Remember the old Josh? The “fearsome Pirate” you couldn’t wait to read? Well, he’s not quite back, but this post aimed at a Catholic apologist has all the old spit and wit we used to enjoy.

Hat tip to Steve Spearman who sends along two posts from Professor Bainbridge.

“Terry Shaivo, Congress and First Principles.”

“Shaivo, Divorce, and Double Effect.”

An acquaintance of mine has a new grandson who is doing very poorly. I received this email after another email earlier today about him. If y’all would please pray for the baby and his family, it would be most appreciated.

Peanut is now in critical condition at Texas Children’s Hospital and being
given 100% oxygen. It seems that his lungs are not developing a substance
that lets him absorb oxygen correctly. It looks like we have a real challenge
here folks…. please keep the prayers going for Landon [Peanut], Brittany and Rhonda.
Thanks.

Some OBI baseball photos today.

Stretching before practice. Meanwhile, Coach Wasluski going over the plan for the day.

The batting cage is a big part of practice. And finally, catchers going through their drills.

I don’t understand the strong attatchment to the specific doctrine of imputation. It’s at best a theologoumenon, a theologian’s word for a concept that the Bible gives to us metaphorically. I also want to ask what the doctrine of imputation gives us that can’t be subsumed into the doctrine of union. The Eastern concept of theosis, or as Paul says “putting on Christ”, seems to convey the same substance but with richer, less artificial metaphor. I don’t think that imputation is wrong, but it’s not the whole story.

Now for something a little different:

Last week I took a concentrated course at the seminary called Theological Themes in Films. Before the class we had to watch 25 movies, some very familiar (Groundhog Day, The Matrix), some not as familiar (Whale Rider, Unstrung Heroes), and some virtually unknown to American audiences (Kolya, Central Station). As we discussed those films, we talked about different aspects of the Gospel and how these different movies “preached the gospel” (example: Groundhog Day “preached” conversion, in a sense).

We still have to write a paper about a movie or a group of movies (not necessarily on our list) that preach some aspect of the gospel. While I am trying to decide what to write my paper about, I thought I would throw it open to the BHT. What movie or movies (secular, please, let’s not have any “Left Behind:The Movie” nominations!) that you can think of communicate an important aspect of the Gospel?

I am going to stand by my reticience to get into the issue of imputation and N.T. Wright. I realize that a number of persons associated with the “New Perspective” on Paul have said controversial things about imputation, most certainly Robert Gundry, as pointed out by Piper in Counted Righteous in Christ. I have stated before that the New Perspective represents a diversity of views and that reformed criticism of the NPP that doesn’t acknowledge the cast difference in the scholars associated with that label is unconvincing to me. I have said that Wright’s own substantial work on Paul is in the process of publication, and it connected to his work on Jesus, and I’m still reading.

But there are some questions worth asking:

In which New Testament books is imputation clearly a central theme of the book?
In which New Testament books does imputation significantly change or define justification?
How does imputation figure into Jesus’ use of the word “justified” in Luke 18:14 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted?”
How does imputation figure into Jesus’ acceptance of persons during his ministry, in particular, in John 8:11 She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more” or Luke 19:9-10 9 And Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost” or Mark 10:13-15 13 And they were bringing children to him that he might touch them, and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the children come to me; do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. 15 Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.”
If the essence of the imagery of justification is imputation, then how does it work in these instances?

[a rather mangy character creeps into the Tavern, looking like he just got out of bed.]

I’m out of the loop lately, as I have no computer (my Powerbook’s backlight burned out after 10 months of 20+hrs-a-day usage, and it’s being repaired under warrentee. It’s kind of weird to drop in here and read the BHT after more than a week away. Here are a few notes and asides:

On whatever is happening in Florida: There are days when the thought that a court would accept my spouse’s testimony concerning my desires is an absolutely horrifying thought.

On Calvinism and Election: Look, we’ve done that. Can we move on? Suffice it to say that if Calvinism or the doctrine of election are the principle source of satisfaction, comfort and joy in your life, you’re missing the point, and you probably need therapy. Get help, for your sake and for those who love you, while there’s still time.

On the weather: whoever is in charge of this is dropping the ball. This is spring. It isn’t supposed to snow. Particularly when the day before, it was warm enough to be outside without a coat. A real disappointment, that’s what it is.

OK, back to your usual squabbles. See you in another week or so.

Reading Capon makes me realize that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is less about me (Kent) and more about us (humanity). Is this a good thing?

One of the reasons I am benefitting so much from my study of N.T. Wright is how it is tying up so many New Testament themes. I can know officially say that I am quite convinced the issue of “On what basis are we included in the people of God?” is, indeed, prominent and critical, and I can see where the argument about “righteousness” is raging. I believe Wright is quite likely correct to see a larger issue than imputation at work here, though certainly imputation is part of Paul’s way of describing how God includes us in the people of God.

Take for example, Paul’s confrontation of Peter in Galatians 2. Galatians 2:14-16 14 But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?” 15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

I came to this passage in my study of the Prodigal Son. It’s almost a replay, with Peter playing the role of the older brother, and the Gentile Christians the role of the graciously included younger brother. Paul is, in effect, asking him, “Did you understand the story of the Prodigal Son?” Our deep-seated prejudices are connected to the GOD we believe in. We don’t eat with Gentiles because we believe God is still paying attention to the kosher system as the mark of His people. But He’s not. His people are marked by faith in Jesus Christ. Mark 7 says he declared all foods clean. In Acts 10, God tells Peter to kill and eat so that he will understand it is time to go into a Gentile’s home and proclaim faith in Jesus as the new “way of righteousness.” An in Galatians 2, Peter still wants to think of God as the God of Leviticus, not the God whom he saw and experienced for those three years in Galilee, the God who raised Jesus from the dead and gave the Commission to go to all nations and make disciples.

Jesus is always inviting us to see God in himself. In his ministry, miracles, teaching, death and resurrection. The New Testament invites us to see God in exactly the way Jesus portrays Him in his ministry and his actions. This is the real challenge in reading the Bible today, and it’s a constant challenge for all of us to realize what the implications are for the lives we lead and the opportunities we have to serve.

Fellows and lurkers, please pray for a family in one of our sister churches here in Lexington. Their 2-year-old child died from injuries sustained when her mother accidentally ran over her while backing up their vehicle. Article.

Right here is one of the best posts I’ve read about Terry Schiavo. I don’t quite agree with all of the opinions expressed here, but the author’s point about the assumptions of personhood are right on. Also relevant in light of the discussion about afterlife over the last couple of days.

RE underwear: once the other person sees your unmentionables, it’s too late, man.

Keep the drunk on his feet.

The record for someone here at work is 68 meters.

Use your mouse, moving it right or left to keep him upright.

Right now two wonderfully important people are being fed via G-tube about twenty feet away from me. One would be called “vegetative” by most, the other has gross spasticity that makes traditional forms of eating problematic.

My work is to provide care for them. It’s also my work to facilitate and advocate for their medical, behavioral and social needs, and in doing so I work with their loved ones to assure that these needs and rights are met.

There is no greater honor I’ve received in life than to be involved in the care of “the least of these”.

BHT Fellows: If you post on the Shiavo discussion, please CLOSE the comments option. Thank You.

OK, here it is. I don’t give a rat’s buttocks about marriage laws and how they affect this case. Is Terri still alive? Yes? Then what do you do when someone is still alive but can’t care for themselves? You take care of their basic needs. One of which is to FEED THEM. Call it a “treatment” if you want to. That’s beside the point. She can’t eat a taco or a creme brulee, so let her get nourishment the only way she can, which is through a tube. That’s a basic human need. You don’t starve a baby, you don’t starve Terri Schiavo. To me, this is a whole different thing than just keeping a person alive by artificial, extraordinary means.

I’m sure none of you would want to die the slow death of being withheld food and water. And that’s my two cents.

The answer for staying a virgin before marriage.

GOP memo says (Schiavo) issue offers political rewards

Tom Delay basically says God sent Terri Schiavo to vindicate him and his fellow conservatives. Hat tip to The Agitator.

In other news, I received my first “you should be praying instead of X” comment. It’s a banner day.

Joe Carter hits the ball dead center field. 418. Into the stands: It’s the marriage laws, stupid.

David Wayne on the true Gospel aspect of this story. Bravo, David.

Bill, Michael meant to say that your thread

you.

Those of you telling me what a rotten husband this guy is need to know that I am living in the capital of domestic violence, neglect, beatings, adultery, bigamy, shacking up and abandonment. If you pastor down here, you see husbands doing things that boggle the mind. And best as I can tell, no matter how rotten they are, no matter how many girlfriends they have, they are still legally the husband and father until the courts say otherwise. Yeah….it sucks. But what are you going to do? Get the community together and vote on who we are going to recognize as husbands and fathers based on their behavior?

I don’t really know much about this case, but why hasn’t a court terminated the rights of the husband?

One other thing. If you have never walked through a situation of having to decide- in lieu of a living will- the issue of feeding tubes and/or life support, you might want to remember that real life isn’t very neat and tidy. I’ve been there many times with families who had to make a decision to stop measures that would keep a person alive or to start measures- like feeding tubes- that couldn’t be stopped easily. Somehow, families find ways to get through this, but often it is with tremendous guilt, anger and blame. People have a way of wanting to show devotion in extreme situations that is frequently more emotional than rational. Most of these families make those decisions without anyone- other than doctors- knowing what was involved. God help the family that must go through this with the media and the public lined up and exposing every nuance of treatment, agendas and family history. I feel for them. In a media-hyped environment, with every factor of every decision out in the open for scrutinty, very few cases would escape controversy and blame.

One of the main arguments Shiavo’s parents/lawyers are making in court for keeping her alive is that her right to practice her religion is being denied.

Where in Catholic theology does it say that she will go to hell if her feeding tube is removed? The only connection that I can make is that since her husband is saying that she would have wanted it removed, it equates to suicide.

Anyone seen the new Love or Money ads (motivations for playing sports)?

I think they’re great.

Lesson #1 to take from this: WRITE A LIVING WILL. Spell everything out in very precise terms. Spare your family from having the burden of figuring out what you would have wanted.

I affirm the horror of the situation. The husband is rat, etc. I don’t think I could let my wife starve to death in front of me. In my earlier post I wanted to posit the question of how our view of the afterlife informs these decisions. If you believe in a conscious intermediate state, at some point is it better to let a Christian go and be with the Lord? Again, I don’t think I could do it, but this situation is making me ponder it, and the only conclusion I can come to is that it would be an agonizing decision that I hope I never face.

The Christian political activists can’t have it both ways. They readily invite government to intervene in “family” matters, then are completely shocked when things don’t go their way. When you invite government into your business, you invite the WHOLE government. All three branches, including the “activist” judges, not just George W.

What the heck? Why do we do them? (assuming you are part of a church that does)

The Shiavo discussion is only going to continue on here if it can avoid becoming another recitation of the same rhetoric of horror. No one on this board is saying this is a good thing. I’m horrified. Kent is horrified. We’re horrified, OK.

I want to encourage a debate of certain aspects of the case, but I am not interested in posts that sound like there are pro-euthansists on here. I won’t hestiate to turn off the threads if we head in the direction of moonbat drooling and name calling. Let’s all agree we are horrified. OK? Now that we’ve taken care of that, what about some of the other aspects of this case:

I’ll repeat what I said earlier: Treatment is withheld every day in America, from all kinds of people in all kinds of situations. This case has “good guys” and “bad guys,” a debate about medical treatment, judges to blame…..everything the media loves. Advocacy groups are all over this for a variety of reasons, not the least their own interests. Again: This happens every day in America, in cases of all kinds, with all kinds of people, and in much less photogenic, blog-friendly terms.

I mean, if we can find 50 neurologists who are horrified at what has not been done for this woman by her doctor and husband, does that mean she was denied due “process?” It sounds like we disagree with their decisions regarding treatment. The barbaric worldview of the attorneys, etc for Michael horrify me. But is it a denial of due “process” to have doctors and lawyers with worldviews that horrify the rest of us? It’s free speech and freedom of religion interacting with medical treatment, and that really gets complicated. We would say “No” to infanticide. Will we say “No” to this as well? If we do, what will it mean to hundreds of thousands of future cases?

Someone is going to have to help me out here on the where the “traditional values” and “pro-marriage” people are on this one. The rat is her husband. Legally. Call him whatever you want. You’re right on every count. Critique the conclusions and treatment. Be outraged. They are married. The Judge believes him that his wife said she didn’t want to be treated in this situation. The other side is quite sure he’s lying and has other motives. Probably right. He’s her husband. They’re married.

I totally agree- emotionally- that the woman’s parents should be allowed to care for her. But she married this guy. He’s her family now. He may disgust them, you and God. He’s her husband. Like I said, aside from all the posts about what he’s done wrong- and I’ve already read a hundred + articles and posts on this- what supercedes his status as her husband?

Conservatives really confuse the heck out of me when they act like this.

On Ashley Smith: Let me assure English Nathan that Ashley Smith is not who I have in mind when I bemoan the “Praise the Lord!” attitude of evangelicals. She did an admirable and brave thing, and I wish her the best. I only wish she’d read to him out of a better book :-)

Maybe in England you don’t see this, but we will now see Christian publishers and other media make millions off this woman. Christians will be all over this with books and celebrity status for Ashley. She will become a Christian hero, no matter what other problems she has that she needs to address (like not raising her own daughter.) To the culture here in America, it appears that if Grandma is run over by a truck, but the driver becomes a Christian, then evangelicals says it was a good thing. It’s their weirdo, sick reading of Romans 8:28: “All things that can be turned into book sales are good…..no matter how much bad was involved in getting there.”

I’m totally serious. It’s a bit easier to see if the bad guy gets saved. You could do any number of terrible things, but if you wind up with a testimony we don’t just say “The Lord have mercy on you.” We make you into a celebrity and all the horrendous events into God’s plan to make you a celebrity. Sick.

I notice that information about the ten people who were killed on a nearby Native American Reservation is absent from my My Way Homepage (this is not an indictment of My Way).

Now, on to what’s been deemed more important news…

We’ve moved to attacking the quality of Mrs. Schiavo’s medical care…we were somehow ok with the care she received until it hit the press?

Death sucks and is often ugly, this is why Michael writes the way he does about the subject of death. I’m assuming he’s seen it someplace besides television. The fact that Mrs. Schiavo’s death may potentially be difficult and distasteful is not particularly germain to the case, people have difficult and distasteful deaths every day…you may.

Reporters and activists judging the actions of doctors and family members does not serve justice and humanity’s purposes. This stuff is hard, I’ve seen the best of families stagger under such a load. There is something about the media and the internet that distances us from the compassion we’d normally feel if we were within arm’s length.

I imagine that the increased scrutiny of this case has only served to polarize Mrs. Schiavo’s loved ones. Polarizing decisions into good and evil makes us feel better, it creates a false sense of “clear”.

Here’s what the 14th amendment says.

Two key items:

“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

“The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

In the Schiavo case, I think the question is whether she got due process. If Congress thinks not, then it has the constitutional authority to intervene legislatively.

Here is a story about the neurologist Michael Schiavo chose to examine his wife. He’s one of the leading euthanasia proponents. He advocates starving Alzheimer’s patients, and believes that spoon feeding is a medical treatment that can be withheld.

Sounding Out the Idols of Church Growth is a chapter from Os Guinness and John Seel’s book, No God But God. One of the best books I ever read. Probably out of print.

Here is a review of Guinness’s new book on Evil.

Lee Siegel of the New Republic finally said what I wanted to say from day one, but didn’t want to say. Read the summary at World Mag Blog. Short version: Only evangelicals could retell the story of the murder of three people as a “Praise the Lord! Brian has found Jesus!” story.

Oh, I know. Shut up.

This is the “Let’s just praise God for anything terrible that results in a decision” gang within evangelical media, publishing and preaching. They love this stuff, and their view of reality is so skewered that they can’t stop jumping up and down over a murderer liking Purpose Driven Life to sound normally grieved about the deaths of innocents.

There are times that I think certain kinds of evangelism-oriented thinking are way too similar to cults and mental illness to even want to be remotely associated with them.

There. I said it and I’m glad I did.

Bill Hobbs has some interesting comments on Federalization of the Shiavo case.

I just spent one of those hours that renews my faith in the purpose of this place (OBI) and rebreaks my heart over the many boys in our world who have no father to love them like God meant for boys to be loved. Pray for Justin, who helped me tonight to remember what I am here for, and why God knows what he’s doing in leaving me here.

What is driving today’s church innovations?

Stones Cry Out covers the Shiavo story, too.

I think these two subjects fit nicely together in leu of the recent discussion concerning the afterlife. For those of you who believe in some sort of unconscious state before the resurrection (or a re-creation), how does your view of human nature fit this case? Is she already dead or not? If there isn’t a hint of a brain wave and you hold an essentially monist position, what is the justification for keeping the her alive (when her mind is clearly gone)?

By the way, there is a law in Texas on this, and she would have died 7 years ago. I don’t understand why we even have states anymore, we are quickly turning into the Republic of America. No one can convince me that they didn’t get their due process in the state courts and that the feds needed to step in.

...into the reality of a non media-saturated existance. I don’t know the “sides” in the Schiavo case, but I do know that this is an issue of family that should not be at the center of an entire nation’s opinion-casting.

This family needs the support of wise legal counselors to help them navigate their rights and responsibilities related to the care needs of their loved one. They do not need a circus of opinion and the polarization of a country. This is not a simple decision and reasonable people can hold an opinion on either side of the fence.

Sort of a retro church growth movement…

Greg’s comment that the War of Northern Aggression was fought over slavery is not entirely true. The slavery issue was more a pretense than anything else. And allow me to make an unsupported assertion: Lincoln is overrated.

Since I am the resident anarchist here, let me defend a certain view of the relationship between the Church and the state. I think it is wrong for the Church to employ the state’s monopoly on coercion for any purpose, however noble. The power the state wields inevitably ends up corrupting the Church, since the state’s power is essentially of this world (though given to it by God). The Church has an entirely different kind of power which involves no coercion of all but the free action of the Holy Spirit.

I am morally opposed to euthanasia in most forms, especially involuntary euthanasia, which is what I suppose the case to be with Terri Schiavo. I would support Christians who engage in civil disobedience to save her life. Indeed, I would encourage Christians to do so.

On the other hand I cannot accept Greg’s claim that sometimes the situation merits the Church calling for government intervention in any case. This sounds enough like “ends-justify-the-means” ethical thinking.

I think we need to distinguish between the mode of state power and the application that mode undertakes. By federalizing the Schiavo issue, we expand the mode of the state’s power in order to apply it to a particular situation. The problem is that this thereby permanently expands the mode of the state’s power such that whenever there is a hue and cry concerning another particular situation, perhaps where the Church might object to the application of state power, there would have already been a precedent set.

And we will have shot ourselves in the foot.

“To simply say that the ‘culture of life,’ or whatever you call it means that we don’t have to pay attention to the principles of federalism or separation of powers is certainly not a conservative viewpoint.” Rep. Bob Barr.

Not all conservatives are on the same page about federalizing this situation. I am as horrified as the next person, but I am more than disappointed that we now have a situation where if media decides to pay enough attention, Congress will pass a law. This situation occurs all the time. Not in these precise terms, but treatment is witheld all the time, and the media never gets involved. Now Peggy Noonan said that if conservatives don’t do something, the voters will hold them accountable. Does anyone realize what is happening when the attention of a particular case that is NOT unique causes the government to pass laws under the eye of a camera and for press conference copy?

This situation is a sword that will cut both ways. The selective compassion of conservatives is about to take them against 60-75% of the American public. We will see how this is used politically in the future.

These are even worse

I just received a recorded phone call from my pastor inviting me to attend Easter Sunday.

Someone asked me about my evaluation of Marcus Borg’s work on the Historical Jesus.

I would suggest that a good look at articles on the NTW Page dealing with the Quest for the Historical Jesus would probably turn up a statement to the effect that the value of scholars like Borg isn’t so much in the conclusions they try to sell to the Christian community, but the conclusions they bring to the historical work itself. Borg doesn’t get to the Jesus of the Westminster Confession. He- and all the other Questers- do succeed in getting Jesus out of the trash bin of history and in showing us that there is quite a lot we can know and much more about which we can reasonably speculate than we were led to believe fifty years ago in the heyday of scholarly skeptism. NTW talks about the Third Quest as “the prodigal son” of historical evidence for Christianity “come home.”

Borg is a great example. His final “Christian” version of Jesus is unacceptable, but he builds a remarkable case for Jesus within first century Judaism. (See his books on Holiness, and Jesus.) Borg and Wright wrote a book together, and Wright is very positive about much of Borg’s historical research. He even has good things to say about the Jesus Seminar in that regard….before he demolishes it.

In short, all we’ve learned about first century, second temple Judaism helps us understand the plausibility of much that the Gospels say about Jesus. This historical study doesn’t gurantee an orthodox reading of the New Testament, but it does a lot to move us away from biased, individualized and sectarian readings.

I appreciate those like Luke Timothy Johnson who react so strongly to the Jesus Seminar that they renounce the “historical Jesus” completely, but I think they go too far. There is help for our faith in the Quest, and it isn’t doomed to always be the downhill road to the demise of the faith.

Hello,
I need some help from you Internet savvy peeps. In the process of training Sunday school teachers I have been trying to connect them with good resources to use as they prepare their lessons. I would love to have a library with some good resources but we are not quite there yet. My question is what are the best Internet resources. If you can give me some ones you frequently use it would help out a lot.

Steve at Reformissionary is doing excellent blogging these days. Here’s a Brian Mclaren quote he’s posted.

What did our churches become in modernity but places of Bible exposition (aka objective textual analysis)? What was the ticket to spiritual leadership if not Bible scholarship (that is, credentials certifying our competence at applying modern analytical tools to Bible study)? If our churches leaned to the liberal side, we tended to reduce the Bible to nothing but myths, and if they leaned to the conservative, we tended to reduce it to nothing but propositions, principles, abstractions, doctrines. Can you see how for maybe four hundred years this could remain interesting and engaging, but after five hundred, our culture would be ready for a new approach…something less reductionistic, something more holistic and maybe even mysterious?

I’m having my semi-annual disillusionment with life, so Josh’s “afterlife” topic works real well for me. I have to admit that the topic of the afterlife, particularly eternal existence in “heaven” or anywhere else, doesn’t set well with me. Not because it can’t be true, but because the notion of it outrages me. Who wants to do anything forever? Anything. Now, I can factually say that the exploration and praise of an infinite, eternal being is desirable, but my mind and emotions reel at the concept. Nothing in me can get around the concept. My atheist friends talk about the peace that comes from contemplating non-existence and becoming part of nature and matter, and that horrifies my sense of life. Then I contemplate singing worship choruses forever, or doing anything forever in any environment, and that doesn’t work either.

Nothing reeks of the Freudian critique of religion (we need a psychological crutch) like talk of heaven and eternal life. All that being said, I do think the case for a temporal conscious state is stronger than NTW seems to say. (He does affirm a conscious interim state if you dig around in enough interviews at the NTW Page.) But the emphasis on resurrection and this world becoming the Kingdom of God is much stronger.

BTW- if people would stop assuming that every reference they THINK is about heaven/hell/eternity IS about heaven, etc., they might be surprised. Example, today we read where James and John ask to sit on the right and left of Jesus “in his glory.” I asked what this meant, and the first bright student says “heaven.” See how easy it is to play? Of course, it doesn’t mean “heaven” at all, in the sense most preachers/Christians use that term.

I’m wanting to be Shinto already. More later.

Check out the “unapologetically liberal alternative to the Alpha course.” Their ad was featured prominently in the recent issue of “Circuit Rider” (a magazine for United Methodist clergy). Interesting.

Yes, that’s redundant, isn’t it? I’ve just returned from our Spring Break and a good visit with my brother and his family in DC. And now I’m hacked off. Red Lake and Schiavo. Theology. Anti-catholicism. Intellectual anti-intellectualism. Death. Grrr.

I like much of what Josh S calls his “heresy” on the afterlife. I remember at age 9 at my father’s viewing and funeral the profound sense that he was watching and listening to me. This was very comforting to me as I had watched him suffer with bone cancer in previous weeks and months, gradually losing awareness of my presence. I believed that after he died he regained that awareness. I think this was a self-centered view of things (not in the sense of ‘selfish’). It was a way that my child’s psyche could survive.

I have a problem with the stories we tell ourselves at the death of loved ones. Someone said that the term ‘homecoming’ made their skin crawl. Me too. Josh S calls such talk eisegesis. He’s right. They’re all ways we avoid real grief and sorrow. If we can immediately switch off the pain of losing a parent, a child, a sister, or a friend, calmly dispassionate in the knowledge of our future hope, is it any wonder that we can read about Red Lake and our only thought being, “Here we go again.” I confess it was mine. Dulled to suffering. Numbed to pain and grief. I know that I’m angry but I don’t let myself show it. Would that the stones would cry out.

I’m amazed that deaths that occur within my sphere of my life don’t shake my faith. That’s what shakes my faith—that I’m so unshakable. When death occurs close to us we stand at the edge of the infinite, the bottomless chasm that we understand less than anything else. Right in the flow of mundane ordinary life comes the infinite, the absolute, and how do I deal with it? Ho hum. Happy face. Self-congratulation.

Well now I’m getting mad. Mad at myself and my dishonesty. Mad at theology. I want to cry with those who lose loved ones. I want to beat my breast until I bruise. I want to yell “No!” How can the peace of Christ be comforting to me if I’m not in distress?

Speaking of Terri Shiavo. Scrappleface really hits home (thru satire) to speak volumes about the rights of the disabled versus the rights of a convicted murderer.

And from Common sense runs wild -

If Terri were a murderer, she would be allowed due process before the state takes away her life. She would be allowed an attorney of her own, independent counsel from any concerned party. Her case would be reviewed at the federal level. She would be given a chance. Yes, if Terri w ere a cold blooded killer, she would have more rights than she does now because she is brain damaged.

If that doesn’t sound right. If that doesn’t seem to be what your perception of justice is, then maybe you can understand what this bill still being considering in Congress is all about. It is about giving those who can not speak for themselves just as many rights as we already give our most heinous criminals.

If Mary and the other Saints aren’t up in heaven watching, who should we be praying to? (uber-JN)

I’m kinda with Josh S. (and maybe NTW) re: the afterlife. Call me a Jew but I think there’ll be one judgement day for all, and until then we will all sleep. I don’t buy that the saints that have died before me are all hanging around up there in “heaven” waiting for me to show up. Paul, Polycarp, Martin Luther, Martin Luther King and silly ol’ Kent will all share the first day in the New Jerusalem (actually I’m still planning on living out of town).

This is very close to home, it will be (sadly) interesting to overhear the local response as it occured on “the Rez”.

A few days back, Bill Mac posted a question on prophecy that brought a lot of great comments. As a denizen of the charismatic wing of the Tavern, I wanted to give my thoughts on prophecy.

I was once extremely charismatic and was a strong believer in “the end-time prophetic movement.” My views have changed over time to the point that I am attending a PCA school, but I am not a cessationist. I have yet to see a convincing Biblical case for cessationism. Perhaps a case can be made from experience and observation, but I don’t see one within the pages of scripture. I agree with my cessationist brothers and sisters that at least most of what we see done in the name of prophecy is unscriptural, but I must admit at least the possibility of a continuation of supernatural giftings. I don’t believe that 1 Cor. 3:8-13 refers to the closing of the canon or any other event in this age, but is a picture of the world to come.

I don’t hold to a second “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” or any other “second blessing,” though I once did. If a person does prophesy, it’s due to the will of the Spirit (1 Cor 12:4-11) More »« Less

Are you people going to let Josh confess to innumerable heresies, and just let him off the hook?

BTW Josh, NTW gets a lot of grief over similar- not identical- views of the afterlife. See the NTW page.

One of the ball players walks down from campus, past the bus compound and the volleyball court, to the field. It was a beautiful day for a practice game.

The team is issued uniforms before our first practice game against nearby rival Jackson County tonight.

Managers and coaches load equipment on our bus. We’ll do about 20 road trips on this bus, most of them 2-3 hours each way. I still haven’t learned how to sleep on this vehicle.

A Jackson County player at the plate. We lost 14-9, but that was a great effort for us and we were very pleased with the performance of the team.

After the varsity game, we gather for a team meeting, and it’s so cold everyone huddles up. It is great to be a part of fhe comraderie of the team.

A few staff kids drove over to cheer the team on, and then offered a blanket to some varsity players during the freezing cold JV game. Ahhh…to be young and cold :-)

Josh S- You’re looking in the wrong place for chicks!

The other two members of the trinity

only 5 days left—supplies limited!

Speeders in the hands of an angry God

Ever feel like you wish you could relive your childhood?

If I keep this up, I’m going to be the queen of totally random, pointless posts. Perhaps I should quit while I’m ahead.

Don’t hurt me Michael…hides

Michael: Your 90% gender statement (#8 on your list) strikes me as representative of many things. During my “word of faith” days, I often observed that the ratio of women to men was really, really high. Given my blinders at the time, I assumed it was true for the church as a whole, but now I can see that while there do seem to be more women than men in the church, things were much more heavily weighted that way in WOF circles.

Of course, here we’ve got only a few women. I’m afraid to extrapolate for fear of offend…. wait a minute. I’m Phillip!

Clearly, women want to feel, while men want to think. Not to say that either doesn’t do both, but come on, you all know what I mean. {:)}

John Hendryx says my statement that the Reformed have little interest in historical Jesus’ studies is “perposterous.” I stand by that statement and believe it can be defended.

Alan Culpepper is one of the leading scholars on the study of the Gospels in America. He teaches at Macafee, but he was at Southern when I was there. Here is the excellent ibliography for his “Historical Jesus” class.

Find the typical conservative PCA/OPC Calvinist in that list. The Reformed don’t “do” the historical Jesus. They are clearly uncomfortable with the unwashed liberal scholars that reside in the Third Quest, and are further uncomfortable with many of their presups and conclusions.

Calvinists would burn Marcus Borg’s books at the stake. As historical Jesus’ studies go, they are top notch.

I’m not a pastor, but I have a question for pastors, or those familiar with the pastorate. How much of your time is spent in simply keeping people happy enough not to leave? From my cynical viewpoint, it seems like alot of a pastor or ministers time (or sometimes the core group that exists in any church) is trying to stem the tide of people leaving. Oh no, Mr. X hasn’t been here in two weeks! Better visit. I heard Mrs. S is miffed at ____ for ____. Better visit.

Are any local churches showing “The Passion of the Christ” this Easter?

The Robbie Seay Band is knockin’ me out. “Faith of Our Fathers.” Great stuff. Check this out, too.

I haven’t counted lately, but I am sure I have over 100 Osteen related letters. The new essay is generating more pro-Osteen letters. It’s bringing out the social psychologist in me. (Yes, in addition to being a wordsmith, prophet, preacher and baseball coach, I am also a well-known psychologist of religious fanaticism.)

1. Two thirds of the letters are pro-O-Boy.

2. None- NONE- of those letters mount any Biblical defense of his ministry beyond, “Don’t judge, etc.”

3. Almost all readily agree he doesn’t preach the cross or Jesus. Here’s a sample:

First I have to say I was appalled and angry. We both along with our 4 children are avid watchers of his sermons, we all will sit down and watch and discuss what the topic is about. After reading your commentary I stopped to think about what you have to say and you are correct in the fact that Joel does not mention Jesus or the Cross with every sermon, but he does always state at the end of his message to get involved in a good bible based church and to read the bible. He is giving people a look into the bible and a look into GOD. He is bringing people whom never would have listened before to the bible,where is this wrong? He is reaching a group that has been unattainable to this point. Both my husband and I had to come back to the Lord after leaving him for many years,we were put off by many churches that were a little to hard core for us. We are now both very seated in a Pentecostal church, we are also learning/training to become ministers. We believe that you make choices for yourself and if you come to the Lord, that’s all that matters. We are not to rely on any man, you have to put your faith in GOD. If Joel can bring people in and encourage them to read the bible, who are we to judge this man? Its not about religion its about knowing GOD and reading his word. Maybe its his job to plant the seed, to get people motivated again, to come to the Lord by reading the bible and making their own decision, who are we to criticize? We all have specific jobs here, and we truly believe that the only one to question that is GOD. We don’t rely only on this man to bring us to CHRIST, we listen to other preachers we love to listen to John Hagee whom is very hard core, we take what he preaches and we learn from it, just like we do from Joel’s. We never criticize, for its not our job to judge. We all answer to GOD in the end. We pray that you can do that as well, with a clear conscience.

5. There are a number of Pentecostal/Word-Faith types who seem to feel Osteen is a “healing” experience for them as compared to other preachers. There’s a sense in which Osteen is a kind of therapy for Pentecostals.

6. If you can’t see the coming merger of this with the New Age Hallmark Card theology “Coversations with God” fuzziness, you are asleep.

7. Contrast this version of American religion with Typical Roman Catholicism, for instance. This makes the RCC so Christ-centered that they are two different religions. This is the canonizing of a way of “feeling” about God, and the particulars of the Bible are EXTREMELY irrelvent. With all due respect to the writer above, if she thinks Osteen is promoting Bible reading, she’s daft.

8. 45 of 50 defenders will be female.

9.Osteen is getting high mileage out of providing a contrast to the image of a “preacher.” In his way, he’s like Mark Driscoll, except that Driscoll is hilarious. I’d go to his church just to hear what he would say next.

10. No one mentions the blinking or the mullett.

Anyone want to get a head start on their BHT gift for next year?

Quite the day.

Taught John 5 at 8 a.m. Two people were sleeping. Soundly.
Preached to the students at 9 a.m.
Preached at church at 11 a.m.
Ate lunch. Slept.
Dreaded and worried about things for a while.
Preached to the students at 7 p.m. Evening services make about as much sense as five legs on a dog. It was an OK service. Everyone knows there has been a “terminated relationship” between the local church and the school, but we can’t say anything about it yet. So it’s kindof awkward.
Ate red beans and rice. With ham. And lots of hot seasoning. And a bowl of Raisin Bran.
Goofed off. Still goofing off.
Have a practice game tomorrow. We are hardly ready to play, but I guess we are going to anyway. Hope the other team is less prepared than we are. I don’t think we’ve practiced baserunning once. I’ll mention we circle to the left when we run the bases. That should help.
Clay has been on two choir gigs today, one in Northern Ky and one in Lexington where he got to see Noel. He just returned late.
I bought a camera. And stuff.
I have my men’s Bible study at 6 a.m., class all morning, then the first Holy Week Chapel. Denise coordinates everything. I preach for about 10-15 minutes each day.
Baseball sounds good. One of our staff wants to take me to the Cubs/Reds series. I might let him take me :-)
Clay and I are planning our baseball tour this year. I want two Reds games this time.
I am considering becoming a prophet.

Dear Mr. Doctor,

I want to make it clear that I am a fan of Michael Spencer. I have read your correspondence concerning the estimable Mr. Spencer. In case you need reminding, this is AMERICA. He is free to say whatever he wants on his own blog. In case you went to public school, look up the FIRST AMENDMENT of the CONSTITUTION of the United States. If you are offended by his or anyone elses message, that’s too bad. THERE IS NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED! If Mr. Spencer bugs you that much, TURN THE FREAKING COMPUTER OFF!

Your rantings have proven several things: 1) You are jealous. 2) You and people like you are blind to the incredible irony and hypocrisy of being critical of someone, (Spencer) for being critical of someone else (Osteen) . 3) You need to mind your own business and worry about your own sins. 4) You have demonstrated a high degree of arrogance by assuming you know the mind of Michael.

Stop worrying about Mr. Spencer. God will take care of him as He does with everyone else.

He who shall remain nameless. (unless you look at the authorship of the post)

Would anyone like to write the post that asks the good doctor if he would have any feelings about the most popular doctor in America selling 30 million copies of a book that says cancer can be cured by eating a Snickers bar?

Dear Mr. Spencer:

First of all I want to make it clear that I am not a Joel Osteen fan. I have read your commentaries concerning the young Mr.Osteen. In case you need reminding, this is AMERICA. He is free to say whatever he wants from his pulpit. In case you went to public school, look up the FIRST AMENDMENT of the CONSTITUTION of the United States. If you are offended by his or anyone elses message, that’s too damned bad. THERE IS NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED! If Mr. Osteen bugs you that much, TURN THE FREAKING TV OFF!

Your rantings have proven several things: 1) You are jealous. 2) You and people like you are LATTER DAY PHARISEES. 3) You need to mind your own damned business and worry about your own sins. 4) You have demonstrated a high degree of arrogance by assuming you know the mind of God.

Stop worrying about Joel Osteen. God will take care of him as He does with everyone else.

(Name Removed), M.D.

You know why I’m not going to write a book? Because when I write an essay on the Gospels, a person who actually LIKES the essay says…”Michael’s essay leaves the impression that Paul is to Jesus what Joel Osteen is to the church today.”

!!!!!!!!!!!

I’ll alter the essay in any way suggested if this is what I seem to be saying. Send your feedback to: Internet Monk Publications, 2134 Gene Scott Drive, St. Sadies, Maryland, 23712

Just a question to the fellows that have more charismatic experience than I do.
Some friends of mine needed a baby sitter the other day, because they were going to get “prophesied over.” I don’t think this is the first time. What is this all about? I think the church brings in an itinerant prophet for this sort of thing. What goes on? What are the prophecies like?

Yes, I could just ask them, but they are my friends and I doubt that I could keep the scorn and incredulity off my face.

Robert Lax was a friend of Merton, and I had never read any of his poetry. Pretty cool.

Anyone out there listen to a band called “Telecast?” Recommended by a friend who doesn’t listen to CCM. I’m pretty impressed.

I’m getting some very nice reviews on the new IM piece. I may do a bit of a rewrite to make clear that it’s not exclusively an Osteen problem. BTW- I now know 2 people who do killer Osteen imitations.

I have just completed two brand new sermons with overheads, one sermon adopted from one of these two for church, and five Holy Week outlines on “Jesus Left Alone: Five Circles of Rejection in the Passion of Jesus.” 1. Betrayed by Judas 2) Deserted by disciples 3) Denied by Peter 4) Condemned by Pilate 5) Abandoned by God. I could include family, hometown and his own people if I had more messages. The idea is that each circle is a level of being abandoned. I may use candles as an illustration. Sort of a reverse Advent candle.

Holy Week at OBI is always fun for me. We expand chapel for creative ministries, drama, special music, shorter message, and I get to preach all week.

It lacks the devotional appeal of the BVM on a grilled-cheese sandwich but I wonder how much Satan on a turtle shell will fetch on ebay?

If you want to know how to talk to unbelievers, don’t listen to Rick Warren. Listen to Ravi Zacharias. I’ve been listening to Ravi’s three part presentation at the University of Utah, Weber State and the Mormon Tabernacle. The Tabernacle talk is classic Ravi. A powerfully deep, emotionally and intellectually eloquent, Biblically powerful presentation of the greatness and uniqueness of Jesus. One of the finest presentations I’ve ever heard Ravi give, and that is saying a lot. Worth acquiring. Send one to a seeker sensitive pastor near you.

The question is, “Will we allow the Biblical writers- Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, etc.- to use common literary elements to allude to the Hebrew Bible and the narrative of Israel and Israel’s God that made up their basic view of reality?”

Or will we insist that the level of authorship not include anything other than a bare reporting of events and facts?

For example: Kenneth Bailey has written a wonderful study on the conversation going on between the story of Jacob and the story of the Prodigal Son. In writing the story of the Prodigal Son, Luke doesn’t offer interpretation that directly points to these connections, and literary study that makes those connections is not on the level of scripture interpreting scripture. But I believe the connections are there, and that they provide a key element in understanding how the story of the Prodigal Son isn’t simply a story of individual redemption, but a story of Israel’s restoration from exile, and the true significance of Jesus’ actions of welcoming sinners. The story is, quite possibly, a replaying of the story of Jacob, and Israel, and every other prodigal in our various stories.

I will admit to being unimpressed with the idea that Paul and other NT writers can interact with the text in this way, but we cannot. As I said earlier, such connections are “inspired” or “inerrant,” but they are valuable and worthwhile. Every good teacher finds ways to connect the text and its story with the stories of the lives of his/her hearers. When Luke or Paul quotes various Davidic Psalms as the words of Jesus, are we- New Covenant believers- not invited to read all of scripture in a Christ-incarnated way?

Hopefully, none of us would equate our reading of scripture with scripture itself. But, at the same time, hopefully none of us believe that we cannot read scripture like any other literary work, including on the level of connected metaphors and repeated themes.

My wife thought that N.T.’s statement excerpted below was a “stretch”, I thought “hmmm…”. Any thoughts from the Tavern?

“The whole New Testament is written from the point of view that new creation has already begun—that it began when Jesus of Nazareth came out of the tomb on Easter morning and that through His victory over sin and death there are indeed real possibilities which were not there before,” Wright said.

This new creation, he said, is most apparent in John’s Gospel.

He noted, for example:
—Mary Magdalene, the first human to encounter the risen Jesus, mistook Him to be a gardener, which echoes the Genesis 1 and 2 account of God in the Garden of Eden.
—Later in John 20, Jesus breathes on the disciples, thus reenacting the breath of life in Genesis 2.
—Jesus’ reinstating Peter and commissioning him to tend His sheep mirrors God’s commission to Adam in Genesis 2 to tend the animals.

“The whole chapter of John 21,” Wright continued, “has a sense of the disciples’ calling to live in a strange, unmapped, new land, in a world never previously imagined because it was never previously possible, in a world in which one can follow Jesus.”

You gotta listen to this Mark Driscoll interview. (Hat tip to Steve McCoy at Reformissionary) This is full of gems. My fave so far: You have to be seeker insensitive. Offend someone and bring two friends.

Update: He just said Osteen has a mullett. I am cracking up.

For the next few months, BHT misbehavers won’t be sent to Landover Baptist, as has been our tradition. Instead, they will have to read 100 pages from the New Macarthur Commentary on the Bible. Macarthur’s ability to be a Dispensational New Puritan Calvinist should make