Articles

Here are some longer articles from the virtual pen of Danny and Brian.  Is there anything you’d like us to write about?  Let us know and we’ll be glad to consider it.

• Learning the Bible.  Five essential resources that will help you study the Bible, and come to understand God’s Word more fully.
• The Illusion of Media Neutrality. Some food for thought when considering the use of various media in a Christian context.
• The Importance of Bodily Resurrection.  Why is bodily resurrection so important?  Ten things to think about.

 

Learning the Bible

Five Resources for Under $75 (Including Shipping!)

We have compiled a list of resources that we believe is a great start to a deeper, more thorough understanding of the Bible.  If you are like us, you have limited time and money, it is our belief that the resources below will prove a worthwhile investment on both counts.

Good Translation(s)

Learning to read the Bible begins with (drum roll…) a Bible!  When you purchase an English Bible you are really purchasing a translation.   There are many excellent translations available today.  The true benchmark of “excellence” is faithfulness to the original text.  However, by the very nature of language, each translation will have various strengths and weaknesses in certain areas.  In some cases, it is a matter of taste, in others, a matter of better capturing the nuances of the original Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic.   As such, it is great to learn to read the Bible in many translations.   Enter biblegateway.com, where you can access and compare multiple translations online.  When studying the Bible (as opposed to daily devotional reading), you ought to use multiple translations reflecting multiple styles (CBD has an excellent translation comparison here).  You can use a fairly literal translation (NASB, ESV), a more “thought for thought” translation (such as the NLT) as well as a dynamic equivalent translation (such as the NIV or TNIV).

You might also want to check out NET Bible.  This online Bible is the product of a team of translators who include thousands of translator’s footnotes.  It helps you peer into the mind of a translator, and you can do it all online.  They do sell hardcopies of the NET Bible as well, including some great maps.

Learning to Read in Context

How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart (about $12) is a great resource for learning how to read and understand the Bible.  It takes a “genre approach,” meaning the authors emphasize the differences inherent in each biblical genre (you don’t read a psalm the same way you read an epistle or a gospel).  It seems that few readers read the Bible asking the question, “What did the author mean when he wrote this?”  Fee and Stuart not only insist that this be the first question you ask, but they give you clues as to how to answer that question.  

See also: How to Read the Bible Book by Book, also by Fee and Stuart (under $15).  This companion volume gives a great overview of each book of the Bible and shows how it fits into the Bible’s story.  The overview of the story of the Bible on pages 14-20 is worth the price of the book alone.

Historical Context

IVP Bible Background Commentaries: Old Testament & New Testament.  We believe that anyone, with a little guidance and a lot of hard work, can learn to read the Bible in its literary context.  However, it’s the historical context that can easily trip us up.  After all, how many of us have the time or resources to become experts on ancient culture?  That’s why we recommend people purchase these 2 volumes put out by IVP.  As you are doing your Bible reading in, say, Genesis, you can open up the OT volume to help fill in historical details gleaned from archaeology, anthropology, and comparisons to other ancient literature that you may not have already known.  For a relatively cheap price (about $50 combined), you can have a valuable resource that will prove itself useful for years to come.

See also: Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary (4 Volumes), which is a similar product to the IVP volumes, only much larger and it only covers the NT.  If you’re willing to pay the money, you’ll find these to be user-friendly (after all, it has pictures!) and informative.  You can now purchase these in individual volumes or on CD-ROM for your computer.

Lectures

Want to go to seminary but don’t want to pay $500 per credit hour?  Then go check out biblicaltraining.org.  This site includes class lectures covering everything from World Religions to Systematic Theology to Church History from a number of terrific professors, all for free!  For Bible teaching, check out Douglas Stuart’s Old Testament Survey course (a Gordon-Conwell favorite) and Craig Blomberg’s New Testament Survey course.  You can even listen to individual lectures if you are studying one particular book of the Bible.  For those with long commutes (which is about half the population here in Boston) or a busy travel schedule, you can download these onto your MP3 player and listen as you travel.  Just think: you can listen to world class scholars and teachers for free!

The Church

Try as we might, we cannot help bringing our own baggage to reading the Bible.  None of us are impartial readers, and we need to recognize that fact heading into our study.  Depending on your background you will come to the text with a set of preconceived ideas that may or may not be correct.  It is necessary to read the Bible in the context of the community of God’s people; after all, it was written to communities of believers for their instruction and encouragement.  Studying the Bible with a group of believers can be an immensely rewarding experience, allowing you to bounce ideas of each other and challenge your own understanding.  

Cost Breakdown

Biblegateway.com: free

HTRTBFAIW: $12

IVP Bible Background Commentaries: $50

Biblicaltraining.org: free

The Church: priceless

Back to top

 

The Illusion of Media Neutrality

As the title suggests, I want to throw out some food for thought regarding the perceived neutrality of media. As an upfront clarification, please note that by “media” I do not refer to the nightly news or such ilk, but rather the media through which human experience is expressed (e.g., music, poetry, movies, television, etc.)

In “The Purpose Driven Church,” pastor Rick Warren makes the statement that no musical style is intrinsically “good” or “bad.” There is no such thing as ‘Christian music,’ only ‘Christian lyrics’ (p.281). There seem to be traces of such a philosophy undergirding the use of different musical styles in worship. Rock music isn’t intrinsically “bad,” so we can just take that cultural form, add Christian lyrics, and produce perfectly acceptable worship music, yes?

I don’t know if the equation is quite so simple. The reason, as suggested by my title, is that there is no such thing as a “neutral carrier” when it comes to media. Consider music: Would it be appropriate to sing “Jesus Loves Me” to Ride of the Valkyries or Beethoven’s Fifth? How about superimposing Alanis Morrisette’s “You Oughta Know” lyrics on top of the music to Disney’s “Hakuna Matata”? The ideas are are laughable. It follows that music indeed has intrinsic meaning. It is not neutral in its message, waiting for meaning to be assigned to it by the listener (post-modernity, anyone?).

We could even dive deeper and consider the background of such music. What if Anton LaVey pioneered a new style of music that came to great popularity. Would it be acceptable to co-opt said form and add our own Christian touches to it? Rock n’ Roll has its roots in youthful rebellion, and other sensual matters that aren’t always in line with Christendom. Should this affect how we use it?

What of television? Here is a device whose raison d’etre is entertainment. Does this not affect, even subconsciously, how the viewer interprets and responds to the messages it conveys? In a blink, we switch from some horrific human tragedy in a news clip to a sitcom. Does this not somehow cheapen the human tragedy? Moreoever, if somebody sits in front of a TV, whether to watch “The Simpsons” or the Jesus film, aren’t they subconsciously expecting to be entertained? Should we care about this?

Of course, Christianity has a long history of borrowing from local culture. Much in classical Christian art employs pagan symbology (e.g., the halo), and the Christian calendar is filled with holy days that were once pagan holidays (e.g., Christmas). Even more, you could drive yourself crazy with this stuff: Levi’s jeans were originally developed as clothing for gold prospectors, and in the 50’s and 60’s blue jeans were often associated with rebellious riff-raff. Shouldn’t this inform our choice of dress?  This shifts the question a bit. Of course, most people do not care (or know) the history of blue jeans now, and they’ve become acceptable attire for Christians. When and how can we draw this line? Is there a statute of limitations?

Back to the matter at hand, what about praise music? Should we sing a praise song in a minor key? To rock music? I can’t propose a blanket answer, but I will propose that we do well to at least consider such matters. I feel American Christians tend to err on the side of being too cavalier about adopting cultural forms in Christian expression: “Contemporary music at church? Sure! It’ll better connect with the congregation and evoke stronger emotions from them! Entertaining sermons with stunning visuals and drama? Sure! It’ll keep everybody’s attention!”

My suggestion, then, is a thoughtful pause before the “sure!” The forms we choose carry baggage with them, and we may need to address it in our teaching. At a minimum, we should think about it. The emotions felt during the worship may be in response to the music, not God. The engagement during the sermon may be because of the presentation, not the content. If so, we miss the mark, hence we ought to proceed, as my Spanish teacher would say, “con cuidado.” If I were to peanut-butter any statement across this whole subject, I’d say that everything we do should be purposed towards keeping God at the center of it all. We don’t want people standing on the Golden Gate Bridge to fall so in love with the architecture that they fail to cross, and reach the more important destination.

Back to top

 

The Importance of Bodily Resurrection

This article deals with some of the “so what?” questions that come up when we talk about the resurrection of the body. Why is this part of Christian doctrine so important?  Why and how should it affect our lives today?  We will submit some preliminary answers to these questions to stir up further reflection.  First, however, let us consider two orienting thoughts:

(a) In the discussion of future benefits of Christ’s resurrection, we should not lose sight of the fact that there are present benefits as well. Since Christ has defeated sin, we can be free from sin today. Romans 6 carries out this thought; Paul hints at this in 1 Corinthains 15:17.

(b) We must be careful to affirm the temporal nature of “the way things are.” We are told time and time again not to cling to the temporary pleasures of today; something much better is in store.

Keeping these in mind, let’s dig in.  Why does bodily resurrection matter?  What are the implications?

(1)  At the risk of sounding flippant, bodily resurrection is important because the Bible says so. If the Bible says that we will be resurrected, then we ought (at the very least) assume that it is important. This is especially true when we consider that it is the very completion of our salvation!

(2)  This is the true reversal of what happened in the Garden of Eden. This is clearly seen in Revelation 22. “On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there by any curse” (22:2-3). God’s plan is to reverse the curse that was levied against Adam and Eve in the Garden. The imagery of the New Jerusalem in Rev 21-22 intentionally echoes the Garden, and it is even better!  The resurrection restores us to our original, pre-fallen state.  Adam and Eve were not just spirits, they were flesh and blood, wholly good, living in God’s perfect (i.e., untainted by sin) creation.

(3)  God is not settling for plan B. By affirming that God’s original proclamation of creation as “good” and His desire to restore creation, we affirm that God is not simply a troubleshooter who had His plan thrown off track by humankind.  Indeed, humans have marred creation with their rebellion. However, even man’s worst rebellion has not ruined the inherent goodness in creation and its original worth to which God will restore it.

(4)  It Helps reclaim eschatology in the Church. Much of the discussion on eschatology in American Christianity is dominated by talk about dates, tribulation, the Anti-Christ, the rapture, etc.  As such, the hope that permeates the NT can often be lost. Throughout the NT, Christ’s second coming is seen as something to be longed for and a motivator for action. While most would agree, so many still seem to get stuck on details about which the NT gives little information, consequently missing the victory that comes at the end. It is heartbreaking the discussion of the “end times” tends to lead to confusion, fear, or apathy (or some combination of these).  These emotions were never the intention of the NT authors!

(5)  There is comfort in knowing where we are going. It is interesting to note that where we go when we die is not where we will live forever. Where we go when we die is an intermediate state. Granted, it seems to be a wonderful place.  After all, we will be in the very presence of God (Phil. 1:23, 2 Cor. 5:8). But this should make us long for what is beyond even that. If dying and going to Heaven right now is better than this life, then how much more so when we live in a re-created and redeemed world!

In Romans 8, we see that Paul finds comfort during present sufferings in the fact that it is “glory that will be revealed in us” (v.18). But, note that the glory he is referring to is the redemption of our bodies – not simply dying and going to Heaven right away. How different this is from the consolation we often give to others in suffering!

In 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Paul comforts those who have lost loved ones – not by informing them that “they’re in Heaven now”, but by reminding them that someday, Jesus is coming back and all His people will be reunited forever. This is, essentially, 1 Corinthians 15 in miniature. Yet, we consistently comfort those who mourn with thoughts about them being in Heaven, which is comfort, to be sure.  But, we are comforting them with something less than what God has planned!

(6)  There is value to the created order. In much of Greek philosophy the material world was something to be scorned and despised. There was a higher spiritual existence that far exceeded what we see here on earth.  The physical world was a shadow, a less-than-real copy, of the higher reality.  Death involved the soul being transported to some disembodied existence where it remained forever, unencumbered by the loathsome flesh. However, in the Bible, God values what He has created. This, of course, shouldn’t be surprising since He declared it all “good” when He first created it.  He values it enough that He wishes it to be completely redeemed.

