Jesus Changes Things

 (The following is an article I wrote for our local newspaper, the Mail-Journal) 

One of the most powerful books in the Bible is also one of the shortest books in the Bible.

There are several short books in Scripture I could be referring to, but the one I have in mind is Philemon. It is a letter that I have grown to love, written by Paul to a friend named Philemon.

I call it one of the most powerful books for a few reasons. First, it contains the seed principles that led to the abolition of slavery in the modern world. Second, it deftly navigates a complicated and potentially combustible situation. And third, Paul navigates this successfully because he maintains a focus on Christ and what it means to follow him.

If you don’t know the background, Philemon had a slave in his household in Colossae named Onesimus who apparently stole from his master and ran away. Onesimus connected with Paul who was imprisoned in Rome. Onesimus came to faith in Jesus and was now returning with one of Paul’s representatives back to Colossae and his master.

Can you feel the tension of that situation?

Philemon could demand harsh punishment of Onesimus. Paul could demand Philemon obey his instructions. But we don’t get any sense of authoritative pressure or ultimatums from this letter.

Instead, we see Paul calling Philemon to remember the faith he professes and the Christian community he is a part of. Paul graciously highlights how Jesus completely changes how we relate to one another. Any demands he might make, any entitlements Philemon may assume – they are all set aside because of the unity and love we have for one another as followers of Jesus.

“I could order you to do what you ought to do, yet I prefer to appeal to you on the basis of love” is what Paul says in verses 8-9. Philemon shouldn’t view him as a servant any longer, “but better than a slave, as a dear brother…as a fellow man and as a brother in the Lord” (vs.16). In verse 21 he adds, “confident of your obedience, I write to you, knowing that you will do even more than I ask.”

Jesus changes how we relate to one another. We should not demand all the rights we are entitled to over and against others. We should respond to offenses with forgiveness rather than revenge.

Warning: forgiveness like what is being called for here is NOT EASY. In theory everyone affirms forgiveness as a virtue. But to give grace to people who’ve materially or emotionally hurt us? That takes a work of God in our hearts and minds. And it usually takes time to process.

Justice may still be called for and consequences may still be necessary to enforce. Forgiveness and justice are not mutually exclusive. Notice Paul promises to repay Philemon for anything he has lost in vs. 19. But when sincere repentance is present, restoration and reconciliation can rebuild what has been lost or broken.

Jesus changes how we relate to one other. The labels the world applies, the records people keep, the rights others demand – all can be set aside when the transforming redemption of Jesus makes its presence felt in our lives.

 

 

Book Review - Nobody's Mother, Sandra Glahn, IVP Academic

 

One of the most confounding, complicated, and confusing passages in all of Scripture is 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Scholars and theologians have long debated its details and application regarding women in ministry. 

I'm not taking this space to dissect all of the issues at this time. But like the final boss of a video game, the paragraph ends with Paul making the statement that "women will be saved through childbearing". This would be the same Paul famous for developing and proclaiming salvation by faith in Christ. One steeped in modern-day vernacular might be tempted to ask, "what in the world bruh???"

While "Nobody's Mother" does touch on the wide variety of issues in 2:11-15, this book has its greatest relevance on that final gender-role-specific statement. Make no mistake, as cloudy and confusing as these verses are, Dr. Glahn offers critical clarity based on what we know about first century cultural context (I apologize for all the 'C' words). 

This book outlines the various levels of difficulty in interpreting 2:15. But after diagnosing the problems, the author surgically goes to work offering solutions and interpretive answers. She takes advantage of the under-studied world of first-century Ephesus and the cult of Artemis. Good bible students will recognize from passages like Acts 19 that the worship of Artemis was a formidable and popular cultural identification marker in Ephesus. But Dr. Glahn expands upon that premise using historical and extra-biblical records that still exist from that time period. Even architecture and art that remains from that world helps us understand just how entrenched the cult of Artemis was at that time and in that place. 

What I found fascinating was how much additional information we have from discoveries from just the past few decades and how that new information is just now being connected to biblical scholarship. This book puts the pieces together to see a more-coherent picture, offering an very reasonable explanation as to why Paul might tell Timothy and his Ephesian church that "women will be saved through childbearing."

I highly recommend any interested party purchase and read this book for themselves. But here is a summary of what I learned based on her research and conclusions:

• Artemis was among other things a celibate goddess of the hunt and goddess of midwives and childbirth. 
• Against what some have often assumed, she was not a fertility goddess and her temple was not grounds for sacred prostitution. Her cult was not anti-male but it was female-led. 
• Artemis is often called “savior” as protector and warrior who specifically could help deliver women through the childbearing process. 
• Sex and pregnancy were viewed in a somewhat negative or dangerous light by her devotees. This negative impression was based on women's mortality rates during childbirth combined with Artemis' own mythic backstory. The legend states that she was the first born of a set of twins and as an infant observed how her mother strenuously and painfully died to give birth to her twin brother. 
• Her goddess mission then was to help women in the birthing process or provide a quick and painless death if the birth was headed to a tragic end.

