I've Been Tagged!

Okay. My friend Ted was kind enough to tag me. It seems, these are the rules:

1. Write about 5 specific ways blogging has affected you, either positively or negatively.
2. link back to the person who tagged you
3. link back to this parent post (L.L. Barkat is not so much interested in generating links, but rather in tracking the meme so she can perhaps do a summary post later on that looks at patterns and interesting discoveries.)
4. tag a few friends or five, or none at all
5. post these rules— or just have fun breaking them

So here goes:
1. Blogging for me has been fun. Although I've been tempted to quit from time to time, I'm always encouraged by friends in the blogosphere to keep writing. I look back in the archives from time to time and review what I was reading/studying months ago. Blogging takes time and effort. I'm still attempting to get on a "set schedule" - whatever that means in ministry. The negatives are miniscule with blogging. The positives are priceless.
2. Blogs I enjoy reading include Jesus Community, The Jesus Creed, Ben Witherington, She who reads, may write, and Preacherman.
3. Here's L.L's blog. Her thoughts are always worth the time.
4. I'm tagging a friend at Political Hope.
5. See above. Good reading!

The North American Church

From time to time, I check out church research "guru" Ed Stetzer's blog. You can find it here. The most recent trend Stetzer points to is evangelical churches in North America forgetting their mission of sharing the Gospel message and replacing it with a "twelve step program for inner peace." The results have been a lack of importance for evangelism in the North American church.

Stetzer's biggest concern is Christians have lost confidence in the Gospel. In other words, we've moved past the good news of Christ providing restoration, hope, and love to a dying cosmos. We've begun to see salvation more as a individual blessing and for that reason, the challenges in people's lives and meeting those challenges (recovery groups, benevolence ministries, etc.) have taken the lead over the power of the cross. For that reason, the church in North America in is decline. Those "outside our walls" become complacent, apathetic, or skeptical about what goes on inside the church - that is, until a practical problem arises in their lives. The North American church has become a therapy center rather than a place to understand the Gospel.

What are your thoughts?

Friday Fodder

"The only people who can hurt you deeply are the ones you allow to get deep inside your soul." - Erwin McManus

Transparency in relationships is something we all struggle with (some, of course, more than others). Many of us carry scars from previous relationships. The scars run deep and sometimes last for years. Because of the past hurts, many choose to be intentional about keeping others at arms length. They miss the love they so desperately need.

Without the possibility of love, there would be no scars. Without love, we could never experience God's greatest attribute. We would never be able to know one another intimately. Isn't the danger of scars worth the love we experience?

What are your thoughts?

Unconditional Election in John 17

Bruce Ware, Senior Associate Dean at the School of Theology of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville is the first essayist regarding the doctrine of election. The response for this particular passage is provided by Jack Cottrell, Professor at Cinncinati Bible Seminary.

Ware writes from the Calvinist perspective and argues firstly for unconditional election.

"Unconditional election refers to the claim that God's selection of those whom he would save was not based upon (or, not 'conditioned' on) some fact or feature of those individuals' lives, in particular...not conditioned on something they would do, some choice they would make, how good or bad they might be, or anything else specifically true about them in contrast to others also enslaved to sin and deserving God's just condemnation." (3)

Dean Ware begins to make his case with the prayer of Jesus in John 17, using specifically verses 2, 6, 9, and 24. The phrase Ware points to over and over again is "to all whom you have given him (Jesus)." The phrase occurs in similar ways in the verses Ware mentions above. Anticipating an argument from classical Arminians, Ware states, "Belief is necessary, to be sure. But those who believe are those given to Christ by the Father" (7).

Professor Cottrell responds to the idea, by maintaining "...that Jesus' references to 'those whom the Father has given him' apply to the twelve apostles, not to the totality of saved individuals" (59). Cottrell's argument is based upon verse 20, which reads, "I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word" (NRSV). Cottrell moves on to argue the election in John 17 is for apostolic service rather than for salvation (59). His belief is the call to apostolic service is also true of John 15:16. The Arminian professor then maintains "their (the apostle's) salvation is not assured simply because they have been 'given' to Jesus by the Father" (60).

It's obvious that the two interpretations of the prayer of Jesus in John 17 (at least with election) are polar opposites. One of these distinguished individuals might be wrong (causing the other to be in error), both may be wrong, but it seems both cannot be correct. Which begs the question: Is the exegesis provided good exegesis? Do either or both of these individuals go to this passage with "an end" in mind? If so, isn't that dangerous?

What are your thoughts about this particular passage and how it fits into election?

Election starts Thursday!

I've looked forward to receiving a particular book in the mail for the last few weeks. Finally, the book arrived. The work is edited by Chad Owen Brand and is entitled Perspectives On Election. Five theologians write essays describing their view on the doctrine of election and then a response is given.

The Apostle Paul writes to the Ephesians "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, just as he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world...this is the pledge of our inheritance toward redemption as God's own people, to the praise of his glory" (Eph. 1:3-14).

For centuries, this text has been paramount among those who debate what election means through the New Testament. Of course there are others. But the Ephesian text seems to cause people on both sides to stake their claim to the truth. From the time Luther and Erasmus disagreed about the term and its meaning in the 5th century until the modern era, good people have disagreed.

Our task on Thursdays for the next several weeks is to look at the different perspectives and attempt to determine Paul's meaning of the term. I'll attempt to summarize the essays and the responses. I look forward to hearing your thoughts as well.

Better Late Than Never...I guess!

Last week, I'd planned to post on William Young's The Shack near the end of the week. You've figured out by now, that didn't happen. I should have warned you. I have a very analytical mind. Sometimes that's beneficial. Other times, not so much. This time, it's taken me a few extra hours to get through this particular book.

To be honest, I really didn't want to read Young's work. My reading list is always full and this book wasn't on it. And then friends and family read the book inquiring of what I thought. I still wasn't interested. I heard someone else say, "This book will change your life." I'd heard that before. But the way it was said had me thinking, "What's the big deal?" I was then shown the cover and noticed Eugene Peterson's quote. "This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress did for his. It's that good!" I knew I had no choice but to read it and weigh in with my humble opinion. So here goes:

Mackenzie Phillips takes his children on a camping trip. His young girl is abducted and murdered. For good reason, Phillips grieves and experiences A Great Sadness. He steps over the line when he accuses God of being responsible for the tragedy.

Phillips receives a letter from God inviting him back to the scene of the crime. He returns to interact with God through something of a time/location warp. Through the three personalities of God and wisdom, Phillips begins to understand God and His love for mankind. He's then given the choice of whether to stay and continue to learn from God or return to his "other life" and continue the healing process with his family. He chooses to return knowing that decision will bring different challenges.

First, the good things:
1. This book really makes the reader think about theological concepts. Every reader that follows the plot will be challenged to think about his/her beliefs. God can use any media (including a fictional book) to call mankind to Himself.
2. I appreciate the way Young describes the interaction between God and the primary character. The outflowing of God (and His love) throughout Mack's time at the shack flowed easily throughout.
3. Young's "setting the scene" in the first few chapters was difficult to traverse. After the plotline begins to share the story, this became much easier. All in all, I found the work to be enjoyable.

Some issues:
1. Although I appreciated Young challenging the common view of God (an old man with a flowing beard), there were times I felt God's humanity was stressed more than God's divinity. I realize Jesus was fully human. But He was also fully God.
2. Young's view of God is about love, acceptance, and forgiveness. However, because of the importance of seeing God's love, justice and man's responsibility takes a back seat to Young's attributes of God.
3. When Mack is allowed to observe his earthly father and attempt to reconcile, it's almost as if Young moves a little bit New Age(y).

Again, I really appreciated the book as a whole. Would I give it as much praise as Peterson? Uh...no. Is it worth the read? I think so. Almost anything that raises questions about God and our relationship with God should be considered. Is there a genre for Young in the future? Let's wait and see his next project.

Friday Fodder

Today, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on knowledge - particularly different types of knowledge. For example:

1. Is there a difference between head knowledge and heart knowledge?

2. Explain what it means to KNOW GOD, rather than KNOWING ABOUT GOD. Chances are, you've heard those cliches as I have and maybe even used them.

3. Can a historian "know" a person through a book or does one have to "do life" with someone else to gain knowledge?

4. What about pictures? Do they reveal who we are? Can I know someone else or myself through a picture?

5. What can I KNOW about someone or myself, by listening to life experiences of others (stories)?