wordandspirit

This is one of the first volumes in the Bible Speaks Today series, and was originally published 40 years ago in 1968. Unlike later volumes in the series, there is no introduction. Stott dives right in and begins his exposition of the text. Naturally, he covers the issues like authorship, dating, recipients, and themes along the way, but not in so much detail as a typical commentary might.

Paul is writing, he argues, to the churches in South Galatia to defend his apostleship and his gospel, both of which have come under attack from false teachers. Stott often points out that Paul still has many modern day opponents who deny his authority and reject his gospel message.

Each chapter of Galatians is dealt with in three or four chapters in the commentary. Stott sees Galatians as more or less falling into three main parts which roughly correspond to two chapters each. The first (Gal 1,2) deals with a question of authority. Paul defends his authority based on his apostleship. Those who are familiar with Stott's writings will know how keen he is to emphasise the uniqueness of the 12 apostles, and his denial of any kind of apostolic succession or modern day apostles, both of which he would view as challenging the apostolic authority of Scripture.

The second section (Gal 3,4) deals with a question of salvation. The gospel is presented as salvation through the death of Jesus Christ, and is received by faith alone. He sees the false teachers as proponents of salvation through keeping the law as a necessary 'supplement' to what Christ has done. He shows how the law of Moses ("thou shalt...") is contrasted to God's promises to Abraham ("I will..."), and therefore the gospel is analogous to the promise, not the law. He regularly quotes Luther in this section.

The significance of the law is to show us our need of the gospel. Stott argues that this step cannot be bypassed - we must let the law show us our sin, before we can understand what the gospel is. Come to Moses first, and let Moses lead us to Christ.

The third section (Gal 5,6) deals with a question of holiness. Up until now, Paul's message of Christian liberty may lead some to assume that anything goes in terms of behaviour. But liberty does not mean license. Stott argues that Christian freedom is primarily a freedom of conscience - we are not guilty before God. But freedom from law does not mean freedom from keeping the law - our sanctification involves us fulfilling the law, which Paul says is summed up in the command to love your neighbour (Gal 5:14). Similarly, we are called to fulfil the law of Christ (Gal 6:2).

Stott argues that the Christian has a conflict between what he is by nature (the flesh) and what he is by rebirth. In both Gal 5 and Rom 7 Paul presents walking by the Spirit as the solution to this conflict. We have nailed our flesh to the cross, but we need to keep it there until it dies. He describes holiness as a harvest. Paul speaks in Gal 6:8 about whether we sow to the flesh or to the Spirit. Holiness then is not automatic, but depends on where and how we sow.

Although the book has no introduction, a summary section at the end reiterates the main themes of the book and its key points for application. There is also a study guide at the end.

As with John Stott's other contributions to the Bible Speaks Today series, this volume comes highly recommended. Due to its age, he does not address the question of the "New Perspective on Paul" (in particular, were the false teachers really teaching salvation by works?), and perhaps his approach to the issue of modern day apostles would be tempered by some of the clarifications that have been made by groups such as newfrontiers (that modern day apostles are not seen as having an authority equivalent to the 12, who were unique in that sense). I also felt that he could have explored more what it means to walk in the Spirit. Stott makes several comments throughout the book to state that the church are the inheritors of the Old Testament promises, and are in full continuity with the Old Testament believers, which is another key theme found in Galatians.

The strength of this commentary is an uncompromising proclamation of the message of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. Having laid this foundation, Stott then goes on to show how exhortation to holiness is not in conflict with this message. It will prove a valuable resource for anyone wanting to study or teach through the book of Galatians.

Unashamed Workman posted some interesting thoughts on criteria for determining whether a healing is "authentic". He cites two lists of criteria. The first is from the noted skeptic James Randi:

James Randi's Criteria

1. The disease must not be normally self-terminating.

2. The recovery must be complete.

3. The recovery must take place in the absence of any medical treatment that might normally be expected to affect the disease.

4. There must be adequate medical opinion that the disease was present before the application of whatever means were used to bring about the miracle.

5. There must be adequate medical opinion that the disease is not present after the application of whatever means were used to bring about the miracle.

These criteria are actually more related to the report of the healing than the healing itself. For example, a person may genuinely be healed by God without any medical professionals present to make points 4 and 5 possible. And God is of course completely free to heal someone without points 1 and 3 being met.

So while these points are not sufficient to determine whether an authentic healing has taken place, they are useful to consider when reporting a healing (in particular I mean reporting a healing outside of the circle of those people who know the person involved). Integrity is important, and to declare that a miraculous healing has taken place when several of the above criteria are not met can actually result in cynicism from those who hear rather than the desired effect of raising their faith.

Professor of Theology Richard Mayhue boldly declares that the Bible goes further and offers his own set of much stricter criteria:

Richard Mayhue's Criteria

1. The healing must be instantaneous.

2. The healing must be of a disease that neither the medical community nor the human body can heal, such as AIDS - either instantly or absolutely.

