pursuing faithfulness to the Word of God and fullness of the Spirit of God
Archive for January, 2006
At last … number three arrives
Jan 31st
For some reason, our babies just don’t seem to want to come out of their own accord. But today at 12:30, Steph gave birth to Joel by caesarean section. He weighed 8lb 7. Apologies to friends reading this who we have not managed to contact by other means yet.
We are extremely grateful to God for a safe delivery, and for his protection on Joel and Steph. Joel is a Hebrew name, meaning “Yahweh is God”.
I’m off to bed to get some rest now…
The Restorationist Theology of Acts?
Jan 22nd
I am reading I H Marshall’s Tyndale commentary on Acts at the moment, and under the heading of the “Theology of Acts” he discusses the theme of “the continuation of God’s purpose in history”. Underneath that, he makes the fascinating four points (on p24). Interestingly, I feel they reflect an understanding of the church that is very similar to the “Retorationist” outlook.
“First, the events recorded in Acts are seen as being brought about by the will and purpose of God”
This included not just the death and resurrection of Jesus, but even the opposition that the church faced. A robust belief in the sovereignty of God will give a church faith to boldly do what he has called them to, knowing that they need not fear consequences that God will not enable them to handle. We are not just trying to survive, we are actively fulfilling God’s purposes in our day and generation.
“… secondly, … the life of the church was regarded as taking place in fulfillment of Scripture.”
In other words, the second coming is not the only Biblical prophecy yet to be fulfilled, but the very spread of the gospel is to be understood as fulfilling Scripture. How long has it been since you heard prayers pleading for fulfilment of prophecies of a worldwide spread of the gospel? Have hermenutical doubts made us afraid of to ask (“that promise isn’t for us”). And maybe a drift to premillenial or a pessimistic amillenial eschatology has lowered our expectations.
Hab 2:14 “For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD as the waters cover the sea.”
Jer 31:34 “And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest”
Num 14:21 “But truly, as I live, all the earth will be filled with the glory of the Lord.”
Isa 9:7 “Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end”
“Thirdly, the life of the church was directed by God at crucial stages.
By this Marshall refers to the direction of the Spirit though angels, prophecies and visions. To be sure, the Bible does give every church its mission and values. However, every church must choose between a million possible good works, and potential ventures of faith, and here is where the charismatic element comes in. Supernatural guidance gives us faith that will cause us to attempt things that seem humanly impossible or foolish. Churches that are open to the present-day prophetic leading of God are in a position to be used to accomplish his kingdom purposes in ways that we would not dare to believe otherwise.
“Fourthly, the power of God was seen in signs and wonders …”
Marshall’s point here is that “the work of the Christian mission can be said to be carried out by God”. The signs and wonders thus served as reminders that the growth of the church was not down to human gifting or good strategy, but the favour of God himself. We are God’s co-workers (1 Cor 3:9). What we achieve is done by the working of his mighty power within us. This realisation causes us to value prayer more, as we realise our total dependence on him, calling on him to work in us and through us. Some charismatics have exaggerated the number of miracles in Acts, as though every Christian performed at least one miracle a day. But correcting that should not result in an anti-supernatural attitude, where we our expectation of God working in power drops to zero.
Book Review – John For Everyone (Tom Wright)
Jan 21st
Wright is well known in theological circles for his work on both the gospels, and on Paul, bringing his own unique perspective to many passages, while remaining in the evangelical tradition. As I mentioned recently, many in reformed circles are unsure whether to take him as a friend or a foe. However, at the very least his historical expertise is able to shed much light onto many passages, even if not all his theological conclusions are agreed with.
The gospel of John actually provides less opportunity for controversy, as Wright’s preterist approach to many of the parables and eschatological teaching of the Synoptics does not occur, and the “exile” theme is not so prominent. In fact, I was reading this at the same time as reading Don Carson’s commentary on John, and noticed many places where the two are in close agreement with their interpretation and application of key passages.
Wright uses his historical knowledge to bring many passages to life, and he emphasises Jesus as the alternative to the Temple early on. In the first book, he encourages us to see that John is listing seven signs that point to who Jesus is. In some places, he notes where the authenticity of some of Jesus’ sayings have been doubted, but encourages us to believe, giving brief reasons why they should not be doubted on historical terms. He particularly sees echoes of the Old Testament exodus and passover stories in much of John’s material. There was also a very interesting link with the story of David’s three warriors getting water for him in the “drinking blood” part of John 6.
As well as the exodus theme, Wright sees links with the Genesis creation story in more than just the prologue, such as seeing Gethsemane the new garden of Eden where the true Adam is sent to his death by the false ones.
In the trial scene, Wright does not attempt to provide a harmonisation of the order of events with the synoptics, but does seek to defend the gospel’s portrayal of Pilate. Pilate’s two motivations of avoiding trouble and snubbing the Jews reveal his actions as historically plausible. Unlike many schemes, Wright sees the cross itself as the seventh sign in John (walking on the water is not counted).
As he deals with Jesus’ death and resurrection Wright’s focus is more devotional. We are encouraged to stand in awe and wonder at the event, and called to appreciate Easter rather than Christmas as the high point of the Christian calendar. He sees chapter 21 as a later addition but still talks as though he accepts Johannine authorship of it.
Despite his interest in historical matters, these certainly do not dominate the discussion, and Wright consistently looks for ways to apply the text. Sometimes this is in the form of a challenging question intended for further reflection, while in other places he spells out some of the practical implications. As with so many others in the “For Everyone” series, I can recommend these two volumes on John as a very helpful study guide. They will broaden your understanding of the theology, historical background, and ongoing challenge of the gospel of John.
New Newfrontiers Magazine
Jan 15th
Another Newfrontiers magazine (Jan – Mar 2006) is out, although it is not yet available to read online. The last magazine is up now though, which includes two helpful articles on Israel – All Israel will be saved by John Hosier, and Justice, the Gospel and the Land of Israel by David Devonish.
This months magazine includes an interview with Terry Virgo which included two questions that caught my attention.
Q: Is it more important to be known as an evangelical than a charismatic?
Terry: Labels can be unhelpful. However, I believe the good news as reported in the Bible, and therefore, I’m fundamentally evangelical. But it’s out of my commitment to Biblical truth that I became persuaded about charismatic experience.
I thought this was an excellent answer, and is exactly the way I like to think about the “evangelical” and “charismatic” labels. I am charismatic because of my evangelical commitment to Scripture.
Q: Do you think that one of the keys to Newfrontiers’ success is consistency of message, from the highest level of leadership down to local churches?
Terry: Paul says in Acts 20:32, “I commend you to God and to the Word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you the inheritance.” The Bible is clear that there is a body of doctrine that builds the church up. So we would urge all the pastors that we work with to be very Biblical and to give plenty of time to teaching the Word. We cling to the more traditional perspective of seeing the Word as fundamental and central, as in Acts 2:42, “They devoted themselves to the apostle’s teaching.” When churches begin to lose confidence in the Bible they become vulnerable. If Biblical truth is taught systematically with life and vitality, people are built up, set free and equipped.
Again, a reponse I was very impressed with and although in one sense it doesn’t directly address the question, in another, it is the best possible answer. The “consistency of message” should come from consistency of commitment to Scripture, not from lower “levels” of leadership simply regurgitating what they heard from the “higher” levels. This is not just a commitment to believing the Bible, or even a shared understanding of the Bible, but a belief in the value of systematically teaching it. The commitment to Scripture is what attracted me to Newfrontiers in the first place. I pray that it will remain a core value as the family of churches continues to grow.
The God who doesn’t want to be angry
Jan 14th
In the debate on theories of the atonement, the word “propitiation” (“atoning sacrifice” in some versions) that appears in various places in the New Testament, is used to demonstrate God’s wrath at sin. Now God’s anger at sin is, as far as I am concerned, a fact established beyond doubt in the Bible. What’s more it is righteous anger – he both has a right to be angry and it is right for him to be angry.
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness
But it is interesting that John doesn’t use “propitiation” as a proof of God’s wrath against our sin, but as a proof of his love for us:
1 John 4:10 In this is love: not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.
Thus we see that the propitiation not only speaks of God’s wrath at sin, but because it was God himself who provided the atoning sacrifice, it speaks even more powerfully of his great love for the people of this rebel planet.
John 3:16 For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son
No propitiation could conceivably have been more costly for the Father. The one he loves and delights in more than anything was the price of our salvation.
Mark 1:11 And a voice came from heaven: “You are my one dear Son; in you I take great delight.”
So we have a God who is angry at our sin, yet who has this amazing love for us. He refuses to simply pretend that he is not angry, he requires the problem to be dealt with properly. He could of course simply have satisfied his anger at our sin by punishing us, but he chose another way. Thus the cross primarily speaks of a God of love – it simply would not have been necessary if God did not love us so much. He is, it would seem, the God who doesn’t want to be angry.
