Kingdom People – May 2009

How to Preach the Sermon on the Mount by Memory

Interview
Marvin Olasky on the future of World Magazine

Book Reviews
The Case for Life – Scott Klusendorf
A Community Called Taize – Jason Brian Santos
Evangelicals Engaging Emergent – Various
As We Forgive - Catherine Clair Lawson

Book Summaries

Graeme Goldsworthy’s According to Plan
Introduction
Summary (Part 1)
Summary (Part 2)
Strengths
Some Questions for Further Thought

Show Them No Mercy: Four Views of God and Canaanite Genocide
Introduction
One Way of Dealing with the Canaanite Conquest
Other Ways of Dealing with the Canaanite Conquest
Personal Reflections on the Canaanite Conquest

Quotables
Wanted: More Heavenly-Mindedness – John Piper
Pope Luther 
Abortion and White Supremacy
Mark Driscoll on Little-World Negatives

Devotional Thoughts
Light of the World

Missions
Arrival in Romania
Sunday in Romania
Final Days in Romania
Pictures from Our Trip to Romania

Prayers
A Prayer for Missions
A Prayer of Basil the Great
Hosanna! A Prayer for Salvation
In Evil Long I Took Delight
Pentecost Prayer

In the Blogosphere
5/01/09
5/15/09
5/22/09
5/29/09

Notable Items from the Archive
Earth Day or Easter? Mother’s Day or Pentecost? - May 2008
Conversations with a Roman Catholic – May 2007

Pentecost Prayer

Almighty God,
on this day you opened the way of eternal life
to every race and nation
by the promised gift of your Holy Spirit:

 Shed abroad this gift throughout the world
by the preaching of the Gospel,
that it may reach to the ends of the earth;

through Jesus Christ our Lord,
who lives and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God,
for ever and ever. Amen.

In the Blogosphere

Mark Galli: “Preach the gospel. Use actions when necessary.”

Scot McKnight offers a way of presenting the gospel that keeps the church front and center.

The difference between constructive criticism and a critical spirit.

John Frame says we should ask these questions of every film we watch.

A podcast with some young Baptist church planters.

Here’s a way to win Russell Moore’s new book, Adopted for Life.

Major layoffs at Christianity Today International. It’s a hard time to be in the print business. Pray for those affected by the changes.

Top Post this Week at Kingdom People: Personal Reflections on the Canaanite Conquest

Personal Reflections on the Canaanite Conquest

Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide does not quite deliver what it proposes. The introduction by Stan Gundry indicates that all four authors have the same view of the inspiration and authority of Scripture. Furthermore, the title indicates that four different views are offered. After having read this book, I conclude that the book fails at both these counts.

First, it becomes evident very quickly that the authors are not working from the same foundation of biblical inspiration. Cowles minimizes the testimony of the Old Testament and discounts its accuracy by denying that God commanded or commended the Canaanite conquest. How his view lines up with the doctrine of biblical inspiration or inerrancy is beyond me.

Secondly, there are not four views represented here, but only two. It is Cowles over against the other three contributors. The disagreements between the other three scholars are quite minor, so that the latter chapters differ more in emphasis than in the actual proposals set forth. Merrill, Gard, and Longman can, in many ways, be considered in the same camp, even if there are subtle distinctions between their views.

In reflecting on this book, I will point out some points of appreciation and criticism for each of the chapters.

C.S. Cowles

Cowles’ contribution is notably passionate. I enjoyed the spirited rhetoric which he employed to make his case. In the responses to the other authors, Cowles comes across as feisty and passionate, ready to drive home the implications of the authors even if they intend to pull back.

The problem with Cowles’ view is that he fails to take into account the loving and compassionate God revealed in the Old Testament and the angry and wrathful God revealed in the New. He conveniently avoids the Old Testament depictions of God as gracious and merciful just as he avoids the New Testament emphasis on judgment (not least in the words of Jesus himself).

Cowles never once explains why, if his view is correct, the New Testament authors do not seem to be particularly perplexed or embarrassed by the warfare accounts in the Old Testament. If Cowles is right that the New Testament, in effect, abolishes the inferior picture of God established in the Old Testament, why do we not see the warfare passages dismissed by the early Christians?

A second problem with Cowles’ contribution is his view of biblical inspiration. It becomes clear that Cowles sees the Old Testament as a collection of mainly human writings that record the experience of Israel. Therefore, the Israelites were sadly mistaken in their understanding of the will of God. Even though the Scriptures indicate that the conquest actually accomplished the will of God, Cowles insists that their view was faulty.

So is the Old Testament wrong?

In what sense is the Old Testament inspired if these accounts of God’s will are mistaken?

Yet there is a more serious accusation to be made against Cowles’ view, and this accusation concerns his understanding of salvation. Cowles departs from the traditional understanding of Christianity and advocates a view that more closely resembles the heretic Marcion than the early church fathers.

For Cowles, our problem is not our rebellion against God and our need to escape his just and divine wrath. Instead, our problem is our inability to comprehend the love of God. Jesus Christ came to show that God is actually loveable (39). This understanding of the work of Christ is in direct opposition to the evangelical view of sin and salvation.

Eugene Merrill

As I am in substantial agreement with the other three authors, I will offer just a few points of disagreement. Merrill goes too far when he claims that genocide cannot be seen as objectively right or wrong, saying that its divine sanction clears up that question.

Would Merrill say that we cannot see divorce as right or wrong? Or polygamy? Merrill leaves no room for a distinction between the perfect will of God and his permissive will.

The Bible shows that God sometimes makes concessions in this fallen world. At times, he accommodates the wicked world without expressly condoning these accommodations as his perfect will or preference. It is too much of a stretch to see the Canaanite conquest as God’s ideal.

Instead, we should recognize that God did command the Israelites to perform this task of judgment, but that this commandment represents a concession to the fallen state of our world, not a commendation of this action as a good in and of itself.

Daniel Gard

Daniel Gard’s chapter puts forth the view that is closest to my own. I appreciate his emphasis on the future-oriented nature of the Canaan conquest. He is right to see an eschatological continuity between the Old and New Testaments.

Gard also helpfully points out that the conquests of herem are not indicative of all the wars in the Old Testament. We are mistaken if we reduce the God of the Old Testament to a divine being who is always on the warpath.

Gard’s overall thesis is sound, but there is one place where his exegesis is flawed. He believes that the world will be utterly destroyed, based upon an incorrect reading of 2 Peter 3. The proper translation of the passage indicates that the fire that comes upon the earth in the Last Day is a purging, cleansing fire, not merely a destructive one.

Tremper Longman III

Longman’s chapter is beneficial in its attempt to establish a spiritual continuity between the Testaments. But it seems, at times, that Longman over-spiritualizes some of the principles from this type of warfare. He clearly believes in the historicity of the events, but he too quickly moves to the spiritual lessons that we can take from the conquests. I doubt that the Old Testament authors would have understood these events in this way.

All of the authors would have done well to emphasize more substantially that genocide in the Old Testament never takes place on ethnic grounds. The Bible does not condone a sense of ethnic superiority among the Israelites. In fact, God acts against Israel at times because of her own wickedness.

The view of the Old Testament is that God uses nations as the agents of his wrath toward wickedness, even the sin of his own people. Only within the context of God’s sovereign judgment can we make proper sense of the herem ban. Once we turn the picture around, Gard and Longman are correct to point out that the real question should be: Why does God allow any rebellious person to survive?

Conclusion

Reflecting upon the whole of this book, I cannot help but wonder if perhaps we are trying to answer questions that the early Christians did not ask.

Is it possible that we are seeking to fit the Old Testament stories into a different metanarrative, a Western framework of human rights and earthly progress?

Perhaps we can make better sense of the Canaanite conquest if we recall the storyline of the Scriptures. God chose Israel in order that he might bless the world. Yet even in the overarching Story of that blessing, there are cases in which God comes in judgment upon wickedness.

