The Discipleship of Reading: An Opinion

"When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, and my scrolls, especially the parchments" - Paul

What is the relationship of reading and ministry? Or more specifically is there a correlation between reading and preaching and teaching? Should there be a relationship? Is reading an area of discipleship for the minister?

I grew up in a tradition that delivered mixed signals regarding ministry and reading. Oh! the rumblings of discontent at International Bible College (now Heritage Christian University) when General Jackson Wheeler made ministerial students read classics in a required English class. I recall more that one student declaring there was no relevance of this to preaching. "All I need to read is the Bible!" was the mantra. I recall in a class with Steve Williams on the history of Christian doctrine those same tremors. "Why should we be reading this, it is a waste of time. What is Athanasius, Augustine, Luther ... or even Campbell to me?" Since entering full time ministry in 1992 I have encountered the same ambiguity. I personally know ministers who are serious students of the Word and I have encountered others whom I feel sorry for the folks who listen to them.

A few years ago Jackson Carroll published a survey of 2,500 American clergy in Christian Century. In this survey the typical minister spent 4 hours reading each week (this includes "mainline" and "conservative" ministers). The ministers were asked what 3 authors they read most. Among the conservatives Max Lucado, Rick Warren and T.D. Jakes in that selection. The last three books to have been read included The Prayer of Jabez, Fresh Wind; Fresh Fire, and Purpose Driven Church ... the Left Behind Series was prominent too. Read Carroll's findings HERE.

Carroll's survey, though dated now, probably still reflects the basic orientation of reading habits of ministers. Some of the reading reflects the "hot" book of the day and some pragmatic issues like growing a church. Yet much of what is being digested is, frankly, shallow. I was gratified that C. S. Lewis is one that is read among clergy ... but in my own personal experience I know few ministers that have read much of Lewis.

But if reading IS connected to ministry, including pastoral care, how should we go about cultivating it? Paul in 2 Timothy 4.13 asks for his scrolls, which more than likely refers to his Septuagint ... but the parchments seems to have a broader meaning. If Paul felt it necessary to cultivate the discipleship of reading it probably would serve us well too.

Eugene Peterson suggests that ministers actually block out time (lets say one hour) everyday not only for prayer but also for reading. Reading that is not related to the current sermon topic. Reading is in the service of the spiritual life and personal growth. In what areas should we read?

First, I believe every minster should be a student of the Word in the fullest sense. An astronomer knows about astronomy. A minster should know about the Word. When a young person heads to college and reads about Gilgamesh and inquires of his long time preacher I submit the preacher should know about Gilgamesh without resorting to special pleading or caricature. In a day and time when lots of folks read about the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Thomas, and the Gospel of Judas the minister ought to have at least heard of those things. So in my view a minister will absorb (over time) an understanding of the unified Story of Scripture, and the individual settings of the individual books. Fall in love with the Book and know about the book. Know about the history of the Bible ... Astronomers know who Galileo was and what he did. Ministers should know who Jerome, Wycliff, Luther and Tyndale all have in common.

Second, I believe every minister should know the general contours of the story of Christianity AND their own situation in that story within their tradition. Contrary to popular mythology what happened between 100 AD and 2009 AD does matter because those years shape in profound ways not only what we think but what we actually hear and see. Believe it or not it even affects how we interpret the Scriptures themselves ... which themselves are a product of those intervening years from 100 to 2009!

Third, I believe every minister should cultivate the habit of reading some of the great minds of the world. These minds have wrestled in profound ways with issues that we continue to face. We learn, again contrary to popular mythology, that faith is complex and not for the weak of heart. We are actually reading and reflecting on Scripture itself as we read with Ignatius, Augustine, Luther, and Campbell. It is the "communion of saints" as we wrestle together. These minds will also include Plato, Maimonides, among others that will help us lift up our eyes.

Fourth, I believe every minister should read about practical ministry too. I have read at least one book on preaching every year for the last 10 years. Ministry with divorcees has been an obvious need in my own life for the past two years. Or working in the Singles world (I am one of those millions of singles in the church today). But even in this area pastoral care needs to be rooted in healthy theology. In this category I would put reading in a way that expands our ministerial "imagination" to work in and through our particular time and place.

There are those who will disagree with my views expressed in this post. Yet it seems to me that we are disciples. That is we are Students. If we are to address our ever complex world we must have a depth of understanding of the Word, our Situation, and World. Here is a short list of Good books that fall into the above categories:

Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament, John Walton; A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament, Walter Brueggemann (etc), Knowing Jesus through the Old Testament, Christopher J.H. Wright; The Challenge of Jesus, N.T. Wright; Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Everett Ferguson; In the Beginning, Alister McGrath; The Story of Christianity, 2 Vols Justo Gonzalez; The Lost History of Christianity, Philip Jenkins; Reviving the Ancient Faith, Richard Hughes; Theology for the Community of God, Stanley Grenz; Preaching the Sermon on the Mount, Fleer & Bland; Radical Recovery, Suzy Brown ... a few gems.

Reframing the Question

I am taking a brief diversion from our mediations on Jesus & Sabbath to reflect on a question that was put to me the other day. It is not the first time that this question (though perhaps not in the exact same words) has been asked of me. The question is:

"Can a person perform worship acts incorrectly, or the wrong acts altogether, and still be pleasing to God?" Another form of this question is "Can a person be baptized for the wrong reason and be pleasing to God?"

I think the question is misframed from the start. I compare this framing of the question to the lawyer who is "leading the witness" in a court setting. The framing of the question distorts the testimony of Scripture. In answer to THAT misframed question the answers are ...

Clearly there are worship acts that are displeasing to God. Clearly there are worship acts that are wrong.

HOWEVER The question is, rather, does the Biblical narrative testify to people 1) either leaving a worship act "undone" or 2) performing a worship "act" incorrectly ... and being accepted by God inspite of the reality that it is wrong? THIS IS THE QUESTION.

Framing the question(s) this way highlights what the Scriptures ACTUALLY testify too. What does the Story of God reveal? When we look at the unified narrative of God through Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Kings, Chronicles, to name but a few scenes from that drama of grace, what do we see? They testify too:

1) That yes there are wrong acts of worship
2) That God's People often fail in their attempt to worship properly

AND embedded in the Story we see

3) That CORRECT acts of worship can and are DISPLEASING to God as much as incorrect ones
4) That People can and have (according to the Holy Spirit's testimony) done incorrect worship acts and yet were ACCEPTED by God.

Now anyone with beyond a freshman level knowledge of the biblical story knows that all four statements above are TRUE. Sometimes these themes are juxtaposed in the same narrative.

