort (body aches, sick eyes, etc.)
Uncontrolled cough.
When in doubt, call your childcare provider.

Hope

2008-12-29T21:16:00.000-06:00

I heard the bells on Christmas day
Their old familiar carols play,
And wild and sweet the words repeat
Of peace on earth, good will to men.

And thought how, as the day had come,
The belfries of all Christendom
Had rolled along the unbroken song
Of peace on earth, good will to men.

Till ringing, singing on its way
The world revolved from night to day,
A voice, a chime, a chant sublime
Of peace on earth, good will to men.

And in despair I bowed my head
“There is no peace on earth,” I said,
“For hate is strong and mocks the song
Of peace on earth, good will to men.”

Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:
“God is not dead, nor doth He sleep;
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail
With peace on earth, good will to men.”

Advent

2008-12-18T00:47:00.001-06:00

Literally meaning “coming” or “arrival,” this term refers to the coming of Jesus Christ to earth to provide salvation through his life, death, resurrection, and ascension. Christians now anticipate a second advent when Christ will return to earth in bodily form to receive the church and to judge the nations. The term Advent also refers to a season of the church year during which the church prepares to commemorate Christ’s first coming to earth (Christmas). The Advent season encompasses the four Sundays prior to Christmas Day.

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 7-8.

Love Jesus, Hate Religion

2008-12-14T22:21:00.001-06:00

A while back, I noticed that a friend of mine had, "Love Jesus, Hate religion" as her Religious Views on Facebook. I understand the sentiment. What my friend means to say is that she has a personal relationship with Christ, but is not so fond of the institutions that claim to follow Him. Likely this is a way to engage others who are fed up with (or have been burned by) institutional religion. "Jesus isn't the problem. Jesus is cool. It just His followers whom I can't stand, with all their rules and hypocrisy and petty infighting, sectarian differences, etc." Or, on a larger scale, "Religion is a cause of every major conflict the world has ever seen, and continues to see today. If the Muslims and Christians could just agree that Jesus is cool, and follow his teachings to 'love thy neighbor' than we could be rid of all the killing. I'm not like any of the so-called Christians you've met before. I follow the Way of love, and I hate rules and hypocrisy. Let's talk."

Please understand, I am not about to pick on my friend. I know that she is a dedicated Christian who sincerely desires to engage others in religious dialogue. I am, however, offering a critique of the method. I think words matter. Especially words found in the Scriptures. If you broadly claim, even broadcast, that you hate "religion" without any nuance or qualification whatsoever, then you forfeit an important Biblical term. James writes, "Real religion, the kind that passes muster before God the Father, is this: Reach out to the homeless and loveless in their plight, and guard against corruption from the godless world (James 1:27, The Message). So, James likes religion. In fact, the very best religion is that which cares for defenseless people (i.e., orphans and widows).

Similarly, many have jettisoned the word "Christian" for the less hypocritical "Christ Follower." Again, the word is an important Biblical term (see Acts 11:26). Followers of Christ have been called "Christians" for more than 20 centuries. Is it important to drop the term because of bad ambassadors?

Nit picking? Quarreling over words? Hopefully not. I'm just asking for a bit of nuance. If you love Jesus and hate religion, I'll ask why you hate caring for orphans and widows. But if it's hypocrisy you hate, or false religion, than simply say so.

Finally, please understand that I understand that bumper sticker slogans and t-shirts are designed to be provocative--to blow up categories (barriers, even) in order to promote a healthy conversation. I'm all for it. And I'll even do it on occasion. But with awareness that some of those categories will have to be remade further on down the road. I'm a Christian. I love Jesus, and real religion.

Trinity

2008-12-07T22:01:00.008-06:00

Athanasian Creed

Whoever wants to be saved should above all cling to the catholic faith. Whoever does not guard it whole and inviolable will doubtless perish eternally. Now this is the catholic faith: We worship one God in trinity and the Trinity in unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the divine being.

