Blogistan - The Further Adventures of Smootherprince

Zapiro King of Satirical Cartoonists

2011-05-03T04:12:00.000-07:00

© 2011 Zapiro (All rights reserved)
Printed with permission from www.zapiro.com
For more Zapiro cartoons visit www.zapiro.com

2011-04-23T04:22:00.000-07:00

2011-04-23T04:19:00.000-07:00

2011-04-23T04:13:00.000-07:00

Fredelina came to visit

2011-04-22T23:13:00.000-07:00

Contemplative Bride

2011-03-25T14:19:00.000-07:00

Carillionby night

2011-03-25T14:15:00.000-07:00

The billabong

2011-03-11T13:51:00.000-08:00

Guess Who's Daughter?

2011-03-08T03:54:00.000-08:00

My latest Album Cover

2011-03-08T03:41:00.000-08:00

For info on how you can do you own simply follow the instructions here:
http://planetlana.blogspot.com/2009/02/my-album-cover.html

Butterfly Kisses

2011-03-08T03:22:00.000-08:00

Wuthering Heights

2011-03-08T03:19:00.000-08:00

2011-03-08T03:16:00.000-08:00

The Battle for Identity

2011-02-06T02:05:00.000-08:00

Introduction
A wise commentator said that the Christian life can be summed up in two major activities, wrestling and resting. In many ways we wrestle to rest in the finished work of Jesus.

The single greatest battle for any Christian is the chiefly concerned with identity. “Who am I as a Christian?”, and “Who is God?” form two fundamental questions for any believer. How we answer these questions sets the course of our lives ablaze, give us direction, purpose and mission. From the moment of conversion, we are faced with further questions to wrestle with. As a believer we can no longer remain neutral on issues of third world poverty, just or unjust wars, human suffering or the reality of the supernatural. The walk of faith is a life of conflict.

The story of the early Christian church and indeed the people of God has always been one of conflict. This was certainly the case in the years immediately following the death of the apostles.

Pressure was put on the church in three main ways ;

1. They faced a physical battle.
The early Christian church faced enormous oppression from those around them. Many Christians became martyrs for the faith under roman persecution. So widespread was the persecution that the same root word is used for both Witness and Martyr. When the Christian community was blamed for the great fire of Rome, persecution of Christians sunk to new depths. It is in dark days like these that the likes of Polycarp. On the way to his execution he was encouraging the brethren along the way saying; “Now I become a follower of Jesus, for he who suffers is close to Christ.”

2. They faced a spiritual battle.
The book’s of Galatians and Acts bears testimony to the influence of Judaisers within the early church who sought to mould the fledgling Christian church after the pattern and form of the Jewish faith. Significant pressure was placed on members of the church to conform to Jewish rituals. Individuals themselves faced battles to conform or not to conform to the status quo.

3. They faced a mental battle.
This battle is the primary focus of this essay. Pressure was bought on the church to water down and compromise on the truth, to bring in all manner of heresies into its teachings and form the church to the mold of the surrounding religions and cultural practices of the time. These pressures we will look at in more detail, particularly Arianism which got its name from its founder Arius.

Arius
While much of the writing of Arius and his followers the Arians has disappeared, we can gain an accurate picture of the sort of teachings that they were advocating, particularly from the writing of Athanasius. This extract from a letter from Arius to Eusebius, Bishop of Nicodemia c321 is one of the exceptions, and sheds some light on the issue the early church faced in the Arian heresy.

“…I thought it my duty to salute you to him, and at the same time to advise that naturally charitable disposition of yours, which you display to the brethren for the sake of God and his Christ, how grievously the bishop attacks and persecutes us, and comes full tilt against us, so that he drives us from the city as atheists because we do not concur with him when he publicly preaches, “God always, the Son always; at the same time the father, at the same time the Son,; the son co-exists with God, unbegotten, he is not born-by-begetting nor by thought nor by any moment of time does God precede the Son. God always, Son always, the Son exists from God himself.”

Athanasius, a young cleric opposed the teaching of Arius and his followers. His opposition led to the Council of Nicea where upwards of two hundred and fifty Bishops sat to formulate the church’s response to these concerns. Athanasius was actually too young to be granted admittance to the chamber. He faced a hostile crowd as the majority of the Nicene Council opposed his views. Arianism had spread mainly through the influential Universities of the Mediterranean where it had gained progressive popularity. The council would make a pronouncement, which was then conveyed to Athanasius outside, who could respond.

Typically Athanasius would use scripture to refute the strange ideas put forth by the Arians. So successful was his defense that in the end the council ended with only two votes against the Athanasius camp. This coined the phrase which came to represent a defiant stand, “Athanasius contra mundum” or Athanasius against the world.

The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology has this to say about Athanasius’ role and effectiveness;

“Bishop of Alexandria from 328 to 373, an uncompromising foe of Arianism, Athanasius was particularly instrumental in bringing about its condemnation at the Council of Nicea. He is regarded as the greatest theologian of his time.”

The debate formed primarily around two Greek words, “homoousios” and “homoiousios”.

While it may be argued that making such a fine distinction is seemingly unimportant, words and their meanings, however slight their differences represent ideas. Ideas are not static lifeless entities as some would have us believe. They are dynamic. People live and die by and frequently for ideas. Theologians such as Martin Luther argued forcefully for the veracity of asserting ideas as an essential part of the Christian conversion. In this early battle the church was called upon to stand up for the truths found in the doctrine of the trinity.

While the word Trinity does not appear anywhere in the Bible, its truth is evidenced across both testaments, and strikes a resounding chord at the heart of Biblical Christianity from Genesis to Revelation. Some of the truths which flow from the doctrine of the trinity in particular include:

 That God is always, and always has been in relationship, that He is a relational being, a personality.
 That God is not and never was lonely, that he was and always has been supremely satisfied within the relationship he had within the trinity .

Charles Colson, in his book “the faith” points to the nature of the Trinitarian doctrine as a reason for it being frequently overlooked. He also argues for its importance in the broader Christian life when he writes;

“The Trinity—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God in three persons—is often considered to be mysterious at best, self-contradicting at worst. Everyone would acknowledge that the idea of a triune God—three in one—is the most difficult of all Christian doctrines, which is why so many neglect it or even write it off.

But this is tragic. As Saint Caesarius of Arles said in the sixth century, "The faith of all Christians rests on the Trinity." While the Trinity transcends the bounds of human understanding, this doctrine is at the heart of Christian spirituality, and in the life of faith we experience its truth at every turn.”

At the center of many of these controversies was the person of Jesus Christ. That this is so is should not take Christians by surprise, for Christ was nothing if not a radical. He was a man who brought about change. His words brought division, yet healing. His miracles brought wonder and praise to God from ordinary men, women and children, and discomfort and irritation to the religious.

Perhaps this is to be expected as Jesus Christ is at the heart of Biblical Christianity. Josh McDowell writes,

“Christianity does not stand or fall on the way Christians have acted throughout history or are acting today. Christianity stands or falls on the person of Jesus, and Jesus was not a hypocrite. He lived consistently with what He taught, and at the end of His life He challenged those who had lived with Him night and day, for over three years, to point out any hypocrisy in Him.”

Broughton Knox in the first volume of his collected works entitled The Doctrine of God points to the character and nature of God in the person of Jesus Christ when he states;

“The character of God is other-person-centered, and thus Jesus in his own earthly ministry was not given to drawing attention to himself. He did not bear witness of himself, and therefore his affirmation of his deity was not direct so much as indirect. It was very clear, nevertheless, and his followers came to a firm and clear conviction, based on our Lords actions and teaching, that Jesus was divine, their Lord and their God.”
Jesus as God – the Testimony of Scripture

In many places in the Bible, the divinity of Christ and the Sons distinctive part in the trinity is attested to, perhaps nowhere more than John’s Gospel. From its outset the John confers equal status on God and on Jesus.

Jn 1:1 “ In the beginning was the Word, a and the Word was with God, b and the Word was God. c
He was with God in the beginning. d
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. e
In him was life, f and that life was the light g of men”.

And again in John 5 and verse 21 it states;

Jn 5:21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, m even so the Son gives life n to whom he is pleased to give it.

Many of the statements from Jesus’ own mouth attested to his divinity. In many ways they are the most confronting statements when placed beside the historical account of Jesus’ actions and the testimony of the miracles he performed.

Here is one example again from the book of John;

"But he continued,'You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am [the one I claim to be], you will indeed die in your sins.'"John 8:23–24

And again,

"But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father." John 10:38

Here we see Jesus himself appeal to the miracles he performed as proof of His divine identity. His desire to be recognised for who he was did not come from some vainglorious desire, but that his concern was for the people, that they would believe, and in so doing repent and find salvation.

Much of the Book of Hebrews in the New Testament is concerned with the revelation of the Christ of the Old Testament in the person of the Christ of the New Testament.

A compelling argument for Jesus Christ as God can also be made by looking at the Old Testament and see how Christ was foreshadowed in the lives and events of his people. As much as eighty percent of the New Testament is Old Testament reworked and interpreted or explained. Much of this explanation concerns itself with Jesus as the originator, author and finisher of the faith Christians espouse.

The scriptures call for a Saviour who is both now and pre-existing… a very foreign concept even in Micah’s day.

Mic 5:2 “But you, Bethlehem i Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times. ”

The circumstances surrounding Jesus’ birth and life are well documented in the Gospels. His fulfillment of the prophecies concerning himself in the Old Testament alone stands as a testimony to his divinity. With perhaps the town of his birth being a prime example, many of these fulfillments could not have been orchestrated by him. Another example would be the massacre of the children in Jeremiah 31 and the events of Matthew 2:16-18.

Modern-day Arianism
Practically all heresy in some way does one of two things, it either elevates man or it denigrates God. When we examine the Gnostic gospels for example we see a far more ethereal Christ than the Christ of the Gospels. The Gnostics did so to push the agenda that things spiritual were good and things physical were bad. Scripturally we know that the physical body is not in and of its own evil, otherwise Christ could not have been our perfect sacrifice. As Christians however we are encouraged to engage and discipline body, mind and spirit in God’s service.

While the Arian heresy is considered by many to be a thing of the distant past, it occasionally creeps into the teaching of mainline churches in subtle ways. It is most noticeable in the teaching of some of the major cults. We see vestiges of it in modern attacks on the Trinitarian doctrine amongst the likes of Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witness’ and Christian Science.

While the Mormons believe that Jesus pre-existed in Heaven before He became a man, they also believe that all people pre-existed in heaven before becoming humans. He is also believed to be the result of a physical union between God and a mortal woman.

One of the principle arguments used by the advocates for these cults is the theory that the meaning of the scriptures has been so drastically altered as to be unrecognisable from the original, that fundamental information regarding mans relationship with God has been left out. This puts the scriptures, in their view at least as a lesser authority than the pronouncements of their prophets, their own holy books, and at worst is unreliable.

The reverse is actually true; with each faithful revision of scripture, more scholarship, wider research and more manuscript sources (mss) (as well as older manuscripts) has resulted in more accurate translations of the Bible. In most Bibles the introductory notes are devoted to an examination of the pervading method and intention of the translators, giving a picture and indication as to their guiding principles.

John Dickson in his benchmark history, the Christ files argues that the claims of the New Testament should be taken seriously as the most accurate record of the life of Jesus.
In the opening lines of his book he writes:

“Readers may be surprised to learn that scholarly books and articles on the ‘historical Jesus’ number in the tens of thousands. A vast industry has emerged in the last thirty years dedicated to uncovering the real Jesus - as opposed, it is thought, to the Christ presented by the Church.”

In the same vein, Lee Strobel, an award winning Author whose book “The Case for the Creator” was a New York Times bestseller, devotes his latest book, “The Case for the Real Jesus” to confront these errors. He argues persuasively for the reliability of the Biblical record.

Strobel’s own conversion is a testimony to how God works in mysterious ways His wonders to perform. His wife was a committed agnostic, who had a remarkable change of heart and became a born again Christian. Not only had her faith changed, but she had a remarkable change in the quality of her being. Strobel with his characteristic journalistic cynicism decided to use his legal and investigative journalism skills to explore Christianity in order to disprove the claims of Christianity. The result of these explorations astonished even Strobel himself. Much like Paul, he became an apologist for the gospel, writing books defending the faith he once sought to destroy.

In an interview for the film version of his book, the Christ files, John Dickson intimates that Christians should not be surprised that skeptics are attacking the biblical record. The great truths of Christianity fix themselves within a historical context. Those seeking the God of the Bible and those seeking to discredit it will have to grapple with the historical record.

Yesterday, Today, Forever…

If we can trust the historical record of the Bible as an accurate reflection of God’s salvitic plan, we can trust the picture it paints of Jesus, his words, actions and life.

The New Testament historian F. F. Bruce reflects on this when he writes:

“That Christianity has its roots in history is emphasized in the church’s earliest creeds, which fix the supreme revelation of God at a particular point in time, when “Jesus Christ, his only Son our Lord... suffered under Pontius Pilate.”

This historical “once-for-all-ness” of Christianity, which distinguishes it from those religious and philosophical systems which are not specially related to any particular time, makes the reliability of the writings which purport to record this revelation a question of first-rate importance.

If God is the God of yesterday and the God of today, we can trust that He will remain the God of our tomorrow. The consistent evidence from Jesus’ life and miracles points to his enduring power as the saviour of the world, the promised messiah. His supernatural resurrection from the dead is perhaps one of the most verifiable events in history. As all the evidence points toward the Christ, we can make a reasonable claim that he is faithful. Given the reward which faith in Him brings, it is worth any sacrifice, discouragement or ridicule we may face for it.

“I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior.” Isaiah 43:11

Thought for Today, and tomorrow

2011-02-05T10:49:00.000-08:00

New years resolutions
January provides us with an opportunity to take stock of our lives and give thoughtful consideration to our future. They ask important questions like where am I going? How am I going to get there and will there be a place to park. It’s the time for New Year’s resolutions. Most people make pie crust promises; easily made, easily broken.

There are some fair dinkum questions that we should be asking at the beginning of the New Year. Why do so many of us find it difficult to change? If we could do just one thing of value this New Year what would it be?

Here is a useful list I use myself as a measuring stick to see where I am at.
• Live by the scriptures: be joyfull
• Submit to discipline: Be accountable
• Learn to praise God continually: be thankful
• Cultivate right relationships: be connected
• Protect and guard your thought life: be disciplined

On the last point I would like to expand a little, The Bible says as a man thinks in his heart (read his gut) so is he. Our focus can determine who we become. Its our daily practice that moulds our character.

Focus on the Good

When the devil in the garden wanted to tempt Adam and Eve, he didn’t point out all the good things that God had given them. He convinced them that God was holding out on them. He got them to focus on the one thing God had forbidden them to partake of. In this way their picture of God is tainted and God appeared a miser, who was keeping something for himself.

In reality God gives us so many things to enjoy richly. It may be a sunset, the sound of birds chirping. You owe him your very next breath. A useful exercise to do is to make a list of all the things that you are thankful for, no matter how seemingly insignificant. This may take several months to do, but just keep adding to it and review it regularly. A friend of mine in England who tended to get depressed did this exercise and was astonished to find that her list was over a thousand.

A similar list is found in Paul’s letter to the Galatians; “Against such things there is no law.” Paul encourages us similarly when he writes;

“ Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable- if anything is excellent or praiseworthy- think about such things”.

Our focus is going to be somewhere, we as humans are creatures of habit and we tend to obsess over things. We tend to spend an inordinate amount of energy and time thinking and worrying about what may never happen. We are encouraged to overcome evil with Good. That means not just avoid thinking bad thoughts, but to actively replace them with good ones.