For Example:

Nadab and Abihu did get toasted for insulting the holiness of God (Lev 10.1-11). This is a story that is often used to present half of the biblical truth. Yet this disaster is contrasted (by the Holy Spirit) with Eleazar and Ithamar (Lev 10.12-20). What is the purpose of this bringing together two very similar "mistakes" but with radically different results? Why are one set of brothers destroyed and the other set granted healing mercy and divine grace? Do we dare affirm that Yahweh is simply arbitrary!! What do we discern that is the difference: was the difference one of technical precision or was the difference located within the often conflicted human heart? Since I revolt at the notion that the Father of Jesus is purely arbitrary I embrace the notion, highlighted repeatedly in the biblical narrative, that God accepted Eleazar & Ithamar on the basis of knowing their hearts. It shows no respect for either the interity or the authority of Scripture to embrace the first story and hide or deny ... or denigrate ... the latter. Such a precedure reveals more about the person than either God or the biblical text.

Though at times Leviticus 10.11ff, and my next example are characterized as "sugarstick" texts, the Holy Spirit of God saw fit to tell the story of those who did very little according to the "book" in 2 Chronicles 29-30. The story of Hezekiah's Passover is no fleeting moment in the history of God's People according to the Chronicler. By comparison it is one of the longest and most detailed episodes within the entire history of 1-2 Chronicles. The author thought it was THAT important. The Holy Spirit expressly declares that the worshippers did practically nothing associated with the Passover "right" ... and yet it is declared to be one of the greatest worship services in Israel's history (v. 26). For God looks at the "heart" that is "seeking God" (v.19) rather than simply ritualistic precision. Sugarstick or not this text is IN the biblical canon and is written for our learning. How do we integrate it into our theology and what does it say about the God we worship?

In another place one wonders what King David was doing wearing the linen ephod? David is much like any other Mesopotamian monarch of the day in doing this. He is assuming the role of Priest and King. The ephod part of the High Priest's vestments but David was neither Aaronic nor Levite! Yet the Scriptures tell us (2x) that he was wearing it (2 Sam 6.14 and 1 Chron 15.27). This latter text is very interesting indeed. In the context David is bringing the ark back (after the Lord broke out against Israel in the Uzzah episode ... which David later assumes responsibility for). David dresses like the Levites with his "linen robe" (15.27) he wore the linon ephod (v.27) that the Priest wears. As the narrative moves into chapter 16 it states quite explicitly that David offered the sacrifices ...

"After David had finished sacrificing the burnt offerings and fellowship offerings, he blessed the people in the name of the LORD. Then he gave a loaf of bread, a cake of dates and a cake of raisins to each Israelite man and woman" (1Chron 16.2-3)

In Second Samuel 6.13 David also is declared to have sacrificed animals as worship to the LORD. After the sacrifices David gave a magnificent hymn to Asaph for the singing worship of Israel (16.7-36). Interestingly enough as this worship service closes at the end of chapter 16 we learn that they sang with all kinds of instruments but the writer says everything Israel did that day was in "accordance" with the Law of the Lord (16.40). This clearly does not mean that David was authorized to wear a linen ephod of the High Priest in the Law of Moses or that instruments were commanded by Moses or that David could offer sacrifices according to the Law of Moses. But it does mean that God ACCEPTED that worship service.

On the other hand in the biblical canon we read of "legal" worship that is rejected by God. Amos roasts the Israelites for their worship. He flays the worship assemblies! God "hates" Israel's feasts, assemblies, new moons, sabbaths and sacrifice! All of these things were commanded, explicitly, in the Law of Moses. Yet God rejects their formally correct worship for the exact same reason he accepts the formally INcorrect worship of Eleazar/Ithamar, David, and Hezekiah. Yahweh looks for the heart that "seeks God." Now that phrase is not used explicitly in Amos 5 but that is the meaning in the text. Israel's interest in going through the motions, in ignoring the weightier matters of the law (sounds like Jesus actually), made the worship stink in God's nostrils!!!

So I stress once again the question is NOT are there worship acts that can be undone and we "please" God. Or are there worship acts that can be done INcorrectly. The answer is yes there are. We want to serve God in purity of heart and we also want to worship as he directs. Yet the question that actually fits the biblical narrative is: "Can one perform an act of worship incorrectly and still be accepted by God?" According to the Holy Spirit Yahweh has done this on more than one occasion.

Shalom,
Bobby Valentine
Tucson, AZ

Jesus, David, Sabbath & Mercy #1: Reading Mat 12

I plan on doing a series of posts related to Matthew 12.1ff on Jesus and the Sabbath. I plan on placing the text in its historical setting first; second I want to place it with in the argument of the Gospel of Matthew (which has a plot just as surely as Romans or Philippians) ; and third I want to see how Jesus' makes use of the material from the Hebrew Bible. I hope to make reading these posts worth the time of everyone. Even if we do not come to the same conclusions regarding it perhaps we will all see it in fresh light.


Jesus, David, Sabbath & Mercy #1: Reading Matthew 12

Introductory Remarks

For anyone who has read the New Testament scriptures after the Hebrew Bible we learn that the circumcision and sabbath controversy figures more in the former than the latter. Indeed, circumcision is not mentioned in connection with any controversy and not much at all in the Hebrew Bible. The sabbath principle, however, underlies a large portion of the Hebraic doctrine of "grace" and even eschatology ... Sabbath is the basis for the Year of Jubilee etc. The only real controversy is in Jeremiah when the king and people renege on the promised release of slaves in accordance with the Sabbath of Sabbaths the year of release/favor/ grace.

It was the history of God's People, especially the previous 2 centuries before Jesus, that brought the sabbath and circumcision to the fore front. Through the fire of the Selucid persecution with its banning both circumcision and sabbath these two items gained in existential importance. As a result of this persecution these two features became THE identifying marks of Judaism in the Roman Empire. Just as Instrumental Music has become tied to the very identity of the Churches of Christ (and for the same sort of reasons) so these became essential to Jewish sense of identity.

A note on social context. First century Judaism was NOT simply the religion that we read about in the "Old Testament" or Hebrew Bible. Many historical/social forces caused changes in the way the faith of Israel was expressed. Other sources, once highly regarded and even believed to be canonical, helped shape those views. One such work, Jubilees has very important material on the Sabbath.

Jubilees was considered canonical by the Qumran community. The Dead Sea Scroll Bible edited by Abegg, Flint and Ulrich notes that Jubilees is cited as scripture by several non-biblical Dead Sea Scrolls, most importantly by the Damascus Document which is sort of a constitution for the community. Jubilees is represented by 15 scrolls found among the Qumran treasure. Only Psalms, Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Exodus and Genesis (in descending order) are represented by more scrolls than Jubilees. At any rate Jubilees was a very important work among Jews (and later among many Church Fathers) in Jesus day and it helps us understand what most pious Jews actually believed about the Sabbath in the time of Jesus ...

Sabbath Theology and Beliefs (a Snippet)

According to Jubilees, most pious Jews believed the Sabbath was something that even God and the angels observed in heaven. It was in existence prior to the creation of the world. It was a "sign" of something beyond "this" world ...