As it relates to 1 Timothy 2, I'm convinced of Dr. Glahn's conclusion that can be stated this way:

• Paul's confounding “saved through childbearing” statement is a direct counter to the Artemis myth. Artemis is not a real “savior”. Women Christ-followers can have confidence that Jesus is their hope with respect to the sometimes-dangerous and difficult process of childbirth. Jesus will deliver them, not Artemis. Pregnancy is not a curse, it is a good thing. And our security lies in faithfully following Jesus. Childbirth is not something to fear, for those in Christ have a true Savior.

The book offers other additional relevance for both 1 Timothy 2 and other parts of the New Testament, but I'm especially appreciative of the clarity it brings to a notoriously strange part of Paul's letter.

Book Review - Savoring Scripture, Andrew Abernethy IVP Academic

 

Right off the bat I should share in interest of full disclosure that I know the author of this book...maybe knew is a better term. To be honest we really don't know each other presently other than interactions on social media. I played basketball against him in college and with his twin brother during that time as well. We spent a week as counselors at a Christian camp one summer in college too. 

Clear as mud, right?

Andrew has gone on to distinguish himself in the academic world of Christendom. Proficient as a scholar, especially in the area of Isaiah and the prophets. 

Savoring Scripture (2022) is broader than that singular genre though. It aims to help its reader be a better student of the Word of God as a whole. As he states in the prologue, this is a book for any believer to learn "how to read the Bible".

Dr. Abernethy offers six helpful steps readers to better relate to Scripture and the Author behind it. They do not come off as rigidly formulaic, but he spends time developing each carefully enough where they separately be used to deepen our love for God and his Word. 

The steps work out like so:

• Posture: We need to evaluate our heart as we approach Scripture and make sure our attitude is one of humility and teachability. 
• Flow: Once a passage has been selected, we need to be sure we understand what's being said and what the main ideas that are being communicated.
• Context: Beyond the particular passage, we need to discern the setting of a passage both of the book and where the book and passage fit historically.
• Whole Bible: This step focuses our attention on how a passage connects to the redemptive arc of Scripture and how, even tangentially, it relates to Christ.
• Savor God: This is a devotional step where we meditate on what we've learned in the above areas and pray to God, considering what we learn about him in the process.
• Faithful Response: This final step assesses how we can apply what we learn from the passage. "What is God calling me to do in and through this passage?"

Going through this book, it fanned a flame in my own heart to break out of stale routines when it came to my own personal time with God's Word. There's a certain liturgy to these steps and I appreciate how each carries its own weight and importance in and of itself. They all build on one another of course too, but Abernethy has outlined a process that can be utilized in part and as a whole.

Kudos to him for authoring a work that can benefit any pastor, scholar, or beginning student of the Bible.

March Madness - Bible-Style

It all began with an innocuous text exchange last weekend. A couple of buddies and I who have an ongoing thread about our mutual basketball interest were texting about the NAIA and NCAA tournaments. All of the sudden the chat veered into biblical territory when one of my friends jokingly suggested we come up with a 64 person bracket of Bible characters.

I happened to be in one of those fun brainstorming moods and decided to tackle the idea head-on. Before I share my bracket, let me share some of the guidelines I chose to follow:

• First, the Trinity is not eligible nor are any angelic beings. That's just unfair, we're sticking with actual human people from the Bible's history. 
  
  
• Second, because the Old Testament makes up 59% of the Bible, we ought to divide up the characters to reflect that majority. Since there are four regions, my goal was to get close to 75% of characters (3 out of 4 regions). So I decided on the following arrangement.The Beginnings Region is comprised of characters from Genesis. The Law Region, reflective of the people of God being formed under the Mosaic Covenant, covers the Exodus events through the establishment of Saul as King over Israel. The Kingdom Region is comprised of those who lived during Israel's Kingdom days all the way through the years detailed in the Gospels. These three regions would comprise 65% of the books of the Bible. The fourth region is the New Covenant Region which spans the rest of the New Testament after the Gospels. Now, some in the NC region were key characters in the Gospels, especially the disciples. But I am placing them in the later region because that was the timeframe in which they were in their most significant roles.
   
• Third, I chose these 64 people as those who I found as the "most important" to the Biblical narrative. That is sort of nebulous and subjective, but it was my call. 
  
  
• Fourth, I want this tournament to be based on each voter's favorite character. This is not who was most important to God's plan or anything like that. That would be too obvious but also contrary to Jesus' words about "the least being the greatest". Determine these matchups based on who you like most or relate to the best.

Without further ado, I'll share a screenshot of my bracket and after the page break I'll gratuitously share my a breakdown of each region. I'll also attempt to get voting started on a Facebook page and maybe Twitter so keep an eye out for that.