The Bible holds these two truths together: God judges the wicked now, even as his ultimate purpose is to bless all the nations in the end.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Other Ways of Dealing with the Canaanite Conquest

The second position put forth in Show Them No Mercy is from Eugene H. Merrill, professor of Old Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary. Merrill uses the term “Yahweh war” when speaking of the Canaanite conquests. “God initiated the process by singling out those destined to destruction, empowering an agent (usually his chosen people Israel) to accomplish it, and guaranteeing its successful conclusion once the proper conditions were met.” (65)

Merrill takes us through the relevant Old Testament passages that describe these battles. He distinguishes between regular battles and those that display the “undeniable traits” of genocide. He then seeks to reexamine the accounts from the standpoint of Christian theology and ethics.

Merrill frames the conquests within the story of God’s choice of a people through whom to bless the world and bring salvation. Seen in this light, Yahweh war is not so much about eliminating the foreign gods from the land, but about elevating Yahweh as the true God in the eyes of his own special people (80).

According to Merrill, the wars described in the Old Testament must be seen through the prism of holiness – both the holiness of God himself and the holiness of his chosen people, Israel. The battles are intended to protect the holiness of Israel (81) and showcase the utter holiness of God. Radical destruction of the enemy is necessary because God’s reputation and sovereignty is at stake. Israel becomes the divine instrument of God’s judgment in the Old Testament, but no Christian can excuse or condone such warfare today (85).

Merrill concludes his chapter by evaluating the New Testament scenes of apocalyptic judgment. Though he argues for “moderate discontinuity” between the Testaments (due to his Dispensationalist viewpoint), Merrill admits that the scenes of Yahweh war reappear in the final book of the New Testament. Therefore, “Yahweh war… is descriptive of the ages-old struggle between the sovereign God of Israel and the church on the one hand, and the devil and his demonic and human hosts on the other” (91).

Furthermore, “the issue… cannot be whether or not genocide is intrinsically good or evil – its sanction by a holy God settles that question. Rather, the issue has to do with the purpose of genocide, its initiator, and the particular circumstances of its application” (93).

The next proposal is from Daniel Gard, associate professor of exegetical theology at Concordia Theological Seminary. Gard makes the case for what he calls “eschatological continuity.” This approach describes the genocide of the Old Testament as a type of an eschatological event that will find ultimate fulfillment in the future (115).

Gard spends a good deal of time defining herem – the practice of “the ban” in which all spoils must be devoted to Yahweh and all life must be destroyed (116). He seeks to demonstrate from the biblical accounts that defeat in war is a mark of “divine retribution.”

Pointing out the times that Israel is defeated because of the decree of their own God, Gard reminds readers that it is God (and not human armies) who determines the final outcome of an earthly conflict. The Old Testament reveals God turning against his own people, although he promised to preserve a remnant (123).

Instead of seeing discontinuity between the Testaments, Gard argues for an eschatological framework for the Old Testament. In Chronicles, for example, he sees Saul, David, and Solomon as representatives of judgment, restoration and final redemption (130). David, as the warrior king, is a type of Christ, the Warrior who will be the leader of the final, eschatological battle. Christians today exist in a Davidic Age, in which the battle against the Evil One still rages. Yet, we anticipate the new Solomonic era, in which peace will be forever established. However, before this peace can take effect, God will impose the herem ban upon the entire earth and destroy this present world (135).

Throughout his chapter, Gard continually turns to eschatology in order to make his case regarding the continuity between the holy-war texts and the New Testament. “The God who commanded and, at times, personally executed herem against the enemies of Israel is the same God who will execute judgment and destruction at the end of time” (135-6).

In the present age, the church has no authority to fight for God, since we have no territorial or political boundaries. However, Gard argues that those who attack the church attack the Lord himself, and the enemies of the church will be destroyed by the Lord at the end of the age (138).

In explaining how this view of God is compatible with the example of Jesus, Gard appeals to mystery. “If there is a problem in understanding God’s commands and actions, the problem resides not in him but in human limitations.”

Furthermore, he writes: “A more pertinent question than why God commanded such brutal practices as the extermination of the Canaanites is why he did not command the destruction of the entire human race in time and history” (140). Ultimately, the answer for such questioning is found in Jesus, who is both the Lamb of God who lays down his life for sinners and the Judge who will return to fight for his people.

The final position in Show Them No Mercy is set forth by Tremper Longman III, professor of Old Testament at Westmont College. Longman gets to the heart of the issue: How are we to read the Old Testament in light of the New Testament?

By taking readers through the different battles recounted in the Old Testament, Longman points out the overarching principle that God is present with the army in battle. He makes the case that herem warfare is worship.

Before the warfare began, the people of God were to seek the will of God, prepare themselves spiritually, make sacrifices, and keep the ark of the covenant (the mobile symbol of God’s presence) (164-7). During the battle, the march with the ark resembles a religious procession. The warfare strategy clearly relies on God’s involvement in the battle as what ultimately determines victory or defeat. After the battle, the army was to march back and return the ark to its place in the sanctuary. Likewise, there was celebration with music and dancing as all the enemies were utterly destroyed and their spoils devoted to the Lord. (172).

What about the innocent women and children who were slaughtered? Longman does not mince words:

“We must point out that the Bible does not understand the destruction of the men, women, and children of these cities as a slaughter of innocents. Not even the children are considered innocent. They are all part of an inherently wicked culture that, if allowed, to live, would morally and theologically pollute the people of Israel” (174).

How does Longman make the case for spiritual continuity between the Testaments? He argues that there are four phases of holy war in the Bible.

First, God fights the flesh-and-blood enemies of Israel.

Second, God fights Israel when they disobeyed his command.

Third, the Bible prophesies that God will come in the future as a warrior.

Fourth, Jesus Christ fights the spiritual powers and authorities.

The fifth phase is the final battle in which Jesus will come again as warrior and king (175-83).

Longman believes that this spiritual continuity is easily observed once we recognize that “the war against the Canaanites was simply an earlier phase of the battle that comes to its climax on the cross and its completion at the final judgment. The object of warfare moves from the Canaanites, who are the object of God’s wrath for their sin, to the spiritual powers and principalities, and then finally to the utter destruction of all evil, human and spiritual” (185). The Canaanite judgment serves as a preview of the final judgment.

Tomorrow, I will offer some thoughts on these proposals.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

One Way of Dealing with the Canaanite Conquest

The first contribution to Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide comes from C.S. Cowles, professor of Bible and theology at Point Loma Nazarene University in San Diego.

Cowles makes the case for radical discontinuity between the warfare narratives of the Old Testament and the revelation of Jesus Christ in the New. According to Cowles, if we attribute the command for ethnic cleansing to the intention of God, we create severe problems for Christian theology, ethics, and praxis (15).

Cowles’ essay is marked by passion. His analysis cannot be accused of being expressed from the lofty tower of academia. Instead, he forcefully brings the reader face to face with the horror of mass extermination, describing in gut-wrenching detail how this killing took place, including the killing of women and children.

For Cowles, there is no synthesis between the Testaments on this matter. When it comes to the issue of divinely initiated and divinely sanctioned violence, we should acknowledge a radical discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments.

“The starting point in forming a truly Christian theology is not what the Bible teaches about God in general but what Jesus reveals about God in particular,” Cowles writes. We are to see God, “not like the first Joshua, a warrior, but like the second, the Prince of Peace” (23).

The heart of Cowles’ case against the genocide in the Old Testament is his sharp distinction between the God portrayed in the Old Testament and the God revealed in Jesus Christ.

“The God portrayed in the Old Testament was full of fury against sinners, but the God incarnate in Jesus is not” (28). Jesus reveals to us the true God who does not “engage in punitive, redemptive, or sacred violence… God does not proactively use death as an instrument of judgment in that death is an enemy…” (30).

In Cowles’ view, Jesus’ revelation of God stands over against the Word of God mediated by Moses. Perhaps because he knows this discontinuity could make his opinion theologically suspect, Cowles marshals John Wesley for his cause, affirming a quote by Wesley that Jesus came “ to destroy, to dissolve, and utterly abolish” large sections of the Torah (35).

How can we speak meaningfully about the inspiration and authority of the Scriptures if Cowles’ view is correct? Cowles answers questions about inspiration by appealing to Christological criterion. What results is a view of the Old Testament that is inferior to the New, since the understanding of God has progressed since the time in which the Old Testament accounts were recorded.

Cowles seeks to demonstrate this progression by pointing to the advanced theological reflection of the Chronicles, in comparison with the earlier writings. He focuses on the progressive understanding of Satan, so that by the time the Chronicles were written, “the Jews had begun to project some of the darker attributes of Yahweh onto a contradivine being, Satan” (38).

