The founding principles that govern this blog series apply to both individual words and phrases. Thus:
Wax Eloquent
To speak in a beautiful fashion so much so that the audience enters into a heightened state of euphoria; to demonstrate superior skill and aptitude in speaking on a particular topic.
"Whenever we talk about supralapsarianism, Billy always begins to wax eloquent."
This installment of "Words Theologians Like" is credited to Jeremy. Be sure to check out his blog! If you would like to make a contribution to "Words Theologians Like," leave a remark and it may be featured in future installments.
Here is a nice little recurring post idea: "Words Theologians Like." Let me qualify.
Firstly, theologians tend to use the same word/words over and over again when it fits their agenda. Now some of this is necessary. There aren't many, if any, synonyms that communicate the same idea as atonement (which was a word that did not enter the English language until William Tyndale simply transliterated it in the sixteenth century), and there are other examples of terms that have to be used to communicate exactly what the author is conveying. So, I am not talking about those words. I am talking about the filler; the context in which those big, important theological terms exist.
Secondly, when I say "like," I mean abuse. And when I say abuse, I mean like in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and into The Order of the Phoenix where J.K. Rowling writes repeatedly that so-and-so "screwed up his/her face." All the freaking time. That is what I mean.
Finally, this is a shot (albeit a very respectful shot) at the writing of theologians. They are so consumed with sounding profound that they label stuffy, boring, unreadable writing as academic writing. The concepts theologians are discussing are already profound. Abusing some big words is not going to add to the subject matter. But don't get me wrong, I am not in favor of anti-academic, irreverent language where the author is always writing about "punching himself/herself in the throat" or maiming sentence structure and employing one clause disjointed paragraphs and inserting "c'mon" and text message lingo throughout. My point here is that theologians should try to be better writers. They read enough J.I. Packer and C.S. Lewis. One would think that they might garner some better habits.
With all of that said, the purpose of this recurring post is to expose words that theologians use too much. I will include a short definition and an example sentence.
Without further ado, "Words Theologians Like."
Repudiate
To divorce or separate formally from; to refuse to have anything to do with, disown; to reject with disapproval or condemnation.
"After an extensive study of eschatology, Timmy repudiated his view on post-millennialism."
Colin Hanson at Christianity Today weighs in on what he feels are the top theological stories of 2009. The SBC and the ELCA are among notables as well as names such as Rob Bell and Rick Warren. Some of the listed events are encouraging while others are deeply disheartening.
This weekend I read J.I. Packer's work, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God. The cumulation of my thoughts concerning the book are as follows.
Even though God's total sovereignty and the command to do evangelism are seemingly at odds, they are both taught in Scripture. Therefore, no one can claim the Bible as the ultimate authority and then state that God is not totally sovereign or Christians need not evangelize. If an individual denies God’s sovereignty or the mandate to evangelize, then he or she has proven that he or she does not view Scripture as authority, but rather his or her own logic.
It's a simple concept really. God's sovereignty is magnified through obedience.
The apostle Peter gives a tangible example of the magnification the sovereignty of God through obedience.
Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you.
"Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure."
During a recent outing to the tennis courts, Jordan (Resident Thorns Poet) drove through a rarely green stop-light unabated. Miraculously, he was able to achieve the same feat on the return trip.
"Wow," I mused. "That was incredible. Two green lights in two tries."
"That's right," replied Jordan with a smug glow of self-congratulation as if he had somehow willed the light green.
Jordan's faith in his self-sufficiency (although completely in jest) is a trap that many Christians fall into concerning their salvation (unfortunately not in jest): ascribing to themselves that which only God is capable of.
Jordan had no ability to make the light green, just as the Christian had no ability to call him or herself from death to life. Yet the free-will beast rears its head and Christians claim that they breathed life into their own dead lungs.
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
"A man's free will cannot cure him even of a toothache or a sore finger, and yet he madly thinks it is in his power to cure his soul of sin."
About two months ago I was thinking intently on "Seeking a Sign and the Authority of Scripture" and it came to mind again today as I was reading John Piper's new book, Finally Alive. I went back to my post to reread it and the comments section directly addressed one of the thoughts I had. So, rather than write something new, I will simply repost the remarks.
A question was posed by dual blogger, Eva Joy (Here I Am, Send Me and Life and Prime Numbers):
"I am wondering if you have insights on a question I continue to struggle with: How do you resolve that stance (Scripture as authoritative over experience) with the realization that how we interpret Scripture is influenced by our presuppositions which, in turn, are formed by our experience? Scripture may tell us the significance or meaning of an experience but how we understand what it is telling us is often informed by other experiences."I replied,
"That's a good question. I will try to answer it.The citation of experience as the shaper of our Scriptural interpretation is trumped by the understanding of the role of the Holy Spirit. He guides us, illuminating our path through Scripture, taking what is Christ's and declaring it to us. A regenerate heart can take solace in knowing that it is one with Christ, a fellow heir; all well Christ is the first-born amongst many sons, that He may be lifted up and glorified.
"Often social conditioning gets the blame for the things that we believe. But for the Christian, we know we are led by the Spirit.
"'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.' -John 16:13-15
"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God. -Romans 8:14-16
"So, our interpretation of Scripture is not governed by our experiences, as a post-modern society tells us, but rather by the Spirit. We are indeed a new creation in Christ and we can be certain that God is faithful to the promise in John 16. And a semantic look at John 16 shows us (1) that the Spirit spoken of is that of Christ (He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life) and (2) that the Spirit will guide us in all Truth, which includes all matters of Scripture, as Christ is both synonymous with Truth and the Word (John 1)."
Recently I have been thinking about the overarching authority of Scripture and it's command over any experiential citation. Often people proclaim their experiences to be authoritative, but alas, they crumble under the weight of Scripture. The following, although not entirely exhaustive, are my thoughts concerning the preceding.
Seeking an experience, rather than Scripture, for understanding or revelation is warned against directly by Jesus.
Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying, “Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you.” But he answered them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and to test him they asked him to show them a sign from heaven. He answered them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed.
How can I pardon you?
Your children have forsaken me
and have sworn by those who are no gods.
When I fed them to the full,
they committed adultery
and trooped to the houses of whores.
They were well-fed, lusty stallions,
each neighing for his neighbor's wife.
Shall I not punish them for these things?
declares the Lord;
and shall I not avenge myself
on a nation such as this?
Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
In his letter to the Galatians, the apostle Paul gives us an excellent principle by which to live in the new year: do not rebuild.
In chapter 2 Paul tells us that the apostle Peter was eating and mingling with the Gentiles, but when a pack of Jews showed up, Peter and the other Jews "acted hypocritically" (Galatians 2:13). However, Paul saw right through their actions. He knew that the man who had walked with Jesus knew quite well that Christ died for the Jew and the Gentile (Romans 1:16). So he called them out, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews" (Galatians 2:14).
Now Paul knew that someone had begun preaching a false Gospel among the Galatians; one that required circumcision for salvation. So for Peter to withdraw from the non- circumcised to be with the circumcised would only further confuse the Galatians. But Paul makes clear to the Galatians that the circumcision issue here turned out to be the hypocrisy of Peter.
In Acts 10:9-16 Peter has a vision in relation to clean and unclean food. After Peter argues about the cleanliness of the food, he is told, "What God has made clean, do not call common" (10:15). Peter was freed to eat as he pleased. The vision has continued purpose. Peter, in a conversation with Cornelius, a Gentile, relates his vision to their interaction, "You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation, but God has shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean. So when I was sent for, I came without objection" (10:28).
Back in Galatians, Paul knows that Peter has been told he could eat as he pleased, like a Gentile, and Paul knows that Peter has been told that he could associate across Jew/Gentile lines. So why ever would Peter withhold his fellowship with Gentiles when the Jews showed up? Why should the man who eats like a Gentile act as though Jews are more apt for salvation because of circumcision?
Paul continues.
We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 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.
"If the Judaizers' (the circumcision-happy Jews) doctrine was correct, then Paul, Peter, Barnabas, and the other Jewish believers fell back into the category of sinners because they had been eating and fellowshiping with Gentiles, who according to the Judaizers were unclean. If the Judaizers were right, then Christ was wrong and had been teaching people to sin because He taught that food could not contaminate a person (Mark 7:19)."
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
I watched this interview excerpt of Rick Warren on suffering and I am speechless... kind of.
Pastor Rick says that he would ask God why there is so much suffering on Earth; however, as the video demonstrates, Pastor Rick thinks he already knows the answer to the "unanswerable question."
"God's will is not done most of the time on Earth."
Paul warns against this thinking:
As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will" But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?
During the weeks leading up to it, I thought a lot about marriage as a means of sanctification. God uses a spouse to shape, grow, and refine in His truth. And while your spouse is probably the person who has the most significant impact on sanctification, the impact can be attributed also to interactions with other Christians.
But it doesn't stop there. Our interactions with our brothers and sisters are not simply to sanctify us, but also to save us. It's an easy concept, but one that carries a whole lot of weight.
But "The salvation of the righteous is from the Lord" (Psalm 37:39), right? How can our interactions with humans save us?
It all boils down to is this: God uses means to accomplish ends. For example, when Israel wallowed in idolatry the Lord was upset and gave them up. He did not perform any supernatural outright act, but rather He allowed them to be conquered and taken into captivity (2 Kings 17:7-23). Or when Philip came upon the Ethiopian eunuch. The eunuch had no idea what he was reading until Philip came along and explained. The eunuch was converted and baptized right there (Acts 8:26-40). The Lord used Philip to explain the Scripture, rather than granting the eunuch immediate understanding.
So, God uses human means to accomplish His purposes here on Earth which is a means to the end of His glory.
That is an agreeable statement when thinking about conversion. Why else would God call us to evangelism? But do we agree with that statement concerning perseverance?
We should. Paul says, "the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Corinthians 1:18). The key there is "being saved." What does that phrase mean? Our salvation is not immediate, but ongoing; perseverance is entirely as important as conversion. This heightens the importance of proper interactions with other believers.
Perseverance is hard for depraved humans. God knows that. And often His answer is human means.
This is why we must foster correct fellowship within our churches and Christian circles. Our conversation cannot be limited to the weather and the football game. It must be Gospel-saturated. Keeping the Gospel central will ensure that our brothers and sisters are persevering. "The word of the cross" is the "power of God" for those of "us who are being saved." Often times we back-burner the Gospel and need a brother or sister to put it back in front of our face. Those are the human means contributing to our ongoing salvation.
God has these means planned out and in place to accomplish His purposes to the end of His glory, but we must strive to persevere. We must strive to keep the Gospel central in our dealings with other Christians. I would contend that our interactions with brothers and sisters in Christ are equally as important to our interactions with unbelievers.
Now, I am not saying that salvation can be lost. If God so desires us to persevere, He will provide the means. And if a so-called Christian does not persevere, He was a false convert to begin with.
The emphasis rests on the fact that perseverance is not governed by some magical formula that carries us to the end once we are converted, but rather on the centrality of the Gospel in our lives which is often spurred by our interactions with our Christian brothers and sisters. We must be attentive to the Spirit and do what He prompts us to by reading Scripture and seeking the Lord in prayer. Then we must pass it on to those around us.
Therefore, in conclusion, strive to persevere in your own life and strive to help others persevere in their lives. God has given us weighty tasks. We need His strength and guidance to perform them. And we will give Him the glory.
Ok. So I couldn't leave yesterday's post alone; I just have to revisit it.
First I would like to share a comment by my blogging brother, Jake.
I understand the stomach-churning you are experiencing and say to you with hard-conviction that I can relate!
It is one thing to express doubt or affirm that there is and will be a lack of FULL understanding that we will have on this side of eternity... after all.. we are human... frail... finite...
"Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, OR WHO BECAME HIS COUNSELOR? WHO HAS FIRST GIVEN TO HIM THAT IT MIGHT BE PAID BACK TO HIM AGAIN?"
But with Boyd... he uses a sophomoric interpretation to portray, as you put it, "a putrid expression of who God is."
Because, it seems, in Boyd's mind... the chief end of God is to make man's life better... if He can!
For my name's sake I defer my anger,In Paul's introduction to the Romans:
for the sake of my praise I restrain it for you,
that I may not cut you off.
Behold, I have refined you, but not as silver;
I have tried you in the furnace of affliction.
11 For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it,
for how should my name be profaned?
My glory I will not give to another.
...Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ...
I am writing to you, little children,
because your sins are forgiven for his name's sake.
For your name's sake, O Lord,
And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.
God is not man, that he should lie,
or a son of man, that he should change his mind.
Has he said, and will he not do it?
Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?
It is not in the least bit surprising that a post with that title would be driven by an article in... (drum roll)... Christianity Today.
What is surprising is that this post has little to do with what Christianity Today is doing, but rather what someone in Christianity Today is saying. Well, he's not just saying it in Christianity Today. He has been saying it for quite some time. And it makes me want to throw up.
I had forgotten where Greg Boyd really stands; the words that really come out of his mouth. They make me want to throw up.
Here is an excerpt from the article.
Inside the spacious, one-level sanctuary, Boyd bounds onto the stage, shirt untucked, wearing jeans but no shoes. His text is Luke 13:1-5, where Jesus responds to concerns about the Galileans whose blood Pilate mixed with their sacrifices. Jesus also mentions the 18 on whom the tower in Siloam fell. "Do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem?" Jesus asks. "No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish."
Boyd explains that we cannot know anything about why bad things happen.
"Everyone say squat," Boyd directs. The congregation dutifully responds. "That's what you don't know. You don't know squat."
Boyd then strings together a series of scenarios: one person is healed and another is not; one nation prospers and the other suffers.
"All we know is that in this unfathomably complex war zone, crap happens," Boyd says. "It hits the fan, sprays everywhere, and once in a while you get hit."
He elaborates to make sure no one misses the point. No one plans to come down with cancer. Nor should we pretend that cancer fits within God's will, he says.
"This wasn't in your daily planner. It wasn't in God's daily planner. This wasn't God's perfect script for your life," Boyd continues. "It's a war zone. There are a lot of wills that affect what comes to pass other than God's. Now of course the sovereign Lord of history is infinitely intelligent. So he anticipates every possible mess from all eternity, and he has a plan in place so that when the mess happens he has something in place to bring good out of it, to redeem it, to use it to his advantage. He doesn't cause messes for a purpose, but he brings purposes to the messes."
You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”
I know that you can do all things,
and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted.
Not too long ago I got a new Bible. I began paging through and I noticed something different from my previous ESV Bible: the words of Christ were not in red.
At first I thought nothing of it. I read my new Bible and was quite content. However, recently I have been thinking about it. And I have questions.
In 1899, a man by the name of Lous Klopsch decided that a red-letter Bible would be a good idea.
Modern Christianity is striving zealously to draw nearer to the great Founder of the Faith. Setting aside mere human doctrines and theories regarding Him, it presses close to the Divine Presence, to gather from His own lips the definition of His mission to the world and His own revelation of the Father… The Red Letter Bible has been prepared and issued in the full conviction that it will meet the needs of the student, the worker, and the searchers after truth everywhere (Red Letter Origin, ESV.org).
How is it that I could ever think that I alone have enough merit to please God?
"You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." -Matthew 5:48
That's not possible for me alone, but isn't the Gospel great? The merit that I am incapable of generating is simply projected onto me in exchange for my sin, and ultimately the wrath of God, all by the work of Jesus Christ on the cross. What a great transfer!
So how could I ever slip into a pattern where my gratitude is diminished because I feel that I have the right to any of this?
Oh, Lord! Keep me from this behavior...
Read this list. If you are not convicted by 50% of the statements, check your pulse. You may be dead.
Taken from Profiting from the Scriptures by AW Pink
"The ungodly are ever seeking after joy, but they do not find it: they busy and weary themselves in the pursuit of it, yet all in vain. Their hearts being turned from the Lord, they look downward for joy, where it is not; rejecting the substance, they diligently run after the shadow, only to be mocked by it. It is the sovereign decree of heaven that nothing can make sinners truly happy but God in Christ; but this they will not believe, and therefore they go from creature to creature, from one broken cistern to another, inquiring where the best joy is to be found. Each worldly thing which attracts them says, It is found in me; but soon it disappoints. Nevertheless, they go on seeking it afresh today in the very thing which deceived them yesterday. If after many trials they discover the emptiness of one creature comfort, then they turn to another, only to verify our Lord’s word,
'Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again' (John 4:13).
Going now to the other extreme: there are some Christians who suppose it to be sinful to rejoice. No doubt many of our readers will be surprised to hear this but let them be thankful they have been brought up in sunnier surroundings, and bear with us while we labor with those less favored. Some have been taught—largely by implication and example, rather than by plain inculcation—that it is their duty to be gloomy. They imagine that feelings of joy are produced by the Devil appearing as an angel of light. They conclude that it is well-nigh a species of wickedness to be happy in such a world of sin as we are in. They think it presumptuous to rejoice in the knowledge of sins forgiven, and if they see young Christians so doing they tell them it will not be long before they are floundering in the Slough of Despond.
'Rejoice evermore' (1 Thessalonians 5:16). It surely cannot be unsafe to do what God has commanded us. The Lord has placed no embargo on rejoicing. No, it is Satan who strives to make us hang up our harps. There is no precept in Scripture bidding us 'Grieve in the Lord always: and again I say, Grieve'; but there is an exhortation which bids us,
'Rejoice in the Lord, O ye righteous: for praise is comely for the upright' (Psalm 33:1).
Reader, if you are a real Christian (and it is high time you tested yourself by Scripture and made sure of this point), then Christ is yours, all that is in Him is yours."
"Delight yourself in the LORD, and he will give you the desires of your heart."
-Psalm 37:4
