Archive

Archive for January, 2005

Some new articles

January 22nd, 2005 No comments

I have uploaded a few new articles to my theology page.

Two are actually articles that I wrote last year but never got round to proof-reading and uploading to my site:
In at the Deep End (Mark 6:7-13;30-32) looks at Jesus sending his disciples out on his first mission, and the instructions he gave them.
On a Plate (Mark 6:14-29) tackles the story of the beheading of John the Baptist.

More recently, I have been writing and article on the lessons that may be gleaned from Exodus 18 (the story of Jethro’s advice to Moses), particularly in relation to church growth. The church I attend has been discussing the challenges related to growing larger recently and at a day conference I attended today, Exodus 18 came up as the speaker’s main text. This gave me the inspiration to put the finishing touches on my article and upload it.
Sharing the Load (Ex 18:1-27)

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Piper on Romans

January 20th, 2005 No comments

Fans of John Piper will probably be aware of the Biblical Preaching website that hosts his weekly sermons in MP3 format. He has been preaching a series on Romans that started back in 1998 and is still going (over 160 sermons later). In fact he seems to be stuck in Romans 12 at the moment. Anyway, the good news is that they have also been adding older sermons to the site and now the archive goes back as far as the first sermon on Romans.

Not many preachers could get away with preaching for so long on just one book, although Piper is a lightweight compared to Lloyd-Jones’ 368 or so sermons on Romans (and he didn’t even finish the book).

I am reminded of Spurgeon’s comments on preachers who embark on series of sermons in his classic book “Lectures to My Students”:

“I have a very lively, or rather a deadly, recollection of a certain series of discourses on the Hebrews, which made a deep impression on my mind of the most undesirable kind. I wished frequently that the Hebrews had kept the epistle to themselves, for it sadly bored one poor Gentile lad. By the time the seventh or eighth discourse had been delivered, only the very good people could stand it; these, of course, declared that they never heard more valuable expositions, but to those of a more carnal judgment it appeared that each sermon increased in dullness. Paul, in that epistle, exhorts us to suffer the word of exhortation, and we did so. Are all courses of sermons like this? Perhaps not, and yet I fear the exceptions are few, for it is even said of that wonderful expositor, Joseph Caryl, that he commenced his famous lectures upon Job with eight hundred hearers, and closed the book with only eight! A prophetical preacher enlarged so much upon ‘the little horn’ of Daniel, that one Sabbath morning he had but seven hearers remaining.”

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

New Perspective Song

January 20th, 2005 1 comment

A year ago, after doing some reading on the New Perspective on Paul (and getting thoroughly confused by it) I wrote a song about it. I’m sure this must be the first song on the New Perspective! I quickly recorded it planning to come back and polish up the words, singing, drums and guitar parts later, but never got round to it. It looks like I’m never going to find the time to finish it properly, so I’ve put it on my music page in its current form for anyone who’s interested to have a listen. Here’s a direct link to the MP3 (its about 3Mb).

It was inspired by the following article by N T Wright:
http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_New_Perspectives.htm

It’s not intended as an endorsement of the New Perspective on Paul, but the debate over it has raised some important issues. Is it possible that, like the Thessalonian Jews, we can be vigourous defenders of scriptural orthodoxy while at the same time being blind to what it is actually saying.

The lyrics are below (the first line is a quote from NTW)

Verse 1:
Self appointed guardians of orthodoxy
The only way we see it is the way its always been
Calamity is looming for those who leave the path
But those who stay in the way will have the last laugh

Verse 2:
Don’t arrogantly tell me you’ve found a better way
Thanks to all this extra knowledge scholars have today
Our revelation’s final, tradition’s set in stone
So if you don’t agree with us, you’re out there on your own

Bridge:
How could it be wrong
We’ve known it for so long
When all we try to do
Is stick to what is true

Verse 3:
Those who went before us, we love their memory
They dared to speak their minds and they were charged with heresy
We follow in their footsteps, hang on their every word
To think they could have got wrong has got to be absurd

Chorus:
We need to find a new perspective
Admit that sometimes we’ve been wrong
There are some things that we know for certain
But we’ve still got a lot to learn

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

My Commentary Recommendations

January 18th, 2005 No comments

To complement my previous post on online commentary recommendations, and my very own commentary database (no longer updated, please visit http://www.bestcommentaries.com), I thought I would provide some recommendations of my own.

