Monthly Archives: October 2011

Quick review: the Pentecostal & charismatic century

Eyewitness Remembers the Century of the Holy Spirit, AnEyewitness Remembers the Century of the Holy Spirit, An by Vinson Synan

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I enjoyed this for two reasons. Firstly, the author, Vinson Synan, writes in a most affable style. Secondly, I valued the insider’s perspective he have me (I am not charismatic or Pentecostal, but Synan was very involved in a number of key events).

It’s very informative on the Third Wave (John Wimber, Vineyard, Toronto Blessing, etc), as well as how US Pentecostals sought to bridge their racial divide. Synan’s expertise in history comes to the fore in these sections.

I was disappointed with how soft he was on prosperity teaching. He even puts forward the extraordinary argument (p. 115), ‘if it’s so evil, why does it have such a vast following?’

The book can be theologically naive, at times – and I don’t say this because I am not Pentecostal. For instance, Synan suggests there’s little difference between trinitarian and non-trinitarian theology.

Overall, I’d recommend this as a tour through twentieth century Pentecostal history, given by one who loves that history and lives inside it.


 

View all my reviews

Bad ‘god’ arguments

In 2 Kings 18-19, Hezekiah (who did right before the Lord, 2 Kings 18:3) is confronted by the forces of Assyrian king Sennacherib. With Jerusalem under siege, Hezekiah looks in a hopeless position – especially since we know Sennacherib has already wiped out the northern kingdom of Israel.

There’s a power imbalance, but 2 Kings has already told us God’s perspective: Hezekiah is the good guy.

Therefore, when Sennacherib tries to persuade Hezekiah to give up his defence, we know that the subtle arguments are all lies. These lies sound similar to ones people argue in churches today. They include:

  1. Worldly assessments
  2. False accusations of ungodliness
  3. Claimed divine insight
  4. The offer of religion

Worldly assessments
The message from Sennacherib accuses Hezekiah of relying on Egypt (2 Kings 18:21). He even taunts Hezekiah by offering powerful weapons – horses 2 Kings 18:23). And it was true: Hezekiah looked weak and completely compromised. By human assessment there was no hope or future for Hezekiah and Jerusalem.

Likewise today churches hear of how we must act, because people these days just won’t accept … You can fill in the gap! They won’t accept a message of human sin, the news that Jesus is the only way, that the Bible is the authoritative truth from God, etc.

In other words, ‘This is humanly inconceivable, so give it up.’

False accusations of ungodliness
The accusation is that Hezekiah, who claims to trust the Lord, is really against the Lord. After all, he removed all the high places. And then he insisted that the Jerusalem altar was the only place to worship (2 Kings 18:22). To Sennacherib, Hezekiah looks as if he’s acting against worship of the Lord.

And today one of the most cutting comments is, ‘How un-Christian!’ How unlike true Christianity (goes the accusation) to insist Christian leaders believe in Jesus who died and rose again. Or: how unlike God to teach sexual purity for church members – doesn’t God accept everyone?

Claimed divine insight
The public message to Hezekiah includes a remarkable claim from Sennacherib, “The Lord said to me, ‘Go up against this land and destroy it.'” The claim: you can ignore me in the name of the Lord, but doing so will disobey the Lord. (Remember, this is a false claim!)

Today people still offer God-reasons to do things. We’re induced to change the message of Jesus because ‘we know that’s what God wants.’ Once in a while we still hear the blatant claim, ‘God told me to.’ Yet generally it’s more subtle hints that some new way is really what God wants.

The power of religion
The final inducement from Sennacherib is, possibly, the most honest. Sennacherib’s envoy finally admits there’s a religious competition going on. And that Assyria’s gods are the best. Assyria admits it does have different beliefs – but look at how successful this belief system is. It must have something going for it, right? ‘Who among all the gods of the lands have delivered their lands out of my hand?’ (2 Kings 18:35)

Today, we’re told to learn from these faiths. Eastern systems of karma and reincarnation, or Asian Islam, or Melanesian animism … they all work. They help people live, give a framework to understand the world, and form cultural identity. How could Christians be so arrogant as to disagree?

But these are all false arguments. They aren’t demolished, in this case, by debate and argumentation. They are demolished by the story – and by its conclusion.

The last paragraph of chapter 19 is very matter-of-fact. And devastating to all the wrong arguments:

And that night the angel of the LORD went out and struck down 185,000 in the camp of the Assyrians. And when people arose early in the morning, behold, these were all dead bodies. Then Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and went home and lived at Nineveh. And as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, Adrammelech and Sharezer, his sons, struck him down with the sword and escaped into the land of Ararat. And Esarhaddon his son reigned in his place.

 


 

How to hear Jesus

A quick quotation from Christopher Ash’s Hearing the Spirit. Ash makes a case that there are two divergent ways to listen to Jesus today.

The enduring significance of Jesus’ words after he left the earth …

raises a huge question: where and how can we hear His words today?

There are essentially only two kinds of answer we can give. Either we hear Jesus speaking in an interior and subjective way, or we hear Jesus speaking through the written and preached words of the Bible. There are variants of each of these, of course, and there are attempts to combine the two. But I believe that essentially they are distinct and incompatible answers. The latter is Christian and the former is pseudo-Christian.

Exodus & thinking about God

The Bible’s second book, Exodus, seems to me to have three broad sections. Part 1: God prepares to redeem his people from slavery. Part 2: God redeems his people and brings them to himself. Part 3: God deals with his oh-so-fallible people.

The salvation won by the Passover is the big-deal, nation-forming event for Israel. That’s why Passover feast is still celebrated so many centuries later.

In each section, there’s some important development based on God’s name, the Lord. That is, Exodus is not only about the people. Without downplaying the people, the name and character of God are more important.