For the Father is one person, the Son is another, and the Spirit is still another. But the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, equal in glory, coeternal in majesty. What the Father is, the Son is, and so is the Holy Spirit.Uncreated is the Father; uncreated is the Son; uncreated is the Spirit. The Father is infinite; the Son is infinite; the Holy Spirit is infinite. Eternal is the Father; eternal is the Son; eternal is the Spirit: And yet there are not three eternal beings, but one who is eternal; as there are not three uncreated and unlimited beings, but one who is uncreated and unlimited. Almighty is the Father; almighty is the Son; almighty is the Spirit: And yet there are not three almighty beings, but one who is almighty. Thus the Father is God; the Son is God; the Holy Spirit is God: And yet there are not three gods, but one God. Thus the Father is Lord; the Son is Lord; the Holy Spirit is Lord: And yet there are not three lords, but one Lord.

As Christian truth compels us to acknowledge each distinct person as God and Lord, so catholic religion forbids us to say that there are three gods or lords. The Father was neither made nor created nor begotten; the Son was neither made nor created, but was alone begotten of the Father; the Spirit was neither made nor created, but is proceeding from the Father and the Son. Thus there is one Father, not three fathers; one Son, not three sons; one Holy Spirit, not three spirits.

And in this Trinity, no one is before or after, greater or less than the other; but all three persons are in themselves, coeternal and coequal; and so we must worship the Trinity in unity and the one God in three persons. Whoever wants to be saved should think thus about the Trinity.

It is necessary for eternal salvation that one also faithfully believe that our Lord Jesus Christ became flesh. For this is the true faith that we believe and confess: That our Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son, is both God and man. He is God, begotten before all worlds from the being of the Father, and he is man, born in the world from the being of his mother--existing fully as God, and fully as man with a rational soul and a human body; equal to the Father in divinity, subordinate to the Father in humanity. Although he is God and man, he is not divided, but is one Christ. He is united because God has taken humanity into himself; he does not transform deity into humanity. He is completely one in the unity of his person, without confusing his natures. For as the rational soul and body are one person, so the one Christ is God and man.

He suffered death for our salvation. He descended into hell and rose again from the dead. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again to judge the living and the dead. At his coming all people shall rise bodily to give an account of their own deeds. Those who have done good will enter eternal life, those who have done evil will enter eternal fire. This is the catholic faith. One cannot be saved without believing this firmly and faithfully.

catholic (lowercase)

2008-12-04T01:38:00.001-06:00

A term literally meaning “universal” or “worldwide.” The word is most often associated with Roman Catholicism but originally became standardized in Christian theology through the formula appearing in early Christian creeds that affirms belief in “one holy catholic and apostolic church.” To affirm the church’s catholicity is to suggest that the church is universal in scope. In other words, the church is not restricted to any one ethnic group or geographical location but is open to Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female (Gal. 3:28), with its gospel message being directed “to all nations.”

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 24.

Creed

2008-11-24T20:39:00.002-06:00

Derived from the Latin credo (I believe), a creed is a summary statement of Christian faith and belief. The purpose of the earliest creeds was to present a short summary of Christian doctrine, which baptismal candidates affirmed at their baptism. Later, creeds became tools for instruction of new converts, for combating heresy and for use in corporate worship.

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 33.

John Gram on The Shack

2008-11-21T13:58:00.005-06:00

John Gram wrote the following review of William Young's The Shack. Do you agree with his assessment? Why or why not?

Some friends asked me to write a review of The Shack, so here it is:

Like most of you, I had heard of The Shack long before I actually picked up a copy to read. There are certain books that I read not because of personal interest, but because as a minister I want to know what my congregation is being exposed to, as well as the Church at large. Given the popularity – and controversy – surrounding The Shack, I figured that this was one of those books I probably needed to read for myself.

For those of you who don’t know the basic story line, the book revolves around a man named Mackenzie, or Mack, for short. Mack grew up with a “religious,” yet horribly abusive father. Mack finally leaves home at 13 and leads a hard life, but eventually things fall into place. He marries a wonderful Christian woman, and he has five great kids. But then an unspeakable tragedy – “The Great Sadness,” as the book calls it – shakes Mack to his core. On a camping trip, his youngest daughter, Missy, is kidnapped and brutally murdered. The guilt, pain, and anger slowly consume Mack, until one day he receives a note from God inviting him to the same shack where Missy was murdered. Mack spends a weekend with God, during which time He comes to understand the nature and purposes of God more clearly, and ultimately comes to peace with what happened to Missy.