3. The healing must be total.

4. The healing must be completely convincing, even to skeptics.

5. The healing must be done in public with no elaborate services involved.

6. The healing must be of an organic disease.

I have to say I have no idea where he gets most of these from. Point 1 is true as a general rule in the Bible, but there are exceptions. As for point 2, again I cannot see why God cannot heal a disease that does not meat this criteria. Point 3 I broadly agree with but noting the obvious caveat that all people healed in the Bible went on to die (and presumably were not immune from sickness the rest of their lives).

As for point 4, this simply is not possible. Has he underestimated the power of unbelief? We need look no further than the example of Jesus' resurrection to see that some people will ignore the evidence if it does not suit what they want to believe. Point 5 is another tenuous one. Not all healings in the Bible were performed in public, and while there may not have been "elaborate services", a number of them involved unconventional methods. And point 6 is also perplexing. Is healing of a mental problem (e.g. depression, eating disorders) not "real" enough?

So I think Mayhue sets the bar too high to consider something an "authentic healing". And yet I do have some sympathy for his position, as it seems to me far too common for Christians to make exaggerated and even downright false claims about healing these days. Let us be full of faith in the God who heals, full of compassion for those who are sick, and full of integrity in the claims we make about healing.

The full title of this book is "Bind us Together ... to be the church Jesus really wants", and is subtitled "The restoration movement and its message for the church". It grabbed my attention for two reasons. First, it offers a history of the Restoration movement in the UK, something that few other books have done (Andrew Walker's "Restoring the Kingdom" being the most notable exception. And second, the author is from Southampton, where I live, so I was able to visit him to buy my copy and talk about it with him. John Fleming is a member of New Community Church in Southampton, a church which had its roots in the restoration movement in the seventies.

The book is broken into three main sections. The first offers a history of restoration in the UK, and although briefer than Andrew Walker's book, it is perhaps broader, mentioning a wider variety of new church groups that have come out of this movement. He talks about the original desire not to create a new denomination but that restoration would become a focal point for unity amongst believers.

He traces the differences of opinion between restoration and "renewal" (mainly to do with ecclesiology) and quite perceptively draws out the key emphases of the early movement as well as those issues that became contentious.

After reviewing the various new church "streams" that have emerged from restorationism, a fairly lengthy chapter tells the personal story of the author, in particular focusing on three churches he was part of. The first was George Tarleton's church "the Cong" in Chilford. The second was Kendal Avenue Pentecostal in Southampton. The main focus though is on the third - Community Church, also in Southampton. This section will be of particular interest to all those who like myself know this church and have lived in Southampton.

He goes on to examine the decline of many restorationist groups, due to disillusionment in some cases, and the vision becoming blurred in others. He notes that the emerging church takes a very different approach to ecclesiology, favouring being 'experimental' as opposed to the belief that churches can be built according to a New Testament "pattern". He notes that many restorationist churches have embraced the idea of "cell church" but are actually becoming more "program based" in practice.

Part 2 of the book is entitled "What is the church?" In it he examines the Alpha course teaching on the church, before embarking on a tour of the Bible, starting in the Old Testament, moving on to Jesus, and then the book of Acts. In many ways, this section is almost like a second book. In places it felt like little more than a retelling of the story of Acts, but he did try to develop a model for church leadership based on the example of the early church.

The third part of the book is called "the way ahead". Fleming asks "how is the church doing"? In particular his concern is that the New Testament teaches that there should not be many churches in a locality, but that there is just one church in a locality. Clearly we are a long way from this ideal. Even "churches together" initiatives are often little more than Christians "holding hands over the fences", without any real desire to see those fences come down.

While he is generally very complementary about restorationist groups of churches such as newfrontiers, he is disappointed at their lack of vision to work with other local churches. For example, they would rather plant a new church into an area, than send people to join an existing church there. Much of the latter stages of the book could be described almost as John Fleming thinking out loud about the challenges associated with Christians joining together with all other believers in their locality to be the "church together", not just "churches together".

As an appendix to the book there is an essay from 1971 by George Tarleton entitled "glory in the church", setting forth a restorationist vision of what the church should be.

It is hard to evaluate a book with three distinct parts. Section one is a great read for anyone interested in the story of the UK restorationist movement. Section two is useful perhaps as an introductory level overview of the Bible teaching and story of the development of the church. And section three is provocative in that the challenge for local churches to join together that is rarely heard amongst evangelicals, who tend to be pragmatic rather than idealistic with regards to ecumenism. The book is written in an informal, almost conversational style, and perhaps would have benefited from the second section being condensed considerably (or published separately). But despite having read over a dozen books on the church in the last year, this one managed to find some ground that had not been covered by the more prominent authors on ecclesiology.

It is not necessarily that easy to get hold of a copy. I can give you the author's email address if you ask in the comments.

It's been a while since I posted here last. As you can imagine with four children now life has become rather busy for me. Also I have been working a bit on a software project in the last month. But I thought I would write some thoughts on the issue of how I think about "the environment". It is obviously a topic we are hearing more and more about, and is fast becoming one of our society's favourite benchmark's of morality.

On Global Warming

It seems that the consensus is that global warming is real and man-made, although every now and then I come up against skeptics (some more believable than others). To be honest, I'm not sure I really need to know. Most of the "good for the environment" things you can do have merits of their own irrespective of whether the planet is in immanent peril or not.

