EXPELLED: THE MOVIE
“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities -- his eternal power and divine nature -- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).
Ben Stein is a political commentator, actor, and speech writer for former presidents. He was approached by a couple of producers to become active in this movie. It is about the conflict in the scientific community between Darwinian evolution and Intelligent Design. People who have spoken about Intelligent Design have been “expelled” from various universities such as Iowa State, George Mason and Baylor, from writing about in newspapers, and from the Smithsonian Institute in Washington D.C.
The movie opens with the building of the Berlin Wall in Germany at the beginning of the Cold War. The comparison is that the Communists in East Germany wanted to keep out Western ideas especially of that of freedom. Our nation was founded on the idea of freedom, freedom of speech and as Mr. Stein says, of inquiry. He and his team interview various experts, both atheists and Intelligent Design.
Among the most famous atheist is Richard Dawkins. He is the most arrogant of the group though others see God as myth, and see those who do not accept their views as ignorant. Dawkins admits at the end of the movie that he might believe in some sense of intelligent design, from another source in the universe. One scientist thinks that one legitimate view of the beginning of things was some molecules riding on ice crystals of some kind.
Mr. Stein interviews a number of Intelligent Design advocates some who have been expelled. We find that there are a number who come from various beliefs; they are not all Christian. They state that their view as been misrepresented in both the media and other areas. Included in the interviews are a number of Christian and Jewish scientists who believe in God.
One can see that in this movie both sides are presented as Mr. Stein travels throughout the United States and France, Germany and Britain exploring the conflict. What we learn from the movie is that a wall has been built by the powers that be in the elite scientific community that is attempting to stop all discussion. One lesson learned is that the worldview of the scientist effects his view of science. It appears that because Darwinian evolution is the accepted view, no questioning is allowed. Interestingly enough, it was Darwin who “rocked the boat” as it were when he presented his views back in the 1800s.
Throughout the movie Mr. Stein asks why not have this discussion? One explained it this way. Imagine a wall going through your brain or yard. Only one side of your brain has an acceptable view and the other an unacceptable view. Everything on the acceptable side can be spoken while the other side cannot even be mentioned. Go back to the Berlin Wall.
There is interesting dialogue throughout the movie, explanations on the basic level, and astonishing comments. Ideas have consequences. The last part of the movie explores this and has brought about controversy. One comment that caught my attention was something to the effect that these things always have the same beginning. The eugenics movement in the early part of the 20th Century, based on Darwinian evolution, sought to eliminate those who were inferior, or who were an expense on families or nations. Some fifty thousand Americans were sterilized because of this view. Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger, held this view. Today it continues with abortion (an unwanted baby who the mother cannot care for), euthanasia (the elimination of the sick and aged), and now infancide (the killing of born babies if not pleasing to parents). Sex selection in some areas of the world has lead to the aborting of baby girls, for in these cultures, baby boys are more valuable. This will lead to unintended consequences down the road.
Finally, Mr. Stein, a Jew, goes to Germany, where the Darwinian philosophy was part of the murder of millions of people, including six million Jews, in the Nazi concentration camps. The two people he interviews state that Darwinism was an very influential on Hitler and various Nazi scientists. For Stein, this was an emotional and moving moment. He asked the author of a book about Hitler and Darwinism what he thought about this. The author stated that Hitler carried his views to the extreme, that he thought Hitler thought that he was moving evolution along. The author also stated that there was no doubt that Hitler was evil.
Mr. Stein concludes by asking what can we do? This movie is a beginning and I would suggest that as many go see it as possible. Keep in mind, it is a documentary. I know that some good books have been written about Intelligent Design, some by believers and some not. Philip Johnson, a lawyer, has lead the charge in this area from a Christian perspective and his books are worth reading. I’m not much into detail science but if an elite group can force experts in various scientific fields to keep quiet, what can happening in other fields? This is all part of what has been called the cultural war.
For more information on this movie you can go to http://www.expelledthemovie.com/
One additional note. Some of the excuses used by those who expelled people from their teaching positions are excuses I have heard as a preacher. I think that we are in danger of building a wall, if we haven’t already, to try to prevent discussions on various topics. Traditional positions are being defended as law and any who question that are considered “outsiders” and some are attempting to “expel” them. I have written more on this in the next bulletin.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Red Letter Christians
I finished reading Tony Campolo's new book, Red Letter Christians. I like Tony. I have seen and heard him on tape: he is funny and at times challenging. One of the best books that I read on the meaning of various philosophers came from a book of his about thirty years ago. Tony admits at the end of his new book that he is a conservative Christians, but there is no doubt that he is a political liberal.
The purpose of the book is to discuss various issues. He states that he wants to leave Rome (that is, government) and go to Jerusalem (Jesus), as I understood it. While that is a worthy goal, he rarely left Rome. In fact most of his time is spent discussing what politicians and government can do about various social issues.
First, let me say that if you want a good understanding of the religious left, this is a good book to read, especially if you do not listen to talk radio. There are a number of good ideas in the book, some challenging points that he makes, and some points on issues that need to be dealt with. For instance, on the subject of crime, he suggests that those involved in non-violent crime consider repentance, and eventually pay restitution to the victim, something Chuck Colson and Prison Fellowship have advocated for years. He does make some good suggestions.
However, he spends too much time telling us that government is the answer to problems, especially where the church can and does a better job. I think that he has bought into the stereotype that conservative Christians are hard-hearted. When we consider who responded to the disasters involved Karina and the tsunami in the Indian Ocean, I think that the religious left needs to take another look at its rhetoric. See also Arthur Brooks book "Who Really Cares?"
The second thing that bothered me was is use or lack thereof of scripture. He tells us that Palestine belongs to both the Jews and Palestinians because both are children of Abraham, using Genesis 15. Both Isaac and Ishmael are sons of Abraham. The only problem is that God chose Isaac, the special son, to develop His plan that led to the cross. One could argue over the politics of the Middle East, but this isn't the best use of scripture.
Another thing he does is to ignore scriptures that do not fit his views. In talking about the death penalty, he stated that he is totally prolife. He opposes the death penalty and sees it as a means to destroy a person created in God's image. He quotes Old Testament texts that he sees as extreme and New Testament texts about forgiveness and loving one's enemy. Justice is foremost in his mind on a number of issues. Two things: one, he mentions people create in God's image but does not refer to Genesis 9:6 at all where God states that anyone who murders should be killed because he shed innocent blood, a person created in God's image. Two, he says nothing about the justice for the victim and his family.
He admits that those nearer to people who are being help can do a better job, yet he complains that the government budget spends too much on other things such as military spending. He really doesn't inact with the role of government from Rom. 13.
I'm glad I read the book. As I said, he made important points about issues we need to be concerned with. However, as typical of many, a selective history is not good for understanding what Christians have done throughout history, though not perfectly.
I am convinced that we really have difficulty separating our religion and politics, and that we are influenced by both. I think Campolo hasn't recognized this, even though he claims to be a conservative. Some of his views are not necessarily in the conservative perspective. As a conservative, however, we need to be careful that our views do not cloud our judgment either.
The purpose of the book is to discuss various issues. He states that he wants to leave Rome (that is, government) and go to Jerusalem (Jesus), as I understood it. While that is a worthy goal, he rarely left Rome. In fact most of his time is spent discussing what politicians and government can do about various social issues.
First, let me say that if you want a good understanding of the religious left, this is a good book to read, especially if you do not listen to talk radio. There are a number of good ideas in the book, some challenging points that he makes, and some points on issues that need to be dealt with. For instance, on the subject of crime, he suggests that those involved in non-violent crime consider repentance, and eventually pay restitution to the victim, something Chuck Colson and Prison Fellowship have advocated for years. He does make some good suggestions.
However, he spends too much time telling us that government is the answer to problems, especially where the church can and does a better job. I think that he has bought into the stereotype that conservative Christians are hard-hearted. When we consider who responded to the disasters involved Karina and the tsunami in the Indian Ocean, I think that the religious left needs to take another look at its rhetoric. See also Arthur Brooks book "Who Really Cares?"
The second thing that bothered me was is use or lack thereof of scripture. He tells us that Palestine belongs to both the Jews and Palestinians because both are children of Abraham, using Genesis 15. Both Isaac and Ishmael are sons of Abraham. The only problem is that God chose Isaac, the special son, to develop His plan that led to the cross. One could argue over the politics of the Middle East, but this isn't the best use of scripture.
Another thing he does is to ignore scriptures that do not fit his views. In talking about the death penalty, he stated that he is totally prolife. He opposes the death penalty and sees it as a means to destroy a person created in God's image. He quotes Old Testament texts that he sees as extreme and New Testament texts about forgiveness and loving one's enemy. Justice is foremost in his mind on a number of issues. Two things: one, he mentions people create in God's image but does not refer to Genesis 9:6 at all where God states that anyone who murders should be killed because he shed innocent blood, a person created in God's image. Two, he says nothing about the justice for the victim and his family.
He admits that those nearer to people who are being help can do a better job, yet he complains that the government budget spends too much on other things such as military spending. He really doesn't inact with the role of government from Rom. 13.
I'm glad I read the book. As I said, he made important points about issues we need to be concerned with. However, as typical of many, a selective history is not good for understanding what Christians have done throughout history, though not perfectly.
I am convinced that we really have difficulty separating our religion and politics, and that we are influenced by both. I think Campolo hasn't recognized this, even though he claims to be a conservative. Some of his views are not necessarily in the conservative perspective. As a conservative, however, we need to be careful that our views do not cloud our judgment either.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Review of What's So Great About Christianity
Dinesh D'Souza's new book, What's So Great About Christianity is a good read. He challenges atheists at their strongest attacks with clarity and illustrations that are understandable. He explores the criticisms about Christianity such as the Crusades and Inquisitions and offers a historical perspective we often do not see. He talks about Darwinism and the effects on historical events in the 20Th Century. He looks at Galileo and other scientists and seeks of God in the past, explaining their belief in God.
All in all, it is a good book worth having so as to balance out the arguments often referred to in the media.
All in all, it is a good book worth having so as to balance out the arguments often referred to in the media.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Mixing politics and religion
We have probably all heard of the following: you can't mix politics and religion and we should not talk about either with people.
In today's world, neither is true. Over the next few months, a number of books will be coming out on the subject of Christianity and politics. Interestedly enough, while some of the authors are going to attempt to say that they belong to neither political party, their stands on various issues will reveal that they certainly support one or the other. Politics and religion are intertwined in our society today. Both political parties are seeking the religious vote.
Then we have the religious right and the religious left. One complains about the stands of the other on various issues and the other does the same. Both sides tend to stereotype the other. Dennis Prager warns about what he has observed in the secular realm. The right disagrees with the left and wants to debate, but the left disagrees with the right and sees it as evil, therefore no debate is necessary.
We need to be willing to discuss our differences and recognize that both sides have serious issues and disagreements, but that does not make us enemies.
It will be interesting to see how all this plays out over the election year.
Recently, Biblical scholars have come to recognize that the early church and even Jesus faced political power and issues. John the Baptist was imprisoned by a politician over moral issues. Jesus faced the ruling power of Rome. Paul's preaching used words like lord, salvation, and redemption that were used of Caesar.
I really do not know if we can successfully separate ourselves from politics, nor if we want to. But there is a danger. Depending on government to solve or answer our problems is putting our dependence in the wrong place. I think both the left and right religiously have done this, have been disappointed, and mislead, reading problems the wrong way.
So more comments need to be made and hopefully over the year we can do that.
In today's world, neither is true. Over the next few months, a number of books will be coming out on the subject of Christianity and politics. Interestedly enough, while some of the authors are going to attempt to say that they belong to neither political party, their stands on various issues will reveal that they certainly support one or the other. Politics and religion are intertwined in our society today. Both political parties are seeking the religious vote.
Then we have the religious right and the religious left. One complains about the stands of the other on various issues and the other does the same. Both sides tend to stereotype the other. Dennis Prager warns about what he has observed in the secular realm. The right disagrees with the left and wants to debate, but the left disagrees with the right and sees it as evil, therefore no debate is necessary.
We need to be willing to discuss our differences and recognize that both sides have serious issues and disagreements, but that does not make us enemies.
It will be interesting to see how all this plays out over the election year.
Recently, Biblical scholars have come to recognize that the early church and even Jesus faced political power and issues. John the Baptist was imprisoned by a politician over moral issues. Jesus faced the ruling power of Rome. Paul's preaching used words like lord, salvation, and redemption that were used of Caesar.
I really do not know if we can successfully separate ourselves from politics, nor if we want to. But there is a danger. Depending on government to solve or answer our problems is putting our dependence in the wrong place. I think both the left and right religiously have done this, have been disappointed, and mislead, reading problems the wrong way.
So more comments need to be made and hopefully over the year we can do that.
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
election year
This will be an interesting year it being an election year. And more so since many are talking about religion in politics. Over the past few years a number of books have been published criticizing the Christian right, almost to the point of hatred. Dennis Prager states that the right (religious or secular) is mostly willing to disagree with the left and talk about it but that the left sees the right as wrong and therefore evil, and will not discuss anything. While somewhat generalized, it appears to be true.
Then there are the books written by atheists over the last couple of years, likewise criticizing Christianity. There is also books written advocating new texts such as the Gnostics. There are a number of books responding to these being published.
Another group of books coming from both the religious left and right concerns the Christian's role in politics. Among the authors writing are Tony Campolo, Albert Mohlar, D. James Kennedy, Cal Thomas, Os Guinness, and David Klinghoffer. These all should be interesting reads, and more are on the way.
Reading some of these authors past material, I am seeing that it is really difficult to separate one's politics from one's view of Christianity, left or right. They appear to be intertwined. We have often thought that we can divorce religion and politics and have read the Bible in general and the NT in particular in that way. But that view is changing as more Biblical scholars see that the message of Jesus, "the kingdom is near" and of Paul, "Jesus is Lord," were direct challenges to the powers that be. Neither advocated a violent overthrow of either the Herods nor of Rome, but they used terms that could stir up anxiety among the ruling powers.
Paul used terms such as salvation, Lord, and rescue/redemption that the Romans had applied to Caesar, and applied them to Jesus. While some governors could care less about Paul's preaching (The Roman governor of Corinth), others saw it as a threat, especially near the end of the first century.
We will be hearing a lot about this mixture this year. Conservatives leaning in one direction, liberals in another. Hopefully we can talk and learn from each other. I think there are some underlying philosophies that we need to be careful of; for instance that we are created in the image of God and abortion is a challenge to that; that God created the universe and rules, hence global warming might not be all that affected by man. Mars is warming and unless those Martians are getting ready to invade, most think that it comes from activity on the sun rather than on earth. Underlying this is the idea that man can solve all problems without God's help.
I hope to read some of these books on religion and politics and see what can be learned from them. I will admit that I am on the religious right. I have problems with far too much dependence on Caesar (government) for solutions, especially when it is our responsibility. I fear that the desire for the so called social justice issues miss the issues of Biblical justice. Again, the religious left has criticized the religious right for talking too much about abortion - though the most innocent and helpless being is in the womb, created in the image of God. We all should do something to eliminate poverty but is government programs the answer, or are those who are "on the ground" better equipped to handle it.
I look at these and other issues over the year and hopefully learn from them.
Then there are the books written by atheists over the last couple of years, likewise criticizing Christianity. There is also books written advocating new texts such as the Gnostics. There are a number of books responding to these being published.
Another group of books coming from both the religious left and right concerns the Christian's role in politics. Among the authors writing are Tony Campolo, Albert Mohlar, D. James Kennedy, Cal Thomas, Os Guinness, and David Klinghoffer. These all should be interesting reads, and more are on the way.
Reading some of these authors past material, I am seeing that it is really difficult to separate one's politics from one's view of Christianity, left or right. They appear to be intertwined. We have often thought that we can divorce religion and politics and have read the Bible in general and the NT in particular in that way. But that view is changing as more Biblical scholars see that the message of Jesus, "the kingdom is near" and of Paul, "Jesus is Lord," were direct challenges to the powers that be. Neither advocated a violent overthrow of either the Herods nor of Rome, but they used terms that could stir up anxiety among the ruling powers.
Paul used terms such as salvation, Lord, and rescue/redemption that the Romans had applied to Caesar, and applied them to Jesus. While some governors could care less about Paul's preaching (The Roman governor of Corinth), others saw it as a threat, especially near the end of the first century.
We will be hearing a lot about this mixture this year. Conservatives leaning in one direction, liberals in another. Hopefully we can talk and learn from each other. I think there are some underlying philosophies that we need to be careful of; for instance that we are created in the image of God and abortion is a challenge to that; that God created the universe and rules, hence global warming might not be all that affected by man. Mars is warming and unless those Martians are getting ready to invade, most think that it comes from activity on the sun rather than on earth. Underlying this is the idea that man can solve all problems without God's help.
I hope to read some of these books on religion and politics and see what can be learned from them. I will admit that I am on the religious right. I have problems with far too much dependence on Caesar (government) for solutions, especially when it is our responsibility. I fear that the desire for the so called social justice issues miss the issues of Biblical justice. Again, the religious left has criticized the religious right for talking too much about abortion - though the most innocent and helpless being is in the womb, created in the image of God. We all should do something to eliminate poverty but is government programs the answer, or are those who are "on the ground" better equipped to handle it.
I look at these and other issues over the year and hopefully learn from them.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
A Gathered People reviewed
A GATHERED PEOPLE
"And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another -- and all the more as you see the Day approaching" (Hebrews 10:24-25).
A Gathered People is the third book by John Mark Hicks, this time with co-authors Johnny Melton and Bobby Valentine (1). This book’s subtitle is "Revisioning the Assembly as Transforming Encounter." The book is a study of the assembling of God’s people. In churches of Christ there has been two views of the assembly: 1) as a legal duty and 2) as mutual edification (2). In recent years these two views have been in conflict with charges of legalism, traditionalism, progressivism, and entertaining worship against each other. Is this the message we want to portray about our time together?
In my view, we have too often looked at the church (assembly) as an institution that must be controlled in every detail and that any violation is unacceptable to God, and therefore to us. In this scenario, the "church" is "perfect" and what matters is what particular leaders place on it, mostly attendance and giving. Little freedom is found because there is only one way to look at things. The idea that the assembly is a family gathered together for encouragement and strength is foreign to the organizational model.
Hicks and company addresses this in a thought provoking way. They see both views as extreme, though they lean much more to the edification model. Rather, they are attempting to make a corrective as to how we should see the assembly as an encounter with God. We have, in the edification model, tended to see worship as an unimportant aspect. We worship everywhere but the assembly. While not the first to suggest this corrective, they are the first to organize it in a systematic way, combining both Biblical and historical sources in understanding the assembly.
Chapter one discusses the conflicts between the two views of the assembly.
We have an assumption that we can skip two thousand years of history and culture and return to the way the church was in the first century. What we do not realize is that we have been affected by both history and culture. Reading through this book, one will see the changes that have occurred in the assembly. Most of us would not want to meet all day on a Sunday, listening to lengthy readings from scripture followed by exposition and singing. We have enough difficulty with going an hour before wrestleness sets in. We have been impacted in a number of ways by those who have gone before us. I knew a professor of architecture at the University of Illinois who told me once that most church buildings have been following the same pattern since the 1400s. The authors mention that some of the early Restoration preachers would rather gather around a table than have a pulpit, certainly a challenge to our mindset today.
In chapters four and five, the authors examine briefly various influences throughout the centuries on the assembly. We can see where those who have gone before us have influenced us in a number of ways. Of course, some will sneer at this, but it is the reality. Culture affects us! Chapter four looks at various aspects of the assembly, including the way it was conducted, from Rome, Eastern, Reform and Puritan traditions. One can see the emphasis and also the changes that occurred. Chapter five looks at Restoration history and how we too have changed since the early 1800s. Some today would be shocked that there is a vast difference over the years. Eventually it led to the five acts of worship that we know today: preach, sing, give, pray, and the Lord’s Supper. Among the changes that occurred are those of song styles, from the more classical to the country sounding Stamps-Baxter, to contemporary music of today.
The foundation of the assembly is discussed in chapters two and three. Chapter two examines God meeting with His people in the Hebrew scriptures. We can see fellowship in Eden in the very presence of God. But after the Fall, we see people beginning to worship and the development of fellowship through worship. When Israel comes to Mt. Sinai, God comes into the presence of the nation. He would be their God and would be with them as seen in the Tabernacle. In Exodus 24, Moses and Aaron and seventy elders are called up to meet with God. Twice it is stated that they see God and they all live (3). In summing up this event, the authors state that "Three themes dominate. First, the passage beings with the invitation and ends with the experience of divine presence. Second, the word of the Lord, both spoken and written, is shared. Third, both altar and table are present" (4). This develops as the theme throughout the chapter as they look at various texts briefly to show these ideas of the presence of God.
Chapter three examines the New Testament view. They approach with the idea of what the gospel or good news is. The text used is Luke 4:18-19 in which Jesus says:
"The Spirit of the Lord is one me, because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim
freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor."
This text serves as the theme throughout the book, being referred to at least ten times. They see it as the message of the early church, both preaching and living. The assembly lives out the good news in its coming together. Corinth was ignoring the poor when they assembled and took the Lord’s Supper which violated the good news of Jesus (see 1 Corinthians 11:17-31). Even today, we build our fancy buildings and drive our fine cars, we have our creature comforts, padded pews and air conditioning, and our Sunday best in dress. But what message does this send to the outsider such as the poor? In bemoaning this, they state:
"Unfortunately, our gifts are often more dedicated toward our buildings and support staff
than they are to the poor. Could the church treasury at least tithe to the poor so that our
benevolence ministries are not the last budget item but the first?" (5).
They go on to say that our buildings can be a hindrance to others who find themselves humiliated because of their economic situation. This should not surprise us because humility is one aspect of our lives that seems to be in short supply. Paul challenged the Philippians with this by describing the humble life of Jesus (Philippians 2:5-11).
Chapter six discusses the importance that when we come together, God comes as well. He is not a spectator looking on or judging us by how well we sing. Nor is He the recipient of our praise and focus, though that certainly has a role to play. Rather He is an active participant in our assembly, sharing with, comforting, and accepting praise. Two important texts are discussed in this chapter. One is John 4:23-24 where Jesus states that we worship God in Spirit and in truth. What exactly does this mean? Traditionally we have seen this as worshipping in "the inner being and according to the Bible" (6). They see Spirit as the Holy Spirit and truth as the new reality in Jesus, the new Temple as seen in John 2, not a building but a redemptive fellowship.
The other text is the book of Hebrews. We meet not just with those who gather on Sundays but with a host of beings, from God to angels to those who have gone before. God’s rule has broken in to the presence and we share together as we look forward to the future "Eden" when we will walk in the cool of the Garden with God (7).
Chapter seven is the application of what has been said. Our assemblies should shape Christ in us as well as bring glory to God. Here is how they define it. "First, does it glorify God?…Second, do we please ourselves or others?…Third, do we point the unbeliever to God? (8). The assembly, they conclude, should "encounter God, profess our faith and encourage each other" (9).
There is an interesting appendix of things they did not discuss which can be controversial to many people. They explain that it would take much more exploration to discuss those issues, and while they can be important, a foundation is necessary before such discussions can begin.
The above is a very brief review and the explanations are very short from a book that has much to offer to the student of the Bible who wishes to enhance the assembly. So let me say the following.
One, this is an important book, in my opinion, as a corrective to the assembly as edification model. The authors are supportive of this model but want us to see that God is involved with us when we come together and that worship and praise to Him, while to be done in all things (see 1 Corinthians 10:31), should also be seen as part of the assembly. Involved in that as well is the good news as expressed by Jesus in Luke 4:18-19.
Two, the two types of assemblies discussed have been part of what is known as "worship wars," briefly mentioned in the book. Part of the problem is the attitude that we can skip two thousand years of history and culture, thinking that we are not affected by it. We live in a changing culture, both in society and in the assembly, and this needs to be recognize. I have heard some say that we do not want to be like other groups but if you ever visit or watch their television programs, surprisingly we might not be all that different. We sing the same songs, emphasis the pulpit, and have a similar order of assembly. We need to understand the influences that have led us to where we are.
Three, for some this book will be controversial because it challenges cherished traditions. It will be one of those books that can affect our spiritual lives (10). I hope so! We need to revisit our assembly tradition and see the importance of coming into the presence of God in the Holy of holies, and all that means. Among the controversies will be how we see the assembly, the Holy Spirit, the use of lament which is an important though brief discussion in the book, and a number of other ideas. A complain in a review of another book of the authors complained that they used too many big words. This book is not a devotional, it is meant to be studied. It will challenge us!
Finally, I want to say something about their use of the Old Testament, the Hebrew scriptures. For far too long we have had an attitude that the Old is not as important and does not need to be looked at. I have been told on more than one occasion that I have spent too much time in the Old. This is changing and I am thankful that the authors began with the Hebrew scriptures. We forget, and I think some do not realize, that the Bible of the first century church was the Old Testament. From there Paul taught about the assembly, as this book shows, and that he himself stated that he said nothing more than what the Law and the prophets said.
An interesting study in the book is that of the Jewish feasts (11). They look at the seven Jewish feasts and there importance for the Jewish people when they gathered together. Five come out of the Law of Moses, the names of which we heard throughout the year. There is Passover, the Feast of Weeks or Pentecost, Rosh Hashanah or the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, and Yom Kippur. We hear of them but what do they mean? The sixth feast is that of Purim found in the book of Esther. Then there is the Feast of Dedication or Festival of Lights, known today as Hanukkah. Each had meaning for the Jewish people.
This then raises a question. How much did the Hebrew scriptures and Jewish culture affect the early church? That is a question that is being explored more today by various writers (12). I think that we do not realize that the Jewish influences are deep and rich for the first century church, and that having ignored the Old for so long, we have missed important understandings of scripture. Simply saying that since we are New Testament Christians, we do not need to look at the Old except when it supports some case of ours, no longer is a valid idea. Jesus and Paul and most of the other writers lived in a Jewish culture and were influenced and affected by it (13).
I would encourage you to pick up this book. It is thought provoking, challenging, and will help enhance our time together.
George B. Mearns
(1) The other two are Come To The Table and Down To The River To Pray, all published by Leafwood Publishers, Abilene, Texas.
(2) p. 13f
(3) I think that we need to reevaluate our understanding of this text with other texts that state that no one can see God and live. I do not think this is a figurative or spiritual experience, but a eye opening event in the lives of these people. How we see God is important. The legal aspect of the assembly would lean more to an unapproachable God, which I think influences our assemblies.
(4) p. 41
(5) p. 165
(6) p. 134
(7) see John Mark Hicks and Bobby Valentine, Kingdom Come, Leafwood Publishers.
(8) p. 154
(9) p. 166
(10) Several years ago a leading publication of the churches of Christ came out with a list of books that would affect one’s spiritual life. The author intended it as a warning to the dangers found in those books. I read most of them and found that to be true; if followed they would draw us closer to God in Christ.
(11) p. 45-50
(12) Among them is the leading conservative theologian today, N.T. Wright and a number of others. From churches of Christ, Jim McGuiggan, a teacher of mine, has spent much time studying the Old Testament and writing challenging thoughts. John Mark Hicks and his co-authors have been opening an understanding of New Testament texts and ideas with studies in the Old, as this book shows. I am thankful that we have these scholars looking into the importance of the Hebrew scriptures.
(13) Bobby Valentine is examining this on his blog, http://stoned-campbelldisciple.blogspot.com
"And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another -- and all the more as you see the Day approaching" (Hebrews 10:24-25).
A Gathered People is the third book by John Mark Hicks, this time with co-authors Johnny Melton and Bobby Valentine (1). This book’s subtitle is "Revisioning the Assembly as Transforming Encounter." The book is a study of the assembling of God’s people. In churches of Christ there has been two views of the assembly: 1) as a legal duty and 2) as mutual edification (2). In recent years these two views have been in conflict with charges of legalism, traditionalism, progressivism, and entertaining worship against each other. Is this the message we want to portray about our time together?
In my view, we have too often looked at the church (assembly) as an institution that must be controlled in every detail and that any violation is unacceptable to God, and therefore to us. In this scenario, the "church" is "perfect" and what matters is what particular leaders place on it, mostly attendance and giving. Little freedom is found because there is only one way to look at things. The idea that the assembly is a family gathered together for encouragement and strength is foreign to the organizational model.
Hicks and company addresses this in a thought provoking way. They see both views as extreme, though they lean much more to the edification model. Rather, they are attempting to make a corrective as to how we should see the assembly as an encounter with God. We have, in the edification model, tended to see worship as an unimportant aspect. We worship everywhere but the assembly. While not the first to suggest this corrective, they are the first to organize it in a systematic way, combining both Biblical and historical sources in understanding the assembly.
Chapter one discusses the conflicts between the two views of the assembly.
We have an assumption that we can skip two thousand years of history and culture and return to the way the church was in the first century. What we do not realize is that we have been affected by both history and culture. Reading through this book, one will see the changes that have occurred in the assembly. Most of us would not want to meet all day on a Sunday, listening to lengthy readings from scripture followed by exposition and singing. We have enough difficulty with going an hour before wrestleness sets in. We have been impacted in a number of ways by those who have gone before us. I knew a professor of architecture at the University of Illinois who told me once that most church buildings have been following the same pattern since the 1400s. The authors mention that some of the early Restoration preachers would rather gather around a table than have a pulpit, certainly a challenge to our mindset today.
In chapters four and five, the authors examine briefly various influences throughout the centuries on the assembly. We can see where those who have gone before us have influenced us in a number of ways. Of course, some will sneer at this, but it is the reality. Culture affects us! Chapter four looks at various aspects of the assembly, including the way it was conducted, from Rome, Eastern, Reform and Puritan traditions. One can see the emphasis and also the changes that occurred. Chapter five looks at Restoration history and how we too have changed since the early 1800s. Some today would be shocked that there is a vast difference over the years. Eventually it led to the five acts of worship that we know today: preach, sing, give, pray, and the Lord’s Supper. Among the changes that occurred are those of song styles, from the more classical to the country sounding Stamps-Baxter, to contemporary music of today.
The foundation of the assembly is discussed in chapters two and three. Chapter two examines God meeting with His people in the Hebrew scriptures. We can see fellowship in Eden in the very presence of God. But after the Fall, we see people beginning to worship and the development of fellowship through worship. When Israel comes to Mt. Sinai, God comes into the presence of the nation. He would be their God and would be with them as seen in the Tabernacle. In Exodus 24, Moses and Aaron and seventy elders are called up to meet with God. Twice it is stated that they see God and they all live (3). In summing up this event, the authors state that "Three themes dominate. First, the passage beings with the invitation and ends with the experience of divine presence. Second, the word of the Lord, both spoken and written, is shared. Third, both altar and table are present" (4). This develops as the theme throughout the chapter as they look at various texts briefly to show these ideas of the presence of God.
Chapter three examines the New Testament view. They approach with the idea of what the gospel or good news is. The text used is Luke 4:18-19 in which Jesus says:
"The Spirit of the Lord is one me, because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim
freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor."
This text serves as the theme throughout the book, being referred to at least ten times. They see it as the message of the early church, both preaching and living. The assembly lives out the good news in its coming together. Corinth was ignoring the poor when they assembled and took the Lord’s Supper which violated the good news of Jesus (see 1 Corinthians 11:17-31). Even today, we build our fancy buildings and drive our fine cars, we have our creature comforts, padded pews and air conditioning, and our Sunday best in dress. But what message does this send to the outsider such as the poor? In bemoaning this, they state:
"Unfortunately, our gifts are often more dedicated toward our buildings and support staff
than they are to the poor. Could the church treasury at least tithe to the poor so that our
benevolence ministries are not the last budget item but the first?" (5).
They go on to say that our buildings can be a hindrance to others who find themselves humiliated because of their economic situation. This should not surprise us because humility is one aspect of our lives that seems to be in short supply. Paul challenged the Philippians with this by describing the humble life of Jesus (Philippians 2:5-11).
Chapter six discusses the importance that when we come together, God comes as well. He is not a spectator looking on or judging us by how well we sing. Nor is He the recipient of our praise and focus, though that certainly has a role to play. Rather He is an active participant in our assembly, sharing with, comforting, and accepting praise. Two important texts are discussed in this chapter. One is John 4:23-24 where Jesus states that we worship God in Spirit and in truth. What exactly does this mean? Traditionally we have seen this as worshipping in "the inner being and according to the Bible" (6). They see Spirit as the Holy Spirit and truth as the new reality in Jesus, the new Temple as seen in John 2, not a building but a redemptive fellowship.
The other text is the book of Hebrews. We meet not just with those who gather on Sundays but with a host of beings, from God to angels to those who have gone before. God’s rule has broken in to the presence and we share together as we look forward to the future "Eden" when we will walk in the cool of the Garden with God (7).
Chapter seven is the application of what has been said. Our assemblies should shape Christ in us as well as bring glory to God. Here is how they define it. "First, does it glorify God?…Second, do we please ourselves or others?…Third, do we point the unbeliever to God? (8). The assembly, they conclude, should "encounter God, profess our faith and encourage each other" (9).
There is an interesting appendix of things they did not discuss which can be controversial to many people. They explain that it would take much more exploration to discuss those issues, and while they can be important, a foundation is necessary before such discussions can begin.
The above is a very brief review and the explanations are very short from a book that has much to offer to the student of the Bible who wishes to enhance the assembly. So let me say the following.
One, this is an important book, in my opinion, as a corrective to the assembly as edification model. The authors are supportive of this model but want us to see that God is involved with us when we come together and that worship and praise to Him, while to be done in all things (see 1 Corinthians 10:31), should also be seen as part of the assembly. Involved in that as well is the good news as expressed by Jesus in Luke 4:18-19.
Two, the two types of assemblies discussed have been part of what is known as "worship wars," briefly mentioned in the book. Part of the problem is the attitude that we can skip two thousand years of history and culture, thinking that we are not affected by it. We live in a changing culture, both in society and in the assembly, and this needs to be recognize. I have heard some say that we do not want to be like other groups but if you ever visit or watch their television programs, surprisingly we might not be all that different. We sing the same songs, emphasis the pulpit, and have a similar order of assembly. We need to understand the influences that have led us to where we are.
Three, for some this book will be controversial because it challenges cherished traditions. It will be one of those books that can affect our spiritual lives (10). I hope so! We need to revisit our assembly tradition and see the importance of coming into the presence of God in the Holy of holies, and all that means. Among the controversies will be how we see the assembly, the Holy Spirit, the use of lament which is an important though brief discussion in the book, and a number of other ideas. A complain in a review of another book of the authors complained that they used too many big words. This book is not a devotional, it is meant to be studied. It will challenge us!
Finally, I want to say something about their use of the Old Testament, the Hebrew scriptures. For far too long we have had an attitude that the Old is not as important and does not need to be looked at. I have been told on more than one occasion that I have spent too much time in the Old. This is changing and I am thankful that the authors began with the Hebrew scriptures. We forget, and I think some do not realize, that the Bible of the first century church was the Old Testament. From there Paul taught about the assembly, as this book shows, and that he himself stated that he said nothing more than what the Law and the prophets said.
An interesting study in the book is that of the Jewish feasts (11). They look at the seven Jewish feasts and there importance for the Jewish people when they gathered together. Five come out of the Law of Moses, the names of which we heard throughout the year. There is Passover, the Feast of Weeks or Pentecost, Rosh Hashanah or the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, and Yom Kippur. We hear of them but what do they mean? The sixth feast is that of Purim found in the book of Esther. Then there is the Feast of Dedication or Festival of Lights, known today as Hanukkah. Each had meaning for the Jewish people.
This then raises a question. How much did the Hebrew scriptures and Jewish culture affect the early church? That is a question that is being explored more today by various writers (12). I think that we do not realize that the Jewish influences are deep and rich for the first century church, and that having ignored the Old for so long, we have missed important understandings of scripture. Simply saying that since we are New Testament Christians, we do not need to look at the Old except when it supports some case of ours, no longer is a valid idea. Jesus and Paul and most of the other writers lived in a Jewish culture and were influenced and affected by it (13).
I would encourage you to pick up this book. It is thought provoking, challenging, and will help enhance our time together.
George B. Mearns
(1) The other two are Come To The Table and Down To The River To Pray, all published by Leafwood Publishers, Abilene, Texas.
(2) p. 13f
(3) I think that we need to reevaluate our understanding of this text with other texts that state that no one can see God and live. I do not think this is a figurative or spiritual experience, but a eye opening event in the lives of these people. How we see God is important. The legal aspect of the assembly would lean more to an unapproachable God, which I think influences our assemblies.
(4) p. 41
(5) p. 165
(6) p. 134
(7) see John Mark Hicks and Bobby Valentine, Kingdom Come, Leafwood Publishers.
(8) p. 154
(9) p. 166
(10) Several years ago a leading publication of the churches of Christ came out with a list of books that would affect one’s spiritual life. The author intended it as a warning to the dangers found in those books. I read most of them and found that to be true; if followed they would draw us closer to God in Christ.
(11) p. 45-50
(12) Among them is the leading conservative theologian today, N.T. Wright and a number of others. From churches of Christ, Jim McGuiggan, a teacher of mine, has spent much time studying the Old Testament and writing challenging thoughts. John Mark Hicks and his co-authors have been opening an understanding of New Testament texts and ideas with studies in the Old, as this book shows. I am thankful that we have these scholars looking into the importance of the Hebrew scriptures.
(13) Bobby Valentine is examining this on his blog, http://stoned-campbelldisciple.blogspot.com
Friday, November 23, 2007
Blue Laws
When I was growing up, I lived in a little town next to a big city. This town, like many others, had blue laws. For instance, stores were not allowed to be open on Sunday. After washing clothes on Sunday, it was forbidden to hang them out on a line to dry. One could not mow grass on Sunday. Today we think these rather funny.
To paraphrase Solomon, of the making of many laws there is no end. I visited the University of Illinois law library with a friend. It was a library in its own building with several stories of law books. It is amazing the way more and more laws are made. I was told once that every time we get in our cars, we break a law. And of course there is that notorious IRS and the fact that even their own agents do not know it all.
God gave the Jews 10 Commandments based on two, love God and love neighbor, and then some 600 more; and that was all that was needed. By the time we get to the days of Jesus and Paul, we see numerous laws that various religious leaders followed.
I received the following from Grove Books, an English publisher. Since England has been around a little longer than us, they certainly have had more experience with "blue laws." Under the title of "The UK's top 10 most ridiculous laws" comes the following:
1. It is illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament.
2. It is an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British king or queen's image upside-down.
3. It is illegal for a woman to be topless in Liverpool except as a clerk in a tropical fish store.
4. Eating mince pies on Christmas Day is banned.
5. If someone knocks on your door in Scotland and requires the use of your toilet, you are required to let them enter.
6. In the UK a pregnant woman can legally relieve herself anywhere she wants, including in a policeman' helmet.
7. The head of any dead whale found on the British coast automatically becomes the property of the King, and the tail that of the Queen.
8. It is illegal not to tell the tax man anything you do not want him to know, but legal not to tell him information you do not mind him knowing.
9. It is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament wearing a suit of armour.
10. It is legal to murder a Scotsman within the ancient city walls of York, but only if he is carrying a bow and arrow.
This made sense to the politicians who created these laws and I am sure some cultural factors went into them, but then I wonder: some people just have too much time on their hands, even several hundred years ago. Maybe it is just being in a position to make such laws that causes otherwise rational people to think irrationally. Or maybe they are just irrational to begin with. Maybe we should just do away with the profession of professional politicians and go back to citizen servants, those who would live home and work for a couple of months a couple of times a year, make some decisions, and come home.
To paraphrase Solomon, of the making of many laws there is no end. I visited the University of Illinois law library with a friend. It was a library in its own building with several stories of law books. It is amazing the way more and more laws are made. I was told once that every time we get in our cars, we break a law. And of course there is that notorious IRS and the fact that even their own agents do not know it all.
God gave the Jews 10 Commandments based on two, love God and love neighbor, and then some 600 more; and that was all that was needed. By the time we get to the days of Jesus and Paul, we see numerous laws that various religious leaders followed.
I received the following from Grove Books, an English publisher. Since England has been around a little longer than us, they certainly have had more experience with "blue laws." Under the title of "The UK's top 10 most ridiculous laws" comes the following:
1. It is illegal to die in the Houses of Parliament.
2. It is an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British king or queen's image upside-down.
3. It is illegal for a woman to be topless in Liverpool except as a clerk in a tropical fish store.
4. Eating mince pies on Christmas Day is banned.
5. If someone knocks on your door in Scotland and requires the use of your toilet, you are required to let them enter.
6. In the UK a pregnant woman can legally relieve herself anywhere she wants, including in a policeman' helmet.
7. The head of any dead whale found on the British coast automatically becomes the property of the King, and the tail that of the Queen.
8. It is illegal not to tell the tax man anything you do not want him to know, but legal not to tell him information you do not mind him knowing.
9. It is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament wearing a suit of armour.
10. It is legal to murder a Scotsman within the ancient city walls of York, but only if he is carrying a bow and arrow.
This made sense to the politicians who created these laws and I am sure some cultural factors went into them, but then I wonder: some people just have too much time on their hands, even several hundred years ago. Maybe it is just being in a position to make such laws that causes otherwise rational people to think irrationally. Or maybe they are just irrational to begin with. Maybe we should just do away with the profession of professional politicians and go back to citizen servants, those who would live home and work for a couple of months a couple of times a year, make some decisions, and come home.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)