I'm Back!

Michael Jordan famously used those two words in my title to announce his return to the NBA in the mid-90's. My returning to my pastoral role and blogging is much less historic. And while I've been back for a month or so, now feels like the time to share my reflections on my mini-sabbatical.

My TL;DR version I've been telling people is, it was restful but not relaxing. 

It was restful in that spiritually, physically, emotionally I got to a healthier place. Most importantly, I got my heart realigned towards God - an adjustment I knew I needed after being all-around worn down.

It was not relaxing though because it did not go as I had planned. As I'll explain below, a number of unexpected things came up that disrupted my weekly schedule(s).

All-in-all, I think I am walking away from the month off with two major takeaways. 

1) God shows up in unexpected difficulties.

So entering January, we knew my wife needed a outpatient surgical procedure and late in December it was set up. Stress #1 came when we had to hassle with our insurance company and 'upgrade' to a policy that would cover this procedure - at a significant expense. But we did get it covered! Then came the surgery itself, which caused my wife significant pain in the 12 hours post-operation. Once we got the meds worked out it was better but it made her miss two weeks of work. In the post-op consult, the doctor shared that they did find cancer in the skin they had removed. There was a 98% chance they got it all but recommended a follow-up surgery to be sure. 

As that was all happening, we had noticed my wife's car started running weird. The week after her surgery, I took it into the shop and it needed ignition/spark plug work that was going to cost more than the car was probably worth. God provided though. My mom gave us our share of my grandmother's inheritance and it covered that cost. 

Then the following week, a cold virus of some sort went through our family. Yay! Through all of these things, my stress level was redlining. And yet God gently nudged me to the point where I more or less had to 'give up' and say, "Ok God, will you provide and how will you do it?" God's daily provision was evident - and still has been in the aftermath of all of these things.

Stephanie has had her follow-up procedure which seemed to go well. The pain is much less though the procedure was more invasive and complicated. But things are good. God is providing. He is showing up in recognizable ways.

2) I need to "Eat This Book".

This second take-away requires explanation. One of the proactive activities I did on my break was to audit the Spiritual Formation class at Grace College and Seminary.

I actually took it 20 years ago as a M.Div. student but it was with a different professor in a much different format. I had heard over the years about this class and how this particular profess, Dr. Christy Hill, approached the subject. I knew it was the kind of class that would benefit my spiritual life and get my heart adjusted in all the right ways. 

It met my expectations and more. The class requires its students to wrestle with their hearts, their backgrounds, the assumptions and presuppositions about God. As an auditing student, I was not required to do every assignment, thus allowing me to attend to the things that would maximize the personal benefit.

One such assignment I tackled was the extra reading required of the seminary students. I got a referral from a friend who suggested I read "Eat This Book" by Eugene Peterson. It was a great referral and one of the best books I have read in a long time. Peterson is most famous for writing The Message translation of the Bible. To some, he is infamous for that work. 

"Eat This Book" concludes by the author explaining how and why he created The Message. But he gets there by inviting his readers to approach the Bible with a humble but expectant attitude. He offers a layman's version of Bibliology - his theology of what Scripture is. He encourages his audience to work with Lectio Divina the ancient tradition of personally engaging with the Word. He narrates stories of translations and makes a strong case that God wanted to meet us and spiritually form us in His Word.

Peterson is an excellent writer, wonderfully making complex ideas beautifully simple. Case in point is the books title. Three times in Scripture God asks his prophet to 'eat this book/scroll' - most famously in Revelation 10. Peterson unpacks what this means. They didn't likely chew and swallow the literal writings. It was a call to digest, savor, embody God's revelation. God wanted them (and us) to read it for it's transforming value, so His Word would become a part of us. The Bible isn't meant to be read for informational purposes. It's meant to be read so we are conformed into the image of Christ. 

This fresh perspective on God's Word was the exact glass of water my dry soul needed. I've felt worn down and in a lot of ways I know that has been rooted in a dry devotional life. This book hit all the right notes in my soul and I'm already engaging in God's Word differently. Scripture is a beautiful thing. And what the Spirit does in meeting us there is even more beautiful. I need to 'eat this book' and so do you.

Worship at Home - January 3rd

 Sermon

This week's message can be accessed on our FB page here: https://www.facebook.com/Milford-First-Brethren-Church-106750154192984/

Study Guide Questions

After - or even as - you listen to the sermon, try digging deeper into the text by working through these questions:

1. Psalm 113-118 is referred to as the "Egyptian Hallel". What is the significance of that? What does that name refer to?
2. Who does God look out for according to Ps. 113?
3. What major event in the Old Testament is Ps. 114 referring to? What greater New Testament event does that foreshadow?
4. What are false idols in our day that compete for our loyalty and allegiance (Ps.115)?
5. What difference can these truths make in my outlook, my actions, my faith?