Hosea 14:4 I will heal their waywardness and love them freely, for my anger will turn away from them.
Some Links
Jan 13th
I’ve not had time to write much over recent weeks, but I have been doing plenty of reading. Here’s some of the things that have caught my attention:
- The charismatic debate rumbles on, but this time its the cessationists who are continuing, just when the continuationists wanted to stop. Check out some insights from Mark Barnes too, who has sold me three commentaries this week (bang goes my New Years resolution not to buy commentaries faster than I can read them)
- N T Wright continues to attract discussion, with many reformed evangelicals still trying to decide whether he is a goodie or a baddie. Seems like he’s keeping the wrong company. He’s got at least three dubious friends…
- First is Steve Chalke, who caused a furore with his hostile dismissal of “penal substitution”. Sven agrees with him, and has posted three articles this week on the subject. Its also worth checking further back on his site for articles on the “Christus Victor” theory of the atonement. Tom Wright actually responds to some concerns in a Q & A on his site, where he doesn’t reject penal substitution outright, but sees it as one aspect in a richer theology of the atonement. As for myself, I need to do some more research on this subject, but I remember being very impressed after reading John Stott’s “The Cross of Christ” with what a wide variety of ways the Bible uses to talk about the meaning of the cross (redemption, atonement, reconcilliation, ransom etc …).
- Second is Brian McLaren, author of the most controversial book on LibraryThing. Justin Taylor asks why emergent folks such as Brian like Wright so much.. Kevin Cawley, Philip Ryken and Rick Philips offer interesting responses (summary: he’s a baddie).
- Finally, his egalitarian position has attracted the attention of Doug Wilson. Doug’s blog makes for great reading although I doubt many will agree with him on every view he has. He has written a lot about Brian McLaren as well, including a multi-part review of a Generous Orthodoxy, indexed here and here
- On a lighter note, there are two new episodes in the hilarious “Drowning Melville” series on the Save the Wheel website. This is an initiative that Sovereign Grace seem to be behind, with a rather way out sense of humour. Anyway, the “Drowning Melville” series is comedy genius. Check it out.
Book Review – Hunger for God (Piper)
Jan 9th
I was hoping that this would be a rubbish book. Fasting is not something I enjoy, and so I didn’t really want to be persuaded to do more of it. However, the new year is a traditional time for prayer and fasting in many churches, my own included, so I thought it would be a good time to read the book.
“Beware of books on fasting” is the opening sentence of the book. The last thing that Piper would want to do is encourage a legalistic approach. He starts the book off by addressing the criticism that “fasting isn’t Christian”. He disagrees, making Matt 9:14-17 central to his case. The next chapter is devoted to Jesus’ own desert fast where he triumphed over the enemy.
In his usual style, Piper is methodical and thorough in making his case. While he doesn’t say much on the practical and physical aspects of fasting, the reasons behind it are dealt with systematically. Fasting expresses a hunger for God, and glorifies him by preferring him above his gifts. We are to fast for the reward of the Father, not for men to notice us.
Chapter 4 is devoted to fasting for the return of the King – the second coming, and Piper argues that the prayer “your kingdom come” is essentially the same as “maranatha”. Chapter 5 surveys fasting through history, from Old to New Testaments, using Finney, Edwards, and the Korean church as more modern examples. Piper particularly highlights the value of “secret fasting”, in addition to participating in corporate fasts.
There is a chapter on the poor, based on Isa 58, which is a powerful call to be awakened to the hunger of the world, not just your own hunger. This chapter is not so much a call to fasting as a call to action to help the poor – and Piper cautions against an all-or-nothing paralysing effect.
I sensed in places that Piper is more “charismatic” in this book than I have seen before. He discusses the specific guidance that God might bring through a time of prayer and fasting (while cautioning about the need for discernment). He also gives an example of when he felt drawn to prophetically relate a passage of Scripture to his friend’s physical healing.
The final chapter draws from the story of Ezra and calls for fasting on behalf of the many “little ones” who are aborted. His approach to the subject of abortion is direct and he quotes Schaeffer regularly. While not endorsing a “collective tantrum”, he urges Christians to prayer and action. The book’s conclusion is classic Piper, as he explains that the reason God rewards fasting is for his own glory as we acknowledge our helplessness and hope in him. An appendix contains many quotes from writers through the century expressing the value they place on fasting.
