cheapham April 24th, 2008
I heard an interesting quote the other day that I found interesting. I think I’ll present it without any context or commentary and see what sort of comments/responses in evokes. I have my own thoughts, but I think this quote could provoke very interesting (and hopefully fruitful) discussion. It’s short, so here it goes:
I’d rather do violence to a text than violence to a person.
Discuss.
Hank April 18th, 2008
From time-to-time, some LDS missionaries visit me at my aunt’s house here in KC-MO. Instead of shutting the door on them I sit down with them and to discuss the differences in our theologies, hoping to share the good news of Jesus Christ as is found in the Bible. If anyone who wishes to dialog with Mormons, here is an amazing site by two former members of the LDS church: Utah Lighthouse Ministry. Another ministry that originally began as an outreach to Mormons and has since become an apologetics ministry in the fields of Roman Catholicism, Mormonism, Watch Tower theology, Textual Criticism, and most recently, Islam: Dr. James R. White’s Alpha and Omega Ministries (Although I will warn you, he is very much a Calvinist–and I like it!). In fact Dr. White wrote a book called Letters to a Mormon Elder and it is available online here. I really recommend these resources if you wish to engage in an apologetics ministry with Mormons in a loving way.
I want to present an argument or presentation that has come to mind that I am thinking about presenting to the Mormon missionaries next time we meet. However, I wish for the authors here to read this argument and let me know if it is valid and usable. Here is my thought.
Continue Reading »
Honzo April 6th, 2008
As I am sure some of you know, there is a nice little conference going on at Lincoln College in Oxford on the Synoptic Problem starting Monday. There are quite a high number of high-quality papers being presented. Here are some that caught my eye.
April DeConnick has some harsh, but true words about the fundamental problem with synoptic problem scholarship.
To put it plainly, we have no idea what the Gospel of Mark actually said in the first century, or the Gospels of Luke or Matthew. We might act like we do. But the truth is we don’t. Our manuscript tradition is at best 3rd century, and variable particularly by geographic locations. To be honest, I don’t even know where Mark was written, although I can make a fairly educated guess. Textual criticism has created a wonderful eclectic Greek text for all of us to use. But it isn’t what Mark wrote. It isn’t what Matthew wrote. And it isn’t what Luke wrote. How we should handle this fact as a guild has yet to be worked out with any satisfaction. I think we mostly ignore it because dealing with the manuscript tradition is, well, just too complicated.
A part of me acknowledges this, but I think that as long as we recognize the nature of our physical sources and not become too dogmatic in our view of the manuscripts, then we can sucessfully work around this problem. We can only work with what we are given.
What are your thoughts on the synoptic problem? Do you buy it? Like/hate Q? Don’t think it is a worthwhile problem?
Honzo March 31st, 2008
I, like a lot of the Christian side of the blogosphere, have taken more than a fleeting interest in the Enns/Westminster controversy.
For a run down of what the hub-ub is all about, check out Kingdom People :: The Peter Enns Controversy:
- Enns has been criticized for emphasizing the human nature of Scripture over against the divine.
- Enns has written that the first chapters of Genesis are firmly grounded in ancient myth, which he defines as “an ancient, premodern, prescientific way of addressing questions of ultimate origins in the form of stories.”
- Enns claims that Scripture is inspired and inerrant, however the way he describes Scripture seems to counter that belief.
- Enns does not seek to harmonize seemingly-contradictory parts of Scripture because he believes the diversity of Scripture is complementary.
- Enns rejects the idea of objective unbiased historiography.
Here is an exchange between Paul Helm and Enns about Helm’s review of Enns’ book.
Here is an interesting (and instructive) review of Helm’s review by Cdero’s Weblog entitled Bible Monopoly. Here are the central tenets of Bible Monopoly:
* An unwillingness to deal with the plural complexity of interpretation
* A failure to wrestle with the difficult matters of Biblical scholarship
* A failure to see the provisional nature of scripture
* An obsession with turning honest interaction with extra Biblical data into an evil foe of orthodoxy
* A tendency to use past theologians (the one’s they agree with) as the standard of Biblical interpretation
To say on top of what people are saying about this situation, check out Google’s Blogsearch and Technorati’s watchlist.
Honzo March 30th, 2008
Westminster Theological Seminary Suspended Professor Peter Enns effective at the end of this school year and will take steps to terminate his employment because of a book he wrote back in 2005 entitled Inspiration and Incarnation (review), which calls into question more conservative models of scripture while remaining wholly “[apologetic] and assum[ing] an evangelical faith in scripture from the outset.”1
Christianity Today has a write up on the suspension :Westminster Theological Seminary Suspends Peter Enns.
What do you think about the suspension? I know we have bloggers and readers that range from each end of the conservative to liberal spectrum when it comes to the verbal inspiration of scripture.
IMHO I don’t think that he should have been suspended at all, but then again, I tend to lean towards academic freedom and exploratory hypothetical theology which is left up to the students and readers to discern. I have not been in a position of power where Jesus’ words about causing one of these to stumble really apply as it would as being dean of a seminary. However, our view of scripture is not without its problems and it sounds like Enns has taken an honest and subtle look at the problem… and he is punished for it. Now, it is highly likely that this controversy will only boost his employability and sales of his book (my copy is on its way right now), but he now has to move his family, tear up his roots in a community, and evangelicals get a black eye from our own hand.
All of this reminds me about the unnecessary perils of venturing into the academic realm of evangelicalism. I want to be an evangelical scholar. We, as a community, are in desperate need of good scholarship if we are to both remain relevant and respected (listened to). But, if I teach or even consider that which is out of line, I am out of a job and perhaps blacklisted amongst the communities I wish/am called to serve. All of a sudden teaching at a small liberal arts college does not seem all that bad.
Honzo March 19th, 2008
I have had a terrible approach to the study of scripture since the great fracture of 2002 (my adventures at Central Christian College of the Bible). As I am reapporaching my faith in the wake of that experiance, I am looking for good ways to reapproach the Bible. One of my convictions is constructing a book by book Biblical theology. Another one that I am looking to start is paraphrasing the Bible, one chapter at a time. Basically, all it would/has entail[ed] is the translation of a passage of scripture into my own vernacular. I think this helps one see the curves of the narrative of the passage, but this paraphrase would be an excellent item to revisit the next time you go to approach the same text.
What do you all think? Does this idea sound fruitful? Do any of you utilize this approach in your study of the Word of God?
Honzo March 13th, 2008
1. What translation of the Bible do you like best?
Depends on what I am doing. For personal use, I like the NLT because I am a vernacularist. When it comes to indepth academic study, I go with the NRSV and the NASB.
2. Old or New Testament?
While the correct answer is both, in reality, I go with the New Testament. I am a Christian and not a pre-rabbinic Jew, so the NT gets the nod when I am asked.
3. Favorite Book of the Bible?
Romans, hands down… and Genesis and John.
4. Favorite Chapter?
John 3
5. Favorite Verse?
Romans 8:1
6. Bible character you think you’re most like?
Depends on who you ask - I am sure some ’round here and other parts would liken me to those pesky prophets of Baal. But, self identification? Lamech, because when I have lived 182 years I want to become the father of a tike named Noah. That, or I am skirting the question because I don’t like throwing myself onto those people.
7. One thing from the Bible that confuses you?
Paul and the Law - What gives?
8. Moses or Paul?
Paul, all the way.
9. A teaching from the Bible that you struggle with or don’t get?
The stuff that the people writing in Paul’s name tell women to do.
10. Coolest name in the Bible?
Not in the Bible, but the coolest renaming of anyone in the Bible is God himself, when certain Gnostics equate the OT God with the demiurge and name him Yaldabaoth. I know he becomes the evil creator of matter and is holding all of us back and that we need to gets that knowledge, but I still want to name one of my children after him.
cheapham March 3rd, 2008
“In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.” Genesis 1:1-2
Does the Bible, specifically Genesis 1:1-2, support a doctrine of creatio ex nihilo (creation from nothing)? Would such a doctrine have made sense to ancient Israelites/early Christians? How does Gen. 1:1-2 fit into the schema of it’s contemporary ancient mediterranean understandings of the creation of the world? If something was there, then what was/is it? Further, what is really at stake in the answers to these questions?
I’m currently reading a lot about this in one of my classes and have some thoughts…but I’d like to see what you guys have. Certainly, those familiar with Hebrew could contribute much to our understanding of what the text itself (may) say(s).
tom February 26th, 2008
I became a Christian shortly before I turned 17. For some reason, in all God’s omniscience, he placed me in an Independent, Fundamentalist, King James Only, Baptist church. The next few posts will be memoirs regarding what I learned those few years as an Independent Baptist. It will concern not only my experiences and their doctrines, but also their heuristic devices – one of which is fear. I’ll not spend any time refuting the crap I’m going to write about - most of it is self-refuting anyway.
———-
Shortly after God saved me I purchased my first Christian music: Audio Adrenaline: Bloom. I didn’t know who AA was, I just knew I liked rock music and it was kind of cool to find some with Christian themes.* I also purchased, to my eternal regret, Carmen: Riot (but that’s a story for another time).
Elated at my acquisition, I told my pastor. Immediately I was reprimanded for buying such filth because Rock & Roll, of any kind, is sinful. Not being a very thoughtful teenager, and having just been introduced to this Christianity stuff, I accepted what he said. I went home and threw away all my rock CD’s: (just to name a few - Nirvana: Never Mind, Bush: 16 Stone, and Smashing Pumpkins: Melancholy and the Infinite Sadness**)
Interestingly, in an act of clandestine defiance, I didn’t throw away Bloom, but instead I went out and purchased Jesus Freak.
When I asked my pastor why all rock music was bad, he said 2 things:
1. Moses went up on the mountain to receive the law of God. When he came back down, Aaron had all the people worshiping a Golden Calf. While they were worshiping that Golden Calf, there was “a sound of war” in the camp. Now, Tom, what music sounds most like war? Rock music, of course. Anachronism, you wills see, is a continual theme for these folks.
2. The beat of Rock & Roll music is demonic. There are stories of missionaries who let their children buy Christian rock while on furlough, only to return to their post and have the natives tell them, “That’s the beat we used to use to conjure up demons.” You see, even Christian rock is demonic. To use Jr’s illustration, pray to God that if you get a flat tire, that the thudding sound doesn’t conjure a demon.
My pastor then proceeded to give me a number of CD’s by the Gaither Vocal Band, Gold City (I think that was their name), and Crimson Blood (or something like that). After listening to these CD’s, I concluded that if rock music was a tool of the Devil, certainly this crap must be the spawn of Satan. Apparently, though, while the beat of rock music conjures demons, the Country Western sound is acceptable
*Bloom was their last good CD.
** Obviously, I’ve not changed too much – I’m still spoon fed pop culture – except for freakin Nickelback, the musical equivalent of a turd floating in a punchbowl.
Hank February 25th, 2008
The ESV Blog posted on Duncan Forbes’ new way of doing devotions: he uses his Greek New Testament. He is currently blogging about this idea and I must admit, I am very much drawn to it. I think When I come to a break in my devotion plan, I am going to do this. I think this applies equally as well with Hebrew and reading the BHS (or the LXX if you can only read Greek). Here are Duncan’s posts so far.
Part 1: Introduction/Encouragement
Part 3: Seeing the Perfect Tense (seeing all the tenses I would say).
Bad Behavior has blocked 799 access attempts in the last 7 days.