The New Testament unveils God to us in the person of Jesus Christ. The mission of Jesus, according to Cowles, is to “pull back the curtain and let us see the beautiful face of God.”

The people in the Old Testament did not have the capacity to gather the light of God’s truth. Christ comes to reveal the non-violent, true God. “Before he could reconcile us to God, he had to show us a heavenly Father to whom we would want to be reconciled: a God who is for us rather than against us, a God of love and grace who can be loved in return” (39).

How does Cowles’ proposal affect our view of the Old Testament accounts? The Israelites merely acted upon what they believed to be God’s will. But they were wrong. God honored their obedience, even if he despised their atrocious behavior.

Tomorrow, we’ll take a look at three other views on the Canaanite Conquest.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Show Them No Mercy

In the latter years of the previous century, the world saw a marked increase in ethnic violence.

Whether it was ethnic cleansing in Bosnia or the mass murder of Tutsis at the hands of Hutus in Rwanda, the increase in violence worldwide was clearly evident. After Americans and Europeans only reluctantly became involved in ending these crusades, the horror of such atrocities hit home with us after the turn of the century, when Islamic terrorists attacked the United States in the name of Allah and on a mission of jihad, or “holy war.”

Since September 11, Christians in the West have demonstrated a renewed interest in the idea of “holy war,” especially since the Old Testament clearly recounts certain narratives in which God not only commands, but also commends the absolute destruction of nations, including women and children.

How are we to understand these difficult passages of Scripture?

How can we maintain our trust in a good God when he commands Israel to engage in what appear to be genocidal atrocities?

Show Them No Mercy: 4 Views on God and Canaanite Genocide (Zondervan, 2003) is a book that seeks to provide a response to these difficult questions. Under the editing hand of Stan Gundry, four scholars tackle the issues of Old Testament divinely-sanctioned genocide, seeking to provide a way forward so that we can make sense of the warfare narratives in light of the coming of Jesus Christ. This week, I want to look in detail on this book.

Tomorrow and Wednesday, I will briefly summarize each of the four positions and later on this week, I will offer some personal reflections on each contribution.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

In Evil Long I Took Delight

In evil long I took delight,
Unawed by shame or fear,
Till a new object struck my sight,
And stopped my wild career.

I saw One hanging on a tree,
In agonies and blood,
Who fixed His languid eyes on me,
As near His cross I stood.

Sure, never till my latest breath,
Can I forget that look;
It seemed to charge me with His death,
Though not a word He spoke.

My conscience felt and owned the guilt,
And plunged me in despair,
I saw my sins His blood had spilt,
And helped to nail Him there.

Alas, I knew not what I did,
But now my tears are vain;
Where shall my trembling soul be hid?
For I the Lord have slain.

A second look He gave, which said,
“I freely all forgive;
This blood is for thy ransom paid;
I die that thou mayst live.”

Thus, while His death my sin displays
In all its blackest hue,
Such is the mystery of grace,
It seals my pardon too.

With pleasing grief and mournful joy,
My spirit is now filled;
That I should such a life destroy,
Yet live by him I killed.

- John Newton

Mark Driscoll on Little-World Negatives

At last month’s Gospel Coalition, Mark Driscoll gave some wise counsel on avoiding what he calls “little-world” negatives – people who are so wrapped up in one stream of Christianity that they cannot see the positives outside their little world.

“Little world negatives… There are differences between boundaries. There are city boundaries (your church, your denomination, your network).

“Then there is your state (your theological team). I’m Reformed complementarian. There are certain borders around that, inerrancy and complementary gender roles and things of that nature.

“Then there is your nation. For me, my nation would be evangelicalism. I want to be on good terms with evangelicals. I don’t want to declare war on evangelicals in the same way that Illinois shouldn’t declare war on Iowa…

“People who are ‘little-world’ get scared of anyone outside of their proverbial city. You didn’t go to the same seminary as me? You’re suspect!

“You don’t buy all your books from one publisher? Look at your bookshelf sometime. If you have three or four publishers that constitute the totality of your library, you may have turned your theology into a prison and not a home, a place you’re not allowed to leave to go visit other brothers and sisters.”

In the Blogosphere

Kris Allen wins American Idol and gives the show its heart back. This article explains how the underrated dark horse of the competition made it to first place and why Americans chose heart over hype.

10 Basics every man should have in his fishing tackle box.

An interview with SBC president, Johnny Hunt, about the Great Commission Resurgence.

Fascinating article from a Jew who gets “jittery” when it comes to Jesus. Do Jews have a Jesus problem?

Billy Graham’s delivery of “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” compared with Jonathan Edwards’ original.

Z interviews Kevin DeYoung about his book, Just Do Something.

Speaking of Kevin, here is a post about bloggers who are either too critical or too nice.

What happened at Nicaea.

Al Mohler analyzes President Obama’s speech at Notre Dame and concludes that Obama is now “talking about talking about abortion.”

Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, appears on Fox News, explaining why more people are identifying themselves as pro-life.

Top Post this Week at Kingdom People: The Future of World Magazine – An Interview with Marvin Olasky

The Miracle of Forgiveness

In As We Forgive: Stories of Reconciliation from Rwanda (Zondervan, 2009), Catherine Claire Larson tells two sides to the story of the 1990’s Rwandan genocide. On the one hand, she documents the horrific scenes of mass murder. On the other hand, she describes the moving accounts of forgiveness that have taken place between victims and their abusers.

Larson begins her book by laying out a chronology of events. Readers who are unfamiliar with the history of the genocide in Rwanda will find the historical context helpful for understanding the individual stories that follow.

In short, the seeds of the genocide were planted in the bitterness between the Hutu and the Tutsi regimes. In the mid-1990’s, Hutus began a systematic slaughter of Tutsis. Over 800,000 Rwandans were killed in 100 days. The most chilling fact about this genocide is that, in most cases, neighbors were killing neighbors. The Hutus were not roaming the countryside killing strangers with machetes. These were people slaughtering people they knew.

But As We Forgive does not concentrate primarily upon the atrocities that took place during the genocide. Instead, Larson focuses upon the incredible acts of forgiveness that have since followed. 

Within the past several years, more than 100,000 of the killers have been released back into society. One may wonder: How have the victims coped with these new societal developments? These are people who lost parents and siblings and children. They are people who even today bear the physical scars of violence or the emotional scars of rape. How have the Rwandans been able to co-exist with the very people who caused them such pain?

Christianity provides the answer. Larson tells the stories of several victims and perpetrators, and offers a few additional insights into the nature of Christian forgiveness.

As you read these powerful stories, you quickly come to realize that forgiveness does not come easy. The Rwandan victims do not minimize the sin by ignoring it or sweeping its consequences under the rug. 

Larson is unflinching in her portrayal of evil. The line of evil runs through both victim and killer. It is not as simple as “bad” versus “good.” One woman recounts how she was rescued by a man who kept her safe from the threat of death for a period of time, even as he occasionally raped her.

Larson believes that when we look at a murderer, we look at ourselves. The victims need to offer forgiveness, but even they need forgiveness from God.

The struggle to forgive is palpable at times. One woman cries out to God to forgive her for failing to forgive: 

“Oh, God, forgive me for dwelling so much on the past, for pushing others away and feeling lonely, when I didn’t have to feel that way. And most of all forgive me for not thinking of you, or what you have given me today. Help me, God; to start living and to start being truly thankful for the ways you are working in my life.” (84)

Moments later, Larson provides the key to the entire book: 

The more she had come to understand the significance of the Bible’s teachings on Jesus Christ’s death, the more forgiveness seemed possible. She learned how Christ had been executed in a horrible manner, more horrible than some of the things she had seen in the war. And she learned how he willingly died to pay the penalty for her wrongdoing and for anyone else who would give up their bad ways and look to him. If Christ could forgive her, if he could forgive the people who tortured him, then Joy knew she could forgive too. (86)

One might think As We Forgive would be a depressing book. It is not. It is deeply inspiring. The accounts of forgiveness help us move past the petty grievances we hold towards others.

There is also an inspiring account of a group of students who refused to divide into Hutus and Tutsis. “All of us are Rwandans here,” they declared, and paid for their boldness with their lives. 