On "Carbon Emissions"

I've been cycling to work for the last year, which has a few benefits. First, it is much cheaper than owning two cars (I reckon we save around £70 per month by having just one car). Second, it is good for my health (except for the increased risks of getting squashed by a car). And third, it is a better environmental option.

As for long-distance journeys, this hasn't been much of an issue for our family. We very rarely travel abroad, and most years our summer holiday is little more than 50 miles away. This year we're camping just 25 miles down the road.

I occasionally ponder whether we could manage without a car at all. The main issues are to do with church. Public transport either to church on a Sunday morning or to cell groups around town in the evenings is simply not an option. I would also have to stop playing in the band at church.

On Energy Efficiency

I fitted our house with energy efficient light-bulbs, which I guess goes some way to offsetting the fact that the children like the light in the hall to be left on all night. As for other items in the house, when I buy something new, I am trying to be a little more conscious of its energy efficiency that I might have been before. However, I am not sure how environmental it is to replace something simply because it is not energy efficient. Surely the old television or refrigerator going to a landfill site is just as unhelpful for the environment.

On Recycling & Waste

Like most people these days, we are trying to recycle what we can, yet there always seems to be a remarkable amount of stuff generated that needs throwing away. My wife has bought some washable nappies that has cut down a lot on our waste. There are of course services like freecycle, that can take things that still work off your hands, but even so, junk that no-one wants or is broken beyond repair just keeps accumulating.

One of my pet peeves is the amount of stuff we buy or get posted that could just as easily have been received in electronic form. I try to get all my bills and bank statements sent by email, yet still some companies insist on sending me mountains of paperwork. I am also looking forward to the time when music, movies and software are all bought digitally instead of the need for a huge collection of plastic disks and cases. As for books, maybe one day there will be a viable way to buy and read books electronically (Amazon Kindle anybody?), but so far my attempts at reading books on a computer usually end up with me having sore eyes and a headache. I have also migrated my home studio recording equipment to a software-based solution (as much as possible).

I try to make a habit of using things until they have genuinely reached their end of life (and often beyond). Clothes, electrical items, bicycles, furniture should not be replaced until they are no longer fit for purpose. Where that line is drawn is of course a matter for debate, but it seems to me both financially and environmentally irresponsible for a Christian to be just buying newer and better all the time simply because they can.

On Eschatology

OK, its time to get a bit theological. Conventional wisdom at the moment claims that Christians don't care about the environment because of their eschatology - Jesus is coming back and he'll clean up the mess for us. Maybe there is a little of that, but I'm not sure for two reasons.

First, the reason many Christians don't talk a lot about "the environment" is because we have a different name for it. We call it "Creation", and can be found singing about how wonderful it is almost every week at church. In fact a healthy doctrine of seeing our world as God's creation entrusted to us as responsible stewards should be all the impetus we need to cause us to work against those things that destroy our environment.

Second, I think the reason so many Christians care so little about environmental issues is nothing to do with their eschatology but rather because of syncretism. We have made it possible to mix Christianity with secular materialistic consumerism.

Concluding Thoughts

Hopefully I have not come across as proud or self-righteous in this post. So far, the "green" things I have been doing are little more than token gestures. There are a whole host of things I could do to be more environmentally conscious. And of course, the environment is not the only issue I want to be more concerned about. There are issues of poverty, human trafficking, abortion, fair trade, church planting, and evangelism, and as a Christian I want to be in tune with what God's priorities are.

I do want to let myself be provoked on this issue though. Perhaps the main reason Christians react against an environmentalist message is that it often comes bundled with a variety of anti-Christian sentiments. But that need not be the case. Try subscribing to the Simple Pastor blog and reading Phil Whitall's thoughtful comments on a variety of subjects including the environment. There are also a number of interesting books on this topic from an evangelical perspective coming out at the moment. Apparently Doug Moo is going to be writing a book on Creation theology, with special reference to environmental issues, which is definitely one to watch out for.

Anyway, feel free to add in the comments what you make of this issue. Are you doing anything differently to be more environmentally conscious? Or do you see it as a distraction from the "main thing"?

Brief Summary

Published in 1974, this is one of the first volumes in the Bible Speaks Today series. It is an 208 page exposition of the book of Amos, with a short introduction. It is subtitled, "the Day of the Lion", drawing on Amos' striking image of God as a fearsome Lion roaring out before he pounces on his prey.

The Introduction

Amos is introduced to us as a prophet living in similar days to our own - a society of affluence, exploitation and greed for profit. It was also a religious society, yet one that didn't really care how far standards had fallen. Amos was effectively a prophet of doom - the people assumed they had privilege and security when in fact they were in peril.

One of the key themes of the book is the importance of 'evidences' to accompany the claim to be God's people. Religion is repulsive and useless if not verified by evidences. Motyer does not believe though that Amos was prophesying an end to the covenant, but rather that the curses of the covenant were coming into effect.

The Commentary

The commentary takes the form of an exposition rather than merely an exegesis of the text, and Motyer unashamedly takes Amos' message to be directly relevant to Christians today.

