How it's made... not PBS but KJV.

The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and 

Restoration

Bruce M. Metzger & Bart D. Ehrman

35$ on Amazon but much cheaper
when classes are not starting!

This book is a very helpful introduction to anyone interested in the history of the New Testament Text. The style is detailed enough for the academically-oriented (read: seminary/biblical Greek student) but complete enough for the layperson to keep up with the conversation. The footnotes are abundant and very helpful for further research while not necessary to follow the flow of thought.

There are several chapters however, that the layperson (and probably most students) would prefer to gloss over and return to for reference. For example, the history of most significant witnesses to the NT is given at least in brief. (Manuscript histories can only hold my interest for so long. After two or three dozen of these I found myself counting down to the end of the chapter)

I also found myself questioning the motive of the author(s) as I came to the latter portion of the book. Around two-thirds of the way through the text there is an unnatural shift from broadly summarizing textual scholarship to representing a very one-sided perspective of modern textual research. (For several pages, each of the resource cited are other works from the author) Furthermore, the tone of this portion of the text becomes more critical (In the non-academic sense. Perhaps it could be described as cynical?) of contrary views. To put it simply, much of what is suggested could not be classified as “conservative” in the ecclesiastical sense. That being said, I hope and trust that this is simply an attempt to bring the first edition (c. 1964) up to speed with modern research and as such reflects current trends. I do wish that a greater diversity of opinions were presented.

Good book, definitely worth reading in light of modern “DaVinci Code and “Stigmata” discussions.

Four-and-a-half papyri out of five. 

Rank my marriage?

The happy couple

It's wedding season. 

This past weekend Kelli and I were so happy to witness two friends of ours become married. They have been pursuing each other and God for several years and it has been clear that their future marriage will encourage others and glorify God in many ways. 

Sitting in 3-4 wedding this summer (PTL!) I have heard many sermons and seen many ceremonies. With all this driving to and fro, I have begun to think quite a bit about what I have been experiencing lately. 

In most of the wedding "charges" (sermonettes?) that I have been present for, most reflect a Biblical perspective of marriage as being a commitment for life. (See Mark 10:9, 1 Corinthians 7:39 & Romans 7:2-3 for a few examples.) While I completely agree, I think that we (Evangelical Christianity) have dropped the marriage ball and missed the point.  I'm all for life-long marriages, but that is not what defines a good marriage. Having a "Diamond Jubilee" (a 60th wedding anniversary) doesn't mean that you have had a successful marriage. 

The point of getting married is not to stay married. 

Paul explained one purpose of marriage to a group of Christians who lived in Ephesus. (turns out that they were not unlike modern Christians in many ways!) Paul was trying to explain why people would ever submit to one another in marriage and uses the illustration of Jesus and the Church for perspective. (Check out Ephesians 5:22-33) Just as Jesus sacrificed himself (literally) for the people he loves; husbands should put every need of their wives before their own. That's weird and unnatural. Just as Christians do best when we respect and submit to Jesus, wives also are to respect and honor their husbands. That too is weird. Marriage is one of those weird thing that hopefully begs the question of the observant non-Christian... "why?" [insert gospel here]

Moses explained to the children of Israel in Genesis 2:24 how the party first got started. Adam was capable of meeting all his requirements at his 9-5 job but was still missing something. (This passage is the only passage to be quoted 4 times in the Bible) He still needed someone to come along side him to help him be all that God had planned for him to be. God had made Adam to live in community with Eve. To say it another way, marriage is awesome. I am personally in a better place now than 18 months ago when I wasn't married. In fact, when God plans for someone to be single; He personally comes along-side that person and gives them supernatural power to accomplish it. (sometimes called a "spiritual gift;" 1 Corinthians 7:7)

Sadly, many of the sermons that I have recently heard have missed this. 

I would love to have heard my friends describe their desire and passion to towards their future spouses just before they get married. (especially the males ones!) Christ has an even greater desire to be united deeply with all Christians. Christ has a burning passion to know me today better than he did yesterday. (2 Corinthians 11:2 & Revelation 21:9-10)

If people are not looking at how unnaturally my wife and I treat each other, then we are probably doing it wrong. (in other words, we look like every other couple) If I love her well and she respects me well (again, it's weird) then as individuals we will be better off than before. Imagine if I sacrificially romanced Kelli like Noah in "the notebook" or if Kelli valued what matters to me as much as Adrian in Rocky.

