Pages

Monday, October 20, 2008

PTS @ Penknap Lecture: 'Jonathan Edwards & Revival'

Local readers may be interested to know of this forthcoming event, held under the aspices of the Protestant Truth Society:
''
‘Jonathan Edwards & Revival’
...
Monday 27th October 7.30pm
@
Penknap Providence Church,
Tower Hill, Dilton March,
Westbury, Wiltshire, BA13 3SP.
Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) was mightily used of God in the Great Awakening. With his firsthand experience, sound grasp of biblical teaching and penetrating discernment, he is commonly recognised as the great theologian of revival. His concern for an outpouring of the Spirit of God led to an international “concert of prayer” for revival.

Speaker: Dr. Robert Oliver,
(Bradford on Avon & London Theological Seminary)
l
All welcome!

Friday, October 17, 2008

Foundations Spring 2008

Foundations: a journal of evangelical theology, 59, Spring 2008, Published by Affinity

Yes, I know that it's not exactly spring time, so it's a little late to be highlighting the most recent edition on Foundations. But my excuse is that the journal wasn't published until July, and what with holidays n'all, I've only just finished reading it. The reason for delay in publication is that a new editor has yet to be appointed to replace Ken Brownell. Jonathan Stephen, head honcho at Affinity therefore acted as temporary editor for this edition. It was worth the wait though, as the journal is full of interesting articles.
Stephen Clark discusses The Doctrine of the Lesser Evil. With his lawerly mind and highly developed theological nous, he brings a welcome sharpness and clarity to a subject that is often frought with fuzzy thinking.
Anthony McRoy draws attention to The Theology of Arius. With conspiracy theorists such as Dan Brown and Muslim apologists suggesting that the church pronounced a human Jesus God at the Council of Nicaea, McRoy gives careful attention to the issues that were really at stake in 325AD. Arius did not believe that Jesus was a mere man. He accepted his pre-existence as Son of God, a divine figure, but not as divine as God the Father. Nicaea clarified the church's understanding of the relation between the Father and the Son in the godhead. Contrary to Arius' teaching that the Son had a different nature to the Father, the Council of Nicaea insisted that the Son was homoousios, consubstantial with the Father. McRoy also considers Arius' teaching on the role of the Son in salvation. He held that at the incarnation, the Son, who was less than fully God, took a human body, but not a human soul and mind. Arianism therefore gives us a Jesus who was neither truly divine or authentically human. Such a Jesus is incapable reconciling lost human beings to God. In this well-argued essay, McRoy convincingly explodes the conspiracy theories that swirl around the Council of Nicaea.
Mike Plant examines The Call to the Ministry, drawing attention to the historical debate between R. L. Dabney and J. H. Thornwell, two heavyweights of 19th century American Presbyterianism. Dabney disliked the idea of men receiving an "immediate call" to the ministry. He was given to urging men whom he thought fulfilled the biblical criterion to consider entering the ministry of the Word, whether they felt a subjective sense of call or not. Thornwell however, taught that while the church has an important role in discerning whether a man has the necessary gifts and graces to be a Minister, a sense of calling is indispensable. Versions of these two views are still around today, and Plant's foray into historical theology helps to throw welcome light on contemporary deliberations. This is no academic issue, as Evangelical and Reformed Churches in the UK are facing a serious shortfall on candidates for the ministry.
Chris Kelly helps us to get to grips with the underlying structure of the second Gospel in his article, Towards an Outline of Mark's Gospel. His five-part analysis is well worth considering.
Kieran Beville has an article on Preaching that Persuades. He wrestles with the biblical material and ponders how we can preach persuasively in the postmodern world. Beville argues that preachers need to be convinced of the truth and the gospel must be proclaimed boldly. But this must not be confused with arrogance or tub-thumping demagoguery on the part of the preacher. We need to be humble and aware of our own weakness and fallibility even as we declare the Word of the Lord. Thought-provoking stuff.
The journal is rounded off by Alistair Wilson's New Testament Literature Survey 2007-8. He offers comment on various recently published books under the headings; Introductory Issues, Biblical Theology, Gospel Studies, Pauline Studies, Commentaries, and General NT Studies. He concludes with the wise words, "I leave my readers to consider how they should spend their time and money in the face of an overwhelming array of literature. May the Lord grant that the books we read, whether in (reflective) agreement or (fair and loving) disagreement, press us to re-examine the authoritative texts of Scripture and may his Spirit lead us to the viewpoints which may truly be described as biblical."
I haven't a clue when the Autumn 2008 edition of the Foundations will be published. Be nice to get it before Christmas!

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Blogging in the name of the Lord: Paul Wallace

This is the forth in our series of interviews with Christian bloggers. In the hot seat today is...

Paul Wallace

GD: Hello Paul Wallace, and welcome to Exiled Preacher. Please tell us a little about yourself.

PW: Hello Guy, I’m Paul Wallace, I’m 37 years old, I’m the pastor of Magherafelt Reformed Baptist Church, in Northern Ireland. I’ve been a pastor there since about 2003 but have been in full time vocational ministry only since May 2008. I’m married with three children.

GD: Your blog is called "Reformed and Baptist". What made you start blogging?

PW: I think as with most people there was a combination of reasons. One of them was to provide another route for people to become familiar with our church in Magherafelt. Another was evangelistic, I think blogging can be another way of making unbelievers think of eternal things or introducing them to the Gospel, thus I think it’s good to offer posts on history and geography and any other subject of common interest, who knows but that someone who wants to read about Edinburgh history or the Falkirk Wheel will stay on and read some of the more spiritual posts as well. Use tags wisely!

GD: In a recent post, you wondered if blogging might be past its sell-by-date (here). What do you see as the strengths and weaknesses of theology/ministry blogging?

PW: Well I suppose that post sums of most of my thoughts. I think a lot of folks are re-evaluating blogging, I don’t think blogging is past its sell-by-date, but it does need reformation. In many places it has become a pedestal for divisive people to spread their poison, or a medium for overnight character assassination and above all else, an exercise on missing the point. Thus it is virtually impossible sometimes to have a meaningful conversation.

Likewise as Dr. Frame noted the freedom of speech offered by blogging is both an advantage and a disadvantage. To paraphrase the book of Judges, because there is no Internet King every man and women can say what they want, when they want and how they want without oversight or accountability. The biblical reality is somewhat different; most of us would be better off doing a lot less talking or writing and a lot more listening and reading (James 3:1ff.) With blogging one can have a “ministry” now by spending 10 minutes setting up an account on Blogger or Wordpress with zero connection to the Church, with zero accountability to the Church and with no credibility prior to being in what in essentially an influential position.

I also fear that blogging like everything else these days has been afflicted by the cult of celebrity -however in my humble opinion even if you get 20000 hits a day that does not guarantee that you something worth listening to.

That said, there is much edification and indeed education to be had on many blogs. This is especially the case when men have specialist subjects like Michael Haykin (interviewed here) on baptist history.

GD: Which blogs do you find most helpful?

