Some of the most fruitful and profitable studies come from fundamentally re-assessing the assumptions which undergird certain core concepts in the faiSome of the most fruitful and profitable studies come from fundamentally re-assessing the assumptions which undergird certain core concepts in the faith.
I am currently in the middle of John Barclay’s Paul and the Gift and am very much appreciating his very deep investigation into how gifts and grace were understood in ancient contexts and in the history of interpretation. It helps to show how people have been talking above and past each other and very much tied into the framework of their place and time.
Not for nothing, then, does Barclay provide a forward for another book doing something similar: L. Ann Jervis’ Paul and Time: Life in the Temporality of Christ (galley received as part of early review program).
What Barclay does for gift and grace, Jervis does with time. She explores the two predominant perspectives on how Paul views time: the kind of “now/not yet” paradigm popularized by N.T. Wright and others (and one which I have favored), and the “apocalyptic” time viewpoint also common today.
Jervis does well at attempting to not bring any preconceived notions of how time “must work” for Paul in reading Paul’s works. She explores many of the ways in which Paul talks about who Jesus is and what He did in terms of time and temporality.
She well establishes her conclusions: for Paul, there is “death-time” and “life-time.” “Death-time” involves the ways of this world, the powers and principalities, and its corruption and decay. “Life-time” is what God has and is accomplishing in Jesus. She notes well how there is nothing which Jesus needs to be do in order for death to be defeated; He has already done what was necessary in His life, death, resurrection, and ascension. Thus believers are called to live in “life-time” and share in “life-time.” It is not as if she denies that Jesus will return and we will share in the resurrection of life; if anything, it is in her full affirmation of the resurrection and its power which leads her to conclude we already share in “life-time” and simply await for it to be made good in terms of our bodies.
One could strain to continue to justify a “now” but “not yet” framework, but as Jervis well notes, such gives a bit too much credence to that which Jesus has already overcome and defeated. “Apocalyptic” time is rendered irrelevant, because Jesus has been revealed and is revealed in His Lordship and work among His people. There’s no comfort here for a realized eschatology perspective since there is a robust affirmation of the resurrection of the body.
I definitely appreciated this study and have begun working to incorporate it more effectively into the presentation of the Gospel as it relates to where we find ourselves as believers in this moment. We have passed from death to life, and thus from “death-time” into “life-time”; we should live and act like it!...more
It is always interesting to consider different perspectives on a similar set of characters and events. Such is true when considering the heritage of tIt is always interesting to consider different perspectives on a similar set of characters and events. Such is true when considering the heritage of the Restoration Movement.
Makers and Molders of the Restoration Movement by J.J. Haley presents short profiles of many of the main characters in the Restoration Movement in the nineteenth century. Thomas Campbell, Alexander Campbell, Barton Stone, Walter Scott, Isaac Errett, and Moses Lard are considered individually; the author also profiles two pairs in comparison and contrast: Winthrop Hopson and Gorge Longan and John McGarvey and Alexander Procter.
In the split of the Restoration Movement made apparent by 1906, the author went with the Disciples side; his choices reflect that particular ideological emphasis. He has a critical spirit toward what he deemed legalism and those who do not believe in some of the liberties in which he believed.
It was an interesting choice to start with the Campbells even though Stone’s work preceded both of them; it goes to show how much more of Campbell influenced the Restoration Movement rather than Stone.
It was good to get that different perspective on the same people and events and to be introduced to a few characters which most on the Churches of Christ side of that divide know little about. An interesting little work for those interested in such history....more
To this day the term “Canaanite” evokes a cursed, condemned people. Such is understandable from a surface reading of the Old Testament. But who are thTo this day the term “Canaanite” evokes a cursed, condemned people. Such is understandable from a surface reading of the Old Testament. But who are the Canaanites?
Mary Ellen Buck’s Cascade Companions volume, The Canaanites: Their History and Culture from Texts and Artifacts, provides an accessible exploration into what can be known about the Canaanites.
Very little comes from the people who are called Canaanites; the definition can be expanded in ways which will make many of us uncomfortable. “Canaanites” are the inhabitants of the area of the Levant we know today as Israel and Lebanon and parts of Jordan and Syria. The term does not start showing up in Akkadian or Egyptian records until the Middle Bronze Age, but DNA evidence from Early Bronze Age skeletons demonstrate connections with later Bronze and Iron Age Canaanites, attesting to their antiquity in the land. The author explores the evidence we have regarding Canaanite city-states under the Egyptian Empire of the New Kingdom/Middle to Late Bronze Age as well as the archaeological and textual evidence for the Iron Age Canaanite kingdoms of Edom, Moab, Ammon, Phoenicia, and, yes, Israel and Judah. She concludes with some late examples of speaking of Canaanites in the New Testament and by Augustine, and with the evidence of continued DNA connections between Canaanites and modern Lebanese populations.
We may find it uncomfortable to associate the Israelites with Canaanites: after all, was not Canaan cursed in Genesis? Was Israel not to confess they were descended from wandering Arameans? And yet Classical Hebrew is most assuredly a Canaanite dialect, not an Aramaic one. While the Genesis author goes out of his way to demonstrate how Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob descend from purely Mesopotamian/Aramean stock, eleven of the twelve sons of Jacob would have married Canaanite women (and we know for certain Judah did), and Joseph married an Egyptian. Even if the Israelites only married within their tribes while sojourning in Egypt, they would continue to manifest almost 50% Canaanite DNA!
Furthermore, the witness of Israelite history reinforces the conclusion: they lived among and acted like Canaanites. Each Canaanite kingdom had its patron god (Chemosh for Moab; Milkom for Ammon; Qos for Edom), and they believed in El, Baal, Mot, Astarte, etc. as well; Israel confessed YHWH as their God, and they also served the Canaanite pantheon as well, which is what Moses and the prophets condemned.