The name ...

In Part 1
Moses is not too willing, when first asked, to be God’s representative. He conjures an objector’s question, ‘When I tell them God sent me, they’ll ask “What’s his name?”‘ God’s answer (Exodus 3:14-15):

God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.'” God also said to Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations.

The great ‘I am’ is the Lord (in Bible editions, LORD shows the use of the personal name of God). God will be ‘named’ in what he does. To know his name and character, watch him act. My rough approximation of ‘I am who I am’ is ‘Watch this space.’ God is about to act – decisively and conclusively, and then the people will know.

In Part 2
There’s a confrontation between the Lord and Pharaoh. The Lord defeats the murderous and heard-hearted Pharaoh, as well as freeing the Hebrew people. This, too, is to reveal the name of God. God told Pharaoh this was the case (Exodus 9:16): For this purpose I have raised you up, to show you my power, so that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.

In Part 3
The new nation has a clear responsibility, to not take the name of the Lord in vain (Exodus 20:7). They fail, spectacularly. The worship of mere gold statues places doubt on the whole relationship between God and people.

After Moses’ mediation, God proves his determination to work even with such a people as this – he proves it by a renewed declaration of his name (Exodus 34:5-7):

The LORD descended in the cloud and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD. The LORD passed before him and proclaimed, “The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.”

This name-saying is notably different from that of chapter 3. It’s not, now, ‘Watch this space.’ God has already saved a people, punished the enslaving nation, and confronted sin in his own people. God’s actions have revealed his name and character. So God chooses to specify aspects of that character: mercy, grace, forgiveness, just punishment, …

The whole shape of Exodus suggests that reflection on God’s character must always be tied to the works of God. Theology can never (truly) happen in a vacuum, or as a thought-exercise. There are deep thoughts! Thoughts, however, that follow close observation of God’s saving action.

There’s so much story in the Bible. It’s so we can get to know the Lord who speaks his name to us. To be ignorant of the biblical drama – especially its high points in the four-fold gospel account – is to be ignorant of God himself.

 


 

The real atheists, i

I used to be an atheist. Even though I believed in God.
Millions in our world also are atheists. Though some of them believe in multiple gods.

This is clear from Ephesians 2:12 (look for the bold). Before becoming Christian you were …

ἐλπίδα μὴ ἔχοντες καὶ ἄθεοι ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ
hope not having and atheists in the world

My apologies for the extremely clunky, literal and word-for-word translation! I hope it conveys the idea. Here Paul writes to Christians in Ephesus – the proud centre of very active religious devotion to Artemis (see Acts 19:27). Paul addresses people who actively turned to Christ in faith, many of whom publicly spurned their former religious ways (see Acts 19:18-19).

Knowing all this, Paul labels their pre-Christian way of life as without God, atheist.

There are at least two points to draw from this.

  • Artemis (and all those other gods) are not real

None of the countless gods of the nations are the true God. Despite whatever spiritual reality lies behind them, none of them are the Creator, lawgiver, saviour, rock and comfort. Thus, people who follow them – even with amazing and life-shaping devotion – have no God and have no life.

  • The opposite of atheism is relationship with God

The real God always existed for the residents of Ephesus (and Australia too!). Yet it was not enough for Ephesians to merely accept God’s existence. The move from ‘without God‘ to ‘with God‘ came by faith in Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2:8). One who accepts the existence of the God of the Bible, but does not trust him, remains an atheist.

It should not surprise us that atheism has spokesmen and women. We should not be tempted to write them off as ‘a minority’, by saying that more than 50% of our neighbours think God exists. Instead, the Bible makes it clear that atheism is one way to explain the great human problem – we are without God, and need the news of Jesus to restore what we have lost.

 


 

Quick review: Whose community? Which interpretation?

Whose Community? Which Interpretation?: Philosophical Hermeneutics for the Church (The Church and Postmodern Culture)Whose Community? Which Interpretation?: Philosophical Hermeneutics for the Church by Merold Westphal

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

You have to like a book when one of its major catch-phrases is wirkungsgeschichtliches Bewusstsein (aka ‘historically effected consciousness’).

Well, perhaps that’s not the only reason.

Merold Westphal has written a book on interpretation. He’s most interested in interpreting the Bible, but places Bible reading in the context of reading in general. Westphal spends a few chapters setting the topic in its current intellectual climate. Then the main part of the work is a presentation of hermeneutics directly drawing on the work of Hans-Georg Gadamer.

These chapters (6 to 9) are the working heart of the book, as well as providing a summary of Gadamer’s thoughts on interpretation. Here we read that no readers are objective, and that there’s no objective method guaranteed to produce ‘meaning’ for any text – yet that interpretation is not thereby rendered totally subjective and anarchic.

The final three chapters were a touch suprising to me, though I can see how they flow from the earliuer part of the book. In these, Westphal considers – if I have understood correctly – how it is possible for many people and groups to read the Bible, and to do so productively despite differences in perspective. Westphal uses Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue as a case in point.

This surprised me, I think, because I am less interested in a philisophical framework for respectful ecumenical dialogue (though not against this!). I am more interested in how groups of people can to rightly, though contingently, understand the Bible. At risk of simplifying, I think Westphal’s book is about how to read the scriptures and have (true, Christian) dialogue, while my interest is how to read the scriptures and come to a common (true, Christian) understanding.

Nonetheless, I recommend this book. The chapters are short and lucid, though involving some technical terms. It makes me want to read more of Gadamer. It opened my eyes to previously-undervalued applications of hermeneutics (ecumenical situations). Most importantly, it strengthened my attitude that the Bible is not only great because it’s God’s word, and that the way to approach the Bible is as a humble reader ready to learn.

View all my reviews