Characteristics of a Hermeneutical Community - A Spirit Led Community; In the series: GEMEINDETHEOLOGIE: Who & How?

Fowl, who is acutely aware of the effects of sin on the interpreter of Scripture, postulates that "the Spirit's intervention and interpretive work is crucial if the followers of Jesus are faithfully to carry on the mission Jesus gave them."[1] Treier, basing himself on the work of Fowl and Jones, argues for the reading of Scripture to be a pneumatological practice.[2] Yet, this needs to be done heeding Fowl's warning that the work of the Spirit "does not imply that one can ignore scripture." Using Acts 10-15 as his scriptural support, Fowl argues that Christians are to read scripture with the Spirit, but that to do this, they must be able to discern the work of the Spirit in themselves and in others. This necessity for discerning the work of the Spirit in themselves and in others logically results in a tight community.[3] Such tight communities were common among the Anabaptists whose reliance on the Spirit made them open to correction and communal discernment: "they would listen to one another to discern what the Spirit was saying."[4] To summarize, due to our sinfulness we need the Spirit of God to be able to do hermeneutics. This, in turn, requires us to be capable of discerning the work of the Spirit in our lives and in the lives of believers around us, therefore postulating the need for a tight hermeneutical community.

Here again, though, one is confronted with a multidimensional interaction. Human sinfulness requires the role of the Spirit in communal hermeneutics, but at the same time renders the discernment of what the Spirit is doing suspicious. The Anabaptists recognized the importance of the Holy Spirit in the interpretation of Scripture, yet they also "realized the danger of antinomianism inherent in simply allowing everyone to interpret a passage in accordance with some internal impulse ascribed to the Holy Spirit. Hence, the need arose for some kind of 'testing the spirits'," and "the congregation became the locus for that kind of testing."[5] Murray emphasizes the importance of the Anabaptist understanding of the Spirit's work in the gathered church. "Although the Spirit illuminated individuals as they read Scripture, such an emphasis would require that until the individual's understanding was tested in the congregation it was to be treated cautiously. The Spirit's work involved both revelation and unity." The Anabaptist emphasis on the role of the Spirit therefore "meant that only a congregation where there was freedom for the Spirit to guide individuals and unite the community around the Word could operate properly as a hermeneutical community."[6]

---

[1]Fowl, Engaging Scripture, 98.

[2]Treier, Introducing Theological Interpretation of Scripture, 87.

[3]Fowl, Engaging Scripture, 113, 115. Fowl claims that "to be able to read the Spirit well, Christians must not only become and learn from people of the Spirit, we must also become practiced at testifying about what the Spirit is doing in the lives of others. . . . The only way to counter the privatizing tendencies of contemporary church life, which make it unlikely or impossible that Christians would be in a position to testify about the work of the Spirit in the lives of their sisters and brothers, is to enter into friendship with them" (116-17), and therefore in community with them.

[4]Murray, Biblical Interpretation in the Anabaptist Tradition, 145.

[5]Ens, "The Hermeneutical Community," 75-76.

[6]Murray, Biblical Interpretation in the Anabaptist Tradition, 146, 213. 

Characteristics of a Hermeneutical Community - A Bibliocentric community, but a Community Linked with Tradition?; In the series: GEMEINDETHEOLOGIE: Who & How?

It has been argued thus far that this community is Bibliocentric, but what about the role of tradition or doctrine. What role do they play in a hermeneutical community?

While focusing on the local community, Holder also identifies in Calvin an appeal to a larger "transhistorical community, through the appeal to earlier authorities."[1] Conversely, "Anabaptists who accepted that the church has a role in biblical interpretation located this role in the present rather than the past, in the local congregation rather than a monolithic structure." In general, Anabaptists discouraged the "exploration of earlier writings." Murray claims that this was due to the Anabaptists' radical view of the fall of the church. While this "released Anabaptists from dependence on past authorities to make fresh discoveries," Murray laments that it "impoverished their interpretation and deprived them of much scholarly and spiritual counsel." Ultimately, he sees this as an important warning that it is "unnecessary so completely to jettison the contribution of earlier generations."[2] 

Treier, dealing with the interaction of theological interpretation and doctrine, suggests that imitation allows us to learn virtuous judgment, and consequently echoes what he sees as Fowl's warning that "contemporary Christians need to pay attention to ancient Christian interpreters."[3] Thiselton, also dealing with doctrine, emphasizes that doctrine does not inhibit innovative thought. On the contrary, according to him, "only within a tradition of firm communal identity-markers can constructive 'going on independently' be distinguished from maverick idiosyncrasy and self-indulgence." Therefore, doctrine is not "unimportant, repressive, or merely theoretical,"[4] rather it is a good safeguard and consequently a good hermeneutical tool for the hermeneutical community.

---

[1]Holder, "Church as Discerning Community in Calvin," 285n37.

[2] Murray, Biblical Interpretation in the Anabaptist Tradition, 158, 180-81. Murray is not the only one to lament the Anabaptists' jettison of tradition. The majority of the authors that discuss this issue do likewise.

[3]Daniel J. Treier, Introducing Theological Interpretation of Scripture: Recovering a Christian Practice (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 89.

[4]Thiselton, The Hermeneutics of Doctrine, 97. According to Thiselton, the system (doctrine) furnishes coherence and boundary and identity markers. He postulates that this is what is seen in the second and third century when "the communal identity of the apostolic church, founded upon biblical writings, could be publicly discerned through what Irenaeus and Tertullian called 'the rule of faith.'" While life experiences were different between each believer scattered throughout the ancient world (life-world), "the interaction between life-world and system guaranteed a continuity of recognizable corporate identity as this trans-local church." (140)

Characteristics of a Hermeneutical Community - A Bibliocentric Community, but What About Illiteracy?; In the series: GEMEINDETHEOLOGIE: Who & How?

It is important to note that identifying Scripture and scriptural knowledge as essential to a hermeneutical community broaches the topic of literacy and its role in the process.[1] Stock notes that "the question of oral versus written tradition need not be framed in inflexible terms. What was essential for a textual community, whether large or small, was simply a text, an interpreter, and a public. The text did not have to be written; oral record, memory, and reperformance sufficed."[2] While, as mentioned above, Calvin strove for a biblically educated commonwealth, Holder does admit that Calvin's assumption was that at least some members of the congregation were reading the Scriptures.[3] It is also appropriate to mention again that even illiterate Anabaptists had intricate knowledge of Scripture. The Book of Martyrs presents many disputations between Anabaptists and their persecutors where even illiterate Anabaptists are described as being able to argue their Biblical hope in front of and to the amazement of their judges. Illiteracy was not then and is not now a barrier to a community's having as its focus the text of Scripture and interpreting it communally. On the contrary, it would seem that the Anabaptists' communal focus was an impetus for the memorization of large portions of Scripture by those who were illiterate,[4] ultimately helping to make Scripture central to the community.

And what of tradition then? We'll talk about it next time.

---

[1]Roth, for example, in Roth, "Community as Conversation," 43, discussed the oral and visual nature of early modern Europe, in contrast to the print nature of our age. He notes that "many Anabaptists first encountered Scripture through the spoken word -- sermons, disputations, discussions -- rather than in the written word, and in a communal context of conversation and debate rather than as individuals engaged in silent reading and study." Consequently, he questions how this predominantly oral setting could have shaped the understanding of Scripture.

[2]Stock, Listening for the Text, 37. Here, Stock presents Pierre Valdo, the father of the Waldensian movement, as an example of an interpres (the one who was the contact between the illiterate culture and the literate culture), for he "memorized and communicated the gospel by word of mouth." Later in his book, Stock goes on to make a parallel argument when he argues that the Jewish and Christian attitude toward the text "is true for Scriptures that are actually read as well as for those that are memorized and recited, such as the oral gospel and the oral Torah. This recall is a type of reading" (149-50).

[3]In his commentary on 2 Tim 2:15, Calvin writes: "Has not every person an opportunity of reading the Bible?" (John Calvin Commentaries on The Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon 2 Tim 2:15). Holder, in Holder, "Church as Discerning Community in Calvin," 274, identifies four other evidences of this assumption in Calvin's writings.

[4]Ens, "The Hermeneutical Community," 76n26. 

Characteristics of a Hermeneutical Community - A Bibliocentric Community; In the series: GEMEINDETHEOLOGIE: Who & How?

Central to any hermeneutical endeavor is the fact that there must be something to interpret. Yet, a Christian hermeneutical community is not necessarily like any other community: it is a community that has come into existence due to the proclamation of Jesus Christ, is sustained by the proclamation of Jesus Christ, and sustains the proclamation of Jesus Christ. Therefore, to use Westphal's terminology,[1] this community's "classic text" has to be the revelation of Jesus Christ: the Bible. As Stock argues, "the 'text' is what a community takes it to be. . . . For, like meaning in language, the element a society fixes upon is a conventional arrangement among the members."[2] Yet, for a Christian hermeneutical community, the text of Scripture is not only the agreed upon text, but more importantly, it is the necessary nucleus of such a community.[3]

This cohesion around a text creates what Stock refers to as a textual community:

Through the text, or, more accurately, through the interpretation of it, individuals who previously had little else in common were united around common goals. Similar social origins comprised a sufficient, but not necessary condition of participation. The essential bond was forged by means of belief; its cement was faith in the reality of belonging. And these in turn were by-products of a general agreement on the meaning of a text.[4]

Consequently, this textual community is by default an interpretive community as well as a social entity. This leads Stock to claim that the Christian community's faith might be in the Word of God, but "proof is in the text" that they are interpreting, therefore again emphasizing the centrality of the text.[5]

This centrality of the text of Scripture to the Christian community is clearly seen in the reformation. In the proclamation of sola scriptura, the reformers identified Scripture as fundamental to their movement. They were "committed to the careful study of scripture, . . . and utterly convinced of the Scripture's authority and relevance in all matters of faith and daily life."[6] Accordingly, one of the characteristics of the participating church in Geneva was Calvin's expectation of a biblically literate commonwealth.[7] Likewise, among the Anabaptists, Scripture was central to their life and their identity as seen by "the intricate knowledge of Scripture that even illiterate Anabaptists expressed."[8]

Scripture is not only at the core of the hermeneutical community, but it is also at the genesis of this community, in both a theological and a pragmatic dimension. Space does not allow a full discussion of the theological dimension. Suffice it to say that in the New Testament there are descriptions of local communities formed around the Word of God. Acts 2 is a good example of such a community, for the believers are portrayed as devoting themselves to the apostles' teachings and fellowship: the scriptural and the communal dimension. In Hebrews 10, believers are instructed to gather for the purpose of encouragement, but only after they are instructed to hold fast to the confession of their hope: the communal and the scriptural dimension, yet again. As for the pragmatic dimension, Ens believes that the importance of Scripture's "interpretation and application to the life of a Christian" was actually a motivating factor that made Anabaptists search "for a process of interpretation that would ensure correct understanding and proper application."[9] In many such communities, this process was that of communal hermeneutics. "The hermeneutical community was both the locus and focus of their interpretation of Scripture and their implementation of it." This dynamic between community and Scripture was in no way "the church sitting in authority over Scripture but the church as the Spirit's chosen location for interpreting Scripture." Their focus was often ecclesio-centric and ultimately, the "congregation both shaped and was shaped by how Scripture was interpreted in order to produce something true to their understanding of biblical ecclesiology."[10] This highlights the multi-directional interaction between community and Scripture.

---

[1]Merold Westphal, Whose Community? Which Interpretation?: Philosophical Hermeneutics for the Church, ed. James K. A. Smith, The Church and Postmodern Culture. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), 118. Westphal tries to apply Gadamerian theories on conversation and classic texts to the Bible. Westphal does admit that the Bible being the word of God makes it much more than just a classic text, but he insists that "it is not less than the church's classic text" (147). While discussing classic texts, he concludes that "classic texts found communities, are sustained by communities, and in turn sustain communities. But this means that their interpretation is also a communal affair, a dialectic and not a monological process. It takes place among individuals within a community and among communities. If the Bible is the 'classic text' of the Christian church, that church, in turn, is the community of the Bible's interpretation. It belongs to the church's identity that it is the conversation in which its members and its communities seek to understand the Bible and its subject matter: God and our relation to God." For Westphal, therefore, the relation between Scripture and community is multi-directional.

[2]Brian Stock, Listening for the Text: On the Uses of the Past (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996), 146. 

[3]Stock portrays post antiquities textual communalities as not centering on the Torah and the New Testament, but as centering on other texts like the Mishnah and the Rule of St. Benedict, for example. This is because, according to him, "it is the rules, not the Scriptures, that transcend preexisting economic or social bonds, since it is the rules that are both the basis and the result of common interpretive efforts." (Ibid., 150-51.) Since Stock's focus is on medieval society where monasteries were the important textual communities, one can see his identification of documents like the Rule of St. Benedict as the focal texts of those communities. Yet, if it is the Scriptures that are both the basis and the result of common interpretive efforts, as is the case in the communities under discussion in this paper, then it would seem that Stock would agree with the claim that the text of Scripture is the focal text of a Christian textual community.

[4]Ibid., 37. Similarly, Hamilton, in Neill Quinn Hamilton, "Hermeneutics and Community," Drew Gateway 44, no. 1 (1973): 4, claims that "community must arise from conviction rather than arrangements of convenience and expediency." Yet, Hamilton also notes that "Christian conviction has as much power to prevent, as to create community." Cf. Roth, in John D. Roth, "Community as Conversation: A New Model of Anabaptist Hermeneutics," in Essays in Anabaptist Theology, ed. H. Wayne Pipkin (Elkhart, IN: Institute of Mennonite Studies, 1994), 43-44, uses the work of David Sabean on rural communities in early modern Germany to similarly argue that Anabaptist hermeneutical communities "were not united by a specific set of shared values, the familial bonds of love, or even a clear sense of corporate purpose." Yet, instead of providing a text as the cohesive element, he posits that it was the conversations or arguments that each community was engaged in that produced their essential bond. Ultimately, Roth concludes that while Anabaptist hermeneutics were not "merely a reflection of material forces or pragmatic considerations," he thinks that it is "clear that Anabaptist theology did not emerge directly from Scripture." In this he seems to be alone, for while others agree that other factors molded Anabaptist theology, none deny the role of Scripture as he does.

[5]Stock, Listening for the Text, 149, 150.

[6]Roth, "Community as Conversation," 36.

[7]Holder, "Church as Discerning Community in Calvin," 274. Below it will be argued, based on Holder's research, that even in Calvin one can find an element of hermeneutics in community.

[8]Yarnell, The Formation of Christian Doctrine, 102.

[9]Ens, "The Hermeneutical Community," 73.

[10]Murray, Biblical Interpretation in the Anabaptist Tradition, 181, 176-77. 

Characteristics of a Hermeneutical Community - An Introduction; In the series: GEMEINDETHEOLOGIE: Who & How?

Ens, looking at the Anabaptists' view of a hermeneutical community, posits that their understanding of the Bible resulted in its practical application in life. For most Anabaptists, right living had to be "a prerequisite to or concomitant to right knowing," and therefore became "one of the qualifications for proper interpretations." This interpretation-application necessitated a community and "brought together scripture (sole authority), Spirit (essential interpreter-teacher), and church (discerning body)."[1] Here, the Anabaptists furnish us an embodiment of a community seeking to identify the will of the author of Scripture for the purpose of implementing it. In doing so, they elegantly provide a universal paradigm for understanding the ethos of a Christian hermeneutical community. At least two parts of this paradigm, the centrality of Scripture combined with the necessity of the work of the Spirit, seem to recur in most other discussions about Christian hermeneutical communities, confirming its universality. While the elegance of this model is in its simplicity, its outworking is not necessarily simple. As will be seen in the following posts, the interaction between Scripture, Spirit, and community is not one-dimensional and unidirectional, but multi-dimensional and multi-directional.

---

[1]Ens, "The Hermeneutical Community," 82-85. 

Decorating a lemon tartelette

The other day Cindy and I were looking for ideas of how to decorate a lemon tartelette. We looked around for a while, but never did find any ideas we liked, so I figured I'd suggest this one. Blueberries, a mint leaf, and some lemons rind. Enjoy!

GEMEINDETHEOLOGIE: Who & How? - An Introduction

It's 11:30 am on a Sunday morning in Wake Forest, NC. The members of Messiah Baptist Church are gathered to discuss what God has been teaching them about a specific passage of Scripture that week. Further South in Toccoa, GA, the next day at 1:30 pm a preacher is sitting down in his study, cognizant of the preaching engagement that he has scheduled for that coming Sunday. In front of him he has his Bible, his favorite three commentaries, two systematic theologies, and his Greek lexicon and grammar. Across the ocean in Vatican City at 9:00 am on Wednesday, the Magisterium is gathering around the Pope to discuss matters of doctrine. The next day at 2:30 pm in Fort Worth, TX, a small group of PhD students are gathered in a classroom discussing how best to understand the authorial intent of Scripture. What do all of these meetings have in common? Each, in its own way, might be considered to be the meeting of a hermeneutical community.

The practice of community hermeneutics in Christian circles has been traced back by some to early events like the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15.[1] This practice has also been identified in the teachings of 1 Corinthians 14[2] and several other passages in Scriptures. Historically, it was implemented in various forms by groups throughout the last two millennia and is probably most recognized among the Anabaptists. Currently, it is part of the ethos of the postmodern world and the growing house church movement. As Thiselton claims: "all the major traditions of the Christian church formally define doctrine in communal terms, although the emphasis and nature of the community in question varies."[3] For example, in the Catholic tradition, the hermeneutical community is embodied in the bishops that constitute the Magisterium, while in some Anabaptist traditions, the hermeneutical community is embodied by all the believers in the local congregation.

In light of the fact that communal hermeneutics is not necessarily the standard practice in most communities, one may ask: why has Christian community hermeneutics been seen as useful or even necessary by various groups over the last two millennia? As mentioned above, some have followed what they saw as passages describing or even prescribing a participatory hermeneutical experience. Others, instead, have pointed to more conceptual reasons. Fowl notes, for example, that "Christian convictions about sin should play a role in their scriptural interpretation, enjoining them to maintain a certain sort of vigilance over their interpretation."[4] People's awareness of human sinfulness should lead them to seek for wisdom, and as Proverbs 24:6 states: in a multitude of counselors there is safety.[5] In addition, others have identified concepts such as the priesthood of believers (1 Pet 2:9, Rev 1:6), the promise of the law written on every heart (Jer 31:33-34), and the church's possession of the "keys" (Matt 16, Matt 18)[6] as other reasons for a communal approach. No matter what the motivation, though, several questions arise at the mention of the topic of communal hermeneutics. First: how can or should hermeneutics be done in community? Second, but conceptually needing to precede the first: what characterizes this community in which and by which hermeneutics is being done?

The journey that was taken to answer these questions resulted in multiple conversations with a variety of sources, from the reformation and radical reformation to modern scholars in hermeneutics. For the sake of limiting the scope of this paper, the primary focus of these conversations took place in the Free Church context. Therefore, while there was some interaction with ecumenical thought and with the general discussion on community going on in postmodern circles, these two aspects will play only a peripheral role in this paper.

Through all these conversations, several patterns seem to emerge in the understanding of what characterizes a Christian hermeneutical community as well as several models of how to practice hermeneutics in community. What follows is an attempt to systematize the patterns found in these various conversations, which ultimately lead to the following conclusions. First, a hermeneutical community is one that necessarily brings together Scripture, Spirit, and a discerning body. The interactions between these three components are multi-dimensional and multi-directional. It is a community that is created from the authorial intent of the author of Scripture and that has for its scope the correct understanding of the authorial intent of the author of Scripture. Second, there are multiple families of possible applications for community hermeneutics and they can be evaluated by the presence or lack of an authentic hermeneutical community.

---

[1]See for example: Adolf Ens, "Theology of the Hermeneutical Community in Anabaptist-Mennonite Thought," in The Church as Theological Community: Essays in Honour of David Schroeder, ed. Harry John Huebner (Winnipeg, MB: CMBC Publications, 1990), 86. Cf. Wiarda, in Timothy Wiarda, "The Jerusalem Council and the Theological Task," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 46, no. 2 (2003): 236-39, who argues that Acts 15 is not an effective "model for Spirit-led community interpretation of Scripture," since there is a "gap between the apostles and us, and between their time and our own," therefore decreasing the degree of analogy between Acts 15 and our contemporary communities. Wiarda does see this passage as a model, but he narrows the scope of that model to the like-mindedness that is observed within the church. He ultimately fails to connect that like-mindedness to the hermeneutical task observed in Acts 15 or give any insight on how a different interpretive model would affect that like-mindedness.

[2]See for example: Ens, "The Hermeneutical Community," 76, 86; Stuart Murray, Biblical Interpretation in the Anabaptist Tradition (Kitchener, ON: Pandora Press, 1999), 168, 174-77; Malcom B. Yarnell, The Formation of Christian Doctrine (Nashville: B&H, 2007), 101; and R. Ward Holder, "Ecclesia, Legenda Atque Intelligenda Scriptura: The Church as Discerning Community in Calvin's Hermeneutic," Calvin Theological Journal 36, no. 2 (2001): 278.

[3]Anthony C. Thiselton, The Hermeneutics of Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), xviii. Thiselton makes a parallel between hermeneutics and doctrine, pointing out that both draw on "communal understanding" and transmitted wisdom.

[4]Stephen E. Fowl, Engaging Scripture: A Model for Theological Interpretation, Challenges in Contemporary Theology (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1998), 74. Fowl presents a threefold solution to dealing with the effects of sin on interpretation: 1) seeking a one-mindedness with God, 2) living in a close knit community that is also seeking a one-mindedness with God, and 3) being sensitive to the work of the Spirit.

[5]NKJV. Unless otherwise specified, all future Scripture references will be from the NKJV.

[6]For example, Murray, Biblical Interpretation in the Anabaptist Tradition, 173-75, presents these and other passages as having often been used by Anabaptist leaders to justify their communal emphasis on hermeneutics.

Update ...

I know it's been a while since I have posted on this blog. Trust me, it's not because I do not want to, but because life has just been busy. I initially thought that with all the writing that I have to do in this PhD program, I would have a lot of blogging material. Well ... I do, but what I have been lacking is time to transfer those documents to a blog format. In addition, facebook is a much faster way of posting links and quick quotes, so ... here we are, I have not posted anything since August 2012!

I have therefore decided to force myself to post from at least a paper I have written in the not too distant past. I picked one on communal hermeneutics. It was an interesting paper to research and it is in many ways still a work in progress. I do have to warn you that I don't think that my professor was in love with it, but like I said: in many ways, it is still a work in progress. I do hope some of the information and idea will get you thinking about the topic, whether you agree with me or not.

ta-ta

Worshiping Christ in no particular place

Leonhart: Where do you worship Christ?
Hans: Not at any one particular place. . . . I worship him seated at the right hand of his heavenly Father; there he is my only intercessor, mediator, and reconciler to God."

I wonder if the way we use worship terminology these days undermines this very important concept?

From: Balthasar Hubmaier, "A Christian Catechism," in Balthasar Hubmaier, Balthasar Hubmaier, Theologian of Anabaptism, Classics of the Radical Reformation, vol. 5, trans. H. Wayne Pipkin and John Howard Yoder (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1989), 355.

Luther on infant baptism according to McGrath:

In a paradoxical way, infant baptism is totally consistent with the doctrine of justification by faith, because it emphasizes that faith is not something we can achieve, but something which is given to us graciously. . . . Baptism does not presuppose faith" rather, it generates faith. "A child becomes a believer if Christ in baptism speaks to him through the mouth of the one who baptizes, since it is his Word, his commandment, and his Word cannot be without fruit." Baptism effects what it signifies: "So we can see what a great and excellent thing Baptism is, in that it delivers us from the jaws of the devil and makes us God's own, suppresses and takes away sin, and then daily strengthens the new person, and is (and will always remain) efficacious until we pass from this state of ministry to eternal glory."

Wow ... that is not the understanding of salvation by grace alone I thought Luther had. Whatever happened to confessing and believing? Could it be that, as often happens, Luther was so concerned with protecting God and his understanding of Him that his "system" derailed him? This still happens today when people want to try to protect God and their understanding of God as love ... or when people want to try to protect God and their understanding of God as sovereign. When are we going to stop trying to protect God with our theological systems and allow His Word to speak for itself?

From: McGrath, Alister E. Reformation Thought: An Introduction, 4th ed. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. McGrath here cites Luther's Greater Catechism on Infant Baptism.

Generations ...

I have just finished Mary Kassian's The Feminist Mistake. This is a great book to read to have an overview of feminism and the damage that it has caused in the last 50+ years. While there are many quotes and thoughts going through my mind, given my last post I would like to share this one first:

Principles which one generation accepts provisionally, in the context of other cultural commitments, soon harden into icy dogmas for a generation brought up on nothing else. [1]

This is valid for liberation theology, feminism, liberal theology, and any other system we set up. May we be careful in all we do, say, and write.

[1] To be honest, I did something a good researcher should not do, but I don't have the time to deal with it now ... Kassian is not the author of this quote, she quotes it from Michael Novak, Will It Liberate? Questions About Liberation Theology (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1986), 27. I did not check Novak's work for accuracy or context, but even if this is not what Novak intended, it is the warning I am trying to communicate.

Albert Schweitzer

I am currently reading for my comprehensive exams (the comps, as they are know around here), and I just finished Albert Schweitzer's The Quest of the Historical Jesus. Overall, I thought that it was a very interesting book that helped me get a global perspective on a century of German historical higher critical thought (with the inclusion of a few French authors), starting with Hess and Reinhard in the early 1800s.

While reading it, I think I found confirmation of a thought I had about the "liberals" of the time. It seems to me that while we might quickly dismiss them as having played a pivotal role in the crumbling of Christianity, they themselves did not think that they were doing so. Their Christian identity was strong enough that they did not see how their attacks on the text of Scripture would damage Christianity. Listen to what Schweitzer writes:

"God-manhood, the highest idea conceived by human thought, is actually in the historic personality of Jesus. But while conventional thinking supposes that this phenomenal realisation must be perfect, true thought which has attained by genuine critical reasoning to a higher freedom, knows that no idea can realise itself perfectly on the historic plane, and that its truth does not depend on the proof of its having received perfect external representation, but that its perfection comes about through that which the idea carries into history, or through the way in which history is sublimated into idea.

. . . However far criticism may go in providing the reaction of the idea upon the presentment of the historical course of the life of Jesus, the fact that Jesus represented that idea and called it to life among mankind is something real, something that no criticism can annul. It is alive thenceforward—to this day, and forever more.

It is in this emancipation of spirit, and in the consciousness that Jesus as the creator of the religion of humanity is beyond the reach of criticism, that Strauss goes to work, and batters down the rubble, assured that his pick can make no impression on the stone" (78-79).

And again, as he concludes his book:

"Jesus means something to our world because a mighty Spiritual force streams forth from Him and flows through our time also. This fact can neither be shaken nor confirmed by any historical discovery. It IS the solid foundation of Christianity.

. . . further we must be prepared to find that the historical knowledge of the personality and life of Jesus will not be a help, but perhaps even an offence to religion.

But the truth is, it is not Jesus as historically known, but Jesus as spiritually arisen within men. who is significant for our time and can help it. Not the historical Jesus, but the spirit which goes forth from Him and in the spirits of men strives for new inuence and rule, is that which overcomes the world" (393-95).

It sure does sound like he thought that their work could not and would not crumble their Christian faith (their stone). Unfortunately, what Schweitzer did not realize is that their arbitrary and subjective rationalistic assault on the veracity of the text of the Bible did not just leave an impression on the next generation's stone, for some, it shattered it. This is a good warning for our generation of Christian thinkers.

Anabaptist in Italy

I was asked by my adviser to present a paper on the Italian Anabaptists at this year's SWBTS Anabaptism and Contemporary Baptists Conference. I was honored to be presenting in the company of some great scholars who have studied the Anabaptists: Friesen, Patterson, Yarnell, and Caner, just name a few. If you did not get the opportunity to come, but have an interest in the Anabaptists, you can find the audio of the conference here.

This paper also gave me the opportunity to start researching the topic that will end up being my dissertation topic: Italian Anabaptism. I was originally set against doing a historical thesis, but over time I have seen some of the benefits of doing a thesis in historical theology and have develop an interest in this topic. I am looking forward to the next year of research and writing (but before I get there, I have to study and pass my comprehensive exams).

Copycat Duke's Mayo recipe

As some of you know, Cindy has some food allergies. This has caused us to have to make a lot of things from scratch; mayo is one of them. While on the east coast, we both loved the taste and kick of Duke's mayo, and therefore when I set about to make home made mayo, I decided to try to imitate that taste. Here is the recipe I have come up with so far. It is not perfect, but it gets close. Let me know if you can improve on it.

200g oil (I use 100g of light sunflower oil + 100g of light olive oil - Update: I now only use 200g of light sunflower oil)

1 Tbsp white vinegar

1 Tbsp cider vinegar

1 Tbsp lemon juice

½ tsp (2 x ¼ tsp) salt

¼ tsp dried mustard

¼ tsp paprika

2 egg yolks

To make it, I use the technique found here (for making mayo, a stick blender is a lifesaver, but you can do it the old fashion way if you want). Put all the ingredients in the jar. Set the stick blender to speed 1. Place the end of the blender at the bottom of the jar, over the two yolks. Pulse beat the mixture 4 times. Continuously beat the mixture until all the oil is incorporated; you will have to pull the blender up from the bottom some. Set the stick blender to speed 9. Continuously beat the mixture until it is as thick as desired. Enjoy!

Through a passage vs. Topical

I saw a picture similar to this one in a friend's textbook. I thought that it graphically made a very important point: preaching through a passage, if done well, is most likely going to present the original author's point. Preaching topically, which often boils down to picking thoughts from different authors, is most likely going to present the preacher's own point instead of the original authors' intended points, which is a problem since ultimately, when we teach or preach, we are to present's God's truth, not our ideas.

Camillo Renato on Scripture

... Scripture, which having survived until now by the providence of God and by the movement of the Holy Spirit and through the work of the apostles, is a weapon sufficient to save us and to inform us all the necessary things, useful and central and final things of the christian doctrine and customs. It is sufficient to defend ourselves from the bad doctrines of Satan and the Antichrist and does not need new voices, or new discourses, or deductions, or other curiosities, which give birth to contentions and schisms in the company of Christ. It is founded on the word and doctrine of its head and prince Jesus Christ our lord and does not try to extend beyond the designated terms so that, if lost, it would not be pulled into error by Satan.

This is my quick translation of a quote found in Camillo Renato, "Trattato del Battesimo e della Santa Cena," in Camillo Renato and Antonio Rotondò, Opere: Documenti e Testimonianze, Corpus Reformatorum Italicorum, edited by Luigi Firpo and Giorgio Spini (Firenze: G. C. Sansoni, 1968), 108.

While Renato is usually identified as a spiritualist, I thought this was a very good quote on Scripture.

Jerome and Baptism

First they teach all nations. Then they baptize those they have taught with water, for the body is not able to receive the sacrament of baptism before the soul has received the truth of the faith.

found in Jerome, Commentary on Matthew 4.28.18-20, in Manlio Simonett, ed, Matthew 14-28, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, vol. NT 1b. Edited by Thomas M. Oden (Downers Grove: IVP, 2002), 313.

I personally found this very interesting, especially due to the fact that Jerome was 4th / 5th century and that there are traces of infant baptism as early as the 2nd century.

Fourth Trimester Abortion?

I was shocked to read the BP article entitled "'4th-trimester abortion': Canadian woman strangles newborn but gets no prison time." In it, Michael Foust reports that a "Canadian woman who gave birth to a baby, strangled it with her underwear and then tossed the body over a fence outside her parents' house will not get any prison time in a decision that may be matched in shock only by the judge's logic." The judge that overruled the mother's conviction claimed that Canada's lack of legislation regulating abortion shows that "while many Canadians undoubtedly view abortion as a less than ideal solution to unprotected sex and unwanted pregnancy, they generally understand, accept and sympathize with the onerous demands pregnancy and childbirth exact from mothers, especially mothers without support." As R. Albert Mohler Jr. points out: "we are now extending the murderous logic of abortion into a fourth trimester, which is to say, after the baby has been born." Unfortunately, I am not surprised that we are heading down that route ... may God help us all.

Determining the will of God and Newtonian Physics

I was walking on SWBTS campus the other day thinking about what God is doing in our lives. For years now, Cindy and I have decided to wait and stay put, or to keep on going in the same direction, until we are sure that God is changing things. Then, it occurred to me that there is a parallel there with Newtonian physics (I am currently teaching Dynamics and Vibrations at TCU, so physics is on my mind). You see, according to Newton's first law of motion, an object at rest will remain at rest and an object in motion will remain in motion (with a given trajectory, etc.) unless acted upon by an external force.

We do not know what God has in store for us after SWBTS, but I know that I am supposed to be here, so we will wait here and continue on our trajectory, until He applies a force on us and moves us somewhere else. How about you? Are you rushing ahead of God, or are you waiting on Him?

Language distributions around the world.

I recently ran into the following maps posted on Wikipedia. I found them interesting and useful, so I thought I'd share them with you.

The Anglophone world (original):

The Francophone world (original):

The Hispanophone world (original):

The Lusophone world (original):

Vlach. The Church as a Replacement of Israel - A short book review

Vlach, Michael J. The Church as a Replacement of Israel: An Analysis of Supersessionism. Edition Israelogie (EDIS), vol. 2. New York: Peter Lang, 2009. Hardcover, $43.95.

The Church as a Replacement of Israel is the second volume (so far the only one in English) in Peter Lang's Edition Israelogie series. This series is a dogmatic Christian pursuit raising "the question as to how a systematic presentation of the relationship between Israel and/or Judaism and the Christian Church might enrich the development of Christian doctrine and even demand doctrinal modification" (11). Vlach's contribution is the publication of his doctoral thesis done at SEBTS. In it, he intends "to offer a systematic presentation and analysis of the doctrine of supersessionism," in which he will show that "supersessionism is not a 'one-size-fits-all' perspective." To do this, he proposes to define supersessionism and highlight the different types of replacement theology, to present the history of the doctrine, "and, most importantly, look at the major hermeneutical and theological issues involved in this debate" (13). The book follows exactly that pattern with the hermeneutical and theological investigation spanning three chapters.

Vlach defines supersessionism as "the view that the New Testament church is the new Israel that has forever superseded national Israel as the people of God" (27). He also identifies variations in supersessionism, which he subdivides into three main types: punitive, economic, and structural. The punitive view, as the name implies, believes that Israel has been replaced by the church due to its disobedience. The economic view focuses on "the Christ-event" as the reason for the replacement. Unlike the other two views, the structural view is more of a hermeneutical approach, which de-emphasizes the OT's value for "shaping Christian convictions" (31). Vlach also indentifies different intensities of supersessionism.

At the end of his historical presentation, Vlach concludes that "the doctrine of supersessionism has deep roots in church history" (80), and identifies factors which lead the church to those conclusions. He identifies Justin Martyr as "the first church father to explicitly identify the church as Israel" (81), and Origen as providing the hermeneutical foundation for supersessionism. In the middle ages, supersessionism often included the belief of a future conversion of the Jews. The reformation produced a mixed bag of supersessionist views, and it is not until the modern era that the church has seen a large scale rejection of supersessionism, partly motivated by the holocaust, the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, and the advent of dispensationalism.

In the last three chapters, Vlach evaluates the theology and hermeneutics of both supersessionism and non-supersessionism, its opposing view that "asserts that national Israel still has a special identity and role in the program of God" (38). He identifies the nucleus of their core difference as their hermeneutical assumptions: supersessionism seeing the OT mainly in terms of shadows and types, and non-supersessionism adopting a historical-grammatical approach to the text. Ultimately, Vlach concludes that "supersessionism is not consistent with the biblical witness" (13, 203). Vlach posits that the key biblical texts in the discussion (Gal 6:16; 1 Pet 2:4-10; Eph 2:11-22; Rom 11:17-24; and Heb 8:8-13), while compatible with supersessionism, do not require such an interpretation.

Vlach's scholarly work is well written and has a great bibliography and ample footnotes for expanded research, yet it is also written in very attainable language. Therefore, I would not hesitate to recommend it in scholarly and non-scholarly settings. By presenting the full picture of supersessionism, Vlach allows any reader to go from complete ignorance to a good working knowledge of, if not proficiency in, the topic of supersessionism.

Blaising. Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church - A short book review

Blaising, Craig A., and Darrell L. Bock, eds. Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992. Softcover, $32.00.

As Stanley Gundry writes: "dispensationalism and its proponents have been and continue to be in process" (12). This is especially true about one of the sine quibus non of dispensationalism: the distinction between Israel and the church. Blaising, in his introductory historical overview concludes that there has been an abandonment of the "transcendental distinction" between Israel and the church in favor of a "historical distinction in the progressive revelation of the divine purpose" (33). Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church, edited by the authors of Progressing Dispensationalism, is therefore, as Blaising identifies it, "the hermeneutical reexamination of the relationship between Israel and the church, which in turn contributes to the process of self-definition currently underway in dispensationalism." In it, ten dispensational authors "examine aspects of the Israel-church relationship in New Testament theology," and three evangelical scholars "respond to these hermeneutical studies" (34).

For Bock, the reconstruction of New Testament eschatology must take into account that Jesus is the fulfillment of "promises and covenants made to Israel," as presented in Acts 2 and 3 (37-8). Ware believes that in the new covenant, Israel and the church are united people(s) of God, "yet distinct insofar as God will yet restore Israel as a nation to its land" (97). Hock states that the "ecclesiological one new man" is formed by "the remnant of Israel together with Gentiles" (125), which means that there is continuity and discontinuity between the testaments. Saucy focuses on understanding the mystery in Eph 3. Glenny argues for a typological-prophetic understanding of the use of the OT in 1 Pet, where OT Israel is a "pattern of the church's relationship with God" (186). Burns deals with "eschatology, ethnic Israel, and Romans 11" (188). Martin believes that the believer's ethic reiterated by Jesus, "although historically conditioned, is applicable to all ages" (263). Turner considers the New Jerusalem from the perspective of biblical theology. Finally, Barker argues for a 'both-and' approach to "certain potential dichotomous concepts" involving the church and Israel (328).

