The One Thing I Know

I don’t often listen to Christian radio, but this morning I was glad I did. As I was driving to work I happened to hear the song, “The One Thing that I know” by Jars of Clay. I have heard this song numerous times, but this time the importance of its message really struck home to me.

In the context of speaking about the crucifixion, and the redemptive nature of the crucifixion, the song repeats the chorus line:

This is the one thing,
The one thing that I know.

It finally struck my how true and important this is. As a student, specifically of the Old Testament, I frequently find myself wrestling with such issues as the historicity of the OT (or the minimalist vs. maximalist debate) or other historical critical issues regarding the OT. However I come down on these issues it is important to remember that it is the death and resurrection of Christ that is THE ONE THING THAT I KNOW!

Evangelicals (or at least some) may condemn me for admitting to be lenient on issues of inerrancy or the historical reliability of the OT, but the truth is I’m epistemologically humble. There are very few things that I claim to know for certain. One thing I do claim to know is the truth and significance of the death and resurrection of Christ. That is enough for me.

 

The Right Context

I am not an apologist, nor the son of an apologist. However, in my reading I have recently come across a discussion about why one is convinced by ‘evidence.’ 

In the ideal detective story the reader is given all the clues yet fails to spot the criminal. He may advert to each clue as it arises. He needs no further clues to solve the mystery. Yet he can remain in the dark for the simple reason that reaching the solution is not the mere apprehension of any clue, nor the mere memory of all, but a quite distinctive activity of organizing intelligence that places the full set of clues in a unique explanatory perspective. (Lonergan, ix.) 

In other words, it is not for lack of evidence that understanding escapes someone, but the simple fact that they have not been put in the right context that would allow for understanding. Ben Meyer puts it this way: “what has been lacking is not evidence but the subjective conditions that would allow the speaker to grasp the evidence as ‘enough.'” (Meyer, 78 ) 

The importance of this observation can be felt in many contexts, but the one that struck me was in the context of Christian evangelism and apologetics. As Christians we often say that you cannot logically argue someone into accepting Christianity. Yet, at the same time, we confess that our faith is intellectually defensible. It seems to me that the problem for those who do not accept Christianity as intellectually defensible or even the most probable explanation for our human existence is not that the evidence is lacking but they are lacking “the subjective conditions that would allow [them] to grasp the evidence as ‘enough.'” 

The next question would then be, how can we, as Christians, encourage people to get into the ‘right subjective context’ that would allow them to grasp the evidence as ‘enough’? I’m sure that there is not one right answer to this question but I propose these two criteria that may get us a long way toward helping people get in the right context.

 

What Do We Do With Inerrancy?

I originally posted this on Western Seminary’s ThM blog, but I thought it would be worth re-posting it here.

The purpose of this post is to stimulate discussion and to the thoughts of others on an issue that I consider to be of the utmost importance for evangelical faith. Those of us here at Western are mostly from a certain theological camp. The professors have all signed the same doctrinal statement and many of us students are members of ETS which means we have all signed the following statement:

“The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs.” 

My question is 1) how useful is this doctrinal statement and 2) how do others understand it? My purpose in this post is not to undermine this doctrine but have a more meaningful and more mature discussion than is often found when talking about inerrancy.

Here are my reservations.

 

Sermon Reflection: Living in Tension

Our Pastor (I like to refer to him as Reverend John), preached on Ecclesiastes this last week. The gyst of his message was to juxtapose Ecclesiastes and Proverbs and ask which is right? Anyone who holds to the authority of the Bible would be uncomfortable with thinking one book is more right than another, but when you compare Ecclesiastes and Proverbs you are clearly confronted with two different views of life.

For example, Provers says: “Discretion will protect you, and understanding will guard you. Wisdom will save you from the ways of wicked men” (2:11) and “Pursue Wisdom, Live Wisely, She’ll keep you safe! Don’t be foolish, that leads to death”  (21:16).  Then in Ecclesiastes we see: “Then I thought in my heart, ‘The fate of the fool will overtake me also. What then do I gain by being wise?’ I said in my heart, ‘This too is meaningless'” (2:15). There are many other examples of discontinuity between Proverbs and Ecclesiastes and our pastor touched on many of them (you can listen to his sermon here).

He concluded that perhaps this is not a case of an either/or but a case of both and. The point is that very often the wisdom of Proverbs is true to life and should dictate our course of action. Then, on the other hand, sometimes life throughs you curves that cannot be easily explained by the proverbial cause and effect mentality. That is when the viewpoint of Ecclesiastes most clearly speaks to us.

As I listened to this sermon, I found myself thinking,

 

First night with the Thinklings (Pinklings?)

Last night I had the opportunity to sit in on my first ‘Preaching Team Meeting’ for my church. Wow, what a good time. We spent the better part of two hours just talking and theologizing (yeah I’m going with that as a real word) about our church’s upcoming sermon series on, wait for it . . . the ketuvim! Such a good time.

We sat around a table at one of my favorite local pubs and talked Bible and theology for two hours. At one point I realized that this is the closest I’ll get to experiencing the famous ‘inklings.’ Thus, I like to think of this little group as my own personal ‘thinklings’ (read theological inklings) or perhaps even better the ‘pinklings’ (read pastoral inklings) since the main point of the group is to discuss how to bring Scripture to life to our church.

This brings me to the other reason that I celebrate this group and the reason I think all academics should be a part of such a group. In this group we discuss Bible and theology in the context of the church. Here is the best place to discuss Scripture. Scripture does not truly come alive when a parallel within ANE literature is found to illumine some text. Scripture comes alive within the context of the believing community. This is why all academics should try as best they can to study Scripture in this context. The late great (can you use that of a theologian?) brother Brevard knew this well:

” . . . the Bible is a particular kind of literature. It was not written to satisfy human curiosity or to evoke religious speculation on heavenly mysteries, but it is a call for faithful response during one’s whole life.” (Brevard Childs, in Rule of Faith[Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse Publishers, 1998], 1-12. Available online)

PS – to all those who, like me, did not grow up in this kind of an environment let me assure you: a pub is the best place to theologize. Cheers!

(Just to be clear – I only wish that the picture in this post is the pub where we met last night. No, that picture is the famous Eagle and Child, known affectionately as the Bird and Baby, where the actual inklings met.)

 

Wisdom from Sertillanges: Purity of Soul

Continuing my lessons from Sertillanges’ wonderful little book, The Intellectual Life, are a series of observations about the relationship between the Truth and the Good:

Truth visits those who lover her, who surrender to her, and this love cannot be without virtue. (19)

The true springs up in the same soil as the good: their roots communicate. (19)

We think ‘with our whole soul,’ declared Plato. Presently we shall go much farther, we shall say: with our whole being. Knowledge involves everything in us, from the vital principle to the chemical composition of the least cell. (20)

Purity of thought requires purity of soul; that is a general and undeniable truth. (22)

…study must first of all leave room for worship, prayer, direct meditation on the things of God. (28 )

My pastor once told me a story about a time he was preparing a sermon. In the middle of his study he was so overwhelmed by the truth of what he was studying that he stood up at his desk and sang the doxology. I was very convicted. I have spent much time studying the Word, but I have never been moved to praise God because of it. Digging deeply into Scripture must be an act of worship or we are doing it wrong. I am guilty of this.

 

Wisdom from Sertillanges: the Practicality of Truth

Another favorite ‘nugget’ I have gleaned from Sertilannges’ The Intellectual Life, is the following:

Every truth is practical; the most apparently abstract, the loftiest, is also the most practical. Every truth is life, direction, a way leading to the end of man. And therefore Jesus Christ made this unique assertion: ‘I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.’ (13)

One of my Hebrew professors in seminary always pressed on us to dig into the details of the Hebrew text. To go as far as we could go, and then to apply that depth to the average person (or a specific person) in the pew. How important it is to remember as we pursue the depths of academia that all that we learn must be also be practical or we have lost the goal of what we do.

 

‘Rubbing off on me’

You know the phrase “they’re rubbing off on me”? It usually describes someone who is having a personal influence on you so that it can be said that some of their character traits or mannerisms or whatever are ‘rubbing off on you.’  I just had that experience today.

I spent most of today meeting with a group of people that I can only describe as Prayer Giants. Now I am a cynic by nature, an academic by training and someone who is very suspicious of all things ‘christianese’ (i.e., overly ‘Christian’ lingo). However, after spending the better part of the day with people (most of whom are a generation above me) who naturally drip what I would call ‘christianese’ I found myself softened. Part way through the day I realized that these people actually meant everything they said. They are the type of people who say “Isn’t Jesus amazing!” and actually mean it.

I found myself not being judgmental of language and phrases that I normally would call hypocritical or ‘overly spiritual’ but blessed by it. What an amazing time. As I walked away from meeting with these people I couldn’t help but think that not a little bit of Jesus had rubbed off on me because of my time spent with them. I pray that I rub a little bit of Jesus off on the people I encounter in my life.

 

Turnabout is Fair Play

This article was brought to my attention today. It is about Sen. John McCain’s rejection of Rev. John Hagee, who had previously endorsed him as Presidential Candidate. The reason for the title of this post is that now both of the presumptive nominees have had to distance themselves from controversial religious figures. 

I was fairly upset, as a white evangelical Christian, that there was not as big a scandal when McCain won Hagee’s endorsement as there was over Obama’s ties to Jeremiah Wright. I am certain that I am as embaressed or more to share the same label (evangelical in this case) as John Hagee as many black theologians are to share the label with Jeremiah Wright. Let me be clear, I am not in a position to criticize Jeremiah Wright, from what I’ve heard him say, he’s said things I never would but our contexts are vastly different.

On the other hand, I do have a similar tradition to John Hagee. The comments that specifically caused McCain to reject Hagee’s endorsement were his remarks regarding the fact that Hitler’s actions were helping fulfill God’s will to return his people to their land. For me, Hagee’s recent book, In Defense of Israel, which claims that Jesus did not claim to be the Jewish Messiah, is even more problematic. This argument, in my opinion, shatters Christianity as I see it.

Maybe it’s the cynic in me, but I feel like our politicians will accept any influential support until it comes back to bite them where the sun don’t shine. 

 

What a Significant Day!

Many of you may not know just how significant this day is, but it is a whopper. It is significant on a national, international and salvation-historical level. Let me explain.

On the national level. Many of you know that in the United States, today is a day especially set aside to honor our mothers (thanks President Woodrow Wilson). For the history see the wikipedia page.

On the international level. Many of you may not know that today is the Global Day of Prayer (GDOP). This day is an international day of repentance and prayer. It originally started as a renewal in South Africa in 2000 but has become an international event where millions gather across the globe, in 199 of the 220 nations worldwide (according to the GDOP website). 

Finally, on the salvation-historical level. Most of us know that today is Pentecost Sunday. A day where we remember the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles (Acts 2). 

What a significant day! Today we commemorate our mothers who gave us life and raised us, we are called to pray for our world in hope and preparation of the new creation and life to come, and we commemorate the Spirit’s coming which gave us new life.  This day is truly significant, and should give us pause to reflect and to praise.

Praise God, from Whom all blessings flow;

Praise Him, all creatures here below;

Praise Him above, ye Heavenly Host;

Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen.