Month: October 2008

Salvador Dali, Marriage, and the God Who is There

/ davidsschrock

In his book The God Who is There, Francis Schaeffer points to Salvador Dali as an example of someone whose world reshaped his worldview.  Unlike many whose lives are marked by inconsistency, promoting one system of thought but living out another, Salvador Dali, the twentieth century painter, readjusted his artwork to accord with his home life.  Describing this transformation, Schaeffer remarks that Dali’s loving tribute to his wife marks the time in which his paintings took on a more humane and sensible form.  He says, “So on this particular day [describing the day he painted his wife] Dali gave up his surrealism and began his new series of mystical paintings.” (71).

In his later artwork, Dali turned to Christian symbols and figures to express his non-Christian mysticism. For instance in The Sacrament of the Last Supper, he depicts a vaporous savior seated with his disciples overshadowed by a human figured on a cross, presumably Jesus, but whose head is unseen, cut off by the top of the painting.  Thus his paintings have Christian motifs but ignore the historic Christian message.  The painting that Schaeffer points to most and the one that he attributes to his remarkable “conversion” is that of his wife.   In the painting Dali depicts his wife with one breast exposed, her name prominently on the picture, and great artistic emphasis on the ring on her finger, unashamedly supporting their marital vows.  Schaeffer’s assessment is that, “his loved jarred him into a modern type of mysticism” (71). 

But if marital love moved him to some kind of transcedent mysticism, it, by implication, saved him from the suicidal nihilism of a worldview devoid of love and meaning–the worldview that accompanies surrealist art.  Dali named this painting of his wife, “A Basket of Bread.”  Interestingly, this is the same name he gave to two other “eucharistic” paintings.   It seems by such a title that he is applying eucharistic overtones to and deriving spiritual elements from his marriage.  And though Dali does not have the categories or the definitions to understand what he is seeing, in his marriage he sees something transcedent and spiritual.  In short, in his marriage he is given a picture of a greater reality–that is the mystery now revealed of Christ and the church (cf. Eph. 5:32).  Sadly Dali never embraced this greater reality, but it is apparent that his marriage made him thirst for more.  His marital union, it appears, allured him to long for more of Christ, though in the end he ignorantly revolted against the one who drew him near.

Dali’s artistry and life are illuminating.  They remind of us of the impact marriage can have and is designed to have.  It was made to awaken our senses for God.  More specifically, marriage was made by God as a witness to Jesus and his bride, the church.  It is a mystery, but every marriage–Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Wickan, or otherwise that unites one man to one woman–portrays Christ and the church.  Even those like Dali, who reject the Bible, taste and see something eternal, holy, and true in their own marriages, but without Spiritual illumination they will never comprehend that which they experience.  

Salvador Dali’s life and art is a helpful reminder that marriage beckons us to the God who is there.  Even in the lives of agnostics and atheists, marriage serves as divinely-crafted institution to assist the Great Commission and to bring unbelievers to Christ.  Consequently, Christians should see marriages as evangelistic weapons in the spiritual warfare we wage.  As we point married men and women to Christ, we can call on their own marriages to testify to their need and desire for the heavenly marriagee.  Marriage is a personally authenticating reality that testifies to the world and to those who are married (or those who long for marriage) that there is a God who is there, and that he is not silent, and that his message is a wedding invitation for all those who are willing to wear his ring (cf. Matthew 22:1-14).

May we like John the Baptist (John 3:27-30), be faithful groomsmen, calling people to come to the wedding to which all weddings foreshadow.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Bible Arc dot com, a Review and Infomercial

/ davidsschrock / 6 Comments

image 

It was a life-changing revelation to me when I discovered that Paul, for example, did not merely make a collection of divine pronouncements, but that he argued. This meant, for me, a whole new approach to Bible reading. No longer did I just read or memorize verses. I sought also to understand and memorize arguments. This involved finding the main point of each literary unit and then seeing how each proposition fit together to unfold and support the main point. (”Biblical Exegesis: Discovering the Meaning of Scriptural Texts,” pg. 18)

If you are familiar with John Piper’s preaching and method of exegesis, than you are probably familiar with his use of “arcing.”  Piper’s statement above reflects the way he reads the NT epistles, and the benefits of systematically interrogating the argument in each NT letter.  To that end, Pastor Piper has commended Daniel Fuller’s method of Biblical Arcing.  In short, it is an excellent means by which students of the Bible can hone in on the author’s intent.  I bring attention to this exegetical device, because recently, an online web site has been developed for the sole purpose of “arcing” New Testament passages.

Biblearc.com has many strengths.  For starters, it furnishes all the tools necessary to complete the arcing process.  It provides helpful sidebars with navigable widgets and buttons that provide great opportunity to use the arcing nomenclature — which is a little foreign for beginners.  It provides Greek, ESV, NASB, KJV translations, as well as the possibility of providing your own translation.  Moreover, it provides more than 2 hours worth of introduction and training.

Another interesting feature that is forthcoming will be the sharing feature, where completed “Arcs” will be posted, and discussion about their accuracy will be moderated on the website.  This could certainly provide some rich exegetical conversations.

While this method of Bible study is excellent in the dense theological material of Paul’s letters or other New Testament Epistles, it is probably less fruitful for NT narrative passages, or Old Testament literature.  In fact, currently this only works with the New Testament.  Though, even in gospel writing, a device like this still helps us microwave Christians to slow down and let the passage simmer in our minds.  Finally, the point-and-click arcing is more cumbersome than what you would do with paper and ink, but with all the tools in front of you, and with help just a few clicks away, this program looks to be very helpful for the novice “Arcer” (like me), not Archer (like Nimrod). 

In sum, the online capabilities of Bible Arc dot com are really quite impressive.  And for only ten dollars you can setup a yearly account that will save your work and come back to it at a later date.  Additionally, you can print your documents to a PDF file for your own record keeping, and with its note-taking possibilities, Bible Arc dot com provides a great platform for personal Bible study or sermon preparation.

Hats off to all those who created this web gem.  If you are serious about Bible studies, I encourage you to drop the ten bucks and avail yourself of this helpful resource.

(HT: Johnathon Bowers) 

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Adamic Imagery in Colossians 1:15-20

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

Colossians 1:15-20 is one of the most exalted views of Jesus Christ in all the Scriptures.  It demands doxological invocation through theological description. 

In just six verses, Paul unfolds a litany of magnificent truths that span the horizon of biblical theology and reach from the horrors of hell (Christ’s experience on the cross) to the glories of heaven (Christ’s headship in the church and His rule over all creation). Consider:  He is the image of God.  He is the firstborn son over all creation.  He is the Creator of all things.  All things!  Nothing exists without his sovereign oversight.  He upholds the universe, thus he sustains each photon of light from the star whose light has not yet reached the earth.  He is the head of the church.  And he is the firstborn from the dead.  Each truth deserves individual attention.  Taken together they crescendo in praise. 

But these truths are not vaccuous propositions devoid of context and biblical definition.  Paul writes these things to contest the false teaching erupting in Colossae.  Paul lifts up the glory of Christ to combat any notion that deficiency in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  He draws on OT concepts and language to declare Christ has come and fulfilled all things–the law (cf. Rom. 10:4); the promises (cf. 2 Cor. 1:20; the offices of the OT (cf. the book of Hebrews).  He is the God, and in him the fullness of God dwells bodily (Col. 1:19; 2:9).

In making his case, Paul conflates Jesus Christ’s eternal deity and creativity with his functional role as the second Adam.  GK Beale provides helpful commentary and analysis of this Adam-Christ relationship.  He writes:

The three descriptions for Christ in Colossians 1:15-17 (“image of God,” “firstborn,” “before all things”) are thus different ways of referring to Christ as an end-time Adam, since they were common ways of referrring to the first Adam or to those who were Adam-like figures and were given the first Adam’s task whether this be Noah, the patriarchs, or the nation of Israel (GK Beale, “Colossians,” in Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, 854).

While the first Adam imaged God and was YHWH’s firstborn son (Luke 3:38), he was not “before all things.”  In this way, Jesus Christ is a greater Adam, one who is both Creator and incarnated as the perfect image of God.  Whereas, every other son of Adam (daughter of Eve), bears in being a marred image of God, Jesus Christ is the perfect image of God, “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His nature” (Heb. 1:3).  Thus, we who have been redeemed by the Second Adam, who have been buried with him in baptism, and await the redemption of our bodies and to be clothed with the imperishable, are being conformed into the image of the second Adam, the perfect man.  This is the corporeal hope of the Christian life, we will be glorified in our bodies (cf. Rom. 8:29-30), when Christ comes again.

Beale goes on to speak of Jesus position of authority, for as the perfect man, he has always retained his Divine Nature (cf. Phil. 2:5-11):

This position of authority is also grounded in Paul’s acknowledgement that Christ is the sovereign Creator of he world (1:16) and sovereignly maintains its ongoing existence (1:17b).  Therefore, Christ perfectly embodies the ruling position that Adam and his flawed human successors should have held, and he is at the same time the perfect divine Creator of all thins, who is spearate fro mand sovereign over that which he has created, especially underscored by the clause ‘all things have been created through him and for him’ at the end of 1:16 (854).

As we read our Bible’s may we see the intracanonical connections that help us better understand our Savior; and as we see these Spirit-illumined truths, may our hearts be filled with joy as we consider our great and gracious Immanuel.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

The Mystery of Marriage: A Parable of Christ and the Church

/ davidsschrock / 5 Comments

Marriage is a mystery!  Empirically speaking, this is proven every time blissful lovers get married and discover the unforeseen realities of married life.  A young wife may think, “Why didn’t I see that his charming idiosyncracy in courtship is actually a really annoying habit in marriage?”  In every generation and with every marriage, the mystery proliferates, because woven into the fabric of humanity is God-given peculiarity associated with sexual differentiation.  This was implicit in creation, and has been exaggerated by the Fall.  All the same, it is part of God’s plan.  Solomon captures this creational profundity, when he writes, “Three things are too wonderful for me; four I do not understand: the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a serpent on a rock, the way of a ship on the high seas, and the way of a man with a virgin” (Prov. 30:18-19).  From elementary school playgrounds, to high school dances, to twenty-five year anniversaries, the relationship between boys and girls that matures into the coupling of husband and wife is a profound mystery. 

Biblically speaking, marriage is also mystery; but in the Bible, the term “mystery” does not connote obscurity or uncertainty.  Instead, it is used to depict a reality hidden now revealed.  In Ephesians, Paul calls the ingathering of the Gentiles a mystery, describing the way in which nations outside the covenantal people Israel, were made “fellow citizens with the saints and the household of God” (2:19).  He also describes marriage as a mystery (Eph. 5:32).  In both instances, what was once only seen in types and shadows, has now been explained and made clear (cf. John 16:29-30).  The Old Testament promised salvation to gentiles but until Christ’s incarnation, the full plan of salvation for the nations had gone unnoticed.  Just the same, the pattern of men and women leaving and cleaving, coupling one with another in marriages has been patterned since Adam and Eve (cf. Gen. 2:24); yet, only in the fullness of time did the significance of this holy institution become known.  Pertaiing to marriage, it is important for us to understand that God’s telic purposes did not come after the first marriage, but rather they preceded the first marriage. 

J.V. Fesko has called this kind of understanding proleptic understanding of history, “protology,” meaning that in the beginning, God imbued significance to people, events, and institutions that in the fullness of time would find ultimate meaning in Christ and the effects of his redemptive work.  Looking backwards from the fully disclosed canon of Scripture, this could be called typology, but since it is prophetic and future-oriented, it seems better to call it protology (see Fesko’s Last Thing First).  In the case of marriage, when God brought Eve to Adam, he was taking strides to accomplish his eschatological goal of Christ and the church.  As Isaiah writes about our covenant Lord, “God declares the end from the beginning” (Is. 46:9), and in the case of marriage this is absolutely true.

Consider the words of New Testament scholar, George Knight III, as he described the eternal purposes of God in marriage:

Unbeknownst to the people of Moses’ day (it was a ‘mystery’), marriage was designed by God from the beginning to be a picture or parable of the relationship between Christ and the church.  Back when God was planning what marriage would be like, He planned it for this great purpose: it would give a beautiful earthly picture of the relationship that would someday come about between Christ and His church.  This was not known to people for many generations, and that is why Paul can call it a ‘mystery.’  But now in the New Testament age Paul reveals this mystery, and it is amazing.

This means that when Paul wanted to tell the Ephesians about marriage, he did not just hunt around for a helpful analogy and suddenly think that “Christ and the church” might be a good teaching illustration.  No, it was much more fundamental than that: Paul saw that when God designed the original marriage He already had Christ and the church in mind.  This is one of God’s great purposes in marriage: to picture the relationship between Christ and His redeemed people forever!  (George Knight III, “Husbands and Wives as Analogues of Christ and the Church” in Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism, edited by John Piper and Wayne Grudem [Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1991], 175-76)

Marriages that embrace and embody this truth, of seeing themselves as miniature portrait studios of Christ and the church are blessed with knowing the reality for which they were united in covenant love.  Those who do not know this mystery are tragically living in the dark.  Still the saddest group of all may be those who know Christ and his salvation, but do not know how his relationship with the church should shape and inform their marriage.  By choice or ignorance, they embody an egalitarian marriage, and chaff against the gospel.  Scripture’s wise design for marriage as a parabolic representation of Christ and the church, that includes male headship and female submission is not a product of the curse, but a divinely-revealed mystery that God promises to bless.

May we who love God’s wise design in marriage and the gospel that it “mysteriously” reveals, pray for a vision to see God’s design for marriage incarnated in our own marriages and in those around us, so that the world may see a mosaic of marriages within the chruch that illustrate the mystery of Christ and the church.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Last Things First: Meditations on the Image of God

/ davidsschrock

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation (Colossians 1:15).

This weekend, I will be preaching from some of the richest Christological verses in the Bible, Colossians 1:15-20.  And in preparation this week, I have been reading JV Fesko’s Last Things First: Unlocking Genesis 1-3 with the Christ of Eschatology.  Fesko’s treatment of “protology,” eschatology, and Christology are incredible stimulating and illuminating.  Seeing that Genesis 1-3 is not just a polemic against Charles Darwin, nor a proof-text the age of the earth, but rather a glorious beginning to the story of Jesus Christ–his creation, redemption, and new creation.  Fesko effectively demonstrates that these passages are about the Triune God and the true man, Jesus Christ. 

Drawing on a rich history of commentators, Fesko quotes Anthony Hoekema, G.K. Beale, and John Calvin as they seek to explain the context and the concept of the Imago Dei.  Their reflections are worth pondering in order to better understand this tremendous biblical truth–namely, what it means to be made in the image of God, and that Jesus Christ himself is the Image of God!  Quoting from Hoekema’s The Image of God first, Fesko remarks: 

The image of God in man must: “be seen as involving the structure of man (his gifts, capacities, and endowments) and the functioning of man (his actions, his relationships to God and to others, and the way he uses his gifts).  To stress either of the of these at the expense of the other is to be one-sided…To see man as the image of God is to see both the task and the gifts.  But the task is primary; the gifts are secondary.  The gifts are the means for fulfilling the task” (A. Hoekema, quoted by Fesko in Last Things First, 47).

To Hoekema’s balanced representation of structure and function, Fesko incorporate’s Beale’s cultural-historical observations:

G.K. Beale explains the connection between monarchs as images of deities and explains, “ancient kings would set up images of themselves in distant lands over which they ruled in order to represent their sovereign presence.  For example, after conquering a new territory, the Assyrian king Shalmanesar ‘fashioned a mighty image of my majesty’ that he ‘set up’ on a clack obelisk, and then he virtually equates his ‘image’ with that of ‘the glory of Assur’ his god.  Likewise, Adam was created as the image of the divine king to indicate that earth was ruled over by Yahweh” (G.K. Beale, quoted by Fesko, 49).

Finally, Fesko quotes the great reformer, John Calvin, whose comments highlight the dignity bestowed upon humanity’s nature. 

The chief seat of the Divine image was in his mind and heart, where it was eminent…In the mind perfect intelligence flourished and reigned, uprightness attended as its companion, and all the senses were prepared and molded for due obedience to reason; and in the body there was a suitable corresondence with this internal order’ (John Calvin, quoted by Fesko, 50).

In short order, John Fesko, summarizes some of the most important aspects of the doctrine of humanity.  He supports a holistic definition that incorporates Calvin’s substantive understanding, that mankind has essential properties that reflect the Godhead; Hoekema’s dual understanding that mankind is made to rule (function) and that God has given mankind gifts and abilities to carry out that task (structure); and Beale’s cultural-historical understanding of humanity’s place as delegated vice-regents to rule over creation, to expand the glory of God by ruling over creation and proliferating the image of God.

Of course, there is much more to say because this original program was aborted as soon as Adam’s feet touched earth.  Humanity proceded to reflect the image of God, but in a marred and perverted way.  Nevertheless, eternal God’s intention for the true Imago Dei was never thwarted!  As highlighted by Last Things First, Scripture teaches that Jesus Christ was always the intended telos of mankind.  We are made in his image, but He is the image of God (cf. Col. 1:15; 2 Cor. 3:18; 4:4; Heb. 1:3).  Fesko distills the preceding quotations well, so we will finish with his summary:

Set against the ancient Near Eastern religions in which the ‘forces of nature are divinities that may hold the human race in thralldom, our text declares man to be a free agent who has the God-given power to control nature’ (Nahum Sarna, Genesis, 13).  Moreover, no man or any other creature is a deity.  Rather, God’s image, his incommunicable attributes, were given to man so he could rule as God’s vice-regent over the creation (50).

