Child Abuse?

Scot McKnight has some good conversation, again, on the Penal Substitution and the accusation of Child abuse. Check it out...

Fundamentals or Identity?

Chris Tilling and Ben Myers discuss what's the core of Christianity. I must confess that I am tugged towards Ben on this matter, with the comments of Kim Fabricus a necessary edition. Ben notes that:

So what are the “identifying beliefs” of Christian faith? It seems to me that there are two related ones: Christian faith is identified both by its christological character and by its trinitarian character. And at the core of both of these identifying characteristics is a single, central belief: a belief in the unity between Jesus Christ and God.

I would suggest that the instance one associates Jesus Christ with GOD, then one enters both a narrative and symbolic world. One cannot remove Christ from the narrative of Scripture/History. Thus, scripture must play some role in the identity of Christians. For without this backdop of narrative reference, both Christ and God become vague and obscure. Now we can debate the role that scripture must play [I'm liking Vanhoozer's comments on scripture as the "script for the church"], but I'm not convinced that it plays little or no role. It must have some authority in describing GOD's identiry, and thus shaping our identity, or else we become the determiners of meaning - and then relativism destroys the integrity knowledge.

Atonement - Again...

Scot McKnight has thoughts on a collection of essays by evangelical scholars, The Glory of the Atonement. McKnight notes that the emphasis of the book is Penal Substitution.

In short, this view believes the wrath of God (the Father) was poured out on the Son and absorbed by the Son. In this way, the balance of justice is maintained: sin brings judgment (wrath) and the wrath of God must be propitiated. The book’s emphasis is out of balance if one is seeking for anything like a comprehensive theory of atonement in the Bible — for there is more than one (the judicial) story.

My own thoughts on the matter have been variously discussed in Wrath and Atonement and here. I must confess I was rather disappointed with the collection of essays, and I hope McKnight's book brings a balance to the force by noting the range of stories that describe the accomplishments of the cross, resurrection and sending of the Spirit.

I'm rather surprised at this perspective, given the paucity of evidence for it's assertions. I'd like to see McKnight's notion of "protection" investigated more, as that seems exegetically and theologically promising. But not for this student, who is drowning in his own Drama of Doctrine...

Conversion & Loyalty

Phil Harland notes that there is now an online review (by Carolyn Osiek) of Zeba Crook’s excellent book on Paul, “conversion”, and patronage at BMCR:

Zeba A. Crook, Reconceptualising Conversion: Patronage, Loyalty, and Conversion in the Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 130. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2004. Pp. 310. ISBN 3-11-018265-3. €88.00.

Carolyn Osiek notes that:

In sum, Paul was not converted because he had a psychological crisis brought on by a vision, but because it was made clear to him that his patron, God, was asking something new and different from him, and the loyal response of acquiescence was the only way to go.

This seems a rather interesting proposal, and I wonder how evangelical scholars will respond. I especially like the emphasis on loyalty that this model commends. For example, can we be more specific about Paul's patron? Along the lines of including Jesus in that identity? [Ala Bauckham in "Paul's Christology of Divine Identity"] Did Paul conceive, as part of his mission, that he should persuade others to grasp the vision God had given him? And therefore by implication continue in the work that he himself had pioneered? How exactly was it made clear to Paul that his patron, YHWH, was requiring something radically different from him? Was the Damascus event this crucial point, or was it the beginning of a series of crucial turning points...?

Very interesting... Please be aware of Zeba Crook's online article: The Divine Benefactions of Paul the Client.

Mama is a GENIUS!

Well, there's nothing like having the most fab MOM on planet earth! [Seen hiding behind Dr. Dre above... I'm treading on deadly ground posting pictures of "The Mom" but I'll risk this one...]

• Traffic in Truth by Polkinghorne
• Five Speeches that Changed the World by Meyer
• Jesus the Seer by Witherington
• The Climax of Prophecy by Bauckham

These lovely gems arrived today, and will be devoured this weekend, as I celebrate the FIRST weekend off in AGES! Yahoo, and add to that, that tomorrow I will have my Mama and my nephew ring me, well it doesn't get much better than that!

May God's grace spoil them as much as they've spoilt me! Heee hah!

It's Question that Drives us

In the beginning, an empty space. A word breaks the silence, bespeaks a universe; the world dawns. More words; nondescript space acquires shape, becomes a place for forms emerging from the dust. The stage is set. Action!

