pursuing faithfulness to the Word of God and fullness of the Spirit of God
Archive for May, 2006
Augustinian Monks hit a Home Run
May 22nd
It’s been a while since I last posted anything on the “New Perspective on Paul”, but I found this article by Steven Westerholm to be very helpful. It’s entitled “Justification by Faith is the Answer: What is the Question?”
Rather than get embroiled in debate on the meaning of “works of the law” (which I’m seem to remember he’s written on elsewhere) he takes a different approach. He starts with non-Pauline (or possibly Pauline) books, then chronologically works through the Paul’s epistles. He demonstrates that Paul had a thoroughgoing concern with how an individual can be made right before God. Thus by the time he gets to Galatians, Paul can answer the question “how are Gentiles included in the people of God” (the classic NPP question), with the answer he does, precisely because it is first the answer to a more fundamental question.
I found it a very helpful way of looking at the problem, and it goes in some way to finding a mediating position, as it doesn’t deny that Paul is addressing in Galatians the question that the New Perspective advocates are claiming for him.
For reference, here’s some of my earlier posts on the New Perspective:
Carson on the New Perspective
Moo on the New Perspective
Stott on the New Perspective
Book Review – The New Perspective on Paul (Michael Thompson)
Parachurch Organisations
May 13th
The latest edition of the newfrontiers magazine came out recently, and it touches on what could prove a very controversial subject. Basically it sets out to criticise the existance of parachurch organisations, arguing that they fulfill ministries better provided by local churches. I’ve collected together a few of my disorganised thoughts on this subject below. I’ll start with what I thought was good, and then offer a few criticisms…
Points of agreement
Training in the context of the local church
Why is it that when someone wants the practical and theological training for (usually full-time) ministry do they find that their local church has almost nothing to offer? So they are sent off to Bible college, which may be a good environment for academic learning, but is likely to lack the “on-the-job” training aspect that a local church can offer. For example, spending time working with and caring for the elderly would be better than writing a 10,000 word essay on “The Issues and Challenges that the Over-Sixties Present To Churches in a Post-Modern Context”.
Overseas minded people handed over to other organisations
Why is it that when someone declares that they have a heart to preach the gospel and demonstrate practical Christian love overseas, do we give them the phone number of a missionary society? It makes for an all to convinient detachment for the local church. We send some money, they send prayer letters which make us have a warm feeling that we are “doing our bit” for world evangelisation.
There are exceptions acknowledged…
The magazine does seem to be awareness of at least one criticism. What about specialist organisations? Mission Aviation Fellowship and Wycliffe Bible Translators are listed as examples. It is unlikely that an individual local church would have the expertise and specialised resources to provide the services that these organisations do.
Problems
…but not enough exceptions?
But could that not be said to a lesser extent for almost all parachurch organisations? For example, a local church may well be able to provide many of the services that an organization like UCCF do. Getting involved in a church cell may indeed be preferable to simply fellowshipping with students. But though a Christian Union can and should never replace a church, does that mean it is not necessary? CU’s do a work of discipling and evangelising students on a scale that even the most well resourced local churches are not likely to be able to match.
Is the divide that great?
And how true is it that parachurch organisations are doing the work that local churches should? Many missionary societies, bible colleges, student movements etc are making great efforts to ensure that they work in partnership with local churches, offering themselves to provide specialised training, and ensuring that those in their organisation are fully active in local church life.
The church universal
Are we guilty of creating too great a distinction between the church local and the church universal? If people from a load of different churches get together and work together, does that make it any less “the church”? After all, newfrontiers very own “New Day” event will gather thousands of young people from different churches, and pool the resources for an evangelistic effort. It is hard to see how this is substantially different to UCCF mobilising students from many churches for a combined mission.
How are parachurch organisations formed?
Doubtless there are different ways that these organisations come about, but I suspect that many are borne out of a local church ministry that grew big. Whether this be a local evangelist who goes itinerant, or a small ministry to the poor that acquired property and a charitable status, or even a training program that started attracting attendees from further afield. If newfrontiers continues to grow, who is to say that in 20 years time there won’t be more parachurch organisations springing up from those within the local church who have a passion for a unique ministry and joining people in other local churches who have the same burden.
Are we ready to take over?
Finally, what would happen if the directors of Bible colleges and missionary societies read this magazine and decided to close down their organisations? Would missionaries be served and supported as well solely by the members of their sending church? Would those wanting training find anything that really equips them for ministry? At the moment, I doubt it.
Church plants
Newfrontiers is big on church planting, something I wholeheartedly am behind. But this means many churches with small memberships. There is no way that they can sustain a fully comprehensive set of ministries. This means that inevitably, they will need to look to other churches or parachurch organisations for help in some areas. Newfrontiers already do much Bible, worship, and children’s work training at certain large well-resourced churches.
Conclusion
I agree that the existence of so many parachurch organisations is indicative of at least some failure on the part of the local church to support the diversity of ministries needed by its membership. We need to step up to the challenge of meeting these needs ourselves, and being humble enough to learn from the expertise of these parachurch organisations. Personally, I think that we will never be without the need for groups of Christians working together with common goals across local church boundaries, and because of this, there will always be organisations that in some sense will be “parachurch”.
Anyway, I’ve rambled enough now. I would be interested to know what others think on this issue. Would we be better off without parachurch organisations?
