Justification – N.T Wright

I expected this book to be downright heretical and controversial. I found was that it was neither. In fact Wright is a lot more orthodox than most people give him credit for – myself included. Wright’s specialty is to tie the text to history and the overall story of scripture. I must say that this way of looking at scripture has been an eye opener for me over the past few years. I read some of the reviews of this book, and many reviewers claim that Wright is not letting Paul speak for himself. I find that a strange comment. If we locate Paul within first century / 2nd temple Pharisaical Judaism, something which Paul claimed to be a part of, is that not the best way to hear Paul? How else are we to make sense of what he says? He did not write his letters in a vacuum, but was just as socially conditioned as any of us are today.

Don’t tell me N.T. Wright denies PSA

http://trevinwax.wordpress.com/2007/04/24/dont-tell-me-nt-wright-denies-penal-substitution/

A Few Great Reads

These are some of the books I’ve read of late that I really enjoyed over 2009 and early 2010.
My focus was to spend a lot more time reading the Bible and I’ve got quite a few commentaries on the list to show that.
So here are some of my favourite reads in no particular order:

 J.A. Thompson – New International Commentary on Jeremiah
It’s pretty much the standard evangelical commentary on Jeremiah.
Some have said its a bit dated, but I found it full of great insights. Highly reccomended.

Dinner With Skeptics – Jeff Vines

I went to Jeff’s Church in New Zealand, and listened to him preach. He was excellent then and his book is no different. As I read the book Jeff’s voice kept playing in my head. Jeff is a quick thinker and a very logical man, and it shows in this book. But his heart for people shines through too. His answers were solid and he gave a good defence of the Christian faith. The objections are nothing new to me, I’ve heard them before from many other apologetics books like “Reason for God” – Tim Keller and “Reasonable Faith” – William Lane Craig. This book is different from those because it sets Jeff’s apology in a real life situation, and the story line really hooks you in. I found myself wanting to know what happened next. In saying that it’s an easy read and you should finish it in a day or two. Some concerns for me as a student of theology, is that Jeff resorts to a form of open theism or arminian interpretation of the problem of Evil. God takes a risk in creating creatures with free will who will possibly break his heart and use their freedom for evil instead of good. Albeit Jeff does say in the footnote that God was not caught off guard. I don’t find this convincing especially when we scripture speaks of God as omnipotent, as one who declares the begining from the end. Also we note in Genesis that God created a world where sin was a latent possibility (why would paradise have the tree of knowledge of good evil?). Somehow I think God knew and planned all things in life, and that somehow all things work together for the good of those who love Him. I realise there are many different ways to tackling this problem and even the best interpretation of the facts will not give us complete knowledge. Different intepretations are a good thing, and this is a minor flaw in my view.

Overall this is a good book and one I would reccomend as a tool for evangelism or equipping the average Christians with some good answers for skeptics

Jesus wants to save Christians – Rob Bell

First post of the new year! All right and it’s a quick one too. Having read Bells other books (Velvet Elvis and Sex God) I wasn’t holding my breath for anything good but I was pleasantly surprised by this book. I really liked it. The book deals primarily with the idea, explored by many New Perspective theologians (N.T Wright in particular) and Pauline Scholar Tom Holland, of exodus and exile theology in the Bible. Bell traces the narrative of the Bible along these themes. It’s a critique of “Empire”, and that term is defined as the book progresses. Bell spends most of his time looking at the empires in scripture and compares them to the current American “Empire”. At some points the critique is sharp and hits the nail on the head. At other times I got a sense that it was bordering on Anti-American sentiment. I tire of anti-american sentiment in the same way I tire of american patriotism. Neither are the way forward. I keep coming back to the fact that although America may have many problems, it still sends out thousands of missionaries, and allows the Gospel to be proclaimed freely. However there are many times where the Gospel has been co-opted by the American gospel. Under Solomon Israel became a nation not unlike America, and there were many similarities. Most notably in the fact that Solomon started to amass a large army and built military bases on foreign (or near foreign) soil, not too dissimilar from America’s actions in the middle east or cuba.  One negative thing that continues from Bells previous books are some spurious and weak links to Old Testament e.g. the fact that the ethiopian eunich in Acts was riding in a chariot and chariots are symbols of the empire, so Luke is showing us the redemption of chariots.  A weak link if ever there was one. Following on the theme of exile and exodus Bell makes an excellent point that the heart of every human being is in a state of exile, east of eden, and what is needed is not just a physical exodus from egypt but one that deals with the human hearts exile. Fantastic! That is right on the money. On the whole the book is sound and will show you God’s heart for justice, for the oppressed, and to put the world to rights. I reccomend it!

Merry Christmas to the Blogging world

Merry Christmas everyone. I hope you have a restful and enjoyable time with family, and friends.

I don’t think i’ll be posting much in the new year as I will be doing my course. 

Have a good time!!

Dawkins is coming to Town

Richard Dawkins is coming to Auckland in December. It comes as no surprise really. William Lane Craig described New Zealand as a society more secular than Great Britain. It would be interesting to hear his arguments (or polemical bigotry against Christianity), but unfortunately I won’t be able to attend. Anti-religious sentiments seem to be big business for publishers these days. People seem to be open to spiritual things, but agains the idea of organised religion. A year ago I attended a very popular debate at Auckland university between William Lane Craig and the head of the Auckland Rationalist Society. The topic “Is belief if God a delusion?”. The main lecture theater which held approx 300 people was filled to capacity, and so were 5 other overflow lecture theaters with video links. So a conservative estimate puts attendance at around about a thousand. Whether Mr Dawkins can draw a similar crowd remains to be seen. 