Made in the image of Christ, may we rejoice in the True ImageoDei, Jesus, and press on to Christ-like conformity as we embrace our roles as vice-regents, looking for the day when our bodies are redeemed and we will ever reign with Christ (cf. Rom. 8:23; 2 Tim. 2:12).

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Looking for the Kingdom of God in the Book of Ezekiel

/ davidsschrock

When was the last time you preached Ezekiel?  Not from Ezekiel, but Ezekiel.  Not Ezekiel 16 and God’s graphic castigation of Israel’s spiritual whoredom; not Ezekiel 36 and the promise of a renewed heart and a clean spirit; not Ezekiel 37 and the valley of dry bones; I mean Ezekiel, the whole thing? 

If you did decide to preach Ezekiel, where would you try it out?  Would it be a trial run in a Sunday School class?  Would it be at youth lock-in–you’ve got to be there all night anyways?  Would it be to a group of eager seminarians?  Or would it be at one of the largest churches in the Southern Baptist Convention?

This weekend, a good friend of mine, Grant Gaines, had the opportunity to preach to Bellevue Baptist Church (Memphis, TN), and he delivered an outstanding message. Challenging BBC to see the kingdom of God, he preached the whole book of  entitled: “Looking for the Kingdom: The Message of Ezekiel.”

His three points were: There is Sin to be Punished, chapters 1-24; There is an Enemy to be Defeated, chapters 25-32; and There is a Kingdom to be Established, chapters 33-48.  His faithful message exemplifies canonical preaching, biblical theology, and a Christocentric hermeneutic.  I encourage you to listen to it yourself, to consider his example, and to look for the kingdom–and if you have the chance: Preach Ezekiel! 

For more examples of preaching the Bible book-by-book, see Mark Dever’s The Message of the Old Teastament: Promises Made and The Message of the New Testament: Promises Kept .

May we all be unashamed to preach Christ from every verse, chapter, and book of God’s inspired Word.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

A Prayer for the Heretic

/ davidsschrock

Irenaeus of Lyons was biblical theologian par excellence, a faithful apologist for the church, and warm-hearted pastor.  In his polemical work against Gnosticism, he spends two books unpacking and then demolishing the false doctrines of Marcion, Valentinus, and others.  Then in books 3-5, he unfolds a rich biblical exposition of the Scriptures that centers on Christ and that demonstrates mostly well (in some places poorly) what biblical typology looks like.  But at the end of Books 3 and 4, he offers a prayer for those deluded souls for whom he is contending.

He is not merely arguing against these false teachers; he is crying out to God on their behalf, asking for their souls to be saved from these pernicous doctrines.  He is doing what Jude 22-23 instructs us to do: “have mercy on some who are doubting; save others snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh.”

Reading Irenaeus prayer gives you a renewed perspective of contending for the faith.  It is not simply a proud, boastful war of words or theological jockeying– it is a crying out to God, who alone can change hearts, open eyes, and free imprisoned souls from the shackles of Satan.  May we who love the truth consider that the next time we contend for the faith, and pray with Irenaeus for those who are in bondage to false teaching:

We do indeed pray that these men may not remain in the pit which they themselves have dug, but separate themselves from a Mother of this nature, and depart from Bythus, and stand away from the void, and relinquish the shadow; and that they, being converted to the Church of God, may be lawfully begotten, and that Christ maybe formed in them, and that they may know the Framer and Maker of this universe, the only true God and Lord of all.  We pray for these things on their behalf, loving them better than they seem to love themselves (Irenaeus Against haereses 3.25.7).

May we love the truth, and may we truly love by interceding for brothers and sisters held hostage to false teachers!

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

The Fox and the King: Irenaeus on Methods of Correlation

/ davidsschrock

In Against Heresies, Irenaeus of Lyons (ca. AD 130-200) writes a colorful depiction of those who use extra-biblical philosophies and schemas to interpret and understand the Bible.  Contending against Gnosticism and one of its leading teachers, Valentinus, Irenaeus writes:

They gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures; and, to use a common proverb, they strive to weave ropes of sand, while they endeavor to adapt with an air of prophets, and the words of the apostles, in order that their scheme may not seem altogether without support.  In so doing, however, they disregard the order and the connection of the Scriptures, and so far as in them lies, dismember and destroy the truth…

Their manner of acting is just as if one, when a beautiful image of a king has been constructed by some skilful artist out of precious jewels, should then take this likeness of a man all to pieces, should re-arrange the gems, and so fit them together as to make them into the form of a dog or of a fox, and even that but poorly executed; and should then maintain and declare that was the beautiful image of the king which the skilful artist constructed, pointing to the jewels which had been admirably fitted together by the artist to form the image of the king, but have been with bad effect transferred by the latter one to shape of a dog, and by thus exhibiting the jewels, should deceive the ignorant who had no conception what a king’s form was like, and persuade them that that miserable likeness of the fox was, in fact, the beautiful image of the king. In like manner do these persons patch together old wives’ fables, and then endeavor, by violently drawing away from their proper connection, words, expressions, and parables whenever found, to adapt the oracles of God to their baseless fictions (Against Heresies 1.8.1).

