Wally World

Moving...

2006-06-08T21:42:00.001-04:00

Well, the time has finally come. With all the trouble I've had posting to blogspot.com I am moving.

http://wallybarthman.wordpress.com is the new address for my blog, which will also include my website.

Moltmann Quote

2006-06-08T12:28:00.000-04:00

Last week I posted another one of my “reading updates”, which I’m sure few people actually read. However, in that update I mentioned that I was going to focus some of my reading in the next few months to the topic of eschatology. I completed a series of dictionary entries on the topic and have begun delving into Jurgen Moltmann’s Theology of Hope. Today I came across a quote that justifies all my efforts in this area:

“Christian eschatology in the language of promise will be then an essential to the unlocking of Christian truth. For the loss of eschatology – not merely as an appendix to dogmatics, but as the medium of theological thinking as such – has always been the condition that makes possible the adaptation of Christianity to its environment, and as a result of this, the self-surrender of faith”

- Jurgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope, Pg. 41.

More on Truth...

2006-06-08T10:45:00.000-04:00

My friend John Creasy posted a comment on one of my last posts that I thought was good.  So, I’m reposting it here along with my reply to him in an email.

John’s Comment:

Thanks Brian, great critiques. A question I have in my mind now is: what is the difference between "experiencing truth" and "experiencing the revelation of God"? Does not the ultimate knowledge of truth come through God's revelation, precisely the work of Jesus Christ? If that is true, maybe we should talk more about God's revelation. I think it will take a big step for some of us to really believe that Christ is at work and that our experiences may include the reality of revelation.

My Reply:

Hi John,

(This response is going to double as a blog post - hence the tone)

Good comments.  I think you're right on.  As far as I see it "experiencing Truth" and "experiencing the revelation of God", since Truth = Jesus Christ = Revelation of God is precisely the same.  The problem that I often see when it comes to talking about "experiencing revelation" is that the work of the Holy Spirit often gets confused with our inner emotions.  We talk about God speaking through the world, fine and true, but how is that grounded in continuity with God's revelation?

There is a great quote from Karl Barth on how God speaks to the world:
"God may speak to us through Russian Communism, a flute concerto, a blossoming shrub, or a dead dog.  We do well to listen to him if he really does.  But unless we regard ourselves as prophets and founders of a new Church, we cannot say that we are commissioned to pass on what we have heard as independent proclamation"  (Church Dogmatics, v.1.1 - The Word of God, Pg. 55)

People often quote the first part to say, "Look, even Barth acknowledged that God can speak through the world!" but forget the very important second part (and the rest of the page for that matter).  I think we need to recapture the idea of Jesus Christ's on-going work and yes, revelation to individuals and the community.  We need to have the boldness to say, "Jesus revealed to our community that he wants us to be involved in ________".  But we need to make sure that we experience and believe is revelation that is in continuity with the past revelation of God and the future direction of God's work in the world (hence the important of eschatology in ministry (which will be one of my next posts).  If what you believe God is revealing isn't in line with what God has done in the world and has revealed that he will do, chances are you're missing the boat somewhere.

Enjoy the rest of your vacation!

- Brian

More on Truth...

2006-06-06T06:43:00.000-04:00

As a follow up to my post yesterday on Chuck Colson’s critique of the Emerging Church and truth, I thought I’d share a few other thoughts that I have been having on the issue.

One of the distinctions that Karl Barth draws is the difference between being something objectively true and subjectively true.  What is interesting is that Barth doesn’t speak of “objective truth” but rather of something being “objectively true”.  In other words, the proposition is not itself the Truth, it’s a statement about the Truth.  ( I feel as though I’m starting to play word games here)

Example: Jesus Christ is the Lord over all things

Jesus Christ is the Truth, and that statement is objectively true for all people and things in Barth’s view (and I agree).  So, Colson is right to say that Jesus Christ is the Lord whether we experience him or not.  The Lordship of Jesus Christ does not depend on our acknowledgement of it.

However, Barth adds that something that is objectively true becomes subjectively true in someone’s life when they encounter and experience it.  Here’s another example

From the time I was born (and before that) Jesus Christ has been Lord over my life, whether or not I realized it or accepted it.  However, that objectively true statement (Jesus Christ is Lord over my life) didn’t become true “to me” until I was encountered by it, until it became subjectively true in my life.  It was only through this subjective knowing (knowing in the here and now) that I came to understand the objective nature (that it was true prior to my knowing of it).  I disagree with Colson and D.A. Carson here, in part because they’re speaking of objective truth, and I’m speaking of something being objectively true when it comes to the Truth, Jesus Christ.

More later…

Chuck Colson, truth, Truth, and the Emerging Church

2006-06-06T06:28:00.000-04:00

Before I say anything else let me say this: Chuck Colson is a good man and a genuine Christian.  While I disagree with him on a number of important issues (as I will below) his work in prison ministry and his own personal life testimony are living examples of the power of the Holy Spirit to transform people’s lives.  So, if anything I say in the following comes across as anything but gracious my apologies.

In the most recent issue of Christianity Today, Chuck along with his assistant authored a piece entitled Emerging Confusion: Jesus is the truth whether we experience him or not.  In it, Chuck takes a run at Emerging Church people in general.  This isn’t the first time he’d done so, a fact he admits by noting that he had had an exchange with an emerging church leader (Brian McLaren – here).  I would encourage you to read Chuck’s full column first before reading the excepts below.

#1) Though in their effort to reach postmoderns—who question the existence and knowability of truth—I expressed fear that they are coming dangerously close to teaching that objective truth does not exist

Here is the typical line about “postmoderns” – they question the existence and knowability of truth.  But, this is a mischaracterization of the use of the term as far as I’m concerned.  To be “postmodern” is to be living in today’s world.  We live in a postmodern world whether we want to or not.  Also, the values of postmodernism can better be described by what they are not rather than by what they are.  I consider myself a “postmodern” because I reject the modern project and its hope for universal and independent knowledge built upon a self-evident basis (more on this later).  While I affirm in full that we can know things as they are, this knowing is never without a social location.  When I look at things, read things, and speak I speak as a 25 year old protestant middle-class male.  This doesn’t mean I can’t speak of things as they are, but my knowing is always shaped by who I am as a person.

The debate is not as Chuck contends over the existence and knowability of truth, but over the nature of truth.  After all, if someone doesn’t believe truth can exist and be known there’s no debate at all.

2) Of course, truth becomes relational when we come to Jesus, Truth himself. But our doing that isn't what makes it true. He is the truth whether or not we ever experience him. Scripture is never less than revealed propositional truth.

Here is where my disagreement with Chuck becomes most evident.  Scripture is not revealed propositional truth – that is not scriptures original intent nor should it be used in that way.  This way of reading the bible requires you to read it and then “derive the facts” from it.  No, scripture is never less than the living testimony of God’s faithfulness to the world as shown in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ.  Karl Barth and the signers of the Theological Declaration of Barmen had it right when they said that Jesus Christ is the one Word of God in whom we have to hear, listen, and obey.  Scripture as the Word of God, is never less than that which reveals Jesus Christ, not propositions or even propositions about him.

3) The pastor, who lacks formal seminary training, offered not a sermon, but the story of his decision to "follow Jesus."

This line in the story as far as I can tell is either a pot-shot or just irrelevant.  But here’s a few things to ask here.  (1) When did formal seminary training become the be all and end all of someone’s ability to be a pastor?  Don’t get me wrong, I’m seminary trained and believe its extremely helpful, but I’ve worked with a lot of people who aren’t and I don’t think one can take a shot at emerging churches by claiming that some of their leaders lack formal seminary training.  (2) What’s a sermon?  I preached a “sermon” one night which was my faith story about how I ended up where I am today and how I’ve seen God at work in my life.  Does that count as a sermon or not?  (3) When did deciding to follow Jesus become a bad thing?  Last time I checked that was what Jesus asked people to do – “follow me.”

4) Theologian Donald A. Carson puts his finger precisely on the epistemological problem: Of course, truth is relational, Carson writes. But before it can be relational, it has to be understood as objective. Truth is truth. It is, in short, ultimate reality.

Here Colson makes an interesting move – he appeals to a self-evident universal.  He makes the statement that before truth can be known as relational it has to be understood as objective.  First of all, I haven’t a clue what that actually means.  Does this mean that when the Holy Spirit opens the eyes of someone they first known the proposition Jesus is Lord and then it can become relational?  I don’t follow.  He then collapses back on this statement, “Truth is Truth”.  What?  That doesn’t make any sense at all.  In essence what Colson is saying is this: “Look, everyone knows what truth is, it’s self-evident.”  This is an example of foundationalism – the appeal to self-evident propositions that are universally accessible to any rational person.  But, foundationalism is long dead and has been well-critiqued.

So what is my solution?  Truth isn’t propositional, truth is personal because Truth is defined by a person, Jesus of Nazareth, who said “I, I am the way, the truth, and the life”.  Jesus Christ, as the one through whom all things were created (John 1) and as the image of the invisible God (Col 1) reveals who and what truth is – the truth is Jesus Christ.

Categories such as absolute, objective, subjective, etc. aren’t really helpful for a Christian because we have one Truth, Jesus Christ.

Again, to restate, my beef is not with Chuck Colson as a brother-in-Christ but with his misunderstanding of what Emerging Church-types are after.

For another critique of Colson from a slightly different angle, see Tony Jones’ post

Ephesians 2:11-16

2006-06-05T09:14:00.000-04:00

Biblical Text
" Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (which is done in the body by human hands)— remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility." (Ephesians 2:11-16, TNIV)

Commentary from the Early Church Fathers(1)
The New Spiritual Person. Marius Victorinus: Their souls have thus been reconciled to the eternal and the spiritual, to all things above. The Savior, through the Spirit, indeed the Holy Spirit, descended into souls. He thereby joined what had been separated, spiritual things and souls, so as to make the souls themselves spiritual. He has established them in himself, as he says, “in a new person.” What is this new person? The spiritual person, as distinguished from the old person, who was soul struggling against flesh. Epistle to the Ephesians 1.2.14–15.

The Enmity Is Slain in Himself. Gregory of Nyssa: Taking up the enmity that had come between us and God on account of sins, “slaying it in himself,” as the apostle says (and sin is enmity), and becoming what we are, he joined the human to God again through himself. Against Eunomius 3.10.12.

My Comments
In reading these verses of Ephesians, vs. 15-16 really stuck out to me.  Specifically this line, “For he himself is our peace… by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations.”  The second line that stuck out to me was “His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity…”

I sometimes worry that much of our church-talk ends up spiritualizing everything to the point that we can turn this life into a mere holding tank for eternal life – that’s when life will really begin.  Yet here in the second chapter of Ephesians Paul reveals part of the gospel message that I think is essential.  The work of Christ was done in true human flesh, as Marius points out, as the Holy Spirit was joined to human flesh.  So to say that this human body is useless just doesn’t hold up.  The second is the end result of Jesus’ incarnation and life was to create a new humanity.  Jesus did not become incarnate to provide an escape path from the human body (as Gnosticism holds) but rather to restore humanity to what it was supposed to have: full and complete fellowship with God.  Part of this was to “make new” the human body into the “true humanity” that was intended by God from the beginning”.

Finally, Paul points out that the atonement wasn’t just simply about going to heaven after you die, but that part of Jesus’ atoning work was to kill those barriers that separated groups of people from one another.  This, like every other aspect of the atonement, is only part of what Jesus did, but it is an important part.  Thus, the church has the commission to be a part of God’s ongoing reconciliation within the world.  Wherever there are people divide from one another, God is at work seeking to reconcile divided peoples because at the end there will be no division amongst people based on any human attribute.

Notes(2)
Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335–394). Bishop of Nyssa and brother of Basil the Great. A Cappadocian father and author of catechetical orations, he was a philosophical theologian of great originality.

Marius Victorinus (b. c. 280/285; fl. c. 355–363). Grammarian of African origin who taught rhetoric at Rome and translated works of Platonists. After his conversion (c. 355), he wrote against the Arians and commentaries on Paul’s letters.

All comments taken from: M. J. Edwards, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT 8. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 139-140.

Biographical information is from: ACCS Introduction and Bibliographic Information, Ancient Christian commentary on Scripture. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2005).

Reading Update

2006-06-05T07:02:00.000-04:00

So now that all the graduation and wedding craziness is over, I thought I’d finally update my “currently reading” section.

My goal is from here on out (and this will be easier said than done) is to be reading four things all at the same time. 1) Something from Karl Barth 2) Something contemporary in theology 3) Something classical in theology 4) Something related to Youth Ministry.

So, currently here’s what I’m working on

Karl Barth – Church Dogmatics 1.1

Jurgen Moltmann – Theology of Hope

Hilary of Poitiers – On the Trinity

Starting Right – Thinking Theologically About Youth Ministry.

What I’ve found is that I actually do better reading multiple books at the same time rather than trying to focus on just one book and read that all the way through.  Of late I’ve spent more time with the Starting Right book.  It’s a book that was assigned for my Foundations of Youth Ministry class so I’ve read sections of it, but never the whole thing.  I thought it was pertinent for my situation.

I started Church Dogmatics 1.1 last spring but it got shelved during the school year.  My goal is to finish the whole church dogmatics by the time I’m 40.  I’ve read all of 4.1 and significant chunks of 1.1 and 3.4 so I think I have a chance of making it.

Theology of Hope my Moltmann is part of a larger project through which I’m trying to get a grasp of eschatology.  I’ve found that eschatology seems to be a neglected area of thought in the reformed tradition, at least the part in which I’ve come out of it.  But, if “eschatology is the orienting factor for the mission of the church”, as Grenz and Franke contend it’s an importa area of study.  I’m actually prefacing Moltmann by reading a number of articles on eschatology from various biblical and theological dictionaries.

Finally, since I don’t think just because something is newer that it’s better, Hilary of Poitiers On the Trinity makes the list.  I was introduced to Hilary through my study of T.F. Torrance, and more recently through my good friend Matt Bell who relied on him extensively in his Masters’ Thesis work.

So, you might ask what does this have to do with real life?  After all, I certainly don’t expect that my parishioners (including teenagers) will start reading Karl Barth right?  Of course not.  However, my “field of study” has a living subject, The Triune God and regardless of “cool” I am or regardless of what techniques I use to teach, or how fun an event is – If I’m not faithfully bearing witness to the God who is, my participation in God’s ministry will be severely hindered.

Wedding #2

2006-06-05T06:26:00.000-04:00

So on Saturday Renee and I celebrated our second wedding at our Alma Matter in Grove City.  Most importantly, and unlike wedding #1, we were joined by 150 of our friends and family who witnessed our vows and pledged their support to us.

One of the coolest parts of our wedding was our cake, done by my mother-in-law.  All homemade with three different layers consisting of three different types of cake and filling.  But taking the “cake” for me was the bottom layer: chocolate cake with chocolate frosting and peanut butter filling.

Definitely the coolest part was seeing friends and family, many of whom we hadn’t seen in quite some time.  Family and friends came from as close as Pittsburgh and Warren, or as far as Upstate New York, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, and Florida.

Now we have 10 days to relax before we move Renee’s stuff from Columbia, MD to our new house.

New Schedule

2006-05-30T07:29:00.000-04:00

So one of the parts of being married to a teacher is adjusting to a whole new schedule. So here it is, 7:30 in the morning, and I can honestly say I’ve been awake for about a half hour. I’m sitting at Renee’s dining room table and preparing to start scanning photos for the slideshow. My goal, is to finish our slideshow today so that Renee and I can work on seating tonight.

Update

2006-05-29T18:28:00.000-04:00

After over a year and a half, the long distance relationship for Brian and Renee is over (the long distance part that is). Technically it ended on Thursday evening when Renee arrived (just in time for graduation) in Pittsburgh. But, it feels over because yesterday we drove back to Maryland together and will be together from now until the night before Wedding #2, and then from there after. While the long distance relationship was without a doubt worth it, I am glad it’s over. We both commented today as we were working that it was a lot easier to get work done when the other person is in the same room, and you’re not worried about talking to them on the phone.

Anyway, this week’s agenda includes finalizing table assignments for the wedding, printing table cards, scanning pictures, and making a video, all before we head back to Ohio this Thursday for the rehearsal, parties, and wedding this weekend. Then back to Maryland for about a week, before we move everything, for good, to our new house.

Also, pictures from Wedding #1 have been posted.

Graduation

2006-05-26T13:22:00.000-04:00

Well, there I am, hooded and officially graduated from Pittsburgh Theological Seminary with my fancy Master of Divinity degree. For the first time in my life, I enter a summer without planning on returning to school in September. For now, its off for a weekend with Renee's family (as her grandmother passed away this week), a short week in Maryland, then Wedding #2 a week from tomorrow. Things keep happening fast!

Married

2006-05-22T19:19:00.000-04:00

I'm married.

From Left to Right:
Renee's wedding ring, my wedding ring, Renee's engagement ring

As some reader's know, Renee grandmother has not been doing well lately. It became quite evident to us last week that she would be unable to attend the wedding on June 3rd even if she is still alive at that point. It was really important to both Renee and her grandmother that her grandmother is at the wedding (and I agree). So, we made a slight change in plans: we got married on Saturday.

Renee's pastor from home came over to Renee's grandmother's house, we crowded into her room around her bed, we said our vows, exchanged rings, and had communion and were told "You are now husband and wife"

So now the question? What about June 3rd? (Our original wedding date). Nothing changes. We're still celebrating our marriage on June 3rd as originally planned. But why you ask? Very simple: there's a theological reason.

The service on the third has from the beginning been entitled "A Service of Christian Worship in Celebration of the Marriage of Marilyn Renee Barfay and Brian Robert Wallace." Wedding ceremonies are by definition worship services and that's what we had this past Saturday and that's what we're going to have on June 3rd. Also, while Renee and I consider ourselves married, weddings aren't just about the couple, they're also for the family and friends of the bride and groom. In a wedding ceremony the family and friends pledge to uphold and support the bride and room in their marriage. While some of Renee's family was present on Saturday, a lot of her relatives, my entire family, and a lot of our friends weren't at the wedding on Saturday. Needless to say, it's important for us that they also witness our vows and pledge their love and support.

Finally, what constitues our marriage isn't a ceremony, it's the love that we share between us. A wedding ceremony as part of a worship service is a time for the husband and wife to make commitments to each other before the Triune God and their friends and family, and to ask God's blessing upon the new couple. As they say with ordinations, the act of ordaining someone is merely making public and formal a decision that God made a long time ago. This isn't to devalue the important of having wedding celebrations, but rather to put them in their appropriate context within worship services as well as to understand them and celebrations and formulations of something, rather a mechanic blessing that makes something a marriage. Hence, I don't think it's weird we're going to have two but rather believe it was the "command of God in a limiting case" (for you Barth scholars). In other words, given the circumstances (which are unusual) I think we did the right thing - the thing that God would have us do.

(Leave it to me to make this into a theological issue)

Ephesians 2:4-10

2006-05-18T14:25:00.000-04:00

Biblical Text
"But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do." (Ephesians 2:4-10, TNIV)

Commentary from the Early Church Fathers(1)
God Did Not Originally Desire That Any Should Perish. Ambrosiaster: These are the true riches of God’s mercy, that even when we did not seek it mercy was made known through his own initiative…. This is God’s love to us, that having made us he did not want us to perish. His reason for making us was that he might love what he had made, seeing that no one hates his own workmanship. Epistle to the Ephesians 2.4.

He Formed Us Anew as His Members. Ambrosiaster: God made us in Christ. So it is through Christ once again that he has formed us anew. We are his members; he our Head. Epistle to the Ephesians 2.5.

Already Exalted. Jerome: Above he said that God raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand…. Some may ask how God who has saved us and raised us with him has also made us sit with Christ. A simple response would be indeed that, in the light of God’s foreknowledge, Paul is speaking of what is to come as though it had already been done. … One who understands the resurrection and the kingdom of Christ spiritually does not scruple to say that the saints already sit and reign with Christ! Just as a person may become truly holy even in the flesh, when he lives in the flesh and has his conversation in heaven, when he walks on earth and, ceasing to be flesh, is wholly converted into spirit, so he also is seated in heaven with Christ. For indeed “the kingdom of God is within us.” Epistle to the Ephesians 1.2.1 seq.

My Comments
These two comments from Ambrosiaster and Jerome stood out to me.  In the past I've usually focused on the later part of this verse, especially Ephesians 2:8.  Ephesians 2:8 is a verse that contradicts "faithism" – the idea that it is our decision for Jesus that saves us, thereby turning faith into a work that we do in order that God might have mercy.

Ambrosiaster clearly argues against this type of attitude toward salvation.  God's love is shown that even when we did not seek his mercy he made it known through his own initiative.  The act of God in, through, and as Jesus Christ was the embodiment of the mission of God to reconcile the whole world to himself.  Ambosiaster continues that just as we were made through Christ (John 1:3 – all things were made through the Word of God) so too we are redeemed through Christ.  The reconciliation and restoration of us is at God's initiatve.  All that we can do is respond in faithful obedience, but this response is not the condition of salvation.

Finally, Jerome strikes an "eschatological" cord here.  Paul writes this unusual line, "And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus."  Taken literally, at the time of Jesus' ascension we too were taken into the heavenly realms.  The interesting note here is that at the time of Jesus' ascension none of us were born.  So what does Paul mean?  I think Jerome gets at it well, "Paul is speaking of what is to come as though it had already been done."  I agree with Jerome here but want to phrase it a little differently.  Moltmann, in his introduction to Theology of Hope, talks about how Christians live in the tension of knowing that there is something more - the knowing anticipation of the full revelation of God's reign on earth.  The telos, or end point, to which all of history is driving this will literally be true – those who are "In Christ" will be seated in the heavenly places with Christ.  As for now, "in Christ" we too have been taken up into the heavenly places.  What is a reality has not yet been revealed, but is real none the less.  Christ, as our representative has taken us up into the heavenly places: we simply await the eschatological fulfillment of this.

Notes(2)
Jerome (c. 347–420). Gifted exegete and exponent of a classical Latin style, now best known as the translator of the Latin Vulgate. He defended the perpetual virginity of Mary, attacked Origen and Pelagius and supported extreme ascetic practices.

Ambrosiaster (fl. c. 366–384). Name given by Erasmus to the author of a work once thought to have been composed by Ambrose.

All comments taken from: M. J. Edwards, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT 8. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 131.

Biographical information is from: ACCS Introduction and Bibliographic Information, Ancient Christian commentary on Scripture. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2005).

Word to Remember

2006-05-15T12:08:00.000-04:00

There are some day when you ask yourself, "Is ministry really worth it?" On those days (btw, today is not one of those days by any means) it's reading things like this that remind you

"… You've always been willing to talk to me when everyone else is sleeping and in these times you have taught me more than any religious book has. (And you know how much that means coming from me"

Saying Farewell

2006-05-15T01:19:00.000-04:00

So tonight I finally said good bye to Northmont.  Ever since October of 2003, with the exception of the summers, I’ve been a part of the Northmont family.  My first year I was a volunteer and for the last two years I’ve been on staff.  Needless to say, saying goodbye was far from easy.  There are some wonderful people there who I am going to miss dearly.

What stood out to me tonight as I was driving home was that for me I only had one church during seminary.  While it’s true that I was a staff member at Northmont, but I was also part of the Northmont family.  From participating in worship services, youth events, and social events I always felt like one of the group.

While my time in the seminary classroom has been incredibly valuable my time at Northmont has been equally valuable in learning and the lessons I’ve learned I will carry with me for a very long time.

Done

2006-05-13T00:13:00.000-04:00

Done.

That’s right, done.

Today I handed in my last two assignments for m seminary career.  I have one more paper that I need to turn in on Monday to a professor, but that is sitting on my computer awaiting the print button.  For the next week and a half I can relax and enjoy myself as my time in seminary wraps up.  It is literally hard to believe that I am finally finished with my work here.  At the same time I can getting more and more excited about what’s coming next.

This weekend is also my last weekend at Northmont UPC.  I’ve been a part of the Northmont community for about three years.  I started there as a volunteer my first year of seminary and have served on the staff for the past two years.  There are some incredible people there who have helped me along the way and given taught me things that I will never forget.  There is also a incredible groups of kids whose lives I had the privilege of being apart of for the past three years and who I will miss dearly.

But, times-are-a-changing and new challenges and opportunities are coming.  I graduate on May 25th, then Renee and I get married on June 3rd.  We close on our town house on the 15th, take our honeymoon from June 21st – 25th.  Then my first Sunday at Hampton is July 2nd and I’m being formally introduced on July 9th.  Then Renee and I are off to Tennessee as part of Hampton’s Senior High Mission Trip.  It will be a whirlwind two months, but an exciting two months.

Ephesians 2:1-3

2006-05-12T23:49:00.000-04:00

Biblical Text
"As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath." (Ephesians 2:1-3, TNIV)

Commentary from the Early Church Fathers(1)
Whether Sin Is Rightly Spoken Of As Natural. Augustine: We speak of “nature” in two ways. When we are speaking strictly of nature itself, we mean the nature in which humanity was originally created— after God’s own image and without fault. The other way we speak of nature refers to that fallen sin nature, in which we are self-deceived and subject to the flesh as the penalty for our condemnation. The apostle adopts this way of speaking when he says “for we were by nature children of wrath, like the rest.” On Nature and Grace 81.

My Comments
“Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath.” By what nature? “Do what’s natural” What exactly is natural?

If this seems like an unlikely topic for me to pick up on but I’ve spent a good chunk of my time this year reflecting on that question precisely. The first (and in my opinion, best) volume of Alister McGrath’s scientific theology is entitled Nature. McGrath demonstrates that throughout history the concept of nature has really been nothing more than a social construct, one that has often been misused. McGrath demonstrates that throughout history what is deemed “natural” is usually that which benefits those in power.

So, when Paul writes that we were by “nature” children of wrath, what does he mean by “nature”? The word that we’re dealing with here is phusei which can be defined in this context as denoting a condition or circumstance as determined by birth. Where Augustine is helpful is in drawing the distinction between “nature”, or as McGrath would term it “creation” and “nature” as a state of being. Paul is not arguing that we were originally intended and created to be children of wrath. Rather, because of the fall into sin of humanity we are born into a state which we inherit by means of being a human – a state of not being as we were intended to be. By virtue of our birth we were found in this state.

Pastorally this concept has been one of the most challenging for me to work with. People, when confronted with this doctrine of what is termed “original sin” are usually repulsed. After all, why should I be held accountable for someone else’s sin? And isn’t that just simply being human? Two points are worth considering here. There is a good distance from “original sin” to “original guilt”. Original guilt would hold that we are held accountable for the original sin of Adam. I don’t agree with that position. And yes, to a certain extent the doctrine of “original sin” is part of human nature now. But the problem is that this wasn’t intended to be. We, in the words of Cornelius Plantinga live in a world that is “not the way it’s supposed to be”.

About two weeks ago I wrote an obscure post entitled “The Cosmic Nature of the Fall” in the wake of Elora’s death. While Paul is addressing the concept in a very different way here (compared to how he addresses in Romans 8) the central idea is the same. Things aren’t the way they’re supposed to be or will be at the end. That I think is something that the church needs to be reminded of constantly. I’ve heard and I’ve said, “That’s just the way things are.” My first reaction when I hear that now is “Well that may be, but is that how things are supposed to be?”

Notes(2)
Augustine of Hippo (354–430). Bishop of Hippo and a voluminous writer on philosophical, exegetical, theological and ecclesiological topics. He formulated the Western doctrines of predestination and original sin in his writings against the Pelagians.

All comments taken from: M. J. Edwards, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT 8. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 130.

Biographical information is from: ACCS Introduction and Bibliographic Information, Ancient Christian commentary on Scripture. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2005).

Logos Resource Sale

2006-05-12T10:52:00.000-04:00

So as graduation approaches I need to unload some electronic books. Here's what I have available:

SPECIAL OFFER: All four resouces for $450

Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear (List $99.95/ My price: $75)
A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (List: $34.95/ My price: $25)
NET Bible (List: $19.95/ My price: $15)
New International Greek Testament Commentary (List: $499.95/ My price: $375)

If you're interested let me know brian.wallace@gmail.coms

For more information go to http://brian.wallyandnay.net/Logos

Ephesians 1:19-23

2006-05-12T01:14:00.000-04:00

Biblical Text
"… and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that can be invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way." (Ephesians 1:19-23, TNIV)

Commentary from the Early Church Fathers(1)
The Immeasurable Greatness of His Power. Theodoret: But “the immeasurable greatness of his power” ironically now comes to mind as he thinks of the dishonor of the cross and considers how much was achieved through it.

This Redemption Is Already Accomplished, Even If Still in Reference to the Future. Hilary of Poitiers: The language of the apostle, acknowledging the power of God, refers to future things as though they have already happened. For the things which are to be performed already subsist in their fullness in Christ, in whom is all fullness. Whatever is future is so by God’s provident ordering, not as if it might exist on its own

Human Nature Honored. Theodoret: It is clear that he says all this of Christ in his humanity. This is what inspires wonder. For it would hardly be remarkable to say that God sits by God if fellowship in power is a corollary of their identity of nature as Father and Son. But that the human nature assumed from us should partake of the same honor as the one who assumed him, so that no difference in worship is apparent, so that the invisible Godhead is worshiped through the visible human nature—this exceeds all wonder! The holy apostle is overwhelmed. He first sings of the exceeding greatness of his power. Then he speaks of the working of his mighty strength. Then he looks for whatever he can say that might point to the extraordinary nature of his exaltation. Epistle to the Ephesians 1.20.

My Comments
For the last two weeks I've been cranking away on my final papers, which I wrapped up tonight.  I've been working on Exodus 4:10-17 where Moses complains that he is not a "man of words" because he is "heavy" of mouth and tongue.  In retrospect, to look at what God accomplished through Moses' speaking ability, in spite of him not being a "man of words" is astounding.

Theodoret gets to that point with his comments on v. 19-20.  As he notes, the irony is that through death Christ overcome death and the powers of this world.  Hence, what is considered "weak" in the world shamed what is considered "strong".  But, the truth of the matter is that it doesn't matter what is "weak" and what is "strong" when it is in the service of the God revealed in Jesus Christ.  The will of the Triune God in the world, even if for a short time it is rejected and worked against will ultimately prevail over all forces that oppose it.

In the case of Moses, his "weak" voice ultimately shamed Pharaoh because Pharaoh was working against the will of God.  It wouldn't have mattered if Moses was the best speaker in the world or the worst, he would have prevailed because he was on God's side in the matter.

Notes(2)

Theodoret of Cyr (c. 393–466). Bishop of Cyr (Cyrrhus), he was an opponent of Cyril who commented extensively on Old Testament texts as a lucid exponent of Antiochene exegesis.

Hilary of Poitiers (c. 315–367). Bishop of Poitiers and called the “Athanasius of the West” because of his defense (against the Arians) of the common nature of Father and Son.

All comments taken from: M. J. Edwards, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT 8. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 122.

Biographical information is from: ACCS Introduction and Bibliographic Information, Ancient Christian commentary on Scripture. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2005).

PTS Board

2006-05-11T12:50:00.000-04:00

At its annual meeting yesterday, the Board of Directors of Pittsburgh Theological Seminary elected yours truly to be the Senior Class representative to the board for the next three years.

Let's Go Buffalo!

2006-05-10T00:03:00.000-04:00

There’s a great article on ESPN tonight about the rising Buffalo Sabres. Well worth reading!

The Next Two Months

2006-05-09T00:56:00.000-04:00

So it’s crunch week here at PTS for Seniors – our papers are due Friday May 12th.  At this point I have my first draft of one of my papers completed (The Trinity and the Adolescent) and I’m about half way through with my Hebrew exegesis paper, so I’m in pretty good shape.  This week is also the innagural for our President, Dr. William J. Carl, but given my schedule I don’t know how much, if any of that I’ll be taking it.

After Friday I have a two farewell events tied to the end of my time at Northmont.  Saturday from 1-5 we’ll be gathering at Devlin Park and then on Sunday I’ll have my farewell at Northmont.  That evening I’ll be preaching, for the last time, at the SON Service.

After that the next big event in my life in May 25th, which is baccalaureate/commencement which my parents will be coming down for.  Sadly, because its scheduled on a Thursday, Renee won’t be able to make it.

After that, it’s June 2nd-3rd which are the wedding rehearsal and ceremony.  Then its off for about a week and a half to Maryland to Renee can finish up teaching before we return to Pittsburgh in order to…

Close on our townhouse on June 15th.  So we’ll have a couple weeks to spend getting moved in and settled there before…

July 2nd, which is my first Sunday at Hampton and July 3rd, my first day at the office so to speak.  Renee and I are being formally introduced on July 9th however because of the holiday.

After that… July 16th-22nd I’ll be gone as part of Hampton’s Senior High Mission Trip to Tennesee, which I am really looking forward to.

So, pretty much from now till the middle of July I have one major event scheduled every two weeks.  As busy as it will be, its also incredibly exciting to watch all these changes happening.

Mom's New Computer

2006-05-04T20:10:00.000-04:00

So after many years of faithful service, my mom's iMac (circa 1999) finally decided to retire a few weeks ago. So my parents opted to buy a new mac, and tonight I picked them up a new iBook G4. So, tonight, while taking a break from writing my paper for Doctrine of the Trinity, I am setting it up and playing with. Needless to say, I have Mac-envy - my mom has a much nicer laptop than I do.

But... not for long. He he... as part of my job I'll be using a Powerbook G4, and then my Mac-envy will cease.

The Cosmic Nature of the Fall

2006-05-02T00:09:00.000-04:00

Being as reformed as I claim to be, I have a great appreciation for the cosmic nature of the fall.  What I mean by that is this: Not only is humanity marred by sin and thus “noy the way we’re supposed to be”, but the whole cosmos is not as it is supposed to be.  Paul picks up this theme in Romans 8

"For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time." (Romans 8:20-22, TNIV)

Why do see this as so important?  Simply because it helps us interpret why things happen the way they do.  If, as some of the Church Fathers argue, Paul is only speaking figuratively and the whole creation really isn’t affected by the fall, then it gives to humanity a level of independence that I don’t think is appropriate given the nature of the creation accounts where humanity is clearly connected relationally to the rest of the cosmos.  Therefore, the impact of human sin also effects the relationship humanity has with its environment in a negative way.

I think it’s important to understand the fallen nature of our world.  If we look at things such as disease, ecological/environmental issues, etc. and compare them to the image of how the world was supposed to be (Gen 1-2) and how it will be at the end (Rev 21-22) we recognize how exactly different the world is from what it was supposed to be or what it will be at the end.  Thus, a central part of God’s new creation will be the renewal and transformation not only of us, but of the world around us and that is something the church is called to be apart of.  And in particular, what does the renewal and transformation of the world look like when it comes to bio-medical issues such as combating disease?

This has been on my mind with the recent passing of Elora.  I was reminded tonight at the calling hours that we weren’t meant to die, it’s that simple.  We have gotten used to people who are older dying almost to the point that I think we can forgot that death isn’t supposed to be.  But when someone dies at 14, a child who modeled in so many ways what it meant to be truly human at that, we are reminded that death wasn’t supposed to be.  However, death’s like Elora’s cause me to examine and seek out answers in faith.  The only answer I find at all compelling as to why Elora died is that the whole creation is fallen.

Yet, even in the face of this tragedy we rest in the promises that God will renew the creation and we will once again see Elora, transformed and renewed into the likeness of Christ.  Praise be to God!

Lyrics for the week...

2006-05-01T09:13:00.000-04:00

For Elora…

Lives again our glorious King, Alleluia!Where, O death, is now thy sting? Alleluia!Once He died our souls to save, Alleluia!Where thy victory, O grave? Alleluia!"

- From Christ the Lord is Risen Today

Elora

2006-05-01T01:31:00.000-04:00

“Elora Geisler Geier, 14, showed others what it means to love and to live. Elora, a 7th grade student at North Allegheny, lost her courageous fight with Leukemia Saturday, April 29, 2006, surround by many of those who love her.”(Full Obituary Here)

That line, from today’s Pittsburgh Post-Gazette is bittersweet news for those of us who knew Elora. Elora was active with the Jr. High youth group at Northmont. Her life had been indelibly marked by tragedy, as when she was young she had been struck by an automobile which had resulted in long term physical and cognitive effects. But that was part of what made her such a beautiful person. She was genuine in all she said and did. She truly did show what it meant to love and to live. And losing her is the bitter part, but she is free of her suffering.

Late in the summer Elora was diagnosed with Leukemia and she has battled it ever since. She came to youth group just once since then and there was not a person in the room who wasn’t happy to see her smiling face and hear her voice. I guess in youth ministry they tell you you’ll deal with a lot, and this is one of the things that you deal with. And, it goes without saying that the loss is sad and devastating. However, one thought that has been on my mind ever since I heard the news is how Easter has taken on a new meaning because of Elora this year. I was reading my bible this morning and read 1 Corinthians 15:21-28

"For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all." (1 Corinthians 15:21-28, ESV)

The good news of Easter is that death does not have the last answer. The final chapter in Elora’s life remains to be written because the resurrection of Jesus Christ is the sign and promise of our own resurrection. We know, that even in the midst of our grief over the loss of Elora, that she will be raised and transformed along with the rest of the Saints. Until then, Elora is in the hands of her Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Praise be to God!

More House Photos

2006-04-29T13:22:00.000-04:00

So today we had our townhouse inspected and it passed with flying colors.

Here are some photographs that I took today

Our address as of June 15th will be
806 Bruton Drive
Gibsonia, PA 15044

Ephesians 1:15-18

2006-04-26T00:41:00.000-04:00

Biblical Text
"For this reason, ever since I heard about your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all his people, I have not stopped giving thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers. I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in his people," (Ephesians 1:15-18, TNIV)

Commentary from the Early Church Fathers(1)
The Eyes of the Heart. Jerome: His phrase “eyes of the heart” clearly refers to those things we cannot understand without sense and intelligence…. Faith sees beyond what the physical eyes see. Physical eyes are in the heads of not only the wise but the unwise. Epistle to the Ephesians 1.1.15 seq.

These Eyes Have Become Opened Among the Gentiles. Ephrem the Syrian: The signs manifested to the external eyes of the Jews did them little good. But faith opened the eyes of the hearts of the Gentiles. Homily on Our Lord 32.

That You May Know by Insight and Revelation. Marius Victorinus: Let us understand that we arrive at the full mystery of God by two routes: We ourselves by rational insight may come to understand and discern something of the knowledge of divine things. But when there is a certain divine self-disclosure God himself reveals his divinity to us. Some may directly perceive by this revelation something remarkable, majestic and close to truth. … But when we receive wisdom we apprehend what is divine both through our own rational insight and through God’s own Spirit. When we come to know what is true in the way this text intends, both these ways of knowing correspond. Epistle to the Ephesians 1.1.17–18.

My Comments
I really like Jerome's line, "Faith sees beyond what the physical eyes see" and Ephrem points out that the Jewish authorities of Jesus' day saw many signs and it did them no good whatsoever, as they still refused to believe.

I include the comments from Victorinus not because I agree with him (as I do with Jerome and Ephrem) but because I think he's mistaken.  A number of theologians embrace this dualistic knowledge of God often referred to as natural and special revelation.  While I agree that there is biblical support for the position that God is revealed through natural means (Psalm 19:1 and Romans 1) come to mind, there is also a common theme that comes out particularly in the Romans passage.  People seem to get natural revelation wrong.  As Paul notes what has revealed has been made plain from what has been made (Romans 1:19-20) but according to Paul people rejected this knowledge.

The other point of contention that I have with Victorinus comes from my recent study of Moltmann.  What Moltmann argues, and I think persuasively, is that at least in the West classical theism, or "The Spy in the Sky Theology" (NT Wright's phrase) dominates people's understanding of who God is.  So when people talk about God they talk about the creator of the universe – not the crucified Jesus the Christ.

On a more personal note, as I prepare for my final few weeks at Northmont I found Paul's words very relevant to my own feelings as I am preparing to leave the church that I have been apart for the past three years as both a volunteer and staff member.

Notes(2)
Jerome (c. 347–420). Gifted exegete and exponent of a classical Latin style, now best known as the translator of the Latin Vulgate. He defended the perpetual virginity of Mary, attacked Origen and Pelagius and supported extreme ascetic practices.

Ephrem the Syrian (b. c. 306; fl. 363–373). Syrian writer of commentaries and devotional hymns which are sometimes regarded as the greatest specimens of Christian poetry prior to Dante.

Marius Victorinus (b. c. 280/285; fl. c. 355–363). Grammarian of African origin who taught rhetoric at Rome and translated works of Platonists. After his conversion (c. 355), he wrote against the Arians and commentaries on Paul’s letters.

All comments taken from: M. J. Edwards, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT 8. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), ???.

Biographical information is from: ACCS Introduction and Bibliographic Information, Ancient Christian commentary on Scripture. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2005).

Ephesians 1:11-14

2006-04-24T19:37:00.000-04:00

Biblical Text
"In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory."
(Ephesians 1:11-14, TNIV)

Commentary from the Early Church Fathers(1)
Our Inheritance Is Secured. Chrysostom: By this seal God shows great forethought for humanity. He not only sets apart a people and gives them an inheritance but secures it as well. It is just as if someone might stamp his heirs plainly in advance; so God set us apart to believe and sealed us for the inheritance of future glory

My Comments
Ah, the predestination verses from Ephesians. I will admit that there was a day when these verses dominated my thinking like nothing else, primarily because of my training in Westminster Calvinism (aka TULIP). But, in more recent years my thinking has broadened out and I now take more seriously the question of what does it mean that "In him we were also chosen…" What does it mean to view election/predestination through Jesus the Christ?

The part about these versus that caught my attention were the ending – "When you believe you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit…" and "And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation". The phrase, "in Christ" is one of the most common in the New Testament (perhaps the most common, depending on how you define a phrase) and is worthy of great consideration. It is this spirit that joins us to Christ and allows us to share in his life.

Notes(2)
John Chrysostom (344/354–407; fl. 386–407). Bishop of Constantinople who was noted for his orthodoxy, his eloquence and his attacks on Christian laxity in high places.

All comments taken from: M. J. Edwards, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT 8. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), ???.

Biographical information is from: ACCS Introduction and Bibliographic Information, Ancient Christian commentary on Scripture. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2005).

Brian's Big News...

2006-04-24T00:10:00.000-04:00

Renee and I bought a townhouse!!! We had looked at it last weekend and really liked it, so we visited again this morning and decided it was the one and put in an offer. They counter offered an hour later, we counter offered, they responded, and we took it. It’s a townhouse in Richland, about a mile and a half from Hampton Presbyterian (where I’ll be working). It has three bedrooms and four baths (two full, two half), a finished basement, and a nice, big deck. We close on June 15th!

Here are some photos:

This is the exterior

This is the kitchen looking out into the dining room/living room

This is the dining room end of the living room/dining room

This is the living room end of the dining room/living room, looking into the kitchen

This is the family room

This is the bathroom off the family room

Ephesians 2:4-10

2006-04-21T10:45:00.000-04:00

All comments taken from: M. J. Edwards, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT 8. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 131.

Biographical information is from: ACCS Introduction and Bibliographic Information, Ancient Christian commentary on Scripture. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2005).

Ephesians 1:3-6

2006-04-21T10:14:00.000-04:00

" Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves." (Ephesians 1:3-6, TNIV)

_________________________________________

What he means is this: The one through whom he has blessed us is the one through whom he has elected us…. Christ chose us to have faith in him before we came into being, indeed even before the world was founded. The word foundation was well chosen, to indicate that it was laid down from some great height. For great and ineffable is the height of God, not in a particular place but rather in his remoteness from nature. So great is the distance between creature and Creator… You have been elected,” he says, “in order to be holy and unblemished before his face.” … He himself has made us saints, but we are called to remain saints. A saint is one who lives in faith, is unblemished and leads a blameless life. John Chrysostom, Homily on Ephesians 1.1.4.(1)

John Chrysostom (344/354–407; fl. 386–407). Bishop of Constantinople who was noted for his orthodoxy, his eloquence and his attacks on Christian laxity in high places.(2)

______________________________________________

This may soon become a series entitled “Reading Ephesians with Chrysostom” after this opening.  In all seriousness, there are a few gems in the ACCS from just these few verses, but there two really stood out to me, both from John Chrysostom.

The first thing that stood out to me was Chrysostom’s understanding of election.  What I think he holds together really well is that our election is not apart from Jesus Christ, as so often happens in Westminster Calvinism (where election is a decision of the Father before the foundation of the world that can happen entirely divorced from Jesus the Christ).  His line that we are blessed through the same person in which we are elected is right one.  What Chrysostom seems to avoid, at least on this read, is the question of how many are elected.  One might see Chrysostom taking Calvin’s view on election here, in that he’s using election as a doctrine of comfort, not as on that precedes faith (as Westminster Calvinism does).  If one wanted to stretch it, more than I think Chrysostom does, you might see the beginnings of Barth’s doctrine of election (God’s choice to elect humanity through the incarnation of the Son) but I don’t think Chrysostom is quite there.

The second comment is Chysostom’s understanding of what it means to be holy.  Chrysostom doesn’t say “if you do this, then you’ll be holy”, rather he understands being holy as something that we, by virtue of adoption, are given as a status, and then commanded to live into this status that we have freely been given.  So no amount of human effort will bump someone up on the “holiness meter”, but that is not an excuse for “sinning that grace might abound.”  Rather, those who understand what God has done for them in, through, and as Jesus Christ and are thus the “holy ones”, respond by seeking to live Spirit-empowered lives in obedience to God’s intentions for humanity.

Looking at the TNIV, I really appreciate how they translated “In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ.”  The TNIV strives for gender neutrality and could have opted to do any number of things in translating this verse.  Other translations have done things such as “In love he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ” (ESV) or “He destined us for adoption as his children through Jesus Christ” (NRSV).  Now neither of these translations are wrong per say, because the word in the Greek is uiothesian which is understood to mean “adoption” but the root is uios which means “son”.  The TNIV, despite their commitment to gender neutrality accurately renders this one “to sonship through Jesus Christ.”

Now why is all this important?  Jesus Christ, is by his very nature is the Son of God.  Humans are not God’s children by nature but only through adoption into God’s family.  But, our adoption comes through the historical action of the incarnation of the Son of God as Jesus of Nazareth.  He, fully God, took on our flesh and became our brother and thus our representative.  So, he was both the Word of God to humanity and the perfectly obedient true human who lived in full relationship with God the Father.  Since Jesus the Christ was Son of God by nature and our brother, in him (and only in him) we come to share in his Sonship with the Father and thus can rightly be called “sons of God.”

Those who make an issue out of gender language might balk at the use of the word sonship, but its important to not let our human understandings of terms like “Son” and “Father” overrule that which God has revealed about himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  The terms “Father” and “Son” are names which denote relationships, not gender.  God the Father is not male, and God the Son is not a male God; he is only male in his humanity.  So there is no difficulty in saying that women share in Jesus’ sonship with the Father because this denotes a relational term.  Both men and women are fully sons of God the Father through Jesus the Christ, the Son of God.

On a side note, if you’re interested in more, all of the Early Church Fathers are available online at http://www.ccel.org in any number of formats and much of it is well worth reading.

(1) M. J. Edwards, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT 8. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 111.
(2) ACCS Introduction and Bibliographic Information, Ancient Christian commentary on Scripture. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2005).

Reading Ephesians with the Church Fathers

2006-04-21T02:15:00.000-04:00

Since my small group recently finished our reading of the Gospel of Mark, I needed to find something new for devotional reading. What I settled on and hopefully will be blogging on is to read through the book of Ephesians with the Church Fathers. I am fortunate enough to own 12 volumes of the Ancient Christian Commentary on the Scriptures so I will be reading that, along will reading Ephesians from the newly published and somewhat controversial (at least in the evangelical world) TNIV (Today’s New International Version). I’ve used the TNIV a little and so far really like it as an update of the NIV. For ministry purposes I tend to prefer the NIV’s dynamic equivalence method over the more literal method of the ESV/NRSV since I mainly work with teens.

Given everything else that is going on I don’t know how often or how long I will be blogging, but hopefully I can keep it up at least somewhat regularly.

Union Cafe

2006-04-19T11:25:00.000-04:00

From BJ Woodworth

In 16 days the Union Station will open at the Union Project 801 N. Negley Ave. For those of who do not know the Union Project is home of the Open Door ( Pittsburgh Presbytery New Church Development) and the Union Station café is going to be a huge gift and blessing to the East End, the Union Project and the Open Door.

So come buy and bring a friend or two for your morning or afternoon cup of coffee, for lunch or an evening dessert. It is a great place to study! The great thing about this café is it has a plethora of outdoor seating which is hard to find in the East End. It offers free wireless as well! So help us spread the word! Here is the official press release.

Union Station Cafe

The Union Project provides neighborhood space to connect, create and celebrate. Through the restoration and reuse of the abandoned, blighted, former Union Baptist Church, the Union Project provides gathering and working space for artists, community builders and people of faith. Additionally, as key to meeting its mission and focusing on sustainability, the Union Project is initiating several social enterprises that employ local at-risk youth and low-income individuals.

The first of these social enterprises, Union Station café will open for business on May 5. Hours of operation will be 7 am to 10 pm, 7 days a week. Union Station café will serve coffee and cold drinks, light breakfast and lunch menus, and dessert options. Join us for an opening party on Friday, May 5 as part of our monthly First Friday Happy Hours. Contact antwan@unionproject.org for information about Union Station Café.

"The Union Station café is the new hot spot in the neighborhood. Join neighbors in a relaxed atmosphere were you can sit and chat, utilize the free Internet connection, read, or have a quick snack." says new Union Station manager Antwan Davis.

Holy Week and Discipleship

2006-04-15T09:48:00.000-04:00

One of my favorite texts for some time has been Luke 14:25-27

"Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even life itself—such a person cannot be my disciple. And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:25-27, TNIV)

While I've had no trouble explaining what Jesus meant by "hate" (Gk miseo, "to be disinclined to, disfavor, disregard" – BDAG) or as I explained it to our Jr. High group last weekend, to hate is to put everything else, family, friends, etc. as a second priority to your faithfulness to Jesus Christ, such that is being faithful to Jesus Christ and being faithful to someone else contradict, you get rid of whatever is hindering your faithfulness to Jesus Christ.  The usual and quite appropriate response is usually, "But I don't think Jesus wants me to leave my family."

As I was preparing for our Good Friday service I was given John 19:25b-27

"Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, “Woman, here is your son,” and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home." (John 19:25b-27, TNIV)

Here Jesus demonstrated precisely what he intended by Luke 14.  When it came to the mission he had received from his Father he ultimately had to give up everything, including his family.  But what Jesus demonstrates is that faithfulness to one's calling does not justify a callous and blatant disregard for family, as here he entrusts the care of his mother to the beloved disciple.

Brian's Big News

2006-04-06T01:32:00.000-04:00

So my mom commented that I hadn't updated my blog in a while which first of all shows that she has become quite the blog reader. This has in part been because the biggest news in my life that I would be blogging about wasn't quite ready for public knowledge, but as of now it is public knowledge.

Starting July 1st, I will be Minister of Youth and Outreach Worship at Hampton Presbyterian Church in Gibsonia, PA. There I will have two main responsibilities, youth ministry and turningpoint. The Youth Ministry part is pretty much the typical responsibilities: youth group, bible studies, retreats, social events, etc. As many of you know, youth ministry has been my passion for the past three years and I am excited to get the opportunity to land in such a position. My other main responsibility will be turningpoint. Turningpoint is a gathering for: skeptics, believers, veterans, rookies,the passionate, and the burned-out, who seek to know and follow Jesus Christ. The music is rock n roll, the dress is casual, children are welcome, you can bring your friends. As you might know my other passion has been developing worship gatherings that are focused on the praise and adoration of God in a language that is better understood by young people and those outside the church. Needless to say, a position that combined the two things I feel the most passionate about really excited me and I cannot wait to begin.

The Foundation for Reformed Theology

2006-03-31T11:27:00.000-05:00

The Foundation for Reformed Theology is looking to start a new study group in Pittsburgh! The Foundation, which was founded to honor the memory of John Leith, provides funding for individuals to gather and study Reformed Theology.

This group, based in Pittsburgh, would focus on reformed theology in the emerging/missional/post-modern/post-colonial era, selecting from authors such as Lesslie Newbigin, David Bosch, NT Wright, Miroslav Volf, Jurgen Moltmann, Darrell Guder, John Franke, William Stacey Johnson, Walter Brueggemann, Nancey Murphy, Kendra Creasy Dean, etc. as well as inviting featured guests to guide our conversations.

If you are interested in being part of such a group, please email Brian Wallace (brian.wallace@gmail.com) for more information.

About the Foundation for Reformed Theology:The Foundation for Reformed Theology was founded to honor the legacy of John Leith. Dr. John Haddon Leith, was professor of theology at Union-PSCE from 1959 to 1990 who was named the M.E. Pemberton Professor of Theology in 1972. At retirement Leith became professor emeritus and died in 2002. He is the author of a number of books, including Introduction to the Reformed Tradition: A Way of Being in the Christian Community" and "Basic Christian Doctrine".

About the Foundation's Financial Support for meetings:The Fund pays up to $300 for travel expenses, $40 per night for five nights in seminary rooms or $50 per night for five nights for hotel rooms, and a $25 per diem for five days for meals. Individuals pick up the rest of the expenses, usually from continuing education money. Normally, each participant turns in an expense voucher and is reimbursed.”

Reformed Spirituality

2006-03-29T22:43:00.000-05:00

My friend, mentor, and co-worker Frank Stricklen has set up two new sites that will be of definite interest to readers of this blog, both related to "Reformed Spirituality". As Frank notes at the top of his site

"Many would agree with T. Hartley Hall of Union Seminary that reformed spirituality is an oxymoron. It is certainly true that people of reformed faith have historically been very suspicious of any sort of individual spirituality. But, taking a cue from Eugene Peterson, we belive that spirituality is nothing more than the Christian life. So it is the goal of our site is to provide seekers with tools to enhance their walk with God. "

His site is http://www.reformedspirituality.com/ and his blog is at http://reformed-spirituality.blogspot.com/ I would encourage you to check them both out.

Volf on Steelers Fans

2006-03-27T11:13:00.000-05:00

I was listening to the Emergent Podcast today (get it here) and Miroslav Volf was asked about the ever-contentious issue of homosexuality in the church today. Volf didn't directly address what the church's response should be, but rather commented that his book, Exclusion and Embrace, discussed how those who disagree on the issue should relate to one another. He then made the following comment:

"And in any case, relate to those with whom we disagree not as Pittsburgh Steelers' fans relate to Seahawk fans in the Super Bowl or in the way in which Democrats and Republicans have related to one another in recent years, which is a mirror image of how the fans relate to one another and not much more subtle than that"

Volf's point is both comical (It looks like the reputation of Steelers' fans is widely known) but I think his comments are quite insightful about the way we deal with these issues, particularly in the PC(USA).