Egyptian protests, Christians protecting muslims at prayer

2011-02-05T00:16:00.001-08:00

Photograph care of http://imgur.com/NhC4m

The Baptism Of Jesus

2011-01-29T02:55:00.000-08:00

http://www.stpaulsturveypk.org/sermons/sermon/192

2011-01-26T02:25:00.001-08:00

sublime

2011-01-23T04:51:00.000-08:00

2011-01-11T11:26:00.000-08:00

Toowoomba Floods

2011-01-11T01:01:00.000-08:00

Lifehouse Everything skit

2010-12-31T00:02:00.000-08:00

Out of the mouths of babes

2010-12-28T19:25:00.000-08:00

The holiday time has allowed me to catch up on some of the things I have been procrastinating about doing due to the busyness with the family, inclding work on the blog.
Trying to put C to bed today I was asked "daddy, but why do I have to go to sleep." "Well," I said, in a moment of inspiration, "when you sleep you grow. You bigger and stonger and wiser when you sleep." thinking this argument had finished the conversation, i turned to to go.
"but why do we grow when we sleep."
"because God designed us that way, he designed us to grow when we rest."
a few thoughtful moments of silence follows...
"Does God sleep daddy?
"No, C. God doesnt sleep...but he has been around for a very long time. He's very big."
"And he comes to church"
"Yes"
moment of thoughtfulness...
"Mommy is big."

Congratulations

2010-12-28T03:45:00.000-08:00

The First Christmas - Facebook style

2010-12-18T11:45:00.001-08:00

Introducing The Synoptic Problem

2010-10-31T04:31:00.001-07:00

Introduction

This essay aims to examine the Synoptic problem. We begin by defining the problem, and looking at some of the evidence for the peculiarities that exist among the Synoptic Gospels. Flowing on from this we look at the development of the problem in church history, as well as the major theoretical approaches to its solution.
The search for the best solution is analogous to solving a crime. While the objective is clear, the evidence at times may point down two very different paths. The one may place emphasis on witness and testimony of people close to the case; the second may be primarily concerned with forensic evidence. As time progresses and further evidence is uncovered, new light is shed and the existing evidence reexamined and reweighted.
We conclude by giving our assessment of which solution fits the evidence best and offer some grounds upon which such a judgment has been made.
The Nature of the Synoptic problem

The synoptic problem refers to the similarities found in the three Gospels; Matthew, Mark and Luke. Much of Mark is reproduced in the other two, and there is a high degree of agreement between the three when it comes to the order of events and how they are presented, including the wording and quotations used.

“Now to be sure, the Gospels must not be forced, anachronistically, to measure up to conventions for writing history or biography. Instead they must be evaluated by the standards of their day.”

Solving the Synoptic problem has proved something akin in theological circles to untying the Gordian knot. At the heart of Synoptic problem lies the issue of primacy. How did the Gospels come to be written? Which gospel came first?

The need for clarity became all the more apparent after the production of a Gospel synopsis. . This highlighted the close relationship between the Gospels. Sanders and Davies state;
“Matthew Mark and Luke are remarkably alike. There are examples from medieval literature of works which agree as closely, but from ancient literature no other examples of such close similarity are known.”

“Only 30 verses in Mark lack a parallel in Matthew or Luke.”

The very fact that there are four Gospels begs the question; “How do we account for both the similarities and the differences between them?”

Figure 1
Comparing the Gospels: Similarities and Differences
Gospel Peculiarities Coincidences
Mark 7% 93%
Matthew 4% 58%
Luke 59% 41%
John 92% 8%

Figure one gives rough percentages of the similarities and peculiarities of each Gospel. At the two extremes are the Gospel of John and the Gospel of Mark, with Matthew and Luke sharing more of the middle ground.

As to Chronology Luke deviates from the chronology of Mark only four times, while Matthew diverts from Marks order only in a “twofold way”
A brief history of the problem
Early exploration: Origen, Papias and Augustine
The testimony of the early church fathers is one of the keenest sources of academic discussion, with theologians giving either more or less weight to their role.

Origen, the first to truly confront the full weight of the synoptic problem adds two noteworthy comments relevant to this discussion. He maintains that Matthew was written first and that Mark was written second as a record of the Simon Peter’s experiences.

Carmignac, one of those responsible for the translation of the Dead Sea scrolls states of Origen;

“We cannot absolutely reject a tradition so ancient (from the time of the hearers of the Apostles), so stable (no discordant voice) and so universal (from the Indies to Gaul).”

As Carmignac alluded to Origen was not alone in viewing Matthew as the first gospel written. Augustine was one of the first to be struck by the similarities as he attempted to produce a harmony of Gospel accounts.
They “are believed to have written in the order which follows: first Matthew, then Mark, thirdly Luke, lastly John”
“However the evangelists may each have reported some matters which are not recorded by the others, it would be hard to prove that any question involving a real discrepancy arises out of these.”

Of Augustine Blomberg writes; “The priority of the Gospel of Matthew for Augustine seems to have been based at least as much on its greater popularity in the church, which in turn stemmed from its fuller accounts of Jesus’ teaching, than to any historical information he had about the order of writing.”

Yet another ancient source, “Papias states that Mark was the interpreter of Peter and regards his Gospel as based on the witness of Peter.” Papias is also quoted as saying that Marks primary concern was not chronological order. This links the Markan account directly with the Apostles, and bodes well for any theories which would place it as an early account. It also gives credence to the fact that both Matthew and Luke’s chronology varies slightly from Mark’s. (Luke 1:13)

Oral tradition

There are few theologians today who would not accept that there was a period of time in which stories of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection were spread by word of mouth, through the teaching of the apostles, and from discussions of the events of his life.(Mk 16:20,Matt 28:19)

Paul Barnett writes; “In response to the critical question, how do we span the forty or so years between Jesus and Mark’s written text? We note various theories of memorized oral transmission.”

Dunn argues that the prevailing emphasis on Q tends to limit and narrow the work being done in synoptic study, and argues for the merits of an oral based approach to reenergize Biblical scholarship.

Historically, and certainly in the middle ages, adherents to the oral tradition went a step further however and declared that the gospel accounts themselves were all independent accounts based solely on the oral tradition. Form criticism and later source criticism as well as a close analysis of Gospel synopses have shown this hypothesis to be false.

Modern Criticism

Following the Renaissance in Italy and the continued momentum of scientific discovery, the modern approach to the synoptic problem emphasized the literary interdependence of the Gospels upon each other.

“ that this parallelism , of varying degrees of closeness , must be accounted for by their literary interdependence is nowadays almost universally accepted by scholars.”

The Griesbach Hypothesis

The theory which gave Matthew priority, followed by Luke and then reduced by Mark was advocated by J.J. Griesbach in 1789, but “was first proposed by H. Owen in 1764.”

This theory has seen resurgence in more modern times through the eloquent argumentation of Farmer.
“He has maintained that when the evidence is set out against the background of a careful examination the text, together with a careful examination of internal structures, the proposition that the order of the gospels was Matthew-Luke-Mark becomes persuasive.”

The theory has as its advantage that it agrees with both tradition and early Church fathers. It also offers some explanation of the redundancies found in Mark’s account. It maintains that the redundancies are as a result of copying from more than one source, and leaving both descriptions in.

As a theory Griesbach’s hypothesis is the most serious contender of the prevailing two source hypothesis.
Ur-gospel
Lessing (1788) believed that the Gospels had originated from more primitive sources, which he called Urevangelum, which no longer exist He believed that a shorter version of this was used by Mark to write his Gospel. There is some evidence that Mark’s Gospel went through stages in its composition and later redaction.
Fragmentary Theory

Schleiermacher (1817) hypothesised that the disciples “had taken notes of Jesus’ words and deeds” these were collected together and collated and from these the Gospel accounts are to have arisen. Stein continues “This “fragmentary hypothesis” never received much support.”

It would not adequately explain the extent of collaboration among the Synoptics, nor account for their distinctives.
Holtzmann’s two source hypothesis

Holtzmann, picking up on work done by Weisse hypothesizes that Mark produces his Gospel from the eyewitness account of Simon Peter. The other synoptic evangelists then used Mark as the basis for their own accounts, together with a document which relates the teachings of Jesus. This hypothetical document was at first called “Quelle”, German for source, later abbreviated to Q.

At first impression, one is struck by the shortness of Marks Gospel. It contains significantly fewer verses than Luke or Mark, this alone tends to make one think that Marks gospel may have been the forerunner of the others.

Additionally when Matthew and Luke differ from Mark there is marked similarity between them. Redditt writes that while Mathew and Mark may differ from Luke, and Luke and Mark differ from Matthew, it is very rare if ever that Luke and Mathew differ against Mark. This lends itself to the suggestion that Mark is primary and the others secondary.

The very fact of Matthew and Luke agreeing against Mark has been seized upon by proponents of Griesbach, however Stein points out that there may be several explanations which would fit the evidence from a Markan perspective.

Mark’s Gospel, while being the shortest is noted for its detail, which is more what one would expect had one of the other Gospel accounts copied him
Mark’s gospel is notable for its poorer Greek. Scholars hypothesize that it is far more likely that Mark’s poorer Greek be changed than for the better Greek in Matthew and Luke than for them to have been copied and exchanged for the poorer Greek of Mark.
Weisse upon whom Holtzmann based much of his work stated; “The very Hebraisms of our gospel [of Mark] are...a tell-tale indication of his independence & originality. On the one hand, it is possible to label this characteristic as awkwardness and clumsiness.... On the other hand, ...[it] conveys the impression of a fresh naturalness and an unpretentious spontaneity, which distinguishes Mark's presentation most markedly from all other gospel accounts...”
This would also explain the lack of Mark’s characteristic redundancies appearing in the other two Gospels. Such errors are more likely to be removed than copied.

This “documentary theory, while plausible, has one or two weaknesses…One may say with regard to Q that no trace of this hypothetical document has ever been recovered. Even those who advocate the documentary hypothesis admit that it was not a Gospel.”
While acknowledging the skepticism some interpreters feel at working with reconstructed source documents such as Q, Benjamin Sommer argues that to not examine these documents is being disrespectful to the text.

The two source hypothesis was expanded by Streeter to include M for those documents unique to Matthew and L for those unique to Luke. It is seldom considered as anything more than an expansion “modification of the two source theory”. What Streeter’s “The four Gospels, a study of Origins” did accomplish was galvanize support for the two source theory.

The two source theory has received some criticism lately principally from two camps, those advocating the Griesbach hypothesis and those who are concerned that claims about Q have become “extravagant.”
Redaction Criticism

Redaction criticism is “the branch of study which seeks to identify earlier traditions in a writer’s text.”
The very fact that there are four Gospels begs the question; “How do we account for differences between them?” It is this question which drives redaction criticism.

Following a general (albeit not unanimous) consensus on the Markan priority of the two source hypothesis redaction criticism (redactiongeschichte) emerged. This focused primarily on the distinctives each evangelist brought to the text, how it was modified, what was included or excluded.
By its nature redaction criticism of the gospels is significantly influenced by the nuances of the synoptic debate. Guthrie draws attention to this when he states;

“The majority of work in this field has been conducted on the assumption that Matthew and Luke used Mark and Q…Yet recent questions about the validity of the theory of Markan priority must cast some doubts about the results of much redaction criticism.”

“The Gospels were seen as unsophisticated writings…but this perception changed with the rise of redaction criticism, which rediscovered the evangelists as theological interpreters of the Jesus tradition.”

Conclusion: The clearest solution

We began by examining the nature of the problem. Following this we have examined the course of the debate over the synoptic problem, beginning at early observations of the church fathers, and paying closer attention to modern theories concerning the formulation of the Gospel.We conclude now by asserting that the two source hypothesis, given the evidence, while the worst solution except for all the others that have been tried is the most credible.

“The two source hypothesis provides the best overall explanation for the relationships among the Synoptic Gospels.” Cason et al go on to caution that we should approach Holtzmann’s work as a working theory rather than a fait accompli. While there is broad agreement within theological circles concerning the two source hypothesis, there is by no means consensus.

“The foregoing considerations have been regarded by the great majority of scholars as sufficient to establish the theory. In fact it is generally treated as one assured result of criticism. Hypotheses regarding Matthew and Luke’s gospels almost invariably proceed from the assumption that both have used Mark as a source.”

Bultmann points to the influence of Wredes work on the messianic secret in Mark as proof that the optimism of the supposed unraveling of the synoptic problem can blind us to the rich tapestry of the gospel we are critiquing.
There is still much to be done, and caution in our approach to the scriptures is prudent. If we are to appreciate the scriptures as we study over it, we must recognize that we are simultaneously under it.

Bibliography

Alston, William. Historical criticism and the Synoptic Gospels. Scripture and hermeneutics series.Volume 4 Behind the Text; History and Biblical Interpretation. Ed Bartholemew, Craig, Evans, Stephen, Healy, Mary, Murray, Rae.(2003. Grand Rapids. Paternoster).
Augustine Harmony of the Gospels, Book 1 Chapter two http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1602102.htm accessed 04/10/2010
Augustine. Harmony of the Evangelists, Book IV, X.II quoted in Ewell, Walther and Yarbrough, Robert. Encountering the New Testament, A Historical and Theological Survey.(1998. Grand Rapids. Michigan. Baker.)
Barnett, Paul Finding the Historical Christ. (2009. Cambridge. Eerdmans) pg 107
Blomberg, Craig.The Historical Reliability of the Gospels.(1987 Leicester Inter-Varsity Press)
Bock, Darrell. Studying the Historical Jesus; a guide to sources and methods (Grand Rapids, Michigan. Apollos/Baker Academic.2002.)
Bultmann, Rudolf. History of the Synoptic Tradition. (1963 Peabody Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers)
Carmingnac, Jean. The Birth of the Synoptics.(1987. Chicago.Franciscan herald press) translated from the French La naisance des evangiles Synoptiques OEIL Paris by Wrenn, Michael.
Carson, D.A. Moo, Douglas and Morris, Leon An Introduction to the New Testament (Leicester, Apollos,1999)
Cross. A.R. Genres of the New Testament. Dictionary of New Testament Background. Ed Evans, Craig and Porter, Stanley. (2000. Downers Grove, Illinois. Inter-Varsity Press)
Dungan, David. A History of the Synoptic Problem; The canon, the text, the composition and the interpretation of the Gospels. ( 1999. New York. Random House)
Dungan, David. A History of the Synoptic Problem; The canon, the text, the composition and the interpretation of the Gospels. (1999. New York. Random House)
Dunn, James Altering the default setting: Re-envisaging the Early transmission of the Jesus Tradition New Testament Studies. (Volume 49. Number 2. April 2003. Cambridge University Press)
Enns, Paul.The Moody Hanbook of Theology, revised and expanded edition. (2008.Chicago. Moody publishers)
Farmer, William. The Synoptic Gospel. http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hdQqF-9hZ00C&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=synoptic+problem&ots=hreW8PdYO-&sig=zoOKlTRu5XSHW6z2c_f14qbBu7s#v=onepage&q&f=false pg 2

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction, revised edition. (1990. Downers Grove, Illinois Apollos.)
Kümmel, Werner. Introduction to the New Testament, revised edition. (1975 London. Abingdon press).
Reddit, Paul, Source Criticism Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible ed Vanhoozer, K. (2005 Grand rapids , Michigan Baker/SPCK)
Sanders, E. and Davies, Margaret. Studying the Synoptic Gospels. (1989.London SCM) pg 51.
Sommer, Benjamin.The source critic and the religious interpreter.(Interpretation, A journal of Bible and Theology. The ministry of Exegesis.Volume 60. Number 1. January 2006.Richmond Virginia) pg 9-20.
Soulen, Richard and Soulen R.Kendall. Handbook of Biblical Criticism. Third edition. (Louisville Kentucky Westminster John Knox.2001).
Soulen, Richard and Soulen R.Kendall. Handbook of Biblical Criticism. Third edition. (Louisville Kentucky Westminster John Knox.2001).
Source unknown attributed to the London Institute of Contemporary Christianity.
Stein, R. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. ed Green, Joel, Mcnight, Scot, Marshall, Howard. (1992.Downers Grove. InterVarsity Press)
Tenney, Merril New Testament Survey (1961 London. Eerdmans/IVF)
The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church second edition ed Cross. F.L and Livingstone E.A.(1974. London. Oxford University Press)
Tuckett, Christopher. Reading the New Testament: Methods of Interpretation.( Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1987)
Weisse, Chrisitian accessed electronically 10/10/2010 http://virtualreligion.net/primer/weisse.html

Westacott, F in Enns, Paul.The Moody Handbook of Theology, revised and expanded edition. (2008.Chicago. Moody publishers)

Love Thy Neighbour

2010-10-29T02:49:00.000-07:00

Narrative Criticism; Text into Story

2010-10-17T04:48:00.001-07:00

Introduction

This essay seeks to introduce the discipline of narrative criticism and the place and significance of its use in the study of the New Testament. Narrative criticism is a relatively recent development, largely in the latter part of the last century, with significant work being done in the 1980’s and 1990’s.[i] The brevity of its existence belies the volume of academic enquiry, interest and influence it has generated since its inception.