As he goes through the first chapter of Amos, which starts pronouncing judgments on the foreign nations around Israel, he shows how God judges these nations according to how they have treated their fellow man, irrespective of the fact that they have not been recipients of the same special relation as Israel.

But these judgements on the surrounding nations are in fact a noose of judgment that is tightening around their own necks. Israel's sins are revealed as covetousness, indifference, oppression and self-importance - the very same sins the surrounding nations have been condemned for.

Motyer tackles the subject of "vengeance" within the covenant - yes there are blessings associated with the covenant, but there are also curses. He cites the churches in Revelation as examples that this truth still holds valid even in the New Testament era.

On Amos 5, there is an interesting section dealing with the way the Israelites flocked to visit shrines at Bethel, Gilgal, and Beersheba. These were places that God had met with the patriarchs, and there was an almost superstitious assumption that by visiting these places, they would meet God. But they were returning from their pilgrimage unchanged. They needed to make God himself, not Bethel, their place of pilgrimage.

Ultimately, Motyer shows us that Amos is speaking to a people whose religion was simply one of self-pleasing and pretence. The lack of justice (right behaviour in respect to fellow man) in society was evidence of the shallowness of their religion.

Strengths

The main strength of this exposition is the way that the challenge of Amos' message is taken seriously for today, both at the level of the church and for society in general. He cites global corporations forcing small local companies out of business and our lack of care for the environment as examples of the same kind of selfishness that characterised those who Amos spoke to.

Weaknesses

Not a criticism as such but, one subject that will probably raise questions in the minds of readers is the relationship between law and grace, and how this applies to those in the New Covenant. Motyer does tackle this subject, and talks of the "law of grace" and the "grace of law". It is obviously a subject on which there are a spectrum of opinions amongst Christians, but I think he maintains a good balance here that does justice to the message of Amos without ignoring the rest of the biblical witness on grace. Here is a quote concerning Amos' vision of the plumb-line to give a flavour for his approach:

When the Lord draws near with the plumb-line ... [it is] to declare condemned all who try to live by law and forget grace, to declare equally condemned those who have sought after the grace of the sacrifices but who have forgotten the righteousness and the justice of the law, but to accept all those who have constructed the fabric their lives according to the horizontal foundation of grace and according to the vertical erectness of law. The plumb-line will try such and pass them as approved.

Why Buy It?

As usual with the Bible Speaks Today series, this is well suited for those who want to personally study or teach their way through a book of the Bible. It is valuable to have the necessary background (historical, cultural, geographical etc) explained where relevant so you can properly grasp the force of the message of Amos.

I'm sure most of my friends by now know that our fourth child was born on Wednesday morning, but I couldn't let this momentous occasion go unremarked on my blog. We've named him Samuel Calvin Heath and he weighed 7 pounds 10. There are more photos of him on my facebook page.

 

Steph is still in hospital as Sam has to finish a course of antibiotics before they will let him go. And things are especially busy for me this week as I am due to preach at Southampton University Christian Union on Friday evening.

I have created a small Bible verse add-in for those of you who blog using Windows Live Writer. It allows you to simply add a quotation from the ESV, or a link to Bible Gateway in your blog posts.

Installation

First, download the Bible Verse Writer 0.6 zip file and extract VerseWriter.dll into C:\Program Files\Windows Live Writer\Plugins (or C:\Progam Files\Windows Live\Writer\Plugins if that folder exists on your PC). And that's it. Simply launch Windows Live Writer and the plugin will be available and ready for use.

Usage

To use it, simply click on the Insert Bible Verse... link at the bottom right. You then type in the reference you want to use (e.g. Rom 12:1). Then you select whether you wish to have the full text of the verse quoted in your blog, or whether you simply want to link to Bible Gateway. To quote the verse, you must select the ESV option. You can also optionally wrap the text in a HTML <blockquote> tag. This is what it looks like:

33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

(Jer 31:33 ESV)

Alternatively, you can just insert a link to Bible Gateway. This allows you to select from a variety of popular versions. Here is a example link to the Amplified Bible version of Eph 2:10.

Feature Requests

If you find this plugin useful, please do get in touch and let me know. Also if you would like any features added, then simply send me an email, or comment here and I will see what I can do.

Brief Summary

A 455 page commentary on the book of Acts in the NIBC series, which is based on the New International Version. The focus of this commentary is on explaining more fully the meaning of the text, and providing the appropriate historical and contextual information.

The Introduction

He begins by quoting J B Phillips - the church we see in Acts is "the church as it was meant to be". The introduction is a fairly concise 17 pages, and presents Luke as the author and discusses his purposes in writing. Luke is not interested in writing a general history of the church, but in following the route of the gospel from Jerusalem to Rome. Williams takes up the challenge of defending Luke's historicity in a number of places throughout the commentary, arguing that Luke writes with integrity.

The Commentary

The commentary itself does not include the biblical text, but where words or phrases are commented on they are included in bold. He does not often spend time on the Greek text, but is quite thorough in providing the historical and geographical background needed to fully appreciate what was going on.

