The latest edition of 9Marks eJournal is available and the theme is Liberalism. A number of the essays interact with the current emphasis on social justice and ask if this isn't the back door of liberalism (again!). I confess that the increased emphasis I've seen on social justice has left me wondering if there isn't an imbalance in the making. Along with these articles I would also point you to the article by Kevin DeYoung called A Modest Proposal. Kevin cautions us on the vague, if not sloppy, use of a phrase like social justice. His thoughts are worth pondering.
A few of my favorite articles from the eJournal were:
How to become a liberal without attending Harvard Divinity School.
Is the God of the missional Gospel too small?
Social Gospel Redux?
I've not read them all but they all look very interesting. Also, the current issue of Christianity Today has an article by Richard J. Mouw entitled "Carl Henry was Right: Christianity Today's first editor grasped what I as a young theologian failed to understand about church involvement in social justice". Mouw notes that "a constant theme in his [Henry's] writings was that the church as such has neither the competence nor the authority to address political or economic specifics." Henry could allow for "emergency situations" like Nazi German but "in the normal course of things, the church should leave it up to individuals to take a very general mandate to think and act Christianly in the public arena." Though Mouw had originally disagreed with Henry he now believes he was right after all (with a slight nuance).
Friday, January 15, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Divorce and Remarriage: Recovering the Biblical View
Scot McKnight has started a series of reviews on a book about divorce and remarriage which I will be watching with keen interest. (Part 1 is here and part 2 is here, part 3, part 4, part 5) Why am I so interested in this book? Let me give you a little history.
When I was at Moody Bible Institute (1980-1983) I had a habit of latching on to professors and spending countless hours in their office with questions. Two of those in particular were John Walton and Bill Luck. I'm sure I often wore out my welcome but they endured me patiently. If I ever found a disagreement between them I would run between their offices (on different floors) with a verbatim quote of what the other said to see the reaction. One of the classics was when Luck accused Walton of being a Platonist in his understanding of God's nature. I told Walton and he said he was not aware of that. When I dutifully reported this to Luck he retorted, "Ah, so he's an ignorant Platonist!" Both men taught me much in their respective fields (Walton in Old Testament and Luck in Church History, Ethics and Philosophy) but they also showed me how two Christian scholars can engage each other in healthy debate even with the occasional jab. Luck also gave me a thousand labels for people and their beliefs which Walton found most annoying.
Luck published a book with Harper & Row in 1987 which didn't fair too well in the market place. It eventually suffered the fate of books which don't sell and was retired to the status of "out of print". Flash forward to 2009. I get a phone call from none other than my old professor and, by now, very good friend who tells me he has updated his book and is giving it a second try. After we catch up on small talk he drops a bomb shell on me. "Louis, I've dedicated the second edition to you." I was speechless. (Ask anyone who knows me; that doesn't happen too often!) When the copies came into the store I quickly turned to the dedication page to see if it was all just a joke on me. But there it was, and more. He dedicated the book both to John Walton and me. I can't tell you how honored I was by this gracious gesture.
So I will watch as McKnight (who was also a professor of mine when I was at Trinity) makes his way through the book. I pray that this book does what I know Bill has always desired--to stimulate conversation and to engage the entire Bible on this very important subject. Many will disagree with him. That's fine. He can take it. His position is a minority one but I think it deserves a hearing. We do have copies in the store in you would like to see one.
Luck published a book with Harper & Row in 1987 which didn't fair too well in the market place. It eventually suffered the fate of books which don't sell and was retired to the status of "out of print". Flash forward to 2009. I get a phone call from none other than my old professor and, by now, very good friend who tells me he has updated his book and is giving it a second try. After we catch up on small talk he drops a bomb shell on me. "Louis, I've dedicated the second edition to you." I was speechless. (Ask anyone who knows me; that doesn't happen too often!) When the copies came into the store I quickly turned to the dedication page to see if it was all just a joke on me. But there it was, and more. He dedicated the book both to John Walton and me. I can't tell you how honored I was by this gracious gesture.
So I will watch as McKnight (who was also a professor of mine when I was at Trinity) makes his way through the book. I pray that this book does what I know Bill has always desired--to stimulate conversation and to engage the entire Bible on this very important subject. Many will disagree with him. That's fine. He can take it. His position is a minority one but I think it deserves a hearing. We do have copies in the store in you would like to see one.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Baker Publishing Group Mourns a Loss
I just received word that one of the editors for Baker Academic, Jeff Wittung, died last night after being injured in a car accident on January 6th. I met Jeff only once or twice when he was in the store but I recall he was quiet and unassuming. Below is the information I have provided by Baker Publishing. Please keep Jeff's family in your prayers.
Grand Rapids, MI, January 11, 2010 -- Baker Publishing Group mourns the loss of a colleague and friend, Jeffery A. Wittung. Jeff, one of Baker's academic editors, was injured in a car accident on his way to work January 6, 2010. He passed away the evening of January 10. He leaves behind a wife, Marne, and two daughters: Ana (5) and Kate (1).
