Bethke: All of God’s Attributes Win

Youtube is abuzz over Jefferson Bethke’s poem entitled Why I Hate Religion, but Love Jesus. There have been a few who have offered analysis of the poem here and here.  In my personal opinion, I have never been a fan of trying to parse the difference between Christianity and Religion.  It seems more confusing than helpful.  However, when Bethke means religion, he is referring to self-righteousness, that is, the attempt to establish a righteousness of your own apart from Christ.  Perhaps he could have done without the cheap shot toward republicans to start off the poem and could have done a better job of explaining that acts of righteousness are not in and of themselves wrong.  Also, I have a sneaky suspicion that the fact that it currently has over 7 million views may stem from the fact that it appeals heavily to the non-believer because of its negative opinion of the church as a whole.  I wish he were a little more gentle with those remarks, because the Christ-exalting way he ends the poem makes it worth listening to.

However, this video that Bethke made back in April 2011… I thought was awesome.  If you haven’t seen the Rob Bell video he is remaking, scroll down to the end of this post and watch it first.  Here’s how Bethke describes the Rob Bell remake video:

“The beauty of the gospel is that ALL the attributes of God win at the cross, not just love. Gods justice is satisfied, His holiness revealed, His love shown, etc. The cross is a cataclysmic crash between all of God’s attributes showing that he is both JUST and JUSTIFIER of the one who does not work but trusts in Him.”

Book Review: The Resignation of Eve by Jim Henderson

The Resignation of Eve is wrapped up in a much broader debate over the role of men and women in the church.  Henderson’s stated aim in writing is to serve as a voice of reason in the debate in order to prevent a “break up” in the evangelical world over the issue of biblical manhood and womanhood (6).  However, I’m not sure he makes any headway in accomplishing that goal.   In the end, he proposes that the way to prevent that break up is to ascribe to his view and become an egalitarian (271-272).

Henderson argues in The Resignation of Eve that the church is oppressing women by preventing them from being able to serve in the church without restrictions as to how they should be able to serve (22).  This oppression, concludes Henderson, is the reason why some women are deciding to leave the church (22). While the data certainly indicates that there is some drop off in attendance among women, Henderson does not demonstrate that the drop-off is specific only to women.  He never compares the data to drop-off rates in men and drop-off rates in churches as a whole.  It would have been helpful to know if this was a problem specific only to women or if it was more of an indicator of an increased disinterest in the church from the society at large.

Regardless of the stats, the main problem with the book is that Henderson deals very superficially with some issues that demand more than just mere personal observations.  Whether by oversight or intention, Henderson does not deal with several issues that lie at the heart of the discussion.  His book focuses almost exclusively on a select few personal conversations he has had with women throughout the country.  There is no reason given as to why his personal conversations with only a few women are satisfactory in diagnosing what he perceives as a major problem in churches.  I am not against reading an opposing viewpoint.  In fact, I find it helpful to do so.  However, the major  problem with The Resignation of Eve is that it relies too much on Henderson’s personal observations.  He does not go through great lengths to back up his observations biblically, nor does he interact much at all with the opposing viewpoint.  We are just suppose to trust his diagnosis and prescription based upon his hand selected conversations and reflections on those conversations.

Furthermore, he seems unaware of or at least unconcerned about the deeply rooted theological issues associated with the discussion.  He argues that Christians are commanded to share power and therefore should have identical roles across the board for men and women; however, when doing so he neglects to provide adequate support for his position and fails to address important issues of complementarity and subordination in the trinity, creation, and in the role of marriage which complementarians argue is designed to reflect the joyful submission of the church to the headship of Christ.  A serious discussion on the role of men and women in the church should at least acknowledge and provide some kind of defense against these points of opposition.

Also, the book takes the legs out from its argument nearly from the onset.  Henderson uses research from Barna and conversations he personally has had with women throughout the country in order to build his case.  However, the research from Barna indicated that women were by and large satisfied with their church’s position on women’s roles.  With the data not living up to Henderson’s expectations, he then downplays the research in favor of the evidence from his conversations he has had with individual women throughout the country (10-11).  He doesn’t seem aware that the fact that he hand selected these conversations may alter his conclusions.