The style of this commentary is not an exposition, so he does not often enter into discussion on the theological matters raised, but occasionally will add a comment (sometimes more freely in the footnotes).

He argues that the visit of Gal 2:1-10 is the same as that of Acts 15:1-29. He claims that Stephen believed the building of the temple to be a mistake - God had never intended for there to be a temple. On the matter of the baptism in the Holy Spirit, he sees this as a once-for-all historical event not to be repeated.

Strengths

The main strength is that he is thorough but has a good sense of what material to relegate to the footnotes, which avoids the commentary becoming too longwinded.

Weaknesses

While it is good at what it attempts to achieve (explain the meaning of the text), the real lack for me is reflection on theology. He seems reticent to enter into too many theological debates. To be fair, this may well be due to the nature of the commentary series, but with hindsight, it wasn't the most thrilling commentary to read cover to cover (as I have found with a few other Acts commentaries!).

Why Buy It?

As I have said already, it is not the best for reading right through, but it will serve a purpose as a reference book. However, I would probably recommend the TNTC commentary on Acts by I. Howard Marshall or the NICNT commentary on Acts by F. F. Bruce ahead of it. My favourite Acts commentary remains John Stott's "The Message of Acts", which has a much stronger emphasis on application (even though I don't agree with all his conclusions). It might also be worth checking out the recently released Revised Expositor's Commentary on Acts by Richard Longenecker and Darrell Bock's new commentary on Acts.

Bruce Milne closes his book, Dynamic Diversity, with a vision of a gloriously diverse church:

I have a dream – a dream of a congregation where people of all colours and from every ethnic identity find welcome, warmth, dignity and a sense of belonging; I have a dream of a church where men and women worship the triune God, and serve together as equally valuable in the sight of God, and equal in their capacity to honour him. I have a dream of a Christian community where children, youth middle-aged and seniors, boomers, busters, generation-Xers and millennials learn to respect and love and discover their profound need for each other; where people from all wealth and power indexes can live and relate and laugh together.

I have a dream of a family where singles and marrieds, and marrieds with families, and single parents and divorcees are all affirmed in their worth before God and his people; a family where poor and rich, sophisticated and unsophisticated, the physically and mentally strong and the physically and mentally challenged have learned to walk together in love, and to appreciate and affirm each other.

I have a dream of a people of God where differences of personality and huge diversities of spiritual stories and spiritual journeys, or the lack of them, are no barrier to acceptance.

I have a dream of all that many-splendoured, multi-textured humanity uniting under the conscious, blessed rule of the exalted Lord Jesus Christ through his living, liberating, energizing Word, joining in wondering communion in their worship, along with saints and angels – I have a dream.

And I have a dream of that same exuberant, multi-colour family, swept along by the Holy Spirit, streaming forth from the worship place into the community around them – to throw their arms around it, and hug it to their hearts; offering to all who have need the practical ministries of love – to the poor and the homeless, single parents and street kids, HIV / Aids sufferers and the addicted; and sharing too the joyous good news of Jesus and his great salvation – with the lost and lonely, the affluent and the power-brokers, the cynics and the seekers, the young and the aged, the followers of other faith traditions and the followers of none, local residents and those from every corner of the globe; lifting high the world’s only Saviour, and doing so in a way that his holy, all-embracing transforming love is reflected and authenticated in the dynamic diversity of their life together ... I have a dream.

It's a compelling dream, but is it perhaps too easy for us in our consumeristic society to settle for second best, and to get comfortable in churches where we can enjoy being with lots of "people like me"? Are we willing to fight for churches marked by unity in diversity?

I've updated my commentaries database page, and have just broken the 1000 commentaries barrier.

I've added the Paideia, Brazos Theological Commentary and Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms series. A number of the other series have been updated with new editions and I am continuing to update to use ISBN13 wherever available.

I'm hoping that later this year I will find some time to start adding a few more interesting features to it, such as the ability to rate, tag and review commentaries, as well as displaying more information about the different series.

I decided today that I would check out what the Technorati website is all about, and in the process stumbled across a couple of interesting blogs. Emily is a fellow reformed charismatic based here in the UK, and although she focuses a lot on women's issues, I still found a lot of interesting and well articulated posts on her site. And Rick Ianello seems to share a remarkably similar set of theological influences to me. There are quotes from Tom Wright, C H Spurgeon, John Wimber, R T Kendall, Mark Driscoll, and John Calvin. Plus there is a generous helping of silly pictures and videos.

Even more interesting was the fact that I have been tagged with a couple of "memes" and knew nothing about it. So rather belatedly, here are my answers...

First, Jeremy Pierce (Parableman) tagged me with a Bible Meme:

1. What translation of the Bible do you like best?

ESV is my main Bible but my copy is barely hanging together thanks to copious amounts of gaffer tape, and most of Genesis has been stained yellow (I think its to do with rain and my children's felt-tip pens if you are wondering how). So I'm really looking forward to the forthcoming ESV Study Bible which I have earmarked as my next Bible purchase. I'd also like to get myself a TNIV, when they finally put one out in a nice format (Zondervan really seem to be shooting themselves in the foot with this translation at the moment).

