Considering Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics Part 3

Non-sermon related reading has fallen off the grid the last few months.  I feel like I’ve been reading this book for the better part of 6 months.  Not quite, but I have finally finished Graeme Goldsworthy’s Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics: Foundations and Principles of Evangelical Biblical Interpretation.  I already reviewed the first 2 sections which dealt with the basics of interpretation and his argument for a gospel-centered hermeneutic, and how various methods of Bible interpretation have eclipsed the gospel throughout church history.

The final section, Reconstructing Evangelical Hermeneutics, was the most difficult for me to read.  At times he covered areas of philosophy with which I was unfamilar.  So, I was occasionally thinking ‘huh?” (particularly speech-act theory).  But it was still profitable at times, just not as profitable as the previous 2 sections.

Among the areas that were helpful were his discussion of typology, and Dr. John Currid’s criteria for true typology.  This criteria is affirmed by Keller & Clowney in the DMin course available through RTS on I-Tunes.  He was also helpful in discussion contexting (his simpler term for contextualization).  The missionary mandate, as he argues, mandates this.  He also includes a chapter on the interaction and relationship between biblical and systematic theology.  He talks a great deal about how both Calvin and Luther viewed Bible interpretation, and the role of the Spirit (particularly Calvin on this front)

His Epilogue contains a few good quotes to sum all this up:

Hermeneutics is about reading God’s word with understanding so taht we might be conformed more and more to the image of Christ.

The purpose of God’s word is to bring us to God through the salvation that is in Christ.  It does this by revealing his plan and purpose, by conforming us more and more to the image of Christ, and by providing the shape of the presence of God with his people through the Spirit of Christ.

So, pastors and those who regularly teach God’s people should find Goldsworthy’s book helpful as we seek to fulfill our calling.  As the ancient children’s song says, “take up and read.”

Read Full Post »

Considering Keith Mathison

Keith Mathison and I have a fair amount of shared history.  We were at RTS Orlando together.  We spent lots of time talking books and theology together while we worked in the bookstore.  We worked together at Ligonier Ministries for a few years too, at one point sharing an office (sorry Keith).  He remains at Ligonier, and continues to write in his spare time.

While we were in seminary, he worked on his first book, Dispensationalism: Rightly Dividing the People of God? which is the fruit of his journey from dispensationalism to covenant theology.  I was one of the people who gave him some feedback on the early drafts.  Some smarter and well-respected people looked at it too.

His book Given for You,  on the Lord’s Table is a very good study of Calvin’s view and its development within Reformed Theology.  I own, but have failed to read Post-Millennialism: an Eschatology of Hope.  It is one of the areas in which we disagree, but I should get to it eventually.

His latest book, From Age to Age: the Unfolding of Biblical Eschatology looks to be very interesting.  And probably more accessible than Vos’ Pauline Eschatology.  Just a hunch. Keith most likely put together another well-researched, meaningful book.  I only have one question: where is my review copy?

Read Full Post »

Considering Satan

On Nightline, there was a Face Off regarding the reality of Satan.  Mark Driscoll was one of the participants.  Mark did a great job integrating the reality of the Evil One with a presentation of the gospel.  He offered hope in the midst of our personal and societal struggles.

And then there was Deepok Chopra gave a bunch of ying & yang psycho-babble (quoting Freud, but in line with Jung’s work) about how “healthy people don’t need the devil.”   Bishop Pearson forsakes his calling based on a false stereo-type.  Nice.  Another “bishop” denying the teaching of Scripture.  I guess we solve the problem of evil by just not thinking about it.

Both of argue against the belief in the devil on the basis of wars- religious wars.  just because some nuts believe you can drop the bomb on the devil to destroy him does not make this a reason to deny personal evil.  It is a Straw Man argument, fallacious to the core.  The devil is not material, can’t be bombed, shot or drugged out of existence.  Only Jesus destroys the work of the devil (Hebrews 2, I think), which Pearson forgot to mention when saying Jesus would not be pleased by all that bomb dropping.  I’m pretty sure Jesus isn’t pleased with those who think dropping bombs (or flying planes into sky scrappers) is the way to defeat The Great Satan.  Now, legitimate governments bearing the sword against those who pose a threat against those they are charged to protect (Romans 13) is another story.  But the ultimate solution is only Christ and Him crucified to destroy, among other things, the hate in our hearts and the evils that flow from that.