This essay examines firstly the development of the discipline. We examine in brief the main schools of thought in biblical criticism, in order to establish narrative criticism’s place and posture. We allude to major influences in the formation of narrative critical practice as well as works which have either influenced or changed the course of narrative criticism.

Having established an understanding of the ebb and flow of enquiry, we look at the distinctives of this critical form. Firstly; we examine key concepts, including an examination of the methodology and models used.

Finally we conclude with an assessment of the significance of narrative criticism as a distinct discipline within the wider range of competing methodologies. This calls for a value judgment as to how narrative criticism fares when compared with the smorgasbord of exegetical methods available. It asks the question, “What are the strengths and weaknesses of this method of enquiry?”

Development

We begin with form criticism, which flourished between 1920 and 1950.[ii] It is conceded that form critics, in trying to establish the oral history behind the Gospels, have added to the broader understanding of the gospel narratives. It is felt by some that form criticism’s lines of enquiry have been largely exhausted[iii]. Carson et al also concede;

“The historical skepticism that characterises many of the most prominent form critics has given form criticism itself the reputation of attacking the historicity of the gospels. ... this need not be the case.”[iv]

Source criticism developed in parallel to efforts to solve the synoptic problem.[v] Christopher Tuckett defines source criticism as;

“the branch of study which seeks to identify earlier traditions in a writer’s text.”[vi]

Following a general (albeit not unanimous) consensus on the Markan priority of the two source hypothesis redaction criticism (redactiongeschichte) emerged. This focused primarily on the distinctives each evangelist brought to the text, how it was modified, what was included or excluded.[vii]

Narrative criticism, one of the youngest forms of biblical analysis owes its formation to developments in literary criticism being applied to the study of the Bible.[viii]In particular the work of Russian academic Vladimir Propp led to an initial emphasis on the study of structure.[ix] [x]. This coincided among biblical scholars with a movement away from the dominant paradigms in biblical criticism, particularly the perceived antisupernaturalism of Bultmann and later Funk.

“In place of barren studies of tradition history, modern literary critics want to look at the text as it is.”[xi]

Narrative criticism can be seen as a movement towards the dominance of the text in its final form. This is in contrast to the focus which was previously on the source, whether oral or written[xii]. It “views story as fundamental to human experience”[xiii].

“Although focused for some years on structuralist work, it yet contrived to give voice to a plurality of alternatives to conventional historical criticism”[xiv]

Narrative Criticism Distinctives

While the focus of narrative criticism has traditionally been centered on the Gospels and the book of Acts[xv], and in particular the synoptic gospels; Matthew, Mark and Luke, in the past four decades a considerable amount of work has also been done on Old Testament texts.[xvi]

What follows is a broad outline for examining the peculiar features of narrative criticism and is largely based on the six elements identified in Achtemeier, Green and Thompson[xvii] (hereafter referred to as AGT); Fundamental aim; Sequence of events; Timing; Characters; Point of view and Presuppositions[xviii]. Other works identify similar subdivisions Burkett states;

“A narrative critic analyses the various aspects of a story, such as the narrator, the characters, the settings, the events or plot, and the literary techniques the author employs”[xix]

“Of particular value for works of Narrative genre, this approach analyses plot, theme, motifs, characterization, style, figures of speech, symbolism, foreshadowing, repetition, speed of time in narrative, point of view, and the like.”[xx]

Fundamental Aim

The fundamental aim or intention of the narrative is linked in narrative criticism to the implied author.[xxi] Soulen and Soulen state that rather than the real (historical) author, the implied author can also be defined as the point of view from which the narrative is told.[xxii]

Sequence of Events (dramatic flow) and Timing

Bock points out the variety of dramatic devices available to the narrator in moving the story along; Timing within a narrative can vary from greatly accelerated (fast moving with broad brush strokes) to greatly decelerated (emphasizing the detail) may involve flashbacks[xxiii] or retelling (such as Steven’s account in Acts 7)[xxiv].

Callahan alludes to Fackre’s work as; “an account of character and events in a plot moving in time, through conflict to resolution”[xxv]

Characters

According to Gunn, “questions of plot and of character are staples of the study of narrative”[xxvi]. Plot allows for character development. AGT point out the variety of options open to the evangelists to give the reader greater insight into gospel characters.[xxvii]

Griemas emphasises that in order for plots to move forward in a meaningful way, six major components or “actants” are required.[xxviii] Parry gives a more detailed discussion of Griemas’ model as well as a brief outline of how this would apply to Johns Gospel.[xxix]

Sender Object Receiver

Helper Subject Opponent

In the model above it is the sender who initiates an object communicated via a subject to the receiver. This process may be facilitated by the helper or hindered the opponent.[xxx]

Point of view (perspective)

Much has been made in literary theory the covenant between author and reader, creating shared expectations and mutual understanding.[xxxi]This intersubjectivity (shared meaning) between the implied author and implied reader provides an opportunity for drawing meaning from the text.

“However unlike reader response theory”, according to Peter Llewellyn “it is the text and therefore the authors’ intent which supercedes the readers’ interpretation in narrative criticism.”[xxxii]

Presuppositions (assumptions)

The text contains assumptions concerning its audience, how they will read, comprehend and respond to its message.[xxxiii]This is related subtly to the covenant alluded to in the previous section.

“…the implied reader is an imaginary reader who is envisaged to respond appropriately to the values and concerns expressed by the ‘implied author.’”[xxxiv]

Assessment

What then does narrative criticism bring to the field of Biblical study?

Firstly, in narrative criticism’s favour is the ability to approach the Gospels as a whole[xxxv]

Klein, Blumberg and Hubbard point to the value of focusing on such features as theme, plot and the like in showing the text as a unified whole.[xxxvi] Their study cites in particular David Clines’ groundbreaking study of the Pentateuch, a key text in the development of Biblical narrative criticism.[xxxvii]

Secondly, its emphasis on structuralism lends itself to critical enquiry.[xxxviii]

“Narrative criticism highlights the importance of intertextual allusions in stories, allowing theological and ethical points to be made in subtle ways”[xxxix]

Thirdly, in this form of biblical criticism we see a return to the supremacy of the text in its final form.

On the flip side Carson and Moo[xl] point out that some charge narrative critics with ignoring the value history can bring to Biblical exegesis. It is apparent from the research done that narrative criticism is a profitable tool in the arsenal of critics, but its value is enhanced when it does not altogether dismiss other forms of enquiry.

“Narrative criticism works on its own in theory, but very seldom, if ever in practice, is it used in isolation from other critical methods.”[xli]

J.P.Callahan points to the dual nature of narrative criticism’s strengths also being its weaknesses when he writes;

“The use of narrative in theology tends to blur the distinctions between strictly historical, literary and theological disciplines, as well as provide an alternative to dualistic accounts of story and fiction, history and truth.”[xlii]

Conclusion

In this essay we began by examining narrative criticism in very broad terms. We have examined its distinct nature and some of its more salient unique features. We also alluded to its development in contrast to the historical critical methods. Finally we gave an appraisal of its contribution to our study of the Bible and concluded that it was a valuable tool particularly when used in conjunction with other exegetical methods.

[i] Gunn, David. To Each Its Own Meaning; Biblical Criticism and its Application, ed Steven Mckenzie and Stephen Haynes. (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999) pg 201-209

[ii][ii] Neville, David, THL409 Study Guide (Charles Sturt University 2010)(hereafter referred to as SG) pg 14

[iii] Carson, D.A. Moo, Douglas and Morris, Leon An Introduction to the New Testament (Leicester, Apollos,1999) pg 221

[iv] Carson, Moo and Morris Introduction pg 23

[v] Bock, Darrell. Studying the Historical Jesus; a guide to sources and methods (Grand Rapids, Michigan. Apollos/Baker Academic.2002.) Pg 162-168

[vi] Tuckett, Christopher. Reading the New Testament: Methods of Interpretation.( Philadelphia: Fortress Press. 1987) pg 78

[vii] Bock, Studying pg 192-193

[viii] Parry, Robin. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. ed.Kevin J. VanHoozer. (Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books.2005.) pg 530

[ix] A reasonable overview of the impact of Propp and Griemas’ work on Biblical criticism is found in the chapter “The New Testament and Structuralism” in Christopher Tucketts’ Reading the New Testament: Methods of Interpretation

[x] Parry, Dictionary pg 530

[xi] Carson, Moo and Moriss Introduction Pg48

[xii] Parry, Dictionary pg 530

[xiii] Patzia, Arthur and. Petrotta, Anthony. Pocket Dictionary of Biblical Studies. (Leicester.Intervarsity Press.2002.) pg

[xiv] Gunn, To Each Its Own pg 205

[xv] SG pg 18

[xvi] For a comprehensive overview of the major Old Testament work consult David Gunns chapter in “To each Its own meaning”.

[xvii] Achtemeier, Paul and Green, Joel, and Thompson, Marianne. Introducing the New Testament: Its literature and theology (Grand Rapids 2001. Eerdmans.) pg 84-86 hereafter referred to as AGT.

[xviii] AGT p 84,85

[xix] Berkett, Delbert An introduction to the New Testament and origins of Christianity. (Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 2002) Pg135

[xx] Klein, William and Blomberg, Craig and Hubbard Robert JR. Introduction to Biblical interpretation. (Nashville W publishing group.Thomas Nelson. 1993) pg 432-433

[xxi] Source unknown

[xxii] Soulen, Richard and Soulen R.Kendall. Handbook of Biblical Criticism. Third edition. (Louisville Kentucky Westminster John Knox.2001). PG 119

[xxiii] For example Luke 24 6-8 or Luke 24:32

[xxiv] Bock. Studying pg 208-209

[xxv] Callahan. J.P. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2^nd Edition. ed. (Elwell, Walther. Grand Rapids Michigan.2009) pg 813

[xxvi] Gunn To each Its Own Meaning pg 213

[xxvii] AGT pg 85

[xxviii]. Klein and Blomberg, and Hubbard Introduction pg 429-430

[xxix] Parry,Dictionary pg 530

[xxx] Klein,and Blomberg, and Hubbard Introduction pg 429-430

[xxxi] Van Schoor, M. What is communication? (Pretoria J.L.van Schaaik. 1988)..pg.29

[xxxii]Lewellyn, Peter Narrative criticism. Paper presented for students completing Introduction to New Testament at Charles Sturt University residential St Marks National Theological Centre Canberra, 2-3 September 2010

[xxxiii] AGT pg 85&86

[xxxiv] SG pg 18

[xxxv] SG pg18

[xxxvi] Klein and Blomberg, and Hubbard Introduction pg 435

[xxxvii] Clines, DJA. The theme of the Pentateuch (JSOT sup 10 Sheffield:JSOT, 1978) as quoted in Klein Blomberg et al

[xxxviii] Source Unknown

[xxxix] Parry, Dictionary pg 529

[xl] Carson, Moo and Moriss Introduction pg 49

[xli] Lewellyn, Narrative

[xlii] Callahan. Evangelical pg 813

Exegesis: John 1:1-14

2010-10-17T04:35:00.000-07:00

Sources consulted

Achtemeier, Paul and Green, Joel, and Thompson, Marianne. Introducing the New Testament: Its literature and theology (2001. Grand Rapids Eerdmans.).

Adeney. W.F. The Theology of the New Testament fifth edition. (undated. Hodder and Stoughton. London )

[1] Barnes, Albert Notes on the Bible Electronic edition

Barnett Paul. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity, A History of New Testament Times.(1999 Downers Grove. Inter-Varsity Press)

Barnett, Paul. The Truth about Jesus; the challenge of the evidence.(1994 Sydney.Aquila press.)

Barrett, C.K. The Gospel According to John; An introduction with commentary and notes on the Greek text (1975.London. SPCK.)

Blomber Craig. The Historical reliability of Johns Gospel ; Issues and Commentary. (2001 Leicester, England. Inter-Varsity Press)

Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. The Anchor Bible. (1982. New York. Geoffrey Chapman)

Bultmann,Rudolf. The Gospel of John, a Commentary.(1971 Oxford. Western Printing services.)

Burge, Garry. Baker Commentary on the Bible ed Elwell. Walther.(1989. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books).

Calvin, Jean. Institutes of the Christian Religion book 1, Chapter 13 section 11 pg 74 (2009 Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson). and electronic edition

Carson, D.A. Moo, Douglas and Morris, Leon An Introduction to the New Testament (,1999, Leicester, Apollos)

Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan).

Carter, Warren. John, Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist (2006 Peabody, Massachusetts Hendrickson) (pg 101)

Cummins. S.A. Book of John. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible

Gordley Matthew JBL 128, no4 (2009)

Henry, Matthew; Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible (1991. Hendrickson Publishers. Peabody. Massachusets) and electronic edition

Keener. Craig. The IVP Bible Background Commentary.(1993. Downers grove, Illinois.IVP academic)

Köstenberger. Andreas. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Fourth edition ed Beale. G.K. Carson. D.A. (2009.Grand Rapids Michigan. Baker Academic).

Lee. Dorothy. The Gospel of John and the Five Senses. (JBL 129, no1 (2010):115-127

Lewellyn, Peter Exegesis. Paper presented for students completing Introduction to New Testament at Charles Sturt University residential St Marks National Theological Centre Canberra, 2-3 September 2010

Macleod A.J The New Bible Commentary, Second edition. ed Davidson, F.( 1959.London. IVP.).

Morris L. The Gospel According to John Revised edition. The New international Commentary on the New Testament (1995.Grand Rapids Michigan. Eerdmans)

Morris. Leon Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2^nd Edition. ed. Elwell, Walther.(2009 Grand Rapids Michigan)

Neville, David.Study Guide THL409.(2010.Charles Sturt University)

Newman, Kevin. Certain Old Testament Parallels in St John’s Gospel. (Downside review no 424 July 2003 pg 211-224)

Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge University Press).

O’Day. Gail. Toward a Narrative Critical Study of John. (Interpretation. April 1995 The Gospel of John).

Pawson. David. Sermon Series: John’s Gospel date unknown.

Piper, John. Sermon: John1:1-3.In the beginning was the word. September 21 2008. Accessed from http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/in-the-beginning-was-the-word

Raymond Brown The Gospel According to John.(The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982)

Tenney, Merrill C. “A. The Preincarnate Word (1:1-5)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 28. (1981.Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,). Electronic edition

Introduction

John’s Gospel begins with a magnificent declaration of the Deity of the Son of God. It has profound implications for our theology of the trinity, and significantly focuses our attention on the splendor of the incarnation. Not only is it Doxology, it is also didactic in nature, emphasizing the distinctive Sitz im Leben of the fourth Gospel.

The Gospel of John’s primary concern is ontological,[1] and secondly didactic. At the heart of the Christian message is a God who reveals and a God who relates through love. (Prov 25:2, 1 John 4:8,16) Carson picks up this theme but emphasises Johns account as God being self revelatory in the person of Jesus. Jesper Tang Nielsen identifies a core structure at the heart of the Johanine narrative which “is the recognition of God through Jesus”[2]

I am indebted in particular to David Pawson, who presented a sermon series on John’s Gospel in the latter part of the last century, for many of the insights presented in this exegesis.