Jeff joined the Baker staff in April of 2006. He quickly established himself as a colleague of exceptional intellect, wise judgment, gracious spirit, and keen wit. Academic authors who worked with Jeff frequently commended the quality of his editorial interactions. In the workplace, Jeff combined an old-fashioned work ethic with cutting-edge theological insight, wrapping them in a polite, cordial, and good-humored demeanor.
Jeff's scholarly acumen was also on display outside the workplace. He held an advanced degree from Nazarene Theological Seminary (MDiv) and had just finished work for his MPhil from Drew University, completing his comprehensive exams at Drew with distinction. Jeff's interest in the theology of the early church was evident while at Drew, where he was involved in the production of volumes in the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture series and was coeditor of a well-received volume of academic essays, Partakers of the Divine Nature: The History and Development of Deification in the Christian Traditions.
His academic and professional skills and accomplishments, however, were not the primary focus of his life. Jeff was a devoted family man who loved his wife and daughters deeply. He also expressed his knowledge and spiritual gifts in teaching and preaching at his local church, Encounter Community Church of Belding, Michigan.
We at Baker Publishing Group will miss Jeff greatly, and we invite you to pray for the family Jeff leaves behind: his wife and daughters; his mother, father, and sister; his in-laws; and the extended family. They find comfort in Jeff's faith and in their own, but their loss is severe.
Jeff joined the Baker staff in April of 2006. He quickly established himself as a colleague of exceptional intellect, wise judgment, gracious spirit, and keen wit. Academic authors who worked with Jeff frequently commended the quality of his editorial interactions. In the workplace, Jeff combined an old-fashioned work ethic with cutting-edge theological insight, wrapping them in a polite, cordial, and good-humored demeanor.
Jeff's scholarly acumen was also on display outside the workplace. He held an advanced degree from Nazarene Theological Seminary (MDiv) and had just finished work for his MPhil from Drew University, completing his comprehensive exams at Drew with distinction. Jeff's interest in the theology of the early church was evident while at Drew, where he was involved in the production of volumes in the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture series and was coeditor of a well-received volume of academic essays, Partakers of the Divine Nature: The History and Development of Deification in the Christian Traditions.
His academic and professional skills and accomplishments, however, were not the primary focus of his life. Jeff was a devoted family man who loved his wife and daughters deeply. He also expressed his knowledge and spiritual gifts in teaching and preaching at his local church, Encounter Community Church of Belding, Michigan.
We at Baker Publishing Group will miss Jeff greatly, and we invite you to pray for the family Jeff leaves behind: his wife and daughters; his mother, father, and sister; his in-laws; and the extended family. They find comfort in Jeff's faith and in their own, but their loss is severe.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Ordinary Time - Reflections
As a newcomer to the liturgical year the concept of “ordinary time” seemed peculiar. The Pocket Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship defines it this way:
She concludes, “There is nothing ordinary about Ordinary Time at all. It makes daliness, stability, fidelity, and constancy the marks of what it takes for Christians to be ‘Christian’ the rest of the year.” (188)
I like this because I think it provides a net for us to fall in after the season of Christmas. We can’t just walk away from Christmas as if it has no bearing on the rest of our lives other than to consider how to pay off the credit card debt. The Liturgical year won’t permit that. We may pack up (or throw away) the tree and the wreath and toss the torn Christmas wrap but the Liturgical Year won’t allow us to pack Jesus away till next year.
I leave you with this prayer as found in the Ancient Christian Devotional from the Leonine Sacramentary:
“In the RC [Roman Catholic Church] those parts of the liturgical year not part of Advent, the Christmas season, Lent or Eastertide; in other words, usually between Epiphany (or the Baptism of Our Lord) and Ash Wednesday, and the long period from the day after Pentecost Sunday to the beginning of Advent. The name derives from the ordinal numbering of the Sundays and their respective weeks. Many other denominations also recognize this time, the Sundays often termed, for example, ‘the n Sunday after Pentecost’ or ‘Proper n.’” Color: green. (p. 95)Joan Chittister in her book The Liturgical Year devotes two chapters to Ordinary Time: one on the “Wisdom of Enoughness” and the second on the “Wisdom of Routine.” These times are far from ordinary as we usually understand what ordinary signifies. The liturgical year focuses on two major events: the birth of Jesus and his resurrection. Chittister says that Ordinary time affords us the opportunity to “rest in contemplation of those centers of the faith that are the lodestones of our souls. . . In this period that is between the two poles of the life of Jesus, we get to pause awhile. To take it all in. To make the connection between that life, that reality, and our own. They give us time to contemplate the intersection between the life of Jesus and our own.” (96-97) Later she says “It is the time when the implications of Easter and Christmas become most clear to us all. It is decision time: will we take Easter and Christmas seriously or not?” (184) Furthermore, “The Sundays of Ordinary Time are also an education in the faith. The readings of every liturgy for weeks take us piece by piece through the reading of Scripture. They root us in the lives of the chosen people in the Hebrew Testament and, at the same time, they steep us in the unfolding of the Christian Testament.” (185)
She concludes, “There is nothing ordinary about Ordinary Time at all. It makes daliness, stability, fidelity, and constancy the marks of what it takes for Christians to be ‘Christian’ the rest of the year.” (188)
I like this because I think it provides a net for us to fall in after the season of Christmas. We can’t just walk away from Christmas as if it has no bearing on the rest of our lives other than to consider how to pay off the credit card debt. The Liturgical year won’t permit that. We may pack up (or throw away) the tree and the wreath and toss the torn Christmas wrap but the Liturgical Year won’t allow us to pack Jesus away till next year.