PW: I find small, shall we say intimate, blogs most helpful and edifying; those where ordinary folks just share what the Lord is teaching them from his word, or sharing experiences which reveal his wonderful purposes in their lives, or where ordinary pastors of ordinary churches share their meditations. They tend to not have hundreds of comments, they tend not to be argumentative and arrogant. (See my blogroll for examples).
I also appreciate some blogs where substantial critiques of books and movements are posted, emphasis on substantial, which in this context means biblical argumentation based on Biblical truth not on personal opinion and prejudice. For example Iain Campbell’s excellent Creideamh .
So I like blogs like yours, Martin Downes’ Against Heresies (interviewed here), of course I appreciate my friends over at Reformed Baptist Fellowship, as well as a scattering of other folks from around the UK and USA. I do check into the big hitters occasionally, especially Church Matters the 9 Marks blog, because they are very much local church based and centred on the development and ministry of the local church.
GD: What does your family think of your blogging habit?
PW: Well my wife has a blog too ( Home but not alone) so she can’t really criticise! And she is a much more frequent poster than I am. Since I’m not a daily poster by any means, it has virtually no impact on family life. The children just know I have one that’s about it.
GD: What makes you laugh/cry?
PW: Mater from "Cars" makes me laugh.
Preaching and participating at The Lord’s Supper which so vividly reminds me of Christ’s atoning sacrifice and of my communion with Him, not infrequently raises very real affections and emotions in me. I’m not given to crying as such.
GD: How did you feel the call to pastoral ministry?
PW: My call to the ministry was, and still is, related to both the spiritual gifting and “inward” calling, and providential opportunity to serve - “external” calling. I believe there must be both. In a sense then I feel the Lord had been preparing me for service for many years prior to taking up office, but in His time gave me a irresistible desire to serve and a providential sphere in which to answer that call. The assurance that God has inwardly called me to the ministry (a subjective judgment) has been verified by the church’s recognition of gifting and grace which (an objective judgment).
GD: Where did you train for the ministry and what did you find most useful about your studies?
PW: I have no formal training for the ministry, as in College or Seminary, but have many years of informal, local church based training, though I am presently studying again with Reformed Baptist Seminary. In a way it would be true to say that the church I now serve was the location of my training.
Probably the most influential and useful study I have done was Hermeneutics, get this one right and you’re well on the way to being a dependable pastor.
GD: Who has had the greatest influence on your theological development?
PW: On Calvinsm: Loraine Boettner, then theology general: A.A. Hodge, he was my first systematic theology professor! - Outlines of Theology was my meat and potatoes for a couple of years in my late teens. Then John Gresham Machen whose works I devoured and which started to connect everything together.
GD: Who has taught you most of what it means to preach the Word of God?
PW: Can I have two? [Oh alright then - GD] Firstly my former pastor and co-pastor Robert Briggs and secondly Professor Edward Donnelly who I believe to be the most gifted and effective preacher I have ever heard and yet is the simplest preacher I have ever heard. Preaching is much better caught than taught and I am very thankful for having sat under the preaching of these men regularly.
GD: What is the best bit of advice anyone has given you on preaching?
PW: A summary of what preaching is about: “Tell them what it says and then tell them what it means to them”.
GD: What are the most enjoyable and the most challenging aspects of pastoral ministry?
PW: This will sound selfish perhaps but the most enjoyable and challenging aspects of the pastoral ministry are for me one and the same thing - there is the joy and privilege of studying God’s word every day and there is the challenge of having to do so and be accountable to God for it, (not to mention the frequent difficulties encountered in studying it).
GD: The Reformed tradition has been overwhelmingly peadobaptist. What does it mean to be a Reformed Baptist?
PW: It means for me that I am as close to historic Reformed orthodoxy as my conscience will allow, and that is pretty close. There is all sort of talk about what is and what is not “Reformed” and that’s a discussion that is necessary, however there are few paedobaptists today who are strictly aligned with the magisterial reformers on every detail and so by definition being “Reformed” allows for some movement.
For me Reformed means not only adherence to the five solas, not only adherence to and preaching of the 5 points of Calvinism, but also adherence to the three primary marks of a Reformed Church which were and are; preaching of the authentic Apostolic doctrine and application of the same in evangelism and worship, biblical discipline in the church and, proper administration of the sacraments.
Granted my paedobaptist brothers would say I’m at least 25% out on that last point but here I stand I can do not other! I must say I am quite amazed at some of the folks who are still deemed “Reformed” just because they are paedobaptist and in spite of their seismic shifts away from Reformed orthodoxy on the most essential doctrines such as justification, inerrancy etc. I’m not at all convinced that infant baptism and that form of covenantal theology that supports it is the sine qua non of what it means to be Reformed.
For a good summary definition I would fully agree with your readers could consult the links posted here.
GD: Name a top Reformed Baptist theologian.
PW: Dr. Sam Waldron - Owenboro, Kentucky.
GD: If time travel were possible, which figure from post-biblical church history would you like to meet, and what would you say to him?
PW: Oh that’s a hard one! I think it would have to be John G. Paton (if I must choose one) and I’d just ask him to tell me the whole story of his life, I think he was an exceptional example of God’s grace in almost every aspect of his life. His autobiography is wonderful, but I just know there is so much more, and he’d be so good at telling it.
GD: In your profile, you describe yourself as amillennial. I'm with you there. Is it me, or do you also think that premillenialism seems to be gaining ground in Reformed circles? Have you any thoughts on why this might be, and should we be concerned?
PW: Can I be provocative and suggest that it may not be so much that premillenialism is gaining ground in Reformed circles but that it is the other way around? As Colin Hansen has observed there have been many young people won over to the doctrines of grace in the last 10 years, and it seems to me the main areas of growth have been in constituencies that are premillenial and/or dispensational. Should we be concerned? in that I believe premillenialism is wrong - Yes, but nevertheless “the truth shall set you free”!

This is however related to concerns I have about the reformed resurgence in general, it seems to be somewhat disconnected from a covenantal understanding of Scripture which leaves a vacancy that dispensationalism will only too quickly fill given such high profile proponents as Dr. Macarthur. Likewise it seems to be a resurgence that is largely unrelated to the historic confessions which are good sentries of what is biblical. I think until these “resurgents” rediscover the riches of a confessional heritage they will lack a permanency of conviction on anything other than the doctrines of grace, which in turn will make the whole movement no more stable than mainline evangelicalism i.e unstable. I fear sometimes that Calvinism for some is a sort of a theological avant garde movement.
GD: Care to name your top three songs or pieces of music (not necessarily Christian)?
PW: I don’t hardly listen to Christian music at all, so I'm relieved to see the parenthesis!I’m a real eclectic but mostly listen to classical...here are a few favourites. Ralph Vaughan Williams - Fantasia on a Theme of Thomas Tallis, Vítezslav Novák - Slovak Suite, Coldplay - In my Place.
GD: Some evidence of good taste there. I sometimes wish I hadn't asked that question. Peter Mead said he liked We Are The Champions by Queen - on my blog! Now, what is the most helpful theological book that you have read in the last twelve months? It is a must read because...
PW: George Smeaton - The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit (Banner of Truth) and you must read it because the only people who seem to talk about the Holy Spirit much (apart from in relation to regeneration) are the charismatics. Smeaton’s work is one of the few full size works on Him from a confessional Reformed perspective indeed it is the only one I'm aware of.
GD: What is the biggest problem facing Reformed Evangelicalism today and how should we respond?
PW: Apart from what I have already mentioned I’d have to say that at a pastoral local church level and therefore I assume at a global level also, the biggest enemy is materialism and the cult of self, it is endemic and diametrically opposed to New Covenant Christianity.
How should we respond? By elevating Christ and Our Eternal inheritance as often as possible....and by every year, at least once preach on Phillippians 2,3 & 4!
At a theological level I fear at the amount of high brow theological iconoclasm that seems to be going on at present. How to deal with it? Less separation of Church and Seminary would be a good start.
GD: Well, thanks for dropping by for this conversation, Paul. Bye.

Soul & Inspiration: Love


An edited version of a talk for BBC Radio Wiltshire's Soul & Inspiration with Heather Skull.
We’ve been thinking about what the apostle Paul says at the end of 1 Corinthians 13, “And now abide faith, hope and love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” (1 Corinthians 13:13).We have reflected on faith. How important it is to have personal trust that God accepts us as his own in Jesus Christ. The Christian looks forward to the future with hope because we know that Jesus is coming again to make all things new. But there is something greater even than faith and hope. That is love. Faith will one day be turned into sight. Then we will need it no more. Our hope will ultimately be realised in the gory of God’s kingdom. We won’t need to hope for what we already have! But love remains. Love is eternal.

1 Corinthians 13 is really all about love. Without love the most wonderful spiritual gifts are worthless. Without love the greatest self-sacrifice is worthless,

"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing." (1-3).

What then is love? Paul describes the characteristics of true Christian love,

"Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails." (4-8a).

Is that not a wonderful description of love? This is the kind of love that was exemplified in the life of Jesus Christ. Only he has fully embodied the love Paul so eloquently described. Jesus said,

"Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends." (John 15:13)

It was love for us that drove Jesus to the cross to die for our sins. This bowls us over. As Isaac Watts put it in his hymn, “When I survey the wondrous cross”,

Love so amazing, so divine,
demands my life, my soul, my all.

Love is the true hallmark of Christian discipleship,

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” (John 13:34 & 35).

Heaven will be a world of love, where those who have believed in Jesus will bask forever in the love of the one God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Has this heavenly love gripped your soul? “And now abide faith, hope and love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.”
You can listen to this week's edition of Soul & Inspiration here. The talk is 42.18 into the programme.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Soul & Inspiration: Hope



An edited version of a talk for BBC Radio Wiltshire's Soul & Inspiration with Heather Skull.

We are reflecting on the words of the apostle Paul at the end of 1 Corinthians 13, where he says, “And now abide faith, hope and love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” (1 Corinthians 13:13). Earlier we thought a little about faith. Now we are going to focus on hope.

We often tend to think of “hope” in terms of vague optimism. We hope a special something is going to happen in our lives, but we can’t be sure that it will. Many perhaps hope to escape the problems generated credit crunch by winning the National Lottery. Others hope to win talent shows like the X-Factor, or to score a winning goal at and FA Cup Final. Some hope!

The Christian hope however, is much stronger than that. It is not wishful thinking – just hoping that everything will turn out for the best. Hope is faith looking forward to what God will do in the future. Hope seems to be in pretty short supply these days of Global Warming and economic gloom. Politians talk of hope and change. But we tend to be a bit sceptical about their promises.

Here’s a promise you can trust,

“I know the plans I have for you” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you a hope and a future.” (Jeremiah 29:11).

What is this “hope and future” that the Lord promises his people? God has acted in Jesus Christ to rid this world of evil and suffering. Jesus died and rose again to give us hope. With hope in our hearts we can face death knowing that for the believer, death will bring us face to face with our Saviour Jesus Christ. But death is not the end. The Bible teaches that Jesus will one day return to our planet. He will hold the world to account and make sure that justice is done. Jesus will raise his people from the dead and renew the whole creation. Suffering, sorrow and death will be no more.

Having this hope gives our lives meaning. There is nothing random or pointless about our existence. God has wonderful plans for his people. This puts the problems we face in this world into perspective,
.
For I consider that the suffering of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. (Romans 8:18).

This hope is something to get excited about. Our children are already scanning the pages of shopping catalogues, to see what they would like for Christmas. They are certainly excited about what they hope to receive. Christians face the future with hope, because we have so much to look forward to,

Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when [Jesus] is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. (1 John 3:2).

Is that your hope too?

You can listen to this week's edition of Soul & Inspiration here. The talk is 33.55 into the programme.

Monday, October 13, 2008

Blogging in the name of the Lord: Peter Mead

This is the third in our series of interviews with Christian bloggers. In the hot seat today is...

GD: Hello Peter, and welcome to Exiled Preacher. Please tell us a little about yourself.
PM: Hello Guy, thanks. I’m originally from Bristol, England. Married to an American, Melanie, and we have four children under 8 years old. We’re both committed to being involved in world missions and said we didn’t want to end up in the USA or the UK. So we’re living in Surrey! Actually, we’re working full-time with Operation Mobilisation and I have a Bible teaching role that allows me to preach and train in various settings – Bible schools, missions’ teams/conferences and local churches. An increasing proportion of my ministry is given to training preachers in full courses or church-based seminars. I could also mention that I’m a football fan, a book lover, a martial arts student, a very amateur guitar player and someone trying not to like chocolate so much. (Our family site is http://www.pouredout.org/)
GD: Your blog is called "Biblical Preaching". What made you enter the world of blogging?
PM: I have never been a great reader of blogs. At the time I started the Biblical Preaching site I was emailing with three or four friends who were asking questions related to preaching. After answering the same questions a couple of times I decided it would be better to put the answers on a site so that they could all read the same information (and save me from hunting through Sent Items!) So really I began the blog for an audience of thee or four. Once I started it, I found that others in various countries and from different churches were appreciating the site too. In those first weeks I discovered there were other preaching blogs too, although each has its unique goals and approach (before I started my site I was only aware of the Preaching Today blog).
GD: In what ways do you think that blogging can be a help or hindrance to those in preaching ministry?
PM: I want to be a lifelong student of preaching. I want to be a good steward of the ministry God has given me, so that involves learning from others. In recent years I have always been reading a book related to preaching to stimulate my thinking and challenge my ministry. I suppose good preaching blogs can serve as that brief stimulus to improve in various aspects of preaching. For some preachers, books are inaccessible, so free information on a blog is priceless. Sometimes blogs can touch on subjects generally untouched by books. The interaction of a blog allows thoughts to be sharpened or corrected. This is all helpful.
At the same time blogs can be a significant hindrance to preachers who are already over-busy. We live in a time of unprecedented distractions. I know it is easy for preachers to literally waste hours of valuable preparation time by surfing from one blog to the next. Blogrolls are an incredible resource, or a menacingly entangling web, depending on the situation!
GD: This one's for the Geeks: Why Wordpress rather than Blogger?
PM: That’s easy. A totally un-geeky answer, but I preferred the name, so I chose Wordpress!
GD: Fair enough. What does your family think about your blogging habit?
PM: My children don’t really understand it yet, too young. My wife has gone from ambivalent (“don’t let it take time from your ministry”) to gently supportive (“as long as it doesn’t take too much time from your other ministry”). I like her perspective because it reflects mine. I view blogging as a 10-15 minute per day exercise. It’s good for me to crystallize my thoughts on preaching, and if those thoughts help someone else preach biblically, great!
GD: Where did you train for the preaching ministry and what did you find most helpful about your training?
PM: I grew up in a “denomination” that encourages all most men to preach (there is good and bad in that approach). So I started preaching at 17. My father and grandfather were preachers, so it might seem an obvious thing to do, but I was very resistant (shy personality, other goals in life, etc.) I started preaching and was very encouraged to keep on doing so. Then during university I spent my placement year working on an OM Ship (see http://www.omships.org/). I had constant opportunities to preach during that year and learned a lot from the sheer diversity of opportunities. During that year I decided to go to seminary after I finished my business degree. So I went to Multnomah Biblical Seminary in Portland, OR for a year.
After getting married we later returned to Portland so I could do another three very full years at Multnomah. This is where I got my grounding biblically and theologically. As well as enjoying hermeneutics, languages and biblical theology, I particularly appreciated the preaching classes with John Wecks and Gene Curtis. Both had learned from Haddon Robinson, so after finishing at Multnomah, I decided to study under Haddon too. So once we were in our present ministry role with OM, I also did the Doctor of Ministry at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary – purely in order to study under Haddon Robinson.
It’s hard to boil my training down to one most helpful thing. A lot of people seem to delight in declaring that their seminary training didn’t really prepare them for the realities of ministry. It seems fashionable to bash your bible school! I feel for these people as they obviously chose poorly. My training at Multnomah, as it was at that time, was great preparation for ministry. It may sound a little vague, but the most helpful thing was drilled into me by numerous teachers. It was to have a very high view of the Bible. People don’t need my advice, or new instruction, or clever schemes, they need the Bible. I’ve been trained to study the Bible, seek to understand the Bible and then present the relevant message of the Bible – and I’m thankful for that training. In fact, the more I see all that is going on in churches and pulpits around the world, the more I am grateful for the privilege of the Bible training I received at Multnomah and with Haddon Robinson.
GD: What is the best bit of advice that you have received on preaching?
PM: There has been lots of advice along the way, little comments here and there. I was once told, “don’t apologise for being the preacher, no-one else feels as bad as you do about it!” Or similarly, “don’t apologise for not covering everything you planned to cover – let people think they are getting the full meal deal!” But really it’s the core “advice” in seminary that has made the most difference. I suppose as a Haddon student I should say always having a big idea. I am deeply indebted to Haddon for his perspective on preaching, but actually I would point to another piece of advice which has to supersede having a big idea. In my first ever preaching class, my prof took Paul’s words in 2 Timothy 4:2 and drove them home – "Preach the Word!" That perspective has marked me and nothing is more important than that. (Big Idea preaching doesn’t disagree with that, it teaches the importance of getting the big idea from the text and preaching that clearly . . . so the two pieces of advice go together!)
GD: Why do you favour expository preaching?
PM: If expository preaching is defined well, I see no alternative worth considering. Expository preaching is not a matter of preaching form (3 points, verse-by-verse, etc.), but a preaching philosophy. It is an approach that seeks to explain the true meaning of a text, using effective communication skill, with applied relevance to the listeners, all under the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit. Since the definition allows for flexibility and creativity in form, I feel no restriction from my commitment to expository preaching. There are many who hold to a more restrictive approach to preaching and label it “expository.” Some insist that there is only one legitimate form of preaching, some even seem to think their form of sermon came down from the mount with Moses. In some ways when I teach preaching, I am advocating for greater commitment to solid Biblical understanding, but also greater flexibility in terms of selecting sermon form. So with expository preaching defined properly, and a very high view of the importance of the Bible in the life of each believer, I honestly see no alternative.
GD: Are you an extemporary preacher, or do you tend to use notes?
PM: I differentiate between preaching and teaching. When I teach (a seminar, a workshop, a full course), then I will use notes, handouts, powerpoint, etc. When I preach, I don’t use notes. I’m hesitant to use the word extemporary though. Too many people seem to take that to mean “off the cuff” or unprepared preaching.
I used to use notes. I preached with notes for a decade, until I was required in class to preach without notes (note the Robinson influence on my preaching instructor!) I was very resistant, as are all students required to do such a crazy thing. But once it was explained to me and I tried it, I have not gone back. I believe in well-prepared sermons, but I now also believe in note-free delivery. Many people have said that for the eye contact alone, a move to no-notes is worth it, but actually the benefits are numerous! As well as improving eye contact, preaching without notes can really improve the sermon: it forces you to do less jumping around in the Bible, to have a simpler and clearer sermon structure, and a more natural flow of thought. No-notes also helps the speaker in other ways: better eye contact means better connection with the listeners, a more natural manner, greater depth through encouraging study in the actual preaching passage rather than a wild ride in a concordance or a memory trip through systematic theology.
Just yesterday I was in a conversation with another preacher. He told me how he works so hard on his sermons and then doesn’t want to miss anything out in delivery. So he takes a full manuscript when he preaches, but then is never sure at the end whether he actually said what he wanted to – because in his concentration on what he sees before him, his mind is not fully on what comes out of his mouth! Ironic really, but I think many preachers would be surprised if they checked their preaching. They’d be surprised by how much their eyes go to their notes and consequently how little connection there is with the listeners. I’m sure many would be surprised by how well they would do without notes if they were well instructed in the process.
People seem to get very heated on this issue! Most seem so committed to defending another approach or insisting that their memory is not good enough to lose their notes. I don’t insist this is the only way or the right way. If I am teaching in a seminary, then I would insist on no-notes for in-class preaching. But each preacher should do what they can in their own ministry. I would only suggest that people honestly evaluate how effective they really are with their manuscript or notes . . . perhaps some video self-analysis is the way to go!
GD: I think watching myself preach on video would totally freak me out, but I agree with what you said on preaching without notes (see here for an old post on this). What, in your view is the relationship between the work of the Spirit and preaching?
PM: This is a critical question. I think every aspect of the preaching event is spiritual and should be influenced and empowered by the Spirit. When we preach, hopefully we are Spirit-filled and empowered to preach the Spirit-inspired text to Spirit-prepared people.
There are two dangers in this area. One is to assume that relying on the Spirit negates our role in the process. I come across people who hold the view that an unprepared preacher who simply speaks off the cuff is somehow more reliant on the Holy Spirit than one who has prepared carefully and sought to honour the Spirit-inspired text by actually trying to understand it first. The same Spirit who is at work in people’s lives during the sermon can also be very much involved in the preparation process. Sometimes the “Spirit-only” approach is simply due to lack of thinking through the logic of it. Other times it is due to a wrong understanding of the role of the Spirit or a key text – Matthew 10:17-20 (not surprisingly taken out of context and misunderstood!) Other times I think this approach is simply a cop out to avoid facing up to the required work in preparation or personal insecurity due to lack of training and knowledge.
The other danger is to presume preparation alone is sufficient and negate the role of the Spirit. We can easily fall into the trap of professionalism when we have received good training. The solution to professionalism (in the sense of self-reliance) is not amateurism (in the sense of poor quality), but “prayerful professionalism.” This means being the best steward of the ministry opportunity by giving your best, taking advantage of good training, etc., but doing so in reliance on and in the power of the Spirit.
It may be an inadequate answer, but I think the best thing to do is maintain a prayerful conversation with God throughout the process. Pray about passage selection. Pray as you utilize good hermeneutics and exegetical skills to understand the text (that means not expecting direct revelation to do the work of understanding for you!) Pray as you formulate the main idea of the passage and then of the message. Pray as you consider who will be listening to the sermon (prayer for the listeners should also be more ongoing than merely at one stage of the preparation). Pray as you define the sermon’s specific purpose. Pray as you choose the strategy for delivery (sermon form). Pray as you search for and select support materials and design the intro and conclusion. Pray as you run through the sermon ahead of time. If the prayerful conversation with God is maintained throughout the process and before delivery, then hopefully the Spirit will be unhindered by us as He does what only He can do – drive the inspired text home into the hearts and lives of the listeners. I suppose I am saying that prayer matters!
GD: It certainly does. Care to tell us your most embarrassing experience in the pulpit?
PM: I was leading a missions team in central Panama. Sunday morning I was scheduled to preach in the local Baptist church (we were all staying with the pastor). For breakfast we were served a fried egg. I took one small bite and immediately felt my body heat up and react. The physical consequences were immediate and I didn’t know how I would manage the walk to church, let alone get through the sermon. I made it there, physically drained (literally) and still overheating! As I started to preach I asked if someone could get me a drink. Two people independently rushed out and brought back a huge glass of Sprite each. I gave the next sentence of my sermon, then as the pastor translated into Spanish, I downed the first glass of Sprite in one. I gave my next sentence, then downed the second! The faces of the congregation were priceless, they’d probably never seen a preacher with a (soft) drink problem before!
GD: They have now. If time travel were possible, which post-biblical preacher would you most like to hear and what question would you ask him?
PM: Honestly, I would choose A.W. Mead, my grandfather. He died three years before I was born, but everyone who knew him speaks so highly of his ministry. I would love to hear him and learn from him. I’m hoping we’ll be sitting near each other at the first heavenly feast! In terms of someone better known, I would choose Bernard of Clairvaux. While it is politically incorrect to want to hear someone commissioned to preach for a crusade, it seems clear that Bernard was a deep lover of God, a man of the Bible, a leader and a man of lasting influence. His critique of Abelard regarding atonement theory is highly relevant in today’s evangelical climate, but I’d be really interested in his “marital mysticism” that has influenced many down through the centuries (Luther and Calvin, for instance). I would ask him to outline his understanding of God’s love relationship with humanity through the pages of Scripture (if time travel were possible, then I’d have time to hear a long answer!) I suppose I’m drawn more to the understanding of Scripture and theology than I am to any technical preaching question (times have changed a little, after all!)
GD: Which contemporary preachers do you most admire?
PM: I have to say Haddon Robinson, but that is an honest answer. He is a wordsmith, certainly, but he is much more than that. I admire his ability to handle the Scriptures. I admire his ability to say so much, but never seem rushed. I have also appreciated the ministry of Joe Stowell, Bruce Fong and others. I also appreciate men who handle the Bible well, like David Jeremiah or Walter Kaiser (even though he is a big advocate of “keyword” preaching, I love his humour and engaging manner).
GD: If you had to recommend only one book on preaching, what would it be?
PM: I don’t want to be evasive, but it depends who wants the recommendation! Robinson’s Biblical Preaching is genuinely the core text in the field of homiletics as far as I’m concerned. But someone wanting their hand held through the process more and needing more examples would do well to go for Donald Sunukjian’s Introduction to Biblical Preaching. People who get the point of these two books might benefit more from a push toward making their preaching more engaging (Andy Stanley’s Communicating for a Change) or more biblically creative (Jeffrey Arthur’s Preaching With Variety). Then again, if I ever get a book published, ask me again and I will give just one answer!
GD: What? I ask you for one recommendation and you give me four, but not one of them is Preaching and Preachers by Lloyd-Jones. And, I would want a hefty fee if you were to use my blog to advertise your book! Now, what are your top three songs or pieces of music (Christian or otherwise)?
PM: I like music, but don’t listen to much these days. I tend to use car time for phone calls (hands-free!), listening to teaching or football, or praying (not necessarily for the football). When I do listen to music it can be anything from hymns or classical to rock music (especially if it evokes memories like “We are the Champions” by Queen! A song I’ve enjoyed as a football fan!) But since you want me to list my three top ones: (1) I Can’t Wait to Get to Heaven, by Keith Green. I love the clean sound and the simple heart stirring lyrics. (2) The Love of God is Greater Far, by whoever wrote it. I could list any number of worship songs that I appreciate, When I Survey, etc., but this one has a beautiful and powerful simplicity. (3) For something different I would add in a good guitarist playing anything. For an example, listen to Naudo (or Andy McKee) on YouTube playing something like Africa, or Clapton playing Signe.
GD: What is the most helpful work of theology that you have read in the last twelve months? It is a must read because....
PM: I am enjoying The Future of Justification by John Piper, although I haven’t finished it yet. So I would say Act and Being by Colin Gunton. This is a must read because although not the easiest read, its critique of negative theology challenges so many of the core assumptions of Christian theology, but not in such a way as to undermine the Bible, but hopefully to drive us to be more biblical in our theology.
GD: You run courses and seminars on preaching. What are they all about?
PM: I enjoy teaching full courses in the area of preaching. While I would love to teach over the course of a term or a semester, I am usually limited to modular courses. In the last year I have started to run one-day training seminars in Biblical Preaching. This started almost by accident. I had run a full-week course a couple of times and a friend who had participated in that course wanted me to run a scaled-down version during a weekend in his church. This model has proved popular and I have half a dozen or so scheduled for the coming few months. Basically, after an intro to the philosophy rather than form approach to expository preaching, in the course of a few hours we work through the process of moving from text to sermon, and enjoy a fun concluding session on effective delivery. The passage that we work through during the Saturday I then preach on the Sunday morning. In an ideal world, with more time, participants would preach to the group for feedback, but at least this way they get to see the full process and hear “an” end-result (also, after going through a preaching seminar, nobody wants to be the one who preaches the next morning!)
I am also offering this seminar in two 3-hour blocks, sometimes with an extra block allowing participants to preach for the group. Then there are follow-up seminars and workshops too. I am returning to one church to run a seminar on preaching biblical narrative. I have a seminar based on my doctoral work – preaching to model and motivate personal Bible study. Also other related subjects can be taught in an evening workshop session to follow-up on the main seminar. My goal is to help equip people who are preaching, or who are interested in preaching. Many people do not have the benefit of Bible school training, and even some who have gone to Bible school still feel uncertain in their preaching.
If anyone reads this and is interested in possibly having a seminar at their church, please get in touch with me (here). I am always willing to consider travelling for even a handful of people who are committed to preaching as biblically and effectively as possible!
GD: What is the biggest problem facing Evangelicalism today and how should we respond?
PM: I see slightly different issues facing evangelicalism in different cultures. For instance, evangelicalism in the US faces different struggles than here in the UK. Next week, I’ll be in Sri Lanka and the issues there are different again. But there is one issue that I’ll mention.
I think the biggest issue we face is a sliding away from the centrality and authority of the Bible. There is an increasing and alarming biblical illiteracy among believers, including church leaders and preachers. As is usually the case, the church reflects the culture around it. Right now this includes an unwillingness to stand for much of anything and a fear of offending. An increasing number of biblical subjects are being treated as no-go areas and the church is losing out as a result.
I recently heard a helpful comment in this regard. To say, “I don’t know” is humility. To say “we don’t know” is both pushy and presumptious. To say “we just don’t know” or “we just can’t know” is supposedly definitive, end of discussion, time to change the subject. The Bible does teach about many subjects that today are simply shut down by this prevailing attitude. I’m not saying we have to all agree on secondary issues, but I don’t like the notion that anything other than an increasingly shrinking set of primary issues is off limits. Perhaps it is a reaction to past errors, divisions or unhelpful sensationalism. But the answer to error is not silence, but truth. The answer to division is not avoidance of the issue, but gracious teaching and careful interaction. The answer to sensationalism is not ignorance, but sensible teaching.
I suppose our response has a lot to do with preaching, but it goes further than that. It has to do with our expectations of ourselves and other believers, with our ability to both model and motivate personal Bible study, with our capacity to naturally present a contagious passion for God and His Word. The goal is not to have a church of filled heads, repositories of Bible trivia for church quizzes. The goal is to see believers captivated by God’s love and drawn to Him, which means knowing Him, His heart, His values, His mind, His plans . . . all of which is found in the Bible.
GD: That's a good note on which to end this conversation. Thanks for dropping by, Peter!

Soul & Inspiration: Faith


An edited version of a talk for BBC Radio Wiltshire's Soul & Inspiration with Heather Skull.

1 Corinthians 13 is probably the most famous chapter of all the writings of the apostle Paul. In it he sets forth the importance of love for authentic Christian living. The chapter ends, “And now abide faith, hope and love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” (1 Corinthians 13:13). What I would like to do today is look at faith hope and love in turn.

Did you see the recent news reports on the man who flew across the English Channel using a jet-propelled wing? Such a thing had never been attempted before. The Swiss pilot Yves Rossy must have had a lot faith that his equipment was going to work properly!

Everybody lives by faith in one way and another. Some people have faith in the power of human potential. Others have faith in grand scientific theories. Christians have faith in God. This is not an irrational leap in the dark. God has revealed himself to us in the world that he made. Look up at the sky at night and you will hear the heavens declare the glory of God. Look at the earth with all its wonders and you will see the power, wisdom and goodness of God displayed. It is by faith that we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command.

But the Christian does not simply believe that God is Creator. We believe that in Jesus Christ, God became man. He took this drastic step to bring human beings back to God. Our relationship with God has broken down because we have turned our backs upon him. We live how we please rather in the way that he commands. We deserve God’s judgement. But he so loved the world that he sent his Son, Jesus Christ to rescue us by dying on the cross for our sake.

Faith is so important because it lays hold of God’s offer of mercy and forgiveness in Jesus. Many people today are striving for acceptance and approval. The fact that we are saved by faith apart from our works reminds us that God’s receives us freely and unconditionally when we believe in Jesus Christ. An important verse in the Bible tells us,

For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. (Ephesians 2:8).

Now, faith is not simply belief in a doctrinal statement. It is one thing to have read and accepted procedure on evacuating a building in case of fire. It is another thing to entrust your life to a fireman as the flames engulf the building. Faith is personal trust in Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord.

Having faith doesn’t mean that we always understand everything that God is doing in our lives. But we believe that he loves us and wants the best for his children. We know that we can trust him come what may. Jesus said, “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in me”. (John 14:1). Do you have that faith?

You can listen to this week's edition of Soul & Inspiration here. The talk is 24.16 into the programme.

Monday, October 06, 2008

Blogging in the name of the Lord: John M. Frame

This is the second in our series of interviews with Christian bloggers. In the hot seat today is...


GD: Hello John Frame and welcome to Exiled Preacher. Please tell us a little about yourself.

JF: I was born in 1939, raised in the Pittsburgh area. I came to trust Christ as savior and Lord around the age of 13, through the youth and music ministries of my home church. Almost immediately I took an interest in theology, being encouraged by leaders in the church and the proximity of such theology professors as John H. Gerstner, Robert L. Kelley, and James L. Kelso. I majored in philosophy at Princeton University, then attended Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia. At Westminster, my teachers were largely from the “old faculty” that had been teaching there since the 1930s, including Cornelius Van Til, John Murray, and E. J. Young. I also studied there with some younger guys like Meredith Kline and Edmund Clowney. Then some grad study at Yale with people like George Lindbeck, Paul Holmer, and David Kelsey.

I taught at Westminster in Philadelphia from 1968-80, at Westminster in California from 1980-2000, and have taught since at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, FL.

My wife Mary and I have five children, three living on the west coast and two with us in Florida.

GD: Your blog is called "Works of Frame and Poythress". What made you start blogging?

JF: Our site, Works of Frame and Poythress, is not really a blog, but a repository of articles, reviews, and some books by Vern Poythress and myself. There is a blog page, but that just reproduces the articles in blog format. At the moment, I don’t have time to blog, since I’m trying hard to finish some publishing projects, especially Doctrine of the Word of God. However, I do have an interest in blogging, and it strikes me as a likely post-retirement activity.

GD: In your opinion, what are the strengths and weaknesses of theology blogging?

JF: Strengths: (1) It’s a great way to bypass the system of publishers and copyrights, which often slow down and otherwise inhibit the distribution of ideas. (2) It’s a means to distribute ideas for discussion, which one has not completely thought through or has not been able adequately to document. (3) It’s inexpensive. (4) It provides a way of sharing aspects of one’s life other than the professional. (5) Bloggers often provide responses to developments with a speed not possible in other media.

Weaknesses: (1) The downside of freedom of expression (above) is inadequate oversight. Theology in blogs is often not supervised by the church in any meaningful way. (2) Blogs have become virtual sewers of slander, character assassination, bad arguments, ideological dogmatism, etc. (3) It is hard for the average web-surfer to distinguish the good from the bad.

GD: Which theology blogs (if any!) have you found helpful?

JF: I don’t spend a lot of time on blogs and web sites, but there are some I visit from time to time and have found useful. A number of them are written by friends of mine, and I like to keep up on what they are doing.

First our own site, of course (http://www.frame-poythress.org/), which includes not only my contributions but those of my friend Vern Poythress, one of the most profound Christian thinkers around. I have also profited from Exiled Preacher and from these: Andrew Sandlin,
Center for Cultural Leadership, Common Grounds Online, Helm’s Deep, Paul Helm’s theological and philosophical writings. John Armstrong, Monergism, Reformed Blacks of America, Reformation 21, Third Millennium Ministries, together with their associated sites, Reformed Perspectives, Reformed Answers, and their Discussion Forums. Many of my own writings can be found at Reformed Perspectives. Third Millennium is the ministry of Richard Pratt. Triablogue, Truth XChange, Peter Jones’s site exposing neo-paganism. World Magazine Blog, especially the contributions of Andrée Seu.

I also occasionally look in on sites where I generally disagree with the content, but which are interesting to me for some reason. I prefer not to list those here.

GD: What is it that you enjoy most about being a systematic theologian?

JF: Among all the theological disciplines (exegesis, biblical theology, historical theology, practical theology) systematics is the one that adds it all up. When we have a question about God, or Christ, or salvation, systematics is the discipline that looks at all the biblical data, sifts through all the work of past theologians, and tries to formulate an answer. So it answers questions of the form “what does the whole Bible say about…?”

I could not easily get excited about working through scholarly problems about, say, how Turretin’s view of the sacraments developed from 1680-83, though I’m happy that God has provided the church with people who have that kind of skill and interest. But I can get very excited about questions of what we today should believe and do (about the sacraments, the hypostatic union, abortion, or anything else). So to me systematics is the most directly contemporary, practical, and pastoral of all the theological disciplines.

GD: Why should pastors be interested in systematic theology?

JF: As I said, systematics, rightly understood, deals with the real questions about thought and life that pastors have to deal with. This includes questions about theological controversies, but also about ethics, evangelism, church order, contemporary religions and ideologies, social order, and so on. Now of course if you understand systematics as a more abstract and academic discipline, its connection to the pastorate is less direct. But even then the pastor should be able to draw on the writings of traditional systematicians to draw applications for his own ministry and his own people.

GD: You employ a multiperspectival approach to systematics, regularly bringing normative, situational and existential perspectives to bear upon your theological discussions. When did you first think of this approach and why do you believe that it is so helpful?

JF: In a university philosophy course (maybe 1959), I was impressed with the professor’s ability to look at philosophers and philosophical ideas from various angles. It later occurred to me that this is an important aspect of Christian thought. Only God can see everything simultaneously from all perspectives. Since we are finite, we need to seek the assistance of people with other perspectives from our own, and especially from God himself, who has revealed something of his own perspective to us.

As for the threefold perspectives, they have a number of roots. Cornelius Van Til, drawing on the Westminster Confession 16.7, taught me to think of ethics in terms of goal, motive, and standard. He also emphasized the correlation of revelation given from God, nature, and man himself ABOUT God, nature, and man himself. Edmund Clowney also developed a series of triads correlating the officers and ministries of the church with Jesus’ offices as prophet, priest, and king. Vern Poythress showed me some additional triads from the field of linguistics that correlated significantly with these. So in my own work, I tried to bring all these together in a broader system. I think it derives ultimately from the three persons of the Trinity.

Why is it helpful? Well, in understanding God’s revelation, we need to understand his world (“general revelation”) in the light of his word (“special revelation”) as applied to ourselves in his image (what I now call “existential revelation”). These I call “situational,” “normative,” and “existential,” respectively. Misunderstanding of any of these can lead to wrong conclusions and/or to theoretical and practical confusion. So the three perspectives serve as checks and balances on the theologian. When we advance an idea, does that idea do justice to Scripture (the normative question)? Does it show a good understanding of the situation or question to which we are trying to apply the Bible (the situational question)? Do we as theologians have sufficient intellectual and spiritual maturity to be trusted on this matter (the existential question)? We need to keep asking these questions at each stage of the theological inquiry. For more on all this, see here.

GD: What do you intend by "meaning is application"?

JF: People tend to think of “meaning” as some strange kind of object that we dig for underneath the surface of language. Actually, to ask the “meaning” of something is to ask a very practical question. It is to say, “I don’t understand this language; what can I make of it?” Now this kind of question arises in very different contexts, such as the following: (1) If you are confronted by Gen. 1:1 in Hebrew, and you don’t know the language, you might say, “what does it mean?” In this case, you are asking for a translation into English. (2) But let’s say that you already have a translation. You might still have a question about the passage, such as “Who is God?” or “What does it mean to say that God ‘created’ the heavens and the earth?” Here the question of meaning is not a request for translation, but for explanation. (3) But let’s say that you already have some idea who God is, and what creation is. You might still ask “what does it mean?” because you don’t understand what role this statement should play in your life. These three types of questions (and I could mention others) are very different, but they are all questions about meaning.