To be or not to be is not the question, nor our choice. We are “thrown into existence,” says Martin Heidegger. We simply find ourselves in a world. We are here, onstage, with many others. Unaided reason cannot tell us why we are here or what we are to do… Today we have more information about life, and more techniques for sustaining life, than ever before, but we remain flummoxed with regard to the questions of life’s meaning. We have mapped the galaxy, but we are still trying to get our bearings. We have mapped the human genome, but we are still trying to determine what we are. We need guidance as we seek to play our parts, prompting as we grope for our next lines.

Since Chris thinks that Kelly cheated, which I'm sure is just jealousy on Chris' part, I'll let him give the reference to this quote by a rising star among the 'postconservative' crowd. However, extra points go to the person who can state where the heading comes from.

[Hint: It's not a book!]

Who Said?

Even though this book remains, I fear, unreadable for most people outside the guild of New Testament scholarship, the issues pursued here are of serious significance for the church. I have grown increasingly convinced that the struggles of the church in our time are a result of its losing touch with its own gospel story. We have gotten “off message” and therefore lost our way in a culture that tells us many other stories about who we are and where our hope lies. In both the evangelical and liberal wings of Protestantism, there is too much emphasis on individual faith-experience and not enough grounding of our theological discourse in the story of Jesus Christ. My hope, therefore, is that this book will continue to play some role in calling the church back to focussed primary reflection about the story of the Son of God who loved us and gave himself for us in order to rescue us from the present evil age.

Disclaimer: If you're from New Zealand, and you've heard me preach, you may not answer!

Corporate Solidarity

Confession of sin in ancient Israel did not mean unravelling a lengthy laundry-list of personal peccadilloes, with the result that worship of God was turned into a narcissistic reflection on the self. Confession of sin in ancient Israel was a God-centred act of worship that included praise and thanksgiving. Confession of sin often meant recalling God’s gracious deeds for an ungrateful Israel, a humble admission that one was a member of this sinful people, a recounting of the infidelities and apostasies of Israel from early on down to one’s own day, and a final resolve to change and be different from one’s ancestors. Even apart from the question of one’s particular personal sins, one was part of this history of sin simply because one was part of this people.

In some cases, the great prayers confessing apostasy in the Old Testament are uttered by religious individuals who actually have taken no personal part in the nation’s apostasy, though they deeply feel their involvement in the deeds and fate of the people of Israel, from whom they draw their identity. This is the case, for example, with the deeply moving confessional prayers of Ezra [Ezra 9:6-15; Neh 9:6-37].[1]

[1] Meier, Marginal Jew II, 113–14

Accidental & Incidental

Mark Goodacre draws our attention to what he calls the “Forgotten Criterion in the Quest for the Historical Jesus” and "Forgotten Criteria in the Jesus Quest II: View Common to Friend and Foe." A similar form of this criterion is used by Paul Barnett in his book: Jesus and the Logic of History. Barnett makes the claim that:

Because [the letters of] Paul are innocent of any attempt to convey new information about the historical Jesus, such information as they do contain, being incidental, is the more valuable and must be taken carefully into account.[1]

Thus, it should be argued that not only accidental information in the gospels [as Mark points out with regards to the possibility of Jesus owning a home.] but also incidental information that may unknowingly fill us in on some juicy details of what the historical Jesus was like and possibly, what he was up to. Of course, now there will another massive discussion on whether or not the information is actually accidental or incidental but at least this may serve to enlighten us in some areas. As Mark is currently suggesting... Interesting discussion which could have some fruit for our studies... Yes? No? [1] Barnett, Jesus and the Logic of History, pg. 25. Italics mine.

Reality...

“Reality as we know it is the result of a creator god bringing into being a world that is other than himself, and yet which is full of his glory. It was always the intention of this god that creation should one day be flooded with his own life, in a way for which it was prepared from the beginning. As part of the means to this end, the creator brought into being a creature which, by bearing the creator’s image, would bring his wise and loving care to bear upon the creation. By a tragic irony, the creature in question has rebelled against this intention. But the creator has solved this problem in principle in an entirely appropriate way, and as a result is now moving the creation once more toward its originally intended goal. The implementation of this solution now involves the indwelling of this god within his human creatures and ultimately within the whole creation, transforming it into that for which it was made in the beginning.”[1]

[1] N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God, pg. 97-98