Book Review – How Long O Lord (D A Carson)
May 1st
This book, subtitled “Reflections on Suffering and Evil” does not make for easy reading. First, the subject it covers is not one that we naturally like thinking about. And second, this is no lightweight treatment of the topic with simplistic answers to the “problem of evil”. No, here we find Carson as Biblical exegete and philosopher tackling some of the toughest problems in theology, and often engaging in some quite in-depth debates.
The reason for the book is simple – all you have to do is to live long enough and you will suffer. So Christians ought not to wait until it happens before they start seeking answers, but to have a robust Biblical theology that will help them to make sense of things when their world starts falling apart.
The opening chapters contain many heart-wrenching examples of people who have suffered horribly, often without any obvious reason why it should be them. Carson addresses the pain that many feel when they start to think that their beliefs are inconsistent. Each chapter concludes with some questions for reflection, some of which are quite soul-searching in nature.
A good proportion of this book deals with what Carson believes to be sub-biblical views, and in many instances he is arguing against fellow evangelicals. One particularly important view he defends is what he calls “compatibilism” – the belief that God is both sovereign and humans are morally responsible for their actions. Any view that denies one or the other or even softens them is flying in the face of the biblical evidence. If the biblical writers saw no contradictions in these two assertions, he argues, then neither should we.
The book covers a wide range of forms of evil and suffering, including wars (and holy wars), illness, bereavement, God’s discipline, poverty of various kinds, natural disasters and hell. Many of these subjects are controversial, and his usual style is to make a number of biblical points that he feels are overlooked without trying to exhaustively cover the topic.
There is an extensive chapter on Job, in which he attempts to establish that we don’t necessarily get the answers to all our questions. Yes, there is such a thing as “innocent suffering”, but “there are things that you will not understand, for you are not God”. In a chapter on the “suffering God”, he rejects the idea of the “impassibility” of God (albeit with some important qualifications), and asserts that God can suffer. This is seen most clearly at the cross.
As large portions of this book discuss illness, many might wonder what Carson will have to say on the subject of healing. He does interact briefly with Wimber, acknowledging that his concept that the kingdom age has dawned does have biblical warrant. However, Carson believes that many charismatics have failed to see the triumph of the kingdom when God works in the midst of sickness, weakness and opposition. This is of course the classic ‘over-’ or ‘under-realised’ eschatology debate. If Wimber and co. can be show to expect too much now, dare I suggest that Carson has backed off too far in the opposite direction?
The book concludes with a few pastoral reflections, and Carson freely admits that this is not the sort of book you give to someone in the midst of suffering. In fact, he cautions against even being too quick to give theological explanations to people who are suffering. There is an appendix that deals with the delicate subject of HIV, and whether it can be thought of as constituting judgement. His comments are carefully balanced but will certainly not please all readers. The statistics quoted are somewhat out of date now, but Baker are advertising a new revision of this book to be published later this year.
This is by no means a “feel-good” book, but for those who want to wrestle with the biblical, theological and philosophical issues raised by the presence of suffering and evil in our world and in our lives, it is a very helpful overview. And as Carson points out, having a good theology of suffering and evil will help us to stand firm when our turn to face it comes.
Book Review – REBC Hebrews (R T France)
May 21st
Posted by Mark Heath in Book Reviews
No comments
Hebrews makes much use of Old Tesament quotations, and France gives some space to discussing the sometimes unconventional hermeneutics of the author. Basically, in the Old Testament what is true of the Father is assumed to be true of the Son. In fact, in many instances, the author’s exegetical methods are remarkably similar to our own.
For Calvinists, the warning passages in Hebrews present a possible contradiction to other text emphasising the security of the believer. France does discuss this issue, but doesn’t attempt to provide a resolution other than noting the differing pastoral intentions that are present in Hebrews (Paul wants to give assurance to doubters, Hebrews wants to give warning to the complacent). Moreover, France believes that the author of Hebrews really does indicate that ‘real’ Christians can deliberately abandon the faith. The use of “we” in 10:26 indicates to him that again “real Christians” are in view. While not interacting directly with a Calvinist approach to 3:14, he sees this as a verse stating that our “sharing remains conditional” – the race is not run until it has been finished. France sees apostacy also in the mention of Esau in 12:16.
There are helpful explanations of what Christian maturity is about, and how Jesus became perfect through suffering (5:8,9). While he does not wade right in to controversial debates on the atonement, he does emphasise understanding the cross in terms of the Old Testament sacrificial system. Commenting on 10:14 he says that it is pastorally essential to recognise the believer’s ongoing battle with sin. His introductory material to chapter 11 is helpful in explaining the nature of faith, and how the author sees faith in some Old Testament stories that do no explicitly mention it. France sees chapter 13 as naturally concluding the letter and so doesn’t see the need to consider it a later addition.
Overall, I found this commentary very helpful in following the argument through the book, and explaining some of the more difficult parts. It is not a long-winded commentary, which may mean that in places you would like a more detailed explanation. Although he touches on some theological debates and practical applications, on the whole he is happy to do the exegesis, and leave the systematic theology and contemporary application to the reader, which is probably about right for a commentary series aimed at preachers. The volume as a whole represents good value for money compared to most other commentary series available, providing commetaries on nine books for the price of one hardback book.