It may make us uncomfortable, and the assertion that the multiplicity of Canaanite kingdoms was only a Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age phenomenon also might challenge us in some ways, but the Israelites pretty much were no different from the Canaanites around them, and thus they suffered the same fate as the people around them. They only truly became distinctive as a result of the exile they endured.
While the author would thus challenge some of the ways in which Genesis portrays the nations/kingdoms around Israel and Judah, she does note an interesting climatological/historical detail: much of Canaan experienced significant drying for a few hundred years after the 4.2 Kiloyear event, and what had been mostly a farming society turned to shepherding. This would include, and feature, the time of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob according to the textual era (ca. 2150-1850 BCE), a time in which they all were pastoralists.
This is a great resource which well compiles a lot of good information about the Canaanites, and provides an invitation to re-assess the “Canaanite” like we are invited to re-assess the “Pharisee”: what is involved in how those groups are portrayed, what motivates the caricature, and how we can avoid mischaracterization and slander....more
Yes, “mindfulness” is one of those 2020s buzzwords. But there are some things to commend it.
In Mindful Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Simply Path to Yes, “mindfulness” is one of those 2020s buzzwords. But there are some things to commend it.
In Mindful Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Simply Path to Healing, Hope, and Peace, Dr. Seth Gillihan tells his personal story regarding the application of the cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) techniques he would encourage and practice with his own clients in his own life and the benefits which he received.
The author explains what CBT and mindfulness are; he advocates for the pattern of “Think, Act, Be” in regards to one’s practice of mindful CBT. He explains and applies how think, act, and be works in terms of CBT mindfulness in various domains of life: how one looks at oneself and one’s efforts; in appreciating one’s world; in considering one’s body; in relationships; in seeking rest; in work; and in living a life of thankfulness and purpose.
This is a useful resource; a lot of what he says is what a therapist would try to guide you into recognizing for yourself in these various aspects of life. The author does speak of his faith journey from a fundamentalist Christian upbringing to “secular Buddhism” to some kind of reconciliation with at least some of the core principles of Christianity; throughout he will present various points of connection between the principles established herein and religious instruction and encouragement.
With appropriate regard for concerns about making too much of the self, most of what he has to say is in alignment with Christian principles. We should live in thankfulness and gratitude. We should not take what we have for granted. We do well to consider ourselves, our bodies, relationships, etc. in mindfulness with gratitude before God. We should resist negative self-talk while confessing the likely Satanic/demonic influences which would aggravate such negative self-talk. We do need to rest.
Thus one can gain many benefits from incorporating mindful practices and much of cognitive behavioral therapy in one’s life in faith. There are plenty of antecedents for such things in the faith. Yet it all should be done to the glory of God in Christ while conscious of how the self will often magnify itself beyond its proper station....more
Andrew Root’s whole “Ministry in a Secular Age” series is a must read for Christians who want to get a handle on what time it is and significant reconAndrew Root’s whole “Ministry in a Secular Age” series is a must read for Christians who want to get a handle on what time it is and significant reconsiderations of who we are, what we are about, and what we are doing. This concluding volume, The Church in an Age of Secular Mysticisms: Why Spiritualities Without God Fail to Transform Us, does not disappoint.
I always find it challenging to review works by Root in this series because there’s so much going on and it’s nearly impossible for me to keep it all straight. But here goes.
Root interlaces his experiences over the past few years, concluding in a gut-wrenching way, and in the process explains his interest in and consideration of what he deems “secular mysticisms.” In this he recognizes how modern Western society remains God- and spirituality-haunted, and the “secular mysticisms” are the ways in which many in society end up exploring spirituality in a secular age.
There are three main streams of mystical thought in this age: a “humanist” strand, a “counter-enlightenment” strand, and the “Beyonder” strand, according to his framework. He explains all three: the “humanist” one prevalent in liberalism and the pursuit of social justice; the "counter-enlightenment” as the one prevalent in conservatism in its current expressions; and the way he will advocate, the way of the “beyonder.”
He does well at showing how despite all their differences, the “humanist” and the “coutner-enlightenment” forms of secular mysticism all end up making it about the self and the development of the self, and in this he finds their great failings. He spends much time in the thought of Bul, Luther, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, Rosenzweig, and others in expressing these limitations and encouraging cultivation of the “Beyonder” type of mysticism.
The “Beyonder” perceives a God greater than he or she and thus looks beyond him or herself in this kind of mysticism. In the end, the mystical path of the “Beyonder” is a kind of holy resignation, a submission to that which is beyond them and anything they could imagine. It’s a confession the self can only imagine, improve, and do so much.
As with all the books in the “Ministry in a Secular Age” series, it’s nearly impossible to do it any kind of justice in a short review. There’s a lot to process and consider here, and much that is profitable....more
The story often is told: “the Restoration Movement began in the 1820s with Thomas and Alexander Campbell and their theological shift away from PresbytThe story often is told: “the Restoration Movement began in the 1820s with Thomas and Alexander Campbell and their theological shift away from Presbyterianism toward a reformation…”
And if this is the framework in which the Restoration Movement’s origins is framed, much has already been lost.
In Answered by Fire: The Cane Ridge Revival Reconsidered, a consortium of scholars associated with churches of Christ explore the Cane Ridge Revival of 1801: what it was, what it came from, who was involved, what effects it had, and the move away from such things and why. They consider not just the major players but also how Black people participated and women exhorted. They also consider what its legacy might mean for us today. The appendix provides primary and secondary sources for the Cane Ridge Revival.
What was the Cane Ridge revival? For years Presbyterians would occasionally hold large gatherings for communion, and it seems that Cane Ridge, Kentucky, was the meeting place for such a gathering in 1801. Some previous experiences had primed Cane Ridge to become what it was. An exceedingly large number in the tens of thousands gathered at Cane Ridge, and there seemed to be an outpouring of the Spirit on people in various ways: people got the jerks, had a holy laugh, would fall down as if dead and arise converted to Jesus. This was happening among some who were already somewhat religious but also among deists and those who had no religion. While it was ostensibly a Presbyterian gathering, the spirit involved was quite ecumenical: Methodist and Baptist preachers were proclaiming the gospel, and all would share in communion together.
The “pastor” of the church in Cane Ridge, Kentucky, was a man named Barton Stone, and the experience of Cane Ridge would never leave him. His goal of an undenominated movement toward unity among Christians was motivated by his Cane Ridge experience. He would never discount the work of the Spirit on account of what he saw at Cane Ridge.
In the 1830s Stone’s “Christian” movement would merge with the Campbell “Disciples” movement, for they both maintained similar aspirations. Campbell brought a more systematic concept of restoration, but also one far more entranced with Baconian rationalism, and thus did not find much room for the Spirit and His working, and looked upon such things with great skepticism. Thus it was possible for a movement which can count as part of its origins one of the most profound revival experiences in American history, sometimes called “America’s Pentecost,” to become so hyper-rationalist that it uniquely taught and emphasized the idea the Spirit only works in and through the Scriptures.
So there is a lot members of churches of Christ can gain from considering the Cane Ridge Revival, Barton Stone’s role in it, how it shaped Stone and his strand of the movement, and why our forebears so thoroughly turned away from any seeming manifestation of the Spirit among His people. We can rightly critique some excesses which can attend to “spiritual enthusiasm,” but there is also much that can be critiqued in quenching the Spirit in the name of upholding a rationalist system imposed upon the text and the faith. ...more
Are you one of the chosen few who do not suffer from allergies or asthma? Consider yourself quite blessed.
Have you noticed how allergies and asthma seAre you one of the chosen few who do not suffer from allergies or asthma? Consider yourself quite blessed.
Have you noticed how allergies and asthma seem more pervasive, and severe, than ever? You’re not alone.
Allergic: Our Irritated Bodies in a Changing World is a well-researched exploration into allergies.
The author seems to suffer allergies herself, and she is haunted by the death of her father by an anaphylactic response to a bee sting. She goes about researching and interviewing scientists and others on the cutting edge of exploring allergies and all they are about.
What she has to say is quite disturbing on many levels.
The basic idea behind allergies has been known for about a century. The “immune system” treats a harmless substance as if it were a significant threat to the body, and various systems are activated in order to combat the “threat.” At best, one experiences discomfort, congestion, and inflammation; at worst, the body goes into anaphylactic shock and dies.
How we determine if people have allergies has not changed much for a century. She exposes how skin tests are notoriously unreliable: many times a person will show skin evidence of a food allergy, but the body does not otherwise currently react to that food, or perhaps might start doing so in the future but not the present. This is not a denial of food allergies; it’s just that skin tests do not well reflect what food allergies a person experiences. Blood tests can do somewhat better but will not gauge the severity of the allergy. The author learns that she has no skin or blood markers for allergies, and yet she experiences the symptoms of allergies in certain circumstances.
All of this goes to show how little we really know and understand about allergy and how it works. It is getting worse; there is more pollen in the air, pollutants exacerbate our likelihood of coming down with allergies and asthma, and our indoor-centric lifestyles are not helping out, either.
And then there’s the challenge of medical care for allergies and asthma: the promise of certain medicines, but the significant cost involved.
As one with environmental and food allergies and asthma I appreciated all the research that went into this book and the presentation of all the evidence. Hopefully scientists will figure some of these things out. Or, better yet, we stop polluting our environment so much and maybe we won’t be as allergic to it....more
It’s now the most populous country in the world and well poised to make a significant impact on the world of the 21st century. But what is India all aIt’s now the most populous country in the world and well poised to make a significant impact on the world of the 21st century. But what is India all about?
In India: A History, John Keay attempts to lay out what we can know about the history of subcontinental Asia.
The whole enterprise remains fraught with difficulties. How to define “India” is one of them: the British raj was about the only time the whole subcontinent was under a single authority. The author goes with a “greater India” and lays out the history of the whole subcontinent: modern day Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh.
Another challenge is historical records: we might imagine there would be all kinds of records of exploits, but if they ever existed, most have been lost. We prove dependent on a few historical inscriptions which have been preserved as well as archaeological discoveries and myths and legends. And, of course, Indian history is fraught with all kinds of issues in terms of Hindu nationalism.
The author well negotiates these difficulties to present as thorough as a history of the subcontinent as is practicable. He describes what we know about the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC), the entrance of the “aryans” of the Vedas, what can be known about the development of various kingdoms in the first millennium BCE, the Buddha and the development of Buddhism, the Maurya period, interaction with the West, the Gupta period, the various kingdoms in the period immediately after the Guptas in the first millennium CE, and then the long interactions/engagements/wars between various Muslim powers and native Indian kingdoms, all of which lead up to the Mughals and the British Raj.
The history can take on much more details with the Mughals, the British, and the subcontinent after Partition.
This book is quite useful in order to better understand why the subcontinent is as it is and how its societies and cultures have developed. Highly recommended. ...more
To call this biography "thorough" would be an understatement. Written a little over a century after Smith's death, Rae included pretty much every detaTo call this biography "thorough" would be an understatement. Written a little over a century after Smith's death, Rae included pretty much every detail known about Smith's life and travels, and every piece of correspondence of Smith and written to Smith which was preserved (or at least it felt like it), and all kinds of impressions of Smith by others as it details his life in extreme detail. So much detail, in fact, you end up learning a lot more about late 18th century Scotland (and London, and France) than you seem to do about Smith. A case of so much detail that it is hard to get a handle on what would be considered more important versus less important.
So if you want to know anything and everything about Adam Smith, this is the biography for you....more
California’s Amazing Geology by Donald Prothero is what I was always looking for: a book to help me understand what the present theories are about howCalifornia’s Amazing Geology by Donald Prothero is what I was always looking for: a book to help me understand what the present theories are about how this state has come about.
The author provides a basic introduction to geological terms and concepts and then explores, in great detail, each specific geologic area in California and the processes by which they came about. He then considers gold, oil, beaches, and fossils in particular.
As an old earth advocate I am not bothered by the consideration of time in terms of the development. You learn quickly how much the strike-slip faults between the North American and Pacific plates defines California. I will never be able to look at the state in the same way again.
The author does well at showing you how you've never understood the beach. Apparently, at least in California, you’ve never visited the same beach twice: the sand grains are being continually moved across the shoreline until they eventually fall into some deep sea canyon or another, which is why it is dumb to build on barrier islands or think sea walls can hold in the beach. The water is cycling; it’s the energy in the waves which creates the illusion of water going in and out. If caught in a rip current, swim parallel to shore to get out of it; trying to swim back to shore will just exhaust you and you will drown.
Our planet is weird. But all these processes allow for life to persevere. ...more
Dave Chappelle is (rightly) getting grief again about his most recent special and the way he tends to “punch down” in his comedy. This time he decidedDave Chappelle is (rightly) getting grief again about his most recent special and the way he tends to “punch down” in his comedy. This time he decided he was going to make jokes about handicapped people, because it seems no one will speak up for the handicapped community the way people speak up for other marginalized groups.
And what is one of the worst spaces to be in with any kind of disability? Christian spaces. Especially churches.
Amy Kenny knows all about that, as she makes known in My Body Is Not a Prayer Request: Disability Justice in the Church. She has experienced disability for most of her life; she is careful not to explain her particular condition, for reasons which the book makes apparent.
Cue the eye rolling. “Disability justice?” Is this more “wokeness” or something? Another group and all of its grievances? When will it ever be enough?
If you feel that way, you need to repent, because it must be nice being able to just enjoy existing without being challenged or questioned about your existence so as to find such concerns exasperating. Disability justice is looking for much the same thing as other social justice concerns: not supremacy. Simply the ability to belong and jointly participate. To be accepted and welcomed.
But definitely read this book, especially if you do not look at yourself as disabled.
Imagine yourself in the author’s situation, and then think again about the way you have spoken to and/or treated people who manifest disabilities around you.
This book is not enjoyable or comfortable. It’s angry and embittered. But the author has every right to be angry and embittered regarding all she has endured.
The physical disability stuff would be difficult enough on its own. Christians and churches tend to make it all the worse.
Because Christians and churches, as the book well exposes, do not know, and sadly rarely seem to want to know, how they can welcome people with disabilities as full participants in the life of God in Christ and His people.
The author well identifies the “prosperity gospel” tendency in most Christians. Sure, most Christians would say they deny the “prosperity gospel,” but when it comes to health, especially when others experience anything less than what is deemed ideal health, out come the remedies and the insistence on healing.
It’s as if the very existence and persistence of people with disabilities is problematic and awkward for a lot of Christians. Such a person needs to be healed (the author makes a good contrast between “curing,” in which a condition is remedied, and “healing,” in which there can be growth and reconciliation; one can be cured but not healed), or “made well,” however “well” is defined. If they’re not healed or made well, but continue to stubbornly exist as disabled, they clearly don’t have enough faith. People feel the need to find theological reasoning for what the person has endured or is enduring.
It would be tempting to call Christians who treat disabled people in this way as “well-meaning,” but they really are not. They think they are, but what they intend is to uphold the normalcy of having full function and cannot sit well with those who remind us that such is a gift which not all have been given, and it is not a matter of a lack of faith that they remain as they are. Notice how people who need corrective lenses are not treated in such ways. Everyone seems to be able to accept them without too much judgment about it. No one thinks God has failed them if they aren’t restored to 20/20 unhindered vision. So why can’t we treat other forms of disability in the same way?
The author well identifies the challenge: why do Christians see people with disabilities and only see their disabilities? Why can they not see them as…people?
Why can Christians not sit in what they confess as the theological reality of the Fall and the corruption of the creation, and recognize people with disabilities are as fully human as anyone else, and their lives are much more than their condition?
Why are Christians so driven to want to “fix” people who have disabilities or chronic conditions? This same impulse is not present to “fix” those who experience other conditions.
What the author does not discuss, but what is probably at work, is a bunch of deeply primal psychological issues of discomfort with disability. We’re wired/encultured with the expectation of a given range of “normal,” and anything outside that range is marginalized for the safety and overall welfare of the in-group. That’s naturalistic, primal thinking. It should not be so among the people of God.
Thus Christians and churches do well to confess how they have perpetuated ableism, lament it, and prove willing to do whatever is necessary to welcome those with disabilities as full participants in the life of God in Christ and His people.
That will cost money, resources, and effort. It’ll probably require uncomfortable conversations with people who seem oblivious to their ableism. Everyone will have to grapple with the reality of how we all have been affected by the fall and the corruption of the creation, and we all are stronger in some functions and weaker in others, and in Christ our purpose is to be reconciled and jointly participate, and we should remove every hindrance from so doing.
I do appreciate the author’s work, experience, and story. She is right about the way Christians and the church have idolized ableism. We all need to do a lot better.
But I do struggle with some of what is being pushed in the name of disability theology.
I understand the impulse to welcome those who are disabled and to normalize their lives and experience. The author has experienced the weaponization of the hope of incorruption and immortality in the resurrection: you’ll have there what you don’t have here, as if she should look at all she has experienced in terms of lack. That’s quite ugly and uncalled for.
It is noteworthy how Jesus does have the stigmata, the nail prints and the gash of the spear, in His resurrection body (John 20:24-27). We also have to grapple with how Jesus, God in the flesh, experienced disabling in His suffering and crucifixion.
But does this justify a theology of a disabled God and the presence of disability in the resurrection?
This is when I will speak of my experience. I have multiple sclerosis. It was diagnosed in 2017 when I suffered a bout of optic neuritis and lesions were found in my brain and on my spine. To this day my right eye’s optic nerve remains slightly more darkened than the left; I can see out of it without difficulty, but the right eye is not as sensitive to light.