I leave you with this prayer as found in the Ancient Christian Devotional from the Leonine Sacramentary:
"Be present, O Lord, to our prayers, and protect us day by day as well as by night, that in all successive changes of time we may ever be strengthened by Thine unchangeableness; through Jesus Christ our Lord." (p. 41)
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Was Paul a "More Orderly Thinker" than Jesus?
I recently read a statement made by Dale Allison in his book Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet which took me by surprise. Here's what Allison was wrote:
Clearly Jesus was sinless but does sinlessness entail perfection? I don't think so. Having said all that it still seems to rub me the wrong way to say that Jesus' thinking was in some way disorderly. Perhaps because, for Allison, this disorderly thinking includes the idea of the Jesus uttering contradictions (a conclusion I would certainly deny). I do think there were probably kids who could run faster than Jesus. But it's another matter to take a writer like Paul who took time and care in composing a book like Romans and comparing that to a sermon from Jesus or any of his parables and from this judge who is the more orderly thinker. I'm not saying that any of Jesus' sermons or parables shows signs of disorderly thinking. It's just to say it's like comparing apples to oranges. No doubt Allison is thinking of the entire raw data of what we have about Jesus as found in the Gospels (not just one or two samples). And, compared to Paul's writings, he seems to be able to affirm that Paul was the more orderly thinker of the two. But let's go back to my illustration about the better runner. Admitting that there were faster runners than Jesus does nothing to diminish is humanity. Would it diminish Jesus' humanity to admit that Paul (or anyone for that matter) may have been a more orderly thinker? Doing something in a less orderly manner does not mean that it is wrong (and certainly not sinful). The question has got me thinking.
Your thoughts?
Human beings are not vulcans. Why have critics asked whether Paul's views on eschatology evolved with time and whether Romans and Galatians say different things about the law? The reason is that the apostle, who was surely a more orderly thinker than Jesus, said some things that do not obviously go together. Why should we believe Jesus was any different? Do we have a holdover from the old systematic theology? Surely if Jesus was, as many have held, an eschatalogical prophet who lived in the imaginative world of the apocalypses, we should not expect much consistency from him, for the essential irrationality of apocalyptic is manifest from the history of messianic and millenarian movements. (page 3-4, emphasis mine)My mind went through a whirlwind of ideas? "This can't be right. Jesus was God and Paul was just a man. (The implicit Docetism hit me between the eyes!) But, Jesus was a real man too with all the limitations that come with it. Why couldn't that affect the "orderliness" of his thinking? Disorderliness is not sinful. Was Paul more orderly?" Then a host of similar questions came to mind? "Were there better carpenters than Jesus?" "Was Jesus the fastest kid on the block or was there someone faster?" "When Jesus was five could he have drawn a perfect circle?" Did Jesus ever find himself looking for the right word and saying (in Aramaic of course and with an equivalent expression) "it's right on the tip of my tongue"? What would be so wrong with that? Part of what has influenced me, I think, is hearing the word "perfect" used so often when talking about Jesus. He was the perfect teacher, the perfect preacher, used the perfect expression, asked the perfect question, gave the perfect response, saw the perfect opportunity and on and on. So, the corollary seems to be, since no one is perfect (except Jesus), then no one could do it (whatever "it" may be) better than he did. Right?
Clearly Jesus was sinless but does sinlessness entail perfection? I don't think so. Having said all that it still seems to rub me the wrong way to say that Jesus' thinking was in some way disorderly. Perhaps because, for Allison, this disorderly thinking includes the idea of the Jesus uttering contradictions (a conclusion I would certainly deny). I do think there were probably kids who could run faster than Jesus. But it's another matter to take a writer like Paul who took time and care in composing a book like Romans and comparing that to a sermon from Jesus or any of his parables and from this judge who is the more orderly thinker. I'm not saying that any of Jesus' sermons or parables shows signs of disorderly thinking. It's just to say it's like comparing apples to oranges. No doubt Allison is thinking of the entire raw data of what we have about Jesus as found in the Gospels (not just one or two samples). And, compared to Paul's writings, he seems to be able to affirm that Paul was the more orderly thinker of the two. But let's go back to my illustration about the better runner. Admitting that there were faster runners than Jesus does nothing to diminish is humanity. Would it diminish Jesus' humanity to admit that Paul (or anyone for that matter) may have been a more orderly thinker? Doing something in a less orderly manner does not mean that it is wrong (and certainly not sinful). The question has got me thinking.
Your thoughts?
Friday, January 8, 2010
In Store Now - The Dead Sea Scrolls
From B&H Publishing we have a very attractive book on the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is printed on glossy paper with full color. This is part of a series done by B&H Publishing called the Holman QuickSource. The size of the books are 9 1/4 x 5 which I've never really liked since, like mass market, I'm constantly fighting with the book to read the text which is closest to the middle. But some books are worth the fight and this appears to be one of them.
The author, Craig Evans, is an authority on the Dead Sea Scrolls and is the Payzant Distinguished Professor of New Testament at Acadia Divinity School.
Topics include:
Who wrote the scrolls?
Do the scrolls undermine the Christian faith?
Did the New Testament borrow from the scrolls?
The science of dating the scrolls.
Restoring and preserving the scrolls.
Historical groups and people name in the scrolls.
Who were the Essenes?
How did the Essenes interpret Scripture?
How did the Essenes relate to other Jews?
Were Jesus and John the Baptist Essenes?
Archaeology of Qumran and the Scrolls.
I was surprised to read that "the DSS [abbreviation for Dead Sea Scrolls] were discovered at least four times: twice long ago and twice again in modern times." (30-31) In chapter 11 Evans lists all 11 Qumran caves and the contents of each. He also explains how the scrolls are referred to (i.e., 4Q521 means document 521 from Cave 4 of Qumran). This will be an excellent guide for the beginner. Two appendixes round off this work with one listing "Major Scrolls Publications" and the second listing "Major Scrolls Players."
The book is a paperback with 398 pages and sells for $14.99.
Topics include:
Who wrote the scrolls?
Do the scrolls undermine the Christian faith?
Did the New Testament borrow from the scrolls?
The science of dating the scrolls.
Restoring and preserving the scrolls.
Historical groups and people name in the scrolls.
Who were the Essenes?
How did the Essenes interpret Scripture?
How did the Essenes relate to other Jews?
Were Jesus and John the Baptist Essenes?
Archaeology of Qumran and the Scrolls.
I was surprised to read that "the DSS [abbreviation for Dead Sea Scrolls] were discovered at least four times: twice long ago and twice again in modern times." (30-31) In chapter 11 Evans lists all 11 Qumran caves and the contents of each. He also explains how the scrolls are referred to (i.e., 4Q521 means document 521 from Cave 4 of Qumran). This will be an excellent guide for the beginner. Two appendixes round off this work with one listing "Major Scrolls Publications" and the second listing "Major Scrolls Players."
The book is a paperback with 398 pages and sells for $14.99.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
New Website Coming Soon
For some time Baker Book House has had two websites. Both of them had problems; not to mention having two was a problem in itself. Why two? Well, one was dedicated almost entirely to our used and bargain books and the other was for new product. For the past year we have had busy brains hard at work coming up with a new, single, website. The exact date it will go live is still a bit fuzzy but we're looking at the January/February timeframe. I am excited about the possibilities this will offer us as a bookstore. I'll let you know as soon as it's up and running. For some time I have been linking book titles to the respective publisher of the book. When the new website is up I will link book titles to it. I'm looking into offering special pricing for books I highlight or review.
While I'm on the subject of websites. We are often confused with Baker Publishing Group which is our parent company (Who have a bunch of really cool people working there!). They have a separate website which is well worth a visit. Baker Book House was the original name of the publishing company but it was changed, in part, due to the confusion.
While I'm on the subject of websites. We are often confused with Baker Publishing Group which is our parent company (Who have a bunch of really cool people working there!). They have a separate website which is well worth a visit. Baker Book House was the original name of the publishing company but it was changed, in part, due to the confusion.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
In Store Now - A Sword Between Sexes?: C.S. Lewis and the Gender Debates
Hot off the press from Brazos is A Sword Between Sexes?: C. S. Lewis and the Gender Debates by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen. Those with an interest in the current gender debate will no doubt find this of interest especially if they have an added interest in C. S. Lewis. From what I can glean it appears Lewis had quite a change in opinion over the years.
Van Leeuwen states in the introduction: "As early as 1955 he [Lewis] confided to Dorothy L. Sayers that he didn't like 'either ultra masculine or the ultra feminine . . . I prefer people.' How he journeyed to his 'preference for people' from his earlier endorsement of gender essentialism and gender hierarchy turns out to be a complex and fascinating tale, with ongoing significance for the psychology of gender."
Here are some of the endorsements:
"An eye-opener. For those of us who have been influenced by C. S. Lewis but have distrusted his views on gender, this book provides a welcome and carefully researched account of how Lewis changed his mind."--John Hare, Yale Divinity School
"A keen intellect and a rich academic background are necessary in tackling a substantive study of C. S. Lewis and gender, and Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen brings those resources and much more to her work. In this fascinating, careful, and probing examination, Lewis's views of gender and his relationships with women are discussed within their cultural, historical, and theological contexts. This book is wonderfully illuminating and important for C. S. Lewis fans and anyone interested in contemporary discussions of gender."--Christine D. Pohl, professor of social ethics, Asbury Theological Seminary
"In a fascinating chapter about her own relationship to C. S. Lewis, Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen lays all her cards on the table. Then she traces Lewis's changing views of gender step by step through his prodigious output of books and letters until the end of his life, considering not only his work, but the man himself, and the way he has been viewed by others. Van Leeuwen's spirit is generous; her prose, wonderfully clear; her arguments, powerful; and her insight, remarkable. Whether you're a scholar, a Lewis fan, or a general reader, you will find yourself turning pages with pleasure."--Jeanne Murray Walker, professor of English, University of Delaware
Van Leeuwen is professor of psychology and philosophy at Eastern University. The book is a paperback with 264 pages and sells for $19.99.
Here are some of the endorsements:
"An eye-opener. For those of us who have been influenced by C. S. Lewis but have distrusted his views on gender, this book provides a welcome and carefully researched account of how Lewis changed his mind."--John Hare, Yale Divinity School
"A keen intellect and a rich academic background are necessary in tackling a substantive study of C. S. Lewis and gender, and Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen brings those resources and much more to her work. In this fascinating, careful, and probing examination, Lewis's views of gender and his relationships with women are discussed within their cultural, historical, and theological contexts. This book is wonderfully illuminating and important for C. S. Lewis fans and anyone interested in contemporary discussions of gender."--Christine D. Pohl, professor of social ethics, Asbury Theological Seminary
"In a fascinating chapter about her own relationship to C. S. Lewis, Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen lays all her cards on the table. Then she traces Lewis's changing views of gender step by step through his prodigious output of books and letters until the end of his life, considering not only his work, but the man himself, and the way he has been viewed by others. Van Leeuwen's spirit is generous; her prose, wonderfully clear; her arguments, powerful; and her insight, remarkable. Whether you're a scholar, a Lewis fan, or a general reader, you will find yourself turning pages with pleasure."--Jeanne Murray Walker, professor of English, University of Delaware
Van Leeuwen is professor of psychology and philosophy at Eastern University. The book is a paperback with 264 pages and sells for $19.99.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Around the Web
I'm borrowing this idea from Jeff at the Scripture Zealot. From time to time he has a post entitled "Around the Web" (He actually just did one yesterday. I had this written prior to Sunday but scheduled it for release today. So he beat me by a day!) where he links various items of interest. I've always enjoyed these and have wanted to do one myself. Thanks for the idea Jeff. I hope you don't mind me plagiarizing your title. If you'd like I can rename my posts to something different. If I do this half as well as you do I will be happy. These aren't necessarily new they are just items I've either recently discovered or known about for some time but have not had time to do a post on them.
At First Things I found an interesting, and somewhat disturbing, article called "Are Plants Ethical Beings?" I'm not at all ready to start talking about the rights of broccoli.
Mike Wittmer reminds us that the intellectual objections of unbelievers are really simply a smokescreen for their unwillingness to submit to the authority of God. He says, "Sinners know that they are in trouble with God, and so they raise 'technical difficulties' about God to avoid his claims upon their life."
My friend Paul Adams has been doing a series of reviews on a new release from Zondervan by Philip B. Payne called Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Paul's Letters. To date he has three entries: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.
William Lane Craig has a Reasonable Faith Podcast on "More Questions on the Resurrection." (dated 2010/01/04) In particular, I enjoyed his clarification of the "myth growth rate" and the resurrection. It is commonly alleged that myths take a loooong time to develop and there was insufficient time for such myths to develop around Christ. A. N. Sherwin-White is often quoted to support this. The questioner cited the myths that developed around Alexander the Great and noted that it didn't take long at all for those myths to develop. Craig clarifies that what Sherwin-White actually said, using Herodotus as an example, is "that even two generations are too short a span to allow the mythical tendency to prevail over the hard historic core of the oral tradition." (190, emphasis mine. Page number is to Sherwin-White's book.) The distinction is an important one.
Scot McKnight has given high praise to Lynn Cochick's new book Women in the World of Earliest Christians from Baker Academic. He says this "will become the standard for all study of the social location of women in the earliest Christian churches. This is an exceptional book and it will replace Ben Witherington's (now) twenty-some year old study."
Finally, Darrell Bock informs us of the recent Archeological discovery of a house in Nazareth which dates back to the time of Jesus. You can find the inital report here.
At First Things I found an interesting, and somewhat disturbing, article called "Are Plants Ethical Beings?" I'm not at all ready to start talking about the rights of broccoli.
Mike Wittmer reminds us that the intellectual objections of unbelievers are really simply a smokescreen for their unwillingness to submit to the authority of God. He says, "Sinners know that they are in trouble with God, and so they raise 'technical difficulties' about God to avoid his claims upon their life."
My friend Paul Adams has been doing a series of reviews on a new release from Zondervan by Philip B. Payne called Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Paul's Letters. To date he has three entries: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.
William Lane Craig has a Reasonable Faith Podcast on "More Questions on the Resurrection." (dated 2010/01/04) In particular, I enjoyed his clarification of the "myth growth rate" and the resurrection. It is commonly alleged that myths take a loooong time to develop and there was insufficient time for such myths to develop around Christ. A. N. Sherwin-White is often quoted to support this. The questioner cited the myths that developed around Alexander the Great and noted that it didn't take long at all for those myths to develop. Craig clarifies that what Sherwin-White actually said, using Herodotus as an example, is "that even two generations are too short a span to allow the mythical tendency to prevail over the hard historic core of the oral tradition." (190, emphasis mine. Page number is to Sherwin-White's book.) The distinction is an important one.
Scot McKnight has given high praise to Lynn Cochick's new book Women in the World of Earliest Christians from Baker Academic. He says this "will become the standard for all study of the social location of women in the earliest Christian churches. This is an exceptional book and it will replace Ben Witherington's (now) twenty-some year old study."
Finally, Darrell Bock informs us of the recent Archeological discovery of a house in Nazareth which dates back to the time of Jesus. You can find the inital report here.
Monday, January 4, 2010
The Historical Jesus of the Gospels by Craig S. Keener - Part 2
I finally finished section 2 of Keener’s The Historical Jesus of the Gospels and I couldn’t be more impressed. Clear writing combined with detailed research and a responsible handling of the evidence are the strengths of this volume. Each chapter is replete with notes to primary and secondary sources. (Unfortunately, they are endnotes so you are constantly going back and forth.) Since many of the notes are references to primary literature most can safely be skipped unless you are interested in looking them up.
This second section is devoted to evaluating the Gospels. Keener makes a strong case to show the genre of the Gospels is best seen as biography. Unique to the Gospels is Luke-Acts. This two-volume book is unique because while the first part is obviously biography the book of Acts more appropriately falls into the category of ancient historiography. He quotes Hengel and Schwemer as saying that “those who deny Luke-Acts as acceptable first-century historiography need to read more ancient historiography ‘and less hypercritical and scholastic secondary literature.’” (86) The next two chapters deal with ancient historiography as history and secondly as rhetoric. We learn that the ancients were very concerned with accuracy and the reliability of sources and eyewitnesses. They were not blind to biases and clearly knew the difference between history and fiction. Ancient historians often found fault with others for their inaccuracies and flagrant falsehoods. But historians were not only concerned with accuracy they were also concerned with presentation. Even here we learn that the more rhetorically oriented historians were most clearly seen in their treatment of speeches. The Synoptics do not show signs of this type of history. Keener says they “are sometimes less cohesive, sometimes with more evidence of their sources, and do not develop scenes with elaborate descriptions.” (110) He directly addresses the question of whether the Gospels are distorted by rhetoric and he finds the evidence lacking for such a charge. Luke-Acts would be the closest to this type of genre but even here the evidence is not convincing. Keener then explores how ancient history handled agendas: political, national, moral and theological agendas. But even here the presence of agendas does not preclude accurate history. As he notes, “All other ancient historians and biographers, like many modern ones, had agendas they considered important; they used history to shed light on their own time, no less than did the Gospels. But had the Gospel writers wished to communicate solely later Christian doctrine and not history, they could have readily chosen simpler forms than biography for this purpose.” (122)
In the following two chapters Keener looks at the sources of the Gospels: one chapter explores the written sources and another chapter considers the oral sources. On the former Keener works from what’s known in the field as the “Two-Source Hypothesis.” This view holds that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one source and another commonly termed simply as “Q”. Given the validity of this view we can see how Matthew and Luke used their sources and that gives us an idea of how they may have used sources we don’t have access to. This is a far better assumption than that of many critical scholars who assume that the Gospel writers simply invented material where we can’t check them out. This, says Keener, is “imagination run amuck.” (132) Next we come to the oral sources of the Gospels. Keener looks at oral cultures and the testimony of ancient writers concerning the ability of some exemplary people with impressive memory capabilities. In particular, he examines the rabbinic traditions and early Jewish education habits. He recognizes the legitimate complaint brought by some that “all the rabbinic evidence is later than the first century; but”, he responds, “it is hardly likely that this evidence would be discontinuous with all the other Jewish and Greco-Roman evidence that we do have, especially given the particular focus on it in our later extant sources.” (149-150) And in the endnote he further says that “many also observe that the later rabbinic method hardly arose ex nihilo after 70 CE. (475n.150) The memorization habits of the time period offer good evidence that the oral tradition prior to the written sources would be historically accurate when it came to the “gist” of the story. He quotes E. P. Sanders: “‘The Gospel writers did not wildly invent material,’ though ‘they developed it, shaped it and directed it in the ways they wished.’” (150) Form criticism comes under close scrutiny and he finds that while “scholarship as a whole has become less impressed with some earlier form-critical criteria like the criteria of dissimilarity . . . today it often emphasizes the continuity between Jesus and his Palestinian Jewish environment.” (161)
Keener has built a persuasive case that the Gospels should be viewed as historically reliable when their genre is considered and when compared with similar writings and standards of the day. He has not argued for any special treatment to be offered to them but simply to evaluate them on the same basis as any other document of the time would be treated.
Now having examined the primary sources; the next part of the book is entitled “What We Learn about Jesus from the Best Sources.” I can’t wait to start.
This second section is devoted to evaluating the Gospels. Keener makes a strong case to show the genre of the Gospels is best seen as biography. Unique to the Gospels is Luke-Acts. This two-volume book is unique because while the first part is obviously biography the book of Acts more appropriately falls into the category of ancient historiography. He quotes Hengel and Schwemer as saying that “those who deny Luke-Acts as acceptable first-century historiography need to read more ancient historiography ‘and less hypercritical and scholastic secondary literature.’” (86) The next two chapters deal with ancient historiography as history and secondly as rhetoric. We learn that the ancients were very concerned with accuracy and the reliability of sources and eyewitnesses. They were not blind to biases and clearly knew the difference between history and fiction. Ancient historians often found fault with others for their inaccuracies and flagrant falsehoods. But historians were not only concerned with accuracy they were also concerned with presentation. Even here we learn that the more rhetorically oriented historians were most clearly seen in their treatment of speeches. The Synoptics do not show signs of this type of history. Keener says they “are sometimes less cohesive, sometimes with more evidence of their sources, and do not develop scenes with elaborate descriptions.” (110) He directly addresses the question of whether the Gospels are distorted by rhetoric and he finds the evidence lacking for such a charge. Luke-Acts would be the closest to this type of genre but even here the evidence is not convincing. Keener then explores how ancient history handled agendas: political, national, moral and theological agendas. But even here the presence of agendas does not preclude accurate history. As he notes, “All other ancient historians and biographers, like many modern ones, had agendas they considered important; they used history to shed light on their own time, no less than did the Gospels. But had the Gospel writers wished to communicate solely later Christian doctrine and not history, they could have readily chosen simpler forms than biography for this purpose.” (122)
In the following two chapters Keener looks at the sources of the Gospels: one chapter explores the written sources and another chapter considers the oral sources. On the former Keener works from what’s known in the field as the “Two-Source Hypothesis.” This view holds that Matthew and Luke used Mark as one source and another commonly termed simply as “Q”. Given the validity of this view we can see how Matthew and Luke used their sources and that gives us an idea of how they may have used sources we don’t have access to. This is a far better assumption than that of many critical scholars who assume that the Gospel writers simply invented material where we can’t check them out. This, says Keener, is “imagination run amuck.” (132) Next we come to the oral sources of the Gospels. Keener looks at oral cultures and the testimony of ancient writers concerning the ability of some exemplary people with impressive memory capabilities. In particular, he examines the rabbinic traditions and early Jewish education habits. He recognizes the legitimate complaint brought by some that “all the rabbinic evidence is later than the first century; but”, he responds, “it is hardly likely that this evidence would be discontinuous with all the other Jewish and Greco-Roman evidence that we do have, especially given the particular focus on it in our later extant sources.” (149-150) And in the endnote he further says that “many also observe that the later rabbinic method hardly arose ex nihilo after 70 CE. (475n.150) The memorization habits of the time period offer good evidence that the oral tradition prior to the written sources would be historically accurate when it came to the “gist” of the story. He quotes E. P. Sanders: “‘The Gospel writers did not wildly invent material,’ though ‘they developed it, shaped it and directed it in the ways they wished.’” (150) Form criticism comes under close scrutiny and he finds that while “scholarship as a whole has become less impressed with some earlier form-critical criteria like the criteria of dissimilarity . . . today it often emphasizes the continuity between Jesus and his Palestinian Jewish environment.” (161)
Keener has built a persuasive case that the Gospels should be viewed as historically reliable when their genre is considered and when compared with similar writings and standards of the day. He has not argued for any special treatment to be offered to them but simply to evaluate them on the same basis as any other document of the time would be treated.
Now having examined the primary sources; the next part of the book is entitled “What We Learn about Jesus from the Best Sources.” I can’t wait to start.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
The Jesus Prayer - A Review
In the past few years I've had an on-again-off-again interest in Eastern Orthodoxy. My first real exposure to Orthodoxy came when I was writing my Master's Thesis at Trinity on the topic of the Incarnation. I stumbled across a gold mine of Orthodox writers I had never heard of before. But, as I said, my interest was never sustained for long. Among the traditions of the Orthodox is the saying of "The Jesus Prayer." When I saw that one of my favorite Orthodox writers, Frederica Methewes-Green, was writing a book on this prayer my interest was renewed. For those unfamiliar with this prayer it is quite simply “Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me.” (There are variations which she deals with in the book.) The Jesus Prayer: the Ancient Desert Prayer that Tunes the Heart to God is divided into two parts: Part One covers some of the history and gives a general overview of the prayer. Chapter two, of part one, is entitled "Terms, Concepts, and Context" but perhaps she should have added "Cautions." There are some in the Orthodox community who believe the Jesus Prayer should not be said by those who are not part of the Orthodox community. She says "some Orthodox elders hold that self-directed use of the Prayer is, in fact, dangerous, potentially leading to delusion, then to possible insanity or demonic possession." (28) She clarifies that the driving concern here is "mostly thinking of people who harbor prideful fantasies of being a certified mystic, able to wield supernatural powers and demonstrably superior to ordinary folks." (29) At first I was put off by this kind of thinking but then realized that here are a people who take their practices seriously and want to discourage the practice of them outside of their most fruitful contexts and purposes. The Jesus Prayer is part of a very organic context and she says that “some Orthodox find it hard to imagine how people could benefit from the Jesus Prayer if they take it out of context. You need all the elements, they would say, including participation in the Orthodox sacraments (called ‘mysteries’ in the East) and acceptance of Orthodox theology.” (27, emphasis hers) Her own thoughts are summed up with “stay humble and you will be safe” and “if you are open and humble, how could it hurt?” (29-30)
She acknowledges in the third chapter that “[y]ou can try to force your mind to keep going over and over those words, like a gerbil on a wheel, but it’s going to get pretty tedious. The hard part is to mean them.” (33, emphasis hers) The point of the prayer is to foster a relationship with God but it is also instrumental in a transformed heart and mind (an important distinction which she helps to flesh out in this chapter.) The second part of the book is in a Q & A format which reads fairly quickly. The questions cover a wide range of topics from where do I start to how many times (and even how fast) should we say the Jesus Prayer. Frederica wisely avoids creating the impression that there is a single “correct” method of saying the prayer as she shares a wide diversity or practices she has observed by those within Orthodoxy. But she does set some parameters. For example on the question of should we “picture Christ looking at me, or anything like that? Or should I keep looking at an icon of him while I pray” she responds “No, that’s one thing on which the tradition is very firm: do not picture anything. Do not use your imagination.” (68) She notes that this may sound contradictory after she has talked about surrounding yourself with icons but here’s where we need to understand the purpose of icons. She compares icons to a collection of photos of a hero. If you had a chance to meet your hero you wouldn’t take the pictures along and stare at them. “In the Jesus Prayer, we are trying to remain in direct contact with God, and such images can lure us instead into thinking about God.” (68) She tells of her own spiritual father who “found it hard to deflect all the images that meet the eye if praying with eyes open, yet, when he closes his eyes, his mind begins supplying endless quantities of stored images. . . He found that praying with eyes almost shut helped him find a middle way, where images don’t arise.” (69)
Frederica is careful to distinguish this practice from the meditation techniques of religions like Hinduism or Buddhism. While some similarities may exist there are significant differences. One of those is that in Christianity the point of something like self renunciation is not to lose “our sense of personhood and becoming an undifferentiated part of the universe. For Christians, the ultimate reality is interpersonal relationship; personhood is healed and restored, rather than dissolved.” (124)
The further you get into the book the more Orthodox theology is incorporated in the discussion. At times there is what I might see, though she may not have intended it this way, as a “soft” apologetic for Orthodoxy. For example, when answering a question about can’t we dismiss the whole concept of the fear of God she responds, “. . . if you pick and choose from the spiritual treasury whatever seems most appealing, your highest authority is your own opinion—your personal tastes and preferences. And those are self-reinforcing; your personal inclinations will go right on confirming you to the way you already are. . . My advice is to accept the ancient spiritual disciplines as a complete, integrated healing program, rather than picking and choosing to fit. Some kind of wisdom has been worked out in them over the centuries. This net wisdom may well be smarter than you are, because your experience is limited, and also conditioned by your surrounding culture.” (89) Unless I’m misreading her here I think she is saying you either take the complete package or don’t bother with it at all.
The book ends with a bibliography for further reading and “Notes” which are never footnoted through the book so I didn’t realize they were there till I finished the book. It does give the page number and a phrase or word to which the note refers.
So, do I say the Jesus Prayer and risk going insane? On the one hand I think Frederica is encouraging its use as long as we remain humble but on the other hand it would seem that she would encourage a conversion to Orthodoxy in order to truly appreciate what the Jesus Prayer is all about. Whereas in the beginning I thought I would gain something for my spiritual growth there were enough cautions and a just a glimpse of the “full package” required to fully benefit from this practice that I’m left not knowing what to do. If you want to know more about the Jesus Prayer and why it holds such a treasured place in the heart of Orthodoxy then read this book. If you want to say the prayer—well, I won’t even venture any advice on that.
The book is a paperback with 181 pages and sells for $16.99. It is published by Paraclete Press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)