Worship Songs

Devotional Reading

- Monday: Psalm 113

- Tuesday: Psalm 114

- Wednesday: Psalm 115

- Thursday: Psalm 116

- Friday: Psalm 117

- Saturday: Psalm 118

Sermon Snippets - Tamar, the Righteous Prostitute

A little over a year ago, I read and reviewed "Vindicating the Vixens" edited by Dr. Sandra Glahn. I really enjoyed this survey of prominent women in Scripture who have been misunderstood and misrepresented in our common evangelical interpretations.

I decided to use it as a guide for this summer's sermon schedule. I usually try to come up with a series that will work through the summer when people often miss more often. This way, they can still glean a lot out of a specific week's sermon, but not feel lost or behind in the overall series.

Yesterday was my first sermon based on the characters featured in this book. We took a look at Tamar in Genesis 38, who is both described as a prostitute and righteous.

It was one of my favorite sermons I've preached in awhile.

The audio will be up on our website later this week here, but one of the pieces of evidence that she's a righteous hero in this complex story is how the Bible refers to her in other places.

Not only is she described as "righteous" in 38:26 for her actions, but King David names a daughter after her (2 Samuel 13). Absalom names his daughter Tamar as well, though I'm more inclined to see that as a tribute to his sister (2 Sam. 14:27).

Tamar also comes up in the story of Ruth. Ruth's story is another unorthodox account of love and family and God's redemption. In the concluding chapter, the people of Boaz's community give him their blessing, saying,

Moreover, may your house be like the house of Perez whom Tamar bore to Judah, through the offspring which the Lord will give you by this young woman.”

On the surface, one could accuse Tamar just being a scheming femme fatale, going to great lengths just to start a family.

In reality, we see Scripture honoring her for her bold steps to seek what was right. Labels like "righteous" aren't given out to everybody in the story of God. And naming children after an ancestor was a way to show admiration for their character.

Book Blog

We live in an era of polarization. Realities are black or white. Opinions are either/or. Especially with politics, there is no room for nuance or middle ground. Beliefs must be strong one way or the other. 

There are lots of problems with this aspect of living in America in 2019, particularly for the Christian. Why for us as Christians? Because often times, the Word of God offers us a third way that is different than one of the extremes.

Russel Moore captures this in his book Onward, which is my final book I'm featuring in this "Book Blog" series.

Moore begins with the well-founded and well-researched premise that America is increasingly departing from it's long-standing Christian influence. He then outlines in ten chapters how we as Christians ought to biblically respond to the changing culture around us. 

The aspect that I appreciate the most about his book is how specifically he addresses very relevant topics. Issues that are often politicized to death, including: religious liberty, immigration, social justice, being pro-life, and biblical family values. And this is all done within a context of urging Christians to rediscover and maintain their focus on God's Kingdom and God's values. This is how he points to a third way, rather than falling back to Republican or Democrat talking points. 

This book was published in 2015 and the "hot-button" topics it focuses on have only become more and more significant within our culture's consciousness. So much so, that reading it in 2017, I was surprised how prescient it was. To me, it was prophetic much in the way I found A.W. Tozer to be prophetic.

His call for Christians to embody God's love, grace, and "convictional kindness" with boldness and confidence is very much needed if we are to live into the mission of the Kingdom as followers of Jesus. Thus, it has become one of my favorite books of the past few years.

I hope you've enjoyed this little series and maybe even been encouraged to read some of these selections. 

Book Blog

Last week, I shared a favorite book of mine that had connections back to my college and seminary days. This week isn't just one I read back in college, it was written by one of my professors. 

Plowshares and Pruning Hooks helped me understand biblical prophecy and apocalyptic literature in a much deeper way. Like Walter Bruggemann before him, Sandy carefully asks some relevant questions about the way we read prophecy in Scripture:

• What was the purpose of prophecy?
• How literally should we take these passages?
• Are we using a consistent hermeneutic?
• What does past fulfillment teach us about promises we're still waiting to be fulfilled?

I've gotten the sense that this book received criticism from some theological circles, but I know it has been widely affirmed in many others. 

Personally, I always found Dr. Sandy to be a humble, engaging, and encouraging teacher. He was more apt to ask us questions than feed us answers. Even if you differed with him, he was willing to listen and engage you. That is no doubt why I appreciate this book like I do, I know the heart behind it.

In the end, I highly recommend this somewhat obscure book for anyone interested in being better equipped to handle prophecy and apocalyptic parts of the Bible. 

Not really a Music Monday

At the end of this blog, I'll post a music selection for this week. But I wanted to feature something else this week. 

Last Friday I sent out a bunch of tweets regarding biblical interpretation and theological discussions. It seemed to be well received but because of the character limits and the format of Twitter, the entirety of my rant was hard to follow. 