Read Full Post »

Considering Straw Men

Polemical Theology, whether in written or verbal form, can quickly descend into some ungodly places.  Name calling, anger and refusing to listen to what another actually says are evidence of a lack of love.

Another form of “unfair” dispute is the use of the straw man argument.  Here is a good, quick definition:

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position. To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

You can tell that Dr. Roger Nicole & J.I. Packer are such good friends.  At times their counsel is so similar.  How to engage in theological debate is one such area.  Dr. Nicole told us to read our opponents, not only second hand sources, so we might truly understand their arguments.

Dr. Packer inserts this wonderful little sentence in the midst of Keep In Step With the Spirit:

“But all positions should be judged by their best exponents.”

He applies this to the various proponents of the views of sanctification.  It is unfair to argue against something by using either a straw man (which doesn’t exist) or its worst example.  You may win the argument, but you defeated a foe that either didn’t exist or rarely exists.  It would be like beating the Bad News Bears, yet claiming to be MLB World Series champions.

I see these arguments regularly in books by authors who should know better.  Sometimes these arguments are used by men who place themselves in the bounds of either Reformed Theology or Calvinistic soteriology (they embrace the 5 points but not a covenantal view of Scripture or other distinctives of Reformed theology).

For instance, one book I read argued against contemporary worship songs.  It did this on the basis of the worst examples of contemporary worship songs.  It brought up the most pathetic, insipid, meaningless songs as if they were representative of contemporary worship songs.  This author may have convinced many people he was right, but he never dealt with the real deal.  Missing were interaction with the contemporary hymns of Townend and Getty, the songs of Matt Redman or Chris Tomlin or any other songs that seek to communicate biblical theology (Sovereign Grace or Indelible Grace would be other examples).

Another highly respected author attacked the charismatic movement on the basis of its worst excesses.  There was no interaction with sane, thoughtful charismatics who share his Calvinistic views like John Piper, Wayne Grudem or C.J. Mahaney.  All were lumped in the same heretical basket, ready to be tossed out &  burned up.

We who understand the doctrines of grace should be more humble & loving in our disputation.  We should argument against real people holding real positions.  And the best representatives of that position- not the Single A or college team.

Read Full Post »

Considering Jay Cutler

Football is a game for men- tough men.  Unlike many American males, I don’t lie to myself and others.  I could not play that game professionally.  It requires a physical toughness that I lack.  It also requires an emotional toughness that I am familiar with as a pastor.  In football, you have to deal with the emotional aspects of the game- remaining consistent when there are great hills and valleys.  Remaining stable in the face of constant obstacles.

Enter Jay Culter, the pouting All-Pro.  Jay can’t seem to understand that Pro Football is a business.  The goal is two-fold: compete to win the SuperBowl consistently, and make lots of money in the process.  The closer you are to the first, the easier it is for a team to accomplish the second.  As a result, the business-side, just like the game-side, is not easy on a person’s ego.  During the game, fans might boo you.  And during the off-season you might be linked with trade rumors.

Jay can’t imagine that the Broncos might entertain offers for a QB that 1. his new coach knows, and 2. had a better QB rating than he did.  Yes, Cutler had a record setting season.  But his team folded in the crunch (Cassel’s team when on a strong run that would have earned them a playoff spot in most divisions).  As QB, some of that falls on his shoulders.

But Cutler is pouting and demanding a trade- feeling so unwanted.  He’s is proving that they should have traded him.  First, he lacks the mental/emotional toughness required to flourish in professional football.  Trade possibilities have sent him into an epic, public freefall.  He just gave fans on other cities ammo with which to bait him and boo him.  Second, he is more concerned with himself than team.  This doesn’t sit well with any associated with the Patriots and their success over the course of this decade.  Individuals play, but only teams can win.  Teams are made of people who believe “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one” to quote the fictitious Spock from The Wrath of Kahn.  Cutler is focused on himself.  Not a good sign.  He demands his ego get stroked instead of submitting his ego to the needs of his team.  He also refuses to see that a few teams WERE really interested in him (I’m not sure why at this point).

Jay needs to take his meltdown where it belongs- behind closed doors- or no team will want him, including the one he’s on.  And while he’s there he may want to invest in some Daniel Goleman books on emotional intelligence.