This has some practical implications. First, in 1 Corinthians 6:12-20, Paul deals with the Corinthians who thought that the physical body was meaningless, therefore one has the right to do what they want with it (good Greeks that they were). Paul counters by pointing out that God is “for the body” and intends to raise us as He rose Christ from the dead (v.14). Since God places such value on the body, so ought we.  Consider the very fact that Jesus, the God-man, came in a human body, and lives today in that redeemed body!  Christ’s humanity is as important as his deity; clearly the Lord does not think of the body as some lowly vessel, or a prison from which to escape (as did many in ancient Greece).

Second, by analogy, we can make the same connection to creation as a whole in Romans 8. If God cares enough about the created order to redeem it fully, then we ought to care enough about it to honor it now, just as we should with our own bodies.  The moral imperative to care for the earth is not a new trend brought to popularity by Al Gore:  It is at the core of humankind’s purposes on earth (Gen. 2:15).

(7) We share what belongs to Christ. This is, in my opinion, one of the most underrated aspects in modern Christianity. Those who are in Christ are “co-heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8:17). Christians have an inheritance with Christ (because of Christ). This is seen here in resurrection. Christ has won victory over death, and shares that victory with His people.  That is, they are raised from the dead just as He was.

Other Scriptures carry the same idea. For instance, in Daniel 7 the Son of Man receives an eternal kingdom and is worshipped by the nations. In that same chapter, the saints also receive the kingdom – but are not worshipped. In Ephesians 1, Paul says that Christ was raised from the dead and seated at the right hand of God in the heavenlies. In chapter 2, Paul says Christ’s people are also seated in the heavenlies – but not at the right hand of the Father. The examples of Daniel 7 and Ephesians 1 show us that Christ shares in His victory, although there are certainly limits. In the same way, Christ shares His resurrection with His people.

In Philippians 3:10-11, Paul says that he wants to participate with Christ in His sufferings, “somehow attaining to the resurrection from the dead.” In the next chapter, Paul talks about how Christians “eagerly await” Christ’s return when He “will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body” (3:20-21). This echoes what Paul says in Romans 8:17- “if indeed we share in his

sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.” Christ shares His glorious resurrection with His people. That is what it means to be “in Christ.”

(8)  The resurrection treats death for what it really is – an enemy. There are hints in the church of the popular notion that death is just the beginning of a new journey (see Gandalf in Lord of the Rings). While our life as Christians certainly doesn’t end at death, the Bible itself treats death as an enemy that must be defeated. Death is not a part of God’s original plan for creation, it was the consequence of human sin. We know this by nature as well; death doesn’t simply feel like a new beginning. It hurts. It should; it’s a consequence of rebellion against God.

(9)  The resurrection points to the total view of the kingdom of God. “The kingdom of God” is the primary focus of Jesus’ preaching. Contrary to much of popular Christian opinion, this kingdom is not simply a matter of collected souls for some disembodied existence. Rather, it is His kingdom here on earth. This kingdom is inaugurated in Jesus, and is carried out through the Church. This kingdom involves feeding the hungry, healing the sick, etc. In understanding that God’s people will be resurrected in (imperishable) bodily form, we see that this is the final “installment” of the kingdom.

Part of Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom was His healings; these two things cannot be separated. In God’s kingdom, sickness and demon possession are seen for what they are:  Not a part of God’s original plan. In Jesus, these problems begin to reverse. As Jurgen Moltmann stresses, the kingdom of God, when it has fully arrived, is the restoration of the natural (original) order of things: “Jesus’ healings are not supernatural miracles in a natural world. They are the only truly ‘natural’ thing in a world that is unnatural, demonized, and wounded” (The Way of Jesus: Christology in Messianic Dimensions p.99). These miracles point to what is to come.  As Moltmann says “But in the framework of hope for the coming of God and his kingdom, Jesus’ healings become inextinguishable reminders of this future” (In the End, the Beginning: The Life of Hope p.65). Resurrection is ultimate healing: it fully restores what has been destroyed.

(10)  The resurrection avoids an “incomplete redemption.”  The common view of “life after death” understands redemption as souls going to Heaven. However, God’s plan of redemption is far more than that. He has not only given people souls, but bodies.  Those bodies are affected by sin just as the soul is. God’s plan is not to discard what has been marred by sin, but to redeem it and set it free.

Back to top