The Shack is not a great literary work. The writing style kept the book in my bathroom to be read in segments, as opposed to on my bedside table at night when I do my pleasure reading. The plot and dialogue do little more than carry the reader awkwardly to Young’s next lecture point.

MACK: “Wow, Jesus, it’s as hot as Hell out here on the lake.”

JESUS: “Well, speaking of Hell, Mack, let me spend the next few pages telling you all about how I see it and how the Christian Church has it all wrong.”

Okay, so it’s not quite that bad, but it gets close at times. That said, the book did not have to be written brilliantly to accomplish its purpose. The storyline and the characters are really just a vehicle through which the author can express His views on God, suffering, justice, etc. There is actually something quite appealing and engaging in choosing to write this book as a novel, as opposed to a theological treatise, which is really what it is at its heart. Very few believers – rightly or wrongly – would pick up a book called, The Problem of the Nature of God and the Presence of Suffering, but the book’s form as a novel has made it quite successful. And because of its packaging as a novel, many more believers are engaging with the difficult and important questions which Young raises.

What I do appreciate about The Shack is its apparent commitment to Trinitarianism. I say apparent because I know that others have accused it of failing at this point. Personally, I don’t think you could read The Shack as a member of a non-Christian religion or as a modalist (one who believes that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are different “modes” which God assumes at different times, rather than three co-existent persons) and agree with Young’s portrayal of God. Some have accused him of modalism, and perhaps they have a point; there certainly are some parts of His description of the Trinity and God’s interpersonal relationships that leave me uncomfortable. However, these came across to me as temporary “slips” in discussing a very difficult subject, rather than evidence that Young is not committed to an orthodox Trinitarian view. Of course, I’ve never met the man, so I can’t say for sure. The Trinity is one of those great mysteries of the Christian faith that we can more easily define by what it is not, than what it is. Regardless, it is certainly Young’s working out of his Trinitarian views that causes most of the controversy in his work.

In The Shack, God the Father reveals Himself as a black woman for most of the story. Part of the author’s purpose in this is to challenge the image of God as a white grandfather that we all struggle against because of cultural and historical pressures on Christianity. In addition, Young uses Mack’s own childhood experiences to explore the difficulties that many men do have in calling God, “Father.” Revealing God as a black woman helps work through some of these, as well. I really don’t have a problem with Young doing this. He acknowledges that God has revealed Himself as Father and I think he does a good job of upholding the importance of God’s choice in self-revelation. However, it is important for us to remember that God the Father is spirit – neither male, nor female – and I think Young does this tastefully, not with an attitude of “Nyah! Nyah! I’m going to break your stereotypes!”

I’m not really sure how to comment on His portrayal of the Holy Spirit. He does better than most Christians in treating the Holy Spirit as a being with personality, as opposed to an impersonal force. Young decides to portray the Holy Spirit as an Asian woman, probably for similar reasons that God the Father is an African-American woman. I suppose he does a fairly good job at staying faithful to the very limited portrayal of the Spirit which we receive in Scripture.

Most of the problems I have with The Shack on theological grounds are probably accounted for by Young’s view of Christ. After all, most of our understanding of God as a whole is rooted firmly in how we perceive Jesus, God come in the flesh. Young explicitly defends the dual nature of Christ – fully God and fully man – though how he flushes this out causes me some serious concerns. However my greatest concerns come with Christ’s portrayal as a humble, gentle handyman. This is probably my biggest bone to pick with the emergent movement in general: their understanding of Jesus Christ doesn’t seem to be informed by any of the New Testament past the gospels. The resurrected, glorified, “Son of God in power,” does not appear in this work. There is one scene in The Shack where Jesus appears as a King, but it’s an aberration in the novel as a whole. I appreciate what the emergents are reacting against – the image of an aloof, transcendent God who, at worst, could crush you with His little finger (and by the way, is probably looking for an excuse to do so, anyway) and at best, is a far cry from the “Daddy” of Jesus’ prayer. But we must maintain God’s holiness and fearfulness even in His familiarity, and we must maintain his might, wrath, and power, even in His intimacy. In justifiably reacting against one extreme, I think that Young swings too far towards the other. In the end, his portrayal of God is not comforting for me; it is too small and too single-faceted.