So, thanks to one friend's suggestion, I'm posting it as a whole here. I am likely to add some short additions but I hope you enjoy and maybe even are provoked to think deeper on these things.

-----------------------

I've been in ministry around 15 years with a M.Div that was 90+ credits. But the most helpful theological instruction I ever received was something I got early on in my first Systematic Theology class when I believe I was a freshman in college. What follows is from the late Dr. Dave Plaster.

There are levels of authority/certainty when it comes to asserting theological truth. To quote Dr. Plaster, "An understanding of where a statement rests in authority helps us to determine our attitude towards others who disagree with us."

"(The level) does not mean we do not hold various statements with conviction even when others disagree...but we should avoid a 'flat' theology which does not distinguish between levels of authority." These are the 6 levels:

1. Direct Statements of Scripture. These carry the greatest weight of authority. The plain statements of God's Word offer us doctrinal truths that should be non-negotiable. But let's be sure these essential truths are not interpretations.

2. Direct Implications from Scripture. These are very substantially established truths from Scripture but are implications (maybe even applications) and not always 100% directly stated in the Bible.

3. Probable Implications of Scripture. These are inferences drawn tentatively. Some evidence is probable but these are theological statements not totally provable from the Bible.

4. Inductive Conclusions from Scripture. This is where statements/beliefs come from the overall data of Scripture with lots of deducing. There is less direct Biblical evidence being employed.

5. Conclusions inferred from General Revelation. These involve assertions that come from nature, science, and non-biblical wisdom/knowledge. Dr. Plaster taught that if the clear Biblical truth is opposed to this "General Revelation", the Biblical position should be taken.

6. Outright speculations. These are theological statements that could possibly be derived from obscure references in the Word.

The early levels will have more direct ties to a lot of Scripture, but this will lessen the further down the continuum one goes. Also, we should hold firmly to Level 1 truths, but loosen our grip the further we go.

For example, I will never compromise on faith in Jesus Christ as God's way of salvation. That's Level 1. I would die for that. But I am not willing to risk my life on whether or not the Church will live through a 7 year literal tribulation in the end times. That is more a Level 4 (maybe 3) truth, mostly because there is plenty of biblical data for different viewpoints.
These levels are important to think through for a lot of other issues of course. When life begins, Human Sexuality, Creation vs. Evolution, the reality of Heaven/Hell, and Eternal Security are all popular hot-button topics that even people outside the faith engage in at times. These topics need to be viewed through the lense of these levels, even before we ardently defend our views on them.

I have seen more basic versions of these levels of interpretations - where core doctrine is differentiated from traditional dogma which is differentiated from personal preference. But I appreciate this more-specific lens through which to look at theology. We will better understand our own beliefs and better engage in discussions if we accurately assess what level our positions come from.

Good reminders for us all, thanks Dr. Plaster.

-------------

As promised, here's a musical selection for anyone who has persevered this far. This song is directly connected to my sermon from Sunday, which was out of Isaiah 24-26.

It's by a well-known worship artist, Chris Tomlin but it is not one of his popular tunes. I fell in love with it off of his "Live from Austin Music Hall" album of 2004. The cool thing about it is that it features David Crowder and really improves on the original.

A tempo change in the live version plus addition of the lyric "Jesus, Lord and Savior" within the chorus were perfect ways to improve the song - at least in my opinion.

And the original studio edition:

Sermon Snippets - The Bible and Slavery

As I was preparing for Sunday's sermon, it struck me that this was a perfect opportunity to revive what had been a regular part of this blog - "Sermon Snippets" - which offered a preview of the upcoming message.

This coming week, we'll be studying the book of Philemon. Philemon is basically Paul writing a letter of recommendation to a slave-master (Philemon) regarding a returning slave (Onesimus).

So knowing simply that, we are forced to confront a pretty major moral question before we even get into the content of the letter. That question being,

"Why does the Bible remain silent (if not tacitly approving) the morality of slavery?"

I will get to a direct answer to that question, but first it is helpful to understand slavery in the Greek and Roman world of the Bible.

When we as Americans hear "slavery" and "slave-master", images and ideas come to the forefront of our minds that are associated with our own nation's awful practice of slavery. Recent depictions of the Civil War era like 12 Years a Slave, Django Unchained, and Roots have to different degrees sought to depict what it was like.

If at all possible, we should divorce ourselves from those specific connotations as slavery in the Greco-Roman world was different than American during the Civil War period.

How was it different?

Well, below is a graphic which compares the two, along with present employee/employer relationships. 

 

In essence, Civil War-era slavery was based on racism, a relationship of cruelty,  the practice of kidnapping, and was a social system where the authority had absolute control of the slave. 