So it’s difficult to come up with a general definition of “meaning,” unless you make it very broad. But I do think that most questions about meaning have a situation in common: a person is looking at some text that he cannot really make use of, without some help. That is, in general, he cannot use it (here I nod to the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein); he cannot apply it to what he is doing. Application is anything that resolves a question or problem with a text: a translation, a paraphrase, an explanation of the historical setting, an understanding of context. Context is especially important; but there are many contexts: the immediate passage, the book it is from, the other works of the author, the life of the reader, and our general worldview. I think that in most cases, then, when we ask the meaning of a biblical passage, we are asking how it “applies” to ourselves, as we seek to answer some question or use it in some situation.

GD: If time travel were possible, which figure in post-biblical church history would you most like to meet and what would you say to him?

JF: Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria during the controversy over the Nicene formulation of the Trinity. He is a great hero of mine. I would ask how he was able to be so steadfast in his purpose, with most all of the world, and even the church, were arrayed against him.

GD: In your preface to Always Reforming (IVP Apollos, 2006), you have a little dig at fellow "triangulator", Kevin Vanhoozer. What did you make of his proposals for dramatising theology in The Drama of Doctrine?

JF: Kevin is a former student of mine, and I have a huge admiration for his work. He has done more than anybody to promote conversation between Reformed theology (of which he is a strong representative) and contemporary theologians, both evangelical and liberal. More than anyone I know in the Reformed community, he has gained the appreciation of the theological mainstream, without compromising the authority of Scripture or its doctrine of redemption.

If I took a “dig” at Kevin in my Preface, it was also a dig at myself. When people like Kevin and I try to do theology by triangulating norms, situations, and existential factors (as in my above description of triperspectivalism) there is the danger that the simple truth of Scripture will get lost amid all the complexity. In the Preface I was only seeking to warn theologians of this danger. There are dangers both on the side of oversimplification and of overcomplication, and we need to guard against both. Sometimes the meaning of Scripture is obvious: God exists, Jesus is God in the flesh, Jesus gave his life as a sacrifice for the sins of his people. Even here there may be some need of clarification, to some hearers. But we dare not lose these basics as we seek more sophisticated understandings.

Now the idea that Scripture is “drama” is one of many attempts to summarize what kind of book it is. Theologians today are pretty well agreed that Scripture is not a list of theological propositions or of ethical commands. But what is it, then? Kline argued that it has the elements of a “treaty” between a great king and a vassal. But that is not, certainly, its overall literary form. Others have said that the Bible is “history;” but Psalms and Proverbs don’t fit well into that model, at least as history is understood today; nor does Revelation. David Kelsey pointed out that the differences between theologians in their use of Scripture often arise less from their doctrines of Scripture than from their ideas on what kind of book the Bible is, how it should be “construed.” (See here).

“Drama” is one such “construal,” and there is much to be said for it. It incorporates the idea that Scripture has a historical narrative, but it also allows for literary features, character development, moral teaching, worldview communication, etc., such as we don’t always connect with narrative alone. So I think that as a general model for construing Scripture, drama is a promising vehicle. But in literary terms we would never think of a collection of 66 books, with many different authors, subject matters, and points of view, as a “drama,” as we use the term today. Scripture is like a drama in many ways, and “drama” is a useful metaphor for construing the whole. But it is best, I think, to say that Scripture is sui generis. It incorporates many literary genres, but it escapes categorization.

We would certainly be wrong to think that any construal will be a theological watershed, a way of finding large numbers of answers to theological questions that we would otherwise have missed. If we agree that Scripture is “drama,” what difference does that make in answering questions about whether God’s love is universal, whether Christ was able to sin, or whether the return of Christ precedes or follows the thousand years of peace? At most, a construal of Scripture will have subtle effects on the theologian’s emphases and priorities, on what he is likely to take literally or figuratively, etc. So I tend to be more interested in specific theological questions than about large questions of structure, model, or construal.

GD: Is it possible to be both faithful to the Scriptures and contemporary?

JF: Yes. I think Vanhoozer is a good example of this. I think the concept of theology I outlined above encourages, indeed requires, both faithfulness to Scripture (because it is God’s revelation) and contemporaneity (because we are applying Scripture to the world in which we live). Certainly the theologians of the past, especially the writers of creeds and confessions, are helpful to us now. But we need to understand our own times and speak the language of our own times if we are to do our job as theologians.

GD: Why do you think that a persuppositionalist apologetic is better and more biblical than evidentialism? Do presuppositionalists have any time for things like the historical evidence for Jesus' resurrection, the "proofs for God's existence" or Intelligent Design?

JF: “Presuppositionalism” simply means that in all our thought God’s word is our supreme authority. We presuppose it, in the sense that its teachings take precedence over any other ideas we have, from any other source. “Let God be true, though every man a liar,” Rom. 3:4. That means that we must presuppose God’s revelation in all fields of study and all our conversation, even in apologetics, when we are arguing the truth of Christianity with an unbeliever. We cannot at any time pretend to be “neutral.” We should, rather, honestly admit our bias. Of course we should point out also that non-Christians are biased in the other direction: according to Rom. 1, they know God, but they repress that knowledge, exchange it for a lie, prefer not to have God in their knowledge. Insofar as evidentialists deny these biblical teachings, presuppositionalism is far better and more biblical.

But none of this forbids us to use evidences in our apologetic encounters. The Bible itself says that the heavens declare the glory of God. We should assume, then, that study of the heavens will validate Scripture, not falsify it. And we should be ready to use the Bible’s own evidences for its truth: the New Testament’s citations of the Old, the witnesses of 1 Cor. 15: 3-11, and so on. But we should not present these as neutral observers. Rather we should point out that these evidences must be seen through the eyes of faith, and that they make no sense without faith. Indeed, nothing can be rightly understood apart from faith, for everything is God’s creation and bears witness to him.

GD: In both Peter Enns' Inspiration and Incarnation and Andrew McGowan's The Divine Spiration of Scripture, serious Reformed theologians have called into question the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. Is the inerrancy of Scripture still worth fighting for?

JF: I would not live or die for the term “inerrancy,” which is an extra-biblical term and is often used in confusing ways today. But as I understand it, the main idea behind the term is that Scripture, being God’s word, is completely true in everything it teaches. Scripture explicitly affirms that it is true (as in Ps. 119:160, John 17:17). So when God speaks to us, we dare not find fault with anything he says. Our responsibility is simply to believe what he says and to do what he tells us to do. That principle is still worth fighting for. In fact it is the watershed issue of our time: will we believe God, or will we follow human wisdom? This is nothing less than the question of whether God in Jesus Christ is Lord.

GD: Who is you favourite fiction writer?

JF: Mark Twain.

GD: Care to name your top three pieces of music or songs (Christian or otherwise)?

JF: Handel, Messiah; Bach, St. Matthew Passion; Mozart, Symphony 40; Brahms’ Second Piano Concerto. “Arise, My Soul, Arise” is probably my favorite hymn right now, in the Eleanor Tracey arrangement.

GD: Which theological book have you found most helpful in the last twelve months? It is a must read because....

JF: Believe it or not, Holy Spirit Revivals, by Charles Finney (New Kensington, PA: Whitaker House, 1999). Finney here is very different from the picture of him given in the standard Reformed polemics. He is thoroughly dependent on God’s sovereign working, through the prayers of his people, to reach the lost. His opponents, as he describes them, appear to me to be hyper-Calvinists, not authentic Calvinists: people who think that an inquirer should wait passively for the Spirit to change his heart, rather than obeying the biblical command to repent and believe. On that issue, assuming that he has described it correctly, I certainly would have been on Finney’s side. His Systematic Theology, however, contains some significant errors and confusions. He should have stuck to evangelism.