Read Full Post »

Considering Books on the Spirit

This Sunday I’ll be preaching on the Spirit’s work in sanctification out of Galatians 5.  I wish I had more time this week to thumb thru some of the great books I have on this work of the Spirit, and the Spirit of this gracious work.

Here are my favs:

• Keep in Step with the Spirit by J.I. Packer.  The focus on this great book is sanctification, and the Spirit’s role.  I read this as a young Christian, and it was very helpful for me, grounding me in a biblical understanding of sanctification.
• The Holy Spirit: His Gifts and His Power by John Owen.  I read this separately before owning it as part of his Works.  Great stuff!  It was one of the first books by Owen that I read, and helped me major on the majors instead of being caught in excess as a younger Christian.
• The Holy Spirit by Sinclair Ferguson.  It is a bit more technical than most of his books.  But that is fine by me.  More people need to read this to avoid the abundance of confusion that is out there today.  There are so many ways in which the Spirit works in our lives, but we focus on the spectacular and extraordinary.  He’s heavily dependent on John Owen, who is one of his favorite theologians.

Read Full Post »

Considering When Homosexuality Hits Home

My friend has been busy reading.  I am filled with envy and must repent.  She read another book by Joe Dallas.  This one was When Homosexuality Hits Home: What to Do when a Loved One Says They’re Gay.  Here’s what she says:

When Homosexuality Hits Home: What to Do When a Loved One Says they’re Gay was written by Joe Dallas, the author of Desires in Conflict.

In this book Joe Dallas speaks to parents or loved ones of someone who states they are gay. In the first chapter he likens finding out about the loved ones struggle to the process after a death or major traumatic event in our lives. We go through 5 general stages or phases of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. And in this case it is the death of assumptions.

[This is what I was thinking about a week before I picked up this book. I’m stuck in the anger phase and starting my depression.]

Assumptions of how I, as a loved one, expected his life to be.

There is a chapter for parents, one for other family members with varying ranges of relational contact with the SSA relative, and one for when homosexuality hits a marriage.

Joe Dallas uses the prodigal son from Luke 15:11-32 to show how family members may be feeling when one ‘comes out’. Also this verse from Jeremiah 31:16-17 hit home with me;

16 Thus says the Lord:
“Keep your voice from weeping,
and your eyes from tears,
for there is a reward for your work,
declares the Lord,
and they shall come back from the land of the enemy.
17 There is hope for your future,
declares the Lord,
and your children shall come back to their own country.

Joe says you can’t miss the three fold message here:

God sees. He sees both your beloved daughter and son, and He sees your tears.

God preserves. He continues His efforts long after human effort has exhausted itself.

God holds out hope, for both you and your children.

This book gives practical advice from the heart, Joe tells of the 3 most common arguments for the pro-gay position. And he also asks us to walk a mile in the shoes of the gay loved one. To see what the son or daughter has been thinking, for how long they have been thinking it and what they might have to endure in their lifetime.

You will discover what to say and not to say, how to handle family visits, maintain balance and how to strengthen not weaken your relationhip.

On a personal note: my son is struggling with SSA and he still lives at home, we home school and go to church. He is struggling with his faith, his identity, and his sexuality. Being so close constantly puts a strain on our relationship and I, as his mom, have a very hard time keeping my mouth shut. I need to be constantly reminded that God loves him much more than I and God is in control of his life, I’m not. I need to be constantly reminded he is and always has been my son, whom I love more than life itself.

My one piece of advice now to anyone reading this would be to watch your words. Think before you speak, try to see your loved one the way God does. Remember you need the same grace they do, the same grace God freely gives.

Read Full Post »

Considering the 2009 Red Sox

In the midst of juggling my 3 jobs, I’ve decided to come up for air and talk some Boston Red Sox.  Many commentators are focusing on their offense, as if it won’t get it done.

Let’s look back at last season.  We had a less than healthy Papi, a nearly crippled Mike Lowell, an injured Josh Beckett and an absent Wakefield.  Turns out our starting shortstop had a fracture in his wrist too.  Both our hitting and pitching were in trouble.  And we were one win away from the World Series.

This was because Dustin Pedroia continued to improve, and Youk had a career year.  Jon Lester discovered how to pitch deep, and strong.  Dice-K was one lucky guy with a big WHIP and low ERA to garner a good win total.

