Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set. –Proverbs 22:28
I call upon You, Lord, God of Abraham and God of Isaac and God of Jacob and Israel, You who are the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the God who, through the abundance of your mercy, was well-pleased towards us so that we may know You, who made heaven and earth, who rules over all, You who are the one and the true God, above whom there is no other God; You who, by our Lord Jesus Christ gave us the gift of the Holy Spirit, give to every one who reads this writing to know You, that You alone are God, to be strengthened in You, and to avoid every heretical and godless and impious teaching.
St Irenaeus of Lyons, Against the Heresies 3:6:4
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
The Case for Reciting Creeds in Worship with Albert Aymer
[Albert] Aymer has a message for churches doing all they can
to make worship relevant and contemporary. “Remember that worship transcends
time and space,” he urges.
One of the best ways to do that is to use creeds in worship. Continue
reading at the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship.
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
The Trinitarianism of Ephesians 4:4-6, a Chiastic Creed
A few daring theologians in our day are carefully teasing
out some of the “Trinitarian metaphysics” from especially certain creedal and
doxological New Testament passage, not least Tom
Wright and Peter Leithart. This is
not new, though.
St. Irenaeus, in Demonstration
of Apostolic Preaching, quotes in part Ephesians 4:4—6, which reads:
There is one body and one Spirit—just
as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one
faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all
and in all.
From this text, he concludes, “...because ‘above all’ is the
Father, and ‘through all’ is the Word—since through Him everything was made by
the Father—while ‘in us all’ is the Spirit, who cries ‘Abba, Father,’ and forms
man to the likeness of God” (I:5).
Granted, within this creedal remark of St. Paul, Irenaeus
picks up on the unmistakable Trinitarian formula, “One Spirit...one Lord
(Jesus)...one God and Father.” What is
interesting, and certainly out of sorts with much of the rationalistic exegesis
common this side of the Enlightenment, is that Irenaeus continues his
Trinitarian reasoning throughout the following three prepositional phrases of
verse six. Before we dismiss Irenaeus’ exegesis
as a byproduct of the old quadriga, the four-folded methodology, or some other highly
subjective approach, judged through our modernistic rationalism, we should
revisit St. Paul.
When we return to the text, we find an interesting chiasmus,
which would point to the same conclusion that Irenaeus so naturally draws. Look at the structure of this creed.
4:4 A. One Spirit
4:5 B. One Lord (Jesus)
4:6a C. One...Father
4:6b C. Over
all
B.
Through all
A. In all
Granting that this text is likely a creedal formula, and that
it is naturally structured in terms of a chiasm, I for one tend to think that
Irenaeus’ Trinitarian conclusion is spot one.
It is further supported by the patristics’ hermeneutical key, the regulae fidei, the creedal Rule of
Faith, which Irenaeus stresses in the early sections of the same work.
Our ancient fathers in the faith did not pretend or deceive
themselves into believing that they came to the text without any pre-drawn
conclusions, much less without having a deep, deep precommitment. Neither did they strive to recognize their
precommitments so as to avoid them during exegesis, which all our hermeneutical
textbooks caution us to do. Rather the
singular precommitment that ruled exegesis—sometimes for better or worse—was the
regulae fidei, which matured into
what we know today as the Apostle’s Creed.
For them, a robust Trinitarianism was the presupposition of all exegesis
(and all of life), not merely its conclusion.
Perhaps we should put our fathers’ landmark back where we found it
(Prov. 22:28). Thankfully, some are.
Monday, May 20, 2013
Jesus', the New-True Adam's, Wilderness Probation
As the heading suggests, I’m cautious of the title “the temptation”
for its restrictive connotations. The ‘the’, in ‘the temptation’, seems
to indicate that the whole of Jesus’ cosmic level struggle against
Satan, sin, and the wicked world system in its defiant rebellion toward
God is summed up in the forty days and nights in the wilderness. We
know, however, that this is not the case. There are, perhaps, even
greater problems if we are to place the accent on the ‘temptation’ of
‘the temptation’, as it averts attention away from the event’s divine
purpose in God’s redemptive program and poises our focus on merely a
single perspective and design for the event, namely Satan’s. In so
viewing it, from the vantage of Satan’s schematic purposes, we are bound
to be deprived of much of the critical theological content and the
particularly messianic nature of the trial.
The broader context of the passage in all three gospels is, in general, identical: (1) the baptism/Father’s pronouncement; (2) the 40 days in the wilderness; and (3) Jesus’ victorious return onto the public scene, “in the power of the Holy Spirit,” to begin his messianic mission. This consistency is coupled with language in every account that clearly connects the baptism to the probation. The authors, then, intend the two to be treated as a unit; the latter can only be understood in light of the former.
The voice of the Father at the baptism not only declared Jesus’ Sonship, but also defined it. The words: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” brings together to critical strands of messianic expectation from the OT. “This is my beloved Son...” is surely drawn from Ps 2:7, which describes Yahweh’s coming Anointed One, the hope and fulfillment of the everlasting Davidic covenant. It is more than mere coincidence that the very next verse of this Psalm (v. 8) speaks of the Father’s promise to the Son, “Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession.” Thus, it should not surprise us that Satan’s final assault (per Mt) came in a similar form to the very same promise. It is not as though Satan’s offering Jesus the same thing (Mt 4:8—9) as the Father, “the nations...their glory,” was tempting in itself. Consider the weight of this dilemma—seemingly same promise, one from the Father of Light, the other from the father of lies. It appears the there would be little, if any, struggle in the rational mind when faced with such a choice. But Matthew treats this as the climax of the battle; the very point on which redemption swings. But how can this be?
This question draws us back again to the Father’s voice at the baptism, namely to the second clause: “...with whom I am well pleased.” This allusion points back to Is 42:1ff, a passage that Matthew cites directly in 12:18—21, as does Luke, twice (1:79; 2:32; with allusions in Acts 3:26; 4:27). The opening pericope of this chapter (Is 42:1—9) begins a section of Isaiah known as the suffering Servant songs. Here Yahweh’s Servant is identified with a role of suffering, meekness, and humiliation, one that finally ends in the disgraceful death in Ch. 53, an end administered by none other than the Servant’s “well pleased” Father. This depiction of the hoped for anointed Messiah, although an accepted vein within 1st century messianism, seems to stand in stark contrast, if not out right contradiction, to the exalted, victorious anointed Davidic King of Ps 2! These two streams of messianic hope—humiliation-Servant/exaltation-King—converging in the same figure were formerly inconceivable in Jewish eschatology. However, it is precisely this paradox that informs a right understanding of the wilderness phase of Jesus’ Messiahship and answers the question above regarding Matthew’s final temptation. Concerning the question, the weightiness of Satan’s offer of the glory of the nations was to seemingly grant Jesus his rightful exaltation as the Messiah, thus attaining, at least in part, the end goal of his messianic work while altogether avoiding the demanded humiliation, suffering, and death that were part and parcel of the Father’s plan for his Son/Messiah. Thus, the questions facing Jesus at every point in the wilderness probation were, what kind and, whose Messiah would he be?
This, I believe, explains best the perspective and burden of Jesus in the crisis. The perspective of the Father, as this would be, for his Son, a time of testing, trial, that is, probation. Even Satan’s perspective is best illuminated from this angle. Satan’s primary objective was not to bring uncertainty directly upon Jesus’ Sonship or even his sinlessness; but, at first subtle then in sudden desperation, an attempt to derail or, better, abort the Father’s plan to establish his Messianic King, his kingdom, and consequently destroy the very works of the Devil himself (I Jn 3:8). Satan’s awareness of the ultimate doom he would face as a result of Jesus’ success, which began principally at the end of the wilderness probation, is also revealed in his citation of Ps 91:11—12. While Satan rightly observes the promise of special providence for the trusting One of Ps 91, he must too have been fully aware of the promise of v. 13 as well, “...the serpent you will trample underfoot!” (cf. Lk 10:19; Mk 16:18; Gen 3:15).
Unlike Adam, who failed in a state of perfection; Jesus, cloaked in humiliation, came out unscathed from his struggle on a sin torn battlefield! More than that, Adam’s success would have kept him from suffering loss; Jesus’ success first recovered Adam’s loss, and then gained the Messiah’s mantle. Hence, in the desert wilderness Jesus proved what was in his heart—humble, absolute trust in the Father’s promises—the kind of submissive obedience God requires of all people, yet never given by a person before, was offered up by Jesus in the harshest of conditions, thus gaining his Messiahship and our much needed righteousness! Our True Joshua, leading us in to conquer the Promise Land (II Cor 2:14)!
Monday, May 13, 2013
Kermit Gosnell Found Guilty on Three First-Degree Murder Charges
The jury in the murder trial of abortion practitioner Kermit
Gosnell returned a verdict and found him guilty on three of the four
first-degree murder charges he faced.
Gosnell was found guilty of killing Baby A, Baby C and Baby
D and found not guilty of killing Baby E. He was also convicted on hundreds of
lesser charges ranging from infanticide to running a corrupt organization.
The guilty verdict on these three counts subjects the
abortion “doctor” to the potential he will face the death penalty when a second
jury considers his sentencing on the convictions. At minimum Gosnell will face
three life terms in prison. The jury that will be tasked with sentencing
Gosnell on the convictions will begin its work on May 21.
Gonell was also found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in
the death of patient Karnamaya Mongar, who died after a botched abortion. And
he was found guilty on most of the more than 200 counts of violating
Pennsylvania’s informed consent law.
In total, Gosnell was found guilty of 21 out of 24 felony
counts of illegal abortions beyond the 24 week limit and found guilty on all
but 16 of 227 misdemeanor counts of violating the 24-hour informed consent law.
One local reporter covering the trial indicated
Gosnell “heard verdict passively, with small bitter faced smiles.” A Fox news
reporter added, “Our Fox producer in the courtroom says Gosnell looked mad when
the verdicts were read.”
Multiple reports indicate an assistant prosecutor sobbed as
the verdict was read. Continue
reading at LifeNews.com...
Sunday, May 12, 2013
Behold This Fowl! Our First Ever Rose-breasted Grosbeak
“Behold the fowls of the air,” commanded Jesus (Matt.
6:26). John Stott remarked, “Jesus was
an acute observer of nature” (The Birds our Teachers: Biblical Lessons
from a Lifelong Bird-Watcher, p. 14).
These things being so, today we were blessed to both obey and imitate
Jesus! For the first time in nearly
twenty years of birding, we had the distinct pleasure to acutely observing the
first Rose-breasted
Grosbeak that we remember ever seeing.
While walking across the deck late this morning, I caught a
flash of black and white near the suet feeder hanging above a sitting bench in
the southeastern corner of the yard. I
nearly dismissed it at being our regular Mockingbird; thankfully, though, I
took a second glance. I hollered to
Fanny to grab the glasses, hopefully suggesting it might be a Grosbeak. Sure enough!
I could hardly make the positive identification before
Fanny’s head gradually appeared in the lower rim of my binocular picture. Typically, she had already begun her stealthy
stalk toward the unsuspecting bird.
Perhaps more than any other situation, Fanny’s one-eighth of Cherokee
blood is evidenced when there is a beautiful bird in the yard and her Kodak
Z990 is in hand. She slowly moves across
the lawn seemingly without even bending a clover stem (it is almost creepy to
watch!). It can also be frustrating, as
Israel and I are satisfied after a shot or two.
However, neither we nor the dogs are allowed to come out of the house,
until Fanny is convinced that the bird has left the area and is never, ever,
ever returning...lest she misses one last opportunity for a shot! Ugh.
Today was worth the wait.
She was able to pull off these and many other remarkable pictures.
Then this evening, he returned again. He relaxingly feasted on some more suet,
while we were working the garden beds a mere twenty foot from the feeder. He spent about ten minutes with us and was
off again. This jewel doesn’t normally
summer in our region, so we are probably just a brief stop on the spring
migration trip. What a joy!
Because our fowl friend is still in molting, I would suggest
clicking the link above and seeing the bird in full plumage in order to fully
appreciate the brilliant handiwork of our incomprehensible Creator God!
Small Pleasures
While doing a little fly fishing at Otter Lake on the Parkway yesterday, Israel spotted this little fella on the hiking trail. His shell was smaller than a silver dollar.
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
Rogation Days
The days between now and Ascensiontide are called Rogation days because they are set aside as days of prayer. Rogation comes from a Latin word meaning to ask or pray, and we certainly have much to pray about at this time. Naturally, agriculturally oriented societies spend much of their Rogation prayers asking God to bless their herds and crops so they will have the food they need. In more industrial societies people ask God to bless them with "honourable industry." Surely, as the Prayer Book reminds us, all can pray for sound learning, pure manners and to be saved from violence, discord, confusion, pride, arrogancy, and every evil way. Of course, it is important for those in industrial societies to remember that they, too, depend on the fruit of the earth for their sustenance. Therefore let them pray earnestly for good weather and a bountiful harvest. Floods and drought have already affected much of the world's food supply this year. Let us beseech God to deliver us from them, lest there be shortage and need...
"Almighty God, Lord of heaven and earth; We beseech thee to pour forth thy blessing upon this land, and give us a fruitful season; that we, constantly receiving thy bounty, may give thanks unto thee in thy holy Church; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen." ~Collect for The Rogation DaysHelpful words from Bishop Dennis Campbell
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