2. Old or New Testament?

I'm with Jeremy - they're both the Word of God. I will confess to having a much better stocked commentary collection for the NT than the OT. Something I hope to rectify in the coming years.

3. Favourite Book of the Bible?

Hmm, hard question. I like 1 Corinthians because its got a bit of everything in it. 1 Peter, Matthew, Ephesians, Philippians and Romans get honourable mentions in the NT category. As for the Old Testament, its between Psalms, Leviticus, Joel, Proverbs, Hosea, Isaiah, Nehemiah, and Genesis.

4. Favourite Chapter?

Now this is even harder. I think I'll go for Romans 8. I love the Sermon on the Mount too, but that's three chapters.

5. Favourite Verse?

Again, too many to choose from, but I will go with Romans 8:32

Other than that, I always liked Job 3:2 in the NIV as it is even shorter than John 11:35

6. Bible character you think you're most like?

Timothy

7. One thing from the Bible that confuses you?

I remember reading Rev 7:5-8 when I was probably only about 12 years old and wondering why Dan gets left out and why Ephraim gets turned into Joseph. I guess my commentaries on Revelation will have a good answer but I've yet to check it out.

8. Moses or Paul?

They're both a little scary, but I think I'd feel a bit safer with Paul.

9. A teaching from the Bible that you struggle with or don't get?

Why does the book of Job have to be so longwinded?

10. Coolest name in the Bible?

Apart from Mark, I would say that it would have to be He-man.

The other meme I was tagged with is from Peter Smythe, asking for "five things I dig about Jesus". He rather flatteringly calls me a "famous pneumablogger", but he wouldn't be saying that if he saw how few readers I actually have! Anyway, it's a great question and I have no shortage of things to say here...

1. I love his single-minded sense of purpose. He was on the earth to do his Father's will and would allow nothing to distract or sidetrack him from that mission.

2. I love the intimacy of his relationship with his Father.

3. I love the way that he chose such a motley crew for his disciples and stuck with them even when they failed repeatedly.

4. I love his servant-hearted attitude, pouring himself out on behalf of others, and thus displaying complete integrity in his call for us to love sacrificially.

5. I love the fact that he is my advocate (1 John 2:1) before the Father.

I'm supposed to pass these memes on to a few people. Jonathan Skipper, I've not read much from you recently. And Graeme Mallett - it's time to start blogging!

Subtitled, "the new humanity church for today and tomorrow", the central thesis of this book is that God intends for the church to display his glory through the unity in diversity of its members, and that therefore local churches should be actively seeking to promote diversity.

Bruce Milne begins his case by reminding us that already there is a great "worship wave" made up of people from all kinds of diverse cultures and backgrounds as each Sunday, Christians from every part of the planet meet together for worship. But he is not content for this staggering diversity to remain true only of the universal church - it must also be demonstrated in the local church.  He argues that if we can create a "new humanity" church, uniting people of all backgrounds, then this will have tremendous missional attractiveness.

The assertion of this book is that all Christian congregations, everywhere, are called to be ... bridging-places, centres of reconciliation, where all the major diversities which separate human beings are overcome through the supernatural presence of the Holy Spirit.

It becomes apparent early on that this is not some kind of "politically correct" manifesto, but that Milne wants to root his message in Scripture. Racial diversity is a key theme in the book, but he sees many other diversities as equally important. He is careful to point out that it is not an unprincipled diversity though - we don't blindly accept unbiblical doctrine or behaviour just in the name of "diversity".

In the early parts of the book, he sets out to make a solid biblical case for the importance of diversity within our local churches, and emphasises that this is a doctrine whose "time has come" as we live in increasingly culturally diverse communities. Churches therefore need to self-consciously set out to reflect the diversities of their surrounding communities.

... the calling of every local church, everywhere, if it is to be faithful to its New Testament roots, is, among other things, to be a community of reconciliation in which all the primary divisions and polarities of its surrounding culture are confronted and find resolution under the gracious reign of the Lord Jesus Christ.

He shows from the example of Jesus' welcoming of women, children, and Gentiles that his intention was to create a new humanity that embraced those marginalised or considered disreputable. The Pentecost event shows the Spirit bridging racial,  gender and generational diversity.

We have no mandate to gather Christian communities, claiming Jesus' name, that are surrounded by walls of exclusivity, whether or race, colour or ethnicity, gender, age or generation, social or economic status, mental and physical well-being; or communities entirely confined to those who come with impeccable histories of moral and spiritual propriety.

He warns against not just racial prejudices but cultural and class prejudices. "To reject a fellow believer is to reject Christ." The principle of diversity in unity is not simply a nice idea, but is a reflection of the very nature of the Triune God who is diversity in unity.

A few of chapters deal with some of the practical implications of building diverse churches, which are scattered with stories from his own culturally diverse church in Canada.

He is strongly critical of mono-cultural churches, and advocates involving a wide diversity of people within the worship service. Even when there are immigrant communities who do not speak the local language well, he encourages making a concerted effort to include and help them so that all can join together for worship. He even insists that where small groups structures are used, these too should be stratified, and also encourages a greater use of one-to-one discipleship, especially of new converts.