I’m not as pessimistic about this season as some people.  Yeah, no Money-Ramirez.  That also means far less drama. Jason Bay, while not the one man wrecking crew that an interested Man-Ram can be, is a very good hitter and a better defender who will give you a good effort night after night.  Papi no longer has to worry about his wrist, and Lowell will be healthy.  I don’t expect the 2007 Lowell, since he’s 2 years older, but he should still put up respectable offensive numbers for a 3rd baseman.

What excites me about the 2009 Red Sox is the pitching staff.  We seem to be witnessing a return of Beckett 2007, which means he could be a dominating pitcher now that he’s healthy again.  He has been that guy in Spring Training (yeah, it’s only Spring Training), which he wasn’t last year. 

Although we aren’t sure what we are going to get from Penny and Smoltz, if they flounder we could have Buchholz 2007 to step in.  He seems to have regained a good arm slot, and his confidence.  He’s not the tentative pitcher who was giving up runs like a 2-for-1 special was going on.  Lester has offered us no reason to doubt he’ll continue his domination of hitters.  He’s confident and strong.  With Penny and Smoltz, the Red Sox can occasionally rest Lester, Beckett, and especially Wakefield.

The bull pen should be better (though bull pens are tempermental things).  Masterson was the key to making it steady last year.  If Delcarmen can be consistent (which he seemed to be after Masterson joined the pen), and Saito can set-up and occasionally close, we can have a healthy, aggressive Papelbon for the playoffs.

Pitching wins championships, and the Red Sox have a championship caliber pitching staff.  While their offense will not reach the heights of the 2003-4 Red Sox, it should be more than sufficient to provide the runs this staff needs to be very successful.

Read Full Post »

Considering the Cult of the Mediocre

A friend of mine just started a new position with a church.  The Sr. Pastor wanted him to read Working the Angles: The Shape of Pastoral Integrity by Eugene Peterson.  So, I lent him my copy.  He just gave it back, and I decided to re-read it.  It has been nearly a decade since I read this book.  I’ve enjoyed his books on ministry in the past.  It will be interesting to see what 9 years in the trenches will do to shape my view of them now.

Today I read the introduction during a slow spot in the ER.  Though written over 20 years ago, his words of warning still ring true.

Peterson believes that most pastors have left their post, “whoring after other gods.”  He relates meetings with other pastors when they discuss, not the difficulties of staying close to God and helping others until Christ is formed in them, but numbers and programs. 

“The pastors of America have metamorphosed into a company of shopkeepers, and the shops they keep are churches.  They are preoccupied with shopkeeper’s concerns- how to keep customers happy, how to lure customers away from competitors down the street, how to package the good so that the customers will lay out more money.”

 We have fallen prey to the mindset of consumerism and marketing.  He then quotes Martin Thornton:

“A walloping great congregation is fine, and fun, but what most communities need is a couple of saints.  The tragedy is that they may well be there in embryo, waiting to be discovered, waiting for sound training, waiting to be emancipated from the cult of the mediocre.”

That really is the joy of ministry, discovering those who long to be godly and serve others.  And then to invest in them and see them grow (with ups and downs).  For me it wasn’t so exciting to kick off a new program.  But to see someone “get it” or make some great strides in growth really stoked me.

“The biblical fact is that there are no successful churches.  There are, instead, communities of sinners, gathered before God week after week in towns and villages all over the world.  The Holy Spirit gathers them and does his work in them.  In these communities of sinners, one of the sinners is called pastor and given a designated responsibility in the community.  The pastor’s responsibility is to keep the community attentive to God.  It is this responsibility that is being abandoned in spades.”

Yeah, I can see that all around me.  People expect the glitz and sparkle.  But the reality, helping people listen to God … not so much in demand these days.   Most pastors are doing what they need to do to remain gainfully employed.  Richard Pratt used to remind us often, “If you earn your living from your faith, you’ll lose either your living or your faith.”  If you keep your faith, and live it out, not many churches will really be interested in you.  But if you stop living by biblical convictions, you may have a tough time finding a church willing to listen.  Some might say this is what I tell myself so I’ll sleep at night.  But I heard plenty of stories from other guys- many a church wants a CEO or entrepenour, not a pastor.

“The visible lines of pastoral work are preaching, teaching, and administration.  The small angles of this ministry are prayer, Scripture, and spiritual direction.”

Peterson’s point in the introduction is that these angles can be faked.  “We can impersonate a pastor without being a pastor.”  We can fool people that we are the real deal, at least for awhile.  Peterson’s book is about developing an attentiveness to God so you can help others be attentive to Him through prayer, Scripture and spiritual direction (individual and corporate).  He’s trying to move pastors back into a spiritual reality we never should have left.

Read Full Post »

Considering the Many Temptations of Jesus

As I slowly work my way through Luke’s gospel, there is a slight difference in the accounts of Matthew & Luke.  Matthew says, “Then the devel left him, and angels came and attended him.”  Luke puts it this way, “When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.”  Many see that opportune time to be the final week.  But I notice Jesus being tempted throughout Luke’s gospel. 

In chapter 4 he faces the temptation to reveal his messianic identity too soon, as the demons try to “out him” repeatedly.  Jesus was also tempted by the crowds to disobey the Father and stay in one location to preach.  He had been sent to preach the gospel all through the region.

As the reports of his great authority and power spread, Jesus would often withdraw to isolated places to pray.  He was resisting the temptation to pride.  He was also tempted to fear men as he was verbally attacked in the synagogue (5:21ff).  Later in that chapter he was tempted to give in to the legalism of the Pharisees, and John’s disciples.  He faced this again in chapter 6, along with the temptation harden his heart to another man’s misery, as the Pharisees had.

So you see that a pattern of continual temptation emerges.  This is why we find that he “faced all of the same temptations we do, yet did not sin (Heb. 4 15).”  Like us, Jesus was continually tempted to sin- but didn’t.  He did what we could not do.  So, when he endured the curse (Galatians 2), he did it for us instead of for his own sin.  My little girl knows that Jesus died for our sins.  One day she asked “who died for Jesus’ sins?”  Honest question from a 4 year-old.  Honest answer- he had no sins but ours.

Read Full Post »

Considering MLB Team Salaries

While fixing the kids’ lunch today, I was watching the Sports Reporters.  They were talking about the economy’s effect on salaries, and just about every team but the NY Yankees.  The salary cap was mentioned, and one of the reporters repeated an oft mentioned error.  I can’t stand it when supposed experts (like this guy and Colin Cowherd) don’t know the facts.  I think Cowherd also passed on this bit of incorrect information.

2008 MLB Salaries

1. NY Yankees  $209 million
2. Detroit Tigers  $138.6 million
3. NY Mets  $138.2 million
4. Boston Red Sox $133.4 million

It will be interesting to see how it all stacks up come the beginning of this season.  Both the Red Sox and Tigers have dumped salary.  Lots of teams have.  The Red Sox spent more the first few years of John Henry’s tenure as owner.  But these knee-jerk reactionaries refuse to face facts.  The Red Sox have been implementing their plan of player development in order to reduce their salary (they spent more than $143 million in 2007).  They don’t want to depend on high priced free agents.  To compete until they could develop guys like Lester, Pedroia and Papelbon, they spent money.  But to think they ever actually competed with the Yankees salary-wise is silly.  John Henry knew that the Red Sox could not sustain a system where they spent ever-increasing amounts on free agents (as the Mark Teixeira sweepstakes showed, they picked targets and set limits- just as with the A-Fraud trade which the MLBPA, not Bug Selig squashed [sorry Colin]). 

Henry doesn’t want the Yankees to be in a completely different stratosphere when it comes to salary (they may near the $100 million gap this season).  But they also don’t want those team who receive revenue sharing to just pocket the cash.  They want them to spend money on players’ salaries so ALL teams are better increasing the competition and the MLB product.  As a result, I don’t find the talk of a salary zone by John Henry to be disingenuous.  Whether or not it is good for the game is up for debate.  But to take the comments out of context, including historical context, is unfair, and not solid journalism.

Read Full Post »

Considering the Pornification of Culture

Al Mohler has a good piece on his blog about pornography.  One shocking statistic he relates is that 70% of internet pornography is viewed during work hours.  That means lots of people are looking at porn while at work.  One government official spent 20% of the work day looking at on-line porn.

Porn providers are also starting to tap into the newer communications devices, like cell phones.  There is a growing epidemic of teens sending pictures of themselves undressed.  Obviously, those then get sent around the school.  There is plenty for us to think about, and the gospel is the only hope we have of reversing this to regain sexual sanity.

Read Full Post »