It was with great anticipation that I opened a package that appeared on my doorstep a couple of weeks ago – an advance copy of the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Volume 1 (Genesis – Deuteronomy) – which is part of the complete Old Testament Set released this past Monday. You see, my good buddy, Christian Penrod, had pointed me to an opportunity to get a copy of one of Zondervan’s OT Bible Backgrounds Commentaries to review – and, in all honesty, I don’t know that I was all that excited.

I’ve been let down by a number of Bible commentaries over the years – particularly OT commentaries – which, at best, acknowledge that Abraham and his descendents fit within the culture of their geography, and at worst, pretended the Hebrew culture was wholly unique, enlightened and only negatively impacted by “foreign” cultures. The truth of the matter is – as many of you, my frequent readers know – the Hebrew people, from Abraham through Jesus and his followers, were culturally influenced – and cultural influencers – with their own “pop culture” references that take more than a literalist hermeneutic to crack.

The Hermeneutic is Key

Many lay Christians have a hard time going beyond a literal hermeneutic, primarily because they know of no other method, and – in essence – end up using an a-historical-grammatical method – in essence, filling in the cultural “gaps” (i.e. reading between the lines) with modern cultural references and meanings, based upon the grammer used in their chosen translation.

In contrast, most well-read preachers/teachers, tend to use some form of historical-grammatical method, in which they try to examine the original meaning of the text – as first heard and taught – and then apply the principles at hand to the modern culture of their listeners. However, the historical context used often stops when the immediate boundary of the Hebrew/Christian culture at hand – or when a systematic theology developed centuries (or millenia) later conflicts with the culturally relevant meaning.

Examining the wider culture in which the Hebrews and/or Christians lived, though, is often ignored. One key reason tends to be that liberal scholars have tried to use such comparative studies, which show similarities in cultural beliefs/practices, to discredit Christianity as a shadow, or amalgam, of other contemporary beliefs.

This does not need to be the case. In fact, it should not be.

What Zondervan has done with its ZIBBCOT series it to take a highly respectful study of the cultures and events surrounding the people of the Bible, and compared them, verse-by-verse, with the experience of the Hebrews and Christians. In addressing their methodology, General Editor John H. Walton states:

Read the rest of this entry »

I am reading So Beautiful by Leonard Sweet and came across this gem on page 85:

There are many features in my ministry that get me in trouble with certain segments of the Christian community, but perhaps the biggest of them all and the one I least understand is the way I am deemed guilty by association because I quote certain people. I admit it: I quote anyone. I quote the good, the bad, and the ugly… especially the bad and the ugly. I get this from John Wesley, who enjoyed everybody he met and believed he had something to learn from everybody. I begin every day with the assumption that everyone I meet has something to teach me. I begin every day with the assumption that the most important people in my life I haven’t met yet.

I’m currently working on a case study for one of my classes. It involves forgiveness. One of the “highly suggested books” to read is called Unpacking Forgiveness by Chris Brauns.  It’s an interesting book. The basic premise is that we are not called to forgive a person until they repent and ask for it. He states that is called Biblical forgiveness. He believes that forgiveness and reconciliation can never be separated and can only be given to a person who wants to be forgiven. He believes that Christians should always be ready to forgive.

He defines forgiveness as a commitment by the offended to pardon graciously the repentant from moral liability and to be reconciled to that person, although not all consequences are necessarily eliminated. (pp. 72)

His three basic ideas about forgiveness when dealing with an unrepentant offender are:

1. Resolve not to take revenge
2. Proactively show love
3. Don’t forgive the unrepentant,  but leave room for the wrath of God.

Of course, his third principle is the most controversial. He  quotes Romans 12: 17-21, especially verse 19 as his proof text. THose verses say,

¹⁷Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. ¹⁸If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. ¹⁹Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”^[d]says the Lord. ²⁰On the contrary:
“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”^{[e] 21}Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (emphasis his)

So,  I know this is kind of unfair since you haven’t read the book (or maybe some of you have) but I’m curious what are you thoughts about his definition and his principles of dealing with the unrepentant person? Please don’t assume that I agree or disagree with the guy. I had to read the book and apply it the case study. I’m chewing on that paper now. I’ll look forward to your thoughts.

The book can be found at Amazon here.

I have a facebook friend who posted this as his status update. A friend of his wrote it in response to yesterday’s vote in Maine that repealed a law passed by the Maine legislature on marriage between homosexuals. I wonder what you think:

I want to give the church a big congratulations for their victory tonight in Maine.

Once again, you kept your eyes on the prize and won. I mean, why wouldn’t you win? You have G-d on your side! Your biggest talent lies in fundraising and your marketing departments never fail. Even though you could use a better PR department, you do a good enough job to get done what you want done. After all, fear is the best way to motivate people.