"And he [God] gave us a great sign, the sabbath day, so that we might work six days and observe a sabbath from all work on the seventh day. And he told us [i.e the Angels] - all the angels of the presence and the angels of sanctification, these two great kinds- that we might keep the sabbath with him [God] in heaven and on earth. And he said to us, 'Behold I shall separate for myself a people from among the nations. And they will also keep the sabbath ..." (Jubilees 2.17-19)

From this text we see that most Jews believed that God himself observed the sabbath before the creation of the world, that the angels were privileged to observe it with him and that one of the purposes of calling Israel was to observe the "sign" ... that is the sign of the transcendent realm ... of the sabbath with God and the angels on earth.

Jubilees helps understand not only some of the lofty opinions regarding the sabbath but sheds light on what the majority of Jews thought to be "work" and "lawful" on the sabbath day. The Angel who delivers the message in Jubilees closes chapter 2 discussing what is considered work. The Angel declares:

"Let everyone who defiles it [i.e. the sabbath] let him surely die." (2.25; cf. 50.8, 13) )

So even though the death penalty was not enforced in Jesus' day by Jews for breaking the sabbath it is clear that many still held the view that such should be the case. The Angel continues by describing the kind of work that shall not be done

"And they should not prepare thereon anything which will be eaten or drunk, which they have not prepared on the sixth day ... On this day we kept the sabbath in heaven before it was made known to any human ..." (Jubilees 2. 29f)

The Rabbis (and rabbinic Judaism is ONE form of Judaism which seemingly preserves the traditions of the Pharisees) codified in the Mishnah several kinds of work that were forbidden. This list was designed to protect the sanctity of the sabbath (as they understood it). There views were rooted in the interpretation of the Torah and likely Jubilees too. The words of Jubilees and the Mishnah help frame the question that was put to Jesus. "Reaping" was understood to be forbidden on the sabbath day (cf. Exodus 34.21) by the rabbis. It was not just the reaping but eating food that was not prepared the prior day.

The folks from Qumran that gave us the Dead Sea Scrolls agreed with Jubilees (since Jubilees seems to have been considered Scripture at Qumran this should not surprise us) and the Rabbis (and the folks at Qumran were not Pharisees). But the Damascus Document states,

"Let only that be eaten on the Sabbath day which has been prepared on the previous day." (X, 22)

Interestingly enough the Rabbis agree with Jesus that saving a life (learned through the horror of the Maccabean revolt) is permitted on the sabbath. The Qumran folks forbade that AND helping your animal out of the ditch. The Pharisees were the "liberals" of the day believe it or not. The Essenes were the arch conservatives of the day. It is important to note that the Pharisees believed it was lawful to save a LIFE on the sabbath but a physcican was forbidden to practice medicine in NON-life threatening situations. Thus to set a bone was forbidden. This highlights the tension in the pericope following the field episode.


The Sabbath in the Fire Pit

I pointed out above that the Selucid Empire attempted to integrate the Israelites more fully into a Hellenistic culture. The meant adopting Greek worship and piety. One consequence was the elimination of those practices that were alien to the Greeks. It was a costly and deadly experience for the great grandparents of the Pharisees who confronted Jesus that day ...

According to the decree, they put to death the women who had their children
circumcised, and their families and those who circumcised them; and they hung the infants from their mothers’ necks. But many in Israel stood firm and were resolved in their hearts not to eat unclean food. They chose to die rather than be defiled by food or to profane the holy covenant; and they did die. And very great wrath came upon Israel (1 Maccabees 1.60-64).

It was through the blood of Israel that the Sabbath and circumcision became foremost in defining what a "Jew" is. When we imagine ourselves pointing to grandparents, aunts and uncles that lost their lives rather than compromise on these two points then we begin to see the trauma of the sabbath controversies in the Gospels and the early church.

One more helpful tidbit when reading these stories in Matthew 12 is that it was believed that David visited the tabernacle in 1 Samuel 21 on the sabbath day. In our next post, when we look at how Jesus uses these examples from the Scriptures, we will see why.

I hasten to say that Jesus did not reject sabbath theology. In fact the Gospels present Jesus' ministry as the coming of that gracious Sabbath of Sabbaths. Jesus' issue is altogether different.

Shalom,
Bobby Valentine
Tucson, AZ

K. C. Moser: Student of the Word

Alister McGrath in his recent outstanding study Christianity's Dangerous Idea asserts Protestantism gift to Christianity was the belief that all people have the right to read and interpret the Scriptures for themselves. This "democratizing agenda" as McGrath terms it (p. 53) is certainly one that the founders of the Stone-Campbell Movement embraced with enthusiasm. These individual readings, over time, became collective readings that were more often than not shaped by controversies (p. 204). In our own Movement the rhetoric of freedom to study to "show ourselves approved unto God" has remained a constant. Yet many conclusions arrived at through the polemics that lead to the separation of Churches of Christ from the Disciples have led to powerful social impulses to conform to these assured results.

Though most frequently seen as the lighting rod in the "Man vs the Plan" controversy, Kenny Carl Moser is a case study in the protestant principle within one individual. Here is an outline of his life ...

Born January 23, 1893

1914 Publishes “I’ll Take Jesus,” and “Marching On to Glory-Land” in Hosanna to the King, No.2 edited by Emmett S. Dean (Trio Music Company)

1914 Approved by the Texas Dept of Education to teach

1915 Enters Thorp Springs Christian College (has discussions with father and C. R.
Nichol on the indwelling Spirit)

1918 Teaches Music at Thorp Springs

1919 Preacher in Normangee, TX. Publishes first known article (“Doing the Will of God” in October 23 Firm Foundation

1920 Preacher in Longview, TX

1921-23 Ministers with the Wewoka church. Co-Editor of The Herald of Truth

1923-26 Minister with 10th & Francis Church in Okla City. Teaches the personal
indwelling of the Spirit for the first time here in 1925

1926? Frederick, Okla

1927-30? Back to Wewoka Published Studies in Romans (Outlines and Comments)

1930-? Abilene, TX

1932 The Way of Salvation

1933-34 Associate at Tenth & Austin, Wichita Falls, TX (publishes “Can the Gospel Be Obeyed?)

1935 Ardmore, Okla Publishes “Six Gospel Sermons”

1937 Publishes “Are We Preaching the Gospel?”

1937-40 Morton/Lubbock, TX

1939 Appears on the ACC Lectureship

1940-47 Preaches for 12th & Drexel in Okla City

1947-50 Enid, Okla

1948-49 Staff writer for World Vision

1952 Publishes Christ Vs. A Plan

1950-56? Back to 12th & Drexel

1956 Moves to Lubbock

1957 Publishes The Gist of Romans

1960 Publishes A Re-Study of Salvation (a revised version of “Christ Vs A Plan)

1964 Accepts teaching position at LCC

1974 Contributes essay, “Our Lack of Understanding of the Person and Mission of Jesus” to J. D. Thomas’ What Lack We Yet?

1976 February 17, enters his rest

1976 Last published article appears in 20th Century Christian six weeks after his death. It is called, appropriately, “Jesus and the Resurrection.”

Moser began his spiritual adventure rooted squarely in the "Texas Tradition [1]" The Firm Foundation was the principle organ of this theological stream within Churches of Christ. The power to conform is testified to by Moser, "I was brought up at the feet of teachers who denied the indwelling of the Spirit and for no better reason I denied it too. After I began to study for myself, I soon discovered that no doctrine is more plainly taught than the doctrine of the indwelling Spirit.” This quote reveals Moser passion for spiritual integrity before God. He inherited a position on the Holy Spirit but embraced a very unpopular position because he began to "study for [himself]."

Moser found himself in deep trouble because he embrace the rhetoric of studying for himself as a birthright. Through his writing career he exhibits a pioneering attitude and vigorous independence in his study of the Word of God. Moser believed there were three critical principles involved in God honoring Bible study.

1) the disciple must have an intelligent method of study

2) the disciple must be honest

3) the disciple must embrace a non-sectarian spirit

By method Moser meant a close contextual reading of any passage of Scripture. As a contributor for both the Gospel Advocate and World Vision Moser chose the title "Text and Context" for his columns.

By honesty Moser meant "a sincere desire to know the truth." The disciple seeks "to be taught himself" not to be a teacher of others. The disciple does not approach the text to "prove another wrong." Rather the goal is to be lead by God's Spirit to understanding and living the truth that is discovered.

By embracing a non-sectarian spirit Moser meant the disciple has no special loyalty to "our position." In fact "my, your, or our position might be unadulterated error." The sectarian spirit is among all the enemies of spiritual Bible study the worst. Sectarianism spills blood! Again testifying to the power to conform Moser states
"there are too many who are willing to sacrifice the influence and good name of those who differ from themselves; and, too, for the reason, chiefly, that some one is considered out of line with 'our position.' To pronounce one a heretic simply because he is out of line with others is ... rank sectarianism." There are plenty who live in fear of their own convictions because they may "be put out of the synagogue."

Moser's testimony to the power of coercion was experienced in his own life. He was kicked out of the Texas synagogue and found a welcome with in the Nashville Bible School stream of the Churches of Christ. His courage to actually compare his inherited faith against a careful and dedicated reading of the Scripture is worthy of emulation. G. C. Brewer commented on Moser's approach as "the most encouraging thing I have seen ... among the disciples of Christ" in decades.

It is my prayer that Christianity's Dangerous Idea will once again take root among "us." I pray that ministers, elders, deacons, pew packers will follow Moser's example. Let's embrace a method that respects the narrative context of the Bible. Let's seek after the truth and embrace it as God enables us. Let's embrace a non-sectarian attitude that does not assume that "our" position is the correct one but rather once again returns to the Word seeking enlightenment from above. Lets pray for eyes to see the river of the Spirit and for ears to hear the rhythm of grace.

Shalom,
Bobby Valentine



[1] For more on the difference between the "Texas Tradition" and the "Nashville Bible School Tradition" in Churches of Christ see John Mark Hicks and Bobby Valentine, Kingdom Come: Embracing the Spiritual Legacy of David Lipscomb and James Harding; John Mark Hicks "The Struggle for the Soul of the Churches of Christ (1897-1907) and Bobby Valentine "Lipscomb of Texas vs. Lipscomb of Nashville: R. L. Whiteside's Rejection of David Lipscomb's Pacifism" both of these are in Thomas Olbricht & David Fleer (eds) And the Word Became Flesh: Studies in History, Communication, and Scripture in Memory of Michael W. Casey.

Il Divo ::: Amazing Grace

An awesome rendition of one of the most recognized songs of the Christian faith

Books ... Opening Our Minds ... Expanding our World

"Reading is to the mind what exercise is to the body" -Sir Richard Steele

Reading helps us understand our world and our place within it. Being a person that is often alone at night, and a person that does not have cable/satellite tv, I find several hours each night that are "silent." Until recently I did not have internet at home either ... so how to fill that time? Well I read ... and watch movies if I can. Most of the books I read will be non-fiction (there are exceptions to this) and often religious/historical in nature. Here are a few works that I have enjoyed ...

Often when "we" think of American Indians the image of tee pees come to mind. A couple years ago I learned of the Anasazi, a people that flourished a thousand years ago. I took the girls to camp in Chaco Canyon in NM in the shadows of their ruins. What an awesome sight reminding me of pictures of Babylon or Ur! I just finished reading Kendrick Frazier's People of Chaco: A Canyon and Its Culture (revised and expanded). Frazier, and other scholars, dislike the term Anasazi however. These Americans were a sophisticated group of people with engineering and architectural skills that are amazing. Pueblo Bonita is a marvel that so few US Americans know about.

I have been on a "NT" backgrounds kick lately. I have read two very good but very different works recently in this area. Paul Barnett's older (1990s) Behind the Scenes of the New Testament (IVP) is an outstanding and sprightly composed work. It has lots of line drawings, maps and charts to help conceptualize the information. In eleven chapters he covers the history of the first century as it relates to the New Testament. Two outstanding chapters were "Why Was Jesus Remembered?" and "The Gospels" are worth the book. This is an ideal book for a Sunday School teacher, elder, preacher that does not want to get overwhelmed and has limited knowledge of the social context of early Christianity. Reading the Gospels, Acts and Epistles will be enriched by Barnett. I am always looking for a good solid work I can recommend for students and this is one.

Shaye J. D. Cohen's From the Maccabees to the Mishnah spotlights the specific subject of Jewish life, faith and practice in the centuries before and after Jesus. Unlike Barnett who follows a basic chronological approach throughout his work, Cohen divides his material into themes like Jews & Gentiles; Jewish Religion, Practices & Beliefs; Sectarian & Normative; and the Emergence of Rabbinic Judaism among others. Each chapter then develops its theme in a sort of chronological fashion. Written on a slightly different level than Barnett this work is still highly readable. One very helpful section is Cohen's exposition of how "most" Jews believed they should relate to the state and how that was rooted in Jeremiah's letter to the Captives in Babylon. Another helpful and illuminating section is his exposition of Christianity as a Jewish "sect." He convincingly shows (and succinctly) shows how Christianity, especially in Luke-Acts is seen as a "legitimate development of Judaism." The last chapter on the rise of Rabbinic Judaism ... a POST AD 70 development ... is rich. It is here that the eventual separation of "Christianity" from the "rabbis" is to be found. Cohen is right about the Jewish matrix of Jesus, Peter, James, John, and especially Paul. This is one of those books that should be absorbed by serious New Testament students.

Steve Mason's Josephus and the New Testament is a very helpful book. He notes that Josephus is a "perennial bestseller, much loved, occasionally quoted, hardly ever read." Mason believes that Josephus is the "most significant non-biblical writer for NT interpretation." If this is so then why is that so few actually read Josephus? Because the works of Josephus are more extensive than the Hebrew Bible itself, because he seems to ramble "endlessly" in places; and the most accessible edition of Josephus (Whiston's) is as old as the KJV! Mason, a Josephus scholar, envisions his book as a "road map" to the mass that is Josephus. He guides us first into the proper use and the often shoddy "abuse" of Josephus (he is especially critical of some earlier 20th century scholarship). Then he introduces us to the man himself and his writings. He looks at "Whose Who in the New Testament World" as Josephus sees them. His chapter on Josephus and Luke/Acts is very good. I enjoyed this book very much and for those who wish to "dig" deeper in the word and pay attention to the "context" of the Living Word and how that is witnessed to in the written word this will be a valuable tool.

Blessings as we all strive to be better students of the word ...

Shalom,
Bobby Valentine

Thinking about Martin Luther? Disciple? Heretic? Worse?

Greetings from the land of Saguaros and Scorpions. Sometimes I am simply amazed at, in MY perception, how tunnel visioned we as a group of people can be.

Here at Palo Verde we have been doing our 120 Days through the Bible. Last night in my Bible class we reviewed the reading since Sunday (Joshua 1-Judges 10). As we have gone through and read this material in God's word I have once again been struck by two significant facts that seeming smack us up side the head:

1) Yahweh is incredibly gracious, long suffering and merciful

2) God's People are incredibly rebellious, blind, disobedient, reach incredible LOWS ... it is hard to conceive of a LOWER point than in some of Judges. And yet though full of sin and apostasy they remain God's People.

Surely if that which was written before was for our learning we can learn something about the way God relates to his people. He calls them to a very HIGH ideal and deals with them with incredible long suffering and mercy.

Further when we look at the leaders of God's People from Joshua to Samson the quality seems fairly low (Joshua clearly being the best of the bunch but then there was the Gibeonite episode). If Samson showed up on my door step to ask my daughter out I'd call the cops!!! Yet the Lord of Grace did in fact use them and blessed their feeble efforts.

Now when I move from the history of God's people within Scripture to that of "profane" history and I see men like Martin Luther and ask myself how he would compare to Jepthah or Samson. Clearly he was mistaken (like Joshua whose mistake cost the ENTIRE people!) on stuff. Even important stuff. Yet I wonder if God changed how he looked at human beings from the time of Samson to Martin Luther? One wonders if Luther would have been satisfied with just one night of dew on the ground and a dry cloth? Or if Luther would have visited prostitutes before bringing a visitation to the Philistines? I am just wondering "out loud?" Are Luther's sins greater than those recorded in Judges when "every man did what was right in his own eyes." I wonder if the grace Samson found was denied to Luther?

Interestingly enough it is only in fairly recent times that restoration Christians decided that Luther was not much better than a pagan. Alexander Campbell could chastize those who CLAIMED the epitaph "Protestant" as traitors to Luther,

"O for another Luther, to lash the popery of false Protestants, who prefer implicit surrender of their own judgment to the decision of ... pretenders to divine wisdom ...

In his debate with Rice, Campbell extolled his gratitude and respect not only on Martin Luther and John Calvin but their predecessors. Specifically of Luther and Calvin he says these astonishing words about Luther and Calvin. They,

"were God's chosen vessels to accomplish at the proper time a mighty moral revolution, whose might, sway and extended empire over the human mind and destinies of the world, have not yet been fully appreciated." (Campbell-Rice Debate, p. 587).

Those are interesting words. Now Campbell, someone will say was not inspired and I agree. His opinion matters for nothing right!!! However I think Campbell recognized something quite significant ... perfection of either understanding or practice is not what makes one a part of the family of God or makes a people the People of God. Could it be that Luther was in fact truly a disciple. That term is used to describe the "Way" that is the people of Jesus in the NT more than any other term (by a long way). It neither implies "arrivedness" or "perfection" ... rather the term implies the people of God are sophmoric and imperfect ... always learning and growing.

Thus I think Luther was in fact a disciple of Christ. How Luther's errors are worse than Israel's I fail to be able to discern ... but that is just me. Lord, we pray thee, to have mercy on our arrogance and our inability to even perceive YOUR work in the cracked pot Martin Luther.

Shalom,
Bobby Valentine
Tucson, AZ

A "Day" in the Life of Bobby ... and Tifani

Since I began this blog on April 11, 2006 there have been many twists and turns in the life of this Stoned-Campbell Disciple. My family made the trek from the land of beer and cheese in Milwaukee to the land of Saguaros and Scorpions in the Arizona desert. We went from snow in April to sunburns in January!! We moved from one awesome congregation of the Lord's family to another. Along the way the Jobian experience of divorce ravaged the sanctity of my family. All along, in the happy times and the not so happy times, I have blended the personal with thoughts on biblical themes and opinions on contemporary life. I thank my readers who have been remarkably devoted for some reason. I get emails on almost a daily basis about my blog and for this I am grateful ... grateful that God has used it to bless someone somewhere out there. I plan on returning to a regular routine of blogging. I have worked on one for a long time and it has grown into something far beyond a blog post. That will appear very soon ...

But in the spirit of being on a journey and sharing my bad days and my good days I offer another page in the life of Bobby, Rachael and Talya Valentine. The readers that are on my Facebook will already know this but God has been faithful to me and my family. I praise him for the church family here in Tucson and back in Milwaukee. I have many friends that have loved me through the dark days.

As God blessed Job he has blessed me too with a new page ... a new "Day" in the on going life of Bobby V and family. My blessing is exactly five foot eight with long flowing dark brown hair and sparkling dark eyes. This blessing deeply loves the Lord, she can recite the shema in Hebrew, loves to laugh and cut up. She is compassionate and giving. She loves to ride my Harley through the mountains. She loves to jam to music (even Pink Floyd!). And get this she likes football. She is so beautiful that Song of Songs was probably written about her ... especially chapter 4! This blessing is named Tifani. She has blown my pea sized brain away!! We pray and read together ... it is wonderful. She has two children just like me (Avery and Evan). She has had some of the same experiences (sad ones) that befell the Valentines but she has not been embittered. Sometimes I am simply amazed at her capacity for grace! I have often talked about grace but she lives it. We have been dating since March of this year and interestingly enough we have known and had the same friends since high school...but never knew each other. Some things are simply mysterious!! Marvelously So!!!

To make a long story shorter I recently asked Tifani to be my wife. She said yes! I cannot begin to express how wonderful a person she is. After my divorce I dated a number of women after I could actually wrap my mind around that reality. They were all fine but I longed for something that would never be. Beyonce has a song called Halo that captures what Tifani did, or God did through Tifani ...