Three responses follow these ten chapters. VanGemeren, committed to Westminster (331), seems to think that dispensationalists have not gone far enough in his direction. Waltke, believes that this shift in dispensationalism "shakes the very foundations of dispensational hermeneutics" (348). Kaiser, is encouraged by the progress and applauds both the spirit, methodology, and many conclusions of this volume. Blaising and Bock conclude this book with a summary and a cursory presentation of progressive dispensationalism

Overall, I appreciate the progressive approach to dispensationalism presented in this volume, since it does attempt to smooth out some of the tensions that a clear dichotomy between Israel and the church creates. Bock's presentation of the kingdom existing in the church, as a "showcase of God's present reign through Messiah Jesus," for example, decreases the stark division that the classical dispensational view presents of a purely future kingdom. This allows the reader of Scripture to apply passages, like the sermon on the mount, where Jesus is talking about the kingdom. I recommend this volume for all who want to understand the history and current status of dispensationalism. Whether one agrees with the conclusions of the authors or not, there is much in this volume that will trigger fruitful thought about Israel and the church.

Baptism in the Theology of A. H. Strong - Conclusion

After a short summary of Strong's ecclesiology, Strong's doctrine of baptism was presented. As with most of his ecclesiology, Strong presents a Christocentric doctrine of baptism. Overall, his doctrine of baptism is orthodox and congruent with Baptist theology and the Biblical text. Upon analysis, helped by the study of his contemporaries and the study of the Acts 18:24-19:7 pericope, it was determined that Strong's view of 're-baptism' betrayed a anthropocentric shift in Strong's thinking. This resulted in a flawed view of 're-baptism' and a theoretical exaggerated de-emphasis on the administrator of baptism. The latter was probably also partially generated in reaction to the landmarkist debate. In addition, point was taken with Strong's understanding of the baptism of John as Christian baptism. All of these, though, are minor details that do not invalidate the value of his doctrine of baptism.

I hope that this series has been beneficial for you. Personally, it forced me to think about some issues that I had not thought of much before.

Below are links to the entire series.

Intro

A Christocentric Church - Summary of Ecclesiology Part I
The Organization of the Church - Summary of Ecclesiology Part II
Relation Between Local Churches - Summary of Ecclesiology Part III
Baptism, Christocentric at its Core
Baptism, Not Primarily the Entrance into the Church
Baptism, Not for Regeneration
The Administrator of Baptism
The Baptism of John
Rebaptism
Looking at Strong's Contemporaries - Part I
Looking at Strong's Contemporaries - Part II
Looking at Strong's Contemporaries - Part III
Looking at Strong's Contemporaries - Part IV
An Analysis - Part I
An Analysis - Part II
An Analysis - Part III
An Analysis - Part IV

Baptism in the Theology of A. H. Strong - An Analysis - Part IV

Rebaptism

When discussing 're-baptism,' one first needs to define what is meant by 're-baptism.' For example, were the Ephesian twelve 're-baptized' or was it their first baptism, the former one not being considered a baptism?[80] Re-baptism proper has to be defined as the repetition of baptism when the previous baptism was valid. This cannot be seen in Scripture, as was shown above, and does not make any theological sense. Baptism should be performed only once.[81] One can agree with Luther, Weston, and Strong that allowing the repetition of baptism (re-baptism proper) when one's faith is rekindled after a period of doubt can only lead to an infinite repetition of something that should be done once and for all.[82] So, the question is: if the baptism of someone is not found satisfactory, is there a warrant to baptize that person anew? Dargan sees precisely that in the Ephesian pericope: a "warrant for the rejection of an immersion not found satisfactory, and the performance of a true one in such case."[83] That being the situation, what renders someone's baptism not satisfactory or invalid, requiring it to be done anew for the first time? While, for the twelve, the question might be more complicated to answer, what about nowadays: what makes baptism invalid?

Since this is an analysis of Strong's view of baptism, his definition of baptism will be used: baptism is "the immersion of a believer in water, in token of his previous entrance into the communion of Christ's death and resurrection,– or, in other words, in token of his regeneration through union with Christ."[84] What invalidates this definition? Obviously, the lack of any component would invalidate it. Hence, the absence of immersion in water would render a baptism not valid. If the one who is being baptized is not a believer, one who has "entered into the communion of Christ's death and resurrection," then the baptism would not be valid.

This is where the tension is with Strong's view. The controversial scenario given by Strong is the case where a person is persuaded that he mistakenly thought himself regenerate at the time of his baptism. Here, Strong advises that, if the ordinance had been administered "with honest intent, as a profession of faith in Christ," it should not be administered again. The thrust of the argument is on the intent of the person being baptized, but intent is not in Strong's baptismal definition. Regeneration, though, is in his definition; accordingly then, in his scenario, regeneration was missing upon the first baptism, therefore rendering it equivalent to a public bath and requiring a proper baptism after regeneration does happen.

Strong argues for his position due to the fact that the intent of the person was correct, therefore placing intent and the person at the center of the issue. This anthropocentric approach is alien to the rest of his ecclesiology. Had he continued to be Christocentric, therefore placing Christ at the center of the issue, he would have correctly focused on the need for a regenerate candidate, instead of focusing on the candidate's intent, and would had to have come to a different conclusion.

[80] W. O. Carver, agreeing with Strong, states that in the case of the Ephesian twelve, "baptism–not re-baptism" was administered to them. See: Beth Allison Barr, The Acts of the Apostles: Four Centuries of Baptist Interpretation (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2009), 690.

[81] Akin, ed. Theology for the Church, 785.

[82] Wilburn T. Stancil, "Rebaptisms in the Southern Baptist Convention: A Theological and Pastoral Dilemma," Perspectives in Religious Studies 21, no. 2 (1994): 136; Johnson and Weston, An Outline of Systematic Theology, 337; and Strong, Systematic Theology, 950.

[83] This is Dargan's conclusion from the Ephesian pericope discussed above. Dargan, Ecclesiology, 364.

[84] Strong, Systematic Theology, 931.