He then categorizies these women that he’s had conversation with into three groups:  those who have “resigned to” their church’s teaching and have accepted that they will not be allowed to exercise all their gifts and abilities in a church setting, those who have “resigned from” the church out of frustration of the church’s view on women, and those who are “re-signing” their churches and are attempting to make changes in their church’s view on the role of women.  In these categories, his bias is clearly displayed: women who are complementarian have settled for less than what they are capable; women who are egalitarian are “following in the footsteps of Jesus” (5).  Never, does he seem to concede that these women who are “resigned to” their churches’ teaching may not just be ignorant and passive, but could be outrageously happy and confidently resolved not just in their church’s teaching, but in the Scripture’s establishment of clear patterns of church involvement for men and women.

Furthermore, he argues that our culture has evolved beyond the oppressive concessions made by Scripture to accommodate the culture of the Ancient Near East and 1st Century Palestine.  He compares these old views to Amerigo Vespucci’s first map of the Americas:

“The maps we use are subjective–they’re drawings of how explorers ‘see’ their world, city, or neighborhood.  Their maps represent how they think we should see the world.  Consequently, maps at times leave out details their creators simply didn’t know about…  For two thousand year, Christianity has been working off the mental maps that were created by our own explorers (many of whom lived during the same era as Vespucii).  Is it possible that, similar to Vespucci’s map, some of the maps we’ve inherited are also wrong–limited by the perceptions of their creators, including how God views women? (270).”

This betrays, I believe, the clarity with which the Scripture speaks on these issues.  They are not mere culture accommodations, but are applications that stem from established patterns laid out in creation itself (1 Timothy 2:13).

One final point of contention and perhaps the most significant, in a very short paragraph, Henderson provides the foundation for what he understands to be the biblical case for identical roles for men and women in the church:

“Christians who believe men and women have equal influence in the church have a pre-Fall paradigm, meaning men and women equally express the image of God.  For them, gifts, not gender, determine who does what in the Kingdom.  Those who hold a post-Fall paradigm believe that Eve reports to Adam.  Due to our fallen nature, they believe we need to focus on order.  Pre-Fall people are concerned more with freedom.”

He takes no time to explain how he sees his view as a “pre-fall” understanding of the role of men and women in the church, but just throws it out there while at the same time labeling those who he would disagree with as having a “post-fall” understanding.  Complementarians have routinely pointed back to the garden to demonstrate God’s intended purpose in male/female roles, namely that Adam was created first then Eve, Eve was created from Adam, Eve is said to be Adam’s helper, and Adam provides a name for Eve–all of which happen “pre-fall.”

In the end, I did not find this book to be a helpful resource for men, women and churches seeking to understand God’s intended purpose for the role of men and women in the church.  It provides some insight into the egalitarian point of view, but even this is limited as the work focuses primarily on his interpretation of the data he has gathered from his personally selected conversations with women throughout the country.  There is very little space devoted to bringing the Bible to bare on the discussion.  For this reason, I would not recommend this book as a valuable resource in understanding the issues more clearly.

On this issue, I would recommend Recovering Biblical Manhood and Woman by Wayne Grudem and John Piper.  For a balanced approach that gives a voice to both sides of the debate, check out Two View on Women in the Ministry.  

***Disclaimer:  I was given a free copy of this book for the purposes of this review. 

Book Review: Why Church Matters by Joshua Harris

Why Church Matters is a reprint of Joshua Harris’s 2004 book formerly known as Stop Dating the Church.    I understand the title change.  As a pastor, if I were to recommend this book to someone or go through it in a small group setting on a Wednesday night, I’m not sure a book so negatively entitled Stop Dating the Church would place church members in the most receiving of dispositions.  It would be difficult to get past the fact that their pastor may have just passive aggressively called them all church-daters.

Why Church Matters is framed more positively and sets up the book to paint a compelling picture of the importance of the church and encourages Christians to find value in what God has established for his glory and their good, the body of Christ.  Harris certainly does this, and he does it in a straight forward and engaging manner that even the newest of Christians is capable of understanding.  This is certainly the strength of the book.  Clearly, articulately, pointedly and repetitively, Harris holds the church up high and asks believers to commit to it.

You will not find in this book a detailed biblical theology of the church.  Such a study is beyond its scope and intent.  However, you will find introductory answers to important questions about the church.  For example, why do we need the local church?  What are the responsibilities of the local church?  What does church membership mean?  What does church membership look like?  How do I choose a church?

However, the main question the book intends to answer is found in its title, why does the church matter?  It matters, according to Harris, because “it is the place where our new life in Christ is lived out and proven (47).”  It matters also because the “church down the street” puts on display to non-Christians the truth that new-life in Christ is the foundation for a new society (37).  Furthermore, it matters because if we are disenchanted with the local church, we are at best inconsistent, claiming to be followers of Christ while refusing to love those for whom he poured out his blood (47).

I would recommend this book.  Harris offers a good introduction to the significance of the local church.  It may be just what someone needs in order to make the move from worn-out church dater to fulfilled church member, a move that is a matter of life and death, a matter of persevering or faltering.  The topic is a crucial one.

Read the first chapter here.

*FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DISCLAIMER:  I received this book for free from WaterBrook Multnomah Publishing Group for  the purposes of this review with no obligation to write a positive review.

Everyone Needs a Bible-Eater

Love this plan to read the Bible through in a year from Trent Hunter at www.trenthunter.net who now apparently has the market cornered on the greatest name ever given to a bible reading plan, Bible Eater.

From Trent’s blog:

Here’s a quick overview followed by an explanation of its features taken straight from Trent’s blog:

• Read 2-3 Old Testament chapters per day and take 4 days off per month, or use those days to catch up.
• Read 1-2 one-sitting designated Old Testament books in each 3-month period, indicated in blue.
• Read 1 New Testament chapter per day, 5 days per week.

Features:

1. Flexible Format: This plan has a balance of daily reading at a pace of about 2-3 and sometimes 4 chapters a day, and 4 days off per month. In addition, 1-2 Old Testament books are designated for a one-sitting read during each 3-month period, including Deuteronomy, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Isaiah. These books were chosen because they are the right length to keep the reading plan simple, but also because these books can be helpfully read in a single sitting for the big picture.
2. Reading Both Testaments Together: Some annual reading plans assign the first ten months to the Old Testament and the last two to the New Testament. Others get you in both testaments but have you in four different places every day. Since we read the Old Testament from the perspective of our New Testament position, it is good to read both together, but this plan keeps it simple with one track in each testament at a time. While the Old Testament is designed to be read in three-month blocks, the New Testament books can be read in any order.
3. Redemptive Historical Highlights: Every chapter in the Bible is important since every word in the book is from God. But some chapters are more crucial for helping us understand the overall narrative of the Bible’s salvation story. Red highlights indicate these kinds of chapters. Some contain promises of a prophet, a priest, a king, a new exodus, a new creation, etc. to come. Others show the need for this One in the unfolding drama of God’s grace to a rebellion-wrecked, suicidal humanity. New Testament highlights show the fulfillment of these great expectations in Jesus Christ.

The Death of Pretty

Pat Archbold of the National Catholic Register is mourning a tragic death, the death of pretty.  He defines pretty as “a mutually enriching balanced combination of beauty and projected innocence.”  He laments that a time when women wanted to project an innocence has now passed us by, a death that has had a profound impact on men:

“By nature, generally when men see this combination in women it brings out their better qualities, their best in fact.  That special combination of beauty and innocence, the pretty inspires men to protect and defend it.

Young women today do not seem to aspire to pretty, they prefer to be regarded as hot. Hotness is something altogether different.  When women want to be hot instead of pretty, they must view themselves in a certain way and consequently men view them differently as well.

As I said, pretty inspires men’s nobler instincts to protect and defend.  Pretty is cherished. Hotness, on the other hand, is a commodity.  Its value is temporary and must be used.  It is a consumable.”

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/blog/the-death-of-pretty#ixzz1hnak555Q

Well said.  Pretty inspires nobility from men, a desire to protect and defend.  Hotness, today’s brand of beauty, inspires commercialism and says  women are to be consumed, not protected.

I would only add to the argument–to stay with the hotness as a commodity analogy–that like any good vender, women are selling what men are buying.  Men aren’t merely innocent bystanders who have been forced into consumerism, but are instead driving the entire market.  Pretty is dying, frankly, because the market just isn’t there for it. Like one former seminary professor of mine once argued, the Hooter’s billboard on the side of the road is not an indicator that patriarchy has gone missing, but that patriarchy has gone awry.  Men have not merely been shuttled along against their wills into passions and desires that they wanted no part of, but have themselves been buying hotness in bulk, forcing the vender to increase the hotness supply and discontinue the pretty line, or risk having no market at all.

So there is a very real sense in which pretty is passing us by, and its death is being ushered in by men.   Pretty is being replaced with a more depraved product line, but no amount of nostalgia for our grandparents generation will ever be enough to fill the void. We’ll need new hearts for that, hearts of flesh, not stone.  We’ll need to see that the Gospel redefines beauty, namely, because it purposes to recreate the beauty-beholder; eyes born to consume a product for the purpose of fulfilling their own passions and lusts must be transformed into eyes that love everyone that bares the image of God.  Pretty is in decline; there is no question.  But its nothing a little mud and spit won’t cure (John 9:6).

Have Yourselves a Merry Dark Christmas

This is excellent from Andrew Byers, written on the Gospel Coalition blog.  Yes, even the best day the year has to offer doesn’t ultimately fulfill.  Enjoy your families this season and be reminded of the need for the Gospel when in the midst of all of the joy, the darkness of the human heart inevitably shines through.  All the more reason to love this holiday.  Have Yourselves a Merry Dark Christmas.

The darkness of Christmas, whether the first one or the one this 2011, serves as a reminder of why Jesus had to come . . . and why he will come again. The oppression of kings like Augustus and Herod demonstrate the need for a better King. And when the celebrated merriness of Christmas is interrupted by my children fighting over who gets to open the door with baby Jesus in the Advent calendar, they remind me why baby Jesus had to come. Family conflict over the Christmas feast reminds us that a new feast awaits at the second Advent of our Lord.

The darkness of this season is an occasion for worshipful gratitude and a catalyst for the eager expectation that Emmanuel will soon be with us face to face again . . . in light stronger than the brightest stars can muster.

Implications of the Incarnation

As Christmas approaches, it is important to not only think about the incarnation itself, but to flesh out and rejoice in the implications for what the incarnation means for those who find their hope in Christ.  Here are a few.

1.  His union with us through the incarnation is the basis for our adoption as sons and thus, the basis for our union with him.

But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman , born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.  And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!”  So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God (1 Cor 4:4-7).

2. His incarnation means we are free from the old and dead version of humanity, because he has created and brought us into a new and alive version of humanity.

The first man was from the earth, a man of dust, and as is the man of heaven, so also are those who are of heaven.  Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven (1 Cor 15:47-48).

3.  His incarnation means you are free from trying to accomplish what is impossible, because he accomplished what is impossible, fulfilling the righteous requirements of the law.  

For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do.  By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit (Rom. 8:3)

4.  His incarnation means you are free from the quest for riches, because he has given you great riches.

For you know the grace of our Lord jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich (Rom 8:10).

5. His incarnation means you are free from concern only for yourself and free to be concerned for others, because he humbly submitted himself to the concern of God.  

Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.  Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.  Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form a servant, being born in the likeness of men.  And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross (Phil 2:3-8).

6. His incarnation means you are free from the slavery of death, because he destroyed it’s captain…

Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is , the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery (Hebrews 2:14-15).

7. …and you are free from the wrath of God, because he satisfied it…

Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people (Hebrews 2:17).

8. … and you are free from the inevitability of failure when tempted, because he didn’t fail when tempted.

For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted (Hebrews 2:18).

9.  His incarnation means that what the history of salvation pointed to has arrived finally and fully in Christ.

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth… And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace.  For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ… (John 1:14-17).

10. His incarnation means that the one who was invisible has been made visible.

…No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known (John 1:18).

11.  His incarnation means God is with us.  

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” which means, God with us (Matthew 1:22-23).

Book Review: The Prince’s Poison Cup by RC Sproul

Its an important task when you are rummaging through the mounds and mounds of Christian children’s literature out there to find material that is sound enough to impart to your children. The discouraging part of the task is that it seems as though the majority of what is available is more commercial driven in nature, designed to appeal to a broad audience at the expense of Gospel clarity. There are far more resources out there that tend toward moralism and self-worth than there are those that tend toward the truth of human depravity and the supremacy of Christ in being the solution to that depravity.