I believe this book is an excellent approach to the subject of fasting. It avoids setting out legalistic requirements, and while at the same time does a good job of communicating its value. Perhaps best of all, it seeks to stir a passionate hunger for God, for the second coming, for the poor to be fed, and for the lives of unborn children to be spared. If it can do this, then we will be driven to our knees in prayer and fasting.
Book Review – Neither Poverty Nor Riches (Craig Blomberg)
Jan 2nd
This book is part of the “New Studies in Biblical Theology” series edited by Don Carson, and is subtitled “A biblical theology of possessions”. The format of the book is basically to survey the entire Bible for its teaching on money and possessions, and to draw out the principles it teaches.
The introduction contains a sobering array of statistics, highlighting the severe problem of poverty in the world, and the meagre contribution that many Christians and churches are making. He agrees with many of the ideas from Ronald Sider’s famous book “Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger”, and asserts that there is “a substantial disparity between the biblical mandates and contemporary Christian practise”.
Obviously the subject of possessions is discussed directly in numerous pages throughout the Bible, and indirectly in almost very part. Blomberg does a remarkable job of surveying the material concisely, while still finding the time along the way to discuss alternative interpretations of key passages, and very briefly suggesting practical applications.
In the two chapters on the Old Testament, Blomberg detects that riches can be both associated with those whom God has blessed for their righteousness (but their generosity is always underlined as well), and those who have obtained it by unrighteous means. In the law, there are a number of safeguards to prevent extremes of wealth and poverty from emerging. This idea that there are extremes of wealth and poverty that are intolerable, is one of Blomberg’s main theses. He doesn’t see the Bible as advocating asceticism, or even unrelenting simplicity, but that excess should be avoided, and ‘surplus’ should be honestly identified and shared.
There is a chapter on the intertestamental period, showing how a gap between rich and poor, which started under the Israelite monarchy, grew even further during this period. The New Testament is dealt with in four chapters, starting with the synoptics, which are broken down into parables and teachings. Blomberg deals with some of the more radical calls to giving possessions away, and advocates Sider’s idea of a “graduated tithe”, where more affluent Christians should endeavour to give considerably more than 10% into the work of the kingdom and also directly towards holistic mission to the poor.
James and Acts are surveyed in a chapter on “Early Christianity”. Blomberg rejects the liberation theology idea of “God’s preferential option for the poor”, while acknowledging that it is often the poor who are righteous and the rich who are not both in the Bible and in general experience. He does not endorse violent revolution, but for the church to be a prophetic voice and a counter-cultural community. He sees the sharing of property in Acts an example of having a “communal purse” which was replenished by occasional generous contributions and used for helping the poor.
In a chapter on the Pauline epistles, 2 Cor 8-9 is covered in some depth, and the “patron-client” system is seen as the background to much of Paul’s teaching, along with communal meals. He notes that during this period a broader socio-economic spectrum was found amongst church membership Blomberg argues that Paul’s understanding of possessions is much closer to Jesus and James than some people have claimed. A final chapter surveys the rest of the New Testament as well as noting Luke’s unique emphasis on the poor, a category that can include any outcasts, including the more materially prosperous tax collectors.
Every chapter has its own summary, which is always admirable for its conciseness, and there is a final chapter which presents summary and conclusions for the whole book, which is similarly succinct. Blomberg draws out five main principles, affirming that though possessions are good gifts, they can turn our hearts from God, and that we need to be transformed in our attitudes to money. Again he reiterates the idea that there are excesses of wealth and poverty that are unacceptable, and that our attitude to material possessions is inextricably linked with more ‘spiritual’ matters. He then gives an excellent but brief section on application, including some biographical information on how he has sought to implement these principles in his own life. He also shows concern that churches are not giving enough themselves, and encourages churches to rectify this situation and individuals to give directly to those organisations who combat poverty but also care for the spiritual well-being of those they serve.
In all this is an excellent survey of Bible teaching, and will prove very challenging to all who have the time to read it. The brief application notes will need further reflection by those who want to take action in their own lives, but this may be a strength of the book. The author cannot be accused of being a “guilt manipulator” (as Sider was), but rather has set the biblical evidence out clearly and let it speak for itself. Those who don’t have the time to read the whole book would do well to borrow a copy and just read the final chapter (and maybe the “Conclusion” section from each chapter).
