Musings of a Former Fundamentalist (IFB) Renewed by Reformed Theology
yep, I recommend this link, article or whatever it is
Reconsider the true meaning of Christmas. That’s the message of this short 10 min. video clip produced by St. Helen’s Bishopgate in London. The clip below is designed for those who aren’t Christians. It’d be a great clip to spread on your Facebook page and other places this Christmas. [HT: Justin Taylor]
That’s Christmas (Short Film) HD from St Helen’s Church on Vimeo.
Bible commentaries abound today. Scores of commentaries confront the would-be expositor of any book of the Bible, and almost nobody blinks at a new series of commentaries anymore. It goes without saying that the relative value of a given commentary is all over the map, and here perhaps more than anywhere else, a discerning eye is called for.
You guessed it, I’m getting ready for the “but you have to check out this new commentary series” line. But I really mean it. The new Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (ZECNT) series will live up to any amount of hype one can dig up. I’ve reviewed several commentaries, I own bits and pieces of a score of commentary sets, and have examined others besides, yet this series promises to be a true must-have, when it comes to exegetical commentaries.
Like many other students of Scripture, I’ve been schooled in Greek, but that was some time ago. I also aim to fix an opinion on any passage I plan to teach. But with the amount of scholarly material one must evaluate, the task can be a bit daunting. Opening a commentary for answers can lead to far more questions than originally conceived. And some commentators stand out for their pious, know-it-all approach to informing us of their thoughts on the subject.
In sharp contrast, Thomas Schreiner in his ZECNT commentary on Galatians, excels at making the task of studying and making judgments easy. He provides all the relevant arguments on a given question, both the pros and cons. He defends positions that he ultimately rejects, all in the effort of explaining what is at stake and how to best see the big picture in a given exegetical question.
The clarity and candor on display in Schreiner’s work is complemented by the brilliant (can I use that term of a commentary?) ordering of material conceived by the ZECNT editors. After allowing for an in-depth introduction to set the stage for the book, each unit of the text is addressed in such a way as to best help the teacher or preacher work through the material of the Text and see connections to the overall outline of the book, catching the flow of the larger argument. Greek is used throughout but never in an over the top way. Almost universally, the Greek follows the English, and the effect is to draw one into the Greek arguments more easily, encouraging and promoting the revival of long-forgotten Greek exegetical skills.
Each section begins with a literary context of the unit and a tie in to the over-arching outline of the book. Then the main idea is summarized in a few sentences. The English translation of the text is next given in a special graphical layout which highlights the relationship between the various clauses and phrases which make up the text. Following this, the structure of the textual unit is discussed and a more detailed exegetical outline is provided for the text just before a detailed explanation of the text (with footnotes) is offered. Finally, a pastoral application section concludes the discussion on the passage at hand. Theology is thus applied to life in a masterful way, which will help guide the teacher and pastor to make appropriate and relevant applications from the exegetical study he undertakes.
At the end of the commentary the major themes of the book are discussed, giving an overview, or summary of all that Galatians has covered. This section is a miniature biblical theology in a sense, and will be of great value to those seeking a bigger picture view of the book, before they dive into the separate pieces.
Now on top of all the positive things I’ve mentioned up to this point, Zondervan is to be commended for choosing a competent and careful scholar to pick up his pen for the Galatians commentary. Thomas Schreiner has written books on the question of Paul’s use of the Law, and on the more practical side of how the OT Law relates to Christians. He also is one who’s publicly disputed the New Pauline Perspective, standing for a conservative, Reformed view of justification by faith and imputation. The expertise and faithfulness Schreiner has shown over the years makes him eminently qualified to write this book. And furthermore, his attitude and style in writing remains irenic, open and fair-minded, even when he stands forcefully against a contemporary exegetical trend.
The problem passages are many in Galatians, and Schreiner succeeds in navigating them well. I’m particularly impressed by how the book maintains a pastoral perspective throughout. I shouldn’t be surprised, however, since Schreiner himself is a preaching pastor even as he fills the roles of professor of NT and associate dean of Scripture and interpretation for Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. A fine combination of learning and grace exude from the man himself and this book.