My condition is currently well controlled with immunosuppressant treatments I receive biannually. It does mean I get illnesses which others might fend off without difficulty, and symptoms show up much quicker. I have temperature sensitivity, especially to heat. I have periods of greater vitality and other periods of greater fatigue.
I do not try to make too much of my condition, because I am doing quite well by the grace of God and can generally function in the range of “normal.”
But theologically I give no quarter to my multiple sclerosis. It is absolutely a result of the corruption of the creation. The condition may have something to do with the microbiome, and certainly seems to have something to do with the presence of the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV). For reasons science is still trying to figure out, my immune system randomly decides to attack the myelin sheath of my nerves, and these lead to the lesions on my brain, spine, and optic nerve.
I have full confidence that my immune system will not attack my nerves in the resurrection body. I would imagine the resurrection body would not need an immune system! My disabling condition - and it is indeed a disabling condition, which has caused far more grief to others than I have yet experienced - will not endure for eternity. It does not glorify God. It’s like cancer: the body turning on itself. No one wants to theologically celebrate cancer and no one, including the author, imagines there is a place for cancer in the resurrection. Likewise, there should be no space for multiple sclerosis in the resurrection. Or rheumatoid arthritis, or a thousand other autoimmune conditions.
Thus, just like an ableist theology can distort for all kinds of reasons, disability theology can likewise distort, even if it does so with the best of intentions. The fact that we all have suffered from the fall and the corruption of the creation does not minimize the reality that such remains the theological explanation for the presence of various disabling conditions. We do not have to become Platonists and posit the ideal immune system, or in terms of the author, the ideal leg, to be able to see how God created the immune system and the leg with certain expected functions, and a lack of such functioning, or excess in such functioning, represent distortions and corruptions of that. I have every confidence in God in Christ that He can find a way to honor what the author has experienced while providing her, in the resurrection body, with all that has been lost because of sin and death; that is my expectation for all who will share in the resurrection of life.
The use of Jacob’s story was quite disappointing. You cannot bear effective witness regarding what God did to and through Jacob by going from Genesis 28 to Genesis 32 and then create a strawman Jacob who is today’s self-made man. There are profound and compelling things going on in his relationship with God, making it his own as opposed to entrusting himself to the Fear of his father Isaac; but Jacob’s appeals to his wives in Genesis 31 attest to his understanding of how the only reason he has anything to show for his efforts for the previous 20 years was the blessing and favor of God. This Jacob slander bothered me, and it sadly detracted from what otherwise is a compelling witness: Israel’s own patriarch experienced disabling from an encounter with God, and Israel continued to bear witness to that disabling.
Yes, God prophesies a welcome into the people of God for those who experienced disabling conditions which would have kept them from God’s presence in the Temple. But those same sets of prophecies to Israel also speak about the blind recovering sight, and the lame able to walk, and so on. And I find associations between those unable to communicate with speech and what Paul speaks of regarding the unutterable groans of the Spirit in Romans 8:26-27 to cheapen what Paul is communicating. This is not to dismiss the standing of those who cannot communicate with speech or to suggest they should not be welcomed and honored as fellow people of God in Christ; instead, it’s cheapening the profundity of what Paul is saying in Romans 8, for what the Spirit is groaning could never be expressed by words. It captures something far deeper than human communication.
It pains me to have such qualms with what otherwise is an important testimony for Christians and churches to consider. Treat people with disabilities as people. Welcome them. Don’t make everything about their disability. But be willing to recognize what the person experiences in terms of the disability, find ways to help, and avoid acting like the savior. If they offend your theology and Christology, that’s your problem regarding which you need to better pray and study. ...more
The past ten years have been quite extraordinary in American history, especially as it relates to the condition and situation of white American EvangeThe past ten years have been quite extraordinary in American history, especially as it relates to the condition and situation of white American Evangelicalism. It’s been difficult to get a good handle because so many of those in the midst of it prove reticent at anything resembling introspection and self-critique, and many of those well trained in the secular environment are at a significant remove from the white American Evangelical community.
But Tim Alberta is a white American Evangelical; his father was a prominent pastor of a politically conservative Evangelical church in the Detroit area. And Tim Alberta is well trained in the secular environment. To this end his The Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory: American Evangelicals in an Age of Extremism is one of the better and compelling investigations into what has been going on in white American Evangelicalism over the past decade, and what it means for the future of American Evangelicalism and America in general.
As might be noticeable, my one overarching critique is his equation of white American Evangelicalism with American Evangelicalism writ large. There are still plenty of non-white American Evangelicals in America, and they have not been the major supporters of the MAGA phenomenon as seen in this work. The trends Alberta experiences and notes are very real in white American Evangelicalism; not so much everywhere else. It is always good to be reminded there is more to Evangelicalism than white American Evangelicalism.
Alberta writes as part of the in-group but as one whose credentials and loyalties are rendered suspect because he is less than enthusiastic about Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump. He profiles his experience of speaking to his church, the one in which his father preached for years, at his father’s funeral, and the furor it caused. The book is full of interviews with all sorts of people in the world of conservative politics, MAGA, and American Evangelicalism: Jerry Falwell, Jr.; Ralph Reed; Robert Jeffress; Stephen Strang; David French; Russell Moore; and many others. The author visits churches which gained significant membership increases with MAGA political flair as well as the high profile MAGA conferences and rallies.
And what is seen is a crude politicization of religion, a MAGA tribalism with a Christian nationalist veneer, leaving many who held conservative political views but a robust faith in Jesus aghast and marginalized. Churches which attempted to navigate COVID-19 and the trials and tribulations of 2020 in ways which took seriously the ways of Jesus found themselves shrinking, while churches loudly defying local health guidelines and promoting MAGA in the pulpit swelled. Many white American Evangelicals of note found themselves closer to political power than they could have imagined, and were captivated by it. Plenty of white American Evangelicals in the pews were swayed by the fearmongering and nostalgia for an imagined past inherent in the MAGA movement.
Christians seem concerned about persecution but do not seem to give thought to the power they have and how they’re leveraging that power, and what they may end up reaping because of what they have sown. Grifters are gonna grift; their marks will continue to be deceived. And 2 Timothy 4:2-3 is more accurate than we might have imagined:
For there will be a time when people will not tolerate sound teaching. Instead, following their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves, because they have an insatiable curiosity to hear new things. And they will turn away from hearing the truth, but on the other hand they will turn aside to myths.
Paul was never as concerned about the dangers from without which Christians could clearly perceive. The pernicious danger has always been from within; the messages, the ones we want to believe and make us feel better about ourselves. The problem was always the false prophets; the challenge is to remain faithful in proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus, especially when those who need to hear it most assume their faithfulness to its message.
There have been various forms of reckoning. This crisis, too, shall pass. The Church of Christ endures; it has since Jesus ascended, and it will beyond His return.
Alberta is able to bring the story back to his home church in Michigan and its reinvigorated pastor who endured the difficult days and was emboldened to stand on even more faithful ground.
But white American Evangelicalism will not be what it once was. If defined in terms of the statistics about belief and church participation in America, especially among its younger crowd, the white American Evangelicalism investment in political conservatism is one of the biggest and most disastrous failures in history. This is a time of reckoning, a revelation of hearts and minds, and it is not pleasant. White American Christians might well have to learn a lot of humility and to respond appropriately. It will feel entirely novel and contrary to all they had come to experience and believe; yet it will ultimately prove more faithful to the ways of Jesus than the fearmongering power politics of our present age....more
When you are the crossroads of the ancient Near Eastern world, you’re going to experience a lot of drama. And empires.
That’s probably the most concisWhen you are the crossroads of the ancient Near Eastern world, you’re going to experience a lot of drama. And empires.
That’s probably the most concise way of explaining the history presented in Ancient Syria: A Three Thousand Year History by Trevor Bryce.
The period in question at its greatest extent is around 2600 BCE to 730 CE; the author’s primary focus is from 2300 BCE to around 280 CE. The author chronicles the Bronze Age kingdoms of Ebla and Mari, the influence of Mesopotamian empires and Mitanni, the Hittites, the Egyptian Empire of its New Kingdom, the collapse of the Bronze Age and the Syro-Hittite kingdoms which arose in the Early Iron Age, and then the litany of empires: Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek - primarily Seleucid but some Ptolemaic, and then, of course, the Romans. The author also highlights the rise and fall of Palmyra. The rest of Roman and Byzantine Syria is quickly covered in what amounts to an afterword.
If you’re looking for the “great man” approach to history, and an expansive overview over a large region and time, then this work will do very well for you. A particular strength is the detail in which the author covers the Seleucid Empire; normally it is passed over quickly in favor of Rome.
The two main challenges I have with the work involve geography and focus.
“Syria” is a nebulous being. The very term itself expresses the challenge: “Syria” is the Greek rendering of Assyria, and the Greeks were coming of age and exploring their world right at the time the Assyrian Empire was fading and would ultimately collapse. If anything, the greatest reminder of the Assyrian Empire is how it would give its name to a wide swath of its western holdings.
But that’s the problem: “Syria” was only part of the “Assyrian Empire.” Those from the areas between Anatolia and the Assyrian heartland would resent being given the name of the people who overcame and oppressed them.
It would seem “Syria” is really the area the Greeks and Romans considered “Syria,” roughly between Anatolia and the Euphrates, and at some times, all the way down to Egypt. Such is why Israelite and Jewish history are also considered in this work.
But in the process eastern areas of modern Syria get short shrift; the Parthians and Sassanids are only discussed inasmuch as they are influencing the story of the Seleucid and Roman territories of Syria.
Beyond this, as a “great man” history, the last we hear much about “Syrians” themselves are…in the days of Assyria. There’s a lot of great information about the various Syrian states before the Assyrians in this work, but once we get to Assyrian dominance, the story now becomes all about the people who ruled over Syria and the Syrians. Discussion of religion is almost non-existent; what might be known about ancient Syrian cultures or societies will not be found here.
Thus this work is good for what it is: a political history of “Syria” as conceived of by the Seleucids and Romans, projected back in history to the Early Bronze Age and extending to the fall of Palmyra with a coda regarding everything up to the days of the Islamic conquest. But to learn more about ancient Syrians, one will have to look elsewhere....more
Scot McKnight has written a thorough commentary, The Letter of James as part of The New International Commentary on the New Testament (NICNT) series. Scot McKnight has written a thorough commentary, The Letter of James as part of The New International Commentary on the New Testament (NICNT) series. But of course such is what should be expected from an entry into the NICNT; they are known for being quite scholarly and thorough.
Within the commentary, McKnight provides an introduction regarding the text in its context, and provides framework explanation for each section. A translation of the text is provided within each section, and plenty of commentary is given on the text in its context and often in terms of its general understanding and application.
McKnight did very well at making sure the reader is aware of just how challenging it is to provide much coherence in terms of an overall framework of James while also making it clear the letter is not pure chaos and does have themes and some forms of movement within it. But this does not mean he bats 1.000 at it; sometimes his attempts at associations within the text seem particularly strained.
He does particularly well at deeply investigating James 4:13-17 to show how the modern facile reading misses James’ deeper critique of merchants and their extraction of wealth from communities. His supposition of James as having continual concerns of his Jewish Christian Disapora brethren as tempted to turn to violence on account of what they were experiencing is understandable and is quite plausible, but at times seems possibly overstated. At times it does seem we’re learning more about McKnight than James when it comes to how much mining gets done in some aspects of the text.
Yet none of that should cast aspersions on the overall quality and integrity of the commentary. A highly valuable resource when considering the Letter of James....more
There are always some aspects to a group’s history which said group has incentives to neglect or diminish. And then there are those aspects to two groThere are always some aspects to a group’s history which said group has incentives to neglect or diminish. And then there are those aspects to two groups’ shared histories which both have incentives to neglect or diminish.
So tends to be the 1820s experience of what would become the participants in the Restoration Movement and the Baptists, particularly in the “American West” as it was known at this time. In Early Relation and Separation of Baptists and Disciples, Errett Gates sets forth the history of this time.
The association was logical: the Campbells and those influenced by them were trending away from Presbyterian understandings of baptism and a kind of baptism more like the expression and experience of the Baptists. Alexander Campbell was a dynamic speaker, and his association and influence brought many into the overall Baptist fold in the 1820s. His Christian Baptist publication likewise proved fairly influential.
Yet, in the end, Campbell was no Baptist. His “Reforming brethren” understood baptism to be of even greater significance than the Baptists themselves did. It was not really their desire to be part of any sect, anyway, and there were many Baptists who were very much into being Baptist. And Campbell and the “Reforming brethren” were not aligned with Calvinist ideologies or creeds.
And so the stronger relations of the earlier 1820s led to almost complete separation a decade later, perhaps best exemplified by Campbell’s decision to cease publishing the Christian Baptist and to begin publishing the Millennial Harbinger (and perhaps also expressing other adaptations in theological emphasis in the process).
It’s an interesting history recounted, and all the more so on account of some of the points of dissension then which would no longer be points of dissension now. The Baptists could not stomach the Reformers’ insistence of no need to examine anyone for some experience of faith before baptizing them, but baptizing them simply upon making request and confessing Jesus in faith; likewise, the Baptists were very much more attached to upholding certain creeds, and the Reformers were not about that. Thus the “Reformers” have been vindicated by later adaptations in theology and practice, although many of the most significant domains of the Baptists remain quite Calvinist in theology.
Bradley Cobb reissued this work in a highly readable and well formatted Kindle version. Recommended for understanding the divergence between the Restorationists and the Baptists, and the “bad blood” which can often be found between them....more
It is hard to find Jesus in the hot mess known as the First Book of Samuel.
That did not stop Daniel Stulac from trying in Tragedy of the Commons: A CIt is hard to find Jesus in the hot mess known as the First Book of Samuel.
That did not stop Daniel Stulac from trying in Tragedy of the Commons: A Christological Companion to the Book of 1 Samuel.
I read this as part of an online book club experience; it is not something I would have likely chosen otherwise. I freely admit this kind of book is not my jam. I’m not going to come out and say the author is wrong; that would be an unfortunate judgment. I think the author is a bit too harsh on historical and historicist readings of the text, and I believe his exegesis suffers as a result. I can appreciate a canonical and Christological framework and reading of a text.
This work is very personal and written in a very particular style. We learn a lot about the author; we can tell he is Reformed in theology and perspective, and it shows at times.
I can appreciate the overarching analysis of 1 Samuel in terms of God meeting His people in the mess and mire of life, something best exemplified in Jesus. I appreciated how the author did not make it all about Christological typology between David and Jesus; the author keeps coming back to Saul as the primary and tragic figure of the text, which is appropriate.
I felt the author was a bit too hard on Eli. Perhaps there is the intent to see Eli as fairly wicked and less exemplary than Samuel. But I have to wonder if too much is being brought forth from the book of Judges, which surely comes before 1 Samuel canonically and chronologically, and regarding which we are tempted to want to make a point of a lot of forms of continuity. But there remains some tension between the two: there is an editorial judgmentalism about the book of Judges as a time when everyone did what they thought was right because there was no king in Israel. Stulac recognizes the pro- and anti-monarchic tendencies in Judges and 1 Samuel, but will make much of the condemnation of wanting a king. Eli and Samuel both are not model parents; Eli certainly suffers a family curse, and can be seen as cursed. But for all his faults, Eli seems to have cultivated and developed Samuel quite well, which is quite the stretch for someone who is himself a son of Belial.
I found it interesting how the author did not make anything of the Samuel : David :: John : Jesus typology which seems manifest in the Gospel of Luke. What also seems entirely missing is recognizing where Saul was better than both Eli and Samuel: Saul’s sons were not sons of Belial; Jonathan was in fact quite superior to Saul in almost every quality, and not for nothing would Saul reckon David as “his son.”
But the author does well grapple with the tragedy of Saul and how he proves less than worthy.
Some of the connections and associations the author attempts to make with various aspects of Jesus and the Gospels I found tendentious. But I did appreciate grappling with Jonah in terms of Saul and his end: we want to see Saul and Jonah redeemed, and there’s no redemption for them. Jesus giving the “sign of Jonah” is much more controversial than might be imagined. Yet even here I think Stulac undercuts Jonah: one can argue his running away from YHWH’s burden is very much because he has prophetic insight, not from the abandonment thereof. Elisha wept when he looked upon Hazael, recognizing how much pain and distress Hazael would bring upon Israel; how much more anger and pain then, then, to be tasked with proclaiming a repentance to the very people which you know will come and devastate your people and exile them, and to see YHWH show them mercy when you know what that will mean in the future for Israel?
As indicated, I am a fan of Christological readings. I would very much agree the presence of Jesus in 1 Samuel is one showcasing God working in the midst of His people in the muck and mire and the less than ideal, and there’s much to be gained from it. But I am less a fan of Christological readings unmoored from historical restraints. Stulac seems to primarily see the excesses of historiography - excesses I would also condemn - and not the important forms of temperance it can provide.