GD: That's a surprising choice, I must say! Now, what does a systematic theologian have to say about the credit crunch?

JF: Scripture doesn’t forbid borrowing and lending, but it does warn of dangers in this (Prov. 22:7) and commends those who are generous in giving to the needy. Similarly, it doesn’t condemn riches as such or the use of luxuries, but it often presents riches as a spiritual snare. We should not set our heart on riches or use them to oppress the poor.

The credit crunch has occurred because in our society borrowing has become a central feature of daily life and material things are valued disproportionately. And everyone assumes that government has the responsibility to prevent and to solve the problems these attitudes create. Scripture summons us, rather, to repent and turn back to God.

GD: What is the biggest problem that faces Reformed Evangelicals today and how should we respond?

JF: The issue of the authority of Scripture, as I described it above, is the most pressing theological problem, and we need to be uncompromising in our allegiance to the Bible as God’s word. This means saying no to fashionable philosophies and theologies, to much that is called “biblical criticism,” to those who attempt to limit Scripture to certain spheres of human life, to those who would put tradition (Protestant, Catholic, ethnic, denominational, or any other) on a level rivaling Scripture.

GD: Well, John Frame, thanks for dropping by for this conversation.

JF: My pleasure, Guy. Thanks for the opportunity to engage your readers.

GD: No problem.
Watch this blog for more conversations on theology and preaching.

Thursday, October 02, 2008

Blogging in the name of the Lord: Tim Challies

First in the hot seat for this new series interviews is uberblogger....

Tim Challies

GD: Hello Tim Challies and welcome to Exiled Preacher. Could you tell us a little bit about yourself?

TC: Thank you for doing this little interview! I’m a pretty boring person so there is not a lot to say. I am a married father of three who lives in Oakville, Ontario (a suburb of Toronto). Though my training is in history, I am currently self-employed as a web designer. I run a blog called Challies.Com and a book review site called Discerning Reader. I am the author of The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment.

GD: Why did you start blogging?

TC: I began challies.com back in 2002. My parents and siblings had recently moved from the Toronto area down to Atlanta and I began a little web site so I could post pictures of my children for the benefit of my family. One day I got it in my head to write an article and to post it on this little site (again, for the benefit of my family). Another article or two followed this one. From there Google and the other search engines worked their magic and other people encountered the articles. Soon others began reading the site and I learned that I enjoyed writing articles. One thing led to another; the pictures of the children came down and more articles went up. The rest, as they say, is history.

GD: What kind of things might an uninitiated reader find on your blog?

TC: In the course of an average week a reader might find links to other interesting articles and sites, one or two book reviews, and four or five articles dealing with any number of subjects. I do not plan the blog days or weeks in advance, so what comes out every day is just what is on my mind that morning.

GD: What have you found most enjoyable about blogging?

TC: The most enjoyable aspect, and this may sound hopelessly selfish, is that it challenges me to constantly be learning and growing. If I were to stop reading the Bible, if I were to stop reading good books, I’d very quickly run out of things to say. So the blog keeps me constantly seeking to learn, to grown, and to apply.

GD: Yours must be one of the biggest evangelical blogs around. Phil Johnson of Pyromanics called you, ”The World’s Most Famous Christian Blogger”®. Any hints for perennial underachievers like er, me?

TC: I think the best thing bloggers can do is to focus on creating good content. There are many tricks to driving readers to a blog, but it is far more difficult to create dedicated, day-by-day readers. To do this you will need to focus on creating very good content—the kind of thing that people will want to read on an ongoing basis.

GD: Oh, so it's content that counts. I was kind of hoping that you'd share some of the tricks. Now, is there any truth in the rumour that Adrian Warnock "discovered" you?

TC: I’ve heard this rumour too. I have quite a poor memory but that memory includes nothing about Adrian discovering me. If anything I think “The Passion of the Christ” found me. I wrote a very early review of it that was read tens of thousands of times and which drove a lot of traffic to my site.

GD: What does your family think of your blogging habit?

TC: I’ve asked my wife what she thinks of it and she assures me that it has been a good thing in my life. And my children are convinced that I’m famous because I have a blog.

GD: Your book, The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment came out earlier this year. What's it all about?

TC: The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment is a book that looks to the Bible to seek what God teaches on the subject of spiritual discernment, a term I define as the skill of understanding and applying God's Word with the purpose of separating truth from error and right from wrong. Written for the general reader and in a way that is suitable for a wide audience, the book teaches people to think biblically so they might act biblically. It appeals for discernment, teaching the importance of this discipline and applying it to the lives of Christians.

GD: Name three of your top Christian favourite authors. Why so good?

TC: I try to read very widely but have not been reading seriously for all that long. Hence I have not had time to come up with a long list of favorite authors. Having said that, I do enjoy the books from some of the usual suspects—R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, Mark Dever and others like them. Their books have always challenged me and I have benefited greatly from them.

GD: What is the most enjoyable non-Christian book that you have read recently?

TC: I do try to read quite a few non-Christian books. It is too easy, I think, to focus exclusively on Christian books. I have greatly enjoyed Malcolm Gladwell’s two books (The Tipping Point and Blink) and have little trouble recommending them. I think Christians who read too little outside of the Christian genre are missing out. There are some great books available beyond the bounds of the Christian bookstores.

GD: Who was the most influential figure in your theological development?

TC: My parents were by far the biggest factor in my theological development. Though very new Christians when I was born, they spent a year at L’Abri and there they gained a very solid theological grounding. They passed this on to me and to my four siblings, all of whom are committed believers in Jesus Christ.

GD: What is the most helpful work of theology that you have read in the last twelve months. It is a must read because....

TC: I suppose this would be Overcoming Sin and Temptation by John Owen. It is a difficult read but one that is very rewarding. Owen challenged me in the way I understand sin and challenged me to dedicate every effort to overcoming it. He showed that we cannot simply stand back and wait for the Spirit to sanctify away our sin, but that we must join with the Spirit in this work. Ask around and you’ll find multitudes of Christians who can attest to this book’s power and influence in their lives. That book is being challenged by Jonathan Edwards’ The Religious Affections for top spot, but I’ll withhold further comment until I’ve finished it.

GD: Good choices there. What would you say is the biggest challenge facing evangelicalism today?

TC: This is an issue to which I’ve given a lot of thought, but an issue which is remarkably difficult to answer. Still, the issue that has continued to trouble me for several years now is the sufficiency of Scripture. There was a time when Christians were rejecting the Bible as infallible and inerrant; today, though, it seems that Christians are affirming those traits while perhaps tacitly denying its sufficiency. The question for the church today is whether we will really allow the Bible to guide our faith and practice or if we will let other factors and other philosophies guide us. When we play up other factors we necessarily downplay Scripture.

GD: Tell us your top three songs or pieces of music.

TC: I listen to a lot of music and my top three songs may well vary from week-to-week. Recently I’ve been listening to the three CDs by Sojourn and have been greatly enjoying several of those tracks. I’ve also been enjoying the latest CDs from Sovereign Grace Music and have found several favorites on those albums as well.

GD: Lastly, which blogs do you enjoy reading most and why?

TC: Because I seek to point people from my site to others, I read (or at least skim) quite a few other blogs (probably 100 or more). Among my favorites would be Justin Taylor’s “Between Two Worlds” (Justin provides a good roundup of interesting new stories), "Boundless Line", Al Mohler’s blog and a quite a few that wouldn’t be of any interest except to friends and family.

GD: Well, thanks Tim for dropping by for this little chat. See ya!

Blogging in the name of the Lord, Series 4

Coming soon.....
Blogging in the name of the Lord, Series 4.
A new set of conversations with top theology bloggers.