"Remember those walls I built
Well, baby they're tumbling down
And they didn't even put up a fight
They didn't even make up a sound

I found a way to let you in
But I never really had a doubt
Standing in the light of your halo
I got my angel now ...

Everywhere I'm looking now
I'm surrounded by your embrace
Baby I see your halo
You know your my saving grace ..."

Great song. Great words. For me that is. It is amazing how God can work and we do not even know it. Here are a few pictures of my gal pal ...













Enjoy the song and lyrics of Halo ... and Beyonce has a beautiful voice ...



Blessings,
Bobby V

Hermeneutics: A Salvation Matter!? Reflecting on Thomas B. Warren

As I type these words I am sitting at a table at Starbucks sipping on an iced double shot hazelnut latte. I'm here with a few books and my manuscript for my K. C. Moser book. Let me share some thoughts ... unrefined as they are:

I grew up singing lyrics penned by John Fawcett, "How precious is the Book divine, By inspiration given! Bright as a lamp its precepts shine, To guide my soul to heaven." In singing these words we intended to affirm our commitment to the Bible as the written word of God and its essential importance in the life of the Church. We were, and are, a "people of the book." We, the faith progeny of Barton Stone and Alexander Campbell, have rhetorically "amened" Chillingworth as he quipped "The Bible, the Bible alone, the religion of Protestants." Thus in our rhetoric we affirmed two basic core tenets of our identity: 1) the sufficiency of scripture and 2) the perspicuity or clarity of scripture. These notions so ingrained into our collective Stone-Campbell DNA are often heard as "all I need is the Bible." "We don't interpret the Bible, we just obey it," "It means what it says and says what it means." Or some other such slogan ... and we have all used them at one point or another.

Though we have, at times, vociferously attacked any notion that we "interpret" the Bible and that a disciple needs any sort of spiritual help outside of the Bible ... I want to pose the question "Is that a polemical mask? a Ploy?" Do we hide a secret within our church closet the truth that we do in fact not only believe we MUST interpret the Bible but that it must be interpreted in a SPECIFIC and PARTICULAR way to arrive at already believed propositions (i.e. doctrinal statements)? I believe the only answer to this question is in the affirmative. Our most conservative scholars have taught us that simply reading and believing the Bible is not enough rather the run of the mill disciple must be educated to a certain way of interpretation for her soul depends upon it.

I draw upon Thomas B. Warren's "When is an 'Example' Binding? as a classic example. Warren was a great and classic polemicist in the last half of the 20th century. He challenged atheists like Anthony Flew as well as those within his own circle of fellowship. "When is an 'Example' Binding?" was first published in 1975 and remains a critical textbook among many today. My first encounter with the book was in a class called "Establishing Biblical Authority" with Kippy Myers, now a professor at Freed Hardeman University. "When is an 'Example'" is a difficult book to read at best but if we get beyond Warren's writing style it is fascinating in its claims.

For Warren a reader of the Bible begins with a philosophy of some sort. He critiques three (Empiricism, Romanticism, and Idealism, pp 11-13). "Philosophy leads theology around by the nose" he states (p. 10). It is "logic," however, that is lens through which we are to read the scriptures. The kind of logic we can use for biblical interpretation is found in, among other places, Logic, An Introduction by Lionel Ruby (a book I was required to read in school). "The Bible is the most logical book which has ever been written" (p. 9).

Warren exerts tremendous mental energy through a series of exercises that make scriptural interpretation as methodical and (seemingly) precise as a Calculus textbook does with mathematics. The underlying cause for this is that hermeneutics is, when all is said and done, actually a salvation issue. This is stated explicitly (and I did not catch this for many years).

"The importance of this problem is seen in the following facts: 1) Only God's truth (the Bible) can free men from sin (John 8:32), 2) one must learn not only what the Bible SAYS but also what it MEANS."

There are a number of critical problems here that call out for attention. For starters the Scriptures do not teach that the "Bible" sets humans free from sin and the citation of John 8.32 does not support such a claim. The "truth" that sets us free in the Gospel of John is the Messiah himself not the Bible and certainly not the Bible as Protestants understand the term. "Truth" is a Person "I AM ... THE Truth" (John 14.6). But for our purposes note that Warren makes it crystal clear that the MEANING of the Scripture is NOT self-evident but must be interpreted according to his understanding of logic. This becomes even clearer as we read ...

"It is important for each person to learn as much of what the Bible SAYS as he possibly can, but it is conceivable that one might MEMORIZE the entire Bible itself and NOT understand what it MEANS. One must learn not only what the Bible SAYS but ALSO how the various statements ... relate to one another" (pp. 7-8)

We all agree with Warren we need to have a "big picture" view of Scripture. Yet for our purposes here we need to see that interpretation is declared essential. The laser becomes more focused ...

"Even if one gained knowledge of that God is and that the Bible is His word, he still COULD NOT BE SAVED [my emphasis] by such knowledge if he did not know how to properly INTERPRET the Bible" (pp. 8-9). (For similar statements on the necessity of interpretation to get the real meaning of Scripture see pp. 20, 121, etc) This is far removed from "it means what it says and says what it means!"

Hermeneutics is a salvation issue! One does not simply learn about God through the Bible. Indeed we may learn all that and still could not be saved. Salvation hinges on interpretation. Thus the importance, and urgency, of the matter for Warren. The issue of MEANING is important for two reasons as we work our way through Warren's thoughts:

1) the Bible can, and does, mean MORE than what it actually says for a person living today

2) the Bible can, and does, mean LESS (and even the OPPOSITE) of what it actually says

I'm using my own words here but that is the "basic thesis of the book" a phrase that pops up repeatedly in the book. One must accept this "basic thesis" or be in danger of missing the true meaning of scripture and endangering the soul. Through the lens of logic we can reduce the the biblical materials to a series of Propositions and arrive at the actual "word of God" which may be, btw, MORE than the Bible claims or LESS depending on issue and circumstance.

Through the proper use of logic, according to Warren, faithful Christians can actually construct a reading that directly and explicitly contradicts the actual words of the text. In fact to DO what the text says is "sin" and to do the opposite is to "obey" God's revealed will. First Corinthians 14.39-40 is one of Warren's examples. It reads,

"Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues; yet everything should be done in a fitting fashion."