Young’s very negative views on authority and institutions, as well as his issues with words like “religion” and “Christian” and various “nouns”– which never really rise above the level of anal semantic objections that simply point out the structure and limitations of language rather than offer any real insight – probably stem from this miopic and anemic view of God in The Shack. While his Trintiarianism is not fatal to the book as a whole (he certainly makes some points worth considering) it does lead to some unorthodox – and a times, dangerous – conclusions, such as his suggestion that the Godhead submits to humans even as humans submit to God in our relationship with Him. This is the sort of “God is a gentlemen” and “Love never imposes” theology that has become quite popular lately, but fails to account for the entire revelation of Scripture.

Honestly, I don’t think that a well-read Christian will find anything new in The Shack. Young offers the standard modern church answers to the problem of suffering, such as God can’t end suffering without limiting human freedom, God doesn’t cause suffering, but allows it for good, etc, etc. He’s changed the packaging, but not really the message. And in the end, Mack receives no real answers, but learns to rest in the goodness of God and his inability to understand the answers, anyway. Perhaps the best way to describe The Shack is a kinder, gentler version of the book of Job.

I suppose these are the sorts of issues that one runs into when one decides to put 250 pages worth of words into God’s mouth. That may seem a little harsh. After all, Young isn’t standing on the rooftops, screaming, “Thus saith the Lord!” And yet, I don’t think this is all that unfair of an analogy. If you are going to put words in God’s mouth, you shouldn’t be held to a lesser standard because you do it in a novel. And The Shack is much more polemical than prophetic. Some folks will probably be uncomfortable with The Shack because it doesn’t share the same assumptions about God, life, death, etc as their own system of theology (Indeed a systematic emergent theology sounds a bit like an oxymoron!). These disagreements are fine. At other times The Shack seems unfaithful to the revelation of Scripture. Would I call it heresy? No. I’ve learned from a good friend to reserve the word “heresy” for damnable beliefs. In other words, if you believe this is true about God, then you do not have saving knowledge of Him. (After all, as uncomfortable as it makes us, Scripture offers right beliefs as just as important a test of salvation as ethical behavior or love.) I do not believe that the portrayal of God in The Shack or the theology of The Shack is heretical in this sense. And in the end, there is some real good to be gleaned from reading it.

Thus, I have no problem with Christians reading and discussing The Shack. It raises some very important and difficult questions with which the Church needs to wrestle. There is too much cotton candy preaching and too much sugary-sweet music and literature that is more likely to give a person diabetes than true inspiration. We need books like The Shack to see where the Church is not measuring up, as well as to evaluate the sort of thinking and thinkers that the Christian community is producing. The Shack should be read with discernment, but so should every other Christian author. It just might need a few more grains of salt than usual.

God is Gracious

2008-11-17T19:20:00.000-06:00

www.dandeelines.blogspot.com

Consensus?

2008-11-15T00:56:00.007-06:00

My friend asked an insightful question several days ago:

Hi Dan.
I happen to know :)that you grew up in a church where pre-trib was canonized in the church's statement of faith and that you went to a seminary that is solidly in that camp. And yet I also perceive that many younger evangelical scholars are moving away from a strong pre-trib position, or are at least sympathetic to other views/system. I'd be interested in any thoughts/evaluation you have on where you see the evangelical church headed on this doctrine. Will we always be so splintered or is there some consensus emerging in the near future?

First some background. I grew up in an Independent church that was strongly influenced by the Dispensational tradition. One of the many theological distinctives of this tradition is that it holds to a belief that the Bible teaches that Christ will return to earth before he rules on earth for a thousand years (Premillennialism).

More particularly, this tradition has emphasized that the Bible teaches that the church will be removed from the earth before a seven-year period of intense suffering known as the “Tribulation.” This view is the Pre-tribulational view referenced above by my friend. The timing of these “end-times” events has been a point of contention to the point of bickering and division within certain streams of evangelicalism. As an earlier generation of conservative evangelicals watched mainline denominational institutions succumb to liberalism, these finer points of eschatology became the outer wall of defense against liberal inroads. The second president of the seminary from which I graduated (Dallas Theological Seminary) even pointed this out in print, commenting that he had never met a liberal who believed in the pre-tribulational rapture (my paraphrase). One of several litmus tests for conservative dispensational theology, the timing of these eschatological events was and is included in the doctrinal statement of the Seminary as well as in the doctrinal statements of many of the churches of similar tradition.

My friend perceives that the tradition may be softening on some of the finer points, at least to the point of sympathetic dialogue with others who hold different views. I think he’s right. In fact, Russell Moore, Dean of the School of Theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, has documented this emerging consensus in evangelical theology (at least at the scholarly level) in his The Kingdom of Christ: The New Evangelical Perspective.

This is not doctrinal erosion down a slippery slope toward liberalism. It is a shift in emphasis in the discussion of eschatology. Instead of working so arduously with high levels of certainty on figuring out the timing of end-times events, evangelical camps who historically have been at odds are spending more time discussing the points at which we agree. I think it’s good. In the past we spent so much effort charting the end of the world, that we eclipsed the main focus of eschatology (the return of the resurrected Lord, the resurrection of the dead, judgment, the renewal of the earth, and the eternal reign of Christ).

The overemphasis of fine points has also led (I think) to an apathetic attitude from people who are rightly “tired of the fight,” to the point that they too are ignoring the main focus of eschatology (perhaps best illustrated by the self proclaimed “Pan-millennialist” who believes, “It will all pan out in the end.”). The knee-jerk that removes all statements of eschatology from church doctrinal statements is not wise. The hope of our faith is grounded in revealed truth that the faithful will be raised from the dead and vindicated by the risen Lord.

My professors are working hard to keep “the main thing the main thing,” while properly and humbly prioritizing the finer points of eschatological timetables. As Christians we have a robust hope. The last enemy, Death, has been conquered by the risen Christ. Since He is alive, then He is coming back. Since His body came back to life, so will our bodies. He will judge and He will reign. The faithful are strengthened by this hope to persevere through their sufferings while participating in His redemptive action by spreading the Gospel, caring for physical needs, tending the earth, etc.

Great question, Philip. I hope and pray that we will not always be so splintered. The doctrinal statements will not likely be revised any time soon. But I think the eschatological emphases of many evangelicals are better mirroring the emphases of the Scriptures. Come quickly, Lord Jesus!

Christ, Christology

2008-11-07T00:45:00.000-06:00

The Greek word translated in English as “Christ” is the equivalent of the Hebrew term Messiah and means “anointed one.” Although not intrinsic to its meaning, the NT use of the term Christ tends to point to the deity of Jesus. Christology is the theological study devoted to answering two main questions: Who is Jesus? (the question of his identity) and What is the nature and significance of what Jesus accomplished in the incarnation? (the question of his work).

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 25.

Pneumatology

2008-11-05T22:40:00.001-06:00

The division of Christian doctrine dealing with the Holy Spirit. The word arises from the Greek words pneuma (spirit) and logos (the teaching about). Pneumatology explores the person and work of the Spirit, especially the Spirit’s involvement in human salvation.

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 92.

Anthropology

2008-11-02T21:54:00.000-06:00

From the Greek word anthropos (human) and logos (word), that is, words about, or teaching concerning, humankind. Anthropology in general refers to any study of the status, habits, customs, relationships and culture of humankind. In a more specific and theological sense, anthropology sets forth the scriptural teachings about humans as God’s creatures. Christian anthropology recognizes that humans are created in God’s image but that sin has in some way negatively affected that image. Anthropology is also interested in the question of the constitution of a human being….

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 10

Bibliology

2008-10-31T00:28:00.000-05:00

The topic in systematic theology that deals with issues of the nature and character of the Bible. Bibliology attempts to understand what kind of book the Bible is, how it is authoritative for Christian faith and practice, and to what extent and in what manner the Bible is to be understood as divine revelation.

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 20.

Soteriology

2008-10-29T19:30:00.001-05:00

Literally, “the study of salvation.” This topic within the corpus of systematic theology deals with the work of the triune God in bringing creation, and especially humans, to enjoy the divine purpose for existence. More specifically, “objective” soteriology speaks of the life, death, resurrection and exaltation of Christ in relation to human salvation. In addition, “subjective” soteriology (the work of the Spirit in the application of Christ’s salvation) deals with the process whereby individuals are brought to God’s saving goal. Topics generally covered include election, calling, regeneration, faith, repentance, conversion, justification, sanctification and glorification.

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 108.

Ecclesiology

2008-10-27T21:45:00.003-05:00

The area of theological study concerned with understanding the church (derived from the Greek word ekklesia, "church"). Ecclesiology seeks to set forth the nature and function of the church. It also investigates issues such as the mission, ministry and structure of the church, as well as its role in the overall plan of God.

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 42.

Eschaton, Eschatology

2008-10-26T20:43:00.004-05:00

Derived from the Greek term meaning “last,” eschaton refers to the ultimate climax or end of history wherein Christ returns to earth to establish his eternal kingdom of righteousness and justice among all nations. Eschatology, then is the theological study that seeks to understand the ultimate direction or purpose of history as it moves toward the future, both from an individual perspective (What happens when a person dies?) and from a corporate perspective (Where is history going, and how will it end?).

Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki, & Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 46.

Bibles for Children

2008-10-23T22:00:00.006-05:00

I’m on the hunt for excellent resources for discipling children. I’ve enjoyed hunting around on the Internet and at Barnes & Noble looking for the best Children’s Bible. Today, I’d like to recommend two. The first is for younger children, and is aptly named The Beginners Bible: Timeless Children’s Stories. Published by Zondervan, it’s apparently pretty popular boasting, “The bestselling Bible Storybook of our time––over 5 million copies sold!” I like it because it is well illustrated. The graphics are colorful and consistent. There is plenty on each page to capture my 18 month old’s attention while she listens to the stories. The stories are fairly well written, with a young audience in mind (recommended for children Ages 6 & Under). My daughter has nearly destroyed her copy with lots of love. It’s probably her favorite book, which is remarkable, since she has lots of books. It contains over 90 stories from the Old and New Testaments.

Its weak points are consistent with most other Bibles for Children. Namely, the episodic nature of the stories lacks any cohesion to a larger plot structure. Now if your goal is simply to lay a foundation by getting these episodes into the consciousness of your child, than this criticism doesn’t matter that much. Which is why I’m still using this Bible, and am willing to recommend it as a good resource for the very young.

However, I will insist that you graduate your child to a better Bible as soon as you possibly can. In fact, we are already transitioning our 18-month-old to The Jesus Storybook Bible, which I whole-heartedly recommend. Also published by Zondervan, this Bible cares deeply about the larger narrative of the Scriptures (creation, rebellion, redemption, and re-creation). The illustrations are breathtaking. (In fact, my wife has stopped me twice from cutting the pages out and hanging them on the wall!) This Bible is still episodic, but it weaves the stories together with common phrases, foreshadowing, and summary. For example, after the story of Abraham’s offering of Isaac, the author (Sally Lloyd-Jones) writes, “Many years later, another Son would climb another hill, carrying wood on his back. Like Isaac, he would trust his Father and do what his Father asked. He wouldn’t struggle or run away. Who was he? God’s Son, his only Son––the Son he loved. The lamb of God.”

Obviously, the narrative of each story is a lot longer than that of Beginner’s. So, it will have to be reserved for children who can sit a bit longer (publishers recommend age 4 & Up). However, we’ve found that our 18 month old can already sit through these stories, because, I believe, for two reasons: First, the stories were obviously written to be read aloud, by an author who knows how to use language to communicate to children; Second, the illustrations hold attention. This Bible is superb. Understanding how the diverse stories of the Bible fit together in a larger plot structure came very late for me in my own walk. I think we can do a better job of showing our young Bible students how each story relates to the Gospel, and I’m thankful for this excellent resource

New Rhythm

2008-10-22T00:19:00.005-05:00

I recently accepted a ministry position at our local church. We've been attending Highland Baptist Church since we moved to Dallas five years ago. There have been a lot of ups and downs. The last two years we have been pastorless. In August, our close friend, Grant Gassiott agreed to be the Senior Pastor. This is a really good thing. Grant served our church previously as the Pastor of Young Adults, and was a rock during the interim.

One of the nice thing about our church is that there are plenty of opportunities to get involved. As our Children's Ministry director was stepping down, there was a volunteer spot available to lead that department. I'm having a blast with Grant and the other staff members. I think we make a good team. I work at the church on Mondays. They've been generous to give me my own office, which has been especially helpful, since I've been moving my books and cases to the church. This has freed up much-needed real estate for our son who is scheduled to be born November 17.

My hope was that my first ministry post-seminary would be in a supportive role under a man from whom I could learn a lot about leadership. Grant is a great example. I'm thankful that my career in nursing gives the flexibility to take a bi-vocational approach as the Lord continues to shape me.

So, if you see a fairly consistent theme on this blog related to Children's Ministry--this is why.

Toward a Culture of Life

2008-10-19T20:49:00.011-05:00

I'm usually hesitant to comment on politics, but I just wanted to point something out. The Republican Party, for all it gets wrong, gets a few things right. The fairly consistent stance, for instance, against abortion. I am one who believes that abortion is the greatest moral evil of our day. There are many other massive problems. To highlight and prioritize one over the others does not mean that I do not care about the others. I hate war and poverty and social injustice. However, the abortion issue for me is an epidemic crisis.

So, as I face a voting decision, I quickly become a so-called "single-issue voter." I choose the presidential candidate that I believe will be more likely to appoint judges who are more likely to turn around the legislation that I think is the greatest evil. This means that in the last two presidential elections I have voted for George Bush, and I will likely vote for John McCain. This does not make me a war-monger. I'm a Dad that thinks babies should be protected with constitutional rights. So is President Bush:

In the debate about the rights of the unborn, we are asked to broaden the circle of our moral concern. We're asked to live out our calling as Americans. We're asked to honor our own standards, announced on the day of our founding in the Declaration of Independence. We're asked by our convictions and tradition and compassion to build a culture of life, and make this a more just and welcoming society.

For the times I have felt embarrassed not only of President Bush, but of the current Republican ticket, I've felt proud twice (at least). Once, was when President Bush vetoed legislation for stem cell research on embryos. He gave his veto speech with a crowd of kiddos behind him-- "snowflake babies" who were adopted by parents who believed they were human. The second time was just last week when I saw Governor Palin embracing and shaking the hands of people with Down's Syndrome. The outcasts of our society, who are aborted at an alarming rate, were in the national spotlight for a beautiful moment of love and acceptance by a high-profile government official. She believes that we need a "culture of life." Of her son (who has Down's Syndrome) she said:

Trig is beautiful and already adored by us. We knew through early testing he would face special challenges, and we feel privileged that God would entrust us with this gift and allow us unspeakable joy as he entered our lives. We have faith that every baby is created for good purpose and has potential to make this world a better place. We are truly blessed.

Let's protect our kids.

Welcome.

2008-10-18T13:56:00.005-05:00

After more than a year off, I decided to re-enter. Since dandielines in recent years has been almost exclusively a site for communicating about our family, I thought it would be good to launch my musings in another location. This way those who simply want to see pics of the kiddos don't have to scroll through the blather. So, I welcome you to Grace and Peace--hopefully a place of mutual encouragement. After much deliberation (mostly in my head, but some with my wife), I choose the name because it is one of my favorite phrases in the Bible. Paul consistently uses it in his greetings. I consider myself not only to be a recipient, but also a lifelong student of Grace. Man's rebellion made us enemies with God. His gracious provisions (in His Son, by His Spirit) have brought peace between the Creator and His Creatures. Thus, for Christians to greet one another "Grace to and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ," is to remind one another of the Gospel--the very reality that unites us as brothers and sisters.