Weekend

2006-03-21T09:13:00.000-05:00

So this past weekend I was faced with a choice – I could either have A) Attended a conference in Baton Rouge, LA that focused on the theology of the Torrance clan B) Gone on a retreat with our high school students from church.  I opted for the second, and didn't regret it a bit.

This retreat was a collaboration of about ten churches, whose youth workers all knew one another in college.  It was aimed at training students for discipleship and helping students discover their "Spiritual Pathway".  The retreat was centered on Gary Thomas' "Sacred Pathways" book.  While I appreciate what Thomas is trying to do, his approach concerned me going into the weekend (by the way, any approach to spiritual development has numerous pot holes in it).  Basically what he did was develop different ways in which people connect to God (traditionalists, contemplatives, ascetics, intellectuals, sensory, naturalists, caregivers, etc.) and came up with a quiz that the kids took to discover what their top two pathways were.  Then they went to a workshop for each of their top two.  I was leading the "traditionalist" workshop, which as you can imagine drew exactly zero kids across the two sessions.  But, some of the other sessions were extremely well done and the kids absolutely loved them.  I think what was important was that the leaders of the sessions emphasized that just because you're a naturalist (one who experiences God through nature and the outdoors) or an intellectual (one who experiences God by learning) that isn't an excuse to skip out on things such as worship services, bible studies, etc.  Rather, it’s a way to enhance your spiritual life.  Since I had no one show up for my workshop, I sat in on the intellectual workshop (which is the area I scored highest in anyway) and had a whole lot of fun.  The rest of the retreat was an absolute blast, and our speaker, Dr. Terry Thomas (A professor at Geneva and a Grove City/Pittsburgh Seminary grad) was absolutely incredible.  He honestly spoke for an hour and held every single person's attention in the room.  He was authentic, funny, engaging, and most importantly, challenging.  No matter where you were on your journey with Jesus Christ, his talks were relevant because he talked about discipleship.

So, the workshops, the speaker, the free time activities, etc. were wonderful.  And although I came home with no voice and had to preach on Sunday night (check out the audio here or the video here) it was a great weekend.

Course Change

2006-03-16T01:24:00.000-05:00

Ah the start of a new term… and term III none the less, which seems like the only normal term all year, but turns out not to be normal in the least.

So this term I had planned on taking Dr. Purves class, Theology and Pastoral Care, for credit and auditing Dr. Cole-Turner's class, The Doctrine of the Trinity.  Well, those plans got reversed this week and I'm now taking Doctrine of the Trinity, and auditing Theology and Pastoral Care.  Why you might ask?  That's a great question.

I've had Dr. Purves for 5 courses in my seminary career (Theology/Practice of Holiness, Pastoral Care, Reformed Dogmatics, Theology of T.F. Torrance, and Scientific Theology) and I've benefited greatly from each and every course.  In fact, looking at the list I can name one significant insight that shapes how I live my life and how I do ministry (or to put it more appropriately, how I participate in the on-going ministry of Jesus Christ).  I had originally decided to take Theology and Pastoral Care for credit and write a paper that would take Dr. Purves framework and apply it specifically to youth ministry, and I'll admit that in the back of my mind I had thought that someday I might write a book entitled something like "It's Not Up to You: A Christ-Centered Theology for Youth Ministry." Honestly, I'd still like to write that book/article/blog entry (I figure it'll be one of the three) someday because I think what Dr. Purves is proposing is radical, Christ-centered, and would be of great benefit to many burned-out over-worked youth workers.  But, I have a pretty good understanding of what Dr. Purves is proposing because I took my first run at applying it to Youth Ministry last year in my philosophy of Youth Ministry paper.

On the other hand, since I was exempted from taking Introduction to Systematic Theology, I never had a course that covered the doctrine of God in any depth until I took Theology of T.F. Torrance and we read his book, The Christian Doctrine of God (which to this day has to be one of the most dense and demanding books I've ever read).  As I was sitting in Doctrine of Trinity on Tuesday, I saw that one option for being graded in the class was to write a paper that was 3500-4000 words long (roughly 12 pages) on our topic of choice, and Dr. Cole-Turner suggested that we compare Moltmann, who we're required to read for the course, to another major Trinitarian thinker (he suggested Pannenberg, Jenson, T.F. Torrance, Freddy Zizioulas, or Catherine LaCunga).  During break I began reading "Rediscovering the Triune God" by Stanley Grenz and remember this line from the book: "Moltmann, in contrast [to Pannenberg], retains Barth's focus on the Word as the locus of divine revelation.  In this sense, he stands closer to Barth than Pannenberg does" (Rediscovering the Triune God, Pg. 76).  This got me thinking that it might be fun to compare Barth and Moltmann, because they choose similar starting points, yet end up in two very different places, to the point where Barth is accused of being a modalist and Moltmann is accused of being a Tri-theist.  So my early title is as follows: "The Modalist and the Tri-Theist: The Word of God as Revelation in Karl Barth and Jurgen Moltmann" or something along those lines.  Basically what I want to do is test Grenz's hypothesis and find out why, despite a similar starting point, they end up in such different places.

So yes, I opted to write a paper that I have no idea how to write and will require me to read large sections of Barth's church dogmatics.  Why might I do this?  Especially when I have only 8 weeks instead of 10 to write it?  Well, because I'm a big dork.

Reading Update

2006-03-07T09:29:00.000-05:00

So with the end of a term so comes the changing of my reading.  This term for Missiology I was assigned David Bosch's Transforming Mission which I thought was an absolutely glorious book.  Sadly, I didn't get a chance to finish it during the term and while I was in Mississippi I read a good chunk of it but still failed to finish it.  So that's still on my currently reading list.  One book I did finish was Stanley Grenz's A Primer on Postmodernism which I found to be an excellent introduction to postmodern thought.  Perhaps most helpful is that Grenz doesn't presuppose that all postmodern thinkers are in agreement, and does a good job showing where those differences.  I also started reading another book by Grenz, Rediscovering the Triune God where he looks at the major developments in Trinitarian thought during the 20th Century, survey thinkers such as Barth, Rahner, Moltmann, Pannenberg, Jenson, Torrance, and others.  I've only read the sections on Barth, Rahner, and Moltmann but so far its been a really helpful book.  It has also piqued my interest in Jurgen Moltmann and has me even more interested that I am auditing the Trinity class here next term, where we'll be reading The Crucified God and Theology of Hope.  Finally, in my on-going reading I am slowly making my way through Barth's Church Dogmatics 1.1, Doctrine of the Word of God, where he does his Trinitarian exposition.  His "Doctrine of God" is contained in volumes 2.1 and 2.2, but he develops the unity of God emphasizes in 2.1 and 2.2 from the exposition of the Trinity in 1.1.

As a side note, what has been helpful about Grenz's book on the Trinity was his critique of Barth.  Unlike my teacher (Barth) I tend to emphasize God's threeness over God's oneness (see my posts on plural pronouns for God), especially given my context in the United States where the word "God" is a loaded cultural term.  I think we're better off talking about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and using phrases such as "Triune God" instead of just "God".  That being said, I have a lot to learn from Barth's exposition of the Trinity and the Doctrine of God.

Looking ahead to next term my reading will be of top-caliber.  I'm taking Theology and Pastoral Care with Dr. Andrew Purves, which will be my 6th full class with him.  He's basically teaching his most recent book, but having us read the sources that influenced his thinking.  Included on that list are the following: Calvin, Athanasius, Moltmann, McLoed Campbell, Torrance (James), and Milligan.  Needless to say, it’s a pretty impressive list.  For Church and Society: Local (which would be more aptly named Theology from the African-American Context) we're reading a number of books that I've never read, and probably wouldn't if I didn't have to take this class and that is the good part of this class.  I'm auditing Doctrine of the Trinity, which will be an introduction to the Trinity through Moltmann.  Finally, I'll have my last term reading Alister McGrath's Scientific Theology vol. 3, Theory.  All in all, it'll be a good term of reading.

Mission Mississippi

2006-03-07T00:19:00.000-05:00

I've posted a new podcast that talks about some of my experiences this past week in Mississippi and New Orleans. It's available for download here or via podcast here.

Racial Diversity and Emergent

2006-03-05T17:58:00.000-05:00

This post may get me in trouble but I’ve been thinking about it for a while. A consistent critique is that Emergent/Emerging Church is too-white and there are now people who are calling themselves post-emergent and listing this as one of the reasons. While it is true that the majority of the emerging conversation is dominated by while males, it’s an issue of context. The issues that have sparked the emerging conversation are mainly issues that have come up in the traditional evangelical and post-mainline churches (there are no longer any mainline churches) and these churches have been predominantly white. So to say that emergent needs to try and involve more historic African American churches is rather backwards – how do you convince people to get involved in something that has little or no relevance to their situation? If anything, I think the emerging conversation can learn a lot from the historic black church because they’ve been being missional and engaged in their communities for years because they’ve never enjoyed the place of privilege in society.

Now, what I’m not saying is that the traditional racial divide between the White and Black church is a good thing but it is part of our current situation. In fact, I applaud efforts to seek racial reconciliation and integration in the lives of our churches. All I’m saying is that I think to critique the emerging conversation for not being more racially integrated is short sighted.

For a response to a similar critique from Brian McLaren, go here

Mission Mississippi 4

2006-03-05T11:09:00.000-05:00

So my ingenious plan to blog while I was in Mississippi was befuddled by a lack of electrical outlets from which to charge my computer and cell phone. I had a great cell phone signal, but little means of using it. Anyway, at present I am in the car on my way home from Chattanooga, TN where we spent the night.

Over the next week I’ll be making a number of posts related to my trip to Mississippi as well as pictures from my time there.

Mission Mississippi 3

2006-02-26T20:46:00.000-05:00

So we were told that we would have electricity in our hard-top tents but as it turns out we don’t, so my ability to blog during the week will be very limited but I’ll try and post a few times as long as my battery doesn’t die completely on my computer.

Your prayers will be greatly appreciated this week. The town or Pearlington, Mississippi is a forgotten and depressed down that hasn’t received much help.

Mission Mississippi 2

2006-02-26T07:29:00.000-05:00

Time: 7:24am
Location: Motel 6 – Chattanooga, TN

We’re about half way to Mississippi and spent the night here in Chattanooga. We’ll arrive at our final destination today, probably sometime around dinner time tonight. We enjoyed dinner at the Waffle House that is in the parking lot of the Motel last night and got to listen to Thomas’ stories. Thomas grew up in India, and has many really funny stories about riding a scooter in the monsoons when you can’t see the potholes because they’re flooded, and other good ones about traveling behind water trucks that leak, and gravel/dirt trucks that make it impossible to turn without wiping out on the scooter.

I also took a great deal of abuse at dinner last night from a group of the women on the trip when I divulged that I do sometimes get out of bed, take my breakfast, and go to class – and do so without brushing my teeth! (Side note: I don’t like the taste of orange juice and tooth paste, so I brush them after class). All in good fun however. The irony was that our fearless leader, the Rev. De Niece Welch, the esteem Associate Pastor for Outreach at Shadyside Presbyterian church couldn’t find her way into the Waffle House last night because she couldn’t find the door…

Mission Mississippi 1

2006-02-25T17:57:00.000-05:00

So this will be an interesting journal, because it’s going to serve two purposes.  The first is that in lieu of taking a final exam I am going on this mission trip to Mississippi to do hurricane relief work with Presbyterian Disaster Assistance.  But the second is to keep people back home up to date on what I’m doing and what we’re experiencing.  Too often mission trips are so overwhelming to be summed up easily when one returns home and you end up basically telling people “It was quite an experience.”  So I hope that by blogging/journaling during the trip I can prevent that from happening.

So what are my expectations and understandings of this trip?  Well as far as expectations go I’m not sure really.  The group is a mixed group of people from Shadyside Presbyterian, Bidwell Presbyterian, and the seminary.  We’ve got a few young people in the group with the youngest being a teenage girls who’s way-cool mom (who’s also on the trip) allowed to take a week off from school in order to take part in the trip (talk about having your priorities in the right order!).  There are four seminary students, three of us in our 20’s, along with a girl who is a sophomore in college.

Right now as I write this we’re on Interstate 81 in Tennessee heading for Chattanooga where we’ll spend the night tonight before finishing our trip to Mississippi.  Because of the advent of modern technology, I am able to be online via my cell phone in the van.  So really we’ve got two days before we get down to business really.

So why mission?  And why Mississippi?  This is really my third mission trip. The first one was with Habitat for Humanity in conjunction with my housing group in college, and the second to the Dominican Republic my first year of seminary.  Both were interesting and very different experiences to say the least, and I really enjoyed both of them.  But looking back on them, I don’t know why I did them really.  I guess it just seemed like it was the “right” thing to do and I was a Christian, so that’s what I did.

Reflecting on it now, in light of having taken Missiology I want to argue that we do mission work not primarily because it’s good for us (although the value of pilgrimages are well known) and its not because we’ve got something good that we can share (although there is an element of charity involved in the work).  I believe that the church is called to do mission work because we are called to participate in the mission of God in redeeming the world.  In Jesus Christ God was reconciling the world to himself (according to the Confession of 1967) and that works continues through the church.  We believe that God is at work in the world and the church’s role is to put hands and feet on that work, which is you think about it is a pretty awesome job.  But mission is primarily eschatological – we do things that we know God is doing/will do in bringing to fullness the new heavens and the new earth.

So here’s an example.  Rev 21 tells us that God will wipe away every tear and there will be no more mourning, crying or pain in the end.  If this is how things will be at the end, the church can better discern God’s lead by looking for opportunities to where God is doing that here and now.  This is where I see this mission trip fitting in.  We’re going to Mississippi not because we’re “super-Christians” who are earning brownie points by doing this.  We’ve doing this because we know that this is where God is at work, making right what is wrong.  In essence mission work is a living example of the Kingdom of God coming near because as the body of Christ we are Kingdom people.  We recognize that the rulers of this day, while useful and ordained by God, are not the real rulers of the universe and that it is only God and God’s work that will make the world right.

We also read in Philippians that there will be a day when every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is LORD to the Glory of the Father.  This is our basis for evangelism.  Because we know as Christians that this is an “objective reality” (to use Karl Barth’s language) we seek to bear witness to this and be apart of God’s work in showing this to the rest of the world.  We don’t do evangelism (primarily) to increase the size of our church or to help others find eternal life (because the work of salvation is God’s alone) but because we as Christians are aware of and acknowledge the Lordship of Christ as the true ruler over all the universe and realize that by following him we can be exactly what we are intended to be.

All of this can sound very self-glorifying because after all, “Look at us!  We’re being Kingdom People!  We’re acting for God, look at how right we are in what we’re doing!”  But I hope that’s not my attitude.  I believe the call to participate in God’s service is a high one and one that must be taken with all seriousness and therefore with a great deal of humanity.  I almost didn’t write the sentence above about the Kingdom of God coming near in mission work because even our work will be sadly imperfect, despite our best intentions.  We just can’t get past our broken and sinful selves.  I almost wonder whether mission trips shouldn’t begin with a prayer of confession first, acknowledging our own inability to be completely faithful in that which God has called us to, but also recognizing that God has called us to this task in spite and precisely because of who we are.

5:54 PM, from somewhere on the road in Northeastern Tennessee.

Off to Mississippi

2006-02-24T19:50:00.000-05:00

So for all intents and purposes I am done with my second to last trimester of seminary.  I took my Hebrew final this morning and am in the process of finalizing my paper for Theology/Ethics of Karl Barth (well, my outstanding editor is currently reading it – she's the best)

Tomorrow morning I am off to Mississippi in conjunction with Shadyside Presbyterian and Bidwell Presbyterian churches to work with Presbyterian Disaster Assistance.  IN THEORY I will able to keep my journal of experiences online as we're supposed to have cell phone access (and hence I'll have internet access through my phone) but we'll see if that actually happens.  I'm a little cautious about taking my laptop with me, but I've got a security device for it and if nothing else, I'll just keep it locked in the van during the day.  I am doing this trip in lieu of taking the final for missiology so I need to keep a journal and would really rather not have to write it out handwritten.

I've got a full bag of books to keep me entertained during the long, did I mention really long trip?  About 20 hours driving across two days actually.  Anyway, this includes Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics 1.1 "The Doctrine of the Word of God", Stanley Grenz's "A Primer on Postmodernism" and "Rediscovering the Triune God", Dan Kimball's "Emerging Worship", and William LaDue "A Trinity's Guide to the Trinity."  As you might be able to tell, I'm taking Doctrine of the Trinity next term and feel the need to brush up on my knowledge, since I didn't take Introduction to Systematic Theology my first year.  More importantly, while we're down there we'll be taking part in the mission of God in the world, which will be part of the sermon I'm preaching on the 19th after we get back.

The World Does Not Exist

2006-02-22T01:19:00.000-05:00

This could be my single weirdest post ever, and it could be that I'm totally off my rocker, and it could be that the end of the term is finally getting to me and I'm just plain going to crack up.  But here goes…

The world we see around us and the people that we know and even our very own selves do not exist.  We are false creations, we were never intended to be, and we will not be in the end.

A former pastor of mine told me that if I wanted to see what the world really was I should read Genesis 1-2 and Revelation 21-22.  Sometime try doing that, read the first two chapters of the bible and the last two.  Why?  Because that is how the world was intended to be (Gen 1-2) and how the world will be in the end (Rev 21-22).  The whole rest of the bible, from Gen 3 through Rev 20 is the story of how things got messed up and what God has done, is doing, and will do to restore things.

The real world is the world that really exists, and what really exists is the world that God created and intends.  That is not the world we live in right now to say the least.  Even our very own selves are not as we were intended to be, and even we will be made new in the resurrection (see 1 Corinthians 15).

Want a concrete example of why the real world doesn't exist?  George Bush, the President of the United States may be the most powerful man in the world (some would dispute this and say its actually those who run the banks, etc. but my point remains).  And in fact, one might say that George Bush is lord over the whole world.  And, in a similar fashion there are governments and institutions around the world that exercise control over the world and all that is in it.  However, they are not the real rulers of the universe.  (By the way, this is not some anarchist argument about the inherent evil of all government, I'm just pointing out that whether it be the best or the worst leaders of this age, they are not the true lords of the universe).