I can’t recommend the work more highly, and I’m now interested in checking out other titles of this exceedingly useful commentary series. If the Galatians volume is truly representative of the larger series, then the Zondervan Exegetical Commentary of the New Testament series is truly a must-have resource for the exegetically minded pastor and teacher.
Pick up a copy of this book at Amazon.com, Westminster Bookstore or directly from Zondervan.
Disclaimer: This book was provided by Zondervan for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.
In Kevin Bauder’s latest article, he discusses the nitty-gritty details of how fellowship and separation pan out in his view. This is the culmination of a long series of articles on the differences between Fundamentalists and Conservative Evangelicals. I think quoting his conclusions at some length here, would be helpful for my readers, but I encourage you to go read the entire post.
Finally we come to the hard part. I have been writing about fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals. In the process, I have tried to articulate briefly a vision of Christian fellowship and separation. This vision involves a boundary (the gospel), outside of which no Christian fellowship is possible. It also involves a center, the whole counsel of God. Increasing levels of fellowship necessarily index to this center.
In my thinking, separation is simply the absence of fellowship. Outside of the boundary, separation is absolute. No Christian recognition should ever be given. Inside the boundary, separation is decided by the extent to which we Christians mutually hold the faith (the whole counsel of God) in its integrity.
Even among fundamentalists, certain separations are unavoidable. These separations are forced upon us when we cannot jointly hold the whole counsel of God in its integrity. In that sense, each separation includes some element of censure. Nevertheless, separation at one level does not necessarily require separation at every other level. Nor do these separations necessarily require that we adopt a contemptuous attitude toward one another. To the contrary, separations can and usually should be carried out with grace and charity.
At the risk of publicly embarrassing a friend, let me cite an example. Some years ago, God in His grace allowed me to make the acquaintance of Dr. Michael Barrett, president of Geneva Reformed Seminary. Dr. Barrett is a committed Presbyterian, while I am a Baptist by conviction. He is a covenant theologian (though a premillennialist), while I am a dispensationalist (though hardly of the Hal Lindsey variety).
It should go without saying that Dr. Barrett and I find our fellowship limited in a number of areas. Both our ecclesiology and our eschatology differ at important points. He is not going to ask me to lecture on baptism and I am not going to ask him to make speeches about pretribulationism.
More importantly, we cannot be pastors in the same church. Dr. Barrett probably could not in good conscience pastor a church that strictly forbade infant baptism. I could not pastor a church that allowed it. Consequently, Dr. Barrett and I are not likely to plant any churches together.
In other words, we separate from one another. We separate in every area that requires a commitment to those areas of eschatology or ecclesiology over which we differ. We cannot cooperate in any way that would require either of us to surrender his obedience (as he understands it) to Christ.
Do not make the mistake, however, of thinking that Dr. Barrett and I see one another as enemies or even opponents. Far from it. When it comes to an understanding of the beauty of holiness, of the majesty of God and the mercy of the Savior, of the importance of gracious affections and the role of sober worship, I find that I have far more in common with Dr. Barrett than I do with most Baptists or dispensationalists.
For the sake of those things, I have a deep respect and love for Dr. Barrett, and I am convinced that he reciprocates. Each of us shares concerns with the other that we share with few other people. We pray for one another. Both of us yearn for God’s best blessings in the ministry of the other. Most germanely, we are committed to fellowshipping and collaborating wherever it is legitimately possible.
To put it baldly, I grieve to be separated from Mike at any level. I see our separation as an evil, and I yearn for the day when our fellowship will be utterly unhindered. If there were a legitimate way of overcoming that separation now, I would pursue it.
Our separation is an evil (an evil circumstance, not an evil act), but it is a necessary evil in view of the alternatives. One alternative would be for one of us to abandon his commitment to obeying Christ. The other alternative would be for us to pretend hypocritically that we are not divided in those areas where divisions really exist. I would sin against Dr. Barrett by asking him to do either of these things.
Until one of us can convince the other of the error of his ways (not a likely prospect at this point in our lives), Dr. Barrett and I will continue to separate from one another where we must. We will also fellowship and work together where we can. We will do both to the glory of God, precisely because we care about one another.
This ought to be our attitude toward all fundamentalists with whom we differ. Indeed, it ought to be our attitude toward all other Christians who stand in some degree of error. We ought to separate where we must, fellowship where we can, and love one another withal.
In my opinion, the now-old new evangelicals were guilty of a very serious error. It was as serious as a Christian can commit. I also believe that hyper-fundamentalists are guilty of errors that are (nearly?) as serious. Very few levels exist at which I can overtly cooperate with exemplars of either group. Fellowship in both instances is severely truncated. Nevertheless, I find leaders in each group who challenge me spiritually and whose examples (at least in limited areas) I wish to emulate. Furthermore, where they are obedient to the Lord and genuinely trying to serve Him, I want them to succeed.
Other fundamentalists do not necessarily draw the lines where I do…. [and] might very well choose to separate from me. That, too, is part of the judgment that they must make, and I must grant them liberty to make it. I am not the one to whom they will answer.
For my part, the dictum is pretty simple. Let us separate where we must. Let us fellowship where we can. Let us love one another withal.
Please do read the whole thing as he includes even more practical examples as to specific decisions he’s had to make. Oh, and plan to read his entire 24 part series while you’re at it! I like the vision of separation and fellowship that Bauder gives. I’m not so sure absence of fellowship entails everything Scripture says of separation, however. Let me know your thoughts if you get a chance. Thanks.
We’re one week away from Christmas, and the Santa questions will start coming thick and heavy for Christian parents. For those of us who love Jesus, what are we to do with Santa?
Well, Mark Driscoll recently wrote an article for The Washington Post’s “On Faith” column about Santa, and he offers some practical advice.
‘Tis the season . . . for parents to decide if they will tell the truth about Santa.
When it comes to cultural issues like Santa, Christians have three options: (1) we can reject it, (2) we can receive it, or (3) we can redeem it.
Since Santa is so pervasive in our culture, it is nearly impossible to simply reject Santa as part of our annual cultural landscape. Still, as parents we don’t feel we can simply receive the entire story of Santa because there is a lot of myth built on top of a true story.
So, as the parents of five children, Grace and I have taken the third position to redeem Santa. We tell our kids that he was a real person who did live a long time ago. We also explain how people dress up as Santa and pretend to be him for fun, kind of like how young children like to dress up as pirates, princesses, superheroes, and a host of other people, real and imaginary. We explain how, in addition to the actual story of Santa, a lot of other stories have been added (e.g., flying reindeer, living in the North Pole, delivering presents to every child in one night) so that Santa is a combination of true and make-believe stories.
We do not, however, demonize Santa. Dressing up, having fun, and using the imagination God gave can be an act of holy worship and is something that, frankly, a lot of adults need to learn from children….
Driscoll goes on to give the history of the true Santa Claus. Did you know that he was an actual bishop who at one time was imprisoned for his faith in Christ and may have even defended Christ’s Deity in the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325? I encourage you to read the entire article and consider giving your children a history lesson on the real Saint Nick this Christmas.
The following articles may assist in providing a biographical sketch of ol’ Kris Kringle.
[HT: Shaun Tabatt]
In today’s church, the Old Testament is often overlooked. When attention is drawn to it, the focus tends to be on creation science, Proverbs for daily living, Psalms for devotional nourishment, and character studies for us to emulate. The Christian church largely focuses on the New Testament for its teaching and preaching. In a sense this is natural, because the New Testament is so definitive for church life. Yet the NT spends a lot of time focusing on the Old Testament, and the early church’s Bible was primarily the OT. In fact, the more one understands and appreciates the message of the Old Testament, the better he or she will be prepared to really be impacted by the teaching of the New Testament.
Thankfully, the last twenty or thirty years have seen a revival of interest in the Old Testament and the recovery of preaching it as a Christian testament. Moralistic surveys of the characters of the Old Testament might have some use, but they are being set aside today in favor of a biblical theological approach that sees a unity in the Bible as a whole. The narrative of Scripture is being seen again as thoroughly Christocentric, and countless believers are being revitalized in their faith through finding the glory of God in the Old Testament afresh.
A big factor in the renaissance of the study of the OT has been the impact of good Christian books. P & R Publishing has produced a series of helpful books on OT themes called The Gospel According to the Old Testament series. The first book in that series is Faith in the Face of Apostasy: The Gospel According to Elijah and Elisha by Raymond B. Dillard.
Dillard’s book and the series as a whole, parts ways from a simple anthropocentric approach to the OT. Such an approach centers on people and their needs, and looks to the OT for examples to follow, and life-lessons to learn. Dillard’s approach, in contrast, focuses on what we can learn about God from the story, remembering that all OT stories have the unique quality of being divine revelation. The “first question” in this approach, “will not be ‘What’s here for me?’ but rather ‘What do I learn about God from this passage?'” Once we learn “about what God is like” from the passage, we are then prepared to ask “How we should I respond to this God?” Dillard then goes a bit further. “For Christian readers of the Old Testament”, he says, “there is yet another step to take…. We need to ask, How can we see God in Christ reconciling the world to himself in the pages of the Hebrew Scriptures? That is, in addition to anthropocentric and theocentric ways of reading the Bible, there is also a Christocentric approach.” (pg. 124-125)
With these goals in mind, the book begins with a historical overview of the time period of Elisha and Elijah and the likely time when Kings was written (the Babylonian exile period). It is interesting to note that Elijah and Elisha are singled out and given almost 1/3 of the space of the entire book of 1-2 Kings. Dillard also traces how later Scripture uses the account of Elijah and Elisha, focusing particularly on the parallels Matthew draws between Elijah and John the Baptist, and Jesus and Elisha.
The book moves on to a treatment of all the texts in 1 and 2 Kings where Elijah and Elisha have an important role. Each chapter contains, two or three passages (quoted entirely) which are discussed individually followed by questions for further reflection. Having the Biblical text included allows for the book’s easy use as a devotional guide. The study questions make it handy for a small group study, and the material covered is simple and direct enough to allow for several uses. The themes developed and traced often throughout Scripture, make this an accessible theological resource, and the brief nature of the thoughts shared make it a perfect tool for pastors, who could easily prepare a longer sermon using the material Dillard offers as their starting point.
Dillard’s exegesis is sound and the application he draws is challenging, relevant and helpful. I particularly enjoyed how he brought to bear a detailed understanding of the historic worship of Baal (from the Ugaritic texts) and how this highlights many of the points made in the stories of Elijah and Elisha. From crossing the Jordan, to the chariot of fire, from the rain being stopped and with fire coming from heaven, all of this relates to the alleged domain and limits of the god Baal. Dillard also excels at translating the concerns of the agrarian age of Elijah and Elisha to our own contemporary problems. Along the way he also develops a thoroughly God-centered approach.
The anticipatory function of Elijah and Elisha (e.g., the confrontation with Baal on the spot of the future battle of Armageddon, the feeding of a hundred men from 20 loaves with food “left over”, and etc.) is highlighted well in this book, even as parallels with Christ are carefully and judiciously drawn. Sometimes more explicit NT connections are left for the discussion questions, and I credit the author with stopping short of stretching too far in finding types and analogies of NT truths in the stories. I was intrigued too by the fascinating parallels drawn between Elijah and Moses when they went to Mount Horeb, and the discussion of the redemptive role of miracles — restoring creation to how it was intended to be.
The stories of Elijah and Elisha are breathtaking, and life-giving in themselves. Just as Elisha’s bones brought a man to life, so too will this book bring life to your spiritual soul as you see those stories in a fresh and faith-filled way. The book may open your eyes to a Christian understanding of the Old Testament that you were unaware of. At the very least it will thrill you to the wonderful, covenant keeping God we serve, and His Son Jesus Christ. I highly recommend this book and others like it in The Gospel According to the Old Testament series.
Disclaimer: This book was provided by Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.
Pick up a copy of this book at Westminster Bookstore, Amazon.com, or through P & R direct.