A proper understanding of the meaning of this text is a matter of salvation for Warren. I want to point out two important (to me) points about the meaning of this text as Warren understands it. First that the conclusion which he arrives at will be agreed with, he says, IF we recognize "the truthfulness of and (b) by acting in harmony with the basic thesis of this book" (p. 54f). So unless one agrees and endorses Warren's approach to LOGIC one will never actually understand the MEANING of the text for you and me. Second, when the cards are down it is not logic that determines the meaning of this text for us but rather rejection theologically unacceptable conclusions. "If one rejects the basic thesis of this book, THEN HE HAS NO WAY OF SHOWING THAT THE COMMANDS IN VERSE 39 ARE NOT BINDING ..." (p.55, my emphasis). Warren has to show that v.39 is not binding because if he doesn't he cannot tell folks not to speak in tongues! Or to not to want to prophesy! His logic is driven by polemics and not by either the immediate context or the remote context (his lingo).

A faithful Christian, indeed possibly a Christian period, must forbid speaking in tongues and cannot be eager to prophesy. So by accepting the logic of Warren we learn that we must disobey what the apostle actually said and in so doing we will save our souls. The text MEANS nothing like what it appears to mean:

"[R]ather than being under obligation not to forbid men to 'speak in tongues' ... Christians living today ARE under obligation to teach others it is wrong either to attempt to or to claim to be able to 'speak in tongues.' This is the case because the total evidence of the Bible warrants this deduction." (p. 55).

I wonder what Warren would say if some one used the same "logic" for the passage just a few verses away in 14.34? Would not Thomas' allies say such a person did not believe in the "authority of the Bible?"

First Corinthians 14 is not the only place where it is clear that the fear of an "unacceptable" conclusion drives the Warren's hermeneutic and not the biblical text or even logic. Later he soundly rejects the notion that only explicit commands are binding on humans because "if this doctrine were true, it follows that no one could rightly say, 'You must not use instrumental music in the worship of God; it is sinful to do so" (p. 100). Warren has already at that conclusion (just as he did regarding 1 C 14.39) and any approach that calls the CONCLUSION into question is to be rejected out of hand. Rather we "must" accept the basic premise of the book and THEN the conclusions will follow ... the ONLY acceptable conclusions. Conclusions already believed. Alister McGrath opined "It is important to appreciate that Protestant readings of the Bible are often shaped by past controversies" (Christianity's Dangerous Idea: The Protestant Revolution, p.204). The same can be said here. Warren has positions that are arrived at not by biblical exegesis but were hammered out in a polemical arena. Within the construct of Thomas B Warren correct biblical interpretation is simply another rung on the ladder we erect to heaven. It is, in my view, works salvation. If we misinterpret 1 C 14.39 it will cost us our salvation. This approach, it seems to me, breeds arrogance. It breeds self reliance. It all but denies the role of sin in our human apprehension of truth. It multiplies division and schism exponentially. This is serious stuff.

I believe in the Bible and ALL of the Bible. I believe the Bible is "logical" but certainly it is not a book of logic. It has a rhyme, it has a reason, it has a flow, it has an organic unity and it has a Story. I believe Scripture must be wrestled with and digested and prayed over and consumed for the life of the disciple and the Gathered People of God.

I do not believe the Bible is the Savior. The Crucified and Risen Messiah is. People had faith in him and lived in fellowship with him and each other long before there was something like our present Protestant Bibles. I believe God has given us Scripture to nourish us as we walk with him ... so I sing "give me the Bible" and laud the excellencies of the written Word as it points me to the Living Word who dwells with his people to this very day. I hope to offer another post that may have some helpful pointers to a more theologically healthy hermeneutic.

My comments on Brother Warren's book should not in ANY way be understood as an attack on him. I value his efforts to serve the Lord and thank God for his courage and faithfulness. His approach to the issue of hermeneutics is where I demur from him.

I am sorry for the long absence in my blogging. I promise to be more faithful with it in the future.

Twilight Thoughts of Alexander Campbell: An Interview

In the Twilight Years of Alexander Campbell he lectured and preached extensively to the Bethany College community. By this time Alexander Campbell was a saintly old gentleman and a seasoned reflective student of Scripture. For those who know only Campbell's "Sermon on the Law" might be surprised a large chunk of his hermeneutical enterprise was focused on the Pentateuch. In 1859 and 1860 his lectures were recorded and later published after the Civil War by W. T. Moore as Familiar Lectures on the Pentateuch. Also recorded in this same period were extensive extracts from his sermons. What follows is an imaginary interview with the old Reformer ... I will refer to quotations by Extract numbers as printed in Familiar Lectures ...

Elder Campbell the reformation you promote has exalted the Bible. Can you share your mature thoughts on that old religious tome?

"The Bible is a perfect chart for the entire voyage of life. Beyond that it has no value. It is not adapted to man in Heaven or Hell." (# 21). But the "vast deal of Bible reading, in these latter days [is] for the purpose of enabling men to stand erect upon a particular point of faith, peculiar to themselves ... than with obtaining a clear and unbiased understanding and truthful appreciation of the intent and meaning of Holy Writ" (# 9).

Elder Campbell what kind of book is the Bible?

"[T]he Holy Scriptures have every form of expression. We have not only poetry and prose, precepts, promises and threats; but all various forms and usages of human speech ... It is very proper that this should be so. For this book is addressed to man, by Him who alone comprehends him in his relations to his fellow man and to his Creator ... It is worthy of observation, that in the Bible as addressed to man, God does not deal in abstractions." (#11)

Do you have a favorite part of Scripture or is there any "more important" than other parts?

"No man has ever suggested an improvement to the parables of the Saviour ... they are the wisest exhibitions of literature in the world." (# LXXX). However "among the most important ecclesiastical documents are the two oracles, which we sometimes denominate the kernel of Christianity - the Epistles of Paul to the Romans and to the Hebrews. They contain the most comprehensive and complete exposition of all that enters into Christian faith and worship, ever spoken or written." (# LXXXV)

Elder Campbell, in our day Christians have retreated from the physicality of the world. Do you have any mature thoughts on Creation and its destiny?

Absolutely! "The principles of creation are: First, goodness, the actuating: Second, wisdom, the directing: third, power, the executive principle" (# 8). The order here is important. "The universe itself is the offspring of God's love. It was not created simply because he had the wisdom and power to do it. The element of love entered into the intention, characterized the execution, and approved the completion of his labors." (# 18). Its all about God's love!

Some have been influenced by the materialism of the Enlightenment and have abandoned biblical teaching. You see "the impression prevails in many minds that the earth is to be annihilated. Such is not our belief. There is a vast difference between annihilation and change ... This earth will will unquestionably be burned, yet through the process of variation and reconstruction of its elements, God will fashion the earth and heavens anew, and fill them with tenants to glorify His name forever" (# 13; cf #LXVI). The victory of the Messiah goes as far as the curse is found.

One final question Elder Campbell, what kind of God do you worship?

"I worship a great God and a little God...He is so large that he fills the universe with his presence, and so small that he dwells in my heart. [A]nd if the love of God fills the heart of man, he must be happy." (# XCVII)

Thank you for the courtesy of the interview Elder Campbell. Your thoughts certainly exhibit years of study and worship. Thank you for sharing them with us ... we will have to reflect on them ourselves.