It has been argued that Jesus was really a failed political revolutionary, not the Lord of the universe and that he basically died as a martyr for a failed cause (a la Albert Schweitzer).  This view is typical of those with Christologies that deny Jesus being fully God and fully man.  What's ironic is that I think these people are right, Jesus did die for political reasons, but it is precisely because he was fully God and fully man that he died.  Because Jesus Christ was the Lord of the Universe as the one through whom all things were created (Col 1, John 1) he threatened the principalities and powers of the day (mainly the Jewish establishment that had close links to the Roman government) because he exposed them as frauds.  They were not the real rulers of the universe, he was!  No one likes to be exposes as a fraud so they killed him.

Here's where everything went tragically wrong (for the rulers of this age).  In the resurrection Jesus' claim to Lordship of the Universe was vindicated as even death which is the ultimate weapon of the principalities and powers of this world, could not ultimately contain him.  So this sets up the book of acts, in which Paul goes throughout the Roman empire and declares quite openly and publicly that Christ crucified is the Lord of the Universe, not Caesar and because Jesus is the true Lord of the Universe people should place their faith and trust in him.

Ultimately the purpose for the church, and its task of preaching the Gospel, is not to increase the population of heaven, but to participate in the mission of God in bringing about the creation of the New Heavens and the New Earth.  This does not preclude eternal life, but eternal life is only one aspect of salvation in a much larger scheme.

So what does this all have to do with the non-existence of the world around us?  As Paul writes, "For the present form of this world is passing away" (1 Cor 7:31).  Note, Paul does not say "For this world is passing away" but rather this "form" (schehma in greek) is passing away, not the world itself.  In other words, the world which we see and live in isn't the "real world" because its not as God intends, that is the only real world.  The one we see is only a "form" with temporary rulers (who at their best are like those of 1 Cor 13, and at their worst are Rev 13) and even our own selves are not as we were intended (Gen 2) nor how we will be in the end (1 Cor 15)

30 Hour Famine

2006-02-22T00:37:00.000-05:00

This past weekend I took part in the 30 Hour Famine with our youth group. Rather than trying to do a blog entry, I took my voice recorder along with me and have generated a fifteen minute file, complete with interviews and recaps of the weekend's events. It can be downloaded here or picked up via podcast here

The Emerging Church Doesn't Exist

2006-02-16T02:23:00.000-05:00

So I had planned on writing a blog post on the non-existence of the Emerging Church, but BJ beat me to it.  But to sum up, there is no "emerging church" singular as church has traditionally been defined.  There's no official list of emerging churches, no common statement of faith, etc.

What there is what I call the "emerging ethos" which at the same time exists and but doesn't really exist.  It's comprised of people, meetings, blogs, relationships, emails, faith communities, and conversations.  It's something that is ridiculously hard to quantify, because it avoids being quantified.  If one wants to quantify anything, the organization Emergent might be the easiest, but even that organization acts largely as a catalyst for the "ethos" of people, etc.  While I think there are some commonly held threads that make up the "emerging ethos", namely it’s a group of people who desire to critically engage the culture around them in a missional sense.  However, there are people in the "emerging ethos" who would disagree with that statement that I just made, and truthfully, that's part of what makes it so interesting.

To give a more concrete example, take a look at pomomusings.  I came across Adam's blog because he was dating a girl I went to college with, and kept following it because without question is interesting (I've exchanged a few emails with him but never spoken with him in person).  Now, if you spend much time on Adam's blog you'll figure out that he and I disagree on some pretty significant issues, but yet we both have that e-shaped banner "Friend of Emergent" on our blogs.  Now, I have no idea if Adam would consider me apart of the "Emergent ethos" but despite our substantial disagreements on certain important issues, I consider him apart of the "emergent community" (for what that's worth).

I guess part of what I've found refreshing about the "emergent ethos" is that I've never been asked to leave my particularities at the door in exchange for seeking some "one-size-fits-all" solution but rather encouraged to bring my particularities to the table and discuss them honestly.  Unlike the General Assemblies that I've attended where it was "right" and "left", the emergent ethos is more of an "us" than anything else, because people are so different and are invited to bring those differences with them into discussions.

Personal Podcast

2006-02-11T22:59:00.000-05:00

So I’m a geek, there’s no question about that. I learned how to podcast when I started the PTS Audio project back in December. Then this weekend I decided to design a separate podcast for the Emerging Church Conversation. So, now I’ve decided to podcast myself. Right now there’s only two sermons that I’ve preached this year, but I am planning on podcasting my reflections from my hurricane relief trip to Mississippi that I’m going on in a few weeks. I have no idea who will actually listen to me, but I figure in order to maintain my geek status I should do it.

ECC @ PTS

2006-02-10T17:39:00.000-05:00

Emerging Church Conversation @ Pittsburgh Seminary

Sponsored by Evangelical Student Fellowship and Emergent Pittsburgh(All audio files are in mp3 format and are available via podcast here)

Missiology Class (Scott Sunquist and John Franke)

Evangelical Student Fellowship Lunch with John Franke

The One and the Many: Toward a Theology of Christian Pluralism (John Franke)

A Conversation about the Emerging Church (Part 1, Part 2)

John Franke (Biblical Seminary)

Ian Kane (Three Nails)

BJ Woodworth (The Open Door)

Jim Walker (Hot Metal Bridge)

Jeff Eddings (Hot Metal Bridge)

Emergent Pittsburgh Cohort gathering with John Franke

EC Event

2006-02-09T23:59:00.000-05:00

So for the past couple months I had worked on pulling together a series of events focusing on the Emerging Church, and today was the big day. So while I am tired and glad its bed time, I am also convinced that it was worth the effort as God's effort really shown through. While I did a lot of the coordination behind the scenes, much credit goes to those who were central in the exchange of ideas today, which include (but not limited to) John Franke, Scott Sunquist, Vera White, Don Dawson, BJ Woodworth, Ian Kane, Jim Walker, Jeff Eddings, Terry Timm, Jim Mead, and the list goes on…

What I loved about today was the sense of energy that was present during the events, especially the panel discussion.

I will have an extensive collection of audio downloads from today that will be available by the end of the weekend (my computer is capturing it as we speak)

Update

2006-02-08T00:50:00.000-05:00

So this is officially week nine of the semester, we have one more full week of classes left, and then its one day of class and finals week. I have a paper due on Thursday (which I need to finish tomorrow) then I'm off to Maryland for the weekend because Renee is being baptized. Also this Thursday is our Emerging Church event here at the Seminary that Evangelical Student Fellowship is co-hosting with Emergent Pittsburgh. Then when I get back I have a paper to write for my Barth class (which is 15-20 pages), finish volume 2 of Alister McGrath's Scientific Theology, and take my Hebrew final. Then I'm off to Mississippi for a week in partnership with Shadyside Presbyterian, Bidwell Presbyterian, and Presbyterian Disaster Assistance. Then I'm going to get back and take off for Rochester, where I'll meet with my Committee on Preperation for Ministry, before heading down to see Renee again, and then starting my last term as a student at Pittsburgh Seminary. So yeah, it's a whirlwind couple of weeks. As soon as Term III begins we have our High School retreat. Oh yeah, and next weekend is the 30 Hour Famine that I'm helping with. You know, you can't say I don't keep myself busy can you? I'm really not complaining because I don't do well being bored, its just a lot of plates to keep spinning.

Super Bowl

2006-02-05T23:22:00.000-05:00

Well, I know what its like to be in a city that actually wins a Super Bowl. Sure, as a Buffalo Bills fan I know what its like to with four AFC titles in a row, as well as lose four Super Bowls to three different teams. And I know what its like to lose in Game 6 of the Stanley Cup finals (regardless of a so-called possession rule, we were robbed by a lousy call) because I was there.

However, while I admit to cheering for the Steelers tonight, my loyalty to Western NY remains as strong as ever. Go Sabres!

Rodger Nishioka

2006-02-05T12:41:00.000-05:00

Rodger Nishioka gets it – he really does. Rodger is a professor at Columbia Seminary and spoke at the APCE (Association of Presbyterian Christian Educators) meeting yesterday about the challenge of reaching out to the least churched generation in history (my age group, 18-35). You can read about his comments here

Side note: Rodger will be the keynote speaker at the 2006 Young Adult Retreat being held at Camp Crestfield on May 5th-6th.

Running Con't

2006-02-04T17:43:00.000-05:00

So of late I've picked up my running a little more, and have been make slow but steady progress. I actually got out running three times this week, even today in the light rain that has been showering Pittsburgh for a couple hours. I must say running in the rain is one of the truly wonderful experiences one can have, as the rain keeps you from overheating. Plus, its 40 degrees out, which is also nice given that it's January here in Pittsburgh.

More on Plural Pronouns

2006-02-03T11:15:00.000-05:00

So I was thinking about my previous post on "plural pronouns" and a comment that Backwoods Presbyterian made about the use of plural pronouns being considered heretical by some segments of the Christian population.  Then I thought of this verse this morning:

According to the ESV (note, not the NRSV, which is known for its gender-neutralizing)
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. (Genesis 1:26a)

Breaking it down literally:

wayomer ("and he said", 1st person masculine singular verb)
-elohiym ("God", technically actually plural, but used in the singular to denote the God of Israel)
na-aseh ("let us make", this is a 1st person plural form of –asah which means to make, and its cohortative in meaning so it translates "let us make".  If it wasn't cohortative it would translate "we will make")
-adam ("man", this is a singular noun, but has been understand to mean the human race, both male and female)
betsalmenu ("in our image", this word actually breaks down into three parts.  "be" – in, "tselem" – image or likeness, and "nu" which is the plural possessive pronoun, "our")

What is interesting is that the author mixes pronouns in such a way that it says: God (singular) said let us/we will (1st person plural) make man (a generic masculine singular) in our (plural possessive) image.

If God has chosen to reveal themselves using plural pronouns (twice in one verse!) I see little reason why we cannot use them, as long as we emphasize the oneness of God (which Israel did).

Worth Blogging About...

2006-02-02T23:40:00.000-05:00

On Monday Renee and I, along with my parents and her Mom, went to Grove City to do wedding planning. In the course of four hours we accomplished the following:
1) Wedding Reception Plans and Menu (1 Hour)
2) Florist (45 Minutes)
3) Rehersal Dinner (45 Minutes)
We were quite proud of ourselves to say the least.

Anyway, the photo. We are having our reception at Old MAP on campus. The picture to the left is from the Crimson Ball during our freshman year at Grove City, which took place in Old MAP. Two things to note in this photo. (1) Yes, at the time I weighed about 150 pounds soaking wet so that's why I look about 12 in the photo. (2) At the time we were weren't dating (in fact, at the time this photo was taken I was dating someone else) and wouldn't start dating for almost 5 more years...

Funny how things work out isn't it?

Denominations

2006-02-01T11:45:00.000-05:00

This fall I had he opportunity to attend the National Youth Worker's Convention here in Pittsburgh, sponsored by Youth Specialties.

During the opening session there was a great quote from Tic Long.  He was encouraging attendees to talk to other youth workers to share ideas, etc.  He commented: "This week let's put aside denominational differences.  It's not that our denominations aren't important, but they don't matter"

Wow, think about that statement for a minute: "It's not that our denominations aren't important, but they don't matter".

Essentially what Tic said was that our denominations are important, but they don't matter.  What a radical way to look at ecclesiology!  But yet I know what Tic means.  Denominational lines have long been transcended in the world of youth ministry.  Youth Specialties events appeal to all sorts of people with varying denomination backgrounds, ranging from independent/free church churches, to congregational churches, to Methodist, Presbyterian, Anglican, and even Roman Catholic youth workers.

When I asked one of my professors, Scott Sunquist, about this comment he responded with this.  "Well of course, that makes total sense.  Youth Ministry utilizes a missional approach to ministry, so the church is pen-ultimate, not ultimate".  The church, while important, isn't the chief end.  The chief end is to make disciples of Jesus Christ, whether they be free church, Methodist, Presbyterian, Roman Catholic, Anglican, Eastern Orthodox, etc.  (I acknowledge that some who I listed in that list wouldn't full agree with my previous statement)

Is this the picture of ecclesiology in 40 years?  Where we'll be to the point where denominations are important but they don't matter?

What is the Emerging Church?

2006-02-01T11:35:00.000-05:00

Often the question is asked, "What is the Emerging Church?"

While such some would say that the unanswerable question, I thought this quote from the late Stanley Grenz was quite accurate:

"When someone says Emergent, they really haven’t said anything because this network is so diverse. There are so many different styles and agendas that it’s hard to get a handle on what holds it all together. I think if one were to ask what’s the scarlet thread, I would say these are folks who are taking seriously the context in which they find themselves, which many of them would consider postmodern. They’re trying to take seriously the transitions and changes that they see going on in North American culture, and they want to embody the gospel in a manner in which people in this changing climate can see it, understand it, and respond to it."

For the full interview see http://www.modernreformation.org/sg05interview.htm

Theology Joke

2006-01-31T14:59:00.000-05:00

He he… there is no theological depth to this at all but its sort of funny

Karl Barth, Rudolf Bultmann and Paul Tillich are taking a break together, fishing on Lake Geneva. They are having a lovely time, smoking their pipes, chatting idly. It's hot and they are getting thirsty. So Karl Barth gets up, steps out of the boat, and walks across the water to the shore, grabs some pepsi and returns. It's quite hot so the drinks doesn't last long. Barth tells Tillich: "your turn, Paul". Tillich gets up, steps outside the boat, walks across the water, and fetches some fresh water. It is getting really hot now, and the water is finished once again. Bultmann is beginning to sweat particularly profusely... and finally Barth asks him too: "Come on, Rudolf, your turn now." With a slight tremor in his knees, Bultmann gets up, steps out of the boat, and sinks like a stone. Fortunately he is a good swimmer; he drags himself back into the boat and sulks at the far end. Tillich turns to Barth and says: "Do you think we should have told him where the stepping stones are?" Barth looks at him in astonishment and replies: "What stones?"

PTS = Conservative?

2006-01-31T01:29:00.000-05:00

Today an article appeared in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette highlight Dr. Sam Calian's retirement as the President of Pittsburgh Seminary.  The article, on the whole is well-written and does highlight Dr. Calian's role in the development of our present faculty (in the past praise of Dr. Calian has focused on the massive increase in our endowment).

But one line in the article really stood out to me.  Arguing that PTS has taken a shift from the "left" to the "right" former theology professor George Kehm gives as evidence this statement:

"The student body has also changed. Even students from conservative schools such as Geneva College are represented there now," he said.

I laughed when I read this.  I laughed really hard actually.  Let's be honest – Mr. Kehm might have a point (in fact I would agree with him that PTS has shifted to the "right"), but I think some perspective is needed.

I am a graduate of Grove City College which I imagine Prof Kehm would include amongst the "conservative" schools now represented at Pittsburgh Seminary.  The problem is this: "conservatives" don't really think Pittsburgh is all that conservative.  Seriously.  No lie.  When I was looking at seminaries I talked to some of my professors at Grove City (who I respect a great deal to this day) and they recommended that I consider schools such as Trinity Evangelical, Gordon-Conwell, Westminster, or Reformed Seminary.  When I talked to people in my home Presbytery (who I also respect a great deal), they often recommended schools such as McCormick or Columbia Seminaries.  Seldom mentioned was Pittsburgh.  When I would suggest it the response was usually "Well yeah, Pittsburgh is okay too…"  It was never included as one of the good conservative schools, or one of the good liberal schools.

Want some evidence that Pittsburgh isn't that conservative?  In "conservative" (not fundamentalist circles mind you) circles the ordination of women is a hot topic of debate.  At PTS?  The ordination of women is a foregone conclusion – it may be discussed occasionally, but there is at most one professor who would go on public record as opposing the ordination of women (in some form).  In fact, one of the "standard bearers of traditional Presbyterian theology" (to use Rodgers' phrase) Andrew Purves has gone as far as to call the non-ordination of women a great sin of the church. (It's in his most record book, Reconstructing Pastoral Theology.  I can't give the exact reference because I've loaned my copy to someone for the term).  If one of the more "conservative" faculty members is calling the non-ordination of women as a "great sin" I don't think that PTS is now considered a "conservative" institution.

What's actually funnier is that there is a decent population of people who wouldn't consider Grove City and Geneva all that conservative, honestly.  I remember talked to students at Grove City who were a little uncomfortable coming to Grove City because it wasn't conservative enough.  Why?  1) We only had to go to chapel 16 times per semester 2) We didn't have to sign a code of conduct or statement of faith 3) We could consume alcohol off campus 4) We could dance on campus 5) Girls were allowed in the guys dorms and vice-versa at limited times 6) We could listen to whatever music we wanted to.  We even had students who transferred to Grove City from other schools such as Bob Jones, Liberty, and Cedarville because Grove City was "more liberal".

Just some food for thought.

Update

2006-01-28T11:20:00.000-05:00

So I was trying to find a comment that someone made on my blog (turns out it was from way back on September 4th) and I realized that I haven't posted in forever.  So here's some new thoughts…

Lately I've been focused heavily on school work, as the end of the term approaches.  I've also been "distracted" by this new thing called "searching for a call".  I should be formally "Certified Ready Pending Call" which is fancy Presbyterian language for "Is ready to be hired by a church for gainful employment."  It's getting quite interesting thus far and I'm intrigued to watch what opens up.  It's also a little unsettling because unlike industry, where it can be six weeks from initial interview to start date, in the Presbyterian church its more like six months from initial interview to start date, at a minimum.

I've got my course line up for next term and it looks pretty good.  I'm taking my last term of Hebrew (Hebrew Exegesis) where I think the languages finally become useful because you focus on utilizing your knowledge of Hebrew when it comes to understanding and interpreting the text, rather than just translating it.  In other words, the shift moves from words to their meaning really.  I'm also taking Church and Society: Local which is a study of theology from the African-American context, which also looks quite interesting.  I'll also be taking Theology/Pastoral Care with Dr. Purves (which is, no lie, my 5th full class with him, excluding three one-credit independent studies that I've been doing this year which would bring the grand total up to 18 credits, of the equivalent of six full classes, or a full term and a half).  In Theo/Pastoral Care we'll be reading his book, Reconstructing Pastoral Theology, and then examining the major influences on him, including Athanasius, Calvin, Milligan, McLoed Campbell, Torrance, and Moltmann.  I'll also be taking the last of my one-credit independent studies in Scientific Theology with Dr. Purves, Matt Bell, and Rev. Jim Mead.  Finally, I'll be auditing Doctrine of the Trinity with Dr. Cole-Turner, focusing on Moltmann's work in the Trinity and the Kingdom and The Crucified God.  All in all, I think it'll be  good final term.