I am only planning to recommend commentaries that I have read myself, so don’t expect one for every book of the Bible, and neither am I just going to list every one I have read. I plan to update the recommendations in the future as I have a chance to do some more reading.

New Testament

Old Testament

Categories: Commentaries Tags:

Commentary Recommendations

January 18th, 2005 3 comments

Updated September 2007 to fix broken links

There are a number of websites with lists of recommended commentaries, but not all are that helpful. Here I will post a list of what I believe to be the most useful sets of commentary recommendations on the internet. The recommendations come from an evangelical perspective.

Denver Seminary have recommendations for the Old Testament and New Testament. There are plenty of choices for each book, with some marked out as being specially appropriate.

Parableman – Commentary Recommendations – This is fairly similar to the Denver list, recommending three different “levels” for each book. It is extremely helpful in providing links to thorough reviews of many of the commentaries recommended.

Desiring God also provide a recommendations list on their website. This is great news, as John Piper knows what he is talking about in the area of Biblical exegesis.

For my own recommendations, see here. Brian Le Stourgeon also has a good list available here.

Categories: Commentaries Tags:

New Blog Software

January 16th, 2005 1 comment

I am trying out the Serendipity blogging software, which should make life a bit easier for me in terms of managing my webpage. If all goes well, I will move all the old entries from my existing blog accross to here.

Apologies if you had some problems recently accessing this site. I have been making a number of changes, but all should be finished before too long.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

More 2005 Commentaries

January 12th, 2005 2 comments

Some more good news about forthcoming commentaries. The NIGTC series is continuing to progress rapidly with 2 Corinthians (Harris) due out soon. John Nolland has finished his manuscript for the volume on Matthew so hopefully that will be appearing before too long.

The NAC series will also take a few more steps towards completion this year with commentaries on Genesis vol 2(Matthews), Psalms vol 2 (Shepherd), Isaiah vol 1 (Walker) and 1 Corinthians (Guthrie) due out this year.

Tom Wright is also preparing commentaries on Philippians and Galatians, although I don’t know what series these will be for.

Categories: Commentaries Tags:

The Jerry Springer Opera goes ahead

January 8th, 2005 No comments

We’ve all no doubt heard a lot in the media recently about the Jerry Springer Opera that the BBC will be showing this evening despite a deluge of complaints from Christians. I thought I would add a few thoughts of my own to the the debate:

1. Everyone has standards of taste and decency

Many people have been angered that Christians should attempt to stop them watching something that they would genuinely enjoy and not feel at all offended by. But all of us surely have some standards that we would expect the BBC (or in fact any broadcaster) to adhere to. For example, which of the following things would you be happy to see broadcast on BBC2? The list includes some topics that I have heard debated recently on BBC radio.

  • The video of the beheading of Kenneth Bigley
  • A performance of a homophobic hate rap
  • An evangelistic sermon warning that all who don’t accept Jesus will face Hell
  • An anti-Semitic comedy
  • A Creation-Science documentary rejecting evolution as fraudulent and bad science.
  • A hard-core pornographic film

It should also be apparent as you consider this list that the idea that you have to first see something to have an opinion on whether it is suitable for public broadcast is ridiculous. As long as you have reliable information on the contents, then that is enough to allow an informed decision.

2. This program is merely one example of a broadcast that causes offence to Christians.

There are a number of different things that can cause offence to Christians:

  • Blasphemy – particularly the use of the names of God or Jesus as curses, or representing them in degrading or mocking ways.
  • Foul and obscene language, gratuitous violence and explicit sexual content.
  • Misrepresentation or mockery of Christian belief and Christians themselves. (Often by the means of vilifying or belittling those characters who represent them in dramas or comedies)
  • Promotion of ethics and philosophies that are in direct opposition to those of Christianity. (This can include all sorts of things from the encouraging sex outside of marriage to denying the existence of God).

This list is no secret – the BBC schedulers and the Opera’s script writers will have easily deduced that this program would be particularly liable to offend Christians. The BBC’s claim that “the target of the opera’s critique is not Christianity or religious belief” seems either extraordinarily naïve or wilfully ignorant. But let us not pretend that if this one program is not shown that all is now well. It is clear that a large amount of existing broadcast material will offend Christians in some way, even if it is not as repugnant to watch as this particular program.

And let us also readily admit that the church is not, and should not be above criticism. It is one thing to want to avoid hearing blasphemy (which is directed at God), but we should be willing to hear the complaints and accusations of an unbelieving world. The trouble is, it is extremely rare that the opportunity is given for Christians to respond with advocacy of Christian beliefs and ethics. If the BBC could be seen to be giving evangelical Christians a genuine opportunity to speak out, then perhaps the level of complaints would not have been so high for the Jerry Springer Opera.

3. Television shapes thinking and attitudes

In many ways, television is the ultimate propaganda tool. Watching a comedy or drama is not like going to church and hearing a sermon, or hearing a government minister set out his vision of a better society. In the latter cases, we know we are hearing an advocacy of a point of view and we critically evaluate it, but when we are being “entertained” by the television we are often also being educated without necessarily realising it. We are being taught what types of people to laugh at and despise, and what types of people to admire and emulate simply by the way they are portrayed in these programs.

So when people ask “Why don’t you simply not watch it?” they are missing the point. Of course those who complained were not planning to watch it. What they were more concerned about was the type of attitudes it encouraged in its viewers, in particular to derive entertainment from the mocking of God. It is certain that a good number of school children will be watching this (its on at 10 o’clock on a Saturday night), and its humour and language will be repeated round school playgrounds and workplaces around the country in weeks to come.

An analogy may prove helpful here. Imagine an astoundingly insensitive television channel broadcasting a comedy this evening which made a joke of people dying in a tsunami. There would be outrage. The relatives of the dead would consider it insulting and disrespectful. It would hardly matter that they were not going to watch it, or that the target audience were people who weren’t affected by the tragedy.

4. Paying customers have a right to complain

The BBC claims that “We are sensitive to matters of faith and religion in broadcasting”. If this is indeed true then they have no right to criticise license payers for informing them that their broadcasts have caused offence. Upsetting a large portion of your customers is a bad move for every business, but one that monopolies often feel they can get away with. In the UK you choose to pay your license fee to the BBC or you choose to watch no television whatsoever. The BBC apparently feels free to show what it wants because its position is so secure.

But of course, the BBC’s customers include not only Christians but people of many other world views. They have a right to be heard too. But if in this case the BBC is catering to those who enjoy a bit of anti-religious sentiment in their comedy, where is the corresponding programming for Christian viewers which allows Christians in their own (and hopefully more dignified) way to issue challenges of their own to the prevailing attitudes and beliefs of society?

5. “Freedom of expression is both a right and a responsibility”

This point is one made by the BBC themselves in their stock email response to complaints and it is a good one. If people are to be free to say what they want, then they must also be willing to accept their responsibility to be respectful of the feelings and opinions others.

As it happens, this particular program is hardly an issue of freedom of expression as the BBC is not obligated to broadcast any and every item that is made available on film. People can watch this at theatres and I presume that DVDs are available (or will be soon).

The email goes on to say that BBC2 “is there to present challenging work of all sorts”. I wonder if that would include the challenge of the gospel, or would they consider that to be taking “freedom of expression” too far.

I did email the BBC to inform them that I am disappointed with their decision to broadcast the program, but I did not tell them I wanted them to cancel it. Rather, I hope that the result of this controversy will be a more respectful attitude from the BBC towards Christian feelings, not just in deciding what not to show, but actively seeking to find more programs that Christians can enjoy watching. Maybe we can look forward to some evangelistic preaching on BBC2 later this year. Or then again, maybe the BBC will pay a meagre fine to OFCOM and then comission some comedies about Christians who complain about broadcast standards.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

2005 Commentary News

January 8th, 2005 No comments

There are lots of exciting new commentaries to look forward to in 2005. Check my commentaries web page for all the details. Here’s the highlights:

  • The Baker Exegetical Commentary series is progressing nicely with Philippians (Silva) and 1 Peter (Jobes) out soon.
  • There will be some more additions to the New Cambridge Bible Commentary series, notably 1 & 2 Corinthians by Craig Keener.
  • The IVPNTC series nears completion with volumes on Mark (Kernaghan) and 2 Peter & Jude (Harvey and Towner). IVP are also rapidly progressing the ACC series, and some of the exisiting volumes will be made available on CD-ROM this year.
  • Bruce Waltke’s second NICOT volume on Proverbs will be published soon
  • Focus on the Bible add a commentary on Matthew by Price, and Tom Wright’s “For Everyone Series” will get Romans.

Sadly no news yet of anything for this year from the NICNT, Pillar or NIGTC series.
It’s also worth pointing out that Wesley Owen have an excellent sale on the WBC and NIVAC series running at the moment.

Categories: Commentaries Tags: