Keeping Christ Central

The Book I'm Most Anticipating in 2012

2012-05-22T13:47:00.001-04:00

It's an embarrassment of riches, really; we live in an age where great resources for understanding the Bible are plentiful. What a blessing. Or, what a distraction! With the glut of resources, I'm constantly being reminded that I am simply not able to read all of the great books that are being published. As I get intentional about what I read, the need for good practical books remains. For example, my wife and I are currently reading Tim Keller's book on marriage out loud to each other, and it's been amazing. Likely the best book on marriage either one of us have ever read! But the focus of my reading is usually on what I might call 'tool books,' or books that are really tools to help me better read and understand the Bible for myself. I spend the weight of my time there, because these books help me to dig for myself into God's Word.

For me, then, the most anticipated book release of 2012 is "Kingdom Through Covenant," by Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum. In this book, an Old Testament Professor(Gentry) and a Systematic/Biblical Theology Professor(Wellum) team up to examine what they call the backbone of both testaments. Here is the publisher's description:

Many theological discussions come to an impasse when parties align behind either covenant theology or dispensationalism. But Peter Gentry and Stephen Wellum now propose a significant biblical theology of the covenants that avoids the extremes of both classical systems and holds the potential to break the theological impasse. Kingdom through Covenant is not a system-driven work, but a careful exposition of the covenants as key to the narrative plot structure of the whole Bible.

Kingdom through Covenant emphasizes the importance of the covenant concept throughout Scripture, showing that crucial theological differences can be resolved by understanding how the biblical covenants unfold and relate to one another. Rather than looking at covenant as the center of biblical theology, the authors show how the covenants form the backbone of Scripture and the key to understanding its overarching story. They ultimately show that the covenant concept forms a solid platform for systematic theology.

By incorporating the latest available research from the ancient Near East and examining implications of their work for Christology, ecclesiology, eschatology, and hermeneutics—Gentry and Wellum present a thoughtful and viable alternative to both covenant theology and dispensationalism.

Canadians can pre-order it at a hefty discount here.

Americans can get an even better discount here.

Buy it and read it!

(Did I mention that both of these professors are Canadians? From my neck of the woods? The potential blessing of reading it just multiplied tenfold!)

Wrestling With Ecclesiastes, Part III - Observing Life Under the Sun

2012-04-30T19:51:00.000-04:00

Table 1:
The Ancient Hebrew View of the Universe
(see footnote 30)

This is the third post in a weekly series called, 'Wrestling with Ecclesiastes.' I've always found Ecclesiastes to be a very difficult book to understand, so this past semester I took the opportunity to focus on it in one of my classes. In this blog series I'm sharing some of what I've learned. For the first two posts in the series, go to the following:

Part 1 - The Teleological Suppression of the Eternal: Rethinking Absurdity in The Teacher's Perspective

Part 2 - Foundations: Author, Structure, Genre

Today's post is, I believe, the most important key to understanding Ecclesiastes. I've titled this post, 'Observing Life Under the Sun' because that is what I think Ecclesiastes is, a catalogue of observations by The Teacher about life under the sun. Read on to find out what I mean.

When we get looking at Ecclesiastes it becomes clear that the work of The Teacher is one of personal empirical observations.21 The Teacher's language is filled with these verbs of observation, with The Teacher himself as the subject (mostly, but not limited to, the first person singular voice). Some key phrases are: ‘I saw,’22 ‘I gave my heart,’23 ‘to seek,’24 ‘to explore’ (1:13; 7:25), ‘I spoke with my heart’ (1:16), ‘my heart saw’ (1:16), ‘I gave my heart’ (1:17; 9:1), ‘I spoke in my heart,’25 ‘I explored in my heart’ (2:3), ‘I will see’ (2:3), ‘I turned’ (in the sense of ‘considered, looked at, reflected on,’ 2:11, 12), ‘I knew’ (2:14; 3:12, 14), ‘I found’ (or ‘to find’ with The Teacher as the subject),26 and ‘I said’ (8:14; 9:16). Further, the pronoun ‘I’ occurs on its own, usually as an intensifier of a first person verb, 28 times in the book,27 and the noun ‘heart’ with the first common singular pronominal suffix attached to it, occurs 18 times.28

But these personal observations are intentionally limited. The qualifying phrases ‘under the sun’ (29 times),29 and ‘under the heavens’ (3 times, 1:13, 2:3, 3:1) occur throughout the book, for a total of 32 combined occurrences of the synonymous phrases. As The Teacher makes his observations, he does not do so as a prophet, from the top down, letting special revelation about ultimate reality refine his observations. Rather, he deliberately observes life ‘from the ground up,’ or ‘under the sun.’ Table 1

displays the Hebrew view of the universe, and offers insight into the world that The Teacher is observing. For the purposes of this present study, it can be noted that the ‘under the sun/under the heavens’ qualifying phrase radically alters The Teacher's perspective.31 This is not to question the validity of the book, but it does radically effect its interpretation. As he makes his observations, The Teacher is choosing to do so with a sort of ‘tunnel vision,’ simply soaking in what really happens in the world and offering reports. For one thing, this insight has great bearing on the so-called contradictions throughout the book. Michael V. Fox observes:

The contradictions in the book of [Ecclesiastes] are real and intended. We must interpret them, not eliminate them. To be precise, [The Teacher] is not so much contradicting himself as observing contradictions in the world. To him they seem to be antinomies, two equally valid but contradictory principles. He does not resolve these antinomies, but only describes them, bemoans them, and suggests how to live in such a refractory world. The contradictions do not make the book incoherent. On the contrary, [The Teacher's] persistent observation of contradictions is a powerful cohesive force, and an awareness of it brings into focus the book’s central concern: the problem of meaning in life. The book of [Ecclesiastes] is about meaning: its loss and its (partial) recovery.32

To be sure, the book of personal observations under the sun is the key to this, and other key themes throughout the book. As we will see in a later post, it is only in the epilogue that this ‘under the sun’ limit to perspective is removed.

------------------------

FOOTNOTES:

²¹ Michael V. Fox interestingly notes that, “[The Teacher's] epistemology as a whole has no parallel in other ancient Near Eastern Wisdom Literature, which, contrary to a widespread view, is not empirical” in “Qohelet’s Epistemology.”HUCA 58 (1987), 137.

²² 1:14; 2:13, 24; 3:10, 16, 22; 4:1, 4, 15; 5:12, 17; 6:1; 7:15; 8:9, 10; 9:13; 10:5, 7

²³ 1:13, 17; 8:9

²⁴ 1:13; 7:25, 28; 12:10

²⁵ 2:1, 14, 15; 3:17, 18

²⁶ 7:27, 28 (3x), 29; 12:10

²⁷ 1:12, 16 (2x); 2:1, 12, 13, 14, 15 (3x), 18 (2x), 20, 24; 3:17, 18; 4:1, 2, 4, 7, 8; 5:17; 7:25, 26; 8:2, 12, 15; 9:16

²⁸ 1:13, 16 (2x), 17; 2:1, 3 (2x), 10 (2x), 15 (2x), 20; 3:17, 18; 7:25; 8:9, 16; 9:1

²⁹ 1:3, 9, 14; 2:11, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22; 3:16, 4:1, 3, 7, 15; 5:12, 17; 6:1, 12; 8:9, 15 (2x), 17; 9:3, 6, 9 (2x), 11, 13; 10:5

³⁰ Guardian Data Store. “The Ancient Hebrew Conception of the Universe,” n.p. [cited 24 February, 2012]. Online: http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://flowingdata.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/ancient-hebrew-cosmology-545x770.jpg&imgrefurl=http://flowingdata.com/2009/11/06/7-visualization-groups-on-flickr-to-find-inspiration/&h=770&w=545&sz=84&tbnid=9p-S9MlAADSsHM:&tbnh=93&tbnw=66&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhebrew%2Bcosmology%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=hebrew+cosmology&docid=yn8DNAUeL8DilM&sa=X&ei=wnE1T_zTD6PL0QGDwq2_Ag&ved=0CC8Q9QEwAg&dur=20.

³¹ I am indebted to Richard P. Belcher for first pointing me to the prevalence of, and importance of this phrase in Ecclesiastes. In his Ph.D. dissertation, supervised by Tremper Longman III and with Peter Ens as a secondary reader, he writes, “Although [The Teacher] carries out his search from a wisdom standpoint, his limited under the sun perspective effects his conclusions concerning divine retribution. Much like the author of Psalm 73, he struggles to understand why certain things happen in this world. Whereas the author of Psalm 73 needed a renewed understanding of God to break from from his struggle, [The Teacher] needs the epilogue to remind him of the revelation of God” Richard P. Belcher. Divine Retribution in Ecclesiastes: An Analysis of the Deed-Consequence Relationship With Implications For the Interpretation of the Book. (Ph.D. Dissertation, Westminster Seminary, Philadelphia, PA: ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis, 2000), iii; For a fuller fleshing out of this idea see Ibid., 253-255; For others who share the perspective that the phrase ‘under the sun’ denotes a limit to perspective, see, for example, Longman, Ecclesiastes, 39; Michael A. Eaton. Ecclesiastes: An Introduction & Commentary. (Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, D.J. Wiseman, Gen. Ed. Leicester, Eng; Downers Grove, ILL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1983), 15-50.

³² Fox, A Rereading of Ecclesiastes, 3.

Carl Trueman on (Screen-Using) Multisite Churches

2012-04-24T16:32:00.001-04:00

As I wrestle with issues of the application of Biblical truth to the nitty gritty of church life, I find that time and again, Carl Trueman is helpful to me. And I'll admit it: more often than not I find myself agreeing with him. Whether he is talking about a cultural or an ecclesiastical issue, he is a sharp thinker, a clear writer (and speaker), gracious, and downright hilarious (which doesn't hurt).

This past week I particularly appreciated his discussion of multi-site churches, where (contra. Keller), those multisite churches use a screen to 'beam' the preacher to the congregation (or audience, for that matter). His article is worth reading in full, and it can be found here.

Wrestling With Ecclesiastes, Part 2 - Foundations: Author, Structure, Genre

2012-04-23T11:45:00.003-04:00

This is the second of what will likely be a weekly series entitled 'Wrestling With Ecclesiastes.' Ecclesiastes is a difficult book; it's hard to get past some of the content. But I am convinced that if we do some wrestling, the book yields great blessing! The first post can be found here:

Wrestling with Ecclesiastes, Part 1 - The Teleological Suppression of the Eternal: Rethinking Absurdity in The Teacher's Perspective

Today's post will cover a few essential foundational matters including the authorship, structure, and genre of the book.

The authorship and structure of Ecclesiastes are inseparably tied together. The prologue identifies the author with the Hebrew word Qohelet, which the ESV translates as 'The Teacher' (1:1). Michael V. Fox observes that, the noun Qohelet,8 has the root meaning of ‘assembly,’ and its contextual meaning is, “one who does something in the assembly,” namely, public teaching (cf. 12:9).9 The Teacher further identifies himself as the son of David (1:1), and the king over Israel in Jerusalem (1:1, 12). The intended tie to Solomon is clear, because he is the only son of David who reigned from Jerusalem and over Israel.10 The book is structured around a prologue (1:1), body (1:2-12:8), and epilogue (12:9-14), with the opening (1:2) and closing (12:8) of the body enveloped by the key statement, “absurdity of absurdities, says The Teacher, [absurdity of absurdities],11 all is absurdity.”12 In addition, there are three places where the phrase ‘says The Teacher’ is added into the narrative (1:2; 7:27; 12:8). This, coupled with the clear stylistic differences between the body of the book and its epilogue,13 has led most to attribute the latter to the hand of an editor, with some even positing that a third hand was responsible for 12:13-14. However, Fox offers another solution to the differences in person and style. Fox’s thesis is that, “the Book of (Ecclesiastes) is to be taken as a whole, as a single, well-integrated composition, the product not of editorship but of authorship, which uses interplay of voice as a deliberate literary device for rhetorical and artistic purposes.”14 He goes on to note that the phrase, ‘says The Teacher’ in 1:2, 7:27 and 12:8 can be equated with the voice of the narrator, but that the narrator is the author of the whole work, stepping out of the persona of The Teacher and adding comments along the way. In addition, Robert Holmstedt has argued convincingly that in the body of his work, The Teacher creates a second persona, a conversation partner. He argues that the ‘I and my heart’ formula that occurs throughout the book is a device wherein The Teacher creates this second voice, in reference to his inner dialogue with himself (i.e. ‘I and my heart’).15 So there may be a dual persona, the primary of which is The Teacher, and the secondary as his heart, with the third voice of the narrator adding words from outside the Teacher persona. Whether these persona theories are accurate makes little difference to reading the book as a unity, though, if it is remembered that the book of Ecclesiastes was accepted into the canon of Scripture as a unity, with the crucial epilogue attached. For these reasons, and crucial for my argument, as I interpret the book, I will view it as a unity.

With regard to genre, a brief analysis of Ecclesiastes reveals that it is clearly a wisdom book. This is inherent in the book, because its earthy, simple, yet profound observations fit nicely into the wisdom genre. Some of it even has the ‘feel’ of proverbial statements (see, for example, chapter 5). Further, the book contains many key repeated words from the wisdom genre, with words from the root for wisdom,16 knowledge,17 skill,18 folly,19 and madness,20 occurring throughout.

Stay tuned next week for a discussion of what I believe to be the key to understanding this difficult, but amazing book of the Bible.

--------------------

Footnotes:

⁸ Found in 1:1, 2, 12; 7:27; 12:8, 9, 10; in other words, the beginning, middle, and end of the book.

⁹ Michael V. Fox. A Time to Tear Down & A Time To Build Up: A Rereading of Ecclesiastes. (Grand Rapids, MI/Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999), 161.

¹⁰ I recognize the well-documented linguistic problems with this dating. For our purposes it is enough to note the intended tie to Solomon, without going into detail on what this means. For excellent discussions on the dating of Ecclesiastes see, for example, Longman, Ecclesiastes, 9-11; Fox, A Rereading of Ecclesiastes, 159-160.

¹¹ The square brackets indicate words found in 1:2 but not in 12:8.

¹² My own translation (throughout).

¹³ Note for example the switch from the first person beginning at 1:12 to the third person in the epilogue.

¹⁴ Michael V. Fox. “Frame Narrative and Composition in the Book of Qohelet.” HUCA 48 (1977), 83.

¹⁵ See “'I and My Heart': The Syntactic Encoding of the Collaborative Nature of Qohelet’s Experiment.” JHS 9:19 (2009), 2-27. In that place he writes, “Rather than לֵב used with verbs of speaking to express the idiom for internal speech, i.e., someone thinking or speaking to himself, it is used as a full-fledged character in Qohelet...the לֵב here is personified as an experiment partner distinct from himself (so also Fox 1999:267): two investigators can pursue different, even opposing, lines of inquiry better than one, thereby strengthening the conclusions that are ultimately drawn” Ibid., 13-14.

¹⁶ 1:12, 16 (2x), 17, 18; 2:3, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 (2x), 19 (2x), 21, 26; 4:13; 6:8; 7:4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12 (2x), 16, 19 (2x), 23 (2x), 25; 8:1 (2x), 5; 9:1 (2x), 10, 11, 13, 15, 16 (2x), 17; 10:1, 2, 10, 12; 12:9, 11

¹⁷ 1:16, 17 (3x), 18; 2:21, 26; 7:12, 25 (2x); 8:1, 5 (2x), 7, 12; 9:1 (2x); 9:5 (2x), 10, 11, 12; 11:2, 5 (2x), 6, 9; 12:9

¹⁸ 2:21; 5:10

¹⁹ 1:17; 2:3, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19; 4:5, 13, 17; 5:2, 3; 6:8; 7:4, 5, 6, 9, 17, 25 (2x); 9:17: 10:1, 2, 3 (2x), 6, 12, 13, 14, 15

²⁰ 1:17; 2:2, 12; 7:25; 9:3; 10:13

Mark Dever on Numbers and Church Growth

2012-04-20T10:18:00.001-04:00

I was REALLY encouraged by this 9 minute Q & A session with Mark Dever.

HT: Justin Taylor

WRESTLING WITH ECCLESIASTES, PART 1 - THE TELEOLOGICAL SUPPRESSION OF THE ETERNAL: RETHINKING ABSURDITY IN THE TEACHER’S PERSPECTIVE

2012-04-17T09:11:00.003-04:00

Ecclesiastes is a difficult book, and aptly called, “the black sheep of the canon of biblical books”1 by one author. Of the three wisdom books in the Old Testament, Proverbs teaches patterns of order in a universe governed by the righteous Yahweh, Job teaches the covenant people to embrace mystery in suffering and to live for God’s glory, and Ecclesiastes teaches that all of life is absurd,2 and that God’s people should despair. Or so it would seem upon a cursory reading. I am not the first to struggle with the meaning of this book. Longman reports that, “there were ancient doubts about its divine authority among the rabbis and others”.3 He continues:

In the first tractate of the Mishnah (Shabbat, ch. 3), Rabbi Tanhum of Nave is quoted as saying, ‘O Solomon, where is your wisdom, where is your intelligence? Not only do your words contradict the words of your father, David, they even contradict themselves’...I further observe that the Pesiqta of Rab Kahana (Leviticus Rabbah 28:1) states: ‘The sages sought to store away the Book of Ecclesiastes, because they found words in it which tended to heresy.’4

However, because of its beginning and end, along with its connection to Solomon, the Jewish community did recognize Ecclesiastes as canonical.5 Further, there is no evidence that Christians questioned whether this book was a part of Holy Scripture.6 But that does not mean Christian interpreters have been free from struggle: “In the summer and fall of 1526 (Martin) Luther took up the challenge to lecture on Ecclesiastes to the small band of students who stayed behind in Wittenberg during the plague. ‘Solomon the preacher,’ he wrote to a friend, ‘is giving me a hard time, as though he begrudged anyone lecturing on him. But he must yield.’”7 Thankfully, upon a close reading of Ecclesiastes, the book does yield an important message. This blog series is the product of my own wrestlings, my own effort to read Ecclesiastes closely, and force him to yield his meaning. The title of my series hints at the key to the book’s meaning - the teleological suppression of the eternal: rethinking absurdity in The Teacher’s perspective - and my thesis, which will unpack this title, is as follows: Ecclesiastes is a wisdom book in which the author observes the absurdity of life under the sun, with the end goal of helping the covenant people to accept the absurd and to live for the eternal. In the posts that follow, I will unpack each aspect of this thesis in turn. I will begin with matters that are foundational to my overall argument, including questions of author, structure, genre, and the issue of observing life under the sun. I will then move to discuss the key themes of absurdity, The Teacher’s view of God, and his teaching on joy. With these foundations in place, I will offer a quick overview of the book as a whole, before I conclude by discussing the epilogue as the end goal of the argument of the book, and therefore as the essential key to understanding absurdity in The Teacher’s perspective.

----------

Footnotes:

¹ Bruce Waltke, with Charles Yu, An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical, and Thematic Approach. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007), 946

² A defense of this translation of the Hebrew term 'hevel' will be set forth in a post to follow.

³ Tremper Longman III. The Book of Ecclesiastes. (NICOT. Ed. Robert L. Hubbard Jr. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: Eerdmans, 1998), 26.

⁴ Ibid., 27.

⁵ See Ibid., 28.

⁶ See Ibid., 29.

⁷ John Piper. “Martin Luther: Lessons From His Life and Labor,” n.p. [cited 24 February 2012]. Online: http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/biographies/martin-luther-lessons-from-his-life-and-labor.

The Bernie Madoff Guide to Church Growth

2012-03-26T19:42:00.001-04:00

My buddy Clint has an insightful little post here.

How To Write God Book Reviews and How to Learn From Poor Critiques of Your Writing

2012-03-15T20:59:00.005-04:00

Dr. Robert Holmstedt, a professor of mine in the Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations at the University of Toronto, offers some very helpful advice on writing book reviews in light of two negative reviews of one of his recent books (An analysis of the Hebrew Grammer of Ruth). In his reflections, Holmstedt sets some helpful criteria for writing a good review, and models a willingness to both critique and also learn from 'poor reviews'. In light of the sheer time and energy it must have taken to write this book, his humility is to be commended. Here are the key introductory paragraphs to whet your appetite for read the whole thing:

Two reviews have now appeared and neither is positive. Timothy Lim (Edinburgh) reviewed it forThe Expository Times (122:3) and, just recently, Marjo Korpel (Utrecht) reviewed it in the onlineReview of Biblical Literature.
Both reviews are instructive, even if they are rather dismissive of my work. How then, you ask, are the reviews instructive? Do they point out fundamental problems that I would change if I could go back and write the book over or that I’ll adjust as I write the next volume in the series? Not at all, I answer. Rather, the reviews shall serve as teaching fodder, since how to write a useful review is clearly not taught much anymore and apparently the concept and components of a useful review are not as obvious as one might expect.

Even if you are not interested in Hebrew grammer, you will benefit from reading the whole article here.

51 Minutes (or so) in Heaven

2012-02-19T12:10:00.004-05:00

I've always been dubious when I've heard about books where people say it happened to them, but today it happened to me and the experience I had was absolutely trustworthy. I know of many people who long to get a peek, just a glimpse, into what happens when they die, so they buy people's testimonies about glimpses, trips, experiences, dreams, where they saw, visited, experienced, gazed at, heven or hell. These readers all seem to have one thing in common: they long for a deeper assurance of the eternal, and they want other people in their lives to be jarred into these greater realities as well. But I've always found this unsettling, because although there is a God who reveals glimpses of the eternal to people, there is also an enemy who deceives, not to mention deceitful people out there who write lies in order to get rich. But I know for certain that my story is true and certain and to be trusted, and I come away from it feeling an assurance of the eternal that is absolutely to be trusted. Let me tell you what happened to me today.

It all started with my friend John. God led him to heaven for several hours this week, and today he led me, my wife, and about a thousand other people to see the very same realities. John is my pastor, and he is preaching through the book of Revelation. And my wife and I agree that as we were sitting under this ministry this morning, we were transported to see heaven (and hell) in a way that has changed us.

This should not shock anyone. In reference to his preaching, the Apostle Paul told the Galatians: "It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified" (Gal 3:1b, ESV). Paul's preaching gave people a visual display of the the realities he proclaimed. In another place, Paul said that "All Scripture is breathed out by God" (2 Tim 3:16a). So when I heard my pastor open God's living Word this morning, read it, and proclaim its message to us, I should not be surprised that I was, and about a thousand other people were, transported. That he is currently preaching through the book of Revelation explains why I saw heaven in particular so clearly.

And so it comes back to me as a preacher. As I evaluate myself I need to ask, 'will my preaching lead people to a clearer vision of Christ crucified?'; 'am I preaching from all parts of God's Word (including Revelation), so that God's people have a vision of heaven that they long for?'; 'will my preaching leave people wondering about the eternal, wanting a bit more of a peek, leading them to buy less-than reliable books when the absolutely trustworthy, living Word of God simply needs to be declared to them and they would be transported to another world?'. I think that preachers are too quick to mock those books and not quick enough to evaluate themselves and what the popularity of those books must say about their own preaching. To a man (or woman), every person I know who buys books of personal testimony about trips to heaven or hell have at least two things in common: 1) they have good motives; they sincerely want to understand more deeply and live more for the eternal; 2) they find the book of Revelation daunting and confusing.

I am thankful to be under the faithful ministry of a man so gifted and godly. I am thankful that he is preaching through Revelation, and, as he often says in sermons, inviting us to put on these new lenses through which we will see the world. I am thankful that my friend in Toronto has begun a series on the same book!

To download my Pastor, John Mahaffey's series as it unfolds, go here.

To check out the Canadian Gospel Coalition Conference he is organizing, click here.

To listen to John Piper's testimony of having God actually speak to him, click here.

The Middle-Aged White Guy's Guide to Christian Rap

2012-02-15T10:31:00.003-05:00

My buddy Tim Challies has provided the following helpful (and hilarious) infographic (I think you can click on it to view the full version):

Tim Keller on New York City's Ban on Churches Meeting in Public Schools

2012-02-07T17:03:00.002-05:00

By Tim Keller....

[This was posted today on Redeemer.com.]
I am grieved that New York City is planning to take the unwise step of removing 68 churches from the spaces that they rent in public schools. It is my conviction that those churches housed in schools are invaluable assets to the neighborhoods that they serve. Churches have long been seen as positive additions to communities. Family stability, resources for those in need, and compassion for the marginalized are all positive influences that neighborhood churches provide. There are many with first-hand experience who will claim that the presence of churches in a neighborhood can lead to a drop in crime.
The great diversity of our city means that we will never all agree completely on anything. And we cherish our city’s reputation for tolerance of differing opinions and beliefs. Therefore, we should all mourn if disagreement with certain beliefs of the church is allowed to unduly influence the formation of just policy and practice.
I disagree with the opinion written by Judge Pierre Leval that: “A worship service is an act of organized religion that consecrates the place in which it is performed, making it a church.” This is an erroneous theological judgment; I know of no Christian church or denomination that believes that merely holding a service in a building somehow “consecrates” it, setting it apart from all common or profane use. To base a legal opinion on such a superstitious view is surely invalid. Conversely, I concur with Judge John Walker’s dissenting opinion that this ban constitutes viewpoint discrimination and raises no legitimate Establishment Clause concerns.
A disproportionate number of churches that are affected by this prohibition are not wealthy, established communities of faith. They are ones who possess the fewest resources and many work with the poor. Redeemer has many ties with those churches and their pastors, and our church community invests time and resources to assist them to be good neighbors in their communities.
Let them be those good neighbors. I am hopeful that the leaders of New York City and the legislators of New York State will see the value of a society that encourages all spheres of culture—the church, government, education, business, etc—to work together for human flourishing.
Dr. Timothy Keller
Senior Pastor
Redeemer Presbyterian Church

Carl Trueman: Gnosticism, Nicea and Celebrity

2012-02-02T10:36:00.000-05:00

I think it is wise to be following the whole controversy surrounding the Elephant Room 2, as it helps us think through: 1) the importance of theology; 2) the issue of celebrity pastors; 3) the issue of authority: who we listen to today....not to mention the fact that like 'em or not, the people involved are all influential within the church.

As usual, Carl Trueman offers a very helpful critique. As I do a 'mirror reading' of his little piece, I'm guessing that he's responding to some comments made by James McDonald. A few of the many helpful paragraphs reads as follows (after pointing out that many people who participated in the Council of Nicea had suffered for their Trinitarian theology):

That someone is willing to die for a cause does not sanctify it; but when you add to this that Nicene orthodoxy has been universally agreed upon as important by millions of Christians of multiple races, nationalities and age profile, through sixteen centuries, surely that should give us pause for thought. The questions asked at Nicea were important and they were asked by serious men, men serious enough to risk death for their faith. To dismiss all this with a wave of the hand or through simple lack of knowledge and competence, and to follow this up by playing the race card, is an interesting move.

But hey, if a bunch of middle-aged American pastors in the Elephant Room tell you Nicea and its delegates -- and all the Christians who have suffered and died to maintain its truth over the centuries -- are irrelevant, who am I to question them? To do so would surely be the height of arrogance. Ahem.

Read the whole thing here.

James McDonald is a very good popularizer, but obviously, not a great theologian. He would be an excellent church leader if he surrounded himself with great theologians and listened to them. That he has failed to do this thus far, severely limits his ability to shepherd a growing movement effectively. It's too bad.

HT: Challies

Voddie Baucham: The Elephant in the Room

2012-01-31T14:07:00.002-05:00

Voddie's word is excellent. Here are the first two paragraphs:

This past week a firestorm erupted over the recent “Elephant Room 2.” The controversy centers around the decision to invite Bishop T.D. Jakes to participate in the event. The central questions in the debate are 1) whether or not Bishop Jakes holds to the historic, orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, 2) whether it was appropriate to invite (and feature) him without first having clarified his position on this cardinal doctrine, and 3) whether he cleared up the matter.
I was scheduled to speak at Harvest Bible Chapel on the weekend following ER2 which raised significant questions about my stance on the matter. While I do not consider it my responsibility to comment on every controversy, I do recognize my duty to clarify matters with which I am involved directly, and/or those that impact the congregation I am called to shepherd. Hence, my explanation now.

I strongly encourage you to read the whole thing here.

HT: Challies

The Other Elephant in the Room

2012-01-28T15:05:00.003-05:00

HT: Challies

For my little article on the first elephant in the room, go here.

Why would a person resign from a committee of faithful gospel preachers in order to 'unite' with a man who is heretical on at least two fronts (and I do use the word 'heresy' with its full force). This is ridiculous!

2012-01-21T12:36:00.004-05:00

How Did the Apostle Paul Understand Leviticus 18:5?

2012-01-21T10:17:00.000-05:00

Justin Taylor's post is about the best little summary/explanation I've read on this important topic. I think this kind of thing is the key to understanding how to read/apply both the Old Testament and the New Testament in the life of the Christian. Here is his post in its entirety:

-------------

The Apostle Paul twice cites Leviticus 18:5 in the midst of important arguments about justification.

In Galatians 3:12 he says, “But the law is not of faith, rather ‘The one who does them shall live by them.’”

And in Romans 10:5 he says, “For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them.”

One of the more common recent readings is that Paul is not talking about the actual Mosaic law, but rather about a legalistic misuse or misunderstanding of it. In part this is because we know that salvation has always been by faith, even under the Mosaic covenant, and yet Paul appears to be contrasting the law with faith (see Gal. 3:11 and Rom. 10:6 for the contrasts).

However, this “misuse of the law” interpretation simply can’t account for Paul’s actual flow of thought and argument. Tom Schreiner points out one of the reasons in 40 Questions About Christians and Biblical Law: “the misinterpretation view suffers from a major defect. Elsewhere Paul always cites an Old Testament text positively to advance his own argument, and we are lacking any clear evidence that he responds to a wrong understanding here. It is most likely, then, that Paul cites the Old Testament to advance his argument.”

So what is Paul really doing? I think Schreiner’s understanding is exactly right, and if you don’t see Paul’s strategy here, you’ll misread a good chunk of Paul’s contrast between the old and new covenants.

Paul reads Leviticus 18:5 redemptive-historically.
Perfect obedience is demanded from those who place themselves under the law, for the atonement provided by Old Testament sacrifices no longer avails with the coming of Christ.
Perfect obedience was not demanded in one sense under the Sinai covenant, for the law provided forgiveness via sacrifices for those who transgressed.
In Paul’s view, however (see Gal. 3:15-4:7), the Sinai covenant is no longer in force. Hence, those who observe circumcision and the law to obtain justification (Gal. 5:2-4) are turning back the clock in salvation history. The coming of Christ spells the end of the Sinai covenant (Gal. 3:15-4:7). Hence, those who live under the law must keep it perfectly to be saved, for in returning to the law they are forsaking the atonement provided by Christ (Gal. 2:21; 5:3). Returning to the law is futile, however, for the sacrifices of atonement under the Sinai covenant pointed ahead to the sacrifice of Christ. Therefore animal sacrifices no longer provide forgiveness now that the definitive sacrifice of Christ has been offered (Gal. 3:13).

In the chapter on this verse in his book, Dr. Schreiner also explains what Leviticus 18:5meant in its original context, how it was interpreted in the rest of the OT, and why we should reject the reading that sees Romans 10:5 and 10:6-8 as both describing the life of faith.

Light Before The Sun

2012-01-16T19:37:00.004-05:00

"Let there be light". The first recorded command in history rang out across a dark, formless void, and instantly the dark gloom was replaced by blazing light. The Creator-God stepped back and admired what he had made and he concluded, "this is good". Twelve hours later, the light faded and was replaced, not with never-ending darkness, but twelve hours of darkness before the light blazed forth again. The first recorded day in all of history was complete. On the next day, sky, and the next, land and vegetation with seed-bearing fruit came into existence through the creative command of God. The succession of evening and morning that had begun a few days previously continued and would continue. And then on the fourth day, God spoke again: "Let there be...lights".

It is well documented that the Genesis creation account records the creation of light first, but the creation of lights, of planets to emanate light, on the fourth day. The question begs to be asked, 'how could God create light on the first, and planets on the fourth day'? Some claim that this is a Hebrew poetic device, and that the days of creation are not meant to be interpreted as a creative succession, but rather, as a poetic re-telling of what must have happened, somewhere between history and myth. Some mock, and cite this as the first error in the Bible, the first authorial slip, the first sign that the Bible is not trustworthy. From human experience it is certainly impossible to have light, to have earth at all, without light-emanating planets.

Indeed, there are many proposed explanations for the creation of light before the creation of planets to emanate light, and I have yet to read all the various views on this important topic...but I do have a theory as to what was going on. I think that the second-to-last chapter of the Bible sheds incredible 'light' on Genesis 1. Revelation 21:23 says this about the New Jerusalem:

"And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and its lamp is the Lamb." (ESV).

What do we learn here? In the very least, we learn that God has no need of planets in order to emanate light, that all he needs is, well, himself. "God is light" (1 John 1:5). And the New Heavens and the New Earth will have no need of planets because all that separates men and women from God will be gone. Jesus, who is The Light of the World (John 8:12), has already paid for sin and redeemed his people. In the New Heavens and New Earth, the full-inheritance will be given, and the God who is Light will provide all the glory that the Christian's eternal home will need.

Could it be that in that first act of creation, God spoke and simply revealed his glory, allowed his own radiance to emanate forth? Could it be that he hung light into place on that day, and that he himself was the source of that light? This certainly makes sense.

Could it be that on the fourth day of creation, God was making provision for sin, for the day when the crowning climax of God's creation, men and women made in his image, would rebel against their creator, and would be separated from God's perfect presence, for the time when the God who is Light would be unbearable to be around, because he is so perfectly pure, and we are so utterly sinful? Could it be that the all-knowing Creator was already thinking of mercy, was already thinking of how to preserve a people who would rebel, so they would be ready for the gospel, even before they were created?

These are some of my own exegetical wrestlings with God's Word. I do not share these things as the final word, or even a great word that I've read in a book somewhere. I share them as the thoughts of a student of the Bible who is in process, but who loves to dig more deeply in the Word of God, so that the God who has revealed himself would be closer to his heart.

I'm so glad that I wrestle with the Bible deeply, long before commentaries on the Bible ever enter my hands. I'm so glad for the privilege of having daily, even constant, first-hand access to the very words of God.

And I'm also glad for community, even cyber-community. Can you share any thoughts that shed light on, or disproves what I've written? I would love to learn from my readers, and to have my gaze at God be brought into greater focus. Leave a comment and give some thoughts!

What Is "Theological Interpretation of Scripture"?

2012-01-09T20:35:00.002-05:00

My buddy Uche answers that question in this very brief, very simple, very helpful introduction to a movement in scholarship that I like (and that he embodies).

Read his answer here.

2011-12-12T19:15:00.002-05:00

Back in 2002 I was blessed to take a course in Early Christian Spirituality with Michael A.G. Haykin, now of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Of the many benefits from that course, one was learning about the Greek Fathers. Here is one sampling, an insight about the Trinity, that shows why being introduced to those writers was a particular blessing:

Gregory Nazianzen:

No sooner do I conceive of the One than I am illumined by the Splendour of the Three; no sooner do I distinguish Them than I am carried back to the One.
When I think of any One of the Three I think of Him as the Whole, and my eyes are filled, and the greater part of what I am thinking of escapes me.
I cannot grasp the greatness of That One so as to attribute a greater greatness to the Rest.
When I contemplate the Three together, I see but one torch, and cannot divide or measure out the Undivided Light.

—Gregory of Nazianzen, Orationes, 40:41

HT: JT

Free Martyn Lloyd-Jones MP3 Round-Up, Again!

2011-11-30T20:49:00.006-05:00

A while back I posted a round-up of free and not free Martyn Lloyd-Jones MP3's available around the web. In response to that post, the people at the ML-J recording trust recently sent me the following e-mail and link:

Dear Ian,

For your Keeping Christ Central blog, I thought that you might like to know that we plan to make another 5 MLJ sermons available to download free of charge over the next 5 weeks. They are all based on the Letter to the Hebrews.

The first one is already available at: www.mlj-usa.com/pages/hebrews

Download and be blessed! If you want to re-read the whole round-up of sermons I posted a while back, here it is. The free section of my earlier post is as follows:

There is a free weekly radio program for streaming (and I think for download as well). If I remember correctly, each week features half of a sermon, bracketed by the comments of a guy with a British accent. It is found here.

Finally, five of his regular sermons are available for free download here. The first one, entitled 'Mind, Heart, Will' is especially good. Start there!

I'll leave this with you: do you know of any free Martyn Lloyd-Jones audio download sites? Am I missing anything? Leave a comment and let me know! Or, do you want to donate large amounts of money to the Martyn Lloyd-Jones recording trust, to set up a free download extravaganza? Contact them and let them know!

Update: 3 more free downloads can be found: here.

Yet another update: 9 more free ones can be found here.

Still yet another update: 2 more free ones can be found here (one is not yet working, though).

In addition to this, someone commented the following:

The best way to get free sermons from Dr. Lloyd-Jones is through OnePlace, which will give you the url for the podcast. Then just manually add that to itunes for automatic updates.

In response to my last post, a number of people pointed out that most of ML-J's sermons are not free because it costs money to run a web site and pay a staff. Great point! I thank God for the hard work of the people at the Martyn Lloyd-Jones Recording Trust, and for this new five sermon Christmas gift!

Update: I just received the following note from the good people at the ML-J recording trust:

I see from your blog entry that you still refer to the 9 Pensacola sermons that we posted free back in 2010.
We had to take those down for reasons that I don’t fully understand, and therefore can’t explain.

In their place we posted a set of 8 sermons that MLJ preached at Hawthorne Gospel Church, New Jersey, USA.

The address of their page is: www.mlj.org.uk/pages/hawthorne

Kind regards
Robin

So, I erased the relevant sermons from earlier in this post, but encourage you to download the new ones available. Happy listening!

Paul Washer Says it Straight

2011-11-22T16:01:00.001-05:00

This is the first time I've ever heard any Paul Washer (even though tons of people have recommended him to me). This is right on, though, and totally worth 5 mins of your time.

HT: Challies

How Do Committees Work Together to Translate the Bible?

2011-11-15T23:06:00.002-05:00

To my knowledge, the King James Version was the first bible to be translated by a committee, that is, a number of scholars who worked together, debated, voted, etc, and produced a great translation of the Bible that was unparalleled in the English language for well over 300 years, and still, is used after 400 years. The clip that follows is more recent, and captures the translation committee of the English Standard Version presenting, debating, and then voting, on how to translate the word for slave into English. It's well worth the four minutes of your time.

HT: JT

G.K. Beale: New Testament Theology is an Unfolding of the Old Testament

2011-11-14T11:28:00.002-05:00

In the following helpful video, author G.K. Beale explains the outline to his magnum opus, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New. In doing so, he explains why I want to buy and devour the book, and also why I have a growing desire to do doctoral work in Old Testament. Watch and be blessed:

Justin Taylor has also posted Beale's full chapter on “The Eschatological Storyline of the Old Testament: The Old Testament Focus on the Latter Days” in PDF format.

Hansen on Keller on Marriage

2011-11-01T09:37:00.006-04:00

I appreciated this review of Tim and Kathy Keller's new book on marriage. Collin Hansen points out what is unique about this book in particular (i.e. why do we need another book on marriage?) and made me want to buy the book to read out loud with my amazing wife.

Here is a brief interview with the authors about the book:

Mr. Bean Playing the Invisible Drums

2011-10-22T13:38:00.000-04:00

HT: challies.com