The evolution theory has been around for some time now. It’s nothing new, and from what I can gather, neither are Mr Dawkin’s arguments for it’s supremacy as the meta-narrative that governs the world. However one cannot escape the feeling that interest in ultimate questions  never dissappeared. Whatever one believes about Atheism, and Evolution, a Christian response must be full of Grace and Truth. I like apologetics. Something about it strikes an urge within me to win arguments, and defend the truth. I used to be on the debating team in school.I’m a self confessed super nerd in this area. But there are times when I realise I can win the argument but lose the person. It’s been a hard lesson to learn. Jumping on the polemical diatribe wagon and denouncing Dawkins with with the same polemical force he uses, is to use the weapons of the world to fight God’s battles. Something Scripture is emphatically against. Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit says Jesus. Our struggle is not against flesh and blood says Paul. But putting our heads in the sand and pretending that the Gospel has nothing to say to this situation is not the way forward either. If Jesus is the true Lord of the world, then what Mr Dawkins offers is a competing gospel for human salvation, and that deserves an answer.

It will be interesting to see how NZ responds to Dawkins.

Recovering the Sattelites

Counting Crows’ best album ever is Recovering the Sattelites.
I must have listened to the album a million times 10 years ago. Today the songs still sound just as fresh and creative as the day I first heard them. Sadly, I learnt later that the album was written when the lead singers wife had died of cancer.

When I saw them in Durban it was one of the first live concerts I had been to, and what a gig it was. Still remember it vividly.

Well what else have I been doing lately? I’m not reading GEP like it says on the side. I really should change that. I’m reading N.T. Wrights Jesus and the Victory of God again. It makes so much more sense the second time around. Wading through the history of the first, second and third quest was tiresome! Glad to be on more meaty matters of Biblical interpretation.

I wrote my exam on Biblical theology last week. Haven’t got any marks back for it, nor have I got any marks back for my essay either. But life goes on. Semester starts up again next year in March. I’ve got a fair amount of reading I hope to accomplish in that time, including my first puritan paperback.

Also heard my first Christmas joke today….its not worth repeating. But it is strange to think how close the end of the year is.  Another year passes by.

N.T. Wright’s latest book

From the Wrightsaid Forum:

As we await Tom’s latest book in the Christian Origin’s series (which he is writing on sabbatical/writing leave as we speak) I was informed at our Diocesan Synod that his latest book was finished in the Departure Lounge at Heathrow on the way out. It was then e-mailed to the publisher!

In a strange way this seems very Pauline (other than the technology)? Paul finishes off a ‘letter’ just before boarding a boat for wherever!

Every blessing,

Mark

Revd Mark Worthington
United Benefice of Harlow Green and Lamesley
The Vicarage, Gateshead, UK

Save my home (but don’t really)

Last night I had the unusual displeasure of watching a local reality TV Show called “save my home”. The show featured a host, a financial advisor and a couple in financial dire straits. I must confess at times I feel a certian pull towards these shows, but not that often. However something that this financial advisor said certainly got my attention.

The couple were in debt via a mortgage and various other personal loans. They were getting deeper in debt on a weekly basis, and had no option but to sell up, pay off all their debts and move into a smaller place. Then the unthinkable happened. Someone made an offer on their house that enabled them to do just that. They would be able to move into a smaller house, which would still have been awesome, and save an extra $300 per week. Not to mention that they would be debt free in 10 years, instead of filing for bankruptcy.

BUT this is the thing that gets me. They went all the way to signing the conditional offer, but refused to sell the house. The wife had too many emotional objections. Even when confronted with all the facts she spent her time yelling at those trying to help her, telling them that it was none of their business as they had no vested intrest in the house.  All the while her husband stood by and let her carry on like this (which is a story for another time see my post yesterday).

It made me wonder about the nature of humanity. So often we are confronted with all the facts, the evidence against us is overwhelming yet we dig our heels in and refuse to budge. We get backed into a corner, the argument is already lost and our best defence is diversion. In this case the couple got what the advisor had said was coming. The buyer withdrew his offer, and the couple are now deeper in debt. How often do we do this? How often do we ignore the facts that are plain to see? Why do we want to fight to be right even when we are clearly wrong and why oh why do we hate accepting help from people when we can’t manage things ourselves?

For me this serves to confirm what the reformers were talking about when they used terms like Total Depravity and Irrisistable Grace. Humanities nature is so tainted by sin, that faced with choosing God, or choosing sin unrepentant humanity will always choose sin. Here we must be careful to say sin = doing bad things, and choosing God = doing good things. Life isn’t that simple. Rather sin is open rebellion against God’s rule, a denial of the image of God and a colluding with the forces of evil against God. We are bound to this sin until God removes our heart of stone, and replaces it with a heart of flesh. This is the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.

Apologetics and rational arguments have their place. But as N.T. Wright so eloquently says, there is much more to this world than imagines by post-elightenment and rationalist philosophers. God did give us a brain, and we are to use it. But without recognising this as the basic stance of humanity we run the risk of letting rationalism set the agenda.

Only the Gospel shows humanity for what it truly is, and only the Gospel has the power to change that. Let us hold fast to the Gospel.