My only quibble with this book is its quick dismissal of the idea of retributive justice in favor of a type of restorative justice. I am not sure that these two types of justice are incompatible. Of course, there is not enough room in this kind of book to develop some of these concepts, which makes me wonder why they were alluded to in the first place.

As We Forgive succeeds in telling a powerful story. We read of pastors and church leaders returning to Rwanda to encourage forgiveness, even as they suffer great personal cost for their decisions. We read of people sacrificing their own desires for the good of others. We read of people so engulfed in their own guilt and despair for the past sins that the offer of forgiveness becomes a liberating act of sheer grace.

These stories are Christianity-in-action. Highly recommended.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Engaging Emergent – One More Time

I confess a sense of weariness when it comes to speaking of the Emerging Church movement.

Back in 2008, I wrote about how the Emerging Church had begun to “recede.” Shortly thereafter, some key participants in the conversation began abandoning the title altogether.

Today, much of the debate centers on correctly identifying “Emerging” as a diverse movement that includes some who are more traditionally evangelical and others who are not.

Regardless of the current state of the debate, evangelicals should at least ask this question: What insights can we glean from the Emerging Church conversation? Such a question presumes that there are both positive and negative aspects of the movement. It takes little thought to condemn the movement outright or to embrace it wholeheartedly. What is needed is a careful engagement of the Emerging conversation so that Christians can distinguish between the wheat and chaff. 

The new book, Evangelicals Engaging Emergent: A Discussion of the Emergent Church Movement (2009, Broadman and Holman) features a collection of essays from notable authors and scholars like Ed Stetzer, Norman Geisler, Darrell Bock, and Mark DeVine. The contributors to this book seek to examine the Emerging Church fairly and then weigh the positives and negatives of the movement in light of Scripture.

Mark DeVine starts off by differentiating between the two streams of the Emerging Church – the more traditional evangelical stream and the more liberal stream. DeVine focuses on defining the Emerging Church by the questions and criticisms of its proponents, not their doctrinal commitments.

DeVine believes that D.A. Carson’s influential critique of Emerging was helpful in its assessment of Brian McLaren’s epistemology. Yet in the long run, by treating McLaren as the main spokesperson for Emerging, Carson’s book caused a good deal of confusion and consternation among those on the more evangelical wing of the spectrum who did not want to be lumped together with McLaren. So DeVine broadens his engagement of Emerging by taking into account the other voices.

My only concern with DeVine’s definition is that, while definitely an improvement over Carson’s, it suffers from the opposite problem. It is almost too broad to be helpful. I am not sure in what way Tim Keller, Mark Chandler, and Mark Driscoll can be considered “Emerging.” Would these men not be voices within the Reformed Resurgence?

DeVine’s contribution could have been strengthened had he illuminated the fact that the young Reformed movement seems to be the flip side to Emerging, in that many of the people he mentions are asking the very questions being raised in the Emerging Church and yet offer different answers.

Ed Stetzer contributes a helpful chapter that looks at Emergent from a missiological perspective. He follows Tony Jones’ terminology in describing the Emerging Church. He divides the movement into three categories  – Relevants, Revisionists, Reconstructionists – and insists that each group be dealt with on its own terms.

Norm Geisler writes about a postmodern view of Scripture. There is little engagement of the Emerging Church here. It would have been helpful had Geisler shown why some of these questions about Scriptural authority are being raised in the first place. Instead, the chapter serves as simply a rebuttal of the views of Stan Grenz and Brian McLaren.

I enjoyed R. Scott Smith’s work on the importance of truth. Smith understands the objections to evangelicalism, and he actually does business with Emergent criticisms. He admits that evangelicals can demonstrate a tendency toward Christian rationalism. We have too often used truth as a weapon instead of expressing it with grace and love. Smith’s chapter is helpful because he remains robustly orthodox, and yet believes this discussion can provide us with something of value. 

Darrell Bock looks at the Christology in the Emerging Church and excels at providing a fair analysis. Recognizing that Christians need to think through Emerging criticisms, Bock contends:

“My point would not be to pit the conventional and emerging story against one another as McLaren is prone to do but to consider how these features combine to do a better job of filling out the full scope of what the biblical call to experience the gospel means.” (183)

My friend, Robbie Sagers, has a terrific chapter on the Emerging views of the atonement and conversion. He engages different authors on their own terms, advocating caution in some areas and acceptance in others.

John Hammett looks at the ecclesiology of the movement and makes a strong case for evangelism: 

“A mission that stops short of ultimately bringing people to the cross to receive forgiveness and eternal life is not the mission to which Christ calls His church.” (237)

Hammett also poses an important question for those in the Emerging camp:

“If we guide our practice of worship solely by the principle of engaging culture, could we not be in danger of creating another set of consumers, with the only difference being that they are postmodern consumers rather than modern?” (241)

Danny Akin offers an insightful chapter about making ethical choices. The issue he focuses on is alcohol. Overall, it seems a bit out of place in a book of this nature, which is more theology/philosophy-driven. 

Chuck Lawless and Jim Shaddix assess the Emerging views of evangelism, advocating some of the positive aspects of the movement while critiquing others in light of Scripture.

Overall, I heartily recommend Evangelicals Engaging Emergent for being an evangelical contribution to the conversation that actually lives up to its title. The essays (for the most part) engage the Emerging Church thoughtfully and biblically.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

The Future of World Magazine: An Interview with Marvin Olasky

When living in Romania, I always looked forward to the arrival of World magazine at the mailbox in our apartment building. Back then, the magazine was printed and mailed weekly, but international postal service slowed things down. I usually wound up with two or three copies at the same time (and several weeks late).

But I didn’t mind if the magazines came in bundles and were late. World was my way of staying on top of the cultural and political developments in the United States. I read each issue from cover-to-cover when it arrived, always intrigued by the conservative Christian perspective on the news.

Today, I am privileged to interview Dr. Marvin Olasky, the editor-in-chief for World. In this interview, I ask him about the history of this great magazine and the direction that World is headed. You can check out World online here. 

Trevin Wax: Several Christian print publications have recently moved exclusively to online content. How is World doing during this economic recession and the current decline of printed news material?

Marvin Olasky: Our circulation is holding steady at a time when that of many other publications is declining so we’re grateful to God, and to our readers.

Trevin Wax: What is your role as editor-in-chief of World? What are some of your responsibilities?

Marvin Olasky: I try to look ahead and lead the staff in setting the overall course of the magazine, and I also try to write a lot. I used to read every article prior to publication, but editor Mindy Belz and managing editor Tim Lamer are terrific and I no longer have to do that.

Trevin Wax: The World Journalism Institute has been seeking to develop journalistic talent in young writers. How has this project gone? Are evangelicals making inroads into journalism outside of Christian circles?

Marvin Olasky: No major inroads in print publications or broadcast media, but given time there may be. The new frontier is electronic, of course, and I’m hopeful that we’ll see some strong inroads there.

Trevin Wax: I have long admired World for publishing letters to the editor that are quite critical – either of political stances or cultural engagement (movie reviews, etc.). What have been some of the more controversial positions that World has taken throughout the years?

Marvin Olasky: The two most controversial were probably our exposure and criticism of plans to make the NIV a “gender-neutral” Bible in 1997, and our exposure and criticism of Ralph Reed’s involvement with the corrupt deeds of lobbyist Jack Abramoff in 2005 and 2006. We’re journalists, but some Christian organizations expect us to do public relations for them, and when we don’t, some sparks always fly.

Trevin Wax: How is World different today than when it began?

Marvin Olasky: Bigger and I hope better, with a firm embrace of biblical objectivity, but with the same theological principles.

Trevin Wax: Where do you see World in ten years? What changes should readers expect? In what direction is the magazine headed?

Marvin Olasky: We’ll continue to be faithful to the Bible, I hope and pray, with some new, young writers and editors grafted into World. We’ll continue to expand our online presence and will try to be ready to respond to technological changes that may surprise all of us.

To find out more about World magazine or to request a subscription, click here.

Light of the World

“You are the light of the world.”
Matthew 5:14

How is it that Jesus says we are the light of the world?

Doesn’t he claim to be the Light of the World himself?