Sociologists claim that homogenous groups are stronger than diverse ones, and therefore are able to grow better, but Milne says that despite this, it is essential that we adopt a biblical rather than a pragmatic model. Ultimately, the only way we can make this succeed is if we can love one another with "grace-love" (agape), which itself requires a supernatural work of God and a death to ourselves.

As far as Milne is concerned, diversity is not optional for the local church. He ends the book with a stunning "dream" of a church that is a loving and accepting community made up of people from all kinds of diverse backgrounds. There is no denying that such a community would bring great glory to God, but it is hard work, and it is perhaps too easy for us to settle for the somewhat easier option of building church out of "people like me".

This book comes as a timely prophetic call to the church to be intentional about welcoming into the church all kinds of people. It provides theological foundations with very practical and down-to-earth application, and most of all builds faith and stirs a vision for the local church as the place people look to for unity amidst diversity in their local context.

I just got back today from New Word Alive in Pwllheli. I won't give a comprehensive report, because I'm sure Adrian Warnock and others have already done that admirably, but I thought I would mention a few highlights and general reflections.

Having three small children and being offsite meant that I didn't get to quite as many sessions as I would normally manage. I missed most of Terry Virgo's talk because my youngest son Joel was making too much noise, but fortunately I have heard Terry speak on that passage a few times already so I at least knew roughly what I was missing! I also didn't get to attend any afternoon sessions. Tim Chester had a very interesting looking seminar series that I might have to see if I can get hold of the recordings for.

Don Carson - 1 John

Don Carson covered 1 John in his four morning Bible teaching sessions. He started off by warning that to omit fact that sin is deeply offensive to God from your presentation of the gospel, whether intentionally or not, will lead to a serious distortion of the gospel, even if the other things you say are true. Whilst he did not mention the "emerging church" directly, it was clear that he was deliberately tackling their way of framing the gospel message.

One very interesting point he made was concerning our attitude as Christians to our own sin. If we consider it trivial, he argued that we are likely to try to attempt to fix it by simply trying a bit harder. Whereas when we see the true horror of its offence to God, we are driven back to the cross. In other words, a low view of the seriousness of sin leads to legalism, whilst a high view leads to grace.

Also on the subject of sin, he made a helpful observation on 1 John 3:9 which literally says that a Christian "cannot sin". He said that we try to wriggle out of it by translating it "cannot keep on sinning", because it is a present continuous verb tense. But he argued for a different understanding of the word "cannot". He gave an example of his school teacher who told him "you cannot chew gum here". In this context it is not meant that it is impossible to chew gum in school, but rather that it is absolutely not permitted. So a Christian cannot sin, in the sense that it is strictly prohibited. It is not OK. And when, tragically, we do, we are sent back to the cross where we find grace and mercy.

John Piper - Suffering

I only got to hear Piper's second sermon on suffering, and though I have heard and read him on this subject several times before, it was amazing to be there and hear him preach on a topic that most preachers would run a mile from. His answer could really be described as a defence of the seventh point of "7 point Calvinism", or, "the best of all possible worlds".

The argument runs like this. God desires above all things to display his glory. He does so supremely by displaying his grace, which he does supremely through the death of his Son. There will never be a greater display of his glory in all eternity - even the second coming will not compare. Thus if God always planned that his Son would be killed, he must also have planned that there would be killers and even that there be such a thing as killing and death.

From here he argued that even suffering then was part of an eternal plan of God, and finds its purpose in bringing glory to God. He did speak briefly of the way that healing brings glory to God and encouraged praying for healing, but he does believe that in this age, the "normative" way is for Jesus to get the glory as our "sustainer" through suffering. In eternity he will be glorified only as the "healer", as suffering will cease.

Mike Reeves - Trinity

Dave Bish had alerted me to Mike Reeve's a couple of months ago. I downloaded a bunch of his talks on Augustine and Luther and started listening and was highly impressed and so I was very pleased to hear that he was doing a seminar series at New Word Alive. I missed the first of his three talks on the Trinity, but got to the second two and thought they were outstanding. He has a remarkable gift for making complicated doctrine and archaic church history come alive. Head over to the theology network website, where you can listen to him giving a very similar series of talks on the Trinity.

One of the most profound things he taught was that because God is Triune, he has always been able to love "the other", unlike a monadic God (e.g. Allah), who has no one to love in eternity past except himself (which would be simply selfishness). Luther said that a sinner was "man curved in on himself", and so a monadic view of God leads to a distorted theology, with a "God curved in on himself" - a god made in our own image.

Word and Spirit?

Dare I venture a word or two on the somewhat sensitive subject of how well the charismatic and non-charismatic evangelicals got on worshipping together? I guess you could say that neither side got things quite how they normally like it! The worship bands were from newfrontiers and Soul Survivor, which meant was a more contemporary feel than some non-charismatics would be used to, although the songs were often interspersed with interviews and book reviews, which did sometimes seem to make things a little disjointed.

