Posts Tagged ‘theology’

Biblical Seminary has created a couple of videos for advertisement for the school. I really appreciated this one because it really grasps the nature of the times and the need for a “missional” Church in the West.

N.T. Wright

4 books. 2 weeks. 1 bishop. 1 man.

If you don’t know already, I am a huge N.T. Wright fan. No other author has had a more lasting impact on my life than he. God has used his writings to help me be a better lover for theology, a better Christian, and (I would even suggest) a better human. Over the next two weeks, I will be reading multiple books by N.T. Wright and reflecting on them here on my blog. My goal: read 4 of his books, write two reflections/posts on each, give a score (e.g., 7 out of 10) for each one, and complete it all before my wife gives birth to our son (wish me luck!). I hope you will find my reflections stimulating and encouraging. If you are looking for someone to call NTW a “heretic,” you won’t find that here, but I hope I can offer you a glimpse into his theology and maybe you’ll pick up one of the books on your own, too. I would also like to challenge any other NTW fans to take on this “N.T. Wright Project” over the summer, read a book or two, and offer reflections on their perspective blogs. Anyone interested?

I have chosen the following as part of this undertaking, and I have provided pieces of the Amazon.com reviews to help you get a brief synopsis of what each book is about:

• Evil and the Justice of God (2006).

Evil and the Justice of God (2006)

“Why does evil persist in a world created by a good God? And why does the church seem so feeble in counteracting evil? Wright, a New Testament scholar who is Anglican bishop of Durham, U.K., and author of several well-received volumes, including Jesus and the Victory of God, addresses these questions in a readable and compelling plea to renew the church’s compassionate mission in these challenging times.”

• The Last Word: Scripture and the Authority of God–Getting Beyond the Bible Wars (2005).
  

  The Last Word (2005)

“Wright offers sensible insights on the transforming power of God, very necessary in these times of skepticism and confusion.” (Publishers Weekly )

“The best book of its kind available.” (The Christian Century )

“[P]robing, provocative, insightful…This is a book of uncommon wisdom for all who read and love the Bible.” (Timothy George, Dean of Beeson Divinity School of Samford University and Executive Editor of Christianity Today)

• What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? (1997).
  

  What Saint Paul Really Said (1997)

N. T. Wright’s What Saint Paul Really Said leads readers through the current scholarly discussion of Paul and gives a concise account of the actual contribution Paul made to the birth of Christianity. Wright offers a critique of the argument that claims that it was Paul who founded Christianity and shows clearly that Paul this allegation is simply not true. But rather that Paul was the faithful witness and herald of Jesus of Nazareth, the Jewish Messiah and the risen Lord of the Christian faith. And that neither he, nor any of those who immediately followed him in the leadership counsels of the Christian church, every claimed or thought otherwise. — Midwest Book Review

• Justification: God’s Plan & Paul’s Vision (2009).
  

  Justification: God's Plan & Paul's Vision (2009)

“For some time now, I have watched in puzzlement as some critics, imagining themselves as defenders of Paul’s gospel, have derided Tom Wright as a dangerous betrayer of the Christian faith. In fact, Paul’s gospel of God’s reconciling, world-transforming grace has no more ardent and eloquent exponent in our time than Tom Wright. If his detractors read this book carefully, they will find themselves engaged in close exegesis of Paul’s letters, and they will be challenged to join Wright in grappling with the deepest logic of Paul’s message. Beyond slogans and caricatures of ‘Lutheran readings’ and ‘the New Perspective,’ the task we all face is to interpret these difficult, theologically generative letters afresh for our time. Wright’s sweeping, incisive sketch of Paul’s thought, set forward in this book, will help us all in that task.” —-Richard B. Hays, Duke University

N.T. Wright

N.T. Wright’s a scholar, but he’s also a pastor. I knew he was a pastor, but it took this past weekend’s “Jesus, Paul and the New Testament: A Theological Dialogue with N.T. Wright” for this to become a reality for me. On Friday night, N.T. Wright (NTW) spoke about one of his areas of expertise–Jesus, who you may have heard about on this blog. NTW spoke about the Greek words that Jesus and Peter use for the word “love.” In John 21:15-17, after Jesus’ resurrection, he speaks to Peter, and the Gospel states,

¹⁵When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love (Greek = agape/αγαπας) me more than these?”
“Yes, Lord,” he said, “you know that I love (Gk. philes/φιλω) you.”
Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.”

¹⁶Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love (Gk. agape love) me?”
He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love (Gk. philes love) you.”
Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.”

¹⁷ The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love (Gk. philes love) me?”
Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love (Gk. philes love) you.”

Jesus said, “Feed my sheep.

If you notice, Jesus twice asks Peter if Peter loves him with agape-love. Peter twice responds, “Lord, you know I do love you with philes love.”  Peter offers Jesus philes love, which is friend-love, but Jesus first wants agape love from Peter. Peter just cannot go that far. He can only give Jesus friend-love. What is interesting, Jesus doesn’t keep pestering Peter waiting for Peter to finally respond, “Yes! Lord! Fine! I love you with agape-love!” Peter couldn’t go that far. So what does Jesus do? He comes down to Peter’s level and meets Peter where he is. In a sense Jesus says, “Ok, Peter. You can only offer me friend-love right now. Ok, then, do you friend-love me?”

Is that awesome?! Jesus comes down to Peter’s level and accepts what Peter can give at that moment.

NTW ends this thought on a note like this, “Maybe there is someone here like Peter today. You can’t give Jesus everything, but only something. Jesus will meet you there.” If you ask me, that reveals the pastoral heart of N.T. Wright, which is what I needed to hear. I have a lot of “head knowledge” from him. I’ve read The New Testament and the People of God. I’ve listened to him talk about Paul’s view of the afterlife. But I really needed something to cut me to the core. And NTW provided that for me this past Friday night.

So, from now on, when people ask me, “Why do you like N.T. Wright so much?” I may just respond with this story.

+++++++

You can read my notes from the majority of the sessions here.

You can listen to and/or watch most of the sessions here.

+++++++

Friday, April 16, 2010

Tom Wright

The theological dialogue with N.T. Wright has begun! The morning began with the five of us (Derek, Jon, Greg, Tim, and me) finding seats in Wheaton’s auditorium directly behind Tom Wright. Yes, we picked these seats on purpose…more “eye time” with the Bishop.

Before the conference, I was somewhat skeptical of the purpose of the conference, believing that this would simply be a bunch of theologians having a love affair with Jesus and the Victory of God or everything Wright has done. I am a huge fan of Wright, and I have adopted much of his theology so I wasn’t too worried about it. However, I was a little skeptical.

The first session squashed any thoughts on that. Richard Hays, who is a very good friend of Wright, opened the conference with a critique of Wright’s lack of appreciation for Karl Barth. Hays considers himself a Barthian, and Wright does not follow the same line of thought and disagrees with much of Barth’s writing. It was a cordial critique, and, as one sitting behind Wright, you can tell he took it lightly.

I don’t want to reflect on every session here, but I wanted to point this out — dialoguing with a theologian must be true dialogue. It involves times of agreeing and disagreeing. There are times where I shout “Amen!” and others where I reject what someone has to offer. I remember someone telling me that scholars have a “code” that they don’t critique one another, but something like the first (and I emphasize “first”) session of the conference was the complete opposite. When I engage theology, I must really be engaged, and, at times, this will mean disagreeing. In fact, if I don’t disagree with some things, perhaps, I am simply being lazy.

Yes, Hays could have come up to the stage (and after losing his father-in-law earlier this week now one would have blamed him), and he could have said some really nice things about Wright’s books, the castle he lives in, or the new, pin-striped shoot he was wearing. But he didn’t. He disagreed (and did so lovingly) with some items in Wright’s proposals, and he took them on. He didn’t run from confrontation. He engaged in it.

Do you run from confrontation or do you engage in it? Do you do it kindly or are you pretentious when participating in it?

I took notes on all the sessions on Friday. The speakers were Richard Hays (Duke), Marianne Meye Thompson (Fuller), Brian Walsh & Sylvia Keesmaat (Toronto), Nicholas Perrin (Wheaton), and N.T. Wright. You can view them here here [link corrected].

N.T. Wright

This Friday and Saturday, I will have the privilege of attending Wheaton College’s “Jesus, Paul and the People of God: A Theological Dialogue with N.T. Wright,” where the Rt. Reverend will be sharing along other scholars sharing about him. From Wheaton’s estimation, there will be about 1100 people attending, which seems astronomical for theology conferences, but I guess that’s what you get when you combine N.T. Wright with Richard Hays, Brian Walsh & Sylvia Keesmaat, Kevin VanHoozer, and Americans starving for good, nourishing theology. I imagine the event will be phenomenal, and I am very excited to attend with four friends. I will be blogging and reflecting on about the event here. So, for the two of you who read this blog that won’t be with me there, you can get some updates about the conference. Enjoy!

Schedule of the event.

Can I Get a Witness?

For one of my classes at Biblical Seminary, I was asked to summarize Brian Blount’s Can I Get a Witness? Reading Revelation through African American Culture. The following is a chapter-by-chapter summary ending with my thoughts on a very good book.

Chapter 1: “The Revelation of Culture”: Brian Blount suggests that any interpretive schemes seeking objectivity are pointless since in the end “all readings are politically situated” (p. 12). Instead, one should admit his or her cultural standpoint and read the text through his or her cultural lens. The reader should seek “what Revelation means for us” (p. 5). With this being said, the most appropriate method is that of cultural studies. Blount suggests that culture is simply the sharing of experience (p.8), and all interpretations have “meaning potential.” If this is the case, biblical interpretation takes into account various opinions and participates in the “construction of meaning” (p. 22), specifically valuing the conclusions of “previously marginalized contemporary communities” (p. 25). This does not allow for a subjective, “anything goes” interpretive style, but it simply suggests that “the case is always open” (p. 35).

(more…)

Theology

We’ve explored two specific marks of the missional church over three different posts. This leads us to the last mark of the missional church — a theologically educated laity. As one approaches the general laity in his or her congregation, he or she can quickly assess whether or not the local church has properly served its congregants by providing some type of theological education for engaging everyday life. In the trend of seeker-sensitivity, many churches have neglected theology believing that “seekers” individuals have no interest in such training. However, Tim Keller suggests that missional churches need to theologically train laity for their vocations when he explains, “In a ‘missional’ church, the laity needs theological education to ‘think Christianly’ about everything and work with Christian distinctiveness…lay people renewing and transforming the culture through distinctively Christian vocations must be lifted up as ‘real kingdom work’ and ministry along with the traditional ministry of the Word” (p. 2). As seminaries continue to close their doors and biblical illiteracy increases, theological education of laity must be of utter importance in the Church’s call to disciple-making.
The twenty-first Church continues to struggle with its identity in the current context. However, there are numerous things, which the Church should continue to focus upon, if it is to be a peculiar people. The Church has and must continue to be shaped by the Great Commission, specifically surrounding the area of discipleship. As stated, discipleship is the most important task for the twenty-first century, missional Church. In light of this, the Church must paradoxically engage culture while at the same time promoting a counter-cultural mentality. These are difficult to balance, but the Church must be able to do both. The missional Church is counter-cultural specifically by promoting multiracial communities and rejecting consumerism and nationalism. In the end, it is important that laity be theologically trained in order to participate as missional people in daily life. The Church for so long has relied on Christendom to assist its efforts for making disciples. However, Christendom overemphasized conversion and not discipleship; thus, neglecting the Great Commission. The people of Christ are to be a peculiar people. If the Church forgets this and falls into the trap of overemphasizing something like relevance, it forgets its identity. If the Church focuses strictly on conversion, it forgets its identity. If the Church becomes racially homogeneous, it forgets its identity. Thus, the Church is a peculiar people, and a peculiar people that have forgotten their identity can never fulfill Christ’s words to “make disciples of all nations.” These things must mark the missional Church in order to do ministry in a twenty-first century context.

There is not enough time to cover all the “marks” so what “marks” would you add?

+++++++

Conclusion of series on “The Marks of the Missional Church”

Read Part 1 on Discipleship here. Part 2 - (Counter)Culture 1 here. Part 3 - (Counter)Culture 2 here.

Citations for all posts:

1. DeYoung, C. P., Emerson, M. O., Yancey, G., & Kim, K. C. “All Churches Should Be Multiracial”, in Christianity Today 49 (April, 2005).
2. Emerson, M. O. & Smith, C. (2000). Divided by faith: evangelical religion and the problem of race in America. New York: Oxford.
3. Hirsh, A. (2006). The forgotten ways. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press.
4. Keller, T. (2001). “The missional church.”
5. Walsh, B. J. & Keesmaat, S. C. (2004). Colossians remixed: subverting the empire. Downers Grove: IVP.

Overview: Coffeehouse Theology is wrapped around the idea of contextual theology. As Ed explains, contextual theology

“recognizes that all theology takes place within a local cultural context. This cultural context colors our reading of the Bible and produces a wide variety of locally made theologies…[it] also reminds us that each local understand of God has strengths and weaknesses, and we can fill in some of these holes by listening to other local theologies” (pp. 36-37; emphasis mine).

Contextual theology breeds humility and understanding. It is not systematic. It does not seek to fit everything within a box. It allows theological study to breathe.

Theology should not only be for personal growth, but it should also transform us into the people of God that the Father needs for his mission. Thus, every Christian is in some sense a “theologian.” We all must reflect on God (theology = the study of God) in order to pursue Christ and his mission, and we are all contextual theologians because we are all contextual beings.

 Ed shows that theological diversity doesn’t plague the Body of Christ. Rather, theological diversity should be celebrated in such a way that it allows communities to see the beauty of Scripture more intimately. For Ed, this doesn’t blur everything into theological relativism, but it remains distinct from clearly defined, “black-and-white” dogma. Contextual awareness (so to speak) allows one to approach theology from a standpoint of humility rather than prideful naivety.

Key themes: diversity, unity, contextual theology

What I didn’t like:

What I (kinda) didn’t like was Ed’s treatment of tradition. I tend to take a little stronger of a stance with tradition (you can see some of my thoughts here). Where I think Ed falls short from my own understanding is that he sees tradition as a guide, whereas I believe we must yield to tradition over our own interpretations unless we have good reason to go against it.

Also, I found the book to have a strong evangelical slant (mainly, salvific notions), but I don’t necessarily think that is a bad thing (indeed, I am evangelical). I just wonder if it would hurt the book’s popularity amongst other audiences, which would be a shame.

What I liked:

Overall, Ed does an excellent job at popularizing much of what is written elsewhere in works from theologians such as John Franke. Ed takes ideas and expounds on them, creating a read made possible for the average church-goer. Whereas I would not recommend a high school youth group member who’d like to go “deeper” read The Character of Theology (by John Franke), I would recommend, however, that he or she read Ed’s book.

I also enjoyed the fact that Ed added a discussion on the purpose of tradition. Even though I disagreed to the extent to which Ed takes it, tradition must be involved, and, for its inclusion, I applaud Ed. Tradition is often neglected in most evangelical books on theology. Some may think it smacks of the rejection of Sola Scriptura, but I would reject that notion.

Also, Ed takes some time to involve the global church, which I believe is often neglected by American Christians. Often, American theology is often treated as the theology, as if Christ was a blue-collar, Ford-loving, Nike-wearing, patriotic, middle class, white, American male. This is most certainly not true, and the global church makes up for our theological brevity.

Who would like it: The first-year seminary student, the first-year bible college student, the novice theologian, and the layperson interested in theological studies. It is a good beginner’s guide to theology. Perhaps one day there will be a Contextual Theology for Dummies written by Ed Cyzewski.

My rating: 8 out of 10 (1 – I would use it for kindling for a camp fire, 10 – I would force it upon someone; 8 – I would keep it and give another copy to someone else as a gift)

Overall Conclusion: Reading Coffeehouse Theology was definitely worth it. I had previous knowledge of contextual theology, but Ed gave me a greater appreciation for it and has fused its importance in my mind. So, if you like theology, I think you should read this book. Coffeehouse Theology clears away some of the mistakes we make, brings the reader to theological humility, and jump-starts the Christian into a better, more unified relationship with Jesus Christ and with other Christians elsewhere. Great job, Ed!

–Cyzewski, E. (2008). Coffeehouse theology: reflecting on God in everyday life. NavPress: Colorado Springs.

–

Ed Cyzewski (MDiv Biblical Theological Seminary) works as a freelance writer in the nonprofit sector of southwest Vermont. He is the author of Coffeehouse Theology: Reflecting on God in Everyday Life, an introduction to contextual theology as well as the Coffeehouse Theology Bible Study Guide and aCoffeehouse Theology Discussion Guide. He can be followed at:

• inamirrordimly.com (theology and culture blog)
• edcyz.com (blog on writing)
• @edcyzewski (Twitter)

Buy Coffeehouse Theology at Amazon.com here.

Other people have done this. I read a lot of books, so why not me?

Sadly, I don’t have too good of a memory, but I suppose the books I remember I read are the ones that are some of my favorites.

My rankings are just as subjective as the BCS, and, so, without further ado, my top theological books that I read in 2008 (in particular order) are as follows:

5 - The Torah Story: an Apprenticeship on the Pentateuch by Gary E. Schnittjer

This was a seminary reading by one of our professors (Gary Schnittjer, duh). Gary engages with the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures (i.e., Genesis-Deuteronomy) in a very accessible way for even the average church-goer.

4 - Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament by Peter Enns

Probably, the most controversial theological book within evangelical, Old Testament scholarship within the past few years. Enns explains that the Bible should be understood as fully-God and fully-human in the same way that Jesus Christ is understood as such.

3 - The Great Emergence: How Christianity Is Changing and Why by Phyllis Tickle

Phyllis Tickle explains, basically, that about every 500 years, the church cleans house, and the result is a purer church. We live in such a time now. I have explained to some that, if one asks how they could better understand me theologically, I would give them this book.

2 - Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church by N.T. Wright

If you’re like me, you’re tired of hearing how the purpose of being a Christian is simply “to go to heaven when you die,” and you wonder if there is anything more to the believing in Christ’s death and resurrection. N.T. Wright thoroughly explains how our view on heaven and the resurrection directly influences what we, as the church, see as our mission. This book is an excellent summary of much of Bishop Wright’s teachings elsewhere, and he elaborates on these topics in a very accessible way.

1 - Jesus for President: Politics for Ordinary Radicals by Shane Claiborne and Chris Haw

No other book has assisted me so much throughout a political season than this one by Claiborne and Haw. Even if I read this book in 2009, it would still be number 1 or 2 on my list. Shane and Chris show how from cover-to-cover Scripture explains that our allegiance must be with God and his mission, and our loyalty should not be shared with the powers of this world. From explaining how we need to be creative in how we handle conflict to suggestions for subversive living like making your own clothes to the complementary, beautiful artwork throughout, Jesus for President ranks at the top of my list.