God is enough

Been reflecting on Psalm 73 for days now ... i found this incredible video and had to share it ...

Slow Fade - Casting Crowns - Fireproof

Great Song ... Great Message

N.T. Wright on the Postmodern Movement 2

This is part of a larger interview of N.T. Wright at the Pastors Retreat of the Los Ranchos Presbytery held in Malibu CA. It is worth listening too

Three Crises: An Evening Chat ... World, Church, Life

Its the late evening here in the desert ... as I write this I am on the back porch, laptop and I looking up at the starry sky ... makes me ask how reflective are we? How introspective can we be? How honest can we be with ourselves and with others? Has anyone else noticed? Or am I just so delusional that I have failed to have eyes and ears to truly see and hear? Let me tell you what I see and then you tell me what you see.

I am only forty years old and the world I live in has drastically changed in my own lifetime. It seems to me that the world is in the throes of an identity crises. We are moving (with more velocity daily) from a Euro-American centric world to an Asian one. The rate of change is intimidating and mind numbingly immense. My barely two hundred year old non-denomination denomination is locked in a life and death mid-life crises that mirrors the chaos of the wider cultural earthquake. And to make matters worse I, Bobby Valentine, am also in the middle of an identity crises! A thread that runs through all of these crises is a poltergeist comically named "Postmodernism." It is both the engine that drives SOME of the tremors and a result of the aftershocks from these cracks in the "Modern" world.

I grew up believing and being comfortable with a certain perspective of the world. This, whether I like it or not and no matter how patriotic one may be, is changing and will never be the same again. Crises! My non-denomination denomination has been trying to come to terms with itself for nearly the length of my life and the old "identity" markers have caved because they were built upon sand of Modernity and the inevitable storm has seen them crash and wash away. Crises! My personal identity was wrapped up so much in being a husband and even Dad that I never stopped to consider how unsure a foundation that really is. Storm came: Divorce from hell. Every other weekend dad. Illusions shattered. Crises!!!!

The crises around us are not a small dust devil but rather a world wide Hurricane Katrina that will alter the maps of the world, the maps of our religious selves and our "personal" life as well. The crises of the surrounding world yanked my head out of the sand when the Grim Reaper knocked on my door ...

For the last year and a half I have been trying to "see" me, see my church, and see my world as it really is. I am not so sure I have done that successfully. I was already looking before the Reaper arrived but he made me do some serious soul searching in all the above areas. To find out who "I" really am I talked to a counselor, cried, cussed, lamented ... and more than any other time in my life I became Israel! He who struggles with God!! God made me look in the mirror and ask tough questions of my world, of my non-denomination denomination, and my family. The most fundamental question of all was "WHO are you Bobby V?"

To answer the question God sent me to his Word. He asked me to listen. He asked me to be silent. He asked me to kneel. He asked me to "give IT up" ... whatever "it" is. He drove me, yes DROVE me, into the Word. I began to realize that the Word is not simply about or even primarily about elders, deacons, and names on a building. The Story actually has surprisingly little interest in this kind of stuff. God challenged me to hear IN his written word his Word for my world, my church, and my life.

I saw, in the written word, that David lived out the Word in a way that was true and yet different than Moses. That the early church revered the written word but sought how to hear the word to them in their own day. I recalled reading in the written word where Paul was accused of seeking popularity for preaching a "law free" gospel (cf Gal 1.10). Sometimes being true to the written Word in our own day causes us to look like "liberal" to those who only see but never understand (meditate on Matthew 12.1-14 and 13.13-15).

For a year and a half I have munched on Scripture like I have never before. Psalms is my daily companion. The Gospels pull me in in a way that I just did not understand at one time. My life has a rhythm that was not there once before. The Story of God in scripture and being with him in worship have been God's tool of giving me eyes to see what I could not before ... and frankly would have preferred not too!!

I have learned that is it is ok to embrace a truly resident alien point of view. This alleviates the stress of the Asian shift in the balance of power in the world. I've learned it is ok to pledge allegiance to the kingdom of God regardless of the ramifications. I have learned that my non-denomination denomination has been shaped by the "myth" of Modernity rather than sola scriptura as we have claimed. Indeed I have come to believe that my task is to help the church live with in the counter world envisioned by the written world in the power of the Living Word. And I have learned that my own identity is not in a marriage, fatherhood or anything else but hidden in the Messiah ... which is why I began to wear a new ring ... a black ring with a crown of thorns woven on it.

Our world is changing and drastically so. But we have safety and refuge within God's global kingdom. Our church is changing and it will not look like it did in AD 50; AD 1000; AD 1878; AD 1906 or even AD 1970. But Jesus is training us to seek out "old treasures" as well as "new (meditate on Matthew 13.52). And my own life will never again be like it was prior to December 16, 2007 ... never! Just like the world will not go back. The church can't go back even if some have illusions that they can. We see to weather the crises by being saturated with God's Story and shaped by it that we can live our faithfully and truthfully in our own day and our own time the Gospel of Christ crucified and the reign of God over all.

Well I have rambled long enough. I invite you to watch the video below. It will help us see just how our world is changing ... and ask the question from a kingdom standpoint: What does it all mean?

Train - Calling All Angels

One of my favs for the last year and a half ...

Extreme-Watching, Waiting

1989! Extreme ... I remember it well. Can rockers sing about the crucifixion? They did. I was blown away by it when I was 21/22 and I still love it ...

Books for Loving God with our Minds and our Hearts

On my way back from Pepperdine I had several hours in the dark by myself. During those dark hours I listened to Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. This Pulitzer Prize winner is a fascinating attempt to understand the incredible economic and technological disparity that has existed between various segments of humanity. Or to put it differently "Why did Europe come to dominate the modern world?" Digging (and thinking) deeply into such realities as how geography and even food production has impacted human development since 11,000 B.C. I confess that I do not buy into all of Diamond's interpretations but this is a book that really helps us wrestle with the reality of just "why" the world is the way it is.

I recently purchased two books on baptism and is history. Daniel Keeran's Ancient and Medieval Baptismal Fonts and Everett Ferguson's Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries. Keeran's is a small book consisting basically of photographs baptismal fonts in Israel, Italy, and other Mediterranean cultures. Christianity has left more than literary remains and Keeran has shared an important slice of Christian history by looking at the "archeology" of baptism so to speak. This book will ... without even saying so ... deepen our appreciation for the practice of baptism in the early church. One baptismal basin is illustrated on pages 18 and 19. It dates to the 4th and 5th centuries and is located about 25 miles southwest of Beersheba. It is so interesting because it is in the shape of a cross and vividly illustrates such texts as Romans 6 or Colossians 2.12.

Ferguson's book is massive! I have only surveyed this work so far and I cannot wait to sink my "teeth" into it. More soon ...