In recent years this kind of extra-biblical accomodation can be seen in Liberation Theology, Feminist Theology, Black Theology (i.e., James Cone), and Environmental Theology—to name only a few.  Using superimposed grids to interpret the Bible, the end result is always a distortion of the biblical theological understanding of the Truth.  In the twentieth century, theologian Paul Tillich, coined the term “Method of Correlation” to describe this kind of dialectic approach to the Scripture, in which he advocated an interpretive method where philosophy supplied the questions and theology and the Bible gave the answers.  The problem is that modern philosophy asked the wrong questions, and thus all biblical appeals were slanted by the question.

In reading Irenaeus, we are reminded of the high stakes of theological construction and the humble dependence we must have on the Bible to not only supply us with ‘biblical answers’ but biblical methods for reading the Scriptures well.  Many have gone before us who have read the Bible, quoted the Bible, memorized the Bible, and gone to hell, because they did not read it as it was intended (cf. John 5:39; 2 Cor. 2:14-16).

A helpful diagnostic of proper methods of interpretation is is Graeme Goldsworthy’s Gospel Centered Hermeneutics, while anything by Kevin Vanhoozer will help think through these matters on a scholarly level; Twentieth Century Theology is a helpful survey of theologians who have misinterpreted the Bible through means of theological accomodation.

May we pray for illumination and perspire in our studies to understand the Scriptures as God’s message of eternal life in Jesus Christ.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Bulls, Birds, and Bugs: Financial Aid from the Forest and the Field

/ davidsschrock

When not going to school, reading, studying, preaching, or blogging, I am helping students with financial aid at Southern Seminary.  This is my full time work, Supervisor of Student Resources, and today I had the pleasure of addressing more than 100 prospective students and their families about financing seminary.  Sharing financial aid nuts and bolts, I tried to frame the presentation with four biblical truths about financial aid.  Considering the current economic uncertainty in the world, I sought to encourage those called to ministry to lift their eyes to heavens from which their help comes from (Ps. 127:1).  You can call it, “Financial aid during a time of financial uncertainty,” or “Bulls, Birds, and Bugs: Financial Aid from the Forest and the Field.”  Let me share them with you briefly.

First, God owns the cattle on a thousand hills.  Psalm 50:10-11 reads, “For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills.  I know all the birds of the hills, and all that moves in the field is mine.”  The underlining truth that grounds our confidence as Christians, is that God is sovereign.  In terms of financial provision, we can trust that all the earth is his and the fullness thereof (cf. Ps. 24:1).  At any time, our Sovereign God can appropriate, reallocate, or liquidate his “stock.”  Regardless of how the Nasdaq or the Dow fare, God’s economy is always good, and he will care for his own.  So as you consider your financial need at this time, be reminded that God owns it all and will provide exactly what you need when you need it.

Second, the birds of the air doing just fine. In Matthew 6:24-26, Jesus confronts anxiety caused by the question of means, when he says, “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on.  Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing.  Look at the birds of the air, they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them.  Are you not more valuable than they?” 

God’s word teaches us that God cares about the birds and the bees and the flowers and the trees, and if he does, Jesus says, we need not worry about our provision.  He cares significantly more about those who bear his image, than the bird who fly today and fall tomorrow.  Jesus goes on, “Seek first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you” (Matt. 6:33).  For those who are called to ministry, it is imperative that we learn to trust God for his provision.  God affords us this learning tank as we prepare for seminary.  Therefore, in a time of financial uncertainty, God gives us the opportunity to learn contentment (cf. Phil. 4:11-13, 19) and to trust him for provision as we train theologically. 

Since we know the end of the story, a new heavens and a new earth with fields aplenty, we can gladly walk through the unsettled middle. 

Third, God’s timing is perfect, so don’t be a horse or a mule.  In Psalm 32:8-9, God says, “I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will counsel you wit my eye upon you.  Be not like a horse or a mule, without understanding, which must be curbed with bit and bridle, or it will not stay near you.” 

In the Christian life and in ministry, it is essential to learn that while God is Jehovah Jireh, the God who provides, he does so in ways and in days that we may not expect–or want (cf. Isa. 55:8-9).  I did not anticipate that my seminary career would take four and a half years to complete, but in God’s timing he made perfect provision for me over the course of 9 semesters. For those going into ministry, this waiting on the Lord, is as important to the pastor, missionary, or church planter as learning Greek or Hebrew.  God’s timing is perfect, but we must learn to trust his timing.  Be comforted by Psalm 32:8-9 and remember Isaiah 64:6, “God works on behalf of those who wait for him.”   Guard yourself from being a horse who moves too quickly or a mule who moves too slowly by trusting in the Lord’s timing.  God’s good designs for your life may include seminary and a bounty of undeserved provision, but they may include another path of provision and blessing.

Fourth, consider the ant and plan wisely.  Solomon writes in Proverbs 6:6-8, “Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise. Without having any chief, officer, or ruler; she prepares her bread in summer and gathers her food in harvest.”  Waiting for the Lord and trusting in his provision does not mean passive inactivity.  I often encounter zealous young men and women called to ministry, who have spent little time thinking about how they might afford the education.  They go out to sea without a paddle, a sail, a radio, or a life raft, assuming that the currents of the waves will lead them in the right direction.  They call this walking by faith, but in fact it is a kind of foolishness that that disregards God’s call to walk wisely, exercising dependent dominion. 

Walking by faith is based on hearing God’s promises and acting in belief (cf. Rom. 10:17; James 2).  Blindly presupposing that God will bless an untimely decision to go to seminary that imperils family, that jeopardizes current ministry, or that hinders the ability to suitably provide for your family–I am speaking to men here–is not the same thing as “risk-taking” faith.  The latter is steeled by God’s promises revealed in Scripture, the former is assumed based on an uncounseled decision (Prov. 11:25).  The sovereignty of God promotes human responsibility; it does not facilitate sloth or idle living.  God’s cosmic reign encourages honest work, coupled with ant-like planning.  Along the way God often smiles on us, providing gracious and unexpected supplies and resources, but this never frees us from the responsibility to plan and to plan well (cf. Prov. 16:1-9).

In short, all creation reflects the glory and wisdom of God that help us to better walk in wisdom (cf. Ps. 19:1; Isa. 28:23ff) .  In the five animals considered here, we see principles of wisdom that spur us on as laborers and aspiring shepherds, for we ourselves must learn to live like sheep even as we train to shepherd.  God is our Great Shepherd and the One who will provide all that we need, and for those who are called to ministry they are also called to wisely pursue biblical equipping, according to the provision and the timing God supplies.  This kind of equipping may come from a seminary, or it may not, but regardless we are called to labor faithfully in the vineyard in the God places us until the master returns to receive his own.

(If you would like more information about Southern Seminary, come to a Seminary Preview Conference.  The next one is scheduled for April 2009.  More information about financing seminary can be found at Goingtoseminary.com. ).

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Intimate Allies (pt. 5): A Message I Don’t Approve

/ davidsschrock

In the season of platform messages and political adds, I feel that it is important to assert that I approved of the first four messages that Tremper Longman and Dan Allender present in their book Intimate Allies.  Their emphasis on spiritual warfare and the kingdom of God, evangelism and discipleship, as well as biblical theology to undergird our understanding of marriage is very helpful.  However, there is a message in their book with which I do not agree, and which is, I believe, fundamentally opposed to biblical marriages, biblical discipleship, and spiritual warfare.  It is the culturally accepted notion of feminism and the ecclesial/anthropological matter of egalitarianism as it pertains to the roles of men and women.  (For an outline of the issues see The Danvers Statement).

Without so much as a definition, an argument, or an admission of an egalitarian agenda, Longman and Allender presuppose and assume that an egalitarian reading of the Bible is normative for the evangelical Christian.  (For an opposing view, to which I wholeheartedly subscribe, see The Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood).  Concerning the Genesis command to fill the earth and subdue it, they write:

In marriage, we are both kings and queens who rule by ordering creation to enhance the glory and pleasure of each other.  We are to rule through sacrificing on behalf of one another (86).

At this point, I am in total agreement.  However, in there next supporting paragraph they deny any kind of intended order in the creation of man and woman.  They continue:

Further, we must recognize that the job description is given equally to men and women.  At this point, God makes no distinction about who is to do what.  Women are not the slaves or servants of men; men are not the slaves of servants of women.  Men and women together fill, subdue, and rule over all of creation (86).

