Pete Enns on Ancient and Modern Mindsets

I realize that this isn’t the most inspiring title of all time, but this is a great investment of two minutes towards understanding the Bible better.

While it may not sound all that controversial, people (like him) lose jobs over this sort of stuff.  Since his departure from Westminster Theological Seminary, Enns has been involved in various pursuits, one of which is his involvement with BioLogos (an organization that explores the integration of Christian faith and science).  You can head over here to see a number of interesting (at least to me) videos and posts from Enns and others.

McLaren Revisited – 1

Frightened Rabbit – Swim Until You Can’t See Land

A few months ago, I shared my take on Brian McLaren.  Since then, his latest book, A New Kind of Christianity, dropped like a bomb on the evangelical landscape.  I don’t choose the word “bomb” to be dramatic.  Cause you know, being dramatic has never really been my long suit.  But I think the word fits, and if you stick around, I may actually get around to explaining why.

Anyway, I got going on a review of sorts, but before too long, I realized that it was in violation of a personal blog rule…  if it can’t be read before a standard length song finishes playing, it’s too long.  So I’ve made the judicious decision of turning one post into three (or more).

It all began about a month ago when I realized the book was out.  But before I could even get my hands on it, there were reviews coming out left and right.  In general, I try to avoid any reviews of a book that I might end up reading so as not to be influenced one way or another before I’ve had a go at it.  In this case, it was especially difficult, but I was moderately successful in being able to steer clear of them.  However, the few bits I did read were less than positive.  I’ve come to expect that when it comes to McLaren.  People are rarely neutral in their opinion of him.

And yet, something about the negative feedback was different this time around.  The tone of the reviews was a bit more heated than the dispassionate critique more typically directed against him.  And so, rather than predisposing me towards a less than favorable bias ahead of time, the whirlpool of negativity produced the opposite effect.  Instead of joining the McLaren-bashing bandwagon, the comments galvanized my resolve to hear him out.  I’d read other books he’d written.  I’d even heard him speak.  Sure, I didn’t buy everything he was peddling, but it never sounded to me like “he hates God,” as one reviewer suggested.  Come on… lighten up.

to be continued… (I know.  You can hardly wait.  And just in case you are taking notes…  No drama.  No bandwagons.)

The Archbishop on Lent

I came across this video today, and seeing as we aren’t even a full week into Lent, I thought it might be encouraging.

The video is of Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, which is the most senior office in the Church of England.  So there’s a chance that he has a good word or two on the season.

Cover-to-Cover – Week 5

Animal Collective – In the Flowers

Leviticus.  What’s to say?

Weird.

Seriously weird.

So let’s keep this short and sweet.

The detailed instructions concerning the various sacrifices has God looking a bit OCD.

The laws concerning skin diseases, mildew, and “discharges” has Him looking like a germ-o-phob.

And then there is chapter 18 from today’s reading.  Once again… really?  They had to be told this stuff?  Baffling.

So what is going on?  There is tons one could say, but suffice it to say, “Leviticus is all about God’s holiness.”  It is stated outright in 11:44-45, and underscored by nearly every other verse in the book.  Everything about the book is saying that God is set apart.  Different.  Not common.

Even the chapters that seem to be about God’s “health plan” for the Israelites are really about contamination.  On the surface, it is about physical contamination.  But just below the surface is the idea of spiritual contamination as well.

How about all the sexual taboos?  They are preceded by injunctions against doing what people do in Egypt or in Canaan.  This too is all about “set-apart-ness”.

“Be holy, because I am holy.”

God is distinct, different from anything else in their experience.  They too are meant to be distinct and different.

Resources for Lent

Grizzly Bear – Two Weeks

It’s strange how the Christian calendar has grown in significance for me over the past several years.  I don’t remember when I was first introduced to the idea of Lent, but something about it resonated with me from my initial experience with it.  I’ll be talking more about that in the next week or so.

However, with Ash Wednesday (the beginning of Lent) just a couple weeks away, I wanted to make you aware of some resources that can help focus your heart, mind, and soul during the forty-six days leading up to Easter.

Last year, I used this great book by (of course) my man N. T.