Contextual Analysis

This pericope occurs at the beginning of John’s Gospel. In many ways it functions much like an overture, setting the tone for what is to come and introducing themes to be expanded upon and explored later.^{^[3]}Many of the key words which feature strongly in John occur in this first chapter.^{^[4]}

John’s Gospel is distinctive enough to be analyzed quite differently from the Synoptic Gospels.[5]^{^[6]} Commentators have said that it is more theological^{^[7]}. “St John, as we have seen, does not hesitate to insert his own reflections in the course of the narrative, and that with considerable freedom.”^{^[8]}

“It must be remembered that the gospels were presentations of Christ; not “biographies” in the modern sense of the term.”^{^[9]}

Much of the interpretation of John’s Gospel depends upon when the exegete believes the gospel was written. Scholars of Bultmann’s ilk and era tended to emphasise Gnostic influences in John’s Gospel, believing the Gospel to have a late composition date. Subsequent archaeological and textual evidence has pointed to an earlier composition, which lends itself to read the Gospel with a strongly Jewish subtext.^{^[10]} Broad consensus does suggest that John was written not only by an individual recalling an event in isolation. A close reading suggests it is the product of a collaborative effort produced in the context of community. ^{^[11]}

“Today it is often argued that the earliest interpretations of the book of John are now embedded within the final form of the text, having occurred after several stages of its composition within a rather isolated and evolving late first century “Johannine community”[12]

In contrast Carson et al states “To think of the Johannine community as isolated and sectarian is to miss the grand vision of John 17, not to mention the fact that Johns Christology finds its closest parallels in the New Testament in the so called hymns (e.g. Phil 2:5-11; Col. 1:15-20) which suggests that the evangelist is more thoroughly in touch with the wider church.”[13]

Formal Analysis

A mixed pericope,^{^[14]}while Johns Gospel falls into the broad biographical genre, this pericope points to the poetic nature of the book, as well as to its didactic purpose. Many scholars have identified it as an early Christian hymn^{^[15]}. It also points to the liturgical function intended by the evangelist.^{^[16]} While following some biographical conventions, it forms a bridge between poetry^{^[17]} and narrative with strong Old Testament (and therefore Jewish) allusions.

“The shift toward a focus on the community revealed by the text was accompanied by a parallel shift away from emphasis on a predominantly Gnostic provenance and milieu of the fourth Gospel and toward a revitalized sense of Jewish provenance and milieu.”[18]

“The Gospel reflects Jewish and Palestinian origins It is steeped in Jewish scriptures and shows an extensive knowledge of the climate and topography of Judea and Jerusalem… as well as the religious, social and historical circumstances of the time it narrates.”[19]

Detailed analysis

The first verse sets the groundwork and tone for the next twelve verses. Due to its importance we will spend more time teasing out this one verse. “In the Hebrew Bible the first book Genesis is named by its opening words; therefore the parallel between the prologue and Genesis can easily be seen.”^{^[20]} “John evidently has allusion here to that place, and he means to apply to “the Word” an expression which is there applied “to God.” In both places it clearly means before creation, before the world was made, when as yet there was nothing.”[21]

Simultaneously it recalls relationship; “with” in the first verse is implicit of two individuals face to face, the underlying meaning here being a God who has in all eternity been relational in nature.^{^[22]}

This relational nature is continued through John’s description of Jesus as “Logos”.

“"Word" is the Greek logos, which has several meanings. Ordinarily it refers to a spoken word, with emphasis on the meaning conveyed, not just the sound. Logos, therefore, is an expression of personality in communication.”^{^[23]}

In contrast to modern conventions where words are viewed in a more passive light, eastern conceptions and particularly Jewish conceptions see words as active having not only a representative, but also a causative effect. It was by Gods Word that the universe was created in Genesis, this thread is continued in the New Testament.(Hebrew 4:12-13).

“Beginning with the use of the wisdom motif, the prologue is full of imagery having to do with revelation, instruction, wisdom, guidance, seeing and understanding.”[24]

“In short, God’s ‘Word’ in the Old Testament is His powerful self-expression in creation, revelation and salvation, and the personification of that “Word” makes it suitable for John to apply it as a title to God’s ultimate self-disclosure, the purpose of his own Son.”^{^[25]}

Several commentators have linked John’s use of Logos to Philo and having roots deeper in Greek philosophy.[26]“John did not superimpose the philosophical concept on the person of Christ, but he adopted the Greek term as the best medium of expressing the nature of Christ.”^{^[27]}While in many ways there are parallels with Philo’s logos, Carson points out several ways in which Philo’s Logos falls short, particularly with regard the Logos’ distinctive personality.[28]“We might say that Jesus is the narration of God”^{^[29]}.

Of the phrase ‘and the Word was God’ C.K. Barrett writes; “John intends the whole of his gospel shall be read in the light of this verse. The deeds and words of Jesus are the deeds and words of God.”^{^[30]}

The Gospel goes on to say that all things were created both by Christ and for Him, that the Logos is life and light.^{^[31]} “Light is a common metaphor in the Hebrew Bible for God’s life-giving creative power (Gen1:1-5, 14-19) salvation (Psalm 27:1) and deliverance from oppressive powers (Isa 9:1-2).”[32]

While other Gospel writers take as their genesis the nativity narratives, or links to prophecy concerning His birth, or genealogies linking Him to Abraham or Adam, John takes one step further back, into the time before time.[33]

Following on from the first two verses, the passage continues to tease out the revelation of the word and its glory in the context of four specific relationships over eight verses.[34]

(1:3,4) We see the creator and his relationship to the creation. It echoes the Genesis account of the separation of light from dark (Gen 1v3,4) and harkens back to the three words beginning the chapter.[35]

Light is contrasted with the darkness which has not grasped it – the Greek word here has a similar double meaning to the word in English ^{^[36]} This also parallels ‘Manifest’ (2:11).

“Prominent at the beginning of each Gospel is John the Baptist, the long awaited forerunner prophesied in the Old Testament who points to Jesus as the greater one who is to come, who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.”[37]

(1:6-9) Pick up a Johannine distinctive, paying special attention to the relationship between John the Baptist and the Light. John is seen as a witness to the light. Later pressed by the authorities to reveal who he was he described himself as a “voice”.

Ephesus, has been suggested as the place of the writing of John’s Gospel[38], and is believed to have been home to “disciples of John the Baptist who made too much of Him and too little of Christ”[39]. There is some suggestion that John’s gospel may have been written to address in part this practice.

Burge writes; “The fourth Gospel contains a polemic aimed at the followers of John the Baptist (see1-19-28; 35-42; 3:22-36; 10:40-42). Elsewhere in the book of Acts we learn about Paul encountering followers of John with deficient beliefs. Surprisingly, they too are located in Ephesus.”[40]

Jesus and John are contrasted and juxtaposed throughout John.^{^[41]}

(1:9) gives us a foretaste of the incarnational nature of the Christ spelled out clearly in (1:14).

The relationship between the Christ and humanity is under the microscope (1:10-13). Here there appears to be a distinction drawn between those who were his “own” who did not receive him and to those who did receive him. On this point Blomberg writes, John “speaks of Christ’s rejection by “his own” (1:11) which may derivatively apply to the majority of humanity but first of all refers to the general response of the Jewish people (Pryor 1990)”[42]

“The reference to believer’s right to become “children of God” in 1:12 clearly builds on the OT characterization of Israel as God’s children.”[43]

Throughout these verses there are strong indications of God’s instigation in all these relationships.

(1:14) is something of a climax which had its beginnings in (1:9).The tone here changes to emphasise not Christ’s divinity so much as his humanity pointing to the mystery of the incarnation.

“After the incarnation, only the privileged group of believers is able to see his glory. In the fundamental verse of incarnation (1:14) this particular group is marked out as ‘we’. The mark of identity is that they, unlike everybody else perceived his glory…One group did not receive him, another believed in his name. The latter were privileged in becoming God’s children.”[44]

“He dwelt among us, here in this lower world. Having taken upon him the nature of man, he put himself into the place and condition of other men.”[45]“‘Dwelt’ here is literally “tabernacled” which means that as God tabernacle with His people in the wilderness, so had the Word tabernacled among His people in Jesus.”[46]

Conclusion

We have examined this pericope in some detail and have noted that it is primarily concerned with Gods revelation of Himself in context of relationship. L.L. Morris, one of the greatest authorities on John’s Gospel summarized his Christology in this pericope as follows; “it is clear that God has taken action in Christ for revelation and for salvation”^{^[47]}.

Essentially this pericope imputes to Christ the glory due to God. Matthew Henry defends the boldness of John when he writes;

“And why should John have hesitated to ascribe the Majesty of God to Christ, after saying in his preface that the Word was God?”[48]

Perhaps the final word should be left to Raymond Brown;

“In many ways John’s Gospel is the best example of realized eschatology. God has revealed himself in a definitive form, and seemingly no more can be asked.”^{^[49]}

Endnotes.

[1] Both Carson and Bultmann use revelation (or self-revelation) as the primary purpose and overall feature of the Gospel.

[1] Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (Journal of New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge university Press).

[1] Blomeberg, Craig. The Historical reliability of John’s Gospel; Issues and Commentary. (2001. Apollos. Grand Rapids, Michigan) pg 72

[1] (As with the didactic traditions of Jewish books such as Proverbs and Psalms, and mirrored in Hellenistic erudition these are frequently in dialectical opposition); darkness light; life, death; glory, grace, water, bread.

[1] Neville, David.Study Guide THL409. (2010.Charles Sturt University) pg 31.

[1] Although there is broad agreement that John was written subsequent to the synoptics, and with at least some direct dependence upon Mark. Morris L. The Gospel According to John Revised edition. The New international Commentary on the New Testament ( 1995.Grand Rapids Michigan. Eerdmans) pg 43-44.

[1] And therefore some have argued, less historical.

[1] Adeney. W.F. The Theology of the New Testament fifth edition.( Undated. Hodder and Stoughton London)

pg 235-236

[1] The New Bible Commentary, Second edition. ed Davidson,F.( 1959.London. IVP.).pg 865 One illustration on this point is that the Gospels place very little emphasis on the Christ’s internal motivations and thought life when compared with the modern obsession with psychology in biography.

[1] Lewellyn, Peter Exegesis. Paper presented for students completing Introduction to New Testament at Charles Sturt University residential St Marks National Theological Centre Canberra, 2-3 September 2010

[1] Brown in particular pays close attention to the layers and theories of compositon.(pg 87-103)

[1] Cummins. S.A. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. ed.Kevin J. VanHoozer. (Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books.2005.) (pg 394)

[1]Carson, D.A. Moo, Douglas and Morris, Leon An Introduction to the New Testament (Leicester, Apollos,1999)

[1] Brown takes the first 18 verses to be a hymn, interjected by commentary (with interjections at verses 6-9; 12b-13;15; 17-18) the case for this is persuasively argued by Gordley (JBL Vol 128 no 4 2009).

[1] Gordley Matthew JBL 128, no4 (2009) pg 781 Carson (pg112) warns “the term poem can only be applied to the prologue with hesitation.

[1] Similarly John’s Revelation was intended to be performed and sung (Llewelyn, Peter, CSU )

[1] Raymond Brown writes “The prologue is written in a carefully constructed, interlocking poetic pattern”(pg . xxiv) in his commentary The Gospel According to John.(The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982)

[1] O’Day. Gail. Toward a Narrative Critical Study of John. (Interpretation.April 1995 The Gospel of John).

[1] Paul Barnett. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity: A History of New Testament Times.(1999. Downers Grove Illinois. Inter-Varsity Press) Pg 313

[1] Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. (The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982)pg 4

[1] Barnes, Albert Notes on the Bible Electronic edition

[1] Pawson extrapolates the theological implications of this by pointing out that God is revealed as Love (1John 4:8;16). This also alludes obtusely to Christ’s humanity in that the Hebrew of Genesis two talks of the face to face relationship between God and man in the creation of mankind; God breathed His “ruach” into man’s nostrils.

[1] Tenney, Merrill C. “A. The Preincarnate Word (1:1-5)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 28. (1981. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), Electronic edition

[1]Achtemeier, Paul and Green, Joel, and Thompson, Marianne. Introducing the New Testament: Its literature and theology (2001. Grand Rapids Eerdmans.).

[1]Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan). Pg 116

[1][1] In particular Heraclitus

[1] Tenney, Merrill C. “D. The Incarnation of the Word (1:14, 16-18)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 33. (1981Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), Electronic Edition

[1] Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan).

[1] Barrett, C.K. The Gospel According to John; An introduction with commentary and notes on the Greek text (1975.London. SPCK.)( Pg 130)

[1]see Col 1: 15-17

[1] Carter, Warren. John, Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist (2006 Peabody, Massachusetts Hendrickson) (pg 101)

[1] Pawson. David. John’s et al

[1] The major commentators tend to group the verses (1-2), (3-5), (6-8), (9-14).

[1][1] Kostenberg ditto.

[1] Piper, John. Sermon: John1:1-3.In the beginning was the word. September 21 2008. Accessed from http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/in-the-beginning-was-the-word

[1] Barnett, Paul. The Truth about Jesus; the challenge of the evidence.(1994 Sydney.Aquila press.) (Pg 75)

[1] Barnett Paul. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity, A history of New Testament Times.(1999 Downers Grove.Inter-Varsity Press) (pg 311)

[1] Pawson. David, John et al

[1] Burge, Garry. Baker Commentary on the Bible ed Elwell. Walther.1989. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books. (Pg 843-844)

[1] Commentators point out the relationship of the interpolations into the hymn and their focus on John the Baptist. Commentators have picked up on the reluctance of John to describe himself (the I am nots) and Jesus’ “I am’s”

[1]Blomber Craig. The Historical reliability of Johns Gospel (2001 Leicester, England. Inter-Varsity Press) (Pg 72) quoting Pryor (1990)

[1] Köstenberger. Andreas. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Fourth edition ed Beale. G.K. Carson. D.A. 2009.Grand Rapids Michigan. Baker Academic. Pg421.

[1] Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge University Press). pg 355-356

[1]Henry, Matthew; Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible 991. Hendrickson Publishers. Peabody. Massachusets Pg 688 and electronic edition

[1] Keener. Craig. The IVP Bible Background Commentary.1993. Downers grove, Illinois.IVP academic

[1] Morris. Leon Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2^nd Edition. ed. (Elwell, Walther. Grand Rapids Michigan.2009) pg 634

[1] Calvin, Jean. Institutes of the Christian Religion book 1, Chapter 13 section 11 pg 74 (2009 Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson). and electronic edition

[1]Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. The Anchor Bible. (1982. New York. Geoffrey Chapman) (introduction pg cxvii)

[1] Both Carson and Bultmann use revelation (or self-revelation) as the primary purpose and overall feature of the Gospel.

[2] Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (Journal of New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge university Press).

[3] Blomeberg, Craig. The Historical reliability of John’s Gospel; Issues and Commentary. (2001. Apollos. Grand Rapids, Michigan) pg 72

[4] (As with the didactic traditions of Jewish books such as Proverbs and Psalms, and mirrored in Hellenistic erudition these are frequently in dialectical opposition); darkness light; life, death; glory, grace, water, bread.

[5] Neville, David.Study Guide THL409. (2010.Charles Sturt University) pg 31.

[6] Although there is broad agreement that John was written subsequent to the synoptics, and with at least some direct dependence upon Mark. Morris L. The Gospel According to John Revised edition. The New international Commentary on the New Testament ( 1995.Grand Rapids Michigan. Eerdmans) pg 43-44.

[7] And therefore some have argued, less historical.

[8] Adeney. W.F. The Theology of the New Testament fifth edition.( Undated. Hodder and Stoughton London)

pg 235-236

[9] The New Bible Commentary, Second edition. ed Davidson,F.( 1959.London. IVP.).pg 865 One illustration on this point is that the Gospels place very little emphasis on the Christ’s internal motivations and thought life when compared with the modern obsession with psychology in biography.

[10] Lewellyn, Peter Exegesis. Paper presented for students completing Introduction to New Testament at Charles Sturt University residential St Marks National Theological Centre Canberra, 2-3 September 2010

[11] Brown in particular pays close attention to the layers and theories of compositon.(pg 87-103)

[12] Cummins. S.A. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. ed.Kevin J. VanHoozer. (Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books.2005.) (pg 394)

[13]Carson, D.A. Moo, Douglas and Morris, Leon An Introduction to the New Testament (Leicester, Apollos,1999)

[14] Brown takes the first 18 verses to be a hymn, interjected by commentary (with interjections at verses 6-9; 12b-13;15; 17-18) the case for this is persuasively argued by Gordley (JBL Vol 128 no 4 2009).

[15] Gordley Matthew JBL 128, no4 (2009) pg 781 Carson (pg112) warns “the term poem can only be applied to the prologue with hesitation.

[16] Similarly John’s Revelation was intended to be performed and sung (Llewelyn, Peter, CSU )

[17] Raymond Brown writes “The prologue is written in a carefully constructed, interlocking poetic pattern”(pg . xxiv) in his commentary The Gospel According to John.(The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982)

[18] O’Day. Gail. Toward a Narrative Critical Study of John. (Interpretation.April 1995 The Gospel of John).

[19] Paul Barnett. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity: A History of New Testament Times.(1999. Downers Grove Illinois. Inter-Varsity Press) Pg 313

[20] Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. (The Anchor Bible. Geoffrey Chapman London 1982)pg 4

[21] Barnes, Albert Notes on the Bible Electronic edition

[22] Pawson extrapolates the theological implications of this by pointing out that God is revealed as Love (1John 4:8;16). This also alludes obtusely to Christ’s humanity in that the Hebrew of Genesis two talks of the face to face relationship between God and man in the creation of mankind; God breathed His “ruach” into man’s nostrils.

[23] Tenney, Merrill C. “A. The Preincarnate Word (1:1-5)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 28. (1981. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), Electronic edition

[24]Achtemeier, Paul and Green, Joel, and Thompson, Marianne. Introducing the New Testament: Its literature and theology (2001. Grand Rapids Eerdmans.).

[25]Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan). Pg 116

[26][26] In particular Heraclitus

[27] Tenney, Merrill C. “D. The Incarnation of the Word (1:14, 16-18)” The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Volume 9. 33. (1981Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), Electronic Edition

[28] Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan).

[29] Carson, D.A. The Gospel according to John. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. (1991. Apollos. Grand Rapids. Michigan).

[30] Barrett, C.K. The Gospel According to John; An introduction with commentary and notes on the Greek text (1975.London. SPCK.)( Pg 130)

[31]see Col 1: 15-17

[32] Carter, Warren. John, Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist (2006 Peabody, Massachusetts Hendrickson) (pg 101)

[33] Pawson. David. John’s et al

[34] The major commentators tend to group the verses (1-2), (3-5), (6-8), (9-14).

[35][35] Kostenberg ditto.

[36] Piper, John. Sermon: John1:1-3.In the beginning was the word. September 21 2008. Accessed from http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/in-the-beginning-was-the-word

[37] Barnett, Paul. The Truth about Jesus; the challenge of the evidence.(1994 Sydney.Aquila press.) (Pg 75)

[38] Barnett Paul. Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity, A history of New Testament Times.(1999 Downers Grove.Inter-Varsity Press) (pg 311)

[39] Pawson. David, John et al

[40] Burge, Garry. Baker Commentary on the Bible ed Elwell. Walther.1989. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Books. (Pg 843-844)

[41] Commentators point out the relationship of the interpolations into the hymn and their focus on John the Baptist. Commentators have picked up on the reluctance of John to describe himself (the I am nots) and Jesus’ “I am’s”

[42]Blomber Craig. The Historical reliability of Johns Gospel (2001 Leicester, England. Inter-Varsity Press) (Pg 72) quoting Pryor (1990)

[43] Köstenberger. Andreas. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Fourth edition ed Beale. G.K. Carson. D.A. 2009.Grand Rapids Michigan. Baker Academic. Pg421.

[44] Nielsen Jesper. The Narrative structures of Glory and Glorification in the Fourth Gospel. (New Testament Studies .Volume 56.number 3. July 2010.Cambridge University Press). pg 355-356

[45]Henry, Matthew; Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible 991. Hendrickson Publishers. Peabody. Massachusets Pg 688 and electronic edition

[46] Keener. Craig. The IVP Bible Background Commentary.1993. Downers grove, Illinois.IVP academic

[47] Morris. Leon Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2^nd Edition. ed. (Elwell, Walther. Grand Rapids Michigan.2009) pg 634

[48] Calvin, Jean. Institutes of the Christian Religion book 1, Chapter 13 section 11 pg 74 (2009 Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson). and electronic edition

[49]Brown, Raymond The Gospel According to John. The Anchor Bible. (1982. New York. Geoffrey Chapman) (introduction pg cxvii)

Marieanne

2010-10-16T02:59:00.000-07:00

This is just a quick tribute to my friend Marieanne, who ran a second-hand bookshop for many years. You will be missed, wishing you Godspeed on your retirment.

having fun with lightsticks

2010-08-28T03:30:00.000-07:00

Created on FACEinHOLE.com

2010-04-03T06:03:00.001-07:00

Create your own FACEinHOLE

Created on FACEinHOLE.com

2010-04-03T05:52:00.001-07:00

Create your own FACEinHOLE

Created on FACEinHOLE.com

2010-04-03T05:49:00.001-07:00

Create your own FACEinHOLE

Figure of eight

2010-02-18T03:00:00.000-08:00

After the rain

2010-02-18T01:33:00.000-08:00

Wirraway and Harvard at Temora

2010-02-05T03:34:00.000-08:00

On the road again

2010-01-25T05:38:00.000-08:00

Sky to spare! Happy Australia day everyone!

2010-01-25T05:17:00.000-08:00

2010-01-25T05:12:00.000-08:00

I was just so struck by the contrast between the mad pace at which we travel, and the stillness of the earth, the deep wells of silence just on the other side of the car door.

2009-10-10T04:22:00.003-07:00

Evanescence: Bring me to life: the cry of our age

2009-10-10T04:21:00.000-07:00

Bring Me To Life lyrics
Songwriters: Hodges, David; Lee, Amy; Moody, Ben;
How can you see into my eyes like open doors?
Leading you down into my core where I've become so numb
Without a soul, my spirit sleeping somewhere cold
Until you find it there and lead it back home

Wake me up
(Wake me up inside)
I can't wake up
(Wake me up inside)
Save me
(Call my name and save me from the dark)

Wake me up
(Bid my blood to run)
I can't wake up
(Before I come undone)
Save me
(Save me from the nothing I've become)

Now that I know what I'm without
You can't just leave me
Breathe into me and make me real
Bring me to life

Wake me up
(Wake me up inside)
I can't wake up
(Wake me up inside)
Save me
(Call my name and save me from the dark)

Wake me up
(Bid my blood to run)
I can't wake up
(Before I come undone)
Save me
(Save me from the nothing I've become)

I've been living a lie
There's nothing inside
Bring me to life

Frozen inside without your touch
Without your love, darling
Only you are the life among the dead

All this time, I can't believe I couldn't see
Kept in the dark but you were there in front of me
I've been sleeping a thousand years it seems
Got to open my eyes to everything

Without thought, without voice, without a soul
Don't let me die here
There must be something more
Bring me to life

Wake me up
(Wake me up inside)
I can't wake up
(Wake me up inside)
Save me
(Call my name and save me from the dark)

Wake me up
(Bid my blood to run)
I can't wake up
(Before I come undone)
Save me
(Save me from the nothing I've become)

I've been living a lie
There's nothing inside
Bring me to life

© DWIGHT FRYE MUSIC INC; FORTHEFALLEN PUBLISHING; ZOMBIES ATE MY PUBLISHING;

Vision

2009-10-09T10:01:00.001-07:00

I have visited the tip of Argentina, the region named Tierra del Fuego ("land of fire") by Magellan's explorers, who noticed fires burning on shore. The natives tending the fires, however, paid no attention to the great ships as they sailed through the straits. Later, they explained that they had considered the ships an apparition, so different were they from anything seen before. They lacked the experience, even the imagination, to decode evidence passing right before their eyes.

Søren Kierkegaard told a parable about a rich man riding in a lighted carriage driven by a peasant who sat behind the horse in the cold and dark outside. Precisely because he sat near the artificial light inside, the rich man missed the panorama of stars outside, a view gloriously manifest to the peasant. In modern times, it seems, as science casts more light on the created world, its shadows further obscure the invisible world beyond.

And we who built the skyscrapers in New York, who build today not just galleons but space stations and Hubble telescopes that peer to the very edge of the universe, what about us? What are we missing? What do we not see, for lack of imagination or faith?
Phillip Yancey A skeptics guide to faith

2009-09-28T11:01:00.001-07:00

A little something from Zondervan

2009-08-25T03:25:00.000-07:00

God doesn't give me grace for the future, uncertain seasons that He may grant me on earth before He takes me home. He doesn't give me grace for next year's headaches — or even next month's heartaches. He won't even loan me enough grace to face the prospects of tomorrow! God only gives me grace for today. He expects me to live this day in His strength, leaning on His wisdom, drawing on His presence and power.

We make the mistake of thinking God is always preparing us for "future ministry." We rush through the present moment too quickly in our effort to reach the next one. As a result, we don't pay sufficient attention to the immediate. Oswald Chambers has said, "Grace is for 'right now.' It is not the process toward some future goal, but an end in and of itself. If we would only realize this, then each moment would become rich with meaning and purpose."

From A Lifetime of Wisdom: Embracing the Way God Heals You
by Joni Eareckson Tada

Zen Again

2009-08-18T03:11:00.000-07:00

rap star in the making

2009-08-18T03:07:00.000-07:00

Gods word is reliable

2009-07-30T12:52:00.000-07:00

The ancient Jews and the early Christians spread God's message by making copies of the original writings — and copies of copies. No one had a Xerox machine, of course, or a laser printer, so copies were made slowly and meticulously by devout scribes. These copyists were obsessed with accuracy. Every letter was carefully copied, every line checked and rechecked. Old Testament scribes counted every letter of every biblical book, and each new copy had to come out exactly right or they started over from scratch.

God in his watchfulness has allowed hundreds of these ancient copies to survive. We have fragments of copies made just a few years after the originals were written. But even with meticulous care, occasionally a word would be dropped or two letters mixed up. By comparing the manuscripts, however, we can easily determine the correct reading. Less than 1 percent of the text of the New Testament is even questioned — that's one word in 4,000! Furthermore, no major teaching of the Christian faith rests on a disputed or doubtful reading.

"Defend the Bible? I would just as soon defend a lion. Just turn the Bible loose. It will defend itself." — Charles Spurgeon

From Christianity for Blockheads: A User-Friendly Look at What Christians Believe
by Douglas Connelly and Martin Manser

2009-07-14T07:31:00.001-07:00

Jeremiah 17
1 "Judah's sin is engraved with an iron tool,
inscribed with a flint point,
on the tablets of their hearts
and on the horns of their altars.

2 Even their children remember
their altars and Asherah poles [a]
beside the spreading trees
and on the high hills.

3 My mountain in the land
and your [b] wealth and all your treasures
I will give away as plunder,
together with your high places,
because of sin throughout your country.

4 Through your own fault you will lose
the inheritance I gave you.
I will enslave you to your enemies
in a land you do not know,
for you have kindled my anger,
and it will burn forever."

5 This is what the LORD says:
"Cursed is the one who trusts in man,
who depends on flesh for his strength
and whose heart turns away from the LORD.

6 He will be like a bush in the wastelands;
he will not see prosperity when it comes.
He will dwell in the parched places of the desert,
in a salt land where no one lives.

7 "But blessed is the man who trusts in the LORD,
whose confidence is in him.

8 He will be like a tree planted by the water
that sends out its roots by the stream.
It does not fear when heat comes;
its leaves are always green.
It has no worries in a year of drought
and never fails to bear fruit."

9 The heart is deceitful above all things
and beyond cure.
Who can understand it?

10 "I the LORD search the heart
and examine the mind,
to reward a man according to his conduct,
according to what his deeds deserve."

11 Like a partridge that hatches eggs it did not lay
is the man who gains riches by unjust means.
When his life is half gone, they will desert him,
and in the end he will prove to be a fool.

12 A glorious throne, exalted from the beginning,
is the place of our sanctuary.

13 O LORD, the hope of Israel,
all who forsake you will be put to shame.
Those who turn away from you will be written in the dust
because they have forsaken the LORD,
the spring of living water.

14 Heal me, O LORD, and I will be healed;
save me and I will be saved,
for you are the one I praise.

15 They keep saying to me,
"Where is the word of the LORD ?
Let it now be fulfilled!"

16 I have not run away from being your shepherd;
you know I have not desired the day of despair.
What passes my lips is open before you.

17 Do not be a terror to me;
you are my refuge in the day of disaster.

18 Let my persecutors be put to shame,
but keep me from shame;
let them be terrified,
but keep me from terror.
Bring on them the day of disaster;
destroy them with double destruction.

Keeping the Sabbath Holy
19 This is what the LORD said to me: "Go and stand at the gate of the people, through which the kings of Judah go in and out; stand also at all the other gates of Jerusalem. 20 Say to them, 'Hear the word of the LORD, O kings of Judah and all people of Judah and everyone living in Jerusalem who come through these gates. 21 This is what the LORD says: Be careful not to carry a load on the Sabbath day or bring it through the gates of Jerusalem. 22 Do not bring a load out of your houses or do any work on the Sabbath, but keep the Sabbath day holy, as I commanded your forefathers. 23 Yet they did not listen or pay attention; they were stiff-necked and would not listen or respond to discipline. 24 But if you are careful to obey me, declares the LORD, and bring no load through the gates of this city on the Sabbath, but keep the Sabbath day holy by not doing any work on it, 25 then kings who sit on David's throne will come through the gates of this city with their officials. They and their officials will come riding in chariots and on horses, accompanied by the men of Judah and those living in Jerusalem, and this city will be inhabited forever. 26 People will come from the towns of Judah and the villages around Jerusalem, from the territory of Benjamin and the western foothills, from the hill country and the Negev, bringing burnt offerings and sacrifices, grain offerings, incense and thank offerings to the house of the LORD. 27 But if you do not obey me to keep the Sabbath day holy by not carrying any load as you come through the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath day, then I will kindle an unquenchable fire in the gates of Jerusalem that will consume her fortresses.' "

Footnotes:
a.Jeremiah 17:2 That is, symbols of the goddess Asherah
b.Jeremiah 17:3 Or hills / 3 and the mountains of the land. / Your

Isaiah 40 (New International Version)

2009-07-11T13:07:00.000-07:00

Comfort for God's People
1 Comfort, comfort my people,
says your God.
2 Speak tenderly to Jerusalem,
and proclaim to her
that her hard service has been completed,
that her sin has been paid for,
that she has received from the LORD's hand
double for all her sins.

3 A voice of one calling:
"In the desert prepare
the way for the LORD [a] ;
make straight in the wilderness
a highway for our God. [b]

4 Every valley shall be raised up,
every mountain and hill made low;
the rough ground shall become level,
the rugged places a plain.

5 And the glory of the LORD will be revealed,
and all mankind together will see it.
For the mouth of the LORD has spoken."

6 A voice says, "Cry out."
And I said, "What shall I cry?"
"All men are like grass,
and all their glory is like the flowers of the field.

7 The grass withers and the flowers fall,
because the breath of the LORD blows on them.
Surely the people are grass.

8 The grass withers and the flowers fall,
but the word of our God stands forever."

9 You who bring good tidings to Zion,
go up on a high mountain.
You who bring good tidings to Jerusalem, [c]
lift up your voice with a shout,
lift it up, do not be afraid;
say to the towns of Judah,
"Here is your God!"

10 See, the Sovereign LORD comes with power,
and his arm rules for him.
See, his reward is with him,
and his recompense accompanies him.

11 He tends his flock like a shepherd:
He gathers the lambs in his arms
and carries them close to his heart;
he gently leads those that have young.

12 Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand,
or with the breadth of his hand marked off the heavens?
Who has held the dust of the earth in a basket,
or weighed the mountains on the scales
and the hills in a balance?

13 Who has understood the mind [d] of the LORD,
or instructed him as his counselor?

14 Whom did the LORD consult to enlighten him,
and who taught him the right way?
Who was it that taught him knowledge
or showed him the path of understanding?

15 Surely the nations are like a drop in a bucket;
they are regarded as dust on the scales;
he weighs the islands as though they were fine dust.

16 Lebanon is not sufficient for altar fires,
nor its animals enough for burnt offerings.

17 Before him all the nations are as nothing;
they are regarded by him as worthless
and less than nothing.

18 To whom, then, will you compare God?
What image will you compare him to?

19 As for an idol, a craftsman casts it,
and a goldsmith overlays it with gold
and fashions silver chains for it.

20 A man too poor to present such an offering
selects wood that will not rot.
He looks for a skilled craftsman
to set up an idol that will not topple.

21 Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
Has it not been told you from the beginning?
Have you not understood since the earth was founded?

22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,
and its people are like grasshoppers.
He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

23 He brings princes to naught
and reduces the rulers of this world to nothing.

24 No sooner are they planted,
no sooner are they sown,
no sooner do they take root in the ground,
than he blows on them and they wither,
and a whirlwind sweeps them away like chaff.

25 "To whom will you compare me?
Or who is my equal?" says the Holy One.

26 Lift your eyes and look to the heavens:
Who created all these?
He who brings out the starry host one by one,
and calls them each by name.
Because of his great power and mighty strength,
not one of them is missing.

27 Why do you say, O Jacob,
and complain, O Israel,
"My way is hidden from the LORD;
my cause is disregarded by my God"?

28 Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
The LORD is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He will not grow tired or weary,
and his understanding no one can fathom.

29 He gives strength to the weary
and increases the power of the weak.

30 Even youths grow tired and weary,
and young men stumble and fall;

31 but those who hope in the LORD
will renew their strength.
They will soar on wings like eagles;
they will run and not grow weary,
they will walk and not be faint.

South Park vs Terry Gilliam

2009-06-21T12:10:00.000-07:00

Night rider series two

2009-06-18T11:12:00.000-07:00

This was a shot taken at night of a B-double with lateral movement of the camera plane.

A little something from Nietsche I picked up in Prison

2009-06-10T04:04:00.000-07:00

The life I touch for good or ill will touch another life and that in turn will touch another, until who wknows where the trembling stops or in what far place my touch will be felt.
Fredriech Nietsche

Measureing the Load

2009-06-10T04:00:00.000-07:00

Its easy to sit in the sunshine and talk to the man in the shade,
It's easy to sit in a well made boat and tell others where to wade,
Its easy to tell the toiler how best to carry his pack, but you'le never know the weight of the load till the pack is on your back
Anonymous

A little something from John Wesley

2009-05-22T15:15:00.000-07:00

“I have thought I am a creature of a day, passing through life as an arrow through the air.
I am a spirit come from God, and returning to God, just hovering over the great gulf, till a few moments hence, I am no more seen; I drop into an unchangeable eternity!
I want to know one thing—the way to heaven, how to land safe on that happy shore. God himself has condescended to teach the way; for this very end He came from heaven.
He has written it down in a book. O give me that Book at any price,
give me the Book of God”

John Wesley

The day of the dust storm

2009-04-15T23:09:00.000-07:00

Revival this Easter

2009-04-10T05:41:00.000-07:00

The Joke

2009-04-03T10:43:00.000-07:00

Prince Charles was being shown around a Scottish hospital.

At the end of his visit, he is shown into a ward with a number of patients who show no obvious signs of injury. He goes to examine the first man he sees, and the man proclaims:

Fair fa' yer honest, sonsie face,Great chieftain e' the puddin' race!Aboon them
a' ye tak your place, painch tripe or thairm:Weel are ye wordy o' a
grace as lang's my arm.

The Englishman, somewhat taken aback, goes to the next patient, and immediately the patient launches into:

Some hae meat, and canna eat,And some wad eat that want it,But we hae meat and
we can eat,And sae the Lord be thankit.

This continues with the next patient:

Wee sleekit cow'rin tim'rous beastie,O what a panic's in thy breastie!Thou need
na start awa sae hasty, wi' bickering brattle.I wad be laith to run
and chase thee, wi' murdering prattle!"

"Well," Prince Charles mutters to the scottish physician, "I see you saved the psychiatric ward for the last."

"Nay, nay," the Scottish doctor corrected him, "this is the Serious Burns unit."

The Atonement and Penal Substitution

2009-03-25T14:58:00.000-07:00

“That Christ stood in our place, was our substitute when he died, is clear in
many places in Scripture. This is strongly denied by some students, and it
cannot be said to be a wildly popular view in modern times.”[1]

Introduction

Few casual observers could have failed to miss the ongoing debate between various Christian apologists, most notably Alistair McGrath and evolutionary biologist and outspoken atheist Richard Dawkins. Among Dawkins’ many objections to religion in general and Christianity more specifically, he attacks the central tenet of our faith, the atonement.

He had this to say;

“I have described atonement, the central doctrine of Christianity, as vicious,
sado-masochistic and repellent. We should also dismiss it as barking mad,
but
for its ubiquitous familiarity which has dulled our objectivity. If God
wanted
to forgive our sins, why not just forgive them, without having
himself tortured
and executed in payment - thereby, incidentally, condemning
remote future
generations of Jews to pogroms and persecution as
‘Christ-Killers’: did that
hereditary sin pass down in the semen too?”[2]

This essay will not be going to any great lengths to refute Richard Dawkins, which has been far more effectively, eloquently and succinctly done by others. I do give him credit for saying that the atonement is the central doctrine of Christianity, and that it can be described as vicious. It is however far from being sado-masochistic, it is the most loving act to give up one’s life for ones friends.

Richard Dawkins portrayal of God is as far removed from the picture painted of God in the Bible, as a hawk is from a handsaw.[3] Dawkin’s delusion begins by taking only two extreme views of theology, those of the ultra conservatives and those of the ultra-liberal camp, and morphing them into a manmade monster. He ignores the vast majority of theologians, and concentrates on the fringe. Dawkins therefore makes fundamental errors in how he approaches theology. He is clearly no theologian. Had he made better use of the broad scope of theological data available to him he may have come to very different conclusions.

This essay seeks to demonstrate how theological sources of data are used to develop an integrated and consistent understanding of an issue within Soteriology, or the study of salvation. More specifically, under the spotlight will be the penal substitutionary theory of the atonement. It is the vicious nature of this doctrine which raises the hackles of many of its critics.

We will begin by looking at the nature and use of theological sources and then examine the doctrine of penal substitution in more detail.

Theological sources

Any approach using theological sources inherently faces certain ontological difficulties. While all sources of theological data do not carry the same weight, there is some agreement over how sources should be weighted. So much has been written about salvation over the centuries, and the debates concerning the atonement have been so varied, that for the purposes of this essay some selections have had to be made. Inevitably something has to be left out.

Given the object of theological study (God), our point of departure cannot be the object Himself. God is not in a test tube in a laboratory where he can easily be examined. Humble theologians will acknowledge that all true theology is the study of God’s revelation of Himself. This has several implications;

· Our study of theology will always be incomplete.
· Revelation is continual and ongoing, and therefore not static.
· Revelation is consistent with and influenced by the nature of the revealer.
· We can only study what He has revealed, primarily in the Bible.

1. The Book of Books

John Murray, Professor of Systematic Theology at the University of Westminster, in Philadelphia, in the state of Pennsylvania points to the centrality of scripture when examining the atonement when he writes;

There is only one source from which we can derive a proper conception of
Christ’s atoning work. That source is the Bible there is only one norm by which
our interpretations and formulations are to be tested. That norm is the Bible.
The temptation ever lurks near us to prove unfaithful to this one and only
criteria. No temptation is more subtle and plausible than the tendency to
construe the atonement in terms of our human experience and thus to make our
experience the norm.”[4]

How theological truth is drawn from the scriptures is a study within itself, called hermeneutics. The study of hermeneutics is however not the focus of this essay. It’s sufficient to say it is important for any student of theology to read God’s word for themselves, and draw conclusions about it. Within evangelical circles, the word of God is the primary source of all theological data. An understanding of its scope and skill in its use need to be a priority for those engaging theological issues. The basic tenet of Biblical interpretation is allowing the scripture to explain and interpret itself. An honest, humble and searching reading of scripture will lead the reader to greater understanding. (Psalm 119:97-112)

While evangelicals esteem the Bible as the highest authority, the Roman Catholic Church gives equal authority to the Bible, the Church and tradition.

Other sources of data include books. Ideas are important. People live and die by and for ideas. God has also commanded us to love Him with our whole mind, including our ideas. He has created us with a seemingly insatiable curiosity to explore and understand the world He created and placed us in. It’s almost like He wants to be found. He is in many ways the puzzle making God. We read in proverbs:

“It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the
glory of kings.” Pr 25:2 [5]

There are a broad range of resources relevant to the study of theology which would fit under the banner of publications. Given the branching here we need to look at types of publications involved these include;

· Theologies,
· Church histories and historical documents,
· Bible dictionaries
· Commentaries.
· Christian Biography

2. Theologians on Theology

In assessing the theological implications of the atonement we need to be wary of taking opinions from theologians verbatim, without cause to reference the source of the authority they lay claim to. It is all too easy to fall into the trap that some eminent scientists have of referring to any statement that a scientist (themselves in particular) may make as being the opinion of science as a whole.[6] What makes a Christian doctrine fundamental depends not on the authority it is given by theologians, as if they were a steady rock in a sea of ideas, but on the authority of God’s word, the Bible.

The written statements of theologians often correspond to debates which may cover a range of theological ground. They are usually a defense of a particular position from what they view to be heretical or deviant. For this reason much of the writing of theologians tends to be reactive. One type of theological writing which bucks that trend is when systematic theologies are written. These are generally carefully structured pieces dealing with a comprehensive range of issues. They are by no means inerrant, but seek to paint a broad picture of the landscape of theology. This is also not to say that they show no theological bias, but usually where such a bias is present, it is clearly and emphatically stated. At times it is unclear when they are asserting theological truth or when they are addressing theological deviancy in much the same way that we may struggle to differentiate when Christ was involved in evangelism or edification.

With academic works, the question is the quality of output. It not only concerns which universities have a higher output, or a larger fragment of intellectual throughput, but how many are read and referenced. The real impact is the quality of the output. Frequently there is a relationship between the quality of the output, the name of the institution and the volume of work produced. Unlike lightning strikes, a greater number of influential works tend to congregate together, in Bible colleges of distinction and at least in part due to the hothouse effect. Colleges such as Fuller theological seminary in the United States, or SMBC in Australia are good examples.

Frequently the more influential the work, the greater the chance that such a work may also end up in the public arena. Living with the underworld by Peter Bolt is just such a work, which started out as a master’s thesis through Moore College, and ended up being published through Matthias Media. Similarly much of the writing of John Piper, one of the most influential pastors of the last ten years, began life as a lecture or sermon. Data is not always written. One of the most outspoken defenders of substitutionary atonement has been Piper, a pastor whose life’s work is available to all on his website[7] in many and various forms, from Mp3 to PDF documents.

3. Church histories and historical documents,

Documents from Church history provide us with a map of theological thought, whereby we can trace the development of ideas, and get some idea of what impact they have had on the life and practices of the church. They are equally important for the sake of continuity in the church, and the protection of the church from heresy. When John Calvin and Marin Luther were accused of schism, and of bringing new and strange doctrines into the church, the two appealed to the testimony of scripture, but also of the church fathers. Luther was emphatic, his Christianity could be traced back to Augustine, and before to the apostles. This two prong attack was a stout defence against the Counter Reformation.

The doctrine of the substitutionary atonement has a long and tortured history beginning with the apostles and continuing through the writings of the Anti-Nicene fathers such as Justin Martyr (100-165).

“Then Trypho remarked, “Be assured that all our nation waits for Christ; and we
admit that all the Scriptures which you have quoted refer to Him. Moreover, I do
also admit that the name of Jesus, by which the son of Nave (Nun) was called,
has inclined me very strongly to adopt this view. But whether Christ should be
so shamefully crucified, this we are in doubt about. For whosoever is crucified
is said in the law to be accursed, so that I am exceedingly incredulous on this
point. It is quite clear, indeed, that the Scriptures announce that Christ had
to suffer; but we wish to learn if you can prove it to us whether it was by the
suffering cursed in the law.”

I replied to him, “If Christ was not
to suffer, and the prophets had not foretold that He would be led to death on
account of the sins of the people, and be dishonoured and scourged, and reckoned
among the transgressors, and as a sheep be led to the slaughter, whose
generation, the prophet says, no man can declare, then you would have good cause
to wonder. But if these are to be characteristic of Him and mark Him out to all,
how is it possible for us to do anything else than believe in Him most
confidently? And will not as many as have understood the writings of the
prophets, whenever they hear merely that He was crucified, say that this is He
and no other?”[8]

Augustine had much to say about the atonement, and defended the faith against the teachings of the Socineans, who advocated the atonement as example. Calvin’s advocacy of Substitutionary atonement is laid out in very clear terms in his institutes of the Christian religion. John Stott, longtime minister of All Souls Langham place, was a strong advocate for the substitutionary perspective, and expounded this succinctly in his book “The Cross of Christ.” D. Martyn-Lloyd Jones, who wrote a sermon series on Romans which went on to become the defining commentary on the book for our time was a firm believer in substitutionary atonement.

Noted scholar J.I. Packer writes;

“as Pauls writes in Galatians 3:13, (NIV) “Christ redeemed us from the curse of
the law by becoming a curse for us.” The reason why we do not have to bear our
sins is that Christ bore them in our place. This points to the thought of
substitution.

It was, then, by substitutionary, propitiatory
sacrifice on the part of the sinless Son of God that our reconciliation was
achieved. So much did Salvation cost; and it was for God’s enemies that the
price was paid.”[9]

For a more comprehensive pedigree of substitutionary atonement see Appendix one.

4. Bible dictionaries

In much the same way as Theologies are ordered and structured to represent theological truth, Biblical dictionaries are publications which expand on Biblical themes with articles arranged alphabetically. Particular emphasis may be given to a part of the Bible, such as Old Testament or New Testament, or the writings of Paul. Others focus on Biblical interpretation or biblical imagery, making useful parallel reading on the subject of the atonement. Frequently, as mentioned in Rev. Dr. Ken Chant’s notes for this subject, the use of analogy to illustrate spiritual truth makes such collections invaluable when examining complex doctrines such as the atonement.

5. Commentaries.

As the name suggests, commentaries are someone’s comments on the scriptures. The work of others in expounding the Bible differs substantially from those already discussed, in that direct interaction and wrestling with the text results in the form of the text changing the form of the commentators output. The Psalms with their definitive lyrical quality differ substantially from Paul’s letters, whereas there are parts of Genesis, and even the prophets where this quality is reflected again.

Commentaries, while not dealing with theology directly, serve to mould and expand a biblical understanding of the passage in view. With regard to the substitutionary atonement of Christ it is useful to know where passages such as Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 feature in the New Testament.

6. Christian Biography

Those who doubt the value of church history and the experience of individual Christians who have gone before do so at their own peril. We see the power of testifying about what God has done referred to in Johns account in Revelation.

“They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their
testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death”. Rev
12:11

The same can be said of Christian biography. Theology can remain stale and lifeless on a dead page until it is enlivened in the heart, soul and life of a believer. This encouragement continues to spread, either from mouth to mouth, in the oral tradition, or if it is truly exceptional may be written down for the encouragement and edification of others. Lee Strobel shares his experience when he writes;

“It was my agnostic wife's conversion to Christianity and the ensuing positive
changes in her character that prompted me to use my legal training and
journalism experience to systematically search for the real Jesus. After nearly
two years of studying ancient history and archaeology, I found the evidence
leading me to the unexpected verdict that Jesus is the unique Son of God who
authenticated his divinity by returning from the dead. It wasn't the outcome I
was necessarily seeking, but it was the conclusion that I believe the evidence
persuasively warranted.”[10]

The Atonement

But what is the atonement? At the heart of the atonement is this question; “Why did Jesus have to die? What did His death achieve for us?”[11] It is the convergence of several major doctrines. It takes place at the nexus of the trigeminous God. It reveals our true identity as Christians. Our view of the atonement shapes our understanding of ourselves. His atoning work on the cross changes our relationship to the Father, makes possible the work of the Spirit in us. It sets us free from the power of sin and the devil.

Erickson points to the centrality of the atonement when he writes;

“The most reconisable symbol of Christianity is the cross. Its significance is
found in the atoning work of Christ. It is the doctrine of the atonement that
becomes the transition point from the objective doctrines of God, Humanity, Sin,
and the person of Christ, to the subjective doctrines. This transition point is
the key element in balancing Christian theology to make it relevant to the
believer.”[12]

J.I. Packer speaks of the atonement as reconciliation to Christ. He writes;

“Reconciliation means peace-making, and Christ made peace we are told by the
blood of the cross (Col 9:20) We were reconciled to God by the death of his Son.
(Rom 5:1-10)”

There are three major candidates in the debate surrounding the Atonement. These contenders all rightfully claim that the atoning work caused the results they postulate. Each has more than a soupçon of claim to the atoning work of Christ. Most theologians agree that this is the case. Where they disagree is on which one has precedence. While all doctrines are true, (doctrine is a synonym for truth) not all doctrines carry the same weight, and there are few weightier doctrines than the atoning work of Christ. The stakes in this debate are high. The atonement represents the ultimate deodate. It is Gods supreme gift to man.

The three main views are;

1. The penal substitutionary view (or Christ died in our place),

“For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous,
to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the
Spirit,” 1Pe 3:18

“Now if we died with Christ, we believe
that we will also live with him.
For we know that since Christ
was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over
him.
The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives,
he lives to God. In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God
in Christ Jesus. Ro 6:8-11”

2. The Christus Victor view (or the atonement as victory over sin and evil)

For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the
kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of
sins. Col 1:13-14

This view of the atonement argues that a ransom was paid not to God, but to the Devil, in order to set us free from the captivity we were under to him.

The Christus victor theory has been emphasized by two very different groups, those who practice sacramentarianism and some Pentecostal groups who express the summation of all theology as a battle between good and evil. This pervasive view has been accepted in the general populace as what constitutes the Christian message. Biblically, however it is not as central to the atonement as penal substitution.

3. The moral government view (or Gods wrath against sin)[13].

“I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for
you.
I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than
his
master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. Now that
you know
these things, you will be blessed if you do them.” Jn
13:15-17

This view sees man’s sin as an act of rebellion not against God as an individual, but as God as ruler, and developed in opposition to Socinianism.

Substitutionary atonement has come under fire from a number of different quarters, but no more so than at the present time. To illustrate and expand upon the arguments for and against substitutionary atonement would require a more significant space allocation than this essay allows. Suffice to say I will draw upon some of the conclusions of others to point us toward the conclusion of the matter.

It is interesting to see that the substitutionary atonement was on the list of fundamental doctrines the editors of “the fundamentals” chose to include. Clearly this would only be the case if the doctrine had experienced some criticism.

“To begin with, the departure from conservative theology became increasingly
pronounced during the early years of the century. One effort to combat this
tendency was the publication of a twelve-volume paperback set produced under the
successive editorship of A. C. Dixon, Louis Meyer, and R. A. Torrey (1910–1912).
Called The Fundamentals, these books especially upheld the virgin birth of
Christ, His physical resurrection, the inerrancy of Scripture, the
substitutionary atonement, and the imminent, physical second coming of Christ.
Millions of copies were distributed free, and those who subscribed to the
doctrines set forth in them came to be known as “fundamentalists.””[14]

This attack on the theology of penal substitution was recognized by a group of scholars writing for Intervarsity press. They stated;

“Since the 1980s a number of influential books critical of the traditional view
[penal substitution] have appeared, and now the trickle has grown into a river.
We believe penal substitution is thoroughly biblical, but it would not be good
enough simply to ignore our critics. We need to hear what they say, engage with
their objections and answer them in a thoughtful, coherent way.”[15]

They indicate through the book how substitutionary atonement aligns itself well with what we as theologians know about God, as He has revealed Himself.

“Penal substitution upholds the truthfulness and justice of God: it is the means
by which he saves people for relationship with himself without going back on His
word that sin has to be punished. In addition to the basic requirement that God
should not be proved a liar, there are several reasons why this is important… It
preserves our understanding of God as a perfect being…preserves what is often
called the doctrine of God’s simplicity… that all of God’s attributes are in
harmony with each other”[16]

They also conclude that penal substitution is not only one of the theories of the atonement, but its central tenet from which all others draw their referent power. Erickson, in his systematic theology comes to the same conclusion. He states;

“We observed… that each of the theories of the atonement contains a valid
insight. It is our contention that the penal substitution theory maintains those
valid insights. Beyond this we argue that those insights bear force only on the
basis of the substitutionary view.”[17]

Conclusion

In this essay we have examined various sources of theological data. We have recognized that all these resources are important and valuable in assessing the validity and scope of biblical doctrine. We have briefly examined the theories of the atonement, and concluded that substitutionary atonement is the central tenet of the Christian faith.

Christ’s death and resurrection have secured for us a future and glorious hope of life with him.

“Jesus shall reign where’er the sun
Doth his successive journeys run.
His
kingdom stretch from shore to shore
Till moons shall wax and wane no more.”[18]

Appendix 1.
The Historical pedigree of Substitutionary atonement [19]

· Justin Martyr (c100-165)
· Eusebius of Caesarea (c275-339)
· Hillary of Poitiers (c300-368)
· Athanasius (c300-373)
· Gregory of Nazianzus (c330-390)
· Ambrose of Milan (339-397)
· John Chrysostom (c350-407)
· Augustine of Hippo (354-430)
· Cyril of Alexandria (375-444)
· Gelasius of Cyzicus (fifth Century)
· Gregory the Great (c540-604)
· Thomas Aquinas (1225-74)
· John Calvin (1509-64)
· Francis Turrentin (1623-87)
· John Bunyan (1628-88)
· John Owen (1616-83)
· George Whitefield (1714-70)
· Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-92)
· D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981)
· John R. W. Stott (born 1921)
· J.I.Packer (Born 1926)

Bibliography
There are no sources in the current document.

[1] Morris, L. The Cross of Jesus. Biblical Classics Library. Paternoster Press. 1988.Kent
[2] Dawkins, R; The God Delusion. 2008. Mariner Books.
[3] With apologies to Shakespeare.

[4] Murray, J. Redemption Accomplished and applied. 1961. Banner of Truth Trust. London
[5] All scriptures included are taken from the New International Version. Pradis CD-ROM: Grand Rapids: The Zondervan Corporation, © 1973, 1978, 1984. Unless otherwise stated.
[6] Here I think of men of the ilk of Richard Dawkins
[7] www.desiringgod.org
[8] Martyr. J. Dialogue with Trypho. Anti-Nicene fathers Chap. LXXXIX. — The Cross Alone Is Offensive to Trypho on Account of the Curse, Yet it Proves That Jesus Is Christ

[9] Packer. J.I. 18 words: The most important words you will ever know. 2007. Focus Pubications. Ross-shire
[10] Strobel, Lee. The Case for the Real Jesus: A Journalist Investigates Current Attacks on the Identity of Christ.
[11] Boyd, G.A. Eddy P.A. Across the Spectrum.2002. Baker Academic. Grand Rapids
[12] Erickson, Millard. Christian Theology, 2nd edition. 1998. Baker Books. Grand Rapids.
[13] Boyd, G.A. Eddy P.A. et al
[14]Vos, Howard Frederic ; Thomas Nelson Publishers: Exploring Church History. Nashville : Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1996 (Nelson's Christian Cornerstone Series)
[15] Jeffrey, S. Ovey, M. Sach, A. Pierced for our transgressions: rediscovering the glory of penal substitution. Intervarsity Press. 2007. Nottingham
[16] Jeffrey, S et al pg 138
[17] Erickson et al pg 836
[18] Hymn Quoted in D. Martyn-Lloyd Jones’ Faith tried and triumphant. Intervastity Press. 1987. London.
[19] Jeffrey. S et al

The Sentinel 2

2009-03-16T04:44:00.000-07:00

The way home from work

2009-03-10T01:54:00.000-07:00

A little Moonshine on the Gardens.

2009-03-08T04:17:00.000-07:00

Night photography either plays havoc with colour or creates unusual subtle shades. This calm sunday night and not a ripple on the water.

Practicing night photography

2009-03-08T03:52:00.000-07:00

The veiw from the bridge

2009-03-06T03:22:00.000-08:00

No, the other Lagoon.

2009-03-06T03:10:00.000-08:00

Fireworks tonight at the Lagoon

2009-03-06T02:47:00.000-08:00

Living the Reality of the Royal Priesthood

2009-02-25T18:30:00.000-08:00

Introduction

This essay seeks to describe the relationship between a fundamental theological truth to its practice in the Christian life. In particular, this essay will examine the nature and practice of the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. As this can also be referred to as every member ministry, the terms will be used interchangeably.

The importance of this doctrine cannot be overstated, in that where it is poorly understood, it is poorly practiced, and where it is poorly practiced Christian witness is weak and ineffectual. On the other hand where it is grasped, Christian witness and service increase, the church grows, and healthy communities of faith are formed. God always honours building when it is done to his design.

This essay will examine the causes of a gap between doctrine and practice; as such I will intentionally avoid overwhelmingly theological jargon, and focus on practical application. At heart the gap between practice and belief is the proverbial two-sided coin problem. On the one hand it is a leadership problem, and on the other it is a laity problem. The common ground, the coin itself, is Christian education also called discipleship.

It should be noted at the outset that there are many academics and people from all streams of life who are quick to criticize the church. Those in the church are not exempt; some have built their whole ministries on telling us what is wrong with the church. This is not the intention of this essay. Those who seek to criticize the church often fail to see it as it is, a body of believers, a royal priesthood. Their focus is on the institutions. They cannot see it from Gods perspective, for He always premises His view of the church with love.

While we shy away from anyone who would seek to criticize the church, we do believe there is tremendous value in taking a critical look at it (in the sense of careful consideration). We believe that if as believers we need to pause and take stock of our own lives, how much more so should we as the Church. In such books as the acclaimed “I believe in Church Growth” by Eddie Gibbs[1] the value in looking at the Church with fresh eyes is demonstrated.

We begin by examining the doctrine itself in broad terms, what it is, where it fits. We touch briefly here on the discrepancy between practice and profession. We describe its nature and tragic consequences.

Next we speculate as to some of the factors which may have contributed to the development of a gap. Was this inevitable? What portion of the responsibility should the church take for the present dilemma? We discuss in particular church history, church culture and leadership styles as influences.

Finally we offer some suggestions as to practical ways in which the divide between practice and theory may be overcome.

Let’s first examine what this doctrine encompasses, and where it fits.

The Priesthood of All Believers

The doctrine (a synonym for truth) of the priesthood of all believers is most clearly summarized in the book of first Peter.

But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a
people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who
called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. 1Pe2 : 9 0[2]

This sums up God’s plan to have a redeemed people who continue His work in the world, who offer to Him the sacrifice of praise, and who spend themselves in service of those around them for the sake of the gospel. Eugene Peterson makes the point that the church is an organization created for the benefit of its non-members. It all started at Pentecost.

“Then tongues of fire landed on everyone’s head. I have no clue what those
“tongues of fire” looked like, but they represented the coming of the Holy
spirit in full measure to the church. And the tongues sat not on the heads of a
select few but on everybody’s head.

From that moment on instead of a few select priests, filled and empowered by the Holy Spirit to act as go betweens with God, suddenly everyone of Jesus’ followers became a priest.”[3]

People, who understand their standing before God as a royal priesthood, yearn to bring the kingdom of God with them into their everyday lives. They represent Christ where they are as chosen ambassadors for Him. They long to share the joy they have with others, and operate with a sense of divine purpose, even destiny. For such individuals there is no secular profession. They are serving God where they are. Their mission is sacred.

“There is no New Testament basis for the clergy/laity ministry dichotomy that
relegates laypeople to a secondary role in ministry. Just as the Reformation put
the scriptures in the hands of the laity, there is now a realization that we
need to put ministry in the hands of the laity… The biblical doctrine of the
priesthood of all believers teaches us that we are all called to full time
ministry in our spheres of influence. As we cultivate our personal walk with God
and nurture others through discipleship and witness, we engage in the enduring
work of God.”[4]

A poor understanding of Soteriology, that is to say salvation, will give us a warped perspective on our identity as a new creation and also our role as a royal priesthood. It is fair to say that many Christians have a phenomenal understanding of how our salvation was bought. At best we have a very limited understanding of what we have been saved from and what we have been saved for.

“The conservative church became fixated on correct belief as the key to heaven
when you die – that became their gospel. Both sides lost the notion of life
transformation. Those of us who inherited the conservative church’s gospel were
taught that if you just preached correct doctrine that we’ve done our job. Now
decades later, we are seeing that there is more to the gospel than just getting
people ready to die.”[5]

As a priest, by Gods decree, we have access to His throne room. It is our responsibility to partake by faith in that privilege. Our primary function is to be priests to God, offering him our praise and prayers. As priests we are called to sacrifice, in many different ways. There is no priesthood without sacrifice. Two ways we can do so is by offering a sacrifice of praise to God, and through suffering for the good of the gospel and of others. This is not to somehow lessen the completeness of Christ’s sacrifice, as we cannot add or take away from it, but we are told to share in His sufferings.

I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the
fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his
death,
and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the
dead. Phil 3:10,11

But rejoice that you participate in the
sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed.
1Pe 4:13

The royal priesthood takes its cue from the ministry of Christ demonstrated in the example of Melchisedek, who was prophet priest and king before God, rather than the Aaronic priesthood, which it supercedes. Many believers know this (at least intellectually) to be true. The main disparity between the practice and the pronouncement is participation by faith. Next we examine how this disparity has been exasperated.

Ecclesiastical Paradigms

Church history

The lack of participation in ministering to the world stems in no small part from history. The general illiteracy of bygone days is something frequently overlooked in our day and age. Schooling of any sort was a luxury few could afford. The newfound wealth created by organized agriculture led to feudalism. The wealth of the feudal lords also allowed for full time clergy who were able to study the scriptures.

It was this ability to read the scriptures and interpret them which led to the emergence of a priestly class during the middle ages. Through extensive land ownership the church became a political as much as spiritual force, frequently leading to Christ’s teaching being marginalized. It was discontent with this status quo which led some to seek a more radical holiness in monastic orders and isolated religious communities. In both instances the result was the same, a growing divide between laity and clergy.

“This history together with tremendous changes in developed Western society have
placed those who are ordained in a quite different position in relation to those
among whom they live and work.”[6]

Books like the Da Vinci code tend to highlight this view of the church, that it is manipulative, secretive and controlling, and anti-women. This is not the picture painted in the scriptures either of the church or God himself.

Traditional Views

Another key factor in understanding this divide is to examine how much of the church views itself. What it believes its identity to be. The traditional view of man as being a dirty rotten sinner barely saved by grace has so pervaded the thinking of the church that it has struggled to reconcile the glowing terms with which believers are addressed in the New Testament. It has failed to fundamentally deal with what the scriptures mean when they say that the church is the salt of the earth or the light of the world or scriptures which say;

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the
new has come! 2Co 5:17

“For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?” But
we
have the mind of Christ. 1Co 2:16

These may be mysteries which are deep and difficult to grasp, but like all Biblical mysteries, they are hidden in the open. They have been revealed, and worthy of being explored.

All too frequently Christians become bound up in legalism, not understanding that they live holy lives in praise filled response to Gods declaration of them as holy despite their action.

“Even though we have a new nature that is created in true righteousness and holiness, we still get confused. Some of the things we do don’t fall in line with our new nature. Some of the old habit patterns left behind by our sinful nature come to the foreground. When this happens, we instinctively think that this is who we are, and that we are failing to live up to the Christian standard. Our wrongdoing makes us question our identity.- “Are we truly Christian?””[7]

Holiness and service are therefore conveniently seen as the preserve of a professional clergy.

This is perhaps most aptly illustrated by the maxim; the clergy are paid to be good, the rest of us are good for nothing. For many in the church the clergy came to represent something akin to Douglas Adams’ electric monk;

“The Electric Monk was a labour-saving device, like a dishwasher or a video
recorder. Dishwashers washed tedious dishes for you, thus saving you the bother
of washing them yourself, video recorders watched tedious television for you,
thus saving you the bother of looking at it yourself; Electric Monks believed
things for you, thus saving you what was becoming an increasingly onerous task,
that of believing all the things the world expected you to believe.”[8]

Wayne Cordeiro puts it this way:

“But somewhere along the line we have forgotten who God created us to be.
Instead of fulfilling our own calling, we hire others to do it for us. We
interview a potential pastor, and if he can preach and do the business of the
church, we hire him. Then after a few years, if he has done an adequate job of
preaching, visiting the sick and performing weddings and funerals, we vote to
“renew his call”. He is the one who is to do the ministry, so we just step out
of his way.”[9]

This very broad brush paints a picture of what is occurring by and large in traditional churches in the western world, although there are encouraging signs that this is changing. [10]

Pentecostalism

All organizations exhibit an internal culture of some description. Frequently they are inherited and passed on from one generation to the next. Changing a church culture is a very deliberate and painful procedure, and one which many in church governance seek to avoid. Jopie van Rooyen in his conference paper on communicating in a changing organizational culture states;

“The concept of organizational culture is not merely a buzz word, but has
generally been accepted as a concrete reality which needs to be managed,
particularly in times of change.”[11]

Church culture is not inherently negative. On the positive side, Pentecostal churches have been proactive in teasing out and embracing what it means to be a new creation. As a result they have often been on the front foot as regards embracing every member ministry. That is not to say that there are some structural deficiencies within Pentecostalism which encourage the theoretical and practical divide.

Pentecostal churches by and large tend to be under the leadership of a single individual or family. This can be seen by careful examination of church history[12]. It is also evidenced by the strong association between the names of individuals and the churches or para-church organizations they lead.[13] The author has even heard within church leadership meetings autocracy justified as the only way in which to govern an assembly effectively.[14] That being said I have also heard from Pentecostal ministers further afield how they never make a church decision without the unanimous support of the eldership.

The net result of this penchant toward autocratic leadership can lead to one individual carrying an enormous workload, frequently taking responsibility for things which can be, and should be done by others. As the leader spends their personal energy and resources for the cause of the gospel, without good boundaries in place burnout can ensue.The net result is that the autocratic nature of Pentecostal churches, by and large tends to steer these churches and communities of faith away from the idea of every member ministry, despite a theological emphasis on the priesthood of all believers within evangelical Pentecostal circles.

The Academy

Perhaps one of the clearest barriers perceived by Christians today is that they do not feel that they are educated enough to minister. Most have not, and most will never attend a Bible college. In the west a degree in theology is the minimum requirement for pastoring a church, particularly among traditional churches. What of those who are called of God but are not academically inclined? Those who buck this trend often take the church into new and exciting territory.[15]

Clearly the disciples were ordinary people who ministered in great power.

“

When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were
unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men
had been with Jesus”. Ac 4:13

But it would also be noted that Jesus taught them, coached them and instructed them for three years in a very deliberate way in order that they would be able to continue his work. The acquisition of wisdom and understanding is implicit in ones growth along the Christian walk.

Whatever its implications, the perceived divide between the academy and the laity compounds the every member ministry debacle.

Church governance and the need for local leadership

There are some who would say that if we are all priests what need do we have for having clergy or ordained ministers? Here we make a fundamental error in our thinking. We break the rule of the undivided middle. God ordains church leadership. If Ephesians is to be believed the people he assigns to various tasks are His gift to the church. For the body of Christ to function effectively we need pastors who pastor, elders who serve, deacons who “deak” and leaders who lead. We may differ on the model, but the need is clearly there until Christ returns. Those who minister need to have a clear call from God to do so, recognised by the local assembly and/or group of related churches. Without such a call no minister can remain in effective gospel ministry.

Vital, active church leadership is essential for the priesthood of all believers to function effectively. The five fold ministry makes sure the church has what it needs to fulfil its purpose. The troops need to be trained, guided, mentored, and coached. Without effective leadership there is no effective ministry in the body. These gifts are given for the equipping of the saints (the church) for the work of ministry. (Ephesians 4)

“God is at work in the church, manifesting himself through gifts of the Spirit.
The purpose of spiritual gifts is the common good of the church (1Cor. 12:7).
The gifts have nothing to do with personal ambition or career orientation. They
are not given to build individual reputations, to warrant superior positions in
the local church, or to demonstrate spiritual advancement. They are not
trophies, but tools. These tools are for touching and blessing others.”[16]

Christian education and Alternative solutions

In conclusion we touch briefly on some of the solutions to narrow the gap between principle and practice of the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. The conclusion we have come to is that a primary concern is Christian education, also called discipleship.

Radicalization and Reformation

By radicalization we are referring to the returning to the roots of the Christian faith. No clear understanding of the church can be gained without examining Christ, from whom our faith and priesthood springs.

By Reformation we infer that our approach to the scriptures be one of humble reverence, that we are continually applying ourselves to its understanding, without reaching the point where we feel that we have arrived or have a particular doctrine “nailed down”.

Discipleship

The need for a rediscovery of what discipleship means is paramount. Here I would refer you to the writings of Dallas Willard and Juan Carlos Ortis as they have spent significant time and thought teasing this issue out.

Alternatives to the Academy model

We need as denominations to generate alternatives to the Academy model. The apprentice model of discipleship works well in a local church context, and is certainly modeled in scripture. In ministry training we somehow overlook this as unworkable.

Ironically one of the most academic of all institutions in Australian theology circles was founded as an alternative to the Academy model. Broughton Knox sought to establish Moore College as a Bible college which would also function effectively as a community of faith. Some practical adjustments had to be made to accommodate this approach. The result has been a college which has seen some of the highest academic achievement.

The development of new technology has made distance education more workable, this is also true in a Bible college context. This has the advantage that leadership is not removed from the local church, placed into an artificial, academic environment for three or four years and then expected to lead and pastor a church well. As it is a relatively cheaper option than a residential college, more people have access to Christian education[17] and leadership training. Technology is reconnecting leadership to the local church context.

These few steps may go a long way in narrowing the divide between practice and doctrinal belief when it comes to the priesthood of all believers.

[1] Gibbs, Eddie, I Believe in Church Growth. 1981. Hodder and Stoughton. London (series editor Michael Green)
[2] All scriptures included are taken from the New International Version. Pradis CD-ROM: Grand Rapids: The Zondervan Corporation, © 1973, 1978, 1984. Unless otherwise stated.
[3] Hybels, Bill. The Volunteer Revolution. Zondervan. 2004. Grand Rapids
[4] Boa, Kenneth. Conformed to His Image. Zondervan. 2001. Grand Rapids
[5] Dallas Willard quoted in Leadership Magazine, Summer 2005. Pg 21,22.
[6] Grundy, Michael. Understanding Congregations. Mowbray. 1998. London
[7] Mulheran, Brian. Jesus: Author and Finisher. Synergy. 2002. Florida
[8] Adams, Douglas: Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency. William Heinermann. 1987. New York
[9] Cordiero, Wayne. Doing church as a team. Regal. 2001. Ventura
[10] http://www.sydneyanglicans.net/ and http://www.brf.org.uk/2954 and http://www.synergy.org.au/site.php?id=4
[11] Van Rooyen. J. Communicating in a changing organizational culture. Organizational Communication; a top priority. Human sciences research council. Pretoria. 1992.
[12] A prime example would be the transition within the CRC movement following the passing of Leo Harris.
[13] Numerous examples exist; Joyce Meyer ministries, the Pringle family, the Houston’s, Benny Hinn
[14] This is clearly refuted in scripture in that four distinct models of church government are noted, including single elder rule. For more on church government see Who runs the Church: four views of church government. 2004. Zondervan
[15] A prime example would be the movement began by John Wimber.
[16] Wimber, John. The Dynamics of Spiritual Power. Hodder & Stoughton. 1990. London
[17] Christian education is defined by Nevin Harner as “a reverend attempt to discover the divinely ordained process by which individuals grow in Christlikeness, and to work with that process”.

Princesses Album Cover

2009-02-22T05:50:00.000-08:00

My album cover

2009-02-20T00:08:00.000-08:00

For instructions on to make your own go to: http://planetlana.blogspot.com/2009/02/my-album-cover.html

The end of one more confirmed old batchelor. Well done Troy, now youre only confirmed as old.

2009-02-15T03:16:00.000-08:00

Alfredo comes to visit

2009-02-15T03:13:00.000-08:00

This friendly fellow is staying in our guests room downstairs. We have guests visiting but have not told them about Alfredo, so as not to make them panic unduly.

Close up on the most wanted taliban member on the Murrumbidgee - Have you seen this boy?

2009-02-08T02:59:00.000-08:00

Frivolities at Troys Bucks night

2009-02-08T02:52:00.000-08:00

Contravention of the Batchelor Act

Troy Cedric William Gahlager Murphy, You have been found Found Guilty by these persons here present that on the 14th of this month you intend wilfully and with heineous forthought to contemplate contrevavention of the batchelors act.

Where the Minister has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that an institution has contravened any of the provisions of this Act or the regulations, an inspector designated by the Minister in writing may at any reasonable time enter upon the premises of that institution to make an inspection for the purpose of determining whether or not the institution is in contravention of this Act or the regulations.

It is the finding of this here Kangeroo court specially convened for this purpose that you stand guilty as charged . (All who agree say aye, or too right mate)

The maximum penalty for this charge includes a free one way rail ticket to Kalgoorlie in a full body cast. Alternatively the maximum penalty may include dyeing of the offender in a smurf shade of blue from the waise down.
Todays proceedings however (in the light of woosie public prosecutors) and in due consideration of the impending fate of the accussed have decided on the following course of action:
Bailif, please read the courts decision:

(Bailif):
We the people Sentence you to:

· A life of penal servitude without the possibility of parole.
· Put up with stockings over the rail in the bathroom

· For the improvement of the accused left foot to take part in an immediate demonstration of the wedding waltz with this here replica. (given broom)

· That you be given a companion for this evening to carry with you to get you used to your new role. (give him ball and chain)

· should you be unable to answer 8 ellen/girl related questions you will be fed marshmallows until the words chubby bunny are indisciferable. You will not be permitted to swallow the marshmallows until instructed to do so.
Members of the jury do you have your questions?

· Are you ready for your questions:

1. What is Ellen’s favourite card game?
2. As a couple you have a “song” please sing the chorus?
3. If Ellen says which dress do I look better in, the blue one or the sage one, which would you pick?
4. When Ellen was a child she had a favourite doll named...? troco
5. What makes cooking chocolate different from normal chocolate?
6. What company makes the fragrance “organza”? (gevinchy)
7. What are chemical peels, cold beam lasers and dermabrasion? Beauty therapy skin treatments
8. Is the birthstone for August a sapphire, opal or moonstone?
9. What will be the date of your second d wedding anniversary?
10. What is the airspeed velocity of a fully laden swallow?

Polingalana Reserve during the Victoria Bushfires

2009-02-08T02:05:00.000-08:00

From the sublime...

2009-02-03T00:41:00.000-08:00

“Compassion is sometimes the fatal capacity for feeling what it is like to live inside somebody else's skin. It is the knowledge that there can never really be any peace and joy for me until there is peace and joy finally for you too.”

Frederick Buechner

“One only needs two tools in life: WD-40 to make things go, and duct tape to make them stop."

G. Weilacher

“Quotation is a serviceable substitute for wit.”

Oscar Wilde

Sneezles

2009-01-02T14:37:00.000-08:00

This Christmas has been one to remember for so many reasons, not least of which it was our daughters first. It was a blast catching up with friends from Canada, Melbourne and Wagga. Its also been eventful for other reasons. The last few weeks have seen me off to the emergency room twice, with significant dehydration, fever and all sorts of wierd and wacky symptoms. I have had more blood tests than O.J. Simpson.

The good news is that I have found out that I am generally disgustingly healthy, have lower cholestrol than a galapagos tortoise, but have what seems to be a case of glandular fever, with the result that I have spent the last three weeks flat on my back resting, drinking gatorade. Those of you who know me know how much I enjoy just resting, so I would personally like to thank the South African cricket team for making my recuperation more pleasant and for stopping me from going stir crazy and climbing the walls.

Thank you also to our church St Pauls who have been a God send, both in prayer and practical ways. I just couldnt help including the following poem from A.A. Milne. It sums up my last few weeks well.

SNEEZLES -A.A. Milne

Christopher Robin had wheezles and sneezles,
They bundled him into his bed.

They gave him what goes with a cold in the nose,
And some more for a cold in the head.
They wondered if wheezles could turn into measles,
If sneezles could turn into mumps.
They examined his chest for a rash,
And the rest
of his body for swellings and lumps.
They sent for some doctors in sneezles and wheezles
To tell them what ought to be done.
All sorts and conditions of famous physicians
Came hurrying 'round at a run.
They all made a note of the state of his throat,
They asked if he suffered from thirst;
They asked if the sneezles came after the wheezles,
Or if the first sneezle came first.
They said, "If you teazle a sneezle or wheezle,
A measle may easily grow.
But humor or pleazle a sneezle or wheezle,
The measle will certainly go."
They expounded the reazles for sneezles and wheezles,
The manner of measles when new.
They said, "If he freezles in draughts and in breezles,
Then PHTHEEZLES may even ensue."
Christopher Robin got up in the morning,
The sneezles had vanished away.
And the look in his eye seemed to say to the sky,
"Now, how to amuse them to-day!"

Canberra Trip November December

2008-12-02T19:25:00.000-08:00

The past four days have seen us away in Canberra, we had a meeting to attend but this provided a great opportunity to catch up with old friends and wonder why the heck we ever left the place.

Canberra is a great place for raising a family. It has also become a bit of an I.T. Hub for Australia. Many people working in Canberra work for the defence department. According to a recent Attenborogh documentary on wildlife and animal behaviour in the Australian Capital Territory "those who work for defence can be differentiated from those who work for the army by not responding to being called dogface".

Prince Charles remarked of the 'Berra that it is a city without a soul. On one level, and perhaps at that time he may have had a point. But things change.

With a growing population of sports mad young people, and more importantly a growing number of people who have been born in Canberra and surrounds living in the city it has taken on a life and a flavour al of its own. Not to mention the fact that it has the highest number of restuarants and coffee shops per capita than any other Australian city, town or hamlet.

Some of the best reasons to visit Canberra can be found here: http://www.wvbc.com.au/ and here http://www.crossroads.asn.au/view.php?page=Home.

Pehaps the best thing about Canberra, other than the fabulously well educated people who wouldn't know how to fix the kitchen sink, is the opportunity the place affords for photography. I have included in the last few photos some examples.

Bush Capital

2008-12-02T19:17:00.000-08:00

James Cooke Memorial, Canberra

2008-12-02T15:06:00.000-08:00

The Sentinels

2008-12-02T12:58:00.000-08:00