Tonight you’ve won Maine but you’ve lost the point.

Another 50,000 hungry people died today. Darfur continues. Shonda says she doesn’t need the man who just beat her and left her pregnant with another child. Church… you’ve won Maine but you’ve lost the point.

You’re no longer a place for comfort, healing, advice, direction, or peace. Rather, you’re just another political machine covered in your own filfthy agenda to make everyone look, act, love, and sound just like you through the use of fear.

Your hate is speaking louder than your love. Tonight, you’ve won Maine but you’ve lost the point.

I’m only asking you to comment on this article, not on the particular actions of the voters. Do you think this article is fair?* Do you think this is a fair comparison/contrast?

Thanks for participating.

*It should be noted that ‘gay-marriage’ has failed in 31 states now when put to the vote.

It’s easy to see the ills of the sin of partiality when we think of differentiating between fellow believers based on race or wealth or appearance in the context of our own communities, those we actually see or with whom we interact.

But how should the command to show no partiality as we hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ (cf. James 2) affect our view of those we never see… of believers who are commies or wear towels on their heads?

The title of this post is a chant I heard in a movie. In the context, men were training for the military. The implied question was “How long will we need to fight?” And the answer – “…until all the commies and towel-heads are all dead!”

The obvious offensiveness of the reference aside, it’s easy to understand how this attitude is spun in the context of a Cold-War or War on Terror. And certainly nations such as ours have the need to defend themselves.

Yet, as we study the application of our faith and the command to treat all believers with equal respect and dignity – it makes me wonder how the church, how American Christians, should think and react when our nation undertakes policies that a) benefit us as believers in THIS country while b) adversely effecting believers in THAT country. And do I even think of the ramifications to them? Where is the balancing point between being citizen of a country and a member of a body?

This need for balance is aptly illustrated by the monumental work One Nation Under God, by Jon McNaughton. The work is truly monumental, and the thought McNaughton put into his work impressive… if not thoroughly unbiblical and misguided. I would offer a rebuttal, but Greg Boyd offers what I think is a fine rebuttal in his post “Painted Idolatry.” Boyd has other views that render him controversial, that said, his rebuttal to the idolatry and quite possibly the blasphemy of McNaughton stands on it’s own merit.

While supporting my country and its right to exist without threat… while celebrating the good that my country has done and even God’s involvement in that – I am challenged to remind myself that I am not so much an American Christian as I am a member of the Body of Christ who happens to live in America. The difference may be nuanced in semantics, but the ramifications should be far reaching.

UPDATE: If you follow the link that says you can ask the artist a question he has a rebuttal to Boyd. And while McNaughton makes some good points about people defending their freedoms – he fails to address Boyd’s (and my) objection to his tying the Savior to nationalistic endeavors.

Here’s a happy thought for you to consider:

“Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction.”

I’ll leave the source a mystery.

jerry

PS-I hope this isn’t a repeat. If it was, I’m sorry. My wife just read it to me a little bit ago and it sounded like a great quote for this series.

Today’s Gospel lesson was taken from Mark 12:28-34.

And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher. You have truly said that he is one, and there is no other besides him. And to love him with all the heart and with all the understanding and with all the strength, and to love one’s neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.” And when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And after that no one dared to ask him any more questions.

I’m sure all of you have heard sermons from this passage or read it. Maybe you have a t-shirt with these words emblazoned on them. I do not know what you have done with these verses, if anything.

This morning as they were read to the congregation by the pastor heard something that struck me as meaningful. It’s that small word: ‘is’. It is there in plain sight. It’s not making any attempt to hide itself. There it is.

Is.

The greatest commandment is. (v 29)

There is no other commandment greater than these. (v 32)

‘Is’ bookends Jesus’ thoughts.

And not only that, but Jesus’ answer stymied everyone so badly that ‘from then on no one dared to ask him any more questions.’ Not one more? Really?

So what Mark is saying is that Jesus’ answer was so profound, so deep, so meaningful, so wonderful, so inspired that it answered all questions they had and all questions they might be considering. Whatever question they might have had from that day forward, in the future, they could not ask because, for better or worse, they remembered this answer and it silenced them. (I wish I had that sort of intellectual prowess.)

Is.

The tense of the verb has not changed. I suspect that if Jesus were standing right beside us, or if he were over there and we had to run up to him, and we asked him this question his response would be the same.

There’s not much point in giving us any other commands. I think I know what the fella was getting at. It was something like, “OK. I’ll just ask Jesus what the greatest command is. I’ll do it. Then I’ll be all set.” Then Jesus completely undoes the man by telling him that the greatest command is neither as sublime nor mundane as he might have supposed. It’s neither; it’s both.

Is.

I think Jesus’ point is something like this: “You are gonna have trouble enough with this one. Manage this and you will be set.” Right.

It’s enough to love God and to love people. That love will manifest itself in a thousand million ways. For some it will mean suffering alongside those who suffer, for others it will mean marching alongside those who march. For some it will mean protesting the vilest and most disgraceful among us, and for others it will mean giving a cup of cold water in Jesus’ name to our worst enemy. For some it will mean fighting wars, for others fighting peace. It will mean discovering and rediscovering each day how to love people, all the people, whose paths we cross, whose lives intersect ours, a thousand times a day.

Right now loving my neighbor means loving a young man in my neighborhood who treated my youngest son badly today, physically by hitting him and emotionally by saying vulgar things about my son’s mother. I know I could call him out (he’s on my little league team and really wants to pitch next year). I could call his mother. I could make him stand in the hallway at lunch tomorrow and eat by himself. I could impose my fairly large size and intimidate him. But that would not be love, would it?

Is.

The command doesn’t change just because we do. The command has not been altered or rescinded just because we are seeing Jesus say it on paper and not with his mouth. The command has not been countered just because we hear it in our hearts and not with our ears. I heard someone say, “You can love your neighbor without loving God, but you cannot love God without loving your neighbor.” True.

Sometimes I wish we had the option though, don’t you?

I have to teach my son that I will protect him, but that I also still love the young man who treated him poorly. Not an easy choice for someone like myself who is anything but a pacifist, someone who swore a long time ago an oath against bullies and punks and all sorts of bully mayhem.

I’m stuck on ‘is.’

It’s easy to love God so long as I do not have to put flesh on him, but make him a person who is as worthy of my love as I suppose God is and I am undone. And there is no getting around it. Jesus said, and I either believe it or I do not, ‘is.’ You know as well as I do that ‘is’ leaves none or less room for wiggle. Nor, for that matter, is it something we have the right to contemplate. ‘Is’ is ‘is.’ There are no two ways about it. The greatest commandment is the two things we find it most difficult to do: Love God; love people.

I’m stuck on ‘is.’

But maybe that’s not such a bad place to be.

It is amazing to me how – just like each of us, as individuals – communities grow, mature and gradually change over time. This is an observation the writers of CRN.Info (once SlicedLaodicea.com) have been making recently. Over the past year, while we have had a number of articles that have focused on countering spurious ODM claims, more and more our writing has focused on higher-order issues – documenting our own struggles, and those of our communities, and how best to apply the lessons taught by Christ and his followers to them.

As such, we’d like to recognize this shift in direction by recognizing the broadening in our focus, in line with the greater items in our site mission, by making a number of cosmetic changes and codifying our change in direction. While we’ve tried to clean up our policies and stuff, remove some of the snarky pages in our design, and to put in some basic recognized debunking (which we will add to over time) to try and cut down on recursive beating of deceased equines.

Prophets

Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man’s gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.

In the kingdom of God, we are called to prophesy – to speak the words of God to the people, and to apply them to the issues of the day. All too often, the concept of prophecy is limited to foretelling future events, but when we are called to prophesy, it is to be one of those who remind and challenge the people of God to live up to their calling, and by doing so defend the defenseless and wrongfully accused. Included in this are the ideas of encouragement and iron sharpening iron.

Priests

As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him— you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For in Scripture it says:

“See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.” Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, “The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone,” and, “A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall.” They stumble because they disobey the message—which is also what they were destined for.

But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

As Christians, we are all called to be priests, and the main calling of a priest is to minister to the people of God and at the most basic level are to be God’s representative on earth. As such, we try to seek ways of pointing out where God’s influence can be seen here, in His world. We are to teach, to learn, and to demonstrate God’s love.

Poets

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

As creatures made in the image of God – whose first action was to create – we have been blessed by Him with this aspect – creation. Creation of works made from His creation. While we, the writers of PPP.Info, may not all be cut out, literally, as poets, each of us has creative abilities granted by Him (as are all talents held by men). As such, we try to create and/or to recognize artistic beauty in our world, and to relay it to our readers.

.Info

Keeping these three roles in mind, we’ve changed the name and address of this site to http://www.prophets-priests-poets.info/ (though it may still take a few days to take effect). We’ve kept the “.Info” to remind us from where we’ve come. We will still defend brothers and sisters in Christ, wronged by the wicked words of “discernmentalists”, but we also want to recognize that this is not our full identity as a blog.  Please be patient as things start to look cosmetically different around here, and please continue to supply iron – as we hope to do, as well – on which to sharpen each other.

Thank you, and bless you, for joining us on this journey.