Today we're off to go snow tubing with the Sr. High kids, which should be fun as always.  Then tonight I'm going to A) Finalize my sermon for tomorrow B) Make my PowerPoint for tomorrow night's service C) Finalize the guest list with Renee.  Fun times!

Monday Renee and I are meeting our parents in Grove City and we're doing the whole "picking out" the food for our reception.

Off to tubing!

Racism

2006-01-19T15:26:00.000-05:00

Racism isn’t pleasant, is that an understatement or what?  Two thoughts from this past weekend.

The first was seeing the movie, Glory Road.  First of all, this is a wonderful movie, even better than Remember the Titans (Glory Road was made by the same people).  The second thing is that anyone my age (and maybe older) should go see this movie because it helps bring to life a history, a shockingly recent history, that we need to know in order to understand our world today.  Racism as a cancer was/is too powerful of a force for those of us born in a post-1980’s world just to ignore.  So go see Glory Road, because it’s a great movie, but also very informative.

The second was a sermon I heard from De Niece Welch (Associate Pastor @ Shadyside Presbyterian Church and an African-American) discussing talking about the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. and where we are in society.  I won’t be able to get this quote right because I didn’t write it down but here’s the jist.

“So where are my people [The African-American people] today.  Well, the emancipation proclamation got us off the cotton fields.  And Martin King and his followers got us civil rights and equality.  So what now?  Well, the hardest battle is ahead, because it’s easy to change laws, but now we need to change hearts”

A couple things for me really rang true here.  From my side (Euro-American) I believe that racism is alive and well.  While laws, etc. have been changed to reduce racism, institutional racism still exists although not as widespread as it once was, but personal racism is all too alive and well.  While there might be segments of the population who hate solely on the basis of race but I think for a lot of people it’s out of ignorance.  As I reflect on my high school experience, the racism that I held (and still hold, although to a lesser degree now) was and is based on ignorance.  I didn’t grow up around African-Americans and my high school was only 10% African-American, 89% Euro-American, and 1% other (primarily Asian) and therefore my discomfort with them was out of unfamiliarity and a fear of the “violent city”.  When I came to seminary I moved into an area that is between two communities in Pittsburgh: affluent Highland Park, and East Liberty, which is predominantly African-American and violent.  From my side moving into this neighborhood has exposed some of my “ignorant racism” for me and I can see signs that I’ve moved past it.  For example, there is a Giant Eagle that I can get to in two minutes in the East Liberty area, but when I began seminary I didn’t like going there – it wasn’t in as nice of a part of town as the one across the river @ Waterworks.  Sometime last year I realized that was stupid and started going to the Giant Eagle closest to me when I needed something quick (I do my main grocery shopping in the North Hills because I go right past a Giant Eagle on the way to and from church).  In retrospect I realize how stupid I was being in not going someplace because I felt “uncomfortable”.  Seminary also gave me a chance to become friends with African-Americans which I had never really had before (or if I had had it, I didn’t take advantage of it).  Now, I can affirm unequivocally I regard African-Americans in every way equal to any other person, regardless of race.  But while I can affirm that at face value, I’ve learned that overcoming racism requires breaking through barriers into friendship.

A second thing that has stood out to me is when I tell people where I live in the city.  I’ll often get responses, “Oh wow, you live down there?  Aren’t you worried about violence?”  People are right to ask this question, after all, on at least three occasions there have been shootings right near the seminary that I’ve heard.  And, last week one of my classmates was mugged by four young people right near the seminary.  But what really drives the question is a racism of ignorance, because people just don’t know what life is like in the city (not that I really do either, but I have a better idea).  They immediately associate the city with African-Americans and thus associate African-Americans with violence.  It’s not that they think African-Americans are less human or of lesser worth, but those perceptions drive them.  I can’t fault them though; I had those same perceptions prior to living here.

While it is nearly certain that I will end up pastoring in a predominantly Euro-American context what these events have underscored for me is two things.

The importance of education: The church has a responsibility to teach our history, one that is sadly marked with racism, in order to help today’s youth understand why things are the way they are

The importance of partnership: I will make it a point to ensure that the church that I work with partners with a church that is comprised of predominantly of people of another race. This can include many things (pulpit exchanges, joint mission trips, joint service projects, etc.).

God and Pronouns

2006-01-19T15:25:00.000-05:00

God and Pronouns

Last night during an online conversation, the discussion of pronouns and God came up once again. While I fully affirm that the Trinitarian language, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, I do understand well that the use of male pronouns, he, he, he, he, he, him, himself, he, he, he… can be misleading. I affirm two things

God is not male or female – God is not gendered. (The only exception to this rule is that if we understand Jesus as living and reigning in ascended body, then one aspect of God, that of the human side of Jesus is male. But, generally speaking, God has no gender)

God however is not an “it” – Never in the bible does God come across as merely an impersonal force. Hence why I believe that the formula “Creator, Sustainer, and Redeemer” falls well short of the acceptable, because it turns God into a force, not a person.

So, what is one to do?  What about the use of the pronouns “they” and “them” and “themselves”?

Traditionally the Western tradition has affirmed articulations such as “One God in three persons”.  Our Eastern sisters and brothers critique this because they see the Western tradition as elevated one God over the three.  One Eastern Theologian has even charged the western tradition with making God four.  The Eastern tradition has favored articulations of the Trinity such as “Three persons of the same substance” which emphasizes the three-personhood of the Trinity while maintaining the unity through the “one substance”.

What makes the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit God is the relationships between the three persons of the trinity.  If the Father were not in relation to the Son and the Holy Spirit, he would not be good (note the bad pronoun use).  The same goes for the Son and the Holy Spirit, they are not God apart from their relationship with the other two members of the trinity.  So to truly speak of the Christian God we must speak of God as plural.

So is it fair to use plural pronouns?  Are the following sentences acceptable?

“I asked God to show me where they wanted me to serve…”
“In the person of Jesus Christ God revealed themselves to the world…”

Where I see the strength of using plural pronouns is that it is faithful to God’s Trinitarian nature and avoids gendered statements.  The downside is that can come across as polytheistic.  Thoughts?

The Stillers

2006-01-17T18:48:00.000-05:00

For those of you outside of Pittsburgh, if you don't believe me how seriously people here take their football, here's some proof.

But here's a story to illustrate what I'm talking about. On Sunday afternoon the Steelers (excuse me, Stillers) played the Colt. Because neither Renee or I particularly care about the Steelers I got us tickets for the afternoon show of Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat at the church where I work. Afterward I pointed out to Renee that for a Sunday afternoon, the streets of Pittsburgh were deserted. We made record time getting home because there simply was no traffic whatsoever. Then we went for a walk and sure enough, few cars and even fewer people. But, as soon as the game was over, East Liberty came back to life…

One thing I can say, "yinz guyz" take their football seriously.

An e-mail exchange

2006-01-13T10:37:00.000-05:00

So email exchanges are sometimes funny, sometimes sad, and sometimes just weird. I'm not sure which the following falls under:

It all began with this email from Dr. Scott Sunquist, our Missiology Professor:

Gentlemen:
I ran across this atheist's web site and found this page helpful. What do you think? I don't do much in this area, so I was looking for some quick resources to help my students when I do a brief section on interpretation in the postmodern context.
Thanks,
SWS
http://www.friesian.com/hermenut.htm

Which prompted this reply from my friend Matt Bell:

This page strikes me as a highly usuable summary, although I suspect that the last three paragraphs (which actually interest me the most) may be too abstract for some students (probably only the anti-intellectual ones, actually, but that number is considerable). Many people are not used to thinking about thinking and find the exercise painful or even silly, yet this is the critical move that leads to the demise of foundationalism and the rise of various post-critical approaches such as postmodern radical deconstruction and its still post-critical opponents including critical realism. (BTW, I've found McGrath very helpful in clarifying realistic approaches, and suspect he may be slightly more accessible, although considerably more verbose, than the webpage below)

"Give the devil an inch..." Since I've been invited to provide input, and since the last three (immensely interesting) paragraphs are precisely at the point of an extended and friendly debate between Wallace and myself, I'll go ahead and say more just about those three. The following is likely only of interest to him, so SWS -- don't worry about following the thread below. I include this as part of my reply to you only for your entertainment.

Brian, it strikes me that your allergy to the phrase "objective truth" and love of postmodern communication strategies qua Franke and McLaren, is precisely an example of confusion of ontological truth and meaning. Contra this, and to respond to your critiques of my insistence upon using the phrase "objective truth", I actually do reject on a certain level all subject-object distinctions. On a certain level, though not the radical one embraced by eastern monisms, I do accept as valid the statement, "I am the wall" or, rather, "I and the wall and all reality are integrated." There is a necessary degree of correspondance between thought and reality, inasmuch as human thought is contingent on the merciful presence of the divine Logos upholding all reality including the reality which is me myself and my conscious existence.

We are consistent at this difference: Your saying yesterday, "Julian of Norwich is wierd" contra my finding her not wierd is a case in point. Julian's core mystic insight is her the-en-pan-sim, her turning on its head pan-en-the-isms yet simulteneously rejecting all deism. God is in everything, though not everything is yet in God as that awaits the eschaton when God will be all-in-all through the submission of all things to Christ who is himself subject to God the Father. The Logos is the presence upholding all reality, including the supposedly inner, hidden world of my own subjectivity (c.f. Psalm 139). With respect to knowledge, thsi means that knowledge of the wall is mediated to me by the Logos:

Wall <-------> Logos <-------> Me

The same Logos that upholds (and therefore constrains) the existence of the wall also uphold and therefore sets bounds upon my existence in all its particulars, including my awareness of self and other. Thus, a logocentric final reality serves as ontological grounds for a radical realism in which certainty may be an ontologically grounded mental state and not an arbitrary and hubristic human dream. Put in the terms we used in lab: No, I can't get at anything apart from my subjectivity. It does not follow however that I cannot know and speak of the objective truth of something. My statements of reality are partially subjective and therefore subjective, but per the subject-object union grounded in the Logos, they may also truly reflect my object and therefore referential to objective truth or truths. I would argue that this is Torrance's mystical view of knowing present behind his onto-relational ontology of reality, and his absolute demand for rejection of all dualism, even the basic one subscribed to by the author of the webpage regarding the dualism of subject and object.

Per eschatological realism and sin, however, you have a strong point. Athanasius points out that the incarnation of the Logos was due precisely the falling away of creation from God. Sin is the disintegration of being (c.f. 2 Pet. 1, esp. in the Greek where participation in the divine nature stands opposite the disintegration of the cosmic reality). Since this is what sin is ontologically, objects may become distanced from their mutual point of unity and unification in the Logos. Subjective knowers such as ourselves experience this as confusion, frustration, the inability to know or be certain. We cannot know autonomously: When we try to do so, that is to know apart from the Logos in which knowledge is grounded, we discover only that we cannot know. We are like the heretics of Dante's city Dis, ever knowing less and less until the eschaton. Opposite this, those who are being redeemed receive the knowledge of Him who called them (again, c.f. 2 Pet. 1) and so discover a reintegration with themselves and the whole of reality. In the Logos we should expect all things to snap back into place. It is vital in this picture, of course, to point out with Panenburg that the kingdom is not yet: We know in part and prophesy in part. The Christian as such is called to truly but not absolutely know. We can be certain, but we must leave room for uncertainty as well.

Enough drivel from me!

Your mutual admirer in Christ,
Matt

To which I replied:

Greetings,I will respond in brief to the article and then to my dear friend.I think the article is well-done. Some students will find it incoherent and difficult to understand, but it's brief enough and straight-forward enough to be well used.As to my dear friend:1) I am not a deconstructionist to the extent that Derrida was, but I think Derrida does have a point in what he says. Writing does take on a life of its own, apart from the intent of the author. I blogged about a recent event that illustrated this to me http://wallybarthman.blogspot.com/2005/12/derrida-was-right.html In this case, the issue was independent of the author's intent, did one reading of the text offer a platform that would justify a woman staying in an abuse relationship. From my read - of course not. From another persons' read, yes, very much so. So rather than some deconstructionists who say that all interpretations are just as valid as the next (though I've never met one who actually believes and practices this) I find myself in agreement with the author of this piece who argues that there is a reality which governs interpretations. Here's the case of the governance at work. One cannot say that Barth instructs pastors to tell women who are being abused to remain in the abusive relationship. However, one could say that a certain reading of Barth gives just this impression, and that is problematic in my view. Barth probably did not intend to do that (I would hope) but it happened none the less, regardless of his intent.2) As to the non-existence of objective-truth. I do not deny the objective existence of the world, the world is not that which I want it to be. I can't merely pretend that there aren't walls and thereby walk through them. However, and this is where perhaps you and I differ (and perhaps I fall victim to individualism) but I can't make an objective statement (this statement was in no way objective) about anything - behind everything I say or do there is some motive. (I think we're in agreement here, I'm just trying to fill poor Sunquist in on the drivel that has preceded this). However, I cannot for the life of me get my head around your arguments about becoming one with the wall. That aside, I am somewhat convinced by the arguments of social constructionists, especially when it comes to the concepts of "culture", that we live in a world of our own creation. The culture in which we live is a product of human creation and we do not stand outside our culture, we stand very much apart of it. After reading both of Franke's books I think he pushed the social constructionist agenda further than I want to (this is partially because my science background reminds me that rocks fall the same regardless of who is dropping or measuring them) but I see fundamental differences between the "objects" of scientific inquiry and the "objects" of theological inquiry. As I wrote in an email last week, the problem with McGrath's approach to scientific theology is the nature of the object of inquiry aren't the same. While his statement "that which is embedded in the universe is embodied in the person of Jesus Christ" is beautiful and almost poetic here's the problem. I can, right now, drop a rock and measure it, touch it, feel it, etc. In science we can recreate the experiments which produce the evidence we examine. In theology this isn't so. We cannot go back and watch creation, we cannot go back and live in the worlds that produced the biblical texts, or sit at the church councils. Our "icons" by which we seek to understand God in a theological sense are of a different nature than those by which we can understand God's creation. This all circles back to deconstructionism. It is far easier for me to examine the authorial intent of Dr. Sunquist because I can go ask him questions. This doesn't work in biblical studies however, we can't ask the authors (in the same manner in which I can ask Dr. Sunquist) what their intent was. Rather, we must ask the author to guide our understanding and interpretation. So what happens when the community's appropriation of a text doesn't match what we understand the author's intent to be? (See blog post http://wallybarthman.blogspot.com/2005/11/tonight-at-northmont.html). Am I then to disregard the interpretation of the community because it contradicts what the majority of commentators have said the author's intent was? Can the Holy Spirit appropriate texts in new ways that go beyond the author's intent? I would hope so! But, there we've begun to slide down the deconstructionist slide because we are allowing the text to take on a life of its own. Okay, that's enough drivel from me.- Brian

The Character of Theology: Preface

2006-01-12T16:57:00.000-05:00

[In preparation for Dr. John Franke's visit to Pittsburgh Seminary as part of the Emerging Church Conversation on February 9th, I will be doing a series of blog posts over the coming weeks on the book.  There won't be any structure per say (chapter by chapter) but rather as I read a section I'll blog on it]

Preface:

In his preface John Franke seeks to give the reader insight into his personal background, with the hope that an understand of his background will help the reader better understand his work.  As he writes "It is better to be latent than blatant… assumes that the long-standing notions of academic neutrality and objectivity are both overrated and unattainable"

Franke identifies three perspectives that have had a significant impact on him: evangelical Protestantism, the Reformed tradition, and ecumenical orthodoxy.  From evangelical Protestantism, which he has interacted with through his entire life, he has been shaped by those communities' emphasis on a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, the sharing of the faith through personal witness and evangelism, and the centrality of the Bible for Christian faith and life.  He notes that even where he dissents from North American Evangelicalism he does so for reason that he believes to be very evangelical.

Franke says that by the time he graduated from college identified himself as a Calvinist and through graduate study this developed into a "full-bodied commitment to the ecclesial and confessional tradition of Reformed Protestantism" (8).  It was from the Reformed tradition that he learned about the church and the mission of God in the world.

Finally, Franke notes that despite the diversity of interpretation from different Christian traditions he had come to appreciate that there did exist ecumenical consensus on central matters of faith that provided common ground in this otherwise diverse setting.    From this Franke says that he regards ecumenical orthodoxy should inform the work of biblical interpretation and theological reflection as on on-going conversation partner.

Franke then identifies himself as postmodern.  Here I will quote from him directly:

"By this [identifying himself as postmodern] I do not mean that I endorse everything that claims to be postmodern, much of which I regard as incompatible with Christian faith.  What I do mean is that insofar as a set of general philosophical beliefs, attitudes, and intellectual tendencies relates to such matters as epistemology, language, and the nature of reality can be identified as postmodern rather than modern, I find much more affinity with the postmodern perspective and believe that in comports far better with the Christian faith than does the modern" (Pg. 8)

Franke asserts that while some would claim to take a "biblical" outlook, rather than a modern or postmodern outlook, such a view is "untenable" as it leave assumptions and presuppositions unexamined.

He then describes the book as an attempt to understand the task of theology in a way that is non-foundationalist and contextual and promotes an "open and flexible" theology that is "self-critical" and "reforming".  Again quoting Franke:

"In light of my history and social location in conservative churches and institutions and to the extent that the approach offered here constitutes a genuine alternative to accepted and established norms for conservative theology, this work may be regarded as postconservative.  As such it seeks to make common ground with postliberal thinkers in the pursuit of the "generous orthodoxy" envisioned by late Yale theologian Hans Frei, who coined the term to describe an understanding of Christianity that contains elements of both liberal and conservative thought while seeking to move beyond the views of knowledge and certainity that liberals and conservatives hold in common" (Pg. 9)

Finally, Franke notes that it is from two particular contexts that the book has arisen, that of teaching at Biblical Seminary which has shaped every part of the book, as well as an attempt to disseminate more widely the ideas that where coming out of his teaching.  Of particular importance to that is the writing of Beyond Foundationalism which he co-write with Stanley Grenz.  In relation to Beyond Foundationalism he writes, "… is a sort of prequel to Beyond Foundationalism that introduces, recapitualates, refines, and anticipates its major themes by providing an exposition of the nature, task, and purpose of theology that gives rise to the methodological proposal developed in the earlier work.

Franke closes the preface with thanks to the various publications, institutions, and people who have assisted him in his work.  Of note, is his final paragraph dedicated to Stanley Grenz who passed away in March of 2005.