As Christians it should be understood that marriages are meant to stay together! Instead of reminding myself to "stick this out, stick this out" in hard times; I need to focus on God who is my only hope anyway. We can't do this outside of God's strength, but with God's empowerment, it's easy. (Matthew 11:30 &1 Corinthians 1:18-2:16) 

The point of getting married is to glorify God.

Does the "teaching Church" still exist?

Book Review: The teaching ministry of the Church (2nd Ed.), Edited by William R. Yount

$15 @ half.com

Today marks the end of my summer reading list remaining un-touched. (PTL) 

I was assigned this book for my "Christian Education 101" class and I found it very helpful and informative while at the same time challenging me to be more involved in my local church. 

Cons: The first section lays a theological framework for the rest of the book (not a con) but key terms at times suddenly change as the reader progresses from chapter to chapter (despite the otherwise excellent editing of Dr. Yount) For example, "Christian Education" in one chapter means the education on might receive in Sunday School while in another chapter is meant to be any education with a Christian perspective. In this passage, the authors give many examples of teaching challenges which are "hot topics" in modern Christianity without defending their position or offering room for discussion. While they generally serve their point, I found many of the examples to be distracting at best.

Pros: The articles are full of scripture. By my estimate there are over 650 individual verses quoted in the book. (Nearly 2 per page!) The perspective of the authors are typical for most conservative evangelicals and I expect that the language "speaks truth in love" into most of the environments that this book comes into. The authors are clearly familiar with the state of the evangelical church... and their Bibles and are looking to unite the two together. The latter three quarters of the book are very helpful and instructive for nearly every educational manner found within the Church. Each chapter clearly demonstrates the author's proficiency in the medium (for example, adult ministry) and describes a rich pedagogy, goals, means to obtain those goals and evaluation. 

I was challenged by this book through many of the questions it raises. Is there a tension between "head knowledge"(instruction) and "heart knowledge"(discipleship)? How does the Holy Spirit continue to teach long after the lesson is over? Do I allow room for the Holy Spirit's work in my instruction and instructing? How can I learn God's truths better? How can I teach God's truths better? 

This book teaches that while each individual Christian is in a continual state of learning and teaching; each Church function should have teaching included in some degree. I would recommend this book to every Christian hoping to strategically serve his/her fellow believer and encourage his/her own spiritual growth.

Translation: if I can't get you to buy it, definitely read it. 

Five out of Five pointed sermons

AMY

Catholic Answers?

$10 on Amazon

Book Review: Theology and Sanity, Francis J. Sheed

I was given this book by a Roman Catholic friend of mine once he discovered that I was in a Trinitarian class at Dallas Seminary. I found it to be very interesting  and was written how I suspect C.S. Lewis would have written; had he been Catholic. The style is very philosophical and challenging although many illustrations are given to help communicate exactly what Sheed is communicating.  Unfortunately for myself; the audience being targeted is exclusively Roman Catholic and unwarranted assumptions (at least from my perspective) are commonly made. While several of the arguments rest on dogmatic beliefs, (For an example, Sheed claims that the concept of a 'community of faith' relies on the infallibility of the Catholic Church’s teaching.) often times the arguments are helpful for viewing Protestantism through another lens. I found this book to be a helpful supplement to my Trinitarian class in that it gave me several technical, weighty arguments to wrestle with. (Some aligning with and others contradicting an evangelical perspective)  two (not surprising) issues I had were the few passages that clearly did not originate from NA27 (for an example, see Sheed’s treatment of John 17:21) and a very Catholic “sensus-plenior” approach to interpreting scripture. 

Overall, I found this book to be a helpful perspective especially relating to anthropology, trinitarian theology and soteriology. While I would not recommend it as a quick read, the writing style is more accessible than most and the arguments are simply presented.

2.5 dogmatic statements out of 5

-Yates

Could your Church do a better job?

$11 @ readerssupermarket

Advanced Strategic Planning, Aubrey Malphurs.

