If you still don’t understand the emerging church, or tend to think it will be a brief, passing trend in church history, this video might help.  Everytime you hear the word “jazz” just replace it with “christian belief” in your mind.  Sit through the first (unnecessary) 40 seconds of introduction and you may just find this helpful.  Not a perfect correlation, but there are some very neat parallels.

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
Matthew 24:24 (NIV)

Many in the church are warming up to this idea.  Some in the nineteenth and twentieth century, especially liberal theologies, used the concept to set forth a humanistic agenda of world peace which stripped away any notion of supernatural salvation or atonement theology from the Christian message.  It is also used by some to propagate socialist political theory.  More recently, it is used by charismatics as grounds for a theology of healing and reconciliation.  While some of these may be aspects of evangelical options, kingdom theology serves as what is referred to as theology’s integrating theme.  Some consider it the most basic theological theme that gives meaning to all other doctrines.  That being said, it was surprising to see John Franke and Stanley Grenz offer such little treatment of it in Beyond Foundationalism, especially in light of Franke’s other work The Character of Theology in which he continues this pattern but does use the term at various points in his work, rather affirmingly.  While I considered the idea that it was not within the scope of Beyond Foundationalism, as it turns out they propose community as theology’s integrative motif.  So, there is an obvious intentionality and thoughtfulness put into it, and they even offered a few brief paragraphs as to why kingdom as an orienting motif falls short.  The reasons they provide are (p. 234-235):

• The kingdom of God is hard to define.  But there have been satisfactory, technical definitions.  Also, community itself is not without controversy.
• It lends itself to individualistic theology, even in the hands of liberal theology.  Actually, kingdom theology probably provides the most social motif while retaining the individual responsibility of persons.  Of course they would probably resist the need for such a move in the first place, since he takes seriously that we do not have meaning or identity without the reference of community.  Still, the individuality of persons is retained in Scriptures, so there is no need to fear where kingdom theology only may lead, even as Franke grants.
• Kingdom theology is a pervasive but not a basic theme in the Bible.  While this may be true if looking for explicit references, this is not true if one understand the concept as implicit.  Community, though also convincingly pervasive, falls short in a similar manner.

“In fact, the concept of community forms the content of the kingdom of God.  The divine reign consists of God at work redeeming, reconciling, and transforming creation into God’s intended ideal and thereby constituting the world as God’s realm.”

I don’t know if they realized what they just did here—they resorted to God’s realm as being more basic than community.  God’s realm is his kingdom.  What community as an integrative motif misses out on is all the dimensions of creation that is beside humans; big-picture ecology is gleaned over.  God’s kingdom plan extends to the destiny of creation, and has a wider scope than that of community.  Since the subtitle of Beyond Foundationalism is “Shaping Theology in a Postmodern Context,” it makes sense that community is at the core of their proposal.  Not to mention, it is incredibly helpful and useful.  Still, since postmodern theory admits that the words we use actually shape our experience, I think it would be wonderful to see works that treat theology’s task, nature, or method take seriously the term Jesus used to define his ministry.  I am curious as to why they decided to go in a different direction.  The one reason I understand, though still have my reservations about, is that it is an outdated model in a post-monarchical world.

Yesterday was a big day for the Southern Baptist Convention.  They voted on some important motions, including the Great Commission Resurgence which was pretty controversial, though it did pass.  Read about that here.  Recently there also continues to be a lot of controversy surrounding calvinism in Southern Baptist churches and seminaries.  Calvinists are still the minority in this denomination.  Apparently the SBC isn’t favorable to the Acts 29 network—a calvinist church planting network—so pastor Joshua Shank decided to propose a motion to widen its support…in the form of a rap.  It was light hearted and the convention seemed to welcome his motion.  The only question I’m left wondering is if, ”Teamwork will make the dream work,” then why is Acts 29 exclusively calvinistic?  With such a young, talented, and visionary network of church planters, it would be great to see it open up to better relationships with those who are outside this particular theological camp.

I will be the one to tuck my child into bed.  I will be the one to teach her to ride a bike for the first time.  I will pack their lunch for school.  I will pray with him before meals, and when he is scared, and on many other sorts of occasions.  When she practices her most enchanting hobbies, spending free time in a way that most pleases her, I will be the one next to her.

I will be the one that celebrates these moments with them.  I will be there whispering in their ear that they are loved by me, and loved even more by God in Jesus.  What could be more powerful a safeguard than that?

“Bart [Ehrman] is quite an angry man.”

“I do think that the Gospels intended to refer—and succeeded in referring—to Jesus himself and not simply to the community’s faith about Jesus.” (on Barthian heritage)

“If you are a theologian that believes you ought to wait for the biblical scholars to sort stuff out before you can then use their material in your own work, then you might sometimes feel like you have to wait forever.”

“The bible doesn’t use the phrase afterlife—that’s a modern term.  Let’s talk about the robust Christian hope.”

“The role of postmodernity is to preach the doctrine of the fall to arrogant modernity.”