Comments: Rereading this preface I was struck by how helpful this was in retrospect.  By clearing identifying his "hermeneutical trajectory" early in the book, it enabled to better understand what was intended by certain phrases as well as what he was contrasting his work to.

[I know this post was extremely long for a short five page preface, but I believe it's important to get an understand of where Franke is coming from in order to understand his book]

MLK Jr.

2006-01-11T13:28:00.000-05:00

The Union Project (a community development, faith and arts non-profit) and The Open Door (a Presbyterian New Church Development) invite you to an evening of celebrating and honoring the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Please join us on Monday, January 16 from 5:30 - 8:00 p.m. at the Union Project at 801 N. Negley Ave. for a time of celebrating the life and ministry of Dr. King. There will be free food, 3 Gospel choirs, a step show and Rev. Dr. "Jimmy Joe" Robinson speaking to us about the meaning and message of Dr. King.

For more information please contact BJ Woodworth or visit www.unionproject.org

Return to Running...

2006-01-08T17:34:00.000-05:00

Rule #1: If you don't run for a few months, then get inspired for the 40 degree weather, prepare for a bad time.

So, I was inspired by a number of things this week that convinced me to take up running again.  1) The scale was beginning to give me news I didn't like to hear 2) I've been feeling very "blah" lately, which is typically symptomatic of being not getting enough exercise 3) I bought myself a new, lightweight windbreak r that will be great for running in the snow since it'll keep my sweatshirts from getting soaked.

However, as per usual, it was a painful experience for me.  I am also fighting off the very tail end effects of a cold which would also explain why it was especially painful today.  But, as per usual once I'm done running I'm glad I went.

An evening of reading and Hebrew awaits me.

Robertson is at it again

2006-01-05T22:46:00.000-05:00

Headlines say: Robertson Links Sharon Stroke, God's Wrath

He's at it again… and for the record, I do not believe that Ariel Sharon's stroke was God's divine punishment because he "divided God's land". I regard Pat Robertson as a brother in Christ, but believe that he is often in grave error when he attempts to use the prophet Joel to say when Ariel Sharon had a stroke.

Emerging @ PTS

2006-01-05T00:00:00.000-05:00

Emerging Church @ PTS Schedule (February 9th)

Noon - Dr. John Franke speaks at Evangelical Student Fellowship (Dining Room #1 - Pittsburgh Theological Seminary)

3:15 pm - Dr. John Franke, The Many and the One: Toward a Theology of Christian Pluralism (Room #4 - Pittsburgh Theological Seminary)

4:30 pm - A Conversation about the Emerging Church with Dr. John Franke and Emergent leaders from Pittsburgh (Room #4 - Pittsburgh Theological Seminary)

6 pm - Dr. John Franke visits with Emergent Pittsburgh Cohort (Contact BJ Woodworth(bj@pghopendoor.org) for more information)

More information is available at http://www.ptsstudents.org/ECC

Postmodern Seminary Vocabulary

2006-01-04T23:37:00.000-05:00

Saw this on Scott Collins-Jones' blog today… pretty accurate assessment of seminary.

The Character of Theology

2006-01-03T00:36:00.000-05:00

On February 9th John Franke will be visiting Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. That's a little more than a month away and I was thinking it might be helpful if a few people undertook a reading of his newest book, "The Character of Theology". I've read it once and am now reading a book that he wrote before that with Stanley Grenz, Beyond Foundationalism. While both books are good (so far I prefer Beyond Foundationalism actually) The Character of Theology is more recent and is shorter. (I should add, I think I like Beyond Foundationalism better because I've read The Character of Theology and simply have a better understanding of what Franke and Grenz are talking about).

Anyway, what I am wondering is two fold 1) Is anyone interesting in reading The Character of Theology before the 9th? Its only 200 pages and it’s a fast read: I read about 100 pages in two days without much effort. 2) Would anyone be interested in having me write a series of blog entries that summarize Franke's arguments from The Character of Theology?

Back to Reality...

2006-01-03T00:25:00.000-05:00

So today ended the great Christmas adventure as I returned to Pittsburgh after dropping Renee off at the airport. This afternoon I managed to kill the entire afternoon doing random stuff, but did manage to get back into getting work done tonight by finishing off some reading for tomorrow, and doing my outline.

Ahead in a next few weeks includes the much-dreaded Hebrew midterm exam as well as making preparations to go to Mississippi during our two week break, trying to keep up with reading plus doing the extra reading assigned for missiology (I'm reading Leslie Newbigin). We also have the Emerging Church "day" here at PTS on the 9th and I'm trying to finalize plans for that. I'll also be keeping up the PTS Audio project, as well as beginning my search for a call (I'm excited about that).

Last year I complained about my life being so busy, this year I committed to not doing that, because the truth is that I love being busy and with all my little projects, I still enjoy what I do here at the seminary and what I do at church.

Missiology awaits tomorrow morning!

Survived :-)

2005-12-28T10:07:00.000-05:00

So Renee and I have officially survived our first Christmas together. We’ve done Christmas with my entire family and now we’re in Ohio with Renee’s family. I’ve also successfully transitioned from 24 to 25 today… yup, hit the quarter century mark.

Jesus and CNN

2005-12-24T09:12:00.000-05:00

So last night I caught the tail end of CNN’s program on Jesus and I expected that when all was said and done I’d be very disappointed.  Surprise of surprise, I wasn’t: they did a really good job.

I only caught the tail end where they were discussing his death and resurrection.  They appealed to a wide variety of scholars including Roman Catholic scholars as well as Bart Ehrman and NT Wright.  I think they accurate captured the reason for Jesus’ death and didn’t try to just blame the Romans or blame the Jewish authorities, and instead got it right that they two were in cahoots.  They also did a good job with the resurrection, and made the point that while science can’t explain the resurrection, none of the supposed explanations adequately explain the faith that developed in subsequent years.  They closed with this comment from NT Wright, “The best explanation for the rise of the Christian faith is that Jesus was in fact raised from the dead on the third day.”

It was also nice to see that “objective” scholars (typically Crossan, Marcus Borg, etc.) didn’t get much attention as they often do because those “evangelical” scholars can’t be trusted because they have an agenda (as if Crossan and Borg don’t?).

Anyway, my accolades this morning go out to CNN for a job well done.

Intelligent Design and the Public Schools

2005-12-22T10:01:00.000-05:00

     So Intelligent Design has gotten a lot of attention lately, especially with the ruling in the Dover case in Pennsylvania.  The case at this point is moot, because the citizens of Dover voted out the whole school board because of their actions.  (To which Pat Robertson warned the citizens of Dover that they had voted God out of their city and to not be surprised if natural disaster hit them… thanks Pat, you’re a real gem.  It’s no wonder people can’t stand Christians, anyway)

My beef with “evolution” is this: it’s not proven.  In fact, no scientific theory is proven.  I was trained in physics so I spent literally hours working with Newton’s laws.  Newton’s laws are not proven.  In fact, to the contrary, they have been found to be less than useful in situations where objects are traveling near the speed of light.  Does this mean that Newton’s laws are wrong?  It’s the wrong question.

Scientific theories are precisely that – theories.  They are explanations of observed phenomena.  They may be more or less useful and accurate, but they are theories nonetheless.  I am not a biologist but unless biology has been exempted from the ordinary rules of science (sarcasm duly noted) one must admit that this is what the theory of evolution is: its an explanation of observed phenomena.  It’s not a fact, its not proven, it’s not some sacred cow that doesn’t deserve to be tested.

If I taught high school physics it would a high crime again science to teach only Newton’s laws because we live in world where Newton’s laws don’t provide good explanations for everything, but they do do a pretty good job of explaining a lot of what we deserve.

So here’s my point: does intelligent design deserve teaching in our public schools?  I’m not sure, I’m not up to date on my Intelligent design knowledge.  But let’s be real and honest and stop trying to deceive everyone into believing that scientific theories are unquestionable.

My second point is this: there is an official religion of public education, secular humanism.  I am not going to say whether this is a bad thing, but let’s stop pretending that by seeking to keep all religion out of public school we’re not appealing to another religion, we are.  Any statement about god is by nature a theological statement, so to say that god does not exist, or god is not, or even god is a pink banana is a theological statement.  Thus, by preventing the teaching of anything about god our public schools are in fact embracing secular humanism as their official religion.  Again, I’m not saying this is a bad thing.  I think if our schools we to embrace another religion it would undoubtedly be far more trouble that it’s worth.  But my point on this is the same as intelligent design, let’s be honest about it rather than pretending that evolution is a proven fact and that there isn’t a public endorsement of a specific religion.

SU Basketball

2005-12-22T08:54:00.000-05:00

So despite being a Syracuse basketball fan for my whole life, and following them closely since my Junior year of college, I had never actually seen them life in person. However, I remedied that situation last night and took care of part of my dad’s birthday present as we went to see SU vs. Illinois-Chicago last night. Minus the end of the first half, when Ill.-Chicago went on a 10-0 run to close the gap from 32-20 to 32-30, it was a good game. SU came out and went on a 7-0 run at the start of the first half to get the game to 39-30 and from there on in the game was never in doubt.

SU didn’t shoot the ball especially well (Gerry McNamara’s 2-13 from beyond the arc is case in point) but Terrance Roberts’ 19 points along with McNamara’s 18 led the way to victory. I think it’ll be interesting to see how this team does when the Big East Season rolls around. It is a shame that Pitt build such a small stadium and henceforth doesn’t sell any public tickets for Big East games.

Home Sweet Home

2005-12-21T11:49:00.000-05:00

So I arrived “home” yesterday. I put “home” in quotes only because “home” for me (and I think many people my age) is a strange concept. Having spent the last six years in Western PA I feel much more “at home” there than I do in Rochester. That being said, “home” is a really nice place to be and since I haven’t seen my parents since August, it’s good to finally see them.

Today I am recovering from some sort of illness that caused my tonsils to explode in size to the point where it hurts to swallow. However, with the help of lots of sleep and extra strength Tylenol, I am doing quite well now. I am also getting a chance to do some much-needed reading today. Dr. Purves has decided that for our Jan 12th meeting of our independent study, we need to read 191 pages… 130 to go for me, on top of my reading for Missiology, T/E of Karl Barth, and trying to finish Beyond Foundationalism before February 9th. Needless to say, I have a very full book bag.

Christmas Break

2005-12-17T12:02:00.000-05:00

So, three weeks down in the semester, seven to go.  We started Christmas break on Friday and I celebrated by driving down to Maryland.  Beth and Jeremy are getting married for well, actually, the third time.  The first time was over the phone back in September, they were legally married over breakfast last week (Jeremy’s dad can sign marriage licenses) and then tomorrow they’ll have their “public witnessing of the marriage vows.”  I’m doing double-duty as homilist/best man.  Today is the rehearsal and rehearsal dinner, followed by the wedding tomorrow afternoon.  Monday Renee is moving from Laurel, MD north to Columbia so that’s Monday’s task.  Tuesday I am set to drive home to Rochester.  Wednesday my dad and I are going to Syracuse to see the Syracuse vs. Illinois-Chicago game.  Thursday evening Renee is flying into Rochester.  Friday is Christmas with my dad’s side of the family, Saturday is Christmas eve with my Aunt Marilyn and Uncle Bob (and family) where we celebrate my cousin Paul and my mom’s birthday (both are Christmas day babies).  Christmas morning we’ll celebrate Christmas at home with my parents, then venture off to see my mom’s side of the family (That side of the family is so big and we have so many kids that we rent out the town hall – no joke).  Then we’ll be in Buffalo on the 26th (Renee’s first hockey game and first trip to McPartlands, only the greatest restaurant in Buffalo) and then on the 27th head to Ohio for Christmas with her family and my birthday (I’ve hit the quarter-century mark).  Then New Year’s Eve we’ll be with Renee’s dad’s family.  On the 30th we have a reunion at Crestfield (which Kevin conned me into preaching at) and then on the 2nd I resume classes and Renee flies back to BWI.

Hmm… vacation?  I think not.

So, somewhere in there I need to keep up on my Hebrew vocab, and read a whole bunch of pages for classes as soon as I get back.  So while I get a stress-free Thanksgiving on the trimester plans, it makes Christmas uber-busy.

Emerging @ PTS

2005-12-14T22:50:00.000-05:00

So, as some of you know I’ve been working on pulling together an event here in February.  ESF (Evangelical Student Fellowship) is a group that I’ve been active with since I started seminary and would say that it’s been a crucial part of my seminary experience.  Last year I joined the leadership team and remain apart of that this year albeit in a slightly different (but better suited role).  In many ways ESF’s leadership has been a model of how leadership should work.  We all trust one another, so the leadership team serves to empower and rather than control.  ESF has, in my time in seminary, hosted a number of different discussion panels and forums on various topics including inclusive language, The Passion of the Christ, Faith and Politics and I think something else that I can’t recall right now.  Anyhow, it was suggested to me to work on something similar on the emerging church.  So, I sat down with Dr. Sunquist (our esteemed advisor) and Rich (one of our co-presidents) and we laid some groundwork for it.  That weekend I went to the Generous Orthodoxy Conference, hoping that I could meet John Franke and convince him to be apart of it.  So, the first day of the Conference I introduced myself to him and we sat together during the first general session.  I mentioned “We’re having a discussion forum on the Emerging Church…” before I finished the sentence he said, “I will come at my own expense to be apart of that.”  Mission accomplished.

So here’s the (very) preliminary plans for the day:

Noon:     John Franke @ ESF (Dining Room #1)
3:15:      John Franke, “The Many and the One: Toward a Theology of Christian Pluralism” (Room #4)
     Responding: Rev. Dr. John Burgess (tentative)
4:30:     A Conversation about the Emerging Church: Featuring John Franke and Emerging Church leaders from around Pittsburgh

Laurelville

2005-12-11T16:46:00.000-05:00

This weekend was our Sr. High Winter Retreat with Pittsburgh Youth Network @ Laurelville. A few highlights…

Being picked to battle two other youth leaders with a dead eel, by trying to break an egg that was held in place by a pair of stockings… and then smelling myself for the rest of the time with a delightful mix of dead eel and rotten egg…

Cabin time discussions with the guys

Winning our first snow football game without even scoring a touchdown…

Watching Cory knock a guy down with his nose

Watching Jarrod show off his CMU football skills

Enjoying 20 minutes of silence in the freezing cold

Watching the weather get worse and worse the closer to home we got

Spending a weekend with a great group of kids

No Church on Christmas Morning?

2005-12-08T13:58:00.000-05:00

This morning in missiology the issue of megachurches who are not having worship on Sunday came up.  It turned out to be a lively discussion.  While I have a critique of many seeker-sensitive megachurches I nonetheless think they have a great deal to teach the post-mainline church about what it means to critically engage culture.  For many of these churches, which have committed themselves to being family friendly, having worship on Sunday morning, especially following huge services on Christmas eve, would be more of a burden than a genuine worship experience.  The cultures to which most of these megachurches aim is one that does not traditionally celebrate worship on Christmas morning.  While that is the case in some settings, for them its not.

My other beef is this – when since has worship been reserved only for Sunday?  I understand the theological significance of gathering on Sundays, but many churches have found that worship services on Saturday evenings are well attended by a different segment of the population?  Is it most important that we gather on Sunday or that we gather?  To me its the latter.

I think what so many post-mainline churches fail to recognize is that the culture shift has had a dramatic influence on our families.  Even from when I was growing up kids are programmed at a younger and younger age between the 102 things that they're involved in.  Some decry this as proof of the downfall of American families, and there may be some truth to that, but it also is showing an increased interest in providing opportunities for kids to be actively involved in things, rather than simply turn them into a bunch of tv-watching latch key kids (which was what my generation was).  If the church can give people a gift on Christmas morning by saying "hey, stay home with your family and enjoy a day together" then so be it.  Dr. Sunquist said, "Christmas isn't about family" and he's right, but in our culture family is a crucial part of family celebrations and if the church fails to understand that I think its made a crucial error.

I am not saying churches shouldn't have services Christmas morning, but I'm just saying that we should be careful in judging the decisions of other churches as to what they decide.

Side note: Matt Bell made a great comment at lunch about the stone-throwing that we here in seminary tend to do when it comes to mainline churches, "its out of envy more than anything".  Ha, isn't that true?

Derrida was right?!?!

2005-12-08T00:48:00.000-05:00

So for any of your philosophical purists, you will undoubtedly be unhappy with my post because I am going to engage a postmodern philosopher without much knowledge of him.  That being said… Tuesday confirmed something that I have long suspected and only recently come to really understand.  Jacques Derrida, considered the father of deconstructionism was really onto something.  A text, regardless of the author's intent does take on a life of its own.

We were assigned to read Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics III.4, the section on Man and Woman (pgs 116-181 for you purists).  In the final part of this section Barth addresses the issue of "orders" in creation, basically arguing that because man and woman are not the same (man is A, woman is B) and A precedes B, etc.  (I won't go into the detail of the argument).  Needless to say, we were dealing with sensitive issues relating to gender roles and Barth said some strong things.  There is only one woman in the class and that was a shame because it would have been great to have multiple female perspectives.  However, this woman, who I've come to respect a great deal, gave what I thought to be a compelling critique to Barth's work from a female's perspective.  What's interesting is that I didn't get the same read of Barth as she did, but I can see where she's coming from.  So who's "right"?  Well, I think that's the wrong question.

As I read Barth's section, especially as one planning on getting married in less than six months, I found Barth's discussion helpful and in some parts convicting.  To her, she found Barth's theology oppressive and dangerous, to the point that it would encourage pastors to counsel women who were in abusive situations to remain there.  So why is this?  Well, regardless of Barth's intent what he wrote (and corresponding the words used by the translators) have contexts all their own, and depending on how one defines those words one's understanding will change.  So what Barth's meant by "orders" and what he intended to say isn't necessarily precisely what we understand when we read him.  So, since I want to rescue Barth, I'm going to argue that he never intended to present a platform which would encourage pastors to counsel women to remain in abusive relationships.  But, we must recognize that he could be read in that way.

Shortly after the national youth workers convention I told my dear friend Matt that I was going to write a blog entry entitled "Why I am Not a Christian".  Now, what I intended by that statement was the term Christian is so socially loaded that identifying myself as one will in some cases put a whole bunch of labels on me that I don't believe to be accurate.  However, as Matt pointed out, by using the title of Bertrand Russell I would be also placing a whole bunch of labels on myself that I didn't want either.  The same holds true with my use of the word postmodern.  In my PIF (fancy Presbyterian title for a resume) I use the word postmodern.  As my pastor pointed out, that term is a loaded one, and might scare people off without just cause.