Is this a contradiction? How can it be that Jesus sees himself as the light, but then he sees his followers as the light too?

These questions are all the more powerful when we realize that there is no light in ourselves. We are prone to love the darkness.

Yet Jesus’ words remain true. We are the light of the world. God has chosen to shine the light of Jesus through us. 

Think about the moon. The moon doesn’t actually shine. It gives off no light – it only reflects the light that comes from the sun. At night, when the sun has disappeared, we are still enjoying the sun’s light, coming via the reflection of the moon.

Likewise, even though Jesus as the Light of the world is no longer on earth physically, his light remains. We, his followers, reflect his light.

We absorb his glory and majesty – the truth of his gospel, and we reflect those glorious truths for all the world to see. So yes, we are the light of the world… whenever we reflect Jesus!

Prayer: Light of the world, thank you for bringing me to salvation and for making me a reflection of your light. Help me to be a good reflection of your glory and your gospel. Amen.

Hosanna! A Prayer for Salvation

I am tangled up in contradiction.
I am strangled by my own two hands.
I am hunted by the hounds of addiction.
Hosanna!

I have lied to everyone who trusts me.
I have tried to fall when I could stand.
I have only loved the ones who loves me.
Hosanna!

O Hosanna!
See the long awaited king come to set his people free.
We cry - O Hosanna!
Come and tear the temple down.
Raise it up on holy ground. Hosanna!

I have struggled to remove this raiment,
tried to hide every shimmering strand.
I contend with these ghosts and these hosts of bright angels.
Hosanna!

I have cursed the man that you have made me,
as I have nursed the beast that bays for my blood.
Oh, I have run from the one who would save me.
Save me, Hosanna!

You have crushed beneath your heel the vile serpent.
You have carried to the grave the black stain.
You have torn apart the temple’s holy curtain.
You have beaten Death at Death’s own game.
Hosanna!

O Hosanna!
Hail the long awaited king,
come to set his people free.
We cry – O Hosanna!
Won’t you tear this temple down,
raise it up on holy ground?
O Hosanna!
I will lift my voice and sing:
you have come and washed me clean. Hosanna.

- Andrew Peterson

Abortion and White Supremacy

“Abortion is the white supremacist’s best friend.”

- Aveda King, niece of Martin Luther King Jr., speaking out regarding the Department of Homeland Security’s domestic terrorism report that inks pro-lifers and hate groups.

King also said, “To say, as the Department of Homeland Security does, that white supremacists have exercised a ‘longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion’ tells me that either the government, the supremacists, or both are clueless about abortion’s grave impact on the black community.”

Source: World Magazine, May 9, 2009

In the Blogosphere

Scot McKnight is asking some hard-hitting questions about the way we present the gospel, and specifically where the biblical teaching of God’s Kingdom fits into the mix. He claims that our individualistic gospel presentations have reached the point they are deconstructing the church. (Part 1, 2, 3, 4)

A list of comparisons between “religion” and “the gospel” taken from Tim Keller’s preaching and writing.

10 People a Pastor Should Fear

Justin Taylor interviews Dr. Kevin Vanhoozer of Wheaton College.

Union University will be hosting a conference on Southern Baptists and the future of denominationalism. The line-up of speakers is impressive.

60% of adult baptisms in the SBC are “rebaptisms.” Thabiti looks to Romanian Baptists as an example of how to avoid this problem.

Matt Svoboda notices something that I have observed as well. Eschatological views of younger pastors are decisively not Dispensational.

Tullian Tchividjian is out of step and fine with it.

From Lucy Ricardo to Roseanne. For better or worse, TV Moms are now part of our lives.

Top Post this Week at Kingdom People: Preaching the Sermon on the Mount by Memory

A Look at the Taizé Community

My first introduction to the music of Taizé came in 2006. I was reading a book by the late Robert Webber and came across a brief mention of a monastic community that recorded chants in various languages. I looked up Taizé on iTunes, sampled some songs, and then bought a CD. (I now own several.)

The Taizé chants are splendid. They are beautifully written, well-performed, and the instrumentation adds an ethereal dimension to the sound. Most of the lyrics are verses from Scripture. The chants are sung in many different languages (including Latin), and yet their brevity and repetition help listeners learn to sing along without too much difficulty.

Taizé is a Protestant monastic community in France that welcomes all denominations. The monastery’s purpose is to be a place of reconciliation and peace between Christians of all different stripes. Thousands of young people go to Taizé every year, from all over the world – including Africa, Asia and Europe. 

A Community Called Taizé: A Story of Prayer, Worship and Reconciliation (IVP, 2008) by Jason Brian Santos documents the history of the Taizé community. The first night that Santos arrived at Taizé was the fateful night in August 2005 when Brother Roger, the 90-year-old founder of the monastery was stabbed to death during evening prayers by a deranged Romanian woman. Santos witnessed the incident from just a few feet away. 

The book opens with this story, partly because of its drama, but mainly because the community’s reaction to Brother Roger’s death illuminates the emphasis on reconciliation for which this monastery is known. The rest of the book tells the story of the community’s beginning and development. Santos also helps readers know what to expect should they decide to go. 

At times, I felt like the book was a biography. At other times, it seemed to be a travel guide. But in the end, the book succeeds at both levels.

Taizé is an ecumenical monastery. Because of the emphasis on reconciliation between humans, the gospel’s horizontal dimension (peace between people) is emphasized, almost to the exclusion of the gospel teaching about our reconciliation to God.

Some readers will undoubtedly find this ecumenism troubling. Furthermore, Protestants generally view the entire monastic enterprise as unnecessary, irrelevant, and sometimes dangerous. And often for good reasons!

At the same time, those of us in the Protestant tradition need to admit our need for some of the spiritual disciplines that the monastic tradition offers.

Why do so many Christians go on spiritual retreats? We have deacon retreats, youth retreats, and pastors’ conferences – places where Christians seek to “get away” and “get alone” with God. It seems clear that even as we eschew monasticism, we find monastic-influenced retreats to be spiritually fruitful.

Why is there such a hunger among Christians today for authentic Christian community? Perhaps the church has become so market-driven that we are attracted to the simplicity of prayer and Scripture reading, of Word and Sacrament, of fellowship and exhortation.

Why are we seeking out times of silence and solitude during the hectic pace of Western life? Perhaps the noise of our busy lifestyles has kept us from hearing the voice of God through the spending of unhindered time in his Word.

I believe there are aspects of the monastic tradition to which we should be cautiously open. We can learn from a community like Taizé, even if we may differ from some of the theology and the extent of the ecumenism advocated there. I am most grateful for the heavenly music created by these praying Christians. You ought to listen to some of the chants. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Check out some of the Mp3s here: Taizé

Making the Case for Life

“Most people who say they oppose abortion do just enough to salve the conscience but not enough to stop the killing.” 

In his new book, The Case for Life: Equipping Christians to Engage the Culture (Crossway, 2009), Scott Klusendorf confesses that the above quote from Greg Cunningham haunts him. It haunts me as well. And that is why the book that Scott’s book needs to be consulted by scores of evangelicals weary of the abortion debate.

The Case for Life is unarguably one of the most important books to come out for the pro-life movement in the past several years. Scott takes the highly sophisticated arguments made against abortion-on-demand and brings them down to a level that anyone can understand.

Scott believes that the case against abortion is sound. The question for us as evangelicals is how we will make the case to our skeptical friends and neighbors. Scott writes:

“My own thesis is that a biblically informed pro-life view explains human equality, human rights, and moral obligations better than its secular rivals and that rank-and-file pro-life Christians can make an immediate impact provided they’re equipped to engage the culture with a robust but graciously communicated case for life.” (14)

Well put. And this is why the book is so valuable. Scott puts forth robust arguments against abortion, yet insists on engaging people graciously. Grace and truth come together marvelously in this pro-life apologetic.

But what is the case against abortion? How do we equip people to engage their friends and neighbors regarding this sensitive debate? Frankly, is it even possible to change minds when it comes to this issue? In answering these questions, Scott points us back to the central concern of the debate: What is the unborn?

Almost every argument for or against abortion can come down to this one question. Abortion-rights advocates assume that the unborn baby is not a human being (or a human person). Regarding the humanity of the unborn, science firmly comes down on the pro-life side.  The unborn human being is just that …a human being. The pro-life position claims that taking the life of an unborn human being is no different than taking the life of another innocent human being.

To make the case effectively, Scott recommends we “trot out the toddler.” If you replace the “unborn child” with the “toddler” and try to make the case for abortion, nearly everyone experiences some sort of repulsion. Why? They understand the toddler is a human being. Most people, once they accept the humanity of the unborn, realize that innocent life is at stake in this debate.

Simply put, the beginning of life is not an issue above Barack Obama’s paygrade. The humanity of the unborn is a scientific fact put forth by embryologists, text books and scientific studies.

The Case for Life succeeds in two areas. First, Scott solidifies the arguments for the pro-life case, which hopefully will reinvigorate the younger evangelicals who are experiencing what has been termed “fetus fatigue” when it comes to this issue. The expansiveness of Scott’s argumentation may serve to reinforce the views of those who are pro-life without quite understanding the reasons why. (Case in point: some pro-lifers make distinctions between late-term and early abortions, or abortion-on-demand and embryonic stem cell research.) Many evangelicals may be nominally pro-life without understanding how many of these life issues are connected around the central affirmation of the pro-life cause: the unborn human being is worthy of protection.

Secondly, Scott helps Christians to winsomely engage people who hold opposing views. And the way he accomplishes this task is by showing how exclusive and elitist the pro-choice argument actually is.

“Opponents of the pro-life view…assert, without justification, the belief that strong and independent humans have basic human rights while small and dependent ones do not. This view is elitist.” (66)

The pro-life camp does not need to vilify abortion-rights advocates. We must simply appeal to the inclusive and compassionate stance of the pro-life cause. We are the inclusivists wanting to welcome every member of the human family.

The Case for Life is divided into several sections. Scott begins by helping pro-life Christians clarify the debate by bringing attention back to the central question surrounding the identity of the unborn.

Next, Scott recommends that pro-life Christians establish a foundation for the debate. This section delves a little bit deeper into the question of human rights and their origin.

Then, Scott helps pro-life Christians answer objections persuasively. He lists several of the main objections and makes a winsome case for the pro-life cause. I found this section to be the most helpful part of the book.

Finally, Scott counsels pro-life pastors and churches in how they can equip their congregants to be advocates for the unborn in their respective communities.

Scott wisely includes some foundational aspects for understanding human rights. He tackles difficult subjects concerning belief in God and the teaching of the Bible with respect to abortion. He also makes a case for Christianity’s uniqueness, devoting a lengthy section to defending the historicity of the resurrection. Scott is right to see the pro-life issue as one that stems from a correct understanding of the gospel itself. Although I appreciated the contents of these chapters, I am not sure that were necessary within the framework of this brief apologetic.  

Overall, The Case for Life should be studied and applied by every pastor or layperson who desires to be profoundly pro-life. Perhaps if evangelicals read this book, the haunting quote from Greg Cunningham will no long be applicable to the people of God.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Preaching the Sermon on the Mount from Memory

Last month, I preached the greatest sermon ever recorded in the history of the world. Greatest, of course, because it is from the mouth of Jesus Christ himself. On April 19, at the request of our senior adults, I delivered the Sermon on the Mount from memory for our congregation. (See the video below.)

I encourage other pastors and preachers to consider preaching large sections of Scripture from memory. Your congregation will be edified in a special way.

Here are some tips for getting started:

1. Choose a literal Bible translation.

I chose to preach the Sermon on the Mount from the English Standard Version, since it is my translation of choice. You might assume that dynamic translations are easier to memorize, but such is not the case. Word-for-word translations are easier to commit to memory, probably because they are closer to the original text, which was intended to be passed down orally.

2. Listen to the Scriptures on Mp3.

For several weeks leading up to delivery, I listened to a recitiation of the Sermon on my Mp3 player. When taking  a shower, when in the car, before going to bed… Find time to listen to the text you want to preach.

3. Read the passage out loud once or twice daily.

Listening helps solidify the words of the text in your mind. But nothing will substitute for the hard work of reading the text out loud and then trying to say it word for word. Try reading the text every night before going to bed. Sleep will help you retain the main ideas of the text.

4. Practice the sermon with someone who is not afraid to correct every mistake.

Corina was a big help to me as I prepared for the Sermon. Whenever I missed a word or phrase, she would let me know. Discovering where the difficulties are will help you be more comfortable as you continue the work of memorization.

An example: Many of Jesus’ words in the Sermon are in chiastic structure, not Western-styled outline form. (1) No one can serve two masters. For either he will (2) hate the one and (3) love the other, or he will be (3) be devoted to the one and (2) despise the other. (1) You cannot serve God and money.  The chiastic structure is unfamiliar to us and can lead to easy mistakes. Understanding the structure helps you catch the rhythm of the ancient text.

Below is the video from my Sermon on the Mount delivery:

Part 1 (Matthew 5)

Part 2 (Matthew 6-7)

Our Recent Trip to Romania

Many thanks to those of you who prayed for us during our recent visit to Romania.
Here are some pictures (with captions) from our trip.

Preaching in the village of Lugasu de Jos

Preaching at Emanuel Baptist Church, the second largest Baptist church in Europe

Teaching pastoral theology students at Emanuel University

A group picture with 3rd year theology students at Emanuel

Celebrating Labor Day in Europe in the outdoors

Recording an interview for a Christian radio station

Sightseeing in downtown Oradea

A Prayer of Basil the Great

We bless you, O God most high and Lord of mercies, 
always working great and mysterious deeds for us,
glorious, wonderful, and numberless;
who provides us with sleep as a rest from our infirmities
and as a repose for our bodies tired by labor.

We thank you for not destroying us in our transgressions. 
Instead, because of your love toward mankind you have raised us up,
as we lay in despair,
that we may glorify your Majesty.

We appeal to your infinite goodness:
enlighten the eyes of our understanding
and raise up our minds front the heavy sleep of indolence;
open our mouths and fill them with your praise,
that we may unceasingly sing and confess you,
who are God glorified in all and by all,
the eternal Father, the Only-Begotten Son,
and the all-holy and good and life-giving Spirit:
now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.

- Basil the Great

Pope Luther

I am more afraid of my own heart than of the pope and all his cardinals.

I have within me the great pope, Self.

- Martin Luther

According to Plan: Some Questions for Further Thought

According to Plan: The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bible raises several important questions for further discussion. Goldsworthy cannot be blamed for not substantively answering these questions. Had he chosen to do so, According to Plan would have taken on a shape quite different than its current form. But there are several questions raised by Goldsworthy’s work that readers will want to consider.

The Nature of “Biblical Theology”

The first question regards the nature of biblical theology itself.

The very title of “biblical theology” tends to place itself in a higher position over the other types of theology that Goldsworthy lists. After all, if faced with a choice between systematic theology, historical theology or biblical theology, most people would probably choose “biblical theology” as being the most helpful.

Not only that, because of the title, some would be inclined to believe that “biblical theology” is somehow more biblical and trustworthy than the other types.

Of course, the discipline of biblical theology is sorely needed in evangelicalism today. We have plenty of systematic theologians and pastor/teachers and too few historical and biblical theologians.

But the point needs to be made that each of these disciplines is necessary. When one discipline is emphasized over the others, it can lead to a lopsided view of Christian theology.

When systematic theology is emphasized to the exclusion of biblical theology, the theological enterprise can quickly turn into a rigid, categorization of theological concepts, some of which may be completely foreign to the mind of the biblical author.

When historical theology is overemphasized, theology becomes less about the biblical text itself and more about the historical developments surrounding theological reflection.

Pastoral theology, likewise, can lead to a downplaying of the difficult texts of Scripture that seem to have little pastoral or pragmatic value.

And biblical theology, by itself, can sometimes result in a neglect of the other disciplines, especially systematic theology.

Goldsworthy cannot be faulted for only treating “biblical theology” in this book. After all, According to Plan is an introduction to this type of theological work.

But as readers finish the book, they should remember that biblical theology is merely one tool in our theological tool belt. It is not the belt itself. Other theological tools deserve time and attention and will need to be consulted, depending upon the task at hand. Maintaining the proper balance is imperative.

The Question of Authorial Intent

The second question raised by Goldsworthy’s work centers on the question of authorial intent.