“If we read the gospels and say our prayers, we should be able to do it.” (on how to move into a post-postmodern world)

“The unity of the church for him [Paul] is a symbolic thing as well as an actual thing.  It is the symbol which says, this is is the new humanity—don’t accept any cheap, man-made substitutes.”

“If you imagine a church that stops doing theology, you are imagining a church that is about to split.”

And here he recalls a quote by Crossan which he considers to have been a subtle, though friendly, jab at Wright’s journey in biblical studies.

“If you read Paul first you’ll read Jesus wrong; if you read Jesus first you’ll read Paul differently.” John Dominic Crossan

1. People-watching, though often amusing, only tells others your own life is not very interesting.  And we wouldn’t want that.
2. Playing your own music through an iPod loud enough to drown out the other noise may cause serious hearing damage.
3. Wane yourself off extra sugar and unnecessary condiments for your drink—this is a sign of maturity.
4. Don’t build yourself an office with 3 tables for your study session.  There is a thing called the public library, you know.
5. If you become a “regular,” it’s only polite to introduce yourself and learn the names of you baristas.
6. Don’t ask sketchy people to watch your stuff as you use the restroom.  Scan the room for people that look trustworthy.
7. Make the move from iced, whipped drinks to lattes or cappuccinos to straight espresso.  There’s a whole other world you’re missing out on.

Read Coffee House Etiquette – Part 1.

What else?

Relational Intelligence: The Disproportionate Investor – Erwin McManus

Talk on 2 Timothy 2:1-7
-You can only know what you have embraced.  You become what you give away to others.
-Invest in people who aren’t trying to define boundaries but find opportunities.
-On character vs. achievement: We want the indulgences of a general with the responsibilities of a civilian.
-Invest in those who understand there needs to be an integration of character and achievement.
-People with good stories and successful ministries are those who refuse to be victims.
-The wrong intention: When I know everything you know and everything I know I will be more powerful than you.

Community of Jesus – Timothy Keller

Talk on Luke 6:12-36; The Beatitudes as a reversal of values

-Four worldly values: power, comfort, success, recognition
-Four kingdom values: weakness, sacrifice, grief, exclusion
-Michael Wilcock: “Prize what the world calls pitiable, and suspect what the world considers desirable.”  At this point Keller humorously asks “Who wants to join?”
-Christian ethic: Draining yourself of ill will towards people, especially enemies.
-To those who have been burned by the Church: Remember the church is not made up of natural friends, it is made up of natural enemies.  The Christian community is not bound together by any other commonality.  The church is therefore a band of natural enemies who love one another for Jesus’ sake.  Be patient while relationships are transformed.

Sexuality and Christian Hope – Timothy Keller

-Sex is not self gratification or self expression, it is radical self-donation.
-To give yourself to someone so deeply that it results in personal transformation and completion.
-Never have physical oneness without whole life oneness.
-Never get physically vulnerable without becoming vulnerable in your whole life.

Culture – Timothy Keller

-Cultural activity is arranging raw material for the flourishing of human beings.  Christians do this for the glory of God.
-On missions: To charge Christianity with colonial and imperial prostitution is to declare that Christianity belongs only to one culture.  Jesus Christ belongs to Africa, Asia, as much as it does the West.
-Lamin Sanneh, African Scholar who teaches at Yale, wrote Whose Religion is Christianity and comments:
Secularism’s scoffing of “African superstition” is cultural totalitarianism … Jesus did not mock their [Africa's] respect for the sacred … [so] they beat their sacred drums for him until the stars skipped and danced in the skies.
-View Keller’s notes on this sermon here.  Extremely insightful.

Pray for the people of Haiti*

Almighty God, our Father, Creator of Heaven and Earth, Mighty Fortress, You are our refuge and strength, an ever present help in trouble. Though the Earth give way and the mountains fall into the heart of the sea though its waters roar and foam and the mountains quake with their surging we will not fear for you have entered into and overcome human suffering in the suffering of your Son, our Lord, Jesus Christ. We join in the prayers of your people all over the World, interceding in agreement, pleading for your merciful intervention for the sake of your people in Haiti. We believe there is a river whose streams make glad the City of God, and we pray this river of mercy to flow through the streets of Port Au Prince.

In your mercy, by your Spirit, through your people and in the name of your son Jesus, would you:

bless the poor, comfort the mourners, rescue the orphans, protect the widows, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick, raise the dead, renew the hope, repair the ruins, restore the land, release miracles, send workers, compel relief, and cause Salvation to spring up through the brokenness of the ground as a witness to your compassionate Glory.

Please hear our prayers. Make us into your mercy and show yourself mighty to save.

We agree in these prayers in the Name of Jesus Christ.
Amen.

*Reliance on Psalm 46

Blog it, tweet it, email it.

Even after weighing the benefits, it’s hard to know when to make the switch and how fast.  Should all of our purchases be digital from now on?  Micah J. Jelinek, Library Administrator at Moody Theological Seminary-Michigan, helped weigh in on this issue as it relates to theology and biblical studies:

If it were me, I would weigh my costs. If I can get a full commentary set through Logos for $500 or a hard copy for $1500, I’d get the copy with Logos. They provide full sets of commentaries at a significantly reduced cost (ex. Logos has the Word Biblical Commentary Series and many others available as add-ons). So, if you get the right package you can search a number of your commentaries/lexicons/etc. all at once through Logos, plus everything is backed up online and it’s also available on your iPhone. Logos doesn’t have every commentary, so that’s where I’d invest money into hard copies. It’s a major transition, but I think having everything searchable and right at your fingertips is a major time saver.

On the future of theological libraries and texts: I don’t think that theological texts will be going all digital for at least 10-15 (or more) years. Even then, because our field of study is (1) under funded, and (2) dependent on older texts, I don’t believe theological libraries will go completely digital or rely completely on a digital database with access to full text books. I think there will always be a place for hard copies of books in academia. Libraries may move to have more online and digital access to books, but hard copies will likely be necessary for reference at the very least.

I would also be hesitant to move to a completely digital collection right now, because Google, Amazon and others are currently competing to claim supremacy in the eBook domain. So, in the same way that there have been transitional periods for video format in VHS vs Betamax or VHS to DVD, I think that we’re in a transitional time for digital literature. The Kindle will likely be obsolete in a couple of years anyway and there is no guarantee that the formatting will remain the same. So for now I’m waiting to see what happens and I’m backing up the eBooks I do have with PDF copies.

After saying all of that, I’m still a purist. For me nothing will ever replace a hard bound book, so I’ll continue to collect hard copies, but to keep up with technology I will also be investing in software like Logos and adding some commentary series’ to my collection that way.

At this time, it seems that buying used books is still profitable, especially if you haven’t invested in a device like Kindle or iPad. And let’s not forget that you can borrow out or give away hardcopies without infringing copyright laws.  Still, purchasing digital volumes through software like Logos seems appropriate at this point in the industry. It will save you time and money.  In conclusion, we are in a time of transition and you will probably have to consider which way to go on an individual basis. Hopefully this helps you make informed decisions.

Read an article from http://boston.com about this phenomenon as it relates to Harvard’s libraries here.

Recently, especially from postconversative and progressive voices, systematic theology as an enterprise has been called into question (following the pattern of Anglicans and others?).  But since long ago systematic theology and biblical studies have existed in somewhat of a tense relationship.  Serious biblical scholars and theologians recognize the importance of understanding the original context of a passage when working through exegesis–extracting meaning.  But the difference lies in where each field places its emphasis.  On the one hand we have the systematic theologian who specializes in inference and developing theoretical constructs. Often times they create or apply philosophical categories to bring clarity to a concept (think back to the debates surrounding the nature of the Eucharist during the Protestant Reformation).  On the other hand, biblical exegetes tend to focus on the particular meaning of a text by drawing on as many contextual clues as possible.  In this way, they become experts in historical, literary, cultural etc. studies necessary for understanding a particular passage.

Where the tension lies.  The systematic theologian is vulnerable to accepting categories, concepts, and definitions of words that have been passed on down through a specific tradition.  Sometimes they are modern traditions, sometimes Protestant traditions, sometimes Roman Catholic, and other times very early Christian.  The danger is in applying certain embedded categories—things taken for granted—to a biblical text. It may just be the case that our received traditions are completely foreign to a passage’s original meaning.  This happens when we are not familiar with the original context.  So what we have are theologians who shallowly search the Bible for proof of their embedded theology. This is called proof-texting. Sometimes it is intentional and dishonest.  Other times it is due to ignorance. Both instances are mistakes and need to be carefully avoided.  The exegete, on the other hand, is vulnerable to not following the logical consequences of their literary conclusions.  What seems to happen is they claim what we can know from a text but then throw their hands up, admitting that to go further is speculative and unfounded.  But on most occasions, applying categories to texts offers clarity of meaning. Syllogisms and philosophical categories have proven to be useful, even in biblical theology.

Still, there are some issues or doctrines, important as they are, that the Bible is not clear on.  Or to go even further, sometimes tension exists between what two passages appear to say on a matter.  Here, the systemizer will make every effort to reconcile and harmonize the texts.  They do this by advancing sophisticated theories in an effort to demonstrate that what the text seems to say on the surface is not really what it means.  On the other hand, biblical exegetes tend to be at peace with living in this tension. What they afford is admitting that any apparent contradictions appear as a result of varying literary conventions far removed from the modern reader.

The present dilemma.  Will you focus on biblical studies and be vulnerable to not answering modern society’s most important questions?  Will you focus on systematic theology and be vulnerable to doing violence to a text?  Both fields have seen capable men and women who consider their conclusions with honesty, humility, and excellence.  Nonetheless, we’ve also witnessed greater fidelity to tradition than biblical authorial intent, and been offered simplistic answers from exegetes who discount the value of philosophical method.  Let’s try to participate in the best work of both worlds.