Over Christmas, my beloved bought me Bread and Wine: Readings for Lent.  It is a collection of readings by various authors who in turn speak to the truths that are prominent during the Lenten season.  The line up is impressive…  Kathleen Norris, Thomas a Kempis, Bonhoeffer, Kierkegaard, Kahil Gibran, Jurgen Moltmann, Wendel Berry, Mother Teresa, to name a few.  Knowing that I’ll be “sitting down” with these folks during the days leading up to Easter has helped me to look forward to it all the more.

I was also recently made aware of another book that isn’t necessarily a Lent reading, but since it follows a popular “40-day” format, it will certainly fit for the season.

I realize that several of us already have a bit of a reading project going on, but I like to think that there is always a little more time for reading.

about time

I think I’ve mentioned N.T. Wright once or a thousand times.  Let me recommend taking some time this week to listen to a couple lectures he gave a few years back at Calvin College on “Space, Time, Matter and the Sacraments.”

I realize that it may not sound like the most exciting topic, but here are a few reasons to push through and do it anyway.

1) He is one of the most influential New Testament scholars alive today, and it would do any Christian some good to know a bit about him and his work.  I don’t necessarily agree with every single thing he says, but listening to him will help you better understand me.  Which I know is everyone’s ultimate goal in life.

2) He walks through lots of the Bible and without really meaning to shows how much of it holds together.  I think those of you doing the Cover-to-Cover will benefit from having something of an overview of this strand of biblical theology.

3) Most protestants don’t have a robust enough understanding of the Sacraments (particularly Baptism and Eucharist), and these two hours of lectures will move one in the right direction.

4) There is something in here for everyone.  Really.  Not just Bible nerds, but also poets, dancers, new mothers, C.S. Lewis fans, and of course, Christians in general.  However, in order to benefit from the few words he may have for these specific interests, one has to wade through all the “God-talk.”  Which is of course the way it should be.

Enjoy…

Part One: Space, Time, Matter, and New Creation

Part Two: Sacraments and New Creation

Cover-to-Cover – Week 2

As I’ve been reading along this week, I was reminded of the problem of setting versus date of composition.  Setting being the “when” and “where” the events are taking place.  Date of composition being when the story or book was actually written.  As you might suspect, as with everything Bible, this can be a very complicated issue.  However, the Genesis account will serve well enough to illustrate the difficulty.

Many conservative Biblical scholars would affirm Moses as the author of Genesis.  So, we have Moses writing some stuff down around 15th century B.C.  Of course, this means that Moses wasn’t a first hand eye witness of anything that is recorded in Genesis.  Which raises the question, how did he know?  I suppose there are some who would ascribe to a theory of God supernaturally revealing the info to Moses and he simply dictated what God said.  Most would affirm some sort of oral/written tradition that had been handed down over centuries, and Moses was the one who collected and shaped it into its final form.  Naturally, there are other theories about who wrote what and when.  Some would date the final form of Genesis much, much later.  Closer to 5th or 6th century B.C.

Anyway, all that’s sort of beside the point.  Mainly, I wanted to share a chart that might help you keep track of the flow of the story.  For what it’s worth…

Then, there is this one too.  It is loads of fun.

Tim Keller on Genesis 1 and Evolution

I know that the Genesis 1-3 reading was a couple days ago, but I stumbled across this paper that Tim Keller wrote to address several of the questions that are raised concerning Genesis 1.

He has written a few books that have been very well received, The Reason for God, The Prodigal God, and Counterfeit Gods. And from what can be gleaned by reading Deep Church, his ministry in New York exercises a considerable influence on Belcher and others like him.

In this paper, he addresses the following three questions:

Question #1: If God used evolution to create, then we can’t take Genesis 1 literally, and if we can’t do that, why take any other part of the Bible literally?

Question#2: If biological evolution is true—does that mean that we are just animals driven by our genes, and everything about us can be explained by natural selection?

Question #3: If biological evolution is true and there was no historical Adam and Eve how can we know where sin and suffering came from?

His answers are well worth reading.

Word Pictures

The Swell Season – Star Star

A little while back, I read Word Pictures: Knowing God Through Story and Imagination by Brian Godawa.  Don’t let the cover or the title fool you.  On first impressions, one might be led to believe that it is artsy-heavy and theology-lite.  The author’s involvement in the movie industry might also (mis)lead one to believe that as well.

It ain’t.  He is up on his theology and does a masterful job synthesizing a wealth of biblical, cultural, and historical information.  Of course, as with any book there are shortcomings, and I would welcome the opportunity (as unlikely as it seems) to clarify some points with him.  Nonetheless, his main point is taken well enough.  The modern church has relied too heavily on propositional truth as enshrined in systematic theologies and the like, and not enough on story, narrative, imagery, and icon.

While you can head HERE to read the first chapter, this quote should give the flavor of the book…

“The net effect of this virtual ignoring of the theological value of art is the implicit devaluing of it.  As the saying goes, actions speak louder than words, and a systematic theology without a developed aesthetic is an implicit sign of an underlying belief that beauty is not an essential part of theology.”

So again, while there are times when he overstates his case and fails to take certain factors into account, I am in general agreement that we stand to lose much when the arts (in their manifold expression) are ignored.  This book is for anyone who loves the arts, the Word, and fairly weighty theology.

Surprised By Hope… Again.

Mumford and Sons – Roll Away Your Stone

I take it back.  In my little blurb on this book a few posts back, I suggested that this wouldn’t be a very good introduction to N. T. Wright’s thinking.  I was wrong.  It may be the perfect book for that purpose.  I read a bit and thought that it was going to be a toned down version of his exceptionally long treatment life after death and the Christian understanding of resurrection.  It is that, but so much more.

Who should read this book?  Anyone who cares about understanding what the New Testament teaches about life after death.  I think even the relatively informed Christian will have their thinking on this subject clarified.  Anyone who wants to understand the gospel and salvation better.  Anyone who wants to understand the mission of the church more fully in terms of the resurrection.  Anyone who tires of simplistic reductions of the Christian faith that tend to rely more on categories of Greek philosophy than the story that emerges from the pages of Scripture.

Here are a few gems…

[A] feature of many communities both in the postindustrial West and many of the poorer parts of the world is ugliness.  True, some communities manage to sustain levels of art and music, often rooted in folk culture, which bring a richness even to the most poverty-stricken areas.  But the shoulder-shrugging, functionalism of postwar architecture, coupled with the passivity born of decades of television, has meant that for many people the world appears to offer little but bleak urban landscapes, on the one hand, and tawdry entertainment, on the other.  And when people cease to be surrounded by beauty, they cease to hope.  They internalize the message of their eyes and ears, the message that whispers that they are not worth very much, that they are in effect less than fully human.

Ok, after you have wrapped your brain around that one, here’s another…

The power of the gospel lies not in the offer of a new spirituality or religious experience, not in the threat of hellfire (certainly not in the threat of being “left behind”), which can be removed if only the hearer checks this box, says this prayer, raises a hand, or whatever, but in the powerful announcement that God is God, that Jesus is Lord, that the powers of evil have been defeated, that God’s new world has begun.

Or…

As far as I can see, the major task that faces us in our generation, corresponding to the issue of slavery two centuries ago, is that of the massive economic imbalance of the world, whose major symptom is the ridiculous and unpayable Third World debt … I simply want to record my conviction that this is the number one moral issue of our day.  Sex matters enormously, but global injustice matters far, far more.

But in order to understand the context of statements like these, one needs to wade through ones like this…

It is love that believes the resurrection.  “Simon, son of John,” says Jesus, “do you love me?”  There is a whole world in that question, a world of personal invitation and challenge, of the remaking of a human being after disloyalty and disaster, of the refashioning of epistemology itself, the question of how we know things, to correspond to the new ontology, the question of what reality consists of.

I think I’ve said this before, but there is no one writing today who more clearly expresses my own feelings, thoughts, misgivings, and hopes.  While he begins with developing our understanding of the resurrection, he ends up leaving no stone unturned.  Because he (and I) believe just that…  the resurrection changes everything.