And interestingly, while I am not a huge fan of "ministry time" which is an obligatory component of a typical charismatic worship service, I found myself thinking in a number of the meetings that people would have benefited from staying to receive prayer rather than simply rushing off to the next thing. We heard some powerful teaching that deserves some time for serious reflection and personal response.

But overall I would say that it was very encouraging to see a genuine desire to stand together for the gospel and not to make our differences become the main thing, while at the same time, not pretending that we don't have any differences of opinion. It will be very interesting to see how this partnership develops in future New Word Alive events.

I was a little disturbed by the mean-spirited smirking at Brian MacLaren's attempts at song-writing (shame on you Michael Patton and Justin Taylor). True, it was a rather ropey performance and recording of a distinctly average tune with lyrics as subtle as a Mark Driscoll sermon. And there is indeed something refreshing about the thought that even the most hip and cool of the emerging crowd can produce something as equally turgid as any imaginationless evangelical stuck in the yesteryear of modernism.

But this is not Pop Idol, where we derive more pleasure from watching no-hopers squirm as they are cut to size by cruel judges than we do from watching the minority who actually have some talent. No, in the evangelical world, we don't just want the person with 10 talents to dominate the show. The person with one talent needs to put it to use. We're so generous in fact that we will gladly give five star ratings to the most musically inept performances and kitsch melodies. Check out the top twenty in the Christian Rock charts on SoundClick if you don't believe me.

Thankfully, regular readers of my site will already know of my astonishing song-writing capabilities which I am using to single-handedly turn the tide of Christian music. And so, to celebrate the fact that I have finally got the Full Faith website back online, and in anticipation of the long-awaited next Full Faith meeting to be held in Poofwelly on Sunday, I present my latest worship song, "Dove of Love from Above". And before any of you even think of critiquing it, you need to know that "God gave me this song".

Dove of Love from Above

I can taste your love
Shining down from above
Fitting me like a glove
Gentle as a dove
And when push comes to shove
I can never get enoughve
Of your love from above

Cover me with your loverly love,
Smother me with thy brotherly love,
My discovery of your otherly love
Soars my heart on above

A live recording will follow if they have the requisite technology in Wales.

This book has to win the prize for the most innovative title of all the books I have read so far on the subject of church. Joshua Harris made his name with a book entitled "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" which argues for "biblical courtship" over against the custom of "dating". In this book, he uses "dating" as a metaphor for the approach that many Christians have to church - 'trying out' churches, but without any intention of commitment. In other words, we have a consumer mentality towards the Church. The point of this book is to challenge Christians to stop dating the Church and "fall in love with the family of God".

The church is earth's single best place – God's specially designed place – to start over, to grow and to change for the glory of God

He makes it particularly clear that he is talking about commitment to a local church. It is not enough to claim to be a part of the universal church if we have no vital connection with other Christians.

If you and I identify with and love the idea of church, we must consider how we can identify with and love an actual church

He reminds us that the Church is "the bride of Christ". Jesus loves his Church, and we should do the same. He explains from Ephesians 3 that the gospel is not just about reconciliation with God, but with one another. He does not view the existence of many denominations as being a incompatible with unity, but calls us to reject a denominational spirit.

The strongest argument I know for why you and I should love and care about the Church is that Jesus does. The greatest motivation we could ever find for being passionately committed to the Church is that Jesus is passionately committed to the Church.

He explains why we need to be part of a local church. He cites John Piper who says "Sanctification is a community project". He warns against the sins of selfishness, pride and a critical spirit that can keep us from community. We should see our church's faults as an opportunity to love and serve. "Stop complaining about the faults of the church, and become part of the solution."

We've believed the lie that we'll be happier the less we sacrifice or give of ourselves and or time. But the more we clutch our time, money, and comfort and selfishly refuse to give to our church, the less we receive back.

He then goes on to list the ten most important considerations when choosing a church. He strongly emphasises faithful teaching of the Word and proclamation of the gospel. He also looks for a commitment to evangelism, serving, discipline and community. The omission that many of my friends have noted is that of the charismatic element. Maybe he was trying to be non-controversial and reach a broader audience with his message (and this message certainly does deserve a broad audience), but nonetheless it is a little disappointing that nothing was mentioned of the importance of an openness to the work and gifts of the Spirit.

There is a chapter devoted to Sunday, in which he calls on us to prepare ourselves before the Sunday meeting, because we should place a high priority on the gathering together. These days we are so attuned to the danger of "legalism", that perhaps what he says in this chapter (for example, going to bed earlier on Saturday night) might be rejected without due consideration. That would be a shame. We might see more of the gifts of the Spirit in our meetings, if we arrived ready and prepared to meet with God, rather than barely awake because we watched television into the early hours of the morning. We also need to stop judging the quality of the worship and preacher, and be ready to receive what God has to say to us.

Most of the books I have read on the subject of church have been aimed primarily at leaders, and those affecting the direction of their churches, but this one is aimed squarely at 'ordinary' Christians. Its seven short chapters could be read in about 10 minutes each, so it should not be intimidating towards those who are not used to reading a lot. Joshua Harris has written a compelling book, and giving a copy to someone who is on the fringe of their church, or is church-hopping, may prove very beneficial to them.

Check out this video about the book here.