Jesus Christ is indeed the center of the Bible. The Old Testament points ahead to the fulfillment of God’s promises in Jesus. Goldsworthy is right to see the foreshadowing and typology of the Old Testament that shines a spotlight on Jesus. In fact, the Christ-centeredness of Goldsworthy’s approach is one of the greatest strengths of According to Plan.

But one can hardly survey the landscape of evangelical hermeneutics and homiletics today without bumping into the roadblock of “authorial intent” as the overarching principle for interpreting Scripture. Some evangelicals go so far as to tell preachers to only preach that which the original author intended to communicate.

For example, if preaching a text in Isaiah that points ahead to Christ, one should preach only those truths that Isaiah had in mind (a Messianic servant representing Israel) and not the fulfillment that only appears later.

Surely there are strengths to this hermeneutical approach. It puts brakes on the imaginative preacher who would take a text and run with it wherever he wants. It keeps teachers grounded in the text and the original historical context of the author.

But how does authorial intent fit with Goldsworthy’s Christ-centered approach to Scripture? At what point do we allow the New Testament explanation of Old Testament texts to tear down the roadblock of authorial intent?

If the Bible has both a divine author (God himself) and a human author (the original writer), at what point do we go beyond the intent of the human author in order to see the divine purpose running throughout the whole of Scripture?

Do we focus on Jesus in the Old Testament only where the New Testament does so? Or are we allowed to see Christ in the Old Testament, even in those places not given explicit Christological connections?

If Goldsworthy is right (and I believe he is), many other evangelical teachers are wrong. (Ironically, the great early proponent of authorial intent as the primary hermeneutical tool was Friedrich Schleiermacher, the father of liberalism.) So Goldsworthy’s Christ-centered reading of Scripture leads to further questions of hermeneutics and homiletics that evangelicals should consider.

The Limitations of the Incarnational Analogy

A third question raised by Goldsworthy’s book is the incarnational analogy he employs when speaking of the divine/human nature of Scripture.

This analogy has become quite controversial since Goldsworthy’s book was first published in 1991. Since then, Peter Enns, former professor at Westminster Theological Seminary, has published a book that takes this incarnational analogy to a new level. Enns believes that the incarnational model helps us to understand the historical context within which the human authors lived. They could, therefore, incorporate into Scriptures various myths and legends common to the time and place in which they lived. The question that arises within Enns’ work is whether or not these incorporations represent true historical events.

Goldsworthy spends little time addressing the way in which he applies the incarnational analogy. This brevity is understandable considering the purpose of According to Plan.

But the incarnational approach today raises some of these important questions, issues which Goldsworthy hints at but never fully develops one way or the other. He rightly reminds us that the divine/human analogy breaks down at some crucial points, not least of which is the temptation of worshipping the Bible itself.

But when dealing with issues of infallibility and inerrancy, Goldsworthy makes statements that do not clarify the question of historicity (63). This question and others beg for further reflection and discussion.

Conclusion

Some Christians are experts in mastering the details of Scripture. They win Bible drills, know answers to trivia questions, and can recount all of the stories. But when it comes to the overall Story of the Bible, their answers leave much to be desired.

Others know very little about the Bible or how the Old Testament has anything to do with the New or how the Bible applies to our life today. They too have missed the big picture that the Bible provides.

According to Plan is an immensely helpful guide to understanding the theology and unity of the Bible. I know of no better resource that helps connect the dots of the Scriptural storyline until the image of Christ is clearly represented. Goldsworthy’s book raises some important questions regarding the nature of Scripture, methods of interpretation, and the relationship of biblical theology to other disciplines.

Overall, this text is a wonderful introduction to the exciting discipline of biblical theology and one that remains accessible to laypeople who want to know what the Bible is all about.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

The Strengths of Goldsworthy’s “According to Plan”

The strength of According to Plan: The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bible is its accessibility to the layperson. Other books that seek to develop a biblical theology make for thick reading. Goldsworthy avoids delving into intricate exegetical details.

Instead, he seeks to provide his readers with an overall grasp of biblical theology. He focuses on the “big picture.”

To accomplish this task, Goldsworthy encourages readers to bypass some of the harder chapters and perhaps return to them later. The “How” section focuses on issues of epistemology. Goldsworthy realizes that some of these chapters will be tough sledding for newcomers to theology. But he is wise to include them, as our presuppositions regarding knowledge and truth have a direct impact on how we understand the Bible. So Goldsworthy’s book remains accessible, without abandoning the thoroughness necessary for the task at hand.

According to Plan remains accessible to laypeople, not because Goldsworthy avoids rich theological teaching, but because he utilizes helpful tools that break down his concepts into simple forms.

For example, summary paragraphs are found beneath each chapter heading. This practice helps readers understand where the author intends to take them in any given chapter.

The book also provides summaries, charts, diagrams, and key terms and phrases at the end of each chapter, making it very easy for readers to quickly access the foundational information of each section. Goldsworthy has succeeded marvelously in making key theological concepts accessible to the laypeople.

The second strength of According to Plan is its Christ-centeredness. Goldsworthy emphasizes again and again that Christ is the one to whom all the Scriptures testify. God reveals himself primarily in Jesus Christ, showing us what the promises of the Old Testament are about.

“God in fact reserves his greatest revelation until the point of fulfillment. Jesus does not simply fulfill the promises; rather, he is the final and fullest revelation of what the promises are really about. This means that the form and the content of the fulfillment exceeds by far the form and the content of the promises themselves. The very act of fulfilling the Old Testament promises is itself the most important revelation of all” (65).

This emphasis on Christ as the center of all Scripture is sadly lacking in many evangelical churches today.

Goldsworthy insists on a Christ-shaped reading of Scripture, as evidenced by his emphasis on the gospel itself as the entry point into studying Scripture rightly.

According to Plan also raises a few questions for me. Tomorrow, I will examine some of the questions that Goldsworthy’s proposal leaves unanswered.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Summary of “According to Plan” – Part 2

The third section of According to Plan by Graeme Goldsworthy is the most extensive, and understandably so.

Here, Goldsworthy leaves behind the questions of why and how biblical theology is done and turns to the pressing issue of what biblical theology actually looks like.

What shape does it have?

What do we discover when we approach the theology of the Bible in the way that Goldsworthy has laid out?

The central section of According to Plan connects the dots of the Bible’s theology.

Interestingly enough, Goldsworthy does not begin with the creation story described in Genesis 1. He starts off with the gospel as the entry point to understanding Scripture: “Jesus is our starting point for all true knowledge, and therefore for theology. He is the goal toward which we move” (87).

Goldsworthy’s attempt to begin theology with the gospel is the outworking of his earlier statement that our entry point into studying the Scripture rightly is through the gospel message that brings us to a personal encounter with Jesus Christ.

Having defined the gospel and its relevance for understanding the rest of Scripture, Goldsworthy turns his attention to the main parts of the biblical narrative. Much of his presentation centers upon the truths about God, man, the world, and God’s kingdom that are expressed in Genesis and Exodus. The reason he spends so much time in the first two books of the Bible is because of the great number of truths about God and the world that are revealed here.

As Goldsworthy progresses through the Old Testament, he ends each chapter with a brief summary of the main point in the storyline, as well as a list of main themes and key words. In his effort to connect the Old Testament narrative to its fulfillment in Christ, Goldsworthy includes events recounted in the New Testament that are foreshadowed at different points in the Old.

For example, in the section on God’s creation of the world, he mentions three themes that will find fuller revelation in the scheme of salvation history later on in the Bible: Adam (fulfilled by Christ as the Last Adam), Creation (pointing to New Creation), and heavens and earth (the new heavens and earth). Breaking down each section into a summary is a helpful way of keeping track of the biblical Storyline.

As Goldsworthy continues through the Scriptures, he shows how the revelation of God is progressive. We see God’s choice of Abraham, God’s purpose in calling out the people of Israel from slavery, the purpose of the Law, and the establishment of the kingdom in Israel. He incorporates the wisdom books (Proverbs, Job and Ecclesiastes) and the Psalms into a chapter called “The Life of Faith” which concentrates on the life of the children of Israel in the Promised Land.

Goldsworthy devotes several chapters to the prophets, emphasizing the conditional nature of the covenant and Israel’s transgression of the Law. He points out the “pattern of redemption” seen throughout Israel’s history. He describes God’s punishment of Israel by sending them into exile. And though many of the Israelites return from exile by the end of the Old Testament, the great promises that God has made to his people have yet to be fulfilled.

Goldsworthy brings his treatment of the Old Testament to a close by pointing ahead to the hope of the Jews that God will one day act to bring about his kingdom and the salvation of his people (199).

As he begins his section on the New Testament, Goldsworthy examines the Gospels by showing how they portray Jesus as God in the flesh. He also shows how Jesus represents the true people of God, the very intention of God for humanity from the beginning of time. Likewise, Jesus is the new creation, the new temple that embodies the new created order (201-09).

The rest of the central section of Goldsworthy’s book focuses upon the spread of the new creation detailed in the book of Acts. He demonstrates how the kingdom of God comes “by the Holy Spirit taking the word about Christ into all the world, through the preaching of the disciples” (213).

In examining the New Testament epistles, Goldsworthy shows how this new creation takes place in us now through our union with Christ, a theological reality that includes vital doctrines like justification by faith (219-21).

Finally, Goldsworthy points ahead to the not-yet-fulfilled future that awaits believers in the new creation (232).

According to Plan ends with a practical exercise in applying the theology of the Bible. Goldsworthy chooses two unrelated topics (“Knowing God’s Will” and “Life after Death”), and then shows how one might use the discipline of biblical theology in order to find the Bible’s teaching on this subject.

We should start by connecting the topic to the gospel. Then, we should investigate the biblical words related to the subject, investigate the various strata of biblical teaching, and arrive at practical conclusions (237-44).

Tomorrow, I will interact with some of the points in Goldsworthy’s book.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

A Summary of Goldsworthy’s “According to Plan” – Part 1

According to Plan: The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bible begins with Goldsworthy’s explanation of why the discipline of biblical theology should be embraced by any Christian who desires to understand the Scriptures rightly.

Goldsworthy does not take for granted that his readers understand the reasons for the existence of this type of book, so he explains the purpose in the first section.

The simple Christian may think this type of exercise to be unnecessary. After all, should we not simply decide to be biblical and therefore believe and act upon the Bible’s teachings?

Goldsworthy does not believe that this type of decision regarding biblical authority solves our problems. After all, people who are committed to the authority of the Bible disagree on very important matters.

Goldsworthy does not believe biblical theology should be seen as a solution to denominational squabbles, but he suggests that “any Christian who wants to understand the reasons for the differences, and who wants to develop a sound method of approaching the text of the Bible in order to find out what it really says and means, needs an understanding of biblical theology” (19).

Biblical theology provides us with certain tools that help us interpret the Bible rightly. This discipline helps us understand problematic or difficult passages of Scripture in light of the overall biblical Story. It gives us the power to relate particular Bible stories to the whole message of the Bible. It helps us understand the Old Testament as pointing ahead to the person and work of Jesus Christ. And by providing a map of the Bible’s narrative, it helps us see the unity of the different biblical books in telling that story (21-25).

Next, Goldsworthy answers the question of how biblical theology is done. He begins by helpfully affirming that every Christian is a theologian (29). The question is not whether Christians will do theology, but how well they will do theology.

Goldsworthy compares and contrasts the discipline of biblical theology to other types of theological inquiry, namely systematic, historical, and pastoral theology (30-32). Biblical theology is set within the wider discipline of exegetical theology, but biblical theology asks this specific question: “By what process has God revealed himself to mankind?” and as a result is able to relate the “whole Bible to our Christian life now” (32).

Goldsworthy is wise to spend a chapter dealing with issues of knowledge. He divides the views of knowledge into three categories: secular humanism, theistic humanism, and Christian theism – arguing of course for the latter as the proper view for studying the Bible as God’s revelation (37-43).

Rather than seeing our study of Scripture as an encounter with mere facts about God, Goldsworthy maintains that theology is about an encounter with God himself, in the person of Jesus Christ. Biblical theology shines a spotlight on Jesus Christ as the one who perfectly reveals God to us.

Personal knowledge of Jesus Christ is vital to correctly understanding the Bible (47). The unbeliever approaches the Old Testament without any presuppositions that would point him to see the progressive nature of Old Testament theology as leading to the New Testament fulfillment. But the Christian approaches the Old Testament after first believing in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Knowing that the gospel revealed in the New Testament is in accordance with the Scriptures (the Old Testament), the Christian can follow the progressive revelation of the Old Testament to its fulfillment in the New (55).

Pointing to the incarnation of Jesus Christ (the Word of God that is both divine and human), Goldsworthy argues for a similar understanding of Scripture. We must not downplay the divine or human aspects of the Word of God. The Bible is the very Word of God – a divine revelation that points to Jesus Christ.

On the other hand, the Bible is given to us through human beings within their own history and culture. The individuality of each author is highlighted, not obliterated. Being a word that is both divine and human, Goldsworthy argues that the truth of God is conveyed without error. “When we speak about the infallibility of the Bible, we mean that it conveys exactly what God intended it to” (63).

Goldsworthy challenges us to avoid the allegorical interpretations that remove history as the stage for revelation. Likewise, we should avoid literalistic interpretations that leave little room for revelation as the interpreter of historical events (67-69).

Tomorrow, we’ll take a look at the rest of According to Plan, and then on Thursday, I will offer a few reflections.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

Final Days in Romania

Corina and I - recording a radio interview this morning in Oradea, Romania

We are finishing up our two-week stay in Romania. The kids have finally adjusted to the time difference (just in time for us to head back home!). Our stay has been delightful. It has been a joy to spend time with friends and family. I have thoroughly enjoyed ministering again in Romania.

Yesterday, I was honored to administer Communion in the village church that I served in before I was ordained as a pastor. We had lunch with the family whose home I stayed in during my weekends in the village back in 2000-02. As we sat around the table and told stories, it seemed to me and Corina that we had never left. Great friends don’t have to catch up. They pick right back up where they left off.

Today, Corina and I recorded a radio interview for a national Christian radio station. We answered many questions about life and ministry in the United States, how our marriage works (since we are from two different cultures/nationalities, etc.), and how Christians are responding to the financial crisis in the United States. I recorded a different radio interview last week. Hopefully, the audio for these two programs will soon be available on this website for any Romanian listeners who might be interested in the contents.

Please pray for us as we pack things up and prepare to say goodbye. We have had a wonderful visit, but we do look forward to going home and continuing the ministry God has given us there.

Be on the look-out for more pictures from our trip. I have posted some to Facebook, but will post some more on the blog next week. Thanks again for your prayers!

Graeme Goldsworthy’s According to Plan

According to Plan: The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bibleby Graeme Goldsworthy is an important and helpful book that seeks to apply the discipline of biblical theology to the text of Scripture.

Too many Christians approach the Bible as a list of rules, general promises, or helpful tidbits to help them in their daily lives. Taking Scriptural verses out of their context can lead to division and incorrect application.

Furthermore, a simplistic appeal to biblical authority can overlook the differences of interpretation encountered by people who are equally committed to the authority of the text.

According to Plan seeks to give Bible readers firm ground on which to stand when interpreting Scripture. Goldsworthy points us to the overarching narrative of the Bible that helps us then understand the individual Bible stories that fit within that larger Story.

Understanding the Story the Bible tells also helps us understand the theological doctrines found in the epistolary material, as well as the poems and songs of the Old Testament.

This week, I will be providing a summary of Goldsworthy’s book and then some interaction with his main points. We’ll begin the summary tomorrow.

written by Trevin Wax  © 2009 Kingdom People blog

A Prayer for Missions

God of truth and love,

Father Son and Holy Spirit,

Hear our prayer for those who do not know You.

We ask that they may come to a saving knowledge of the truth
and that Your Name may be praised among all peoples of the world.

Sustain, inspire and enlighten Your servants
who bring them the Gospel.

Bring fresh vigor to wavering faith;
sustain our faith when it is still fragile.
Continually renew missionary zeal in ourselves and in the Church;
raise up new missionaries who will follow You to the ends of the world.

Make us witnesses to Your goodness;
full of love, strength and faith –
for Your glory and the salvation of the entire world.

- A Prayer for Missions