Isn't this the truth?

2005-12-06T13:46:00.000-05:00

"Among the immediate data of existence there is certainly no greater riddle for man that the fact of the existence of woman and the question as to her nature. And on the other hand the same applies to women… To live humanly means never to escape the astonishment of one's own sex at the other, and the desire of one's sex to understand the other'

- Karl Barth (Church Dogmatics III.4, Pg., 167)

Lesson Learned

2005-12-06T12:56:00.000-05:00

Lesson learned… never loan a book to BJ Woodworth, he'll burn it on you.

"and another book" =  my copy of Preaching Christ Today by TF Torrance.

Alas, I'll always remember BJ every time I took at that book.

Note: I'm actually laughing quite hard as I write this, I am quite thankful that it was only my book that was burned, and no BJ, his computer, his car, or the Union Project.  Plus, talk about the word catching fire.

Where I Stand

2005-12-06T12:50:00.000-05:00

I came across this post on emergent-us that is a pretty accurate description of where I am right now theologically/politically, etc. http://emergent-us.typepad.com/emergentus/2005/12/a_different_kin.html

Sunday's Sermon

2005-12-05T00:22:00.000-05:00

So tonight I preached/led worship at Northmont again, and I was really nervous. I remember the only other time I've really been nervous preaching at Northmont was January of my first year, when it was my very first time preaching there. But tonight I was going to hit kind of close to home with some slides showing our churches' membership loss over the last ten years and the corresponding worship attendance figures (which aren’t nearly as gloomy). Even though I've been there for two years now I still get nervous when I preach sermons that are a little more critical of our church. At the same time, I didn't want to come down too hard, because there's a lot of good that is going on in our church. So my quandary was how do I balance preaching a sermon on how the world has changed and the church needs to respond without sounding like I'm scolding people. The answer? Wait for the Holy Spirit.

My key insight in tonight's sermon you'll only find on the audio recording because it didn't come to me till I got to the end of my outline and realized I hadn't wrapped it up at all. The passage tonight was from Isaiah 40, which is the beginning of Judah's restoration. My key insights was that when changes happen God doesn't get rid of the old and start brand new, he transforms what already is into something new. So, things are "the same" but different. In other words, what is is reformed by God into something which is the same but different. One could say that the Christian church is like this – we're the same but we're all different. This is why in the church history is so important as the "trajectory" from which we come. We're not bound to history, it doesn't dictate to us what we become, but it should inform and guide us. My other key tonight was to point out in the life of our church where we have responded well to the changing world, which actually was quite easy as we've had a group in our church who has become focused on "reaching out" in everything we do.

Anyway, as usual everything is available @ http://www.wallyandnay.net/Brian/Sermons

Me = Emergent?

2005-12-03T09:57:00.000-05:00

So something quite scary happened yesterday – Bob Reufle told me that in Dr. Burgess's Theology/Practice of Christian Worship course…

EXCURSUS: I took Theology/Practice of Christian Worship second term of my first year at the recommendation of a number of the older students, and have not once regretted it.  It's one course in which the theological/practical are not divided at all.  Everything that is discussed in that class deals directly with theological and practical issues.  I think its one of the most useful "practical" courses I've taken in seminary.  I find myself using my knowledge from that class every time I write an order of worship.  HIGHLY RECOMMENDED COURSE.  Plus, Dr. Burgess (I've had him for 3 classes plus an independent study and now a fourth class this term) is an excellent professor.

Anywho, so Dr. Burgess is teaching the class again.  Apparently Dr. Burgess asked the class how many people were familiar with the Emerging Church Worship and followed that up with a comment, "If you've been around Brian Wallace for any period of time you certainly are aware of it".  Yikes!

I guess the reason I laugh at this comment is that I feel that I'm just trying to play around with some of stuff that people have labeled "Emergent".  Truth be told I think its hard to get a grasp on what the label "emergent" actually means, but I think what Dr. Burgess means by the term is worship that is focused on being intentionally multi-sensory and interactive.  Tomorrow night for example I am going to be doing a traditional sermon but I'm going to try and incorporate interactive elements during the sermon.  (Compared to last time where I introduced the scripture and then we had an interactive conversation).  But I am going to try to include stations where people who aren't auditory learners can interact and engage (I'm not sure how yet).

But nonetheless, I had to laugh at my name being used to describe something "emergent".

Da Vinci Code

2005-12-02T11:37:00.000-05:00

In the past two weeks I have encountered two interesting blog posts relating to the Da Vinci Code.  One was from Scot McKnight, noted New Testament Scholar.  He asks the simple question: Why do so many people want to believe that the Da Vinci Code is true? (http://www.jesuscreed.org/?p=574)

The second is from Dan Kimball, who writes that is he thinks the Da Vinci code will present a greater opportunity than the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe.  In his words, the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe is an insiders show – you understand the metaphor Lewis was using if you know the story of Jesus Christ.  If you don't know that story then you'll probably love the story, but miss the Christ-metaphor.  He also makes the great point that he hopes people see The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe and become interested in Lewis and read Mere Christianity.  (http://www.dankimball.com/vintage_faith/2005/12/why_i_am_lookin.html)

I think what both McKnight and Kimball get is that too often the church looks at things like the Da Vinci code and proceeds to give a parent-like scolding to the society thereby ghettoizing itself.  The reaction from those outside the Christian community: "Dan Brown must be right because the church is obviously scared of it".  What if a church rented out a theatre and afterward had an honest discussion about the movie?  Just imagine the teaching moment!  This is a classic case of what so many people are realizing: When you're in a missionary setting you can't pretend to be some big shot and issue a parent-like scolding.  You need to serious engage culture.  In many ways we need to look to Origen, who sought to seriously engage his culture around him as an example of what we need to do.

I do need to note that Origen was eventually declared a heretic because in some ways he over accomdated the faith to the world of greek philosophy.  However, he is still very useful – I recommend John Franke's assessment of Origin in The Character of Theology Pgs. (92-100)

Karl Barth and Creationism/Evolution

2005-12-02T11:34:00.000-05:00

I ran across this on the First-Theology Yahoo Group which gives us an insight into what Karl Barth would say to the on-going evolution/creation/intelligent design debate:

Here is a letter from a granduncle to his grandniece written thirty years ago:
Basel [Switzerland], 18 Feb. 1965

Dear Christine,
You have had to wait a terribly long time for an answer to your letter of 13 Dec.--not because of indifference, for I am sincerely interested in your welfare, and that of your mother and sisters, and am always pleased to have good news from Zollikofen [near Bern, Switzerland].
Has no one explained to you in your seminar that one can as little compare the biblical creation story and a scientific theory like that of evolution as one can compare, shall we say, an organ and a vacuum-cleaner--that there can be as little question of harmony between as of contradiction?
The creation story is a witness to the beginning or becoming of all reality distinct from God in the light of God's later acts and words relating to his people Israel--naturally in the form of a saga or poem. The theory of evolution is an attempt to explain the same reality in its inner nexus--naturally in the form of a scientific hypothesis.
The creation story deals only with the becoming of all things, and therefore with the revelation of God, which is inaccessible to science as such. The theory of evolution deals with what has become, as it appears to human observation and research and as it invites human interpretation. Thus one's attitude to the creation story and the theory of evolution can take the form of an either/or only if one shuts oneself off completely from faith in God's revelation or from the mind (or opportunity) for scientific understanding.
So tell the teacher concerned that she should distinguish what is to be distinguished and not shut herself off completely from either side.
My answer comes so late because on the very day you wrote, 13 Dec., I had a stroke and had to spend several weeks in the hospital.
With sincere greetings which you may also pass on to your mother and sisters,

Yours,
UNCLE KARL

From http://department.monm.edu/classics/Speel_Festschrift/cathey.htm

Reflections

2005-12-02T01:15:00.000-05:00

So every so often I get in a poetic/reflective/nostalgic mood and tonight was one of those nights.  This afternoon I attended the colloquium with Dr. Burgess and afterward walked over to the bookstore to pick up an order of books for the church.  As I was walking back it had begun to snow, and I was struck by how odd everything seemed.

I remember my first year of seminary well.  I came to PTS directly from Grove City and immediately found myself enjoying the work but extremely lonely when I first arrived.  This didn't last long though as I developed friendships rather quickly and sooner than I expected, PTS was home for me.

Winter has come quickly here in Pittsburgh.  Earlier this week it was in the 60s, tonight it dropped below the freezing mark and the snow has been falling steadily.  My Christmas lights are hung and my candle sits, unlit since I keep forgetting to buy a lamp.  The normal signs for PTS around Christmas are up, as it is once again time for Lesson in Carols performed annually by the PTS Choir.

Two major things happened my first year of seminary.  I started to volunteer at Northmont and I really started to develop a love of learning.  I actually stumbled upon Northmont accidentally (well, it was well within God's plan) and was by Christmas just starting to get settled in there.  I remember the first weekend of December I went on a retreat with the Sr. High Youth Group.  I was looking at those pictures the other day and was struck by how much has changed.  Only about two of the kids that went on the retreat are still in youth group.  For the most part the others have graduated.  Odd

I've just started my second to last term of seminary and it's starting to hit me that the end is coming and how oddly at peace I am with that.  I remember when I graduated from college I felt completely not ready to step out into the "real world" and for good reason – I wasn't.  God had more in store for me an hour south here at PTS.  But now I'm ready.  Well, more ready than I expected I would be.

As Spring rolled in my first year I landed myself in a class full of second and third year students: Theology and Practice of Holiness with Andrew Purves.  I was scared to death.  The reading was higher level than I had tackled before and I was intimidated by the other people in the class who knew so much more than me.  I was really quiet in class for a while, slowly finding my voice before one day catching Dr. Purves on some minute detail regarding Calvin's use of the word "impute".  After that I slowly gained confidence, but continued to find myself struck by how much I was learning from my fellow students.  Then it happened, something finally clicked for me that had never clicked before.  I went to Grove City and was taught classic 5 point Westminster Calvinism.  Something about it just didn't sit right with me and it didn't seem to jive biblically with the full breadth of the scriptures, but it seemed to, for the most part, provide a decent model for salvation.  I remember one afternoon sitting in a carrel in the library struggling my way through Karl Barth's chapter on Sanctification in IV.2 and I came across a sentence that said that Sanctification and Justification were presuppositional doctrines to one another.  For some reason then it clicked with me, that the ordo salutis that had so troubled me in college was indeed flawed.  At the time I couldn't explain why, but Karl Barth gave me a language with which to critique where I had come from

My course load is much lighter this year than in the past, 11 credits last term, and only ten this term.  It's nice, a good opportunity to slow down and relax a bit my last year.  Minus Hebrew which I will just never like, my classes are wonderful and I'm really enjoying them so far.  Yet, I can't believe where I am now from where I started.  I sit here now in my third year in the same church doing youth ministry, as well as picking up some small group stuff.  Things that just a year ago I would have dreamed impossible I now do without even thinking about it.  I am looking at a ministry resume that lists a page of what I've done at Northmont, including preaching once a month, interim youth ministry work, and small group work.  A year ago doing small group with adults would have terrified me, but now it seems like second nature.  Here's the really awesome thing – its not that I've worked hard to improve myself, but God has truly equipped me to minister in the setting in which he put me.  I could not do what I do now two years ago.

Looming ahead of me at the close of my first year was CPE (Clinical Pastoral Education) and a summer at home in Rochester, NY with my parents.  I wasn't nervous about living with my parents for a summer, I knew we'd do fine (and we did).  But, CPE had me nervous.  I had heard horror stories about CPE and didn't know what to expect.  Plus, I knew I'd be dealing with tragedy and wasn't sure I was ready for that.  Sure enough, CPE was filled with tragedy.  I baptized six babies that summer, five of whom did not survive more than a day after their baptisms, and in some cases they survived for only a matter of minutes after I baptized them.  I dealt with car accidents, stabbings, cancer, AIDS, and domestic violence on a weekly basis.  Right after CPE the son of our former pastor committed suicide.  It's hard to say whether he was a "friend" of mine per say, but we had gone through confirmation class together and his brother and I were the same age and I would definitely call him a friend.  Anyway, it hit our congregation hard, and I was slated to be in the pulpit that following Sunday.  The week prior I went running and had chest pains, followed a few days later by a full anxiety attack brought on by some heart burn.  While my anxiety attack paled in comparison to anything else I dealt with that summer, it showed me something: tragedy effects those around it a great deal.

I have learned in a painful way that life's tragedies do not go away.  Heavy on my heart tonight is Elora, a girl I have known for a little over a year who is 13 and in critical condition at Children's Hospital fighting to stay alive.  She's already dealt with her share of tragedy, after being struck by a car when she was only 2, and now is battling leukemia.  I also know that the wife of a beloved servant here at the seminary is in intensive care over at Shady Side Hospital.  Just this week the wife of a staff member here ended her six year battle with cancer.  Things in this world are truly not the way they're supposed to be…

Yet, as I dwell on tragedy tonight I am reminded by my lights and the somewhat cheesy WOW Christmas album playing in the background that although this world isn't the way its supposed to be, our hope does not lie in this world, but rather that Jesus Christ, who inaugurated the Kingdom of God 2000 years ago at his birth, showed us what it really meant to be human and did give us hope, that in the end all things would be made new, and by virtue of him we may share in this life today, life as it is supposed to be.

I laugh at myself now, because as I sit here tonight I look at the pile of books that I hope to someday read.  I think about my aspirations now, for what I want to do and where I want to be in three years, and think back just two years ago to my first year of seminary and have to wonder, where will I be in two years?  Will I continue to look back at myself and laugh?  Somehow I suspect I will.  You see, that's the problem with following Jesus.  He says, "Follow me" and you have to.  The problem is he doesn't give you a map, because even if he did we couldn't read it and it would distract us from the much simpler yet far more complicated task of following him.  When I finally decided that I would follow Jesus with my vocation I stepped into a world of the unknown and yet here I am, ready to do the same thing all over again, ready to step into the unknown.  The other problem with following Jesus is that Jesus' life was marked by frustration and tragedy, therefore it should be no surprise that following Jesus still leads us into the paths of tragedy, but we affirm and believe that all things will be made new, and we are called to be apart of that, simply by putting our faith and trust in Jesus Christ, even in the light of the worst tragedy.

PTS Audio

2005-12-02T00:34:00.000-05:00

So today I began a new project here at PTS: PTS Audio.

A few months ago I purchased an RCA Digital Voice Recorder for recording my sermons and then producing MP3 files of them to burn to CDs to send to churches in the coming months. I then got the idea that a lot of good stuff goes on on-campus and it might be nice to have a way for people to access it. Hence, the idea was born. PTS Audio

Today we had three events worth recording: Chapel, Evangelical Student Fellowship, and Colloquium. I have now successfully imported all three events and have them available for download on http://ptsaudio.blogspot.com. You can also get the podcast @ http://feeds.feedburner.com/PTSAudio

Upcoming events I hope to make available include

12/8: Panel on the Eucharist featuring Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Presbyterian, and Baptist voices

12/8: Presentation by Dr. Ron Tappy and Dr. Kyle McCarter on the Tel Zayit Stone

12/13: Installation address of Dr. Edith Humphrey

2/9: Emerging Church Conversation and Lectures with John Franke

Yes – I am a geek, but slowly PTS is moving into the 21st Century.

Why I Love Youth Ministry

2005-11-28T01:11:00.000-05:00

So, Thanksgiving was a simply fabulous week with Renee's family. Today was sort of back to normal with church stuff but we had a mystery movie night tonight.

Because we're in Pennsylvania and tomorrow is the first day of deer season, our kids don't have school. So, Sean wisely planned an activity that not surprisingly, drew about 40 kids. Here's what I got paid to do tonight

1) Be the "DVD" Master for game of Disney Scene-It
2) Eat Pizza
3) Watch Finding Nemo
4) Hang out with a really great group of kids

You'll notice in the photos that I now have two tattoos, care of Mia. The one says "Newbie loves Mrs. Newbie". When I first started at Northmont, back in October of 2003 I was given the nickname of "Newbie" and to this day it has stuck. The other one says "Mother" since they decided I was an "English Biker" with two tattoos… but you know what? They pay me to do this job!

I'm Eastern Orthodoxy - Presbyterian - Anglican

2005-11-23T00:15:00.000-05:00

So I took a quiz on Christian traditions tonight and not surprisingly, here are my results.

(100%) 1: Eastern Orthodox
(89%) 2: Presbyterian/Reformed
(87%) 3: Anglican/Episcopal/Church of England
(80%) 4: Roman Catholic
(75%) 5: Lutheran
(68%) 6: Congregational/United Church of Christ
(49%) 7: Baptist (Reformed/Particular/Calvinistic)
(41%) 8: Methodist/Wesleyan/Nazarene
(36%) 9: Seventh-Day Adventist
(24%) 10: Church of Christ/Campbellite
(22%) 11: Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God
(20%) 12: Anabaptist (Mennonite/Quaker etc.)
(10%) 13: Baptist (non-Calvinistic)/Plymouth Brethren/Fundamentalist

It look my study of Athanasius and T.F. Torrance is rubbing off?

I'm actually not at all suprised by how the rankings came out. The quiz was designed to peg the Presbyterian/Reformed view as unconditional election/limited atonement, where as with my more Athanasian view its not surprise I ended up being Easter Orthodox.

Take the quiz for yourself

Here they are...

2005-11-21T12:26:00.000-05:00

So last spring I had about $215 left over on my Cokesbury account. Northmont paid me for preaching Sunday nights in Cokesbury gift cards (hey, I got all my books paid for, I wasn't complaining). At the time Cokesbury ran a sale on Karl Barth's Church Dogmatics @ 35% off. Given the fact that when the paperback editions came out they were 39.99, and less than a year later TandTClark had raised them to 49.99 I figured that I should finish off my collection while I could get the discount. So I did. Since September I've been putting contact paper on them to help them stay together and this morning I finished putting the contact paper on IV.4 and the Index. So there they are, all 13 volumes and the index.

I also figured out I've read a little over 16% of the church dogmatics. I've read all of IV.1 (779 pages), some of IV.2 (114 pages), some of 1.1 (74 pages), and some of III.4 (210 pages) for a grand total of 1177 pages out of the whole 7000 page work. Yes, I'm a dork and you can keep laughing at me...