I remain all the more convinced one must read 1 Samuel in light of the original contextual purpose of the work: to explain and describe how Israel went from its condition after Samson in the days of Eli, Samuel, and Saul, and how David arose and, in 2 Samuel, would become King of Judah and King of Israel. The prophet compiler/editor of primary source documents is constrained by the events as they played out and to make practical and theological sense of them. And it’s not hard to notice how the prophetic 1/2 Samuel author does not have the same theological motivations and purpose as the Chronicler (who completely passes over this entire period by just providing the genealogy and quickly narrating the end of Saul), or, for that matter, even the Kings author. Saul’s sons are named Ishbaal and Meribbaal, a situation so embarrassing to later scribes their names were changed in the Samuel narratives to Ish-bosheth and Mephibosheth (exchanging Baal for “bosheth,” shameful thing). But of all the sins of Saul, we hear nothing of association with Baal or idols. I guess we can rationalize Samuel’s service in the Tabernacle on the basis of being a literally dedicated firstborn, but the fact remains he is an Ephraimite by birth but officiates in the Tabernacle. In 2 Samuel 8:18, it is noted David’s sons are priests, yet they are Judahites, not Levites. Later kings will be condemned for this kind of behavior; yet not a word of condemnation about it in 1/2 Samuel.
These kinds of “discrepancies” are embarrassing but we have to make good historiological/contextual sense of them so we can then do good, healthy Christological analysis of the text. 1/2 Samuel are thus contextually a theological explanation/rationalization of the rise of the House of David; Judges, Israel’s faithlessness at the beginning and the chaos engendered without centralized authority; 1/2 Kings, monarchic descent into idolatry and faithlessness leading to exile. This is not to say we cannot see Jesus in them; but we first need to confess what we’re looking at before we can really, truly, and well find Jesus in them.
Sure: in the end, we see a dark time yet hope and promise extended in those dark times. We see God working in the muck and mire, and that should give us hope in the hot mess life continues to be. The Word is at work in 1 Samuel indeed....more
The past decade has certainly been a revealing one regarding the body politic of the United States of America. There seems to be no end of analysis ofThe past decade has certainly been a revealing one regarding the body politic of the United States of America. There seems to be no end of analysis of the trends which have led us to this point, especially in terms of the new reactionary populism manifest in the MAGA movement.
In Wronged and Dangerous: Viral Masculinity and the Populist Pandemic, Karen Lee Ashcraft attempts to establish aggrieved masculinity as a primary driver of this new populist movement, and seeks to mitigate its effects.
The author wants to get away from “toxic” masculinity and shift to “viral masculinity” on account of how the particular traits of what she deems neo-populist aggrieved masculinity spreads far and wide and often receives an eager hearing. She uses the recent COVID-19 pandemic as a way of looking at how it spreads; in terms of its effects, she turns instead to the image of the pufferfish, who inflates at any hint of perceived danger and can poison itself in the process.
The author is politically and socio-culturally liberal while having been raised and living in a more conservative environment. She would like to stop centering gender in terms of considering people and their behaviors, and there is something to that. She has a lot of credible observations about the nature of this new populist movement and what animates it.
The author is persuasive about the significant influence of aggrieved masculinity on the new MAGA populism and does well at showing how it manifests itself and is even explicitly appealed to at various points in the rhetoric of key MAGA figures. All of those who wish to prove dismissive about such gender matters, desiring instead to appeal to class or some other factor, would do well to reconsider. Aggrieved masculinity and an impetuously defensive mechanism and posture absolutely animates MAGA, and not just the men, but also plenty of the women as well.
The author is probably right in diagnosing how this aggrieved masculinity will become the death of those who perpetrate it and likely many of the rest of us as well. Unfortunately, aggrieved masculinity “works.” It “sells” well. It’s about the only way the current reactionary populist movement will be able to appeal to anyone younger than Generation X.
I perceive how many of the people of God have become very caught up in this kind of aggrieved masculinity and have made matters of gender preeminent in their thinking and exhortation. Much is made of “masculine” and “feminine” constructs despite the fact Jesus, the Apostles, and early Christians did not make much of such constructs. Sure, there were exhortations to men and women about specific roles in their lives; but when it comes to what faithfulness to Jesus looks like, the New Testament does not speak of virtues or vices in gendered terms. All Christians, men and women, are to “quit ye like men,” or as the NET well translates, “show courage,” in 1 Corinthians 16:13. All Christians, men and women, are called upon to submit to one another out of reverence to Christ and display love, humility, and gentleness (cf. Galatians 5:19-21, Ephesians 5:21).
Alas, it is hard to be constantly bombarded by the message of aggrieved masculinity through one’s media inputs and then not reflect upon them in terms of the faith. Aggrieved masculinity may want to look big and tough, like Kavanaugh’s angry outburst, or the strident speech of someone from the MAGA crowd, but in truth it is reactionary, fearful, anxious, and deeply self-conscious. If we are defined by love, humility, grace, and compassion, there can be no space for aggrieved masculinity. No wonder so many of the MAGA crowd who want “Christian nationalism” do not really want the ethic or ways of Jesus the Christ. He was not an aggrieved male. He felt no need to define Himself as an “alpha.” And neither should His followers.
I wish this book were more coherent and did not break the fourth wall as much. But the author’s main principles aren’t wrong. Aggrieved men feel as if wronged, and they are dangerous to themselves and the body politic. The last decade has provided abundant evidence for that premise. How much more suffering will be caused remains unknown....more
A textual resource for those involved in decently deep studies of the Gospel of John.
The author explain their purpose: they are considering all the poA textual resource for those involved in decently deep studies of the Gospel of John.
The author explain their purpose: they are considering all the possible allusions and references which can be discerned in the Fourth Gospel from all kinds of various sources.
The author then explore the rest of the New Testament, the Greek Septuagint, apocryphal and pseudepigraphal literature, the Targumim and other aspects of early rabbinic Judaism, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Philo, certain Greek works like the Bacchae, the Nag Hammadi library, and especially the Gospel of Thomas. The author then considers the influence of the Fourth Gospel on early patristic authors.
Most of the work involves 2 column comparisons between statements in the Fourth Gospel and from these other texts for consideration. Some explanation of texts and summary conclusions are made.
The author ultimately concludes the Fourth Gospel bears witness to the pervasive influences in Second Temple Jewish and Greco-Roman society.
A good resource for deep intertextual study....more
Loading...
