If you are a fan of liberal, “cultural” protestanism . . . .

Go see the Book of Eli.

Theology w/Paul Zahl

I am currently working my way through Paul F. M. Zahl’s A Short Systematic Theology (Eerdmans, 2000).  Living up to its name, it is a tiny book (100 pgs) divided into three main sections, comprised of 25 compact theses total.  Because of it’s size and potential for theses to open up further avenues for exploration, I am going to blog through this book.

Stay tuned . . .

A Brief, Late Night Apology for Reading Chuck Klosterman

Tonight I finished reading the newest collection of essays by Chuck Klosterman.  I recently “discovered” Chuck due to some ESPN podcasts he had done with the Sports Guy, Bill Simmons.  I did not take long to realize that I am a bit late to the Klosterman party.  Fortunately, that did not detract me from reading his recent 230 page work in roughly 2 evenings, quite a fast clip for me. 

So, whether you would be a neophyte like myself, or have had several trips around the ferris wheel with Klosterman’s work, I strongly encourage you to read his latest book.  In order to be consistent with the title of this post, for now let me give everyone 1 reason to go buy his book immediately: the level of curiosity Klosterman displays for topics that appear as mundane as TV sitcom “laugh tracks,” coupled with the conclusions  about culture he draws from such seemingly insignificant minutiae (some of which I think are accurate), challenges and inspires one to rise above the mental laziness that one can lapse into, even as a graduate student.  The pace & curiosity in his thought is infectious; he makes me want to be a better scholar.

Now, I have likely given more than one reason somewhere in there, & am possibly only in the honeymoon stage with a new author who isn’t afraid to be provocative, so I will try to end this post like many of his essays in his latest work; I hope not.

New Toy!

For those who follow me as I fumble about the dark rooms of theology/ministry, it is pretty obvious that my posting tends to come in waves, or perhaps better put, in binges. 

One of the main reasons for my current hiatus was the quiet passing of the family computer about 2 months ago.  Thankfully, I have parents who model generosity, & i am now typing this post from the new family Dell Inspiron laptop!  It is evident that I continue to become less tech-savvy with each overdue upgrade like this, but for now i am having fun. 

So, hopefully another binge, & not excuse, is coming!

Question for Logicians

Hey readers, quick question.  I am familiar with logic (the discipline, of course), but I was wondering if there was an “official” informal fallacy that deals specifically with the tone with which an argument is verbally stated.  Just curious.

Mystery & Atonement

I’ve been thinking the last day or two about the synergism-monergism debate within more conservative american protestant thought, spurred on by McLaren’s recent book on spiritual formation.  So, here are some off-the-wall reflections:

Here is how I often hear/read the debate being framed: synergists insist that God is offering them a gift, the “package of salvation,” and they are merely taking it.  Monergists protest that if humans contribute at all, even just 1%, then the grace of God has been abjured.

Obviously, there is a limited view of the atonement at work here.  The failings of a merely forensic, penal model of atonement have been well-documented.  One such failing is the need to “quantify” the relationship between God and man in salvation.  This is harmful i think, b/c not only is such abstract calculus impossible, it undermines the role of mystery in salvation.  If both sides assert that God is the primary agent of salvation, then we have to assume some level of, to steal a phrase from a professor at Bethel Seminary, “epistemological humility” in our models. 

This is not relativism; scripture indicates that we can know we are saved.  What i am saying is that given both the complexities inherent in all relationships and the fact that we are not in a position of authority, we have to incorporate mystery in how we understand the atonement.  Models are useful, but when they get parsed down into percentages or packages they become destructive to understanding.

Ray Anderson on Flying

One of the most quotable theologians I have encountered so far in my studies is Ray Anderson.  Here is the latest gem I have found, from his recent published sermon series on the book of Ecclesiastes, where he deals with the inherent tension humans feel due to being of both dust and spirit:

So it is with Christians, added Kierkegaard; they conclude that the domesticating grace of God is not meant to take seriously the wings of the Spirit, for to do so emaciates one’s well-being and destroys one’s peace as an earth-bound creature.  Whereas, in fact, the wings are meant to be used, humans have Spirit, and thus are destined to live a transcendent life, above mere earthly existence.  You see the point of all this is that God has put eternity in your heart.  It means sadness if you are aware of it.  But that sadness is the beating of the wings of your spirit against the prison of the frustrations that encompass you.  And in beating your wings and protesting against the contradictions of life you become more aware, become more of an individual, not just apart of the flock; this means suffering, but the spirit is alive! 

[emphasis mine, 22-3]

The Parables of Jesus & a Theology of Scripture

In McGowan’s recent book on the nature of Scripture he attempts to redefine the concept of the “perspicuity” of Scripture.  He argues that we should alter our vocabulary to comprehension as opposed to perspicuity.  This is b/c McGowan believes that perspicuity “can be understood to imply an access to the Scriptures that is entirely human and natural (46-7).”

McGowan seeks to prevent detaching Scripture from the doctrine of God, saying that “understanding the things of God is a God-given ability and not a natural human ability (47).”  In support of this he appeals to Mt 13:11-13, where Jesus speaks of the incomprehensibility of his parables.  McGowan argues that despite attempts to twist the text to say that Jesus’ parables are capable of being grasped, the text is clear: they are not.  Thus, we must rely on the Holy Spirit to help us understand Scripture.

Now, with the disclaimer that this is only a small snippet of a larger argument McGowan is making, I am curious as to what others make of this use of Matthew 13 in developing a theology of scripture.  While I appreciate McGowan’s stated goal of relocating Scripture within the doctrine of God, I am troubled by this move because within the larger narrative of the Gospels who Jesus is and what he came to do is very revealed.  I think McGowan has misused this text due to not appreciating the Gospel’s genre.  This is not to say his affinity with Calvin’s concept of illumination has no merit, but that I find his use of this text unhelpful.  For my money, John 5 would have been much more compelling.

December Reading: House-Cleaning

As I recently discussed, I try to plan my reading/studying in monthly blocks.  For the specifics of how I do this, click here.  This month I am violating one of my professed strategies by reading books that aren’t thematically connected.  This is mainly because I had already committed to getting a couple books read and reviewed, one of which is long overdue to get done.  To make a long story short, I need to do some house-cleaning.  Lastly, I would like to squeeze in one more this month, probably a shorter work.  I would love suggestions, so send them my way.  Without further ado:

“Laundry” List:

McGowan, A. T. B.  The Divine Authenticity of Scripture: Retrieving an Evangelical Heritage.  Downers Grove: IVP, 2007.  229 pgs

Metzger, Paul Louis.  The Word of Christ and the World of Culture: Sacred and Secular Through the Theology of Karl Barth.  Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2005.  252 pgs

Nichols, Terence L.  The Sacred Cosmos: Christian Faith and the Challenge of Naturalism.  Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2003.  240 pgs

Historical Text:

Olson, Roger E.  The Story of Christian Theology: Twenty Centuries of Tradition & Reform.  Downers Grove: IVP, 1999.  652 pgs

Book Review: Barth for Armchair Theologians

Franke, John R.  Barth for Armchair Theologians.  Louisville: John Knox, 2006.  xi+183

Interest in the theology of Karl Barth remains at a near fever pitch.  For those preparing for a career in theology, staring at the tombs of the Church Dogmatics can be overwhelming.  As a former professor of mine once said, there is no substitute for reading the man himself.  While there is certainly wisdom in that remark, introductions to his thought can be a welcome aid to the daunting volume of Barth’s work.  In this short work, John Franke attempts to provide a helpful introduction to this great theologian.

To help the novice, Franke combines both historical and theological developments.  The bulk of the book centers on Barth’s life and theological pilgrimage, but at key points Franke detours to explain the significance of a time, place, or writing for Barth’s emerging thought.  This has the effect of helping the reader reach the chapter on the Church Dogmatics, the point all of Franke’s earlier writing is moving towards, with a decent sense of how Barth arrived at the convictions he did at the Church Dogmatics, and why they matter so much to him.

The centerpiece of this book is a chapter devoted to Barth’s crowning achievement, the Church Dogmatics.  Before summarizing the contents of each volume, he sets some broader contours of the work.  Franke briefly overviews Barth view of faith & reason, the shape & structure of the CD, and how to go about reading this enormous and complex work.  Regarding strategies for comprehension he summarizes the six “patterns” found in Barth’s work as understood by George Hunsinger.  This is a helpful inclusion as it gives the new reader of the CD a set of broader lens through which to begin to understand Barth.  For someone like myself who has been exposed to Barth numerous times but is not an expert, these six categories helped to clarify for me what I find compelling about Barth & what I don’t.  While the summaries of each volume are well done, I benefitted most from context-setting work Franke does.

The book concludes with an evaluation of Barth’s legacy.  It is at this stage that the debate surrounding McCormack’s project is discussed.  Up to this last chapter Franke’s opinion regarding how to best read Barth (turn to analogy vs. McCormack’s reading) had remained relatively well hidden from view, but at this juncture McCormack’s reading gets Franke’s stamp of approval.  Both traditional and postmodern interpreters of Barth will be dissappointed with Franke’s sympathies with McCormack’s views, although Franke is charitable in his evaluations.  Furthermore, this chapter is invaluable for the book regardless of this inner squabble since the real prize of the chapter is how Franke demonstrates the importance of Barth’s thought for the future of theology, something all parties can agree on.

 Franke has offered an accessible and entertaining introduction to both the life and thought of Barth.  Franke’s work creates a level of desire to engage Barth himself, which should be the goal of any primer of a major theologian.  He helps the reader see why Barth matters, for both yesterday and tomorrow, and provides tools to begin the exploration.  As someone who would consider myself somewhere between a beginner and an expert, I profitted from reading this work, and highly recommend it to anyone interested in Karl Barth.

On Studying Theology

Over @ Evan’s blog there was a recent discussion regarding how one should begin to learn theology.  To simplify the discussion, two main approaches emerged in the comments section:

1. Read a lot of classic works from diverse writers.  Read widely
2. Read a historical overview, then start digging deep into a single theologian.  Read deeply.

Here is my two cents on this: integration.  Both perspectives need to be brought together.  There are obvious reasons for this.  To merely read widely means one misses the depth and nuance many thinkers have.  On the other hand, to give history a cursory glance & focus mainly on someone like Karl Barth (a real temptation for beginning thinkers who live in certain parts of the theo-blogosphere city), is to likely miss the complex contextual factors that led to a person’s thought.  Furthermore, while a simple embrace of the postmodern suspicion of metanarrative may be unhelpful, there is wisdom in a wide reading of history, lest one “history” dominate one’s thinking.  Basically, if you think either/or on this type of deal, you are likely to misread both. 

There are probably many different ways to do this, but here is how I am trying to integrate both perspectives.  I try to section my studying off in months.  Each month is devoted to a single thinker, movement, etc in theology.  However, in the same month I try to read at least one work in the history of theology, Christianity, etc.  My belief is that reading both comprehensively & specifically within the field is mutually enriching, & each perspective provides a helpful platform on which to think about the other.  In this way, the study of theology is like spiritual formation, spiraling ever downward into a better understanding in both scope and specificity.

In sum, the key to studying theology is to remember your sunday school songs: read “deep & wide, deep & wide . . .”

CV Help

A couple schools I am looking into for PhD work want me to attach/mail them my CV.  Problem is, I haven’t written one.

So, I’m calling out to the blogosphere for help.  How should  i format the CV?  What should I include?

New Blog Name!

Welcome to my “new” blog!  The new name reflects my sentiments  in a tongue-in-cheek kind of way as I seek to honor God both in ministry & in the search to understand & know Him.  Also, it is a bit odd, which seems to suit me well.  I really like it.  While the theme may be wordpress stock, it has always been one of my favorites.  In the future, bio & belief updates are coming.

Thanks to those of you who offered sugggestions.  Please update your blogrolls everyone!