Slavery in the Greco-Roman World was not based on race but rather was a working class level of status. There is clear evidence that masters were compelled to treat their slaves with decency, in order to get the most out of their workers. There were certainly plenty of exceptions where abuse and violence were perpetrated, but as a rule, slaves were treated decently. Also, rather than straight kidnapping, slaves came from a variety of entry points. Some were captives of war who'd otherwise face death, some were born into it, and sometimes people would sign contracts to be slaves for limited periods of time in order to improve their financial or social status. Finally, the Bible-era slave had relative freedom in their daily lives compared to the overbearing tyrannical control of the American (and British) systems. 

So with that information in mind, does the original question still burn in your mind? Does the context help 'soften' the harshness of your objections?

It does for me, but at the same time I believe the question is still legitimate. If we are all made in the image of God as Genesis 1-2 tells us, why doesn't the Bible outright condemn slavery? Why didn't God come out and call them to abolish it?

Having researched both Ephesians 6:5-9 and Philemon recently, I've come to two conclusions. 

1. The need to abolish slavery was not urgent during this point in history.
   
   In other words, the level of slavery's evil and abuse was not as pervasive as it would be under the English and American empires. Scripture certainly speaks to how individual slave-owners of their day were to treat their slaves, but it had yet to become enough of an cultural problem for the people of God to address it theologically. Ultimately they would and Christians like John Wilberforce were at the forefront of eradicating what had become a grave communal sin. But slavery in the Roman empire was not inherently evil like slavery in later times would become.
   
2. The Church had a more important mission at this point in history.
   
   The Christian faith was still in it's infancy during the time the writers were penning the New Testament. Early on they were seen from the outside as a sect of the Jewish faith. As the Early Church wrestled and grappled with differentiating themselves from this label, they also needed to legitimize their movement and clearly communicate what it is that they were adhering to. New religions were looked on with great suspicion in the Greco-Roman world and we know early Christians battled false accusations such as cannibalism because of their beliefs and practices (celebrating Communion).
   Before they could fix all of the cultural ills of their day, they needed to establish their message and identify who they were and what they believed. In the long term, the pieces were in place to abolish slavery. But the highest priority was to proclaim Jesus as Savior to a lost and dying world.

Now that we've laid the above principles as a foundation, we can properly study the book of Philemon. It is a short letter that causes us to ask plenty of questions itself as it is filled with compelling nuance and ambiguity. But hopefully this basic treatment of Scripture and Slavery has been helpful. Below I will post references to a number of commentaries that I've found helpful in gathering this information.


Garland, D. E. (1998). Colossians and Philemon (The NIV application commentary series; NIV application commentary). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan. Pg. 359-366.

Lincoln, A. T. (1990). Ephesians (Word biblical commentary, v. 42; Word biblical commentary, v. 42). Dallas, Tex.: Word Books. Pg. 411-428.
 
O'Brien, P. T. (1999). The letter to the Ephesians (The Pillar New Testament commentary; Pillar New Testament commentary). Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co..

Saarinen, R. (2008). The Pastoral Epistles with Philemon et Jude (Brazos theological commentary on the Bible). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Brazos Press. Pg. 199-211.

Snodgrass, K. (1996). Ephesians (The NIV application commentary series; NIV application commentary). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan.

 

Music Mondays

A random idea for a featured song came into my head today. 

It was a song that was very influential in my life as a kid.
It is a song that still affects me today.
However, it is a song that was never on the radio.
And it's a song I can't find on YouTube. (Seriously!)

It is a song I highly recommend that everyone learn though.

What is it? 

The Books of the Bible song I learned in Kid's Action Club (think Awana without the badges). 
We learned all 66 books of the Bible by singing them in order. 

Now there are a ton of songs out there that rap or sing the books of the Bible in order. But none of them that I found did it in the memorable pace or tune that Mr. Paul (Refior) our fearless leader taught us.

This is the closest:

Here is my personal Music Mondays debut singing the original version that we learned, admittedly completely off-key:

 
Really the point of all of this is not song itself, nor my lack of singing gifts. The idea itself is what matters. Being so familiar with God's Word that you are adept at navigating it's diverse landscape is crucial because we are called to explore it our whole lives (see Psalm 119).

As a pastor, I still recite this song in my head from time to time to find specific books. The value of this smacked me right in the face this past spring when I taught a freshman Bible Study Methods class at my Alma Mater. There was a significant portion of the 22 students who were resigned to starting in the index of the Bible to find a passage I was asking them to look up. Others bravely, but slowly combed through their holy texts hoping they'd stumble upon the intended destination. 

Memorization is a helpful life-skill. It becomes spiritual cheat code when applied to Scriptural concepts, making biblical studies so much easier. 

If this song doesn't motivate you to memorize the books of the Bible, find one that does - it is worth it and there are plenty out there.

Answering Criticism of the Bible

Several months ago, I planned to preach on the basics of biblical interpretation in a sermon called "How to Read the Bible for All It's Worth", which I did yesterday.

It is interesting how the timing works with something like this, because last weekend I discovered the latest Newsweek magazine cover story was on basically the same subject. Now if you were to read this article and compare it to my sermon, you would quickly discover they each coming from opposite points of view.

If you are new to these issues, or new to the Christian faith, that article may seem to bring up some troubling questions and inconsistencies about what we call 'God's Word'. It certainly tries to make the case that no one with serious intelligence would take the Bible as fully true and totally sufficient for life and doctrine. 

And while I think it makes some unfair arguments that ignore the complete scope of the issues, I do think it is good for Christians to interact with these criticisms and be ready to properly respond to them. So I am interrupting my semi-regularly scheduled posts on music to offer responses to the various points the article makes. 

Before getting into the specifics, let me preface it all with this:

I grew up in a conservative, Bible-believing family that went to a church of the same ilk. After attending a public high school, I went to a conservative, evangelical college majoring in Youth Ministry and minoring in Biblical Studies before attending the same school's well-renowned seminary where I completed a Master of Divinity in Pastoral Ministry. Given all of that background, nothing in this article is new to me. At one point or another, I had studied and interacted with everything that article brings up. The author paints a picture of evangelicals as having our heads buried in the sand when it comes to these supposed 'weaknesses' of Scripture. Undoubtedly some of us do, but any Christian college and seminary education worth its salt will consider and evaluate opposing arguments, studying them in depth. 

And that is more than I can say for this article.

But let's weigh these criticisms and evaluate their validity.

1. Much of the first quarter of the article deals with issues of textual criticism and transmission of the text (i.e., "translations").  When I first started reading, I was afraid they were going to ignore the transmission process altogether, but the author does describe how the Bible was passed down from generation to generation by scribes copying the Word.  The article undersells the care given to the process and the accuracy that was sought and attained. Yes there are many 'variations' in the the copies of Scripture we have today and we do not have the originals. But what the article fails to recognize is that there is 98% agreement between all of the copies we have.* And no variant puts any serious theological issue in doubt. And when there are variants in play, most cases involve clear evidence which favors why one option was picked over another.
   And the examples the author uses are flimsy when investigated in depth.
   • I would have to Luke 3 more closely, but given my general knowledge of these issues I would guess that Luke 3:16 uses "answered" not because of a scribal mistake, or a 'missing question' , but because it fits with the previous verse and it fit ancient Greek writing styles. 
   • John 7:53-8:11 is widely recognized by evangelical Christian scholars as not part of John's original book - and most good study Bibles include notes like this to explain:
     There is considerable doubt that this story is part of John’s original Gospel, for it is absent from all of the oldest manuscripts. But there is nothing in it unworthy of sound doctrine. It seems best to view the story as something that probably happened during Jesus’ ministry but that was not originally part of what John wrote in his Gospel. Therefore it should not be considered as part of Scripture and should not be used as the basis for building any point of doctrine unless confirmed in Scripture. (ESV Study Bible)
   • The issue with Mark 16 is essentially the same, with most Bibles providing similar commentary that describes how some manuscripts have the verses, some do not. They are left in the text because they are consistent with the rest of Scripture.
     
     
     If you've made it this far, keep reading after the jump for further response to the major points the article asserts.
     
     

In Defense of Dispensationalism

Earlier this week I read a couple of blog commentaries regarding the theology behind the current box-office flop Left Behind. [Ed. note - the author of first blog was a college and seminary classmate of mine who I consider a friend, though one I don't interact with much because we live in opposite parts of the country]

Both criticized the movie and the dispensational view the movie and it's source material best-selling books were based on.

Though I'm not planning on watching the movie, I have read several of the original books and did watch the original film starring Kirk Cameron - so I'm quite familiar with what we're dealing with. And if we're forming a line to make fun of the movie and book series, I will happily be first in line to offer my criticisms. But that does not mean I'm swearing off dispensationalism as well.

Let me explain my position with a (hopefully) brief response to those critiques and defend a progressive version of dispensationalism. 

• While the discussions of the origin of a pre-tribulation rapture are accurate andvalid, both commentators failed to identify the reasons behind Darby's conclusions and why dispensationalism took hold. This view developed because of the shift towards a more-literal biblical hermeneutic. To make a very-long-and-complicated-story short, by the 1700's, the Lutheran and Catholic faiths were the predominant religions of Europe. These 'faiths' were as much political parties concerned with holding and consolidating power as religions. To a lesser extent this was true of the Reformed churches as well. Once the printing press took hold and the common people had easy access to education and Scripture, the predominant allegorical approaches to interpreting and teaching the Bible were countered by Anabaptists who sought to teach and apply the Bible using a more literal and historical hermeneutic. Admittedly, this eventually worked itself out to the point where LaHaye and Jenkins authored a story that featured locusts with armor and scorpion tails (Rev.9). Yes classical dispensationalism has its flaws. One of the major flaws being the tendency to ignore genre and prophetic/apocalyptic language - using what one scholar called a 'flat-earth hermeneutic'. But that error is not any worse than the allegorical interpretation that will cheapen a book like the Song of Songs to make it a picture of Christ and the Church. [Anyone who's read and studied that book realizes it is too graphic to be an analogy or spiritual metaphor] Instead, I appreciate what Progressive Dispensationalism has done to find middle ground. It recognizes the major interpretive factors that come into play with different genres as it applies its literal/historical/grammatical interpretation. I don't believe there will be actual armor-plated locusts with scorpions tails, but I do believe the tribulation judgments will be horrible.
• Dispensationalism also defined the historical periods of time that many other perspectives still adopt. While the founding fathers of this movement seemed to go overboard with how they treated each age and in how they separated Israel and the Church, they deserve credit for the framework that has been plagiarized by everyone from Brian McLaren to Answers in Genesis. Progressive Dispensational scholars like Darrell Bock have provided sound support for tracing the Christo-centric nature of God's sovereign control of history. And as these studies have continued over the past century, the progressive camp has been able to reconcile the previously disregarded NT passages that equated Israel and the Church (though it probably doesn't totally satisfy our Reformed brothers). 
• Though you wouldn't know it from those blogs, there is significant Scriptural support for a pre-trib, pre-millennial return of Christ. Those posts had concerns about length, no doubt, but as I review ALL the pieces of the puzzle Scripture gives us - Daniel, Jesus' statements in the Gospels, Paul's letters, Revelation - I've come to the conclusion that the pre-trib, pre-mill view fits the best with all of the relevant passages. The Gospel Coalition blog seemed to emphasize the Gospels (Matthew) the most. My friend Dave remarked that it was his study of Revelation that led him to change his mind. There must be fair attention given to all of the pieces, though that is tough work. That said, I'm going to be preaching through Revelation using newer sources that take an unusual approach - so I could end up with different conclusions in 6 months. Stay tuned.

Two other minor points:

• The Gospel Coalition blog kept using the term 'secret rapture'. I've never heard that term before in my life. No one I've ever heard of or read - not even the most literal of classical dispensationalists - has ever taken the stance that the rapture will be secret. I have no idea why that term was used, other than to paint the view with additional absurdity.
• To all those who default to "Pan-millenialism", as in, "Jesus is coming back at some point and it will all 'pan-out' " - I say - stop being so lazy! It is intellectual cowardice to pass on doing in-depth Bible study on a subject that comes up so often in Scripture. What do you do when you start reading/studying 1 Thessalonians 4? Do you just skip whole books of the Bible in your teaching? To refuse to take a position is 'weak-sauce' to use a non-theological term.  Yes, it is confusing. Yes, it is complicated. Yes, many godly people take different positions. But you don't have to find perfect clarity. And it is worth knowing why you favor one position over another. Be informed, not ignorant. And of course - apply the clear Scriptural end-times mandate to be faithful to God and worship Christ as He deserves.

Let me end by sharing how thankful I am to serve in a non-dispensational denomination which is gracious enough to allow differing points of view to be held on these non-essential issues. Healthy discussion and debate are good things and I hope this post has been respectful and clear that we don't have to throw the baby (dispensationalism) out with the bath-water (the Left Behind movie).

Personal and Pastoral Thoughts on Father's Day

Father's Day is an interesting celebration for me. As a pastor, it takes on one sort of significance. Personally, it takes on a whole different sort of significance.

The pastoral side of me absolutely loves this holiday. God's Word has some great principles for fathers. It calls upon fathers to lovingly teach and lead their children in the things of God (Deut. 6). It models for them how to impart wisdom and what specifically to share with them (the whole book of Proverbs). It encourages otherwise harsh and removed fathers to be gracious (Ephesians 6:4). And when we consider the entirety of Scripture, the God that is progressively revealed as perfectly loving, just, holy, powerful, and good is regarded as our Father (Psalm 68:5, John 14:1-10, Romans 8:15, 1 Peter 1:17-21, et al).

The personal side of me has conflicted thoughts because of my own father. He died when I was 11. So on Father's Day, I have no one to take out to hug, take out to dinner, and share my appreciation. My father also had his own complicated struggles that affected our family even before he passed. He was imperfect like all human fathers of course, but I was just old enough to begin to understand that his flaws were more than run-of-the-mill. Yet I also knew he loved me very much and he loved the Lord despite his struggles.

So on a day like today, I'm excited and reserved all at the same time. I passionately want to call sons of God to become the mighty fathers God desires them to be. And yet I empathize with those who had negative experiences with their earthly fathers and those who had no experience at all.

I've come to the conclusion that it's ok to view Father's Day with these mixed emotions. It's the reality of the human experience that God is redeeming.