Even after several advanced collegiate leadership courses, I found this book to be both informative and challenging. Malphurs is very comprehensive (in respect to the Church environment)  and makes the challenge of leading well seem manageable and obtainable. I was able to read it very quickly because many of the suggestions are repeated and others seem (at least in hindsight) to be common-sense. The author is clearly familiar with many different church environments and is confident in the various strategies for implementing growth. Malphurs goes to great length to facilitate the development and implementation of core values, mission, vision, strategy, disciple making, forming a team, ministry setting, finances, and continued strategic planning.

I would recommend this book for anyone interested in the growth (and/or maintenance) of his/her Church. This is especially helpful for a topical overview of a solid Christian management strategy rather than a detailed, specific, custom-tailored strategy.

5 out of 5 sailboat analogies

AM Yates

Theology put to the test.

$17.50 @ ImportCDs.com

Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Pacifist, Nazi Resister. DVD. Directed by Martin Doblmeier. 2003.

While staying true to the documentary genre; the director (Martin Doblmeier) includes personal interpretation in such a way that both engages and challenges the viewer in a unique way. Doblmeier devotes a significant portion of Bonhoeffer towards establishing background instead of expounding on later years of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s life. (Which are more commonly known.) (*** For those who do not know; Bonhoeffer was a German Protestant pastor who resisted the Nazi regime in WWII.***) Beginning with the earliest information of Bonhoeffer’s life, Doblmeier slowly builds a case for the perception of the man presented in the concluding moments.

Professionals frequently interrupt the developing narrative in order to provide interpretive insights regarding Bonhoeffer’s circumstances. After several of these interpretive statements, a pattern clearly begins to develop. With only a few exceptions, a general statement regarding God or Christianity is made and on the basis of that unchallenged position the professional will present his interpretation.
For example, Bishop Albrecht Schonherr is quoted stating, “God is a God of peace and justice and one is not true to Him when one has a weak conception of war or Justice.” Bishop Schonherr makes this claim in light of the ironic tension of using murder to end a war. In many ways this is a nonsensical statement when used (as in the documentary) independent of any clarification or further explanation. I would be very interested to know if Bishop Schonherr places priority on either peace or justice and how he views God as being able to resolve that tension. As presented; this question is assumed to have an obvious resolution and furthermore, the capacity for man to imitate this Godly balance is likewise assumed.

Expounding the high ethical standards developed by Bonhoeffer, John De Gruchy defines Christianity as “putting into practice what Jesus preached at the sermon on the mount.” While possibly defensible, this is not the position that Bonhoeffer held. (Or at the very least first held.) Bonhoeffer was highly Christocentric and defined Christianity as the visible representation of Christ through the community of the Church. I suspect that De Gruchy has confused functional and positional Christianity. A Christian is someone who is associated with Christ, not someone who does “Christian” actions. For example, Gandhi never claimed to be a Christian while he did practice many of the commandments of Jesus in Matthew 5-7.
As a third example of this formula, John De Gruchy on a separate occasion defends Bonhoeffer’s actions from a theistic perspective. De Gruchy begins by stating that the question of right and wrong is flawed from the beginning. The real question is “what does God want me to do?” He goes only a little further suggesting that if anyone could know the will of God, surely a professor of Theology would. While I can be confident that his statement is well-intended, the mere investigation of God’s will does not cause one to infallibly arrive at it. Countless wicked deeds have been done by men believing that they were within God’s will.

Conclusion:
While the extensive history of Bonhoeffer’s life was very helpful in allowing the viewer to understand his circumstances more holistically, I thought the account of actual wartime measures was lacking. The audience will surely understand how passionate Bonhoeffer was for peace but someone completely unfamiliar with his story might never understand the extent of the actual measures taken against the Nazi war machine. The war-time phase of his life seems to be the most significant and this documentary I feel has majored on the minors. I also had hoped for more primary source material on Bonhoeffer. As mentioned above, many historians and theologians presented their opinions as to the influence of his life but ironically Bonhoeffer's own opinions seem to be overshadowed by them. Furthermore, those interpretations regarding Bonhoeffer weigh heavily on a particular philosophy or life-view and were varied and unquestioned by the presenters.

Ultimately I did enjoy the documentary and I have a great respect for Bonhoeffer’s legacy. This documentary has greatly spiked my interest in this man (especially regarding his war-time theology) and I hope to study him further in the near future.

4 out of 5 stars

-Yates

What does someone in seminary do?

Billy says:
"get back to work!"

goog_1726817030I have had several people asking me about my seminary experience and what my classes are like. I have found that most of the classes (not including Honors Greek.) I have already taken to be a challenge to my theological convictions and personal paradigms rather than intellectually straining. (I will definately credit ma/pa & the Grace Bible Church Internship for giving me a firm theological education.  I have definitely had an advantage over other students coming from non-Bible College backgrounds.)

In two or three of my classes, we had the option to write a paper for an 'A' and I found them to be fairly challenging and interesting to work on. I have posted one of those papers here for your viewing pleasure. This paper is typical of our assignments and while seeming complicated; mostly involves good organization skills.

Also, as seminarians we meet once a day for 'Chapel' where we have worship and hear a speaker.

Ironically, I have found that most of the fruit of the "seminary experience" has not been at the seminary itself. Most of my raw learning/meditating has come from reading, studying and writing off campus which later gets  polished in the classroom.

AMY 

'Ring-Wraiths;' finally I get it.

Although I don't normally read biographies, I recently found myself taking Brian Fisher's advice and picking one up. (Granted, I didn't have time to finish this one for over a year!) The book is Tolkien; the Authorized Biography, by Humphrey Carpenter. I found it in a pile of free books at a garage sale and almost passed over it but the picture on the cover of Tolkien smoking a pipe was too neat to pass up.

Tolkien (The book but apparently also the man himself) is slow-developing but interesting. Simply stated, he was an obscure Oxford Professor (specifically a Philologist) desiring to entertain his children with creative, mythical stories and at least one of those stories (especially the Hobbit tetralogy) was polished for publication.  Tolkien's obsessive-compulsive nature would not allow him to ever really consider a story to be "complete;" going so far as to research moon phases and measuring precise distances on maps to ensure that every detail was in order.

Prior to writing the Hobbit series, Tolkien had already developed the cultures found in his stories (elvish, hobbit, etc.) from languages he had created as a hobby. He felt as if the languages he invented obligated a certain culture as both representative and explanatory for them. Tolkien was a simple man living in a simple, suburban home. His creativity and imagination were however, clearly less than common. Coupling those with an obsessive focus on detail allowed him to compose (after over 20 years) a terrific novel as possibly his life's work.

If you're a fan of Hobbits and looking for more background information (in light of the new movie?) then I would encourage you to pick this book up used. If you're not pursuing an understanding of Tolkien's literary philosophy on character names or insights into the lifestyle of an author/professor, I would encourage you to pass on this one.  2 out of 5 harry hobbit feet.

AMY

Evangelical Moral Theology?

Tonight I had an interesting discussion with a Roman Catholic friend of mine and we talked at great length about what he called "moral theology." I was interested to hear of his passion in this field and he claimed that it was a common topic in Catholicism. Am I the only one missing this "field" or is this just a title commonly used by Roman Catholics? What would you include in "moral theology" if you had the choice? (or perhaps a better question, what would you exclude?)

Also, C.S. Lewis was a universalist. Kelli just read The Last Battle and it's fairly blatant. Apparently Bell isn't the only one.

AMY

Hodges, Absolutely Free!

Now that I have a bit more time, I want to update the book reviews a bit more regularly. For those who are not aware of the discussion, this debate is considered for the most part to be over. I hope that this first review doesn't betray my background too much but here's lookin' at you kid:

Zane Hodges, Absolutely Free!

Hodges provides a fresh review [at the time] of legalistic perspectives that have begun to work their way into evangelical thought.

$2.30 from Amazon

This might be to the extreme an argument against the Lordship Perspective. Perhaps Hodges stretches their position too thinly, builds a “straw man” at times, or simply takes their “positions” to their logical conclusion. That being said, I am not convinced that the brashness or the severities of the attacks are unwarranted.

Summary: Hodges allows God’s grace as the only means for salvation from hell and the means for motivation towards Godly living. Hodges’ perspective still allows for a defensible theology and strongly encourages Godly lifestyle. 

AMY