For this reason, I am grateful for R. C. Sproul and his series of children’s books that introduce gospel issues to children. He has a knack for introducing potentially complex theological concepts in a very simplistic and engaging manner with a level of clarity that children can comprehend. Ironically, I also imagine parents reading through these stories with their children, just as I was, being drawn once again to the remarkable story of Christ crucified and risen.

The Prince’s Poison Cup is precisely that kind of book. Ella, a little girl who had just taken a spoonful of medicine to soothe her tummy ache, poses the question to her grandfather, “Grandpa, why is medicine so yucky if it’s going to make us well?” Her grandfather then tells her a story about a great king whose own people rebelled against him, choosing to drink from the only forbidden fountain in the entire kingdom. This fountain turned their hearts into stone when they drank from it and caused them to no longer desire fellowship with the king. But the king sent his son the prince on a mission to reclaim his lost people. The prince would make his way to the city of man, and with a golden cup, he would drink from the fountain of poison that was made up of the wrath of the king. Upon drinking the poison, the prince died and the people rejoiced. But the “King of Life” came down to the prince and made the prince alive again, and the fountain that once bubbled with poison, now miraculously bubbled with life-giving water. Then, the prince took the golden cup, filled it with the water, and turned to all of those who had rebelled against the king and said, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink.”

The church needs children’s literature like this. Literature that paints a realistic picture of the human predicament while holding the story of the gospel high as the solution to that predicament. Sproul has done this with The Prince’s Poison Cup. He has aptly communicated the truth of the gospel to children, and to parents for that matter. We have hearts of stone that are opposed to the Great King (Eze 11:19; Rom 3:10). We deserve his wrath (Col 3:5-7). The Great King’s son bore the wrath that we deserved (Isa 53:12, 1 Pet 2:24), turned our hearts of stone back into hearts that desired fellowship with him (Ezk 36:26), and enabled us to drink joyfully from the fountain of living water (Joh 7:37).

I commend this book to parents and grandparents and church leaders as a helpful resource for imparting the truth of the gospel to our children.  **With no obligation to write a positive review, I was given a free copy of this book by the publisher for the purposes of this review.

Could we with ink the ocean fill…

While I was in school at Southern Seminary, I juggled a full-time job, a family of six and a full load of classes.  And then in May, something crazy happened.  I graduated.  Then in June, something crazier than that happened.  I became a pastor.  What I experienced as a result of these two back to back life changing events was somewhat unexpected.  I have found myself missing and needing the explosive output of theological education that spews from the fire hose of the theological seminary.  That same output that gave me the sensation of drowning while juggling all of the rest of my creation-mandated responsibilities was an integral part of molding and forming me into a pastor.

After having been on the ground at FBC Wellington for 6 months, it is apparent that it is crucial for a pastor to continue drinking from the fire hose, and to give time to it unapologetically.  If it were true for Augustine, Luther, Calvin and Jonathan Edwards–the great pastors of the 4th, 15th, 16th, and 18th centuries respectively–then it certainly should be true for pastors in the 21st Century, and not just the well-known ones, but every pastor who bares the responsibility of caring for souls and leading a church that is to be “the pillar and ground of truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).

This blog will serve as a place to do that on a public level, for members of FBC Wellington and others who may accidentally find themselves here to continue on in the task together with me.  With an infinitely valuable God who has reconciled us to him through his infinitely valuable Son, there is certainly much to read and write about.  I understand there are no shortage of blogs out there, and this will only add to the heap, but I am reminded by hymn writer Fredrick Lehman that we are currently in no danger of blog over saturation:

Could we with ink the ocean fill,
And were the skies of parchment made,
Were every stalk on earth a quill,
And every man a scribe by trade,
To write the love of God above,
Would drain the ocean dry.
Nor could the scroll contain the whole,
Though stretched from sky to sky.

-Fredrick Lehman, The Love of God

More to come,

Tory

Can you thrive in a marriage that is not thriving?

Julie Lowe – Can you thrive in a marriage that is not thriving? from CCEF on Vimeo.