Category: Theology

Classic Arm Chair Theology at its best (or should that read worst?)

Quotes to Note 31: On Contemporary Christian Dualism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 4 Comments

In reading through Old Testament Wisdom Literature: A Theological Introduction by Craig G. Bartholomew and Ryan P. O’Dowd, I came across a number of excellent quotes worth remembering [read my full review here]. The following excerpt flows from reflections on how Hebrew wisdom literature celebrates all of God’s creation and details how all aspects of life can be lived for God’s glory.

The dualism mentioned in this quote is all too common in Christian fundamentalism. I think the thoughts below ring true. Let me know what you think.

Creation and wisdom… thoroughly subvert the Christian dualism that has become so commonplace in too much contemporary Christianity in which the “soul” and the church–the sacred–are all that matter while the rest of the creation–the secular–is left to go it’s own way. Theologian Gordon Spykman captures the utter comprehensiveness of wisdom succinctly: “Nothing matters but the kingdom, but because of the kingdom everything matters.” Craig [Bartholomew] often uses the popular chorus: “Turn your eyes upon Jesus, look full in his wonderful face, and the things of earth will grow strangely dim, in the light of his glory and grace,” as an example of the incipient gnosticism in contemporary Christianity. While we understand the positive sentiment in this chorus, we suggest that a wise, more biblical version would be: “Turn your eyes upon Jesus, look full on his wonderful face, and the things of earth will receive their true perspective, in the light of his glory and grace.” [pg. 266-267]

Kevin Bauder’s Eight Characteristics of Hyper-Fundamentalism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 72 Comments

A new book forthcoming from Zondervan includes a chapter from Dr. Kevin Bauder of Central Baptist Theological Seminary in Minneapolis. I won’t talk about the book other than to mention its title, and that it is worth getting! The book is Four Views on the Spectrum of Evangelicalism, edited by Collin Hansen and Andrew Naselli.

I’m still only about half-way through a galley copy of this book, but my eyes lit up when I came across Bauder’s characteristics of hyper-fundamentalism. I think he has captured lightning in a bottle with this list of descriptors, since for a very long time I’ve struggled to pinpoint the cross-over line from reasonable fundamentalism to fundamentalism run wild.

I just have to share Bauder’s eight characteristics of hyper-fundamentalism with you, but I strongly encourage you to get the book and read his entire essay. This quotation is from a pre-published version of the book so it may diverge in part from the final published product.

————————

First, hyper-fundamentalists often understand fundamentalism in terms of loyalty to an organization, movement, or even leader. They equate the defense of the faith with the prosperity of their organization or its leader. Someone who criticizes or contradicts it is subjected to censure or separation.

Second, hyper-fundamentalists sometimes adopt a militant stance regarding some extrabiblical or even antibiblical teaching. [He sites KJV-onlyism as an example.] …When individuals become militant over such nonbiblical teachings, they cross the line into hyper-fundamentalism.

Third, hyper-fundamentlists understand separation in terms of guilt by association. To associate with someone who holds any error constitutes an endorsement of that error….

Fourth, hyper-fundamentalists are marked by an inability to receive criticism. For them, questioning implies weakness or compromise. Any criticism — especially if it is offered publicly — constitutes an attack….

A fifth characteristic of hyper-fundamentalism is anti-intellectualism. Some hyper-fundamentalists view education as detrimental to spiritual well-being…. Colleges, when they exist, are strictly for the purpose of practical training.

Sixth, hyper-fundamentalists sometimes turn nonessentials into tests of fundamentalism. For example, some hyper-fundamentalists assume that only Baptists should be recognized as fundamentalists…. One’s fundamentalist standing may be judged by such criteria as hair length, musical preferences, and whether one allows women to wear trousers.

Seventh, hyper-fundamentalists occasionally treat militant political involvement as a criterion for fundamentalist standing. During the 1960s and 1970s, anticommunism was a definitive factor for some fundamentalists. Its place has now been taken by antiabortion and antihomosexual activism. Most fundamentalists do agree about these issues, but hyper-fundamentalists make militant activism a necessary obligation of the Christian faith.

Eight and last, hyper-fundamentalists sometimes hold a double standard for personal ethics. They see themselves engaged in an ecclesiastical war, and they reason that some things are permissible in a warfare that would not be permissible in ordinary life. They may employ name-calling, half-truths, and innuendo as legitimate weapons. They may excuse broken promises and political backstabbing.

Hyper-fundamentalism takes many forms, including some that I have not listed. Nevertheless, these are the forms that are most frequently encountered. When a version of fundamentalism bears one or more of these marks, it should be viewed as hyper-fundamentalist…

Hyper-fundamentalism is not fundamentalism. It is as a parasite on the fundamentalist movement. For many years it was simply a nuisance, largely ignored by mainstream fundamentalists. Ignoring the problem, however, permitted it to grow. While statistics are not available, hyper-fundamentalists now constitute a significant percentage of self-identified fundamentalists, perhaps even a majority. They have become the noisiest and often the most visible representatives of fundamentalism. They may be the only version of fundamentalism that many people ever see.

–Excerpted from Kevin Bauder’s chapter on Fundamentalism, in Four Views of the Spectrum of Evangelicalism (Zondervan, 2011).

————————

Let me know what you think. Doesn’t Bauder nail it with this description? I think so.

“Old Testament Wisdom Literature: A Theological Introduction” by Craig Bartholomew and Ryan O’Dowd

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

Few Old Testament books are more puzzling than Job and Ecclesiastes. And few books are more frequently misunderstood and misapplied than Proverbs. The Wisdom literature of the Hebrews may be challenging for Western minds to grasp, but it is very rewarding. Craig Bartholomew and Ryan O’Dowd have helped the student of the Bible’s Wisdom literature immensely with their new book Old Testament Wisdom Literature: A Theological Introduction, from IVP Academic.

The authors aim to introduce the reader to Wisdom literature and the theology behind it. This is not just a commentary, although they do offer plenty of insights and comments along the way. Rather it is an introduction and orientation after which one will be more prepared to pick up a commentary an study the Wisdom books more closely.

After the author’s preface and introduction, the book starts with an introduction to Old Testament Wisdom. They compare Egyptian and Babylonian wisdom writings with that of the Hebrews, showing the similarities and differences. The authors appreciate the insights such comparisons provide but make no apologies for the unique approach that the Bible presents. Rather than a pantheon of gods and contradictory wisdom writings, Israel is presented with the one true God, in whose fear is the only place where wisdom can be found.

Next the book gives a helpful treatment of poetry, it’s role in life and the three OT books which are the focus of this work (Job, Ecclesiastes and Proverbs), as well as a discussion of the techniques of Hebrew poetry.

After these introductory chapters, each OT book is discussed as a whole followed by a more in-depth treatment of one special passage: Prov. 31, Job 28, and Eccl. 3:1-15. Next comes a discussion of Jesus as the Wisdom of God, where the New Testament’s treatment of Wisdom and its portrayal of Jesus Christ as Wisdom incarnate.

The book ends with a discussion of the theology of OT Wisdom and then an application of how Wisdom is relevant for today.

My copy of this book is filled with dog-eared pages, scribbles and underlined sections. The authors have done a fabulous job of bringing the best research to bear and digging up the most appropriate quotes for each theme they address. They do a masterful job of discrediting the current criticism of OT Wisdom literature that Proverbs focuses strictly on act-consequence and Job and Ecclesiastes offer a counterpoint or crisis where such a simplistic view is shown to be untenable. Bartholomew and O’Dowd argue that Job and Ecclesiastes merely make what’s implicit in Proverbs, explicit. The nuances and tension in Proverbs itself finds expression in Job and Ecclesiastes. The character of the righteous life is what is blessed in Proverbs, not righteous actions by themselves. And life on earth never realizes divine justice in full.

Proverbs in all its diversity is carefully handled, and I especially appreciated the emphasis on Lady Wisdom and how the Proverbs 31 woman may be understood as Wisdom personified, in a theological way.

The discussion of Job was most illuminating. The struggle and difficulty one has in trying to read through Job is part of the genius of the book, illustrating the perplexing situation Job found himself in. The diagrams in the chapter on Job are helpful, as most of the diagrams sprinkled throughout this work are. I also appreciated the discussion of Job 28 and it’s key role in Job.

Ecclesiastes was similarly handled well. “The Preacher” (or Qohelet) is never expressly said to be Solomon, yet a comparison with Solomon is intended by the author/narrator of Ecclesiastes. The treatment of Ecclesiastes shows how the book traces the intellectual struggle of Qohelet as he struggles with employing Greek wisdom to his world yet knowing the truth that Hebrew wisdom had already taught him. Seeing Ecclesiastes as a struggle with many passages set in “contradictory juxtaposition” with one another, goes a long way in helping one make sense of the book as a whole.

I very much appreciated the discussion of Jesus as the Wisdom of God, it helps to situate OT Wisdom in the redemptive flow of Scripture. The authors resisted a simplistic equation of Jesus and Lady Wisdom, and take pains to show how the authors of the New Testament in their own unique ways appropriated the Wisdom tradition in their exposition of Jesus Christ and his uniquely Divine status and mission.

The final chapters summarizing OT Wisdom theology and it’s impact today is an outstanding example of how to apply Scripture to life and not leave the heady study of doctrine and theology on a shelf away from life in the real world.

The tenor and tack of the authors is profoundly evangelical, yet appreciative of the insights gained from all sorts of scholars. One won’t agree with all of the conclusions of this book, but the clarity and candor with which the authors present their own view is both commendable and refreshing.

Perhaps the point the authors drive home the most is that OT Wisdom literature is anything but dualistic. It is rooted in creation theology and offers us a way to live in God’s world appreciating all of life. I will close with a summary quote which encapsulates the primary message of the OT Wisdom books.

At the heart of the distinction between folly and wisdom is one’s relation to the creation: does one receive it with joy and wonder as the Lord’s gift, or does one make oneself the center around which one relates to the world? The classic term for the latter approach is idolatry. (pg. 316)

I came away from my study of OT Wisdom literature reflecting on the hold idolatry may have in my life. A study of the OT Wisdom books may be just the thing to encourage us to live all of life to God’s glory. Such a study would be greatly helped along by using this book from Bartholomew and O’Dowd as a text-book or study tool. I highly recommend it.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by InterVarsity Press. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

You can purchase a copy of this book from any of these fine retailers: Christianbook.com, Amazon.com or direct from IVP Academic.

Are We Guilty of Homophobia?

~ Bob Hayton ~ 8 Comments

Al Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY, recently was quoted as saying the following in an interview about homosexuality.

“We’ve lied about the nature of homosexuality and have practiced what can only be described as a form of homophobia… We’ve used the “˜choice’ language when it is clear that sexual orientation is a deep inner struggle and not merely a matter of choice.”

He was then asked to defend this statement in the recent SBC Annual Convention. The video of the exchange with SBC pastor and blogger, Peter Lumpkins is here.

I happen to agree with Mohler, especially as he clarified his statements. The Associated Baptist Press summarized Mohler’s response to the question by Lumpkins:

Mohler said at the convention “there is no way anyone in fair mindedness can be confused about what I believe about homosexuality,” because he has written more than 200 articles about it, but that “the reality is that we as Christian churches have not done well on this issue.”

“Evangelicals, thankfully, have failed to take the liberal trajectory of lying about homosexuality and its sinfulness,” Mohler said. “We know that the Bible clearly declares — not only in isolated verses but in the totality of its comprehensive presentation — the fact that homosexuality not only is not God’s best for us, as some try to say, but it is sin.”

“But we as evangelicals have a very sad history in dealing with this issue,” he continued. “We have told not the truth, but we have told about half the truth. We’ve told the biblical truth, and that’s important, but we haven’t applied it in the biblical way.”

“We have said to people that homosexuality is just a choice,” Mohler said. “It’s clear that it’s more than a choice. That doesn’t mean it’s any less sinful, but it does mean it’s not something people can just turn on and turn off. We are not a gospel people unless we understand that only the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ gives a homosexual person any hope of release from homosexuality.”

Mohler said churches have not done their job until “there are those who have been trapped in that sin sitting among us.”

Now the use of “homophobia” is a sticky subject, for sure. But I do agree that Mohler is right. And in this, I echo the sentiments of blogger Elijah Friedeman, and want to quote him at some length (HT: The Aquila Report).

I realize that much of what Mohler said flies in the face of conservative Christianity. No one likes to be called homophobic. And religious people especially don’t like to be called to repentance. But Albert Mohler is absolutely right.

What did Albert Mohler say that was so outrageous? Was it the part about Jesus being the only Savior from sin? Was it the claim that our sinful nature goes beyond a simple choice?Any orthodox Christian should affirm salvation from our sin through Jesus and that we can’t simply decide to turn off our sinful nature.

I know that many conservative Christians want to turn homosexuality into an easy choice. But it doesn’t work like that. Don’t get me wrong. Everyone has a choice about whether or not to engage in sexual acts outside of marriage. But not everyone has a say about whom they’re sexually attracted to.

There are a lot of people in the world with addictive personalities – they’re addicted easily – these people don’t have to give in to their addictive temptations, but they have a problem that can’t be solved with a choice – a problem that only Jesus can fix.

Homosexuality is much the same. Homosexuals have deep-rooted attraction to the same gender that they can’t solve with a choice. Mohler stated that homosexuality, like any other sin, requires a Savior. When did that become a radical sentiment? Last I checked, it’s a biblical concept.

But I have a feeling that most people disagreed with Mohler, because he labeled Southern Baptists as homophobic.

I can’t speak to homophobia in Southern Baptist churches. I’ll have to trust Mohler on that front (apparently he explained exactly how Southern Baptists are homophobic, but I can’t find the transcript). But I know from what I’ve seen, read, and heard, a form of homophobia is very present in many conservative churches.

For some reason there is an irrational fear of and extreme aversion to homosexuals in a lot of churches. We may not come right out and say that we think homosexuals are nasty creatures, but if you read between the lines, it’s pretty easy to pick up on. This is homophobia.

We should not elevate homosexuality above other sins. If we condemn homosexuality as sin, we must also condemn other forms of sexual immorality as sin.

I’ve seen many religious people castigate homosexuals, but turn a blind eye to the other, more pervasive, forms of sins in the church. I’m more concerned about the prevalence of divorce in churches than I am about a few cases of homosexuals trying to silence their critics.

What do you think? Is Mohler totally off base? As for me, I’m standing with him on this one.

For more on this question, see other articles on homosexuality I’ve posted here on my blog. You’ll find reviews of two helpful books I’ve read on this topic.

Book Giveaway: The Essence of Christian Doctrine by Martin Murphy

~ Bob Hayton

I recently reviewed The Essence of Christian Doctrine by Martin Murphy. This little book is an excellent primer on the Christian life and would make for good discipleship material.

Well, the author informed me there is an updated edition available now of his book, and he’d like to offer two giveaway copies to the readers of my blog. So now through Wednesday 6/29 at 9pm, we’ll host a book giveaway for one of these two copies. Just fill out the Google form below to enter the contest. Spread the word about the contest for additional entries (details below).

You can find out more about this book at any of these fine retailers: Christianbook.com, Amazon.com, or direct from Theocentric Publishing Group.

Contest is now closed.

Congrats to Craig Hurst and James Farrat for being the winners in our contest.