By failing to cite a biblical reference, include a footnote, or make an argument for the assertion, “At this point, God makes no distinction about who is to do what,” they disregard biblical testimony to the contrary (cf. 1 Tim. 2; 1 Cor. 11, see Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood for biblical corpus of articles that examine and exegete the relevant passage in Scripture ) and contemporary scholarship that argues for gender complementarity.  Instead, they casually assert their culturally sympathetic appeal and assume it will not cause any problems  This is not an isolated incident either.  In a later chapter, once again discussing the account in Genesis 2, they argue:

Once again, this passage [Gen. 2] is misread if either Adam’s statement of Eve’s derivative creation is understood to mean that the woman is subordinate to the man.  The man is not in any way better, superior, or closer to God than the woman is.  Indeed, the passage could not be clearer: the man needs the woman as much as the woman needs the man (216).

Though I disagree with their conclusion, in this instance Longman and Allender make an argument for egalitarianism, instead of propounding an assumption.  Their argument is feminist reasoning that supposes that worth in the eyes of God is dependent on hierarchy or perceived status.  For instance, a CEO is more valuable than his secretary.  In other words, if men and women cannot assume all the same functions within the home and the church, then they clearly cannot be equal.  They fail to take into consideration that God himself is equal in the Godhead and yet with distinctive roles (see Bruce Ware’s book Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Relationship, Roles, and Relevance). 

Moreover, their argument makes a semantic range fallacy.  They speak of authority (i.e. “subordination) and then proceed to define it in terms of worth or significance (i.e. “better, superior, or closer to God”), when in fact the ordered world illustrates all the time that hierarchy and worth are distinctive spheres of meaning.  A sergeant in the army and a luitenant in the army have different degrees of authority, but the same ontological value; parents and children, in the eyes of God, have distinctive roles of authority and accountability, but both are equally loved by their Father in Heaven; and employers and employees have unique roles, but the same intrinsic value.  To disregard or expunge these roles is to move towards anarchy. 

Longman and Allender disregard these cosmic structures, just as they reinterpret biblical passages that clearly teach that men and women are equal, yet different (see Alexander Strauch’s helpful book by that same title, Men and Women: Equal Yet Different).  After explaining their understandings of Ephesians 5 and 1 Peter 3, Longman and Allender summarize on page 191:

We have already pointed out that this commmand [“wives submit to your husband as unto the Lord,” Eph. 5:22] must be understood in the light of the mutual submission commanded by Paul in Ephesians 5:21.  We have also seen that Peter urged men to a submissive attitude toward their wives when he told them to “be considerate” toward them (1 Pet. 3:7). 

Here again, Longman and Allender are twisting meaning and common sense.  When you go to the doctor, you want him to be “considerate” but you don’t want your visitation to be a collaborative effort!  If in consideration for your feelings, he asked you to take the lead on your colonoscopy, you wouldn’t stay with his practice long.  You expect, and for good reason, that he or she be an authority in medicine.  Your responsibility is to submit, even if it is a woman!  (This hierarchy structure is different than that of the home or church). 

Or, to give another example, this time from Scripture, Jesus is the kind and compassionate head of the body, but this does not undermine his absolute authority.  The analogy of head and body only works because the healthy human body is controlled by the head.  When limbs, under their own initiative begin to lead, something is wrong.  Therefore, consideration and submission are not synonymous, as Longman and Allender suppose.

Throughout their otherwise faithful book these explicit egalitarian appeals arise.  They are exegetically reinforced in Chapter 11, “Submitting to One Another in Love,” and they are seen at work in at least two personal testimonies that portray their wives as spiritual co-leaders in the home (38, 52).  In short, while helpfully setting marriage in its discipling and warfare locus in the kingdom of God, they weaken their kingdom-worldview by denying God’s gender roles.

So overall, I commend the four aspects of the book I previously considered (Warfare, Evangelism, Discipleship, and Biblical Theology), but I do not commend their egalitarian agenda.  Intimate Allies is a book I would recommend to well-read Christians who want to see how their marriage fits into God’s eternal strategy of the Great Commission and spiritual warfare, but it is not a book I would ever use for (pre)marital counseling or that I would commend carte blanche.  There are too many other good books out there that are more faithful to God’s Word.  Finally, I am tremendously appreciative of Tremper Longman’s work, I look to him as an expert in OT and Biblical Theology, but in this instance, I cannot universally commend Intimate Allies.

My name is David Schrock, and I approved this message.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss