Goodbye Blogspot
For numerous reasons, I have moved this blog to Wordpress, click here to go to the new home of LastBibleClass.
a poem for Colby
Spring
Work
They hate work
They love spring
They want to go outside
They can't
Work
Sleep
Is what they need
Not
TV
Video games
Facebook
Excuse
Is what they have
Rest
They can have
On this
LONG
Weekend
That I
Don't get
But I'm NOT bitter
Much.
Work
They hate work
They love spring
They want to go outside
They can't
Work
Sleep
Is what they need
Not
TV
Video games
Excuse
Is what they have
Rest
They can have
On this
LONG
Weekend
That I
Don't get
But I'm NOT bitter
Much.
denomi do it day
a wise sage wrote on the board of the beloved Bible 12 classroom:
"if you have a denomination
denomi do it"
Today you are to study the branch of the greater church that you are in some way connected to. In other words, you are to learn about your denomination.
But first, I want you to read some Scripture that I think is important to the lesson.
Romans 12:1 I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. 2 Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. 3 For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. 4 For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, 5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. 6 Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; 7 if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching; 8 the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads, with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.
and
Eph. 4.11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.
and finally this
1 Cor. 12 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.
14 For the body does not consist of one member but of many. 15 If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? 18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.
21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” 22 On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23 and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, 24 which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, 25 that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. 26 If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.
27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it...
Okay, I wanted you to have read these Scriptures to get a biblical basis for this statement: I think we (the church) should be busier about understanding one another than in seeing whose right and whose wrong. And, that my friends is the philosophy of this project. "We're one, but we're not the same" "One" -U2 lyrics at bottom, ask me and I'll play it in class.
Now, you may surf the web to find information about your denomination. I would start with the website of my individual church which will tell you the exact denomination. I might be able to help you.
I will expect you to integrate your findings into your Beliefs Thesis individually, but I hope you will present to the class as an individual or as a group. Let me know when you are ready to present to present to your class. But don't put it off, our available days are shorter than you realize.
This is one of those days that, now that you have read this entire post, if you need to get something else done and wish to work on something else, you may. But if you wish to use the laptop for something else, clear that through me.
http://www.google.com/
Lyrics "One": (*)
Is it getting better
Or do you feel the same
Will it make it easier on you
Now you got someone to blame
You say
One love
One life
When it`s one need
In the night
It's one love
We get to share it
It leaves you baby
If you don`t care for it
Did I disappoint you?
Or leave a bad taste in your mouth?
You act like you never had love
And you want me to go without
Well it`s too late
Tonight
To drag the past out
Into the light
We`re one
But we`re not the same
We get to carry each other
Carry each other
One
Have you come here for forgiveness
Have you come to raise the dead
Have you come here to play Jesus
To the lepers in your head
Did I ask too much
More than a lot
You gave me nothing
Now it`s all I got
We`re one
But we`re not the same
We hurt each other
Then we do it again
You say
Love is a temple
Love a higher love
Love is a temple
Love the higher law
You ask me to enter
But then you make me crawl
And I can`t be holding on
To what you got
When all you got is hurt
One love
One blood
One life
You got to do what you should
One life
With each other
Sisters
Brothers
One life
But we`re not the same
We get to carry each other
Carry each other
One
One
(*) Please note: Lyrics are currently published under a provisional licence granted by Universal Publishing. All lyrics listed on this site are owned by their respected owners. U2 titles published by PolyGram International Music Publishing BV, except: Blue Mountain Music Ltd. (UK), Mother Music (IRL)/Universal Music Publishing Ltd. U2 Recordings owned by Universal International Music B.V. exclusively licensed to: Island Records (Rest Of The World), Interscope Records (USA).
source u2tour.de/discographie/lyrics/One.html
"if you have a denomination
denomi do it"
Today you are to study the branch of the greater church that you are in some way connected to. In other words, you are to learn about your denomination.
But first, I want you to read some Scripture that I think is important to the lesson.
Romans 12:1 I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. 2 Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. 3 For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. 4 For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, 5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. 6 Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; 7 if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching; 8 the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads, with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.
and
Eph. 4.11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.
and finally this
1 Cor. 12 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.
14 For the body does not consist of one member but of many. 15 If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that would not make it any less a part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? 18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.
21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you,” nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” 22 On the contrary, the parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23 and on those parts of the body that we think less honorable we bestow the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty, 24 which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that lacked it, 25 that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another. 26 If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.
27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it...
Okay, I wanted you to have read these Scriptures to get a biblical basis for this statement: I think we (the church) should be busier about understanding one another than in seeing whose right and whose wrong. And, that my friends is the philosophy of this project. "We're one, but we're not the same" "One" -U2 lyrics at bottom, ask me and I'll play it in class.
Now, you may surf the web to find information about your denomination. I would start with the website of my individual church which will tell you the exact denomination. I might be able to help you.
I will expect you to integrate your findings into your Beliefs Thesis individually, but I hope you will present to the class as an individual or as a group. Let me know when you are ready to present to present to your class. But don't put it off, our available days are shorter than you realize.
This is one of those days that, now that you have read this entire post, if you need to get something else done and wish to work on something else, you may. But if you wish to use the laptop for something else, clear that through me.
http://www.google.com/
Lyrics "One": (*)
Is it getting better
Or do you feel the same
Will it make it easier on you
Now you got someone to blame
You say
One love
One life
When it`s one need
In the night
It's one love
We get to share it
It leaves you baby
If you don`t care for it
Did I disappoint you?
Or leave a bad taste in your mouth?
You act like you never had love
And you want me to go without
Well it`s too late
Tonight
To drag the past out
Into the light
We`re one
But we`re not the same
We get to carry each other
Carry each other
One
Have you come here for forgiveness
Have you come to raise the dead
Have you come here to play Jesus
To the lepers in your head
Did I ask too much
More than a lot
You gave me nothing
Now it`s all I got
We`re one
But we`re not the same
We hurt each other
Then we do it again
You say
Love is a temple
Love a higher love
Love is a temple
Love the higher law
You ask me to enter
But then you make me crawl
And I can`t be holding on
To what you got
When all you got is hurt
One love
One blood
One life
You got to do what you should
One life
With each other
Sisters
Brothers
One life
But we`re not the same
We get to carry each other
Carry each other
One
One
(*) Please note: Lyrics are currently published under a provisional licence granted by Universal Publishing. All lyrics listed on this site are owned by their respected owners. U2 titles published by PolyGram International Music Publishing BV, except: Blue Mountain Music Ltd. (UK), Mother Music (IRL)/Universal Music Publishing Ltd. U2 Recordings owned by Universal International Music B.V. exclusively licensed to: Island Records (Rest Of The World), Interscope Records (USA).
source u2tour.de/discographie/lyrics/One.html
MLD Feb 6 - 7 (updated)
HAPPY CHINESE NEW YEAR
Reminder: You should not be on any website other than those I have assigned for class. If you are found on a site other than those pertaining to this period's work, you may receive a zero for this assignment.
Today's assignment:
Using book four of Mere Christianity, you will begin your Biblical Anthropology essay. The topic requires you to write about your beliefs on man, sin and salvation. This essay must have one quote from Mere Christianity and one quote from Romans. Your essay might include answers to the following (these are here to get you thinking - you do not have to answer them): What do I believe about the nature of humans? Are they fallen? What is the impact of being a fallen creature? How does what I understand about Adam and Eve impact my beliefs? What has God done to make salvation possible? How does my experience with people who call themselves Christians flavor my beliefs? What is my role in salvation? What does God expect of me once I have become His follower? How does the following statement impact my thinking and life? "God is easy to please, but hard to satisfy?"
Please Note: You are required to have one quote from Mere and one quote from Romans. You may use more quotes, but your quote ratio for this assignment returns to the normal 5:1.
Follow the PWI carefully. DO NOT MAKE A COVER PAGE and do not type a heading on the paper. After you print your paper, simply write your name on the top right corner of each page. Be sure you staple.
BE SURE TO SAVE YOUR WORK!
The Biblical Anthropology Paper is due at the end of class on Thursday the 7th.
A word about the style of introducing quotes:
Please do not introduce as follows...
"Romans 5:2 says that..."
instead say some thing like:
"The writer of Romans states that..."
"The New Testament teaches us that..."
"Paul clarifies for his reader that..."
"The letter to the Roman church says that..."
"C. S. Lewis says that ..."
If you don't understand what I'm looking for, feel free to ask me.
Reminder: You should not be on any website other than those I have assigned for class. If you are found on a site other than those pertaining to this period's work, you may receive a zero for this assignment.
Today's assignment:
Using book four of Mere Christianity, you will begin your Biblical Anthropology essay. The topic requires you to write about your beliefs on man, sin and salvation. This essay must have one quote from Mere Christianity and one quote from Romans. Your essay might include answers to the following (these are here to get you thinking - you do not have to answer them): What do I believe about the nature of humans? Are they fallen? What is the impact of being a fallen creature? How does what I understand about Adam and Eve impact my beliefs? What has God done to make salvation possible? How does my experience with people who call themselves Christians flavor my beliefs? What is my role in salvation? What does God expect of me once I have become His follower? How does the following statement impact my thinking and life? "God is easy to please, but hard to satisfy?"
Please Note: You are required to have one quote from Mere and one quote from Romans. You may use more quotes, but your quote ratio for this assignment returns to the normal 5:1.
Follow the PWI carefully. DO NOT MAKE A COVER PAGE and do not type a heading on the paper. After you print your paper, simply write your name on the top right corner of each page. Be sure you staple.
BE SURE TO SAVE YOUR WORK!
The Biblical Anthropology Paper is due at the end of class on Thursday the 7th.
A word about the style of introducing quotes:
Please do not introduce as follows...
"Romans 5:2 says that..."
instead say some thing like:
"The writer of Romans states that..."
"The New Testament teaches us that..."
"Paul clarifies for his reader that..."
"The letter to the Roman church says that..."
"C. S. Lewis says that ..."
If you don't understand what I'm looking for, feel free to ask me.
Mere - Book IV assignment
You should have read and done entries on Chapters 1-7 of Book IV of Mere by the beginning of class on Monday the 28th.
next assignment
Happy Snow day! I am writing this not knowing about tomorrow (Friday), but I want to post a reminder about the reading due next week. You are to have read and written entries for the first five chapters of Book IV by your first class of next week:
F and G - Tuesday
A, C, E - Wednesday
F and G - Tuesday
A, C, E - Wednesday
Jesus and Peter
Thanks to Joe and Duncan we now have our own set of Jesus and Peter action figures. Here, Jesus has just rescued Peter who's faith was weak and he began to sink... he took his eyes off of Jesus and looked at his problems... we need to have faith in God and trust Him to get us through our problems!today
Please write the beginnings of your Christology essay. In today's essay, you should integrate two quotes. One quote from Romans and one quote from Mere Christianity.
Be sure to watch your quote ratio and be sure to do your citations correctly. TODAY ONLY, THIS ASSIGNMENT ONLY: the quote ratio is reduced to 4:1. Before it is considered a finished product, the final quote ratio will be 5:1.
You should turn in your printed essay at the end of this class period. If you are not finished, you should write in pen that you still have work to do. I will be basing my evaluation on PWI and the two quotes.
Write your name in pen on the top right corner. NO COVER PAGE today.
This assignment will be 37% of a full test/paper grade.
Be sure to watch your quote ratio and be sure to do your citations correctly. TODAY ONLY, THIS ASSIGNMENT ONLY: the quote ratio is reduced to 4:1. Before it is considered a finished product, the final quote ratio will be 5:1.
You should turn in your printed essay at the end of this class period. If you are not finished, you should write in pen that you still have work to do. I will be basing my evaluation on PWI and the two quotes.
Write your name in pen on the top right corner. NO COVER PAGE today.
This assignment will be 37% of a full test/paper grade.
Book 2, back to entries, and Christology
You have read book two by now, you were to have written something to turn in as a demonstration of your having completed the reading (summary, outline or point of significance for you, etc...) .
Next, you are to go BACK to book two and select a quote and write an ENTRY in CHRISTOLOGY... Citation of Mere Christianity quotes are to be as follows (Mere II. 3. 8)
Tomorrow will be a MCL day and you will begin a Christology essay. This essay will have one quote from Mere and one quote from Romans. Be careful of the quote ratio. Be sure to follow PWI.
Next, you are to go BACK to book two and select a quote and write an ENTRY in CHRISTOLOGY... Citation of Mere Christianity quotes are to be as follows (Mere II. 3. 8)
Tomorrow will be a MCL day and you will begin a Christology essay. This essay will have one quote from Mere and one quote from Romans. Be careful of the quote ratio. Be sure to follow PWI.
Read book I of Mere Christianity
You are to read the five chapters of book one by Monday at the beginning of your class. Please answer the following:
1. What are the main points of Lewis' argument in book one?
2. What do you think of the argument?
3. How would you change the argument?
This can be written on the same sheet of paper that you wrote your summary of the Gentleman - Christian point in class today.
It is due at the beginning of class on Monday.
1. What are the main points of Lewis' argument in book one?
2. What do you think of the argument?
3. How would you change the argument?
This can be written on the same sheet of paper that you wrote your summary of the Gentleman - Christian point in class today.
It is due at the beginning of class on Monday.
Mere Christianity
We will review the exam and you will account for your having obtained your copy of Mere Christianity in class on Wed. 3rd January, 2008.
If you have it and wish to get a step ahead, read the Preface. Be sure you have a Mere Christianity section in your notebook.
You may have a used copy, it may be from a older sibling, or brand new, the edition doesn't matter (because we will refer to and cite quotes by book, chapter and paragraph, not by page). They are available in the school bookstore and at bookstores in town.
If you have it and wish to get a step ahead, read the Preface. Be sure you have a Mere Christianity section in your notebook.
You may have a used copy, it may be from a older sibling, or brand new, the edition doesn't matter (because we will refer to and cite quotes by book, chapter and paragraph, not by page). They are available in the school bookstore and at bookstores in town.
a review of the ideas of Romans 1-8
Review of some of the ideas in Romans 1-8
Text Idea
1.2 Jesus was promised
1.3-4 Hypostatic Union (100% man><100%God)
1.19-20 General Revelation is enough to condemn a person and cause one to seek God
2.4 God’s kindness causes us to turn to Him
2.10-11 God’s Grace is available to the Jew and the Greek (Gentile)
2.15 The Law is in our hearts
3.1-2 The Jewish advantage is their having been given the Law
3.20 The purpose of the law is to show us our sin
3.23 All have sinned (we’re in the same boat)
4.11,22 Abraham was declared righteous by faith
4.24-25 Jesus died for our wrongdoing and rose for our justification
5.1 Our Justification gives us Peace with God
5.3-5 God uses suffering to strengthen us
5.17 Adam caused condemnation, Jesus brings Grace
6.4 As we walk with Jesus we are new people
6.23 The price for sin is death, the gift of God is life
7.19,24,25 I seek good but fail, it is in God through Jesus that I have victory in the constant
battle with sin
8.1 There is no condemnation in Jesus
*8.18 Our suffering now is in the shadow of the glory to come
*8.26 The Holy Spirit helps us in our weakness
*8.28 In Jesus, we know that He will work suffering to our benefit
*8.37-39 We are secure in Jesus
There will be objective questions from these ideas on the exam.
Text Idea
1.2 Jesus was promised
1.3-4 Hypostatic Union (100% man><100%God)
1.19-20 General Revelation is enough to condemn a person and cause one to seek God
2.4 God’s kindness causes us to turn to Him
2.10-11 God’s Grace is available to the Jew and the Greek (Gentile)
2.15 The Law is in our hearts
3.1-2 The Jewish advantage is their having been given the Law
3.20 The purpose of the law is to show us our sin
3.23 All have sinned (we’re in the same boat)
4.11,22 Abraham was declared righteous by faith
4.24-25 Jesus died for our wrongdoing and rose for our justification
5.1 Our Justification gives us Peace with God
5.3-5 God uses suffering to strengthen us
5.17 Adam caused condemnation, Jesus brings Grace
6.4 As we walk with Jesus we are new people
6.23 The price for sin is death, the gift of God is life
7.19,24,25 I seek good but fail, it is in God through Jesus that I have victory in the constant
battle with sin
8.1 There is no condemnation in Jesus
*8.18 Our suffering now is in the shadow of the glory to come
*8.26 The Holy Spirit helps us in our weakness
*8.28 In Jesus, we know that He will work suffering to our benefit
*8.37-39 We are secure in Jesus
There will be objective questions from these ideas on the exam.
suffering
Please contemplate and write a paper on suffering. Please follow Paper Writing Instructions EXCEPT - no cover page. Just write your name in ink on the top right corner. Please include one Biblical text in your paper as a source. Below are some questions to ponder as you think about your views and some resources you may wish to consider as you think and prepare. The next post is an exam preparation post.
Questions:
Where do you believe suffering came from?
In what ways have you suffered and what did you learn from it?
What comforted you during your suffering?
What character in Shadowlands could you use to illustrate suffering in your paper?
Where is God in our suffering?
When we discover we have caused suffering, what should we do?
Resources
A few years ago a friend wrote and asked why God made him suffer, here is one person's answer to the origin of suffering, click here to read
Scriptures we have considered:
John 14:15-17
Rom 8:18
Rom 8:26-28
Rom 5:1-5
Psalm 46
Psalm 23
1Peter 5:6-11
Questions:
Where do you believe suffering came from?
In what ways have you suffered and what did you learn from it?
What comforted you during your suffering?
What character in Shadowlands could you use to illustrate suffering in your paper?
Where is God in our suffering?
When we discover we have caused suffering, what should we do?
Resources
A few years ago a friend wrote and asked why God made him suffer, here is one person's answer to the origin of suffering, click here to read
Scriptures we have considered:
John 14:15-17
Rom 8:18
Rom 8:26-28
Rom 5:1-5
Psalm 46
Psalm 23
1Peter 5:6-11
writing an entry
procedure for writing an entry:
- Read the assigned text, look for an insight about God and our relationship with Him that you can write about.
- Make note of significant passages within the reading which provide teaching about one of the categories (Bib, Theo Prop., Christ, Peu, Bib. Anth.). What do these passages teach us about God?
- Write a paragraph that explains a point of theology and its application. This paragraph will:
- include a pertinent quote from the passage (be sure to quote just enough of the passage to illustrate your point and not take the quote out of context)
- be read in class and provide a beginning to conversation about the text
- provide a data base of information that can be used later in the writing of the Beliefs Thesis
You are accountable for the entries that we do in class. There will be an inventory done of your notebook before the end of the trimester.
- Read the assigned text, look for an insight about God and our relationship with Him that you can write about.
- Make note of significant passages within the reading which provide teaching about one of the categories (Bib, Theo Prop., Christ, Peu, Bib. Anth.). What do these passages teach us about God?
- Write a paragraph that explains a point of theology and its application. This paragraph will:
- include a pertinent quote from the passage (be sure to quote just enough of the passage to illustrate your point and not take the quote out of context)
- be read in class and provide a beginning to conversation about the text
- provide a data base of information that can be used later in the writing of the Beliefs Thesis
You are accountable for the entries that we do in class. There will be an inventory done of your notebook before the end of the trimester.
Paul
A figure who has inspired me with his work and teaching is Saul of Tarsus who became known as Paul the Apostle. We will consider the life, teaching and work of Paul.
PAUL: APOSTLE OF THE HEART SET FREE is the title of a great work on the life, work and thought of Paul by F.F. Bruce. Much of the organization of this material comes from this book.
A key text to understand Paul is 2 Cor. 3:17 "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom." (NIV) This assertion is made by F.F. Bruce because of the early life of Paul as a teacher of the law and what he discovered in the freedom that comes in Christ.
So we look to some autobiographical texts which will shed some light for us in Paul's life: Gal 1.11-24, 2 Cor. 11.16-12.9, Acts 22:3-21, Acts 26:2-23. From these texts and studying the history of the time of his life, we can understand the man and then better understand his writing.
EARLY LIFE
Paul was born with the Hebrew name Saul. It is asserted that he was about the same age as Jesus and was born in Tarsus, circa. (about) 3 AD. We know that his family was of the tribe of Benjamin but that he was a Roman citizen by birth. Some surmise that because of being from Tarsus that perhaps his grandfather was awarded citizenship because of service to the empire during a war that took place in that region. Of course the citizenship could have been purchased. Whatever the case, we know that Saul was born a citizen of the empire and that became important on several occasions. Tarsus was a cosmopolitan trading city on a crossroads ten miles from the Mediterranean Sea. It was a provincial capital during the Persian and Roman empires, it was also a place of learning. Saul would have not only been trained in Judaism but also in the Hellenism of the day. The influence of the Greeks would have been strong in Tarsus. We may understand that young Saul was well versed in Greek, the learning of philosophy, rhetoric and logic as well as in his native religion of Judaism. We also know that young Hebrew men were also taught a trade and Saul's was the making of tents.
TRAINING IN JUDAISM
We know that young Saul was a student of Gamaliel in Jerusalem. We know that because of this he was a fairly strict Pharisee. We use our knowledge of the history and traditions of the time to extrapolate that Saul would have left Tarsus at about thirteen or fourteen years of age and gone to study. Gamaliel was a fairly well known teacher of the school of Hillel (his grandfather) and was well thought of among the members of the Sanhedrin. Thus, young Saul was well placed among the powers that were in charge during the time of Jesus. For all this to have happened, we may further surmise that his family was of some means to enable him to do so well.
We know from Paul's words and from the history of the time that he would have been a strict teacher of the law. As a Pharisee, he would have held to the many extra-biblical rules and regulations in place by the scribes and Pharisees of the day. Further, we know that he was associated with the Sanhedrin (the ruling council) because of his role in the stoning of and death of Stephen who was the first Christian martyr. Following this we see in Scripture that he became a feared, key persecutor of "The Way" (the earliest name for Christianity) until his conversion.
CONVERSION TO FOLLOWING JESUS
As a feared persecutor of 'The Way', Saul sought and received permission to carry his mission to Damascus where followers of Jesus were growing in number. After receiving this permission, Saul and the guard assigned to travel with him set off to Damascus. On the way there, God called on him. He was blinded, spoken to by Jesus himself and taken on to Damascus where God had prepared a greeting. He was touched by Ananias, and through this God healed him of his physical blindness to go with his newly forsaken spiritual blindness. After a brief time, Saul began to preach that Jesus is the Messiah in Damascus, the movement of the followers of Jesus was blessed by Saul.
NEW VOCATION: APOSTLE
An apostle is someone who is "called" to be a messenger. So this begs the question: How did Saul make such a change? I would propose that this took place because of what I refer to as the 'Arabia Theory'. In this theory, Saul would have taken key scrolls (perhaps Isaiah, Psalms, others?) into the desert to make sense of all he knew from his training to date in light of the direct revelation he received from Jesus on the Damascus road. Following this time of study and contemplation, according to the theory - three years or so, Saul now clearly understood how Jesus "fulfilled the law" and came as the promised Messiah, fulfilling a huge number of prophesies of the prophets. With this preparation, he was ready to begin to take the message of Jesus to the world.
Saul traveled to visit the leaders and was feared by the followers of Jesus. This was because of his previous activity as a man who represented the Sanhedrin and jailed and oversaw the killing of Jesus' followers. Someone needed to step up and help Saul find acceptance, this task fell to Barnabas who encouraged Saul and through that association Saul gained further acceptance by 'The Way'.
After a while, back home in Tarsus (according to some writers), the time had come to take the gospel (the good news about Jesus) to new places. Saul began his missionary journeys.
MISSIONARY JOURNEYS
The team on the first trip were Saul, Barnabas & John Mark. This trip originated in Antioch (which becomes the base of Paul's work) as the church there "sent" them out to take the message about Jesus to people who had not heard of him yet.
We see a clear pattern emerge in Paul's missionary endeavor that will be noticed in much of the missionary work on the trips. We see that Saul went first to the community of the Synagogue first (the gospel went first to the Jews). He appealed to their knowledge of the Old Testament and their (supposed) looking for the coming of the Messiah. On the occasions when he was not welcomed in the synagogue, Paul would go to house of someone who was interested. My take is that, after presenting the message about Jesus being the Messiah, Paul seemed to focus on the people who were willing to listen.
Two items that I want to glance at on the first journey (there is a ton more, but we are not writing a detailed biography here). First is the incident with John Mark. We really do not know why he did it, but John Mark bailed on the trip. Maybe he missed the people back in Jerusalem, maybe the pace was too rigorous, maybe he couldn't deal with Paul's travel rules, or maybe it was culture shock... but whatever the reason, John Mark left. Paul was not happy about this. We know that for sure and will see more when we get to the beginning of the 2nd journey. But there is a point that I want to make here that is really important for us to understand. Even if it takes time, we need to be reconciled to people. It apparently took Paul and John Mark awhile to get their relationship mended, but they did. Look at what Paul says to Timothy when writing later in life. Not only had Paul mended the relationship with John mark, but he asked for him to join him in ministry. We should not be grudge holders. And if we are especially hard headed, we can learn from a guy who was pretty hard headed that we need to "get right with people."
The second thing that I want to point out about the first trip is that Paul was stoned and left for dead. So, was he dead? The question is, like the above point about John Mark, a minor point. But there is an interesting section of the autobiographical text of Paul which would fit here. Did God call Paul out of time and space for a brief moment to further His calling on Paul's life? Perhaps.
The next point that I would like make about the missionary endeavors is the fact that Paul always brought the message of God to his listeners in a manner that was culturally informed. To Jews, he usually spoke using the following components in his talk: The Gospel (death-burial-resurrection of Jesus), quoted Scripture, and used the history of the Jews to show that Jesus is the Messiah (Christ). There are a couple of other points that should be made about the trips, they included signs and wonders, conversions, and threats against Paul (often by Jews).
As mentioned above, the Apostle was careful to speak to people within their cultural understanding. Today this is called "contextualization." Finally, from the first trip, we note that Paul returned to places where he has visited previously and worked to encourage the churches he helped start. Paul and Barnabas returned to Antioch and then after a visit to Jerusalem they sought to embark on their second journey.
The second missionary journey was a trip that began with Paul and Barnabas having a disagreement over the status of John Mark. The solution to this disagreement was that Barnabas decided to travel with John Mark and return to Cyprus while Paul was joined by Silas and traveled over land to revisit the cities in southern Asia Minor that were visited on the first trip. Following the visit to these cities in Southern Galatia, Paul headed north toward the Black Sea. But the Holy Spirit directed Paul to turn west after which he wound up on the northwestern coast of what is now Turkey. Like southern Asia Minor, this region had several large cities, many of which have existing ruins today. By the time Paul arrived, he would have been visiting cities that had strong Hellenistic influences while being firmly Roman. Before we go much further into the Roman Empire, I want us to consider some works of the New Testament scholar, N.T. Wright.
"When Paul was converted, the Roman empire as such was two generations old. The ancient and venerable Roman Republic had collapsed into civil war following the murder of Julius Caesar. Several years of bloody and divisive conflict had eventually led to the emergence of Octavian, Caesars' adopted heir, who took the title August and reigned supreme over Rome and its burgeoning empire for the last two decades BC and he first fourteen years AD. His adopted heir Tiberius carried on and consolidated his work, being followed by the disastrous Gaius Caligula and the shrewd but weak Claudius. Claudius' death in AD 54 left the way clear for Nero, who came to the throne in a blaze of optimism as a bright new hope, and left it, mourned by some, loathed by many, in 68, precipitating the so-called ' year of the four emperors', a few brief months of total chaos ended by Vespasian establishing a new dynasty. During this period the empire stretched right around the Mediterranean world and some distance into much of the hinterland. Having seen off its main rival, Carthage, some centuries before, Rome sat in luxury at the middle of a web of power, influence and money." (Paul, p. 62-3) This was the Roman Empire that Paul traveled in.
When Paul arrived in Troas on the west coast of today's Turkey, God spoke to him in a vision. In a dream, Paul saw a man from Macedonia (the home of Alexander the Great) calling to him "Come over here." Paul was headed for Europe. But in Troas, something else happened, Paul and Silas were joined by Luke, who would be a part of Paul's team off-and-on for the remainder of Paul's travels. The text in question is the first of what are called "we" passages (texts where the writer includes himself in the group he writes about).
After arriving in what is today northeastern Greece, Paul's work in Philippi, Berea, and Thessalonica was followed by his visit to the heart of Greek democracy: Athens. As Paul made his way through the city, he could not help but see the multitude of statues that were all over the city. He was of course talking with Jews at the Synagogue and these discussions spilled over to the marketplace where Epicurean and Stoic philosophers apparently heard him. Paul found himself in the Areopagus on Mars Hill where his discourse with the philosophers included his quoting of Greek poets (probably Epimenides and Aratus). As usual, some listened, some heard, some laughed and a few wanted to hear more.
At this point we need to compare Paul's talk with the philosophers with the conversations he had with the Jews. With the Jews, Paul used the history of the Jews as a contextual basis for conversation. In Athens, Paul connected with the philosophers by referring to the statue to 'an unknown god' and connects previous knowledge to new knowledge, that of the God of Heaven who sent His Son. Paul describes God as greater than temples and not served by human hands and that this god made men and their destinies and sustained them, here probably quoting Epimenides. Again: culture, quote and then gospel, this is how Paul puts the gospel into their context.
Paul then traveled to Corinth and began what would be a long working relationship with a Jewish couple: Priscilla and Aquilla. They were 'tentmakers'[1] who had fled Rome when Claudius expelled Jews from Rome in 49. Following a confrontation with the government in Corinth, Paul ended the second mission trip in Ephesus, where he left Priscilla and Aquilla and then returned to Caesarea by sea and then back to Antioch.
Soon afterward, Paul set out on the third journey through Galatia and Phrygia and arrived in Ephesus. According to the text, Paul spent more time in Ephesus than any other place, two years. Ephesus was an important city in that day. In the 6th century B.C. the temple to Artemis had been founded. Artemis (Diana) had devotes from many places and pilgrimages were made to Ephesus. There, merchants earned income from selling small images, they set up stalls to sell these statues. During the time of the growth of the followers of Jesus, the gospel changed lives and the sales of idols fell. The guild of artisan's complaints grew into a riotous protest in the amphitheater and the riotous meeting was ended because it was unlawful. At the urging of his colleagues, Paul left Ephesus after the riot and traveled back through Macedonia and Greece.
Next, from a comparison of Acts and the Pauline letters we know that he spent three months in Corinth (where there had been trouble with the government on the second journey). Here, in Corinth, Paul was yet again in danger of his life, this time, once again, by Jews. The year was either 56 or 57 and it is at this time that Paul writes a letter to the church in Rome. Those who have studied Paul carefully believe that at this point in his life, once again under threat, he wanted to send a letter of explanation and an exhortation to the church in Rome. He wanted to encourage them to follow God and take the gospel forth to new areas of the empire, specifically, Paul mentions Spain.
Before the letter was dispatched, a copy may have been made. Some evidence from ancient MSS exists that Paul may have had an immediate copy of the letter and addressed it to the Ephesians with an additional preface. The letter made its way to Rome in the capable hands of Phoebe, a deaconess. Rome [2] was the center of the empire and Paul knew the importance of getting a clear explanation of salvation to Rome.
Paul next makes his way to see the Ephesian elders. He lands on a beach within easy travel of Ephesus and at a meeting with the elders, Paul gives his testimony, experience and encouragement. Paul then traveled by sea and eventually to Jerusalem where he was accused by Jews of breaking the Mosaic Law and held by the Romans. He used the occasion of his trail to tell Felix, Festus and King Agrippa of the person and work of the Lord Jesus. He then appealed to Caesar. He was sent with a guard to Rome, eventually he was held under house arrest awaiting trail, released, possibly traveled to Spain, back to Macedonia, re-arrested and finally executed in Rome. Paul, it seems to me, lived and breathed to spread the gospel. The letter we read to the church in Rome explains that gospel and the life the follower of the God of the gospel should live.
_________________________________________
[1] Today, 'tentmakers' work in countries which do not allow missionaries or in countries in which the culture is better served when the missionary is not a full time Christian. It is better in these cultures to have a platform upon which to stand to live and share the gospel. To have a real job and be part of the culture makes it easier to enter the culture and be connected to people's lives. Paul did this with Aquila and Priscilla by making tents in Corinth and Ephesus. 'Tentmakers' take the term from Paul.
[2] ROME
some facts and ideas about the city and the church
circa. 30AD, The Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:10-11), Roman "Jews and converts to Judaism" hear and respond to the gospel. They take this message back to Rome. From this we may conclude that the Gospel entered Rome very early in the history of the church.
49 AD Claudius orders all Jews to leave Rome
56-7 AD Paul writes to the Romans from Corinth
60 AD (WINTER) Paul arrives in Rome (under house arrest) later released (circa. 62), possibly (according to some tradition) travels to Spain and then travels back to Macedonia.
64 AD Rome burns, Nero blames Christians
circa. 65 AD Paul rearrested and brought to Rome, tried and executed (3 springs legend)
circa. 90s Paul's letters collected, copied and distributed by last decade of the first century
PAUL: APOSTLE OF THE HEART SET FREE is the title of a great work on the life, work and thought of Paul by F.F. Bruce. Much of the organization of this material comes from this book.
A key text to understand Paul is 2 Cor. 3:17 "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom." (NIV) This assertion is made by F.F. Bruce because of the early life of Paul as a teacher of the law and what he discovered in the freedom that comes in Christ.
So we look to some autobiographical texts which will shed some light for us in Paul's life: Gal 1.11-24, 2 Cor. 11.16-12.9, Acts 22:3-21, Acts 26:2-23. From these texts and studying the history of the time of his life, we can understand the man and then better understand his writing.
EARLY LIFE
Paul was born with the Hebrew name Saul. It is asserted that he was about the same age as Jesus and was born in Tarsus, circa. (about) 3 AD. We know that his family was of the tribe of Benjamin but that he was a Roman citizen by birth. Some surmise that because of being from Tarsus that perhaps his grandfather was awarded citizenship because of service to the empire during a war that took place in that region. Of course the citizenship could have been purchased. Whatever the case, we know that Saul was born a citizen of the empire and that became important on several occasions. Tarsus was a cosmopolitan trading city on a crossroads ten miles from the Mediterranean Sea. It was a provincial capital during the Persian and Roman empires, it was also a place of learning. Saul would have not only been trained in Judaism but also in the Hellenism of the day. The influence of the Greeks would have been strong in Tarsus. We may understand that young Saul was well versed in Greek, the learning of philosophy, rhetoric and logic as well as in his native religion of Judaism. We also know that young Hebrew men were also taught a trade and Saul's was the making of tents.
TRAINING IN JUDAISM
We know that young Saul was a student of Gamaliel in Jerusalem. We know that because of this he was a fairly strict Pharisee. We use our knowledge of the history and traditions of the time to extrapolate that Saul would have left Tarsus at about thirteen or fourteen years of age and gone to study. Gamaliel was a fairly well known teacher of the school of Hillel (his grandfather) and was well thought of among the members of the Sanhedrin. Thus, young Saul was well placed among the powers that were in charge during the time of Jesus. For all this to have happened, we may further surmise that his family was of some means to enable him to do so well.
We know from Paul's words and from the history of the time that he would have been a strict teacher of the law. As a Pharisee, he would have held to the many extra-biblical rules and regulations in place by the scribes and Pharisees of the day. Further, we know that he was associated with the Sanhedrin (the ruling council) because of his role in the stoning of and death of Stephen who was the first Christian martyr. Following this we see in Scripture that he became a feared, key persecutor of "The Way" (the earliest name for Christianity) until his conversion.
CONVERSION TO FOLLOWING JESUS
As a feared persecutor of 'The Way', Saul sought and received permission to carry his mission to Damascus where followers of Jesus were growing in number. After receiving this permission, Saul and the guard assigned to travel with him set off to Damascus. On the way there, God called on him. He was blinded, spoken to by Jesus himself and taken on to Damascus where God had prepared a greeting. He was touched by Ananias, and through this God healed him of his physical blindness to go with his newly forsaken spiritual blindness. After a brief time, Saul began to preach that Jesus is the Messiah in Damascus, the movement of the followers of Jesus was blessed by Saul.
NEW VOCATION: APOSTLE
An apostle is someone who is "called" to be a messenger. So this begs the question: How did Saul make such a change? I would propose that this took place because of what I refer to as the 'Arabia Theory'. In this theory, Saul would have taken key scrolls (perhaps Isaiah, Psalms, others?) into the desert to make sense of all he knew from his training to date in light of the direct revelation he received from Jesus on the Damascus road. Following this time of study and contemplation, according to the theory - three years or so, Saul now clearly understood how Jesus "fulfilled the law" and came as the promised Messiah, fulfilling a huge number of prophesies of the prophets. With this preparation, he was ready to begin to take the message of Jesus to the world.
Saul traveled to visit the leaders and was feared by the followers of Jesus. This was because of his previous activity as a man who represented the Sanhedrin and jailed and oversaw the killing of Jesus' followers. Someone needed to step up and help Saul find acceptance, this task fell to Barnabas who encouraged Saul and through that association Saul gained further acceptance by 'The Way'.
After a while, back home in Tarsus (according to some writers), the time had come to take the gospel (the good news about Jesus) to new places. Saul began his missionary journeys.
MISSIONARY JOURNEYS
The team on the first trip were Saul, Barnabas & John Mark. This trip originated in Antioch (which becomes the base of Paul's work) as the church there "sent" them out to take the message about Jesus to people who had not heard of him yet.
We see a clear pattern emerge in Paul's missionary endeavor that will be noticed in much of the missionary work on the trips. We see that Saul went first to the community of the Synagogue first (the gospel went first to the Jews). He appealed to their knowledge of the Old Testament and their (supposed) looking for the coming of the Messiah. On the occasions when he was not welcomed in the synagogue, Paul would go to house of someone who was interested. My take is that, after presenting the message about Jesus being the Messiah, Paul seemed to focus on the people who were willing to listen.
Two items that I want to glance at on the first journey (there is a ton more, but we are not writing a detailed biography here). First is the incident with John Mark. We really do not know why he did it, but John Mark bailed on the trip. Maybe he missed the people back in Jerusalem, maybe the pace was too rigorous, maybe he couldn't deal with Paul's travel rules, or maybe it was culture shock... but whatever the reason, John Mark left. Paul was not happy about this. We know that for sure and will see more when we get to the beginning of the 2nd journey. But there is a point that I want to make here that is really important for us to understand. Even if it takes time, we need to be reconciled to people. It apparently took Paul and John Mark awhile to get their relationship mended, but they did. Look at what Paul says to Timothy when writing later in life. Not only had Paul mended the relationship with John mark, but he asked for him to join him in ministry. We should not be grudge holders. And if we are especially hard headed, we can learn from a guy who was pretty hard headed that we need to "get right with people."
The second thing that I want to point out about the first trip is that Paul was stoned and left for dead. So, was he dead? The question is, like the above point about John Mark, a minor point. But there is an interesting section of the autobiographical text of Paul which would fit here. Did God call Paul out of time and space for a brief moment to further His calling on Paul's life? Perhaps.
The next point that I would like make about the missionary endeavors is the fact that Paul always brought the message of God to his listeners in a manner that was culturally informed. To Jews, he usually spoke using the following components in his talk: The Gospel (death-burial-resurrection of Jesus), quoted Scripture, and used the history of the Jews to show that Jesus is the Messiah (Christ). There are a couple of other points that should be made about the trips, they included signs and wonders, conversions, and threats against Paul (often by Jews).
As mentioned above, the Apostle was careful to speak to people within their cultural understanding. Today this is called "contextualization." Finally, from the first trip, we note that Paul returned to places where he has visited previously and worked to encourage the churches he helped start. Paul and Barnabas returned to Antioch and then after a visit to Jerusalem they sought to embark on their second journey.
The second missionary journey was a trip that began with Paul and Barnabas having a disagreement over the status of John Mark. The solution to this disagreement was that Barnabas decided to travel with John Mark and return to Cyprus while Paul was joined by Silas and traveled over land to revisit the cities in southern Asia Minor that were visited on the first trip. Following the visit to these cities in Southern Galatia, Paul headed north toward the Black Sea. But the Holy Spirit directed Paul to turn west after which he wound up on the northwestern coast of what is now Turkey. Like southern Asia Minor, this region had several large cities, many of which have existing ruins today. By the time Paul arrived, he would have been visiting cities that had strong Hellenistic influences while being firmly Roman. Before we go much further into the Roman Empire, I want us to consider some works of the New Testament scholar, N.T. Wright.
"When Paul was converted, the Roman empire as such was two generations old. The ancient and venerable Roman Republic had collapsed into civil war following the murder of Julius Caesar. Several years of bloody and divisive conflict had eventually led to the emergence of Octavian, Caesars' adopted heir, who took the title August and reigned supreme over Rome and its burgeoning empire for the last two decades BC and he first fourteen years AD. His adopted heir Tiberius carried on and consolidated his work, being followed by the disastrous Gaius Caligula and the shrewd but weak Claudius. Claudius' death in AD 54 left the way clear for Nero, who came to the throne in a blaze of optimism as a bright new hope, and left it, mourned by some, loathed by many, in 68, precipitating the so-called ' year of the four emperors', a few brief months of total chaos ended by Vespasian establishing a new dynasty. During this period the empire stretched right around the Mediterranean world and some distance into much of the hinterland. Having seen off its main rival, Carthage, some centuries before, Rome sat in luxury at the middle of a web of power, influence and money." (Paul, p. 62-3) This was the Roman Empire that Paul traveled in.
When Paul arrived in Troas on the west coast of today's Turkey, God spoke to him in a vision. In a dream, Paul saw a man from Macedonia (the home of Alexander the Great) calling to him "Come over here." Paul was headed for Europe. But in Troas, something else happened, Paul and Silas were joined by Luke, who would be a part of Paul's team off-and-on for the remainder of Paul's travels. The text in question is the first of what are called "we" passages (texts where the writer includes himself in the group he writes about).
After arriving in what is today northeastern Greece, Paul's work in Philippi, Berea, and Thessalonica was followed by his visit to the heart of Greek democracy: Athens. As Paul made his way through the city, he could not help but see the multitude of statues that were all over the city. He was of course talking with Jews at the Synagogue and these discussions spilled over to the marketplace where Epicurean and Stoic philosophers apparently heard him. Paul found himself in the Areopagus on Mars Hill where his discourse with the philosophers included his quoting of Greek poets (probably Epimenides and Aratus). As usual, some listened, some heard, some laughed and a few wanted to hear more.
At this point we need to compare Paul's talk with the philosophers with the conversations he had with the Jews. With the Jews, Paul used the history of the Jews as a contextual basis for conversation. In Athens, Paul connected with the philosophers by referring to the statue to 'an unknown god' and connects previous knowledge to new knowledge, that of the God of Heaven who sent His Son. Paul describes God as greater than temples and not served by human hands and that this god made men and their destinies and sustained them, here probably quoting Epimenides. Again: culture, quote and then gospel, this is how Paul puts the gospel into their context.
Paul then traveled to Corinth and began what would be a long working relationship with a Jewish couple: Priscilla and Aquilla. They were 'tentmakers'[1] who had fled Rome when Claudius expelled Jews from Rome in 49. Following a confrontation with the government in Corinth, Paul ended the second mission trip in Ephesus, where he left Priscilla and Aquilla and then returned to Caesarea by sea and then back to Antioch.
Soon afterward, Paul set out on the third journey through Galatia and Phrygia and arrived in Ephesus. According to the text, Paul spent more time in Ephesus than any other place, two years. Ephesus was an important city in that day. In the 6th century B.C. the temple to Artemis had been founded. Artemis (Diana) had devotes from many places and pilgrimages were made to Ephesus. There, merchants earned income from selling small images, they set up stalls to sell these statues. During the time of the growth of the followers of Jesus, the gospel changed lives and the sales of idols fell. The guild of artisan's complaints grew into a riotous protest in the amphitheater and the riotous meeting was ended because it was unlawful. At the urging of his colleagues, Paul left Ephesus after the riot and traveled back through Macedonia and Greece.
Next, from a comparison of Acts and the Pauline letters we know that he spent three months in Corinth (where there had been trouble with the government on the second journey). Here, in Corinth, Paul was yet again in danger of his life, this time, once again, by Jews. The year was either 56 or 57 and it is at this time that Paul writes a letter to the church in Rome. Those who have studied Paul carefully believe that at this point in his life, once again under threat, he wanted to send a letter of explanation and an exhortation to the church in Rome. He wanted to encourage them to follow God and take the gospel forth to new areas of the empire, specifically, Paul mentions Spain.
Before the letter was dispatched, a copy may have been made. Some evidence from ancient MSS exists that Paul may have had an immediate copy of the letter and addressed it to the Ephesians with an additional preface. The letter made its way to Rome in the capable hands of Phoebe, a deaconess. Rome [2] was the center of the empire and Paul knew the importance of getting a clear explanation of salvation to Rome.
Paul next makes his way to see the Ephesian elders. He lands on a beach within easy travel of Ephesus and at a meeting with the elders, Paul gives his testimony, experience and encouragement. Paul then traveled by sea and eventually to Jerusalem where he was accused by Jews of breaking the Mosaic Law and held by the Romans. He used the occasion of his trail to tell Felix, Festus and King Agrippa of the person and work of the Lord Jesus. He then appealed to Caesar. He was sent with a guard to Rome, eventually he was held under house arrest awaiting trail, released, possibly traveled to Spain, back to Macedonia, re-arrested and finally executed in Rome. Paul, it seems to me, lived and breathed to spread the gospel. The letter we read to the church in Rome explains that gospel and the life the follower of the God of the gospel should live.
_________________________________________
[1] Today, 'tentmakers' work in countries which do not allow missionaries or in countries in which the culture is better served when the missionary is not a full time Christian. It is better in these cultures to have a platform upon which to stand to live and share the gospel. To have a real job and be part of the culture makes it easier to enter the culture and be connected to people's lives. Paul did this with Aquila and Priscilla by making tents in Corinth and Ephesus. 'Tentmakers' take the term from Paul.
[2] ROME
some facts and ideas about the city and the church
circa. 30AD, The Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:10-11), Roman "Jews and converts to Judaism" hear and respond to the gospel. They take this message back to Rome. From this we may conclude that the Gospel entered Rome very early in the history of the church.
49 AD Claudius orders all Jews to leave Rome
56-7 AD Paul writes to the Romans from Corinth
60 AD (WINTER) Paul arrives in Rome (under house arrest) later released (circa. 62), possibly (according to some tradition) travels to Spain and then travels back to Macedonia.
64 AD Rome burns, Nero blames Christians
circa. 65 AD Paul rearrested and brought to Rome, tried and executed (3 springs legend)
circa. 90s Paul's letters collected, copied and distributed by last decade of the first century
Studying God
Theology is the study of God. During the remainder of this year we are going to think about God according to five of the categories of what is called Systematic Theology... in fact, you should have begun taking notes and will begin commenting and quoting readings and categorizing this knowledge into five sections of your notebook.
We can say that "Systematic Theology is the study of God with this knowledge divided into categories"
The categories we will use are:
Bibliology (the study OF the Bible)
Theology Proper (the study of the nature and attributes of God)
Christology (the study of Christ)
Pneumatology (the study of the Holy Spirit)
Biblical Anthropology (the study of man, sin and salvation - this one is really a combination of three categories, but we will simplify things by using this one category)
Your notebook should have these five categories among the dividers.
As a Modernist (kind of), I am interested in knowledge but I want to say a word about mystery.
I want to address the amazing amount of really cool ideas in the Bible that seem to defy human understanding. As finite humans seeking to study who God is, we cannot answer everything, we cannot come to a full explanation of all things. We are not God. Our minds are limited, they are fallen. There are some things that I take on faith. My heart believes and the Bible informs my mind,[1] but - there are some things in the study of God that are paradoxical, mysterious and the Modernist cannot answer every question... YET, there is clearly enough knowledge that we DO understand enough about God to know God well in a relationship.
Yes, paradox exists[2]...
The church has recognized mysteries that are hard to wrap our brains around,
BUT we can know God and know Him well...
THUS, I have found that the categories of systematic theology are a way to seek that understanding...
now on to Bibliology
__________________________
[1] A student of mine in class mentioned this quote by G.K.Chesterton, which turned out to be from his amazing book, Orthodoxy: "You can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it." This is a great quote. While googling it, I found this blog post which is also very interesting. It's title is "G. K. Chesterton, Postmodernist", click here to read it.
[2] We can wrestle with eternally based ideas, mysteries and paradoxes like:
- the nature of the Trinity
- the hypostatic union
- predestination and free will
- God outside of time and space
- the existence of time itself
- and so on
without KNOWING the answers... Can we wrestle with ideas and slowly grow in understanding without being certain about the formulae? I hope so... that is what make the journey of learning and knowing God interesting.
We can say that "Systematic Theology is the study of God with this knowledge divided into categories"
The categories we will use are:
Bibliology (the study OF the Bible)
Theology Proper (the study of the nature and attributes of God)
Christology (the study of Christ)
Pneumatology (the study of the Holy Spirit)
Biblical Anthropology (the study of man, sin and salvation - this one is really a combination of three categories, but we will simplify things by using this one category)
Your notebook should have these five categories among the dividers.
As a Modernist (kind of), I am interested in knowledge but I want to say a word about mystery.
I want to address the amazing amount of really cool ideas in the Bible that seem to defy human understanding. As finite humans seeking to study who God is, we cannot answer everything, we cannot come to a full explanation of all things. We are not God. Our minds are limited, they are fallen. There are some things that I take on faith. My heart believes and the Bible informs my mind,[1] but - there are some things in the study of God that are paradoxical, mysterious and the Modernist cannot answer every question... YET, there is clearly enough knowledge that we DO understand enough about God to know God well in a relationship.
Yes, paradox exists[2]...
The church has recognized mysteries that are hard to wrap our brains around,
BUT we can know God and know Him well...
THUS, I have found that the categories of systematic theology are a way to seek that understanding...
now on to Bibliology
__________________________
[1] A student of mine in class mentioned this quote by G.K.Chesterton, which turned out to be from his amazing book, Orthodoxy: "You can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it." This is a great quote. While googling it, I found this blog post which is also very interesting. It's title is "G. K. Chesterton, Postmodernist", click here to read it.
[2] We can wrestle with eternally based ideas, mysteries and paradoxes like:
- the nature of the Trinity
- the hypostatic union
- predestination and free will
- God outside of time and space
- the existence of time itself
- and so on
without KNOWING the answers... Can we wrestle with ideas and slowly grow in understanding without being certain about the formulae? I hope so... that is what make the journey of learning and knowing God interesting.
Bibliology
God is there and He is not silent. This is actually the title of a book by, none other than, Francis Schaeffer. In the above statement are two assertions that we need to consider.
God is there.
and
He is not silent.
I begin this post with this idea because I mentioned some ideas on mystery at the end of the "Studying God" post). In that "sort-of-footnote" I raised some issues about paradox and mystery. BUT there are two things in my mind that are not at all paradoxical or mysterious:
God is there and He is not silent. So, we look at the 'not silent' bit. God reveals Himself to us. The clearest revelation is in the Bible. So, we do BIBLIOLOGY - the study OF the Bible.
First, why did I all cap "OF" above? Because I need to make sure you get the idea that Bibliology is not Bible Study, it is the study OF the Bible... what is it? how did we get it? can we trust it?
Second, why is Bibliology first in this presentation of systematic theology? The study of the Bible is the first category since it is the source of knowledge about God [1]
- - or - -
we can say that the Bible is the basis of Theology. Therefore, we learn about the Bible first. Remember, we need to consider not just the 'what' of belief, but the 'why' behind that 'what.'
So, God is not silent, he has revealed Himself to us. There are two types of revealing - read Psalm 19 and understand that this three part Psalm focuses first on general revelation and then special revelation and then ends with a request for a blessing.
So, we are introduced to the two types of revelation:
a) General - the creation itself
b) Special (sometime called specific) - the very words of God to man.
GENERAL REVELATION
All of God's creation classifies as General Revelation. The arguments for the existence of God that came from Aquinas and others have their basis in the fact that you and I can look around and see things which God can use to point us to Himself.
I see the stars, I am in awe of their beauty, their vastness... I "see" God.
But God speaks too.
SPECIAL REVELATION
Special revelation comes to us as God speaks, as He inspires the Bible.
Inspiration is... (KJV 2Tim 3:16) the 'God-breathed' message of God given to man as the Holy Spirit works through this human writer using the writer's
a) personality
b) education
c) experience
to produce the message that God has for man.
The question is raised: Doesn't the human vehicle introduce sin and therefore error? My answer is no. I reason that the Holy Spirit is inspiring the human author and this eliminates the concern over error. The Holy Spirit is greater than both the sin nature and the Enemy himself and therefore God the Holy Spirit has the ability to produce the message that God intends for man to receive in spite of the writer. Thus, the process which is here referred to as inspiration produces a text which I consider to be free from error. This writing, the original, is called the autograph.
There are (perhaps thankfully) no autographs in existence today. This is bad in that it would be cool to have an original but if we had one, I am afraid that it would be the subject of idolatry and thus displeasing to the God of the text. But we are not to worry.
Even though we have no autographs, we have an amazing wealth of manuscripts (MSS.) which point us, with virtually no question in matters of faith and teaching, to the original message. This wealth of MSS provide us with the basis for the translations that are available to us today. F.F. Bruce documents many important points in his book THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS: Are they Reliable? which is available for you to read on line, click here. [2] These MSS, their findings and history are the basis for the "extra-biblical argument" for the trustworthiness of Scripture.
The Extra-Biblical Argument:
Some facts to remember that may be helpful to you follow. Over five thousand complete New Testaments from ancient times including several MSS from the 4th century including (the oldest?) Codex Sinaiticus at the British Library. Further, there are over thirty thousand portions of books (fragments) available to scholars. These existence of these document are the basis for the argument which follows.
First, when one examines the vast number of New Testament documents available which are dated from a long period of time (1000 years) and
Second, that these texts were discovered over a wide geographical area (the whole of the Roman Empire at its peak) one would consider the probability for error to be very high but
Finally, the reality is that the amount of variance that is discovered in matters of theology is virtually non-existent.
Thus we may say that God not only inspired His message to us but protected it in the transmission process [3] that produced many of the translations we might use today.[4]
Internal Evidence:
Next we consider the internal evidence for the trustworthiness of Scripture by looking at several key texts: 2 Tim 3:16, Hebrews 4:12 and 2Pet 3:14-18. These texts speak to the trustworthy nature of the Scripture. Please note my capitalization of Scripture since I refer to the Bible. I always capitalize these in this context, and when you write for me, you should as well. See also 1Pet. 1:10-12, 2Pet. 1:16-21 (esp. v. 20-21), John 5:47, Matt. 5:17f, Luke 24:27, 44f, John 10:34-36.
Finally, a question that has become more important recently, especially since the publication of The DaVinci Code (which, while a really fun read, I wish people didn't take it so seriously - see NT Wright's excellent response). This important question is the subject of: Which books SHOULD be in the New Testament? I will not dwell too much here, please know three of the criteria to include a book in the New Testament:
--connection between the writer and an apostle
--consistency with the rest of God's message
--acceptance by the early church leaders
There are other criteria, but this is all I am requiring of you.
Personal Experience:
When I think of putting forth an argument for the Christian Scripture, I would be remiss if I did not mention the argument from Personal Experience. In one of the texts you just read, the writer of Hebrews says that Scripture enables us to be discerning. In the Psalms we find comfort. The Scripture really does come alive in us as we read it. Why? Because the same Holy Spirit who inspired the Scriptures awakens us to it and uses the Bible to awaken and challenge us. I have had so many experiences where God has used His word in my heart that this must be a part of my argument.
Finally, we have looked at Bibliology first, because it is the means by which God has revealed Himself to us. It is the means by which we grow in our understanding of God's nature and attributes, and that is what we go to next: Theology Proper.
___________________________________
[1] I need here to point to J. I. Packer's idea that there is a big difference between knowing God and knowing ABOUT God. Tons of people know great amounts of information about God while simultaneously not knowing God. This is tragic... I hope this is not you... I hope our seeking to know God is relational and not just propositional. Some have said the "the longest distance to travel is often the eighteen inches between the head and the heart."
[2] a recent visit by a leader of evangelicalism told me a little about a new find of MSS which will significantly increase the number of MSS which are even older than those studied today thus increasing the volume from which comparison can be made...
[3] what I call the "transmission process" is this:
God is there.
and
He is not silent.
I begin this post with this idea because I mentioned some ideas on mystery at the end of the "Studying God" post). In that "sort-of-footnote" I raised some issues about paradox and mystery. BUT there are two things in my mind that are not at all paradoxical or mysterious:
God is there and He is not silent. So, we look at the 'not silent' bit. God reveals Himself to us. The clearest revelation is in the Bible. So, we do BIBLIOLOGY - the study OF the Bible.
First, why did I all cap "OF" above? Because I need to make sure you get the idea that Bibliology is not Bible Study, it is the study OF the Bible... what is it? how did we get it? can we trust it?
Second, why is Bibliology first in this presentation of systematic theology? The study of the Bible is the first category since it is the source of knowledge about God [1]
- - or - -
we can say that the Bible is the basis of Theology. Therefore, we learn about the Bible first. Remember, we need to consider not just the 'what' of belief, but the 'why' behind that 'what.'
So, God is not silent, he has revealed Himself to us. There are two types of revealing - read Psalm 19 and understand that this three part Psalm focuses first on general revelation and then special revelation and then ends with a request for a blessing.
So, we are introduced to the two types of revelation:
a) General - the creation itself
b) Special (sometime called specific) - the very words of God to man.
GENERAL REVELATION
All of God's creation classifies as General Revelation. The arguments for the existence of God that came from Aquinas and others have their basis in the fact that you and I can look around and see things which God can use to point us to Himself.
I see the stars, I am in awe of their beauty, their vastness... I "see" God.
But God speaks too.
SPECIAL REVELATION
Special revelation comes to us as God speaks, as He inspires the Bible.
Inspiration is... (KJV 2Tim 3:16) the 'God-breathed' message of God given to man as the Holy Spirit works through this human writer using the writer's
a) personality
b) education
c) experience
to produce the message that God has for man.
The question is raised: Doesn't the human vehicle introduce sin and therefore error? My answer is no. I reason that the Holy Spirit is inspiring the human author and this eliminates the concern over error. The Holy Spirit is greater than both the sin nature and the Enemy himself and therefore God the Holy Spirit has the ability to produce the message that God intends for man to receive in spite of the writer. Thus, the process which is here referred to as inspiration produces a text which I consider to be free from error. This writing, the original, is called the autograph.
There are (perhaps thankfully) no autographs in existence today. This is bad in that it would be cool to have an original but if we had one, I am afraid that it would be the subject of idolatry and thus displeasing to the God of the text. But we are not to worry.
Even though we have no autographs, we have an amazing wealth of manuscripts (MSS.) which point us, with virtually no question in matters of faith and teaching, to the original message. This wealth of MSS provide us with the basis for the translations that are available to us today. F.F. Bruce documents many important points in his book THE NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS: Are they Reliable? which is available for you to read on line, click here. [2] These MSS, their findings and history are the basis for the "extra-biblical argument" for the trustworthiness of Scripture.
The Extra-Biblical Argument:
Some facts to remember that may be helpful to you follow. Over five thousand complete New Testaments from ancient times including several MSS from the 4th century including (the oldest?) Codex Sinaiticus at the British Library. Further, there are over thirty thousand portions of books (fragments) available to scholars. These existence of these document are the basis for the argument which follows.
First, when one examines the vast number of New Testament documents available which are dated from a long period of time (1000 years) and
Second, that these texts were discovered over a wide geographical area (the whole of the Roman Empire at its peak) one would consider the probability for error to be very high but
Finally, the reality is that the amount of variance that is discovered in matters of theology is virtually non-existent.
Thus we may say that God not only inspired His message to us but protected it in the transmission process [3] that produced many of the translations we might use today.[4]
Internal Evidence:
Next we consider the internal evidence for the trustworthiness of Scripture by looking at several key texts: 2 Tim 3:16, Hebrews 4:12 and 2Pet 3:14-18. These texts speak to the trustworthy nature of the Scripture. Please note my capitalization of Scripture since I refer to the Bible. I always capitalize these in this context, and when you write for me, you should as well. See also 1Pet. 1:10-12, 2Pet. 1:16-21 (esp. v. 20-21), John 5:47, Matt. 5:17f, Luke 24:27, 44f, John 10:34-36.
Finally, a question that has become more important recently, especially since the publication of The DaVinci Code (which, while a really fun read, I wish people didn't take it so seriously - see NT Wright's excellent response). This important question is the subject of: Which books SHOULD be in the New Testament? I will not dwell too much here, please know three of the criteria to include a book in the New Testament:
--connection between the writer and an apostle
--consistency with the rest of God's message
--acceptance by the early church leaders
There are other criteria, but this is all I am requiring of you.
Personal Experience:
When I think of putting forth an argument for the Christian Scripture, I would be remiss if I did not mention the argument from Personal Experience. In one of the texts you just read, the writer of Hebrews says that Scripture enables us to be discerning. In the Psalms we find comfort. The Scripture really does come alive in us as we read it. Why? Because the same Holy Spirit who inspired the Scriptures awakens us to it and uses the Bible to awaken and challenge us. I have had so many experiences where God has used His word in my heart that this must be a part of my argument.
Finally, we have looked at Bibliology first, because it is the means by which God has revealed Himself to us. It is the means by which we grow in our understanding of God's nature and attributes, and that is what we go to next: Theology Proper.
___________________________________
[1] I need here to point to J. I. Packer's idea that there is a big difference between knowing God and knowing ABOUT God. Tons of people know great amounts of information about God while simultaneously not knowing God. This is tragic... I hope this is not you... I hope our seeking to know God is relational and not just propositional. Some have said the "the longest distance to travel is often the eighteen inches between the head and the heart."
[2] a recent visit by a leader of evangelicalism told me a little about a new find of MSS which will significantly increase the number of MSS which are even older than those studied today thus increasing the volume from which comparison can be made...
[3] what I call the "transmission process" is this:
AUTOGRAPHS
copied into
MSS
collected and distributed
more MSS copied
over the first 1400 years
and then
in the 18th - 20th centuries
when scores of thousands of MSS and fragments from as early as 120AD are found
collected, compared, gathered and translated to the excellent
translations of today
they produce
God's Word to us in language we can understand
Theology Proper
We now turn to THEOLOGY PROPER which is where we consider the nature and attributes of God.
These are the nature and attributes which all three persons of the Godhead (the Trinity) share. So, we might put it this way: Theology Proper is where we consider that which God is. This is compared to the categories which follow it: Christology and Pneumatology, which contain the specific understandings of Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Could one say that Theology Proper is about God the Father? Maybe, but this would not be fully accurate, so I would avoid such an assertion. The point of Theology Proper is to investigate what we can understand about God. The point of Theology is to contemplate the nature of God. Because God is infinite, we cannot know all there is, but we can learn and comprehend what is necessary in order that we may know God well. This is the point of God revealing Himself to us: That we may know God well.
Our first text is Psalm 139 which is a great introduction to "the omnis":
a) Omnipotent - God is greater than physics, not bound to the laws of physics, God is all powerful
b) Omnipresent - God transcends time and space, He is not limited to time and space
c) Omniscient - God has all knowledge
These are the three "omnis," but there are more attributes.
Eternal: God has always been. God is. God always will be. This is similar to omnipresence when we tie time and space together. This is referred to as the 'eternality' of God. God is eternal.
God is Trinity. The doctrine (an agreed upon teaching about something) of the Trinity is a difficult concept for many people to try to wrap their brains around. Trying to put it simply: God is one being in three persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
The Father is referred to as the First person. The Son is known as the second person. The Holy Spirit is called the third person.
God is not three gods, God's persons are united in mind, in purpose and in action. The word 'triune' is used to indicate the trinitarian and unified nature of God. The triune God has a single plan and works in perfect unity and harmony to bring this plan into being for fellowship and communion with humans.
Jesus mentions (John 17) being 'sent' by the Father; He also said in John 15:26 that He would send the Holy Spirit. From this we may understand that there is perfect cooperation in the work of God, what I call 'voluntary subordination' between the persons of the Godhead. No competition, no pride, no fighting about who is first... we see perfect cooperation here. This work, done on our behalf, is completed to satisfy the just nature of God who can not allow sin to go without being dealt with. Jesus did that, He dealt with the sin - on the cross.
So God is Trinity: Father, Son and Spirit. But there are other attributes as well.
God is Just. His decisions are always based on that which is right and, unlike man, these decisions are not subject to fallen emotions. This flows naturally from the idea that God is Holy.
Holy: this means that He is 'different', 'other', 'separate'... He is not a part of His creation. The universe is His creation, He is greater and beyond His creation. Hence, God transcends the creation. His greatness stems from this Holiness. Yet this Holy God is merciful as well.
Merciful. God cares about His creation. The Son came to us to bring the ultimate Mercy. Mercy should be understood as the with-holding of a just punishment in accordance with the will of the just judge, God is such a just judge. This mercy is brought forth in the plan of God because of the work of Christ, so we turn to Christology.
These are the nature and attributes which all three persons of the Godhead (the Trinity) share. So, we might put it this way: Theology Proper is where we consider that which God is. This is compared to the categories which follow it: Christology and Pneumatology, which contain the specific understandings of Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Could one say that Theology Proper is about God the Father? Maybe, but this would not be fully accurate, so I would avoid such an assertion. The point of Theology Proper is to investigate what we can understand about God. The point of Theology is to contemplate the nature of God. Because God is infinite, we cannot know all there is, but we can learn and comprehend what is necessary in order that we may know God well. This is the point of God revealing Himself to us: That we may know God well.
Our first text is Psalm 139 which is a great introduction to "the omnis":
a) Omnipotent - God is greater than physics, not bound to the laws of physics, God is all powerful
b) Omnipresent - God transcends time and space, He is not limited to time and space
c) Omniscient - God has all knowledge
These are the three "omnis," but there are more attributes.
Eternal: God has always been. God is. God always will be. This is similar to omnipresence when we tie time and space together. This is referred to as the 'eternality' of God. God is eternal.
God is Trinity. The doctrine (an agreed upon teaching about something) of the Trinity is a difficult concept for many people to try to wrap their brains around. Trying to put it simply: God is one being in three persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
The Father is referred to as the First person. The Son is known as the second person. The Holy Spirit is called the third person.
God is not three gods, God's persons are united in mind, in purpose and in action. The word 'triune' is used to indicate the trinitarian and unified nature of God. The triune God has a single plan and works in perfect unity and harmony to bring this plan into being for fellowship and communion with humans.
Jesus mentions (John 17) being 'sent' by the Father; He also said in John 15:26 that He would send the Holy Spirit. From this we may understand that there is perfect cooperation in the work of God, what I call 'voluntary subordination' between the persons of the Godhead. No competition, no pride, no fighting about who is first... we see perfect cooperation here. This work, done on our behalf, is completed to satisfy the just nature of God who can not allow sin to go without being dealt with. Jesus did that, He dealt with the sin - on the cross.
So God is Trinity: Father, Son and Spirit. But there are other attributes as well.
God is Just. His decisions are always based on that which is right and, unlike man, these decisions are not subject to fallen emotions. This flows naturally from the idea that God is Holy.
Holy: this means that He is 'different', 'other', 'separate'... He is not a part of His creation. The universe is His creation, He is greater and beyond His creation. Hence, God transcends the creation. His greatness stems from this Holiness. Yet this Holy God is merciful as well.
Merciful. God cares about His creation. The Son came to us to bring the ultimate Mercy. Mercy should be understood as the with-holding of a just punishment in accordance with the will of the just judge, God is such a just judge. This mercy is brought forth in the plan of God because of the work of Christ, so we turn to Christology.
Christology
We now come to a contemplation of the person and work of Jesus in CHRISTOLOGY. Jesus of Nazareth is the Second person of the Trinity, He is God. In Christology we are interested in considering the person and work of Christ. This is often refered to as the nature of Jesus and His life and ministry.
It makes sense to think first about his eternality in Gen 1.1, John 1.1, and Col 1.16-20. His eternality is an aspect of His Deity. To forgive all sins, Jesus must be God. This aspect of His dual nature is what sets followers of Jesus apart from others ways of believing.
We must also consider his humanity and the fact that He promised to come in Gen 3.15. This text is very important as we consider the following statements: 'you will strike his heel' - crucifixion and 'he will crush your head' - resurrection - the enemy's defeat is assured, the sin. Further, we need to look at John 1.14, this is the incarnation. So Jesus has what we call a dual nature. The technical term for this is the hypostatic union, He is 100% man while at the same time being 100% God.
It is necessary that Jesus be both human so that He would be tempted as we are, and that He die and that he be able to, as a human be able to empathize with us as our great high priest. As our great high priest, (Heb 4.14-16) He has empathy for us and suffered for us (Heb 5.5-9).
Thanks be to God for the work he has done for humans... Jesus prayed to the Father and asked him to sent the Spirit, so we turn next to Pneumatology...
TEXTS WE EXAMINED IN CLASS ON THIS TOPIC:
Matt. 1:18, 22-23
Mark 6.30-7.23
Mark 15.21-16.8
John 1:19-34
Col. 1:15-20
Heb. 4:14-16
Heb. 10:11-14
Rev. 4:1 - 5:14
It makes sense to think first about his eternality in Gen 1.1, John 1.1, and Col 1.16-20. His eternality is an aspect of His Deity. To forgive all sins, Jesus must be God. This aspect of His dual nature is what sets followers of Jesus apart from others ways of believing.
We must also consider his humanity and the fact that He promised to come in Gen 3.15. This text is very important as we consider the following statements: 'you will strike his heel' - crucifixion and 'he will crush your head' - resurrection - the enemy's defeat is assured, the sin. Further, we need to look at John 1.14, this is the incarnation. So Jesus has what we call a dual nature. The technical term for this is the hypostatic union, He is 100% man while at the same time being 100% God.
It is necessary that Jesus be both human so that He would be tempted as we are, and that He die and that he be able to, as a human be able to empathize with us as our great high priest. As our great high priest, (Heb 4.14-16) He has empathy for us and suffered for us (Heb 5.5-9).
Thanks be to God for the work he has done for humans... Jesus prayed to the Father and asked him to sent the Spirit, so we turn next to Pneumatology...
TEXTS WE EXAMINED IN CLASS ON THIS TOPIC:
Matt. 1:18, 22-23
Mark 6.30-7.23
Mark 15.21-16.8
John 1:19-34
Col. 1:15-20
Heb. 4:14-16
Heb. 10:11-14
Rev. 4:1 - 5:14
Pneumatology
It is unfortunate that the study of the person and work of the Holy Spirit, PNEUMATOLOGY, is given so little emphasis in many quarters of Christian thought. This could stem from the relatively small amount of text in the New Testament which speaks explicitly to the Holy Spirit. These texts are: John 14, John 16, Rom 8, and the book of Acts, which some commentators have said should be called the Acts of the Holy Spirit in the Apostles (instead of the Acts of the Apostles)
As noted above, the study of the Holy Spirit has been in some quarters the most ignored of the doctrines of God. However, as those who has read the above linked texts will realize, we should know the doctrine because it is the Holy Spirit who lives in, empowers and strengthens the believers who follow Jesus.
First we should consider that the Holy Spirit is indeed God. The Spirit was already present at creation and is therefore, like the other persons of the Trinity... eternal in nature.
In the work of the Holy Spirit, we note that Jesus calls the Holy Spirit the helper, the comforter, the counselor. It is important for us to realize that the Holy Spirit knows our needs and our prayers because He indwells the believer. At the point of justification, the Holy Spirit comes to live IN the follower of Jesus, sealing us forever, and enhancing our conscience.
The Holy Spirit enhances our conscience to enable us to know, within our hearts, what is right. Every human has a conscience; but that conscience is impaired by the fall. Hence, when the Spirit indwells us, our conscience is awakened to that which God's wishes from us: His will. Thus we are better able to live for God.
We should further understand that this pleasing of God comes from growing more like Christ, this is sanctification. In that we are being sanctified, we understand that it is the Holy Spirit who is the agent of this sanctification. To fully understand what this is about, we must now consider human nature, sin and salvation... what we will term Biblical Anthropology.
TEXTS WE EXAMINED IN CLASS
John 16:5-16
John 15:26-27
Acts 2:1-4
1Cor 12:1-11
Gal. 5:16-26
As noted above, the study of the Holy Spirit has been in some quarters the most ignored of the doctrines of God. However, as those who has read the above linked texts will realize, we should know the doctrine because it is the Holy Spirit who lives in, empowers and strengthens the believers who follow Jesus.
First we should consider that the Holy Spirit is indeed God. The Spirit was already present at creation and is therefore, like the other persons of the Trinity... eternal in nature.
In the work of the Holy Spirit, we note that Jesus calls the Holy Spirit the helper, the comforter, the counselor. It is important for us to realize that the Holy Spirit knows our needs and our prayers because He indwells the believer. At the point of justification, the Holy Spirit comes to live IN the follower of Jesus, sealing us forever, and enhancing our conscience.
The Holy Spirit enhances our conscience to enable us to know, within our hearts, what is right. Every human has a conscience; but that conscience is impaired by the fall. Hence, when the Spirit indwells us, our conscience is awakened to that which God's wishes from us: His will. Thus we are better able to live for God.
We should further understand that this pleasing of God comes from growing more like Christ, this is sanctification. In that we are being sanctified, we understand that it is the Holy Spirit who is the agent of this sanctification. To fully understand what this is about, we must now consider human nature, sin and salvation... what we will term Biblical Anthropology.
TEXTS WE EXAMINED IN CLASS
John 16:5-16
John 15:26-27
Acts 2:1-4
1Cor 12:1-11
Gal. 5:16-26
Biblical Anthropology
We have been considering the nature of God to this point. Next, we need to begin considering the nature of humans and their relationship with God, this is BIBLICAL ANTHROPOLOGY. In fact, the category that we are considering (as our fifth and final category) is a combination of three theological categories: humanity, sin and salvation (there are other theological terms for these but you are not responsible for them).
So we begin with human nature. The first and, according to some, the most important thing to consider about the nature of the human is that humans are made in the "image of God." This is, in fact, very important to realize because God values each human so much. It is the human who has received the revelation of God. It is the human who communicates with God. It is the human for whom God paid the ultimate sacrifice - in dying for the human's reconciliation with Himself.
What then, is the image of God? Some have said that it is the ability to communicate with God, others that it is the ability to love God, still others the ability to imagine. I think all of these are correct. But I would contend that it is also about higher thought, reason.
Further, when we consider the nature of humans, there are two ways of thinking about this, humans are:
a) two part: body and soul
b) three part: body, soul (mind, emotion and will) and spirit (everlasting)
There is a fine distinction between the soul and the spirit. Some would say that the second idea of body, soul and spirit are the most biblical as they point ot the teaching of Paul and the quote in Hebrews about God's Word separating the soul and spirit. Which is right is not what I ask you to figure out, but that you give thought to the everlasting aspect of you.
The human is fallen. Fallen-ness affects all aspects of human life. Some would go so far as to assert that the whole of creation was impacted by the fall. The ground was cursed, says Genesis. The creation eagerly awaits the redemption of the human to set things right, says Paul.
The fallen-ness of the human affects not just his spirit in that they are separated from God BUT it causes them to be sick, hurt, ill, and die... but the impact is also on the emotions, the will and all aspects of life...
Humans are made in God's image. They are fallen. They need to be reconciled with God, because of sin.
Definitions
Sin - “to miss the mark.”
Salvation - God making humans right with Himself as they have faith in God’s work.
Justification - God declaring a human to be right with God
Sanctification – the process by which the believer is steadily and gradually made into Christ-likeness by the indwelling Holy Spirit.
One of the great explanations of man, sin and salvation is the New Testament book of Romans. This important book is looked upon as pinnacle of Paul's writing... but first, we need to consider the life of the writer, Paul the Apostle.
TEXTS EXAMINED IN CLASS
Gen. 2-3
Acts. 3.17-26
Deut 6.4-6
1Chron. 28.9
Luke 10.25-28
1Pet. 3.8
Psa 51
So we begin with human nature. The first and, according to some, the most important thing to consider about the nature of the human is that humans are made in the "image of God." This is, in fact, very important to realize because God values each human so much. It is the human who has received the revelation of God. It is the human who communicates with God. It is the human for whom God paid the ultimate sacrifice - in dying for the human's reconciliation with Himself.
What then, is the image of God? Some have said that it is the ability to communicate with God, others that it is the ability to love God, still others the ability to imagine. I think all of these are correct. But I would contend that it is also about higher thought, reason.
Further, when we consider the nature of humans, there are two ways of thinking about this, humans are:
a) two part: body and soul
b) three part: body, soul (mind, emotion and will) and spirit (everlasting)
There is a fine distinction between the soul and the spirit. Some would say that the second idea of body, soul and spirit are the most biblical as they point ot the teaching of Paul and the quote in Hebrews about God's Word separating the soul and spirit. Which is right is not what I ask you to figure out, but that you give thought to the everlasting aspect of you.
The human is fallen. Fallen-ness affects all aspects of human life. Some would go so far as to assert that the whole of creation was impacted by the fall. The ground was cursed, says Genesis. The creation eagerly awaits the redemption of the human to set things right, says Paul.
The fallen-ness of the human affects not just his spirit in that they are separated from God BUT it causes them to be sick, hurt, ill, and die... but the impact is also on the emotions, the will and all aspects of life...
Humans are made in God's image. They are fallen. They need to be reconciled with God, because of sin.
Definitions
Sin - “to miss the mark.”
Salvation - God making humans right with Himself as they have faith in God’s work.
Justification - God declaring a human to be right with God
Sanctification – the process by which the believer is steadily and gradually made into Christ-likeness by the indwelling Holy Spirit.
One of the great explanations of man, sin and salvation is the New Testament book of Romans. This important book is looked upon as pinnacle of Paul's writing... but first, we need to consider the life of the writer, Paul the Apostle.
TEXTS EXAMINED IN CLASS
Gen. 2-3
Acts. 3.17-26
Deut 6.4-6
1Chron. 28.9
Luke 10.25-28
1Pet. 3.8
Psa 51
course divisions
The following are the divisions of material in the course. Your notebook should have the following information easily accessible (mark these on your dividers for maximum efficiency).
Prolegomena/General
Story of Life
Paul/C. S. Lewis
Romans
Mere Christianity
Bibliology
Theology Proper
Christology
Pneumatology
Biblical Anthropology
Prolegomena/General
Story of Life
Paul/C. S. Lewis
Romans
Mere Christianity
Bibliology
Theology Proper
Christology
Pneumatology
Biblical Anthropology
four views on how stuff got here
"Christians should be able to agree to disagree, on disputable matters*, without being disagreeable."
* issues which are not essential to faith and doctrine
"four views on how stuff got here"
1. naturalistic (atheistic) evolution
______________________________________
2. theistic evolution
3. old earth creation (day-age and similar theories) [2] HOW OLD? NASA says
4. young earth creation (6-24 hour days, universe is just over 6000 years old) [1]
• Christians should learn to agree to disagree without being disagreeable about views 2-4.
• The science used to understand views 1&2 is often the same, the presupposition about where the cosmos came from is the issue: ‘God’ or ‘chance’.
• Can we know empirically which is right? Or it is a matter of belief?
• Theologically, it is important that Adam and Eve be real people due to the issues of the fall and redemption.
• three words to use carefully
i. know
ii. think
iii. believe
• does Scripture DEMAND that a Christian hold one of views 2-4? Some say yes, some say no, what do you say?
• remember that this question, Can God do x, y or z? is NOT in question here... how we understand his message about the beginning is...
NOW GO to read Gen. 1-2
________________________
[1] Ussher now concentrated on his research and writing, and returned to the study of chronology and the church fathers. After a 1647 work on the origin of the creeds in 1648 Ussher published a treatise on the calendar. This was a warm-up for his most famous work, the Annales veteris testamenti, a prima mundi origine deducti ("Annals of the Old Testament, deduced from the first origins of the world"), which appeared in 1650 and its continuation, Annalium pars postierior in 1654. In this work, he famously claimed, that the Earth was created at nightfall preceding 23 October, 4004 BC. Other scholars calculated their own dates for Creation, such as that by the Cambridge academic, John Lightfoot. The time is frequently misquoted as being 9 a.m., noon or 9 p.m. on 23 October. See the related article on the calendar for a discussion of its claims and methodology.
Ussher's work is still referenced by Young Earth Creationists (who believe that the Earth is approximately 6,000 years old) and has been much ridiculed as a symbol of religious obscurantism. In fact, calculating the year of creation may seem a trivial and slightly eccentric activity to some nowadays with the benefit of geology and palaeontology - the Earth now being dated by the scientific community at around four billion years old, with the universe nine billion years older than that - but at the time it was an important and difficult task which many Renaissance scholars, such as Joseph Justus Scaliger had attempted. Ussher's chronology represents a considerable feat of scholarship. It required the Bible to be firmly anchored in history, which needed a huge depth of learning in ancient history, including the rise of the Persians, Greeks and Romans. Then constructing a biblical chronology required expertise in biblical languages, and in-depth knowledge of the Bible. His account of historical events for which he had multiple sources other than the Bible is usually in close agreement with modern accounts; for example, he places the death of Alexander in 323 BC and that of Julius Caesar in 44 BC. The period of time between the Flood and the Creation depended on the version of the Old Testament that was used: Hebrew (1656 years), Samaritan Pentateuch (1307 years), or the Ethiopic text (2262 years). Ussher favoured the Hebrew version. Annals has recently been republished in modern English.
-from Bishop Ussher
Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
____________________
[2] A critique of the "age - day can be found here... along with a HOST of pro-young earth material if you are interested!
* issues which are not essential to faith and doctrine
"four views on how stuff got here"
1. naturalistic (atheistic) evolution
______________________________________
2. theistic evolution
3. old earth creation (day-age and similar theories) [2] HOW OLD? NASA says
4. young earth creation (6-24 hour days, universe is just over 6000 years old) [1]
• Christians should learn to agree to disagree without being disagreeable about views 2-4.
• The science used to understand views 1&2 is often the same, the presupposition about where the cosmos came from is the issue: ‘God’ or ‘chance’.
• Can we know empirically which is right? Or it is a matter of belief?
• Theologically, it is important that Adam and Eve be real people due to the issues of the fall and redemption.
• three words to use carefully
i. know
ii. think
iii. believe
• does Scripture DEMAND that a Christian hold one of views 2-4? Some say yes, some say no, what do you say?
• remember that this question, Can God do x, y or z? is NOT in question here... how we understand his message about the beginning is...
NOW GO to read Gen. 1-2
________________________
[1] Ussher now concentrated on his research and writing, and returned to the study of chronology and the church fathers. After a 1647 work on the origin of the creeds in 1648 Ussher published a treatise on the calendar. This was a warm-up for his most famous work, the Annales veteris testamenti, a prima mundi origine deducti ("Annals of the Old Testament, deduced from the first origins of the world"), which appeared in 1650 and its continuation, Annalium pars postierior in 1654. In this work, he famously claimed, that the Earth was created at nightfall preceding 23 October, 4004 BC. Other scholars calculated their own dates for Creation, such as that by the Cambridge academic, John Lightfoot. The time is frequently misquoted as being 9 a.m., noon or 9 p.m. on 23 October. See the related article on the calendar for a discussion of its claims and methodology.
Ussher's work is still referenced by Young Earth Creationists (who believe that the Earth is approximately 6,000 years old) and has been much ridiculed as a symbol of religious obscurantism. In fact, calculating the year of creation may seem a trivial and slightly eccentric activity to some nowadays with the benefit of geology and palaeontology - the Earth now being dated by the scientific community at around four billion years old, with the universe nine billion years older than that - but at the time it was an important and difficult task which many Renaissance scholars, such as Joseph Justus Scaliger had attempted. Ussher's chronology represents a considerable feat of scholarship. It required the Bible to be firmly anchored in history, which needed a huge depth of learning in ancient history, including the rise of the Persians, Greeks and Romans. Then constructing a biblical chronology required expertise in biblical languages, and in-depth knowledge of the Bible. His account of historical events for which he had multiple sources other than the Bible is usually in close agreement with modern accounts; for example, he places the death of Alexander in 323 BC and that of Julius Caesar in 44 BC. The period of time between the Flood and the Creation depended on the version of the Old Testament that was used: Hebrew (1656 years), Samaritan Pentateuch (1307 years), or the Ethiopic text (2262 years). Ussher favoured the Hebrew version. Annals has recently been republished in modern English.
-from Bishop Ussher
Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
____________________
[2] A critique of the "age - day can be found here... along with a HOST of pro-young earth material if you are interested!
Genesis 1-2
The creation story is given to us by God as the opening of His "Love Letter to Man" - that's the Bible... I do not think He intended to give us a science book. I do believe that He gave it to us so that we could understand the beginning of the human story and learn from it.
Gen 1:1 - 2:3 tell the story in a global manner...
Gen 2:4-24 tell the beginning of man's story
think of it this way... the first sets the stage, the second begins the drama, and what a drama it will be... the drama of the history of the people of Israel
Gen 1:1 - 2:3 tell the story in a global manner...
Gen 2:4-24 tell the beginning of man's story
think of it this way... the first sets the stage, the second begins the drama, and what a drama it will be... the drama of the history of the people of Israel
History Part 1
Be sure you know, in relation to the Creation, the four views...
Remember two of the impacts of the fall were to (1) begin suffering and, more importantly, (2) that it separated people from God...
AND that in the midst of God laying out the consequences of The Fall, He also promised a deliverer in Gen 3:15...
and that God chose to work through Abraham and that it was the belief of Abraham, not his actions that resulted in Abraham's Righteousness which we said was an important word that we understand theologically as "the state of being made right with God" (we will revisit this again in Romans 3)... it is important to note here that just as followers of Jesus who have faith are to live that faith out by works, Abraham followed through in life by responding to his faith by DOING what God wanted... Check out the words of James... works are essential when following God in faith....
remember that, after some time went by (God often tells us to wait), God fulfilled His promise to Abraham and Sarah... Isaac was born and that Isaac and Rebekah had a son, Jacob and that whole deal was filled with some amazing drama (just like our lives... dramas which are tainted by The Fall... and that Jacob's name was changed to Israel
and that there were twelve sons whose descendants became the twelve tribes of the nation of Israel... the youngest son was Benjamin, the second youngest was Joseph - drama again... jealous brothers sold him to travelers who sold him in Egypt to royalty and then - of course - MORE drama... but Joseph had learned good character and looked to the God of his fathers: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and was blessed with the ability to interpret dreams which resulted in his becoming, essentially, the prime minister of Egypt... his brother came to Egypt in search of food during a famine (remember the fat and skinny cow dream?) and the nation of Israel began to live in Egypt...
after time, the Egyptians forgot that Joseph bailed them out and Israel was enslaved in Egypt... we call this the Captivity in Egypt and pointed out that this is symbolic of our captivity to the sin nature and, just as Israel needed a deliverer, people who are captive need a deliverer...
God answered the cries of Israel and sent a deliverer... Moses and from this man we learn that you don't have to be perfect, best behaved, or even a good public speaker to serve God, you just have to be willing...
so, God sent Moses (deliverer) and ultimately a great disaster had to fall on Egypt and Israel was protected if they followed God's instruction... they were to place the blood of a lamb on the doorposts of their home... this was the Passover (which set up, and looked forward to THE passover which took place much later... when THE Spotless Lamb was killed and whose blood delivers people from the captivity of the sin nature which they inherit from The Fall) which set up Israel's escape from Egypt which we know as the Exodus ...
after amazing drama, intrigue among the Israelites and fantastic acts of God on their behalf and because of their actions... God gave Moses the Law... bacause God gave this law to Moses, we call the law the Mosaic Law which includes the 10 commandments and the "Greatest Commandment" Judaism properly recognizes the importance of The Shema, check it out in Hebrew
The nation of Israel would wander until Moses died God allowed them to enter the promised land which the nation would develop to encompass all that God had promised Abram... this nation of Israel would be governed by the law during a time when god was their King...
to be continued
Remember two of the impacts of the fall were to (1) begin suffering and, more importantly, (2) that it separated people from God...
AND that in the midst of God laying out the consequences of The Fall, He also promised a deliverer in Gen 3:15...
and that God chose to work through Abraham and that it was the belief of Abraham, not his actions that resulted in Abraham's Righteousness which we said was an important word that we understand theologically as "the state of being made right with God" (we will revisit this again in Romans 3)... it is important to note here that just as followers of Jesus who have faith are to live that faith out by works, Abraham followed through in life by responding to his faith by DOING what God wanted... Check out the words of James... works are essential when following God in faith....
remember that, after some time went by (God often tells us to wait), God fulfilled His promise to Abraham and Sarah... Isaac was born and that Isaac and Rebekah had a son, Jacob and that whole deal was filled with some amazing drama (just like our lives... dramas which are tainted by The Fall... and that Jacob's name was changed to Israel
and that there were twelve sons whose descendants became the twelve tribes of the nation of Israel... the youngest son was Benjamin, the second youngest was Joseph - drama again... jealous brothers sold him to travelers who sold him in Egypt to royalty and then - of course - MORE drama... but Joseph had learned good character and looked to the God of his fathers: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and was blessed with the ability to interpret dreams which resulted in his becoming, essentially, the prime minister of Egypt... his brother came to Egypt in search of food during a famine (remember the fat and skinny cow dream?) and the nation of Israel began to live in Egypt...
after time, the Egyptians forgot that Joseph bailed them out and Israel was enslaved in Egypt... we call this the Captivity in Egypt and pointed out that this is symbolic of our captivity to the sin nature and, just as Israel needed a deliverer, people who are captive need a deliverer...
God answered the cries of Israel and sent a deliverer... Moses and from this man we learn that you don't have to be perfect, best behaved, or even a good public speaker to serve God, you just have to be willing...
so, God sent Moses (deliverer) and ultimately a great disaster had to fall on Egypt and Israel was protected if they followed God's instruction... they were to place the blood of a lamb on the doorposts of their home... this was the Passover (which set up, and looked forward to THE passover which took place much later... when THE Spotless Lamb was killed and whose blood delivers people from the captivity of the sin nature which they inherit from The Fall) which set up Israel's escape from Egypt which we know as the Exodus ...
after amazing drama, intrigue among the Israelites and fantastic acts of God on their behalf and because of their actions... God gave Moses the Law... bacause God gave this law to Moses, we call the law the Mosaic Law which includes the 10 commandments and the "Greatest Commandment" Judaism properly recognizes the importance of The Shema, check it out in Hebrew
The nation of Israel would wander until Moses died God allowed them to enter the promised land which the nation would develop to encompass all that God had promised Abram... this nation of Israel would be governed by the law during a time when god was their King...
to be continued
History Part 2
The Mosaic Law provides the objective basis for leading and administering the nation of Israel, for thier governance, their organization, their morality. This existence as a nation was administered by judges, prophets and priests.
After a while the people of Israel wanted a human king. The prophet Samuel heard from God that Saul would be the first human king of Israel.
When Saul didn't work out, God sent Samuel to anoint David. There were years of drama and intrigue...
David was "a man after God's own heart" but was flawed like us and made some bad decisions. Yet, God used him, Israel grew and became powerful. But David was not allowed to build the temple... that was left for the second Davidic king, Solomon.
Solomon came to the throne through more "Davidic-dynasty-drama." But finally ascended to the throune and then asked God for and received wisdom. Under Solomon's leadership, Israel reached her zenith as a nation state. Israel was a rich and unified state.
But the kings who followed wound up ruling a divided kingdom: Israel in the north (the Northern Kingdom) and Judah in the south (the Southern Kingdom). These divided nations which usually were led by men who were ungodly, with some exceptions like Josiah, ultimately end in the Babylonian Exile. The Hebrews would return to Jerusalem under the (Medo-)Persians.
see these texts:
Jeremiah 25:1-14
2Chronicles 36:1-21
Jeremiah 29:1-14
2Chronicles 36:22-23
Ezra 1:1-8
Ezra 2:1-2
The Greeks and Romans would follow, each of these four empires would work into God's great plan for bringing reconciliation between himself and humans through the Jews in the person of Jesus.
Babylon - used to unify great territories and carry the Hebrews off to the Exile. a great diaspora of the Jews occurs here. Synagogue worship develops because of the absence of the temple.
Medo-Persia - continue the unifying of territories, returns Hebrews to begin the rebuilding of Jerusalem.
Greeks - give us a language of the marketplace that, like English today, is everyone's second language. This provides a means for communicating when one travels the empire of Rome.
Rome - gave us roads for travel, an even greater area, general peace and rights as a citizen... all of which enabled the spreading of the Gospel... the early church, known to some as "the way" begins its spread to the four corners of the earth
continued with history and philosophy intro
After a while the people of Israel wanted a human king. The prophet Samuel heard from God that Saul would be the first human king of Israel.
When Saul didn't work out, God sent Samuel to anoint David. There were years of drama and intrigue...
David was "a man after God's own heart" but was flawed like us and made some bad decisions. Yet, God used him, Israel grew and became powerful. But David was not allowed to build the temple... that was left for the second Davidic king, Solomon.
Solomon came to the throne through more "Davidic-dynasty-drama." But finally ascended to the throune and then asked God for and received wisdom. Under Solomon's leadership, Israel reached her zenith as a nation state. Israel was a rich and unified state.
But the kings who followed wound up ruling a divided kingdom: Israel in the north (the Northern Kingdom) and Judah in the south (the Southern Kingdom). These divided nations which usually were led by men who were ungodly, with some exceptions like Josiah, ultimately end in the Babylonian Exile. The Hebrews would return to Jerusalem under the (Medo-)Persians.
see these texts:
Jeremiah 25:1-14
2Chronicles 36:1-21
Jeremiah 29:1-14
2Chronicles 36:22-23
Ezra 1:1-8
Ezra 2:1-2
The Greeks and Romans would follow, each of these four empires would work into God's great plan for bringing reconciliation between himself and humans through the Jews in the person of Jesus.
Babylon - used to unify great territories and carry the Hebrews off to the Exile. a great diaspora of the Jews occurs here. Synagogue worship develops because of the absence of the temple.
Medo-Persia - continue the unifying of territories, returns Hebrews to begin the rebuilding of Jerusalem.
Greeks - give us a language of the marketplace that, like English today, is everyone's second language. This provides a means for communicating when one travels the empire of Rome.
Rome - gave us roads for travel, an even greater area, general peace and rights as a citizen... all of which enabled the spreading of the Gospel... the early church, known to some as "the way" begins its spread to the four corners of the earth
continued with history and philosophy intro
greek philosophers
We continue our philosophical journey and then embark on our theological journey back in the time of The Exile. The Greek philosophers developed about the same time as the return of the exiles to Jerusalem. this was during the Medo-Persian empire. Biblical books from the era are Ezra, Nehemiah and Esther. Here is the outline from class:
Protagoras
- "man is the measure of all things" (who does that sound like?)
- he was first to call himself 'philosopher'
the Sophists
- taught for pay
- taught what students wanted
- were opposed by S. & P.
- relativist
Socrates
- meaning
- value
- cosmological speculation
- 'Socratic Method' - - 'guiding students to understanding through questioning
- universal values: goodness, truth, beauty, justice
- there are no writings
Plato
- universals
- the myth of the cave
- 'forms'
C.S.Lewis: 'the shadowlands'
Aristotle
- particulars (stuff)
- taught Alexander the Great
- wrote on biology, physics, metaphysics, ontology, ethics
Epicurius
- "to enable us to live well"
- eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die
- allows for gods, but they are uninvolved in universe
which local figures would have liked his philosophy (from class lecture)?
before moving on the the categories of philosophy, consider the ideas of Paul on philosophy, click here
Protagoras
- "man is the measure of all things" (who does that sound like?)
- he was first to call himself 'philosopher'
the Sophists
- taught for pay
- taught what students wanted
- were opposed by S. & P.
- relativist
Socrates
- meaning
- value
- cosmological speculation
- 'Socratic Method' - - 'guiding students to understanding through questioning
- universal values: goodness, truth, beauty, justice
- there are no writings
Plato
- universals
- the myth of the cave
- 'forms'
C.S.Lewis: 'the shadowlands'
Aristotle
- particulars (stuff)
- taught Alexander the Great
- wrote on biology, physics, metaphysics, ontology, ethics
Epicurius
- "to enable us to live well"
- eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die
- allows for gods, but they are uninvolved in universe
which local figures would have liked his philosophy (from class lecture)?
before moving on the the categories of philosophy, consider the ideas of Paul on philosophy, click here
Paul on philosophy
We should seek to understand ideas, realizing that while we will not embrace all ideas, we can learn from them... earlier we began talking about "world view..." we look at ideas through our "world view"
read what Paul said about viewing and considering ideas...
2 Corinthians 10:1-6 (5)
you will need to know 2 Cor. 10.5 from the NIV for the test:
"We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."
note his emphasis: "every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God"
Paul had similar things to say to the people in Colossae:
Colossians 2:6-10
He knew that there would be competing ideas that were enticing to the people, he understood the need for them to compare and understand... but ultimately, having compared these ideas himself and seen the supremacy of Jesus, he wanted them to follow Christ. We see how he lauded the Bereans on the second missionary journey for "examining the Scriptures to see if what I am saying is true"... you and I are faced with ideas all the time... what is our basis for evaluating these ideas? Paul (and I) would hope the basis is the Bible...
now, lets look at the categories of philosophy
read what Paul said about viewing and considering ideas...
2 Corinthians 10:1-6 (5)
you will need to know 2 Cor. 10.5 from the NIV for the test:
"We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."
note his emphasis: "every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God"
Paul had similar things to say to the people in Colossae:
Colossians 2:6-10
He knew that there would be competing ideas that were enticing to the people, he understood the need for them to compare and understand... but ultimately, having compared these ideas himself and seen the supremacy of Jesus, he wanted them to follow Christ. We see how he lauded the Bereans on the second missionary journey for "examining the Scriptures to see if what I am saying is true"... you and I are faced with ideas all the time... what is our basis for evaluating these ideas? Paul (and I) would hope the basis is the Bible...
now, lets look at the categories of philosophy
Categories of Philosophy
These are the notes from class:
philosophy - love of wisdom, seeking understanding not just knowledge
"the speculative attempt to present a systematic and complete view of reality"
epistemology - the study of knowledge, explanation of knowledge, theory of knowledge
Where does knowledge come from?
How is it formulated?
How is it expressed?
What are the differences between, similarities of and relationship between words like: knowledge, belief, opinion, fact, idea, truth
linguistics is a sub-category of
ethics - analysis of, the study of:
ought, should, duty, obligation, right and wrong
metaphysics -
the attempt to present a comprehensive, coherent and consistent account of reality (being, the universe, existence) as a whole.
[cosmology - the study of the universe as a rational and orderly system]
any enquiry that raises questions about reality that lie beyond or behind those capable of being tackled by the methods science
questions of space and time
ontology - branch of metaphysics which concerns itself with what exists
what is being?
what is existence?
what is reality?
the study of the essential characteristics of being in itself, apart from particulars (its not just the components of the marker: the top, the felt, the ink, the fuselage; its the use, and the user which give it value)
We should consider two categories which are different than a strict category: modernism and post modernism
philosophy - love of wisdom, seeking understanding not just knowledge
"the speculative attempt to present a systematic and complete view of reality"
epistemology - the study of knowledge, explanation of knowledge, theory of knowledge
Where does knowledge come from?
How is it formulated?
How is it expressed?
What are the differences between, similarities of and relationship between words like: knowledge, belief, opinion, fact, idea, truth
linguistics is a sub-category of
ethics - analysis of, the study of:
ought, should, duty, obligation, right and wrong
metaphysics -
the attempt to present a comprehensive, coherent and consistent account of reality (being, the universe, existence) as a whole.
[cosmology - the study of the universe as a rational and orderly system]
any enquiry that raises questions about reality that lie beyond or behind those capable of being tackled by the methods science
questions of space and time
ontology - branch of metaphysics which concerns itself with what exists
what is being?
what is existence?
what is reality?
the study of the essential characteristics of being in itself, apart from particulars (its not just the components of the marker: the top, the felt, the ink, the fuselage; its the use, and the user which give it value)
We should consider two categories which are different than a strict category: modernism and post modernism
The Roman Age
Francis Schaeffer points out in How Should We Then Live:
"There is a flow to history and culture." (p.19)[1] From this flow we can learn from history and the lessons it teaches us about life and history.
and, in refering to the artists of the Renessaince,
"The results of their thought would flow through their fingers or from their tongues [or pens] into the external world. This is [as] true of Michelangelo's chisel, as it is of a dictators sword." (p.19)
then...
"People have presuppositions, and they will live more consistently on the basis of these presuppositions than even themselves may realize." (p. 19)
What is a worldview? a filter through which we view and understand and make decisions about data, a philosophy... this course is about working through our own personal philosophy.
From the film series, I note the following:
Schaeffer notes that "...nothing humanistic provides an adequate base for philosophy." I would clarify here that, in this statement, he is defining "humanistic" as a philosophy that has man at its center instead of God.
Roman gods were bigger and stronger men and women who competed, "amplified humanity" but not absolute divinity. The Roman value system had an "insufficient base" due to the lack of absolute truth (polytheism and the change from one 'emperor deity' to the next[2]).
The Roman Empire stretched from Britain to the Caspian sea, from the Euphrates to N. Africa across to Spain. It was vast... but we have seen in our quick survey that indeed things change and empires fall apart...
Rome was built on military might. Schaeffer says this is not enough... what is needed is knowledge of right and wrong. Consider the ramifications of this point for modern America. Consider recent events...
The Romans didn't care who you worshipped as long as you worshiped the emperor. So, why were the early Christian persecuted? They were seen as rebels because they did not worship the Roman gods. The Romans charged the early Christians with atheism, why?
Judaism had a kind of immunity from the worship of Roman gods. When Christians were rejected by synagogues, they were not protected by this immunity. They would not mix religions.
What is syncretism? The mixing of religions. There was no syncretism in the earliest church. There were attempts to mix (Gnosticism is an example; early forms of which were opposed by the apostles. John's letters partially spoke to these issues raised in the late first century.) were rejected by the earliest, infant church. Because according to earliest church teaching (the Bible), all gods, other than the Christian god, are false gods and are not to be worshipped. Because of this, Christians were counted as the enemy of Rome (the charge: atheism). This resulted in martyrdom: many died for the faith, some ran and hid, and others succumbed to the pressure of the Romans and bowed to the Roman gods, but many died.
Eventually, under Constantine, Christianity was allowed:
313: allowed Christianity
381: official Christianity
What difference does one's world view make? It guides how we respond to threat, suffering, pain, etc. Consider the earlier quotes at the top of the post.
_______________________________
[1] All quotes will be from How Should We Then Live by Francis Schaeffer, Fleming H. Revell Co., N.J., 1976
[2] Here I am reminded of the rejection of Stalinism in 1956 by Khrushchev... so much of what communists in the Soviet Union was in one speech thrown out the window.
"There is a flow to history and culture." (p.19)[1] From this flow we can learn from history and the lessons it teaches us about life and history.
and, in refering to the artists of the Renessaince,
"The results of their thought would flow through their fingers or from their tongues [or pens] into the external world. This is [as] true of Michelangelo's chisel, as it is of a dictators sword." (p.19)
then...
"People have presuppositions, and they will live more consistently on the basis of these presuppositions than even themselves may realize." (p. 19)
What is a worldview? a filter through which we view and understand and make decisions about data, a philosophy... this course is about working through our own personal philosophy.
From the film series, I note the following:
Schaeffer notes that "...nothing humanistic provides an adequate base for philosophy." I would clarify here that, in this statement, he is defining "humanistic" as a philosophy that has man at its center instead of God.
Roman gods were bigger and stronger men and women who competed, "amplified humanity" but not absolute divinity. The Roman value system had an "insufficient base" due to the lack of absolute truth (polytheism and the change from one 'emperor deity' to the next[2]).
The Roman Empire stretched from Britain to the Caspian sea, from the Euphrates to N. Africa across to Spain. It was vast... but we have seen in our quick survey that indeed things change and empires fall apart...
Rome was built on military might. Schaeffer says this is not enough... what is needed is knowledge of right and wrong. Consider the ramifications of this point for modern America. Consider recent events...
The Romans didn't care who you worshipped as long as you worshiped the emperor. So, why were the early Christian persecuted? They were seen as rebels because they did not worship the Roman gods. The Romans charged the early Christians with atheism, why?
Judaism had a kind of immunity from the worship of Roman gods. When Christians were rejected by synagogues, they were not protected by this immunity. They would not mix religions.
What is syncretism? The mixing of religions. There was no syncretism in the earliest church. There were attempts to mix (Gnosticism is an example; early forms of which were opposed by the apostles. John's letters partially spoke to these issues raised in the late first century.) were rejected by the earliest, infant church. Because according to earliest church teaching (the Bible), all gods, other than the Christian god, are false gods and are not to be worshipped. Because of this, Christians were counted as the enemy of Rome (the charge: atheism). This resulted in martyrdom: many died for the faith, some ran and hid, and others succumbed to the pressure of the Romans and bowed to the Roman gods, but many died.
Eventually, under Constantine, Christianity was allowed:
313: allowed Christianity
381: official Christianity
What difference does one's world view make? It guides how we respond to threat, suffering, pain, etc. Consider the earlier quotes at the top of the post.
_______________________________
[1] All quotes will be from How Should We Then Live by Francis Schaeffer, Fleming H. Revell Co., N.J., 1976
[2] Here I am reminded of the rejection of Stalinism in 1956 by Khrushchev... so much of what communists in the Soviet Union was in one speech thrown out the window.
Middle Ages & Renaissance
When we think about the Middle Ages, we must not "throw the baby out with the bathwater"... It is without doubt (whatever Schaeffer thinks) that Aquinas was a great Christian thinker and is responsible for much great writing in theology and apologetics. Yet, I agree with Schaeffer (S.) on this point: the Middle Ages were NOT, as some think, the dark ages. Amazing theological, philosophical and political writings continue today to be important. Schaeffer states that Aquinas believed that though the will was fallen, the mind was not. One's understanding of the Fall becomes very important when deciding what to do with this statement. Schaeffer's point (as a Reformed thinker) is that the whole human being was fallen. Thus, man's need for God is total. S. is driving home the point that man cannot reach God alone. It is God who enables man to reach God. This is clear Reformed thinking, based on a world view that looks to the Bible as the sole authority.
Additionally, Schaeffer points out that, during the middle ages, a general corruptness was seen in the mistreatment of people: especially the poor... compare that to what we saw with the values of the early church who went out of their way to value all people as exemplified in their care for abandoned children. This is not to say that no one served people. As S. pointed out in the hospital, care for the sick and aged saw development in the Middle Ages. These people who served were individuals of means and willingness and certain orders of the church devoted themselves to the care of people and evangelism (I think of St. Gellert who, when the newly crowned Hungarian King Istvan called for missionaries to convert the pagan tribes to Christianity, gave his life while seeking to spread the Gospel). There were changes happening which were problematic, but as I said before, let's not throw the baby out with the bath water.
As we consider the Renaissance, Schaeffer is right that the great renaissance city was Florence - a city that has great art and culture. Renaissance means a rebirth of the 'greatness of man.' This greatness was seen in art. There are two works of art that I want to remind us of. These works of art are illustrative to Schaeffer's point and provide the basic things I want us to take away from this. The first is what I consider a clear and shocking step in Fouquet's Red Virgin (This is what Schaeffer called for our reference, The actual work is: Virgin and Child Surrounded by Angels (c.1450)) in which the artist mocks (my word, not S.'s) the Virgin Mary by using the mistress of the king as model, until now, Mary has been revered. I think Fouquet takes far too much liberty thus showing his world view.[1]
What was clearly intended to be the final point of his argument (as one could tell by the use of light and the background music) was Michelangelo's David. In this amazing work of art, the statue displays the greatness of man in a realistic form but in a very unrealistic projection of a David who would have been a teenage boy. Michelangelo, thus exemplifies the greatness of man with this breathtaking statue. S. argues that these and other works of art show the rise of Humanism, a philosophy that, without God, without universal values, places man at the center of the universe.
I contend that, while we must be warned about getting on a slippery slope and placing man at the center of the universe, we must also give credit to the Renaissance for the great revival in the arts which show the genius of the creativity of humans. With a world view that is based on following Jesus, one can understand this genius is possible since humans have within their very being the image of God. I prefer to look at the Renaissance as a place to see how God can be glorified through His supreme creation: man. Let's keep in mind that when we fail to give God the credit we may be on a philosophical slippery slope of giving man more credit than he deserves. Man is fallible, God is not. Man is created, God is the Creator. It is from God that humans receive their genius. The failure to recognize this is found in evidence from the Revolutionary Age, our next era of examination.
------------------------------
[1] Some have doubted that Fouquet knew who the model was. But another work by Fouquet himself painting of Agnes Sorel makes it very clear to me that when we look at these two paintings, Fouquet knew exactly what he was doing. Maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I think not.
Additionally, Schaeffer points out that, during the middle ages, a general corruptness was seen in the mistreatment of people: especially the poor... compare that to what we saw with the values of the early church who went out of their way to value all people as exemplified in their care for abandoned children. This is not to say that no one served people. As S. pointed out in the hospital, care for the sick and aged saw development in the Middle Ages. These people who served were individuals of means and willingness and certain orders of the church devoted themselves to the care of people and evangelism (I think of St. Gellert who, when the newly crowned Hungarian King Istvan called for missionaries to convert the pagan tribes to Christianity, gave his life while seeking to spread the Gospel). There were changes happening which were problematic, but as I said before, let's not throw the baby out with the bath water.
As we consider the Renaissance, Schaeffer is right that the great renaissance city was Florence - a city that has great art and culture. Renaissance means a rebirth of the 'greatness of man.' This greatness was seen in art. There are two works of art that I want to remind us of. These works of art are illustrative to Schaeffer's point and provide the basic things I want us to take away from this. The first is what I consider a clear and shocking step in Fouquet's Red Virgin (This is what Schaeffer called for our reference, The actual work is: Virgin and Child Surrounded by Angels (c.1450)) in which the artist mocks (my word, not S.'s) the Virgin Mary by using the mistress of the king as model, until now, Mary has been revered. I think Fouquet takes far too much liberty thus showing his world view.[1]
What was clearly intended to be the final point of his argument (as one could tell by the use of light and the background music) was Michelangelo's David. In this amazing work of art, the statue displays the greatness of man in a realistic form but in a very unrealistic projection of a David who would have been a teenage boy. Michelangelo, thus exemplifies the greatness of man with this breathtaking statue. S. argues that these and other works of art show the rise of Humanism, a philosophy that, without God, without universal values, places man at the center of the universe.
I contend that, while we must be warned about getting on a slippery slope and placing man at the center of the universe, we must also give credit to the Renaissance for the great revival in the arts which show the genius of the creativity of humans. With a world view that is based on following Jesus, one can understand this genius is possible since humans have within their very being the image of God. I prefer to look at the Renaissance as a place to see how God can be glorified through His supreme creation: man. Let's keep in mind that when we fail to give God the credit we may be on a philosophical slippery slope of giving man more credit than he deserves. Man is fallible, God is not. Man is created, God is the Creator. It is from God that humans receive their genius. The failure to recognize this is found in evidence from the Revolutionary Age, our next era of examination.
------------------------------
[1] Some have doubted that Fouquet knew who the model was. But another work by Fouquet himself painting of Agnes Sorel makes it very clear to me that when we look at these two paintings, Fouquet knew exactly what he was doing. Maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I think not.
The Enlightenment and Revolutionary Age
Schaeffer (S.) stated that da Vinci, for one, had ended in pessimism. So, and that humanism without God is doomed... indeed some postmodern thinkers have said that modernism (whose roots are in the renaissance and the enlightenment) truly shows its end result in Auschwitz. I, as a not quite post-modern, agree but I state that if there are no universal values... no God (who is greater than the human ability to reason) to give them... then who is to stop the crazies like Hitler and all the other people in the twentieth century who killed so many humans because they decided they should, or must? You see I think this is where Schaeffer gets it right. The key thing to remember is that values count. And that having a set of universal values gives direction to the human being.
Schaeffer skirted the enlightenment, mentioning it briefly in the Reformation episode that we did not watch and brings it up as a part of the revolution era. The Enlightenment is "the period of European thought characterized by the emphasis on experience and reason, mistrust of religion and traditional authority, and a gradual emergence of the ideals of liberal, secular, democratic societies." (Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford University Press, 1994) What he did say was that while Voltaire was exiled in England he was impressed by the relative peaceful revolution that took place in Britain when William and Mary ascended to the throne in the "Glorious" of "Bloodless" revolution. When he went back to France he tried to modify what he had observed using Enlightenment values instead of the universals that come from God. S. argues that the thing that saved the British was a "Reformation base." There is a good deal of sense in this argument since the Anglican (The Church of England) Church had gone through its own type of reformation while not being strictly "Reformed." The result in France was the horror of the French Revolution.
So we consider the age of revolution - the eighteenth through twentieth centuries saw uprisings all across Europe and her colonies which sought to overthrow governments, many of which were unjust.
Some of these revolutions were based (partly because of the reformation) upon sound and sometimes biblical values which resulted in peaceful revolutions, others fared worse... much worse... Especially in the twentieth century: Ukrainian famine in the 30s, Hungary in '56, Czechoslovakia in 68, Uganda in 75, Cambodia in the late 70s, Iran in the 70s, Afghanistan and Poland in the 80s, the Balkans in the 90s, Darfur today... Iraq...
S. argues that if laws are based upon biblical (universal) values then they are laws that do not allow the tyranny of kings. He notes that systems of checks and balances are needed by the fallen people in governments.
Conversely, Marxist-Leninism corrupted the revolution in Russia and created a one man elite in Stalin which resulted in the killing of millions when one considers the starving of millions of Ukrainians and the jailing of all political opponents in the Gulags.
Then, without universal values to guide, who was to stop Hitler from killing Jews, Gypsies and others that he considered less than human? Hitler's extermination of these millions was based primarily of the denial of the biblical value that ALL PEOPLE are valuable.
Lex, Rex, or The Law and the Prince by Samuel Rutherford provides a basis for law which Paul Robert illustrated in the stair of the Old Supreme Court building in Switzerland. Justice holds a scale in her right hand but her sword points to The Law of God... universal values as the foundation for
law. We might remember that S. followed by saying that biblical absolutes provide a basis for stopping the despotism of a group or individual or the 51% vote... further... when biblical universals are ignored, what is there to stop fallen people from oppressing one another??? S. gives examples of the failure of the church which should have spoken out about issues like slavery and oppression of women and children in factories...
AND SO a question of application exists for us as individuals and as a community... how should we respond to this call? if we say we embrace biblical universals, how has it changed our attitudes and actions as regarding justice? prejudice? racism? classism? what do our presuppositions tell us about what our world view really reflects? Are we any better? We too need the understanding of the universal values.
But I contend that humans have, since The Fall, always been in the middle of a "revolutionary" era. To deal with this we need to comprehend the reconciliation that God offers. Therefore, we will begin now looking at The Universal values of God by studying God himself.
Schaeffer skirted the enlightenment, mentioning it briefly in the Reformation episode that we did not watch and brings it up as a part of the revolution era. The Enlightenment is "the period of European thought characterized by the emphasis on experience and reason, mistrust of religion and traditional authority, and a gradual emergence of the ideals of liberal, secular, democratic societies." (Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford University Press, 1994) What he did say was that while Voltaire was exiled in England he was impressed by the relative peaceful revolution that took place in Britain when William and Mary ascended to the throne in the "Glorious" of "Bloodless" revolution. When he went back to France he tried to modify what he had observed using Enlightenment values instead of the universals that come from God. S. argues that the thing that saved the British was a "Reformation base." There is a good deal of sense in this argument since the Anglican (The Church of England) Church had gone through its own type of reformation while not being strictly "Reformed." The result in France was the horror of the French Revolution.
So we consider the age of revolution - the eighteenth through twentieth centuries saw uprisings all across Europe and her colonies which sought to overthrow governments, many of which were unjust.
Some of these revolutions were based (partly because of the reformation) upon sound and sometimes biblical values which resulted in peaceful revolutions, others fared worse... much worse... Especially in the twentieth century: Ukrainian famine in the 30s, Hungary in '56, Czechoslovakia in 68, Uganda in 75, Cambodia in the late 70s, Iran in the 70s, Afghanistan and Poland in the 80s, the Balkans in the 90s, Darfur today... Iraq...
S. argues that if laws are based upon biblical (universal) values then they are laws that do not allow the tyranny of kings. He notes that systems of checks and balances are needed by the fallen people in governments.
Conversely, Marxist-Leninism corrupted the revolution in Russia and created a one man elite in Stalin which resulted in the killing of millions when one considers the starving of millions of Ukrainians and the jailing of all political opponents in the Gulags.
Then, without universal values to guide, who was to stop Hitler from killing Jews, Gypsies and others that he considered less than human? Hitler's extermination of these millions was based primarily of the denial of the biblical value that ALL PEOPLE are valuable.
Lex, Rex, or The Law and the Prince by Samuel Rutherford provides a basis for law which Paul Robert illustrated in the stair of the Old Supreme Court building in Switzerland. Justice holds a scale in her right hand but her sword points to The Law of God... universal values as the foundation for
law. We might remember that S. followed by saying that biblical absolutes provide a basis for stopping the despotism of a group or individual or the 51% vote... further... when biblical universals are ignored, what is there to stop fallen people from oppressing one another??? S. gives examples of the failure of the church which should have spoken out about issues like slavery and oppression of women and children in factories...
AND SO a question of application exists for us as individuals and as a community... how should we respond to this call? if we say we embrace biblical universals, how has it changed our attitudes and actions as regarding justice? prejudice? racism? classism? what do our presuppositions tell us about what our world view really reflects? Are we any better? We too need the understanding of the universal values.
But I contend that humans have, since The Fall, always been in the middle of a "revolutionary" era. To deal with this we need to comprehend the reconciliation that God offers. Therefore, we will begin now looking at The Universal values of God by studying God himself.
paper writing instructions
PAPER WRITING INSTRUCTIONS (includes final project)
* these instructions apply to the Beliefs Thesis specifically
1. No heading on the typed pages of the paper, that is what the cover is for...[1 PT.]
2. 1.25" margins all around [.5 PT. EA]
3. 12 point Arial font in paper [1 PT./PG.]
4. Double space the paper [.5 PT./PG.]
5. Your paper must include a well thought out introduction and conclusion. DO NOT start or end the paper with a quote [3 PTS. EA.]. The first words and last words of your paper are to be your original thoughts. The same for paragraphs is expected.
6. Be sure that you always capitalize Bible, don't lose points for carelessness. [5 PTS. EA.]
* 7. The five categories will be covered, you will use the technical term as presented in class in your discussion in a manner which demonstrates your understanding of the topic. [1 pt. each]
* 8. In your written description of the categories, you will use 2 (two) Scripture quotes per category , six (6) of which MUST be from Romans [3PTS. EA]. These quotes will be used in support of your stated position. If you use "C", you will discuss your position and your reasoning for this position.
* 9. In your paper you will use four (4) quotes from Mere Christianity [3PTS. EA.]. The use of Mere quotes will follow the same instructions for Scripture quotes. (_Mere_ II.2.7)
10. Use the necessary words of a quote to support your point. For example: It is not necessary to write all of this...“And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” (Rom 12:2, NIV) When all you need to say is “…be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind…” (Rom 12:2, NIV) CAREFULL!!! DO NOT TAKE SCRIPTURE OUT OF CONTEXT!!!!
11. ALL QUOTES AND CITATIONS WILL BE IN BOLD PRINT [2PTS. EA]
12. 5:1 quote ratio. This means that some of you will be doing more writing in the editing process. [if your quote ratio is off you will be marked down by that percent... SCROLL DOWN FOR MORE INFO*]
13. The length of your paper will be determined by the depth of your thought and the quote ratio.
14. Number your pages at the bottom center (begin numbering AFTER the COVER PAGE). [.5 EA]
15. Make a cover sheet [3 PTS.] with ONLY the following:
YOUR NAME
BELIEFS THESIS (or other title)
X PERIOD
The cover sheet should be:
- CENTERED all around
- using a 16 pt. Ariel font
- in bold
- all caps
- plesae do not double space the title page
16. Staple the paper and cover sheet at top left prior to turning it in. [1 PTS.]
* 17. FOR 2nd EDITION AND BEYOND: attach all previous EDITIONS to the back of the latest edition. [25 PTS. IF LOST]
QUOTE RATIO EXAMPLES
A. If you have 10 lines of quotes and the quote ratio is 3:1, then you must have 30 lines of original writing.If you have 10 lines of quotes and 27 lines of original writing, your quote ratio is off. Since you should have had 30 lines of original writing, I will penalize you according to the percent of writing you have verses what you should have had: 27 divided by 30 equals 90% so you start with a 90, from which I will subtract all other marks. Therefore, in our example, if you should have had 30 lines of original writing and you had only 27, you have a 10 point mark down.
B. If you have 14 lines of quotes and the quote ratio is 4:1, then you must have 56 lines of original writing.If you have 14 lines of quotes and 49 lines of original writing, your quote ratio is off. Since you should have had 56 lines of original writing, I will penalize you according to the percent of writing you have verses what you should have had 49 divided by 56 equals 87% so you start with a 90; from which I will subtract all other Marks. Therefore, in our example, if you should have had 56 lines of original writing and you had only 49, you have a 13 point mark down.
* these instructions apply to the Beliefs Thesis specifically
1. No heading on the typed pages of the paper, that is what the cover is for...[1 PT.]
2. 1.25" margins all around [.5 PT. EA]
3. 12 point Arial font in paper [1 PT./PG.]
4. Double space the paper [.5 PT./PG.]
5. Your paper must include a well thought out introduction and conclusion. DO NOT start or end the paper with a quote [3 PTS. EA.]. The first words and last words of your paper are to be your original thoughts. The same for paragraphs is expected.
6. Be sure that you always capitalize Bible, don't lose points for carelessness. [5 PTS. EA.]
* 7. The five categories will be covered, you will use the technical term as presented in class in your discussion in a manner which demonstrates your understanding of the topic. [1 pt. each]
* 8. In your written description of the categories, you will use 2 (two) Scripture quotes per category , six (6) of which MUST be from Romans [3PTS. EA]. These quotes will be used in support of your stated position. If you use "C", you will discuss your position and your reasoning for this position.
* 9. In your paper you will use four (4) quotes from Mere Christianity [3PTS. EA.]. The use of Mere quotes will follow the same instructions for Scripture quotes. (_Mere_ II.2.7)
10. Use the necessary words of a quote to support your point. For example: It is not necessary to write all of this...“And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” (Rom 12:2, NIV) When all you need to say is “…be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind…” (Rom 12:2, NIV) CAREFULL!!! DO NOT TAKE SCRIPTURE OUT OF CONTEXT!!!!
11. ALL QUOTES AND CITATIONS WILL BE IN BOLD PRINT [2PTS. EA]
12. 5:1 quote ratio. This means that some of you will be doing more writing in the editing process. [if your quote ratio is off you will be marked down by that percent... SCROLL DOWN FOR MORE INFO*]
13. The length of your paper will be determined by the depth of your thought and the quote ratio.
14. Number your pages at the bottom center (begin numbering AFTER the COVER PAGE). [.5 EA]
15. Make a cover sheet [3 PTS.] with ONLY the following:
YOUR NAME
BELIEFS THESIS (or other title)
X PERIOD
The cover sheet should be:
- CENTERED all around
- using a 16 pt. Ariel font
- in bold
- all caps
- plesae do not double space the title page
16. Staple the paper and cover sheet at top left prior to turning it in. [1 PTS.]
* 17. FOR 2nd EDITION AND BEYOND: attach all previous EDITIONS to the back of the latest edition. [25 PTS. IF LOST]
QUOTE RATIO EXAMPLES
A. If you have 10 lines of quotes and the quote ratio is 3:1, then you must have 30 lines of original writing.If you have 10 lines of quotes and 27 lines of original writing, your quote ratio is off. Since you should have had 30 lines of original writing, I will penalize you according to the percent of writing you have verses what you should have had: 27 divided by 30 equals 90% so you start with a 90, from which I will subtract all other marks. Therefore, in our example, if you should have had 30 lines of original writing and you had only 27, you have a 10 point mark down.
B. If you have 14 lines of quotes and the quote ratio is 4:1, then you must have 56 lines of original writing.If you have 14 lines of quotes and 49 lines of original writing, your quote ratio is off. Since you should have had 56 lines of original writing, I will penalize you according to the percent of writing you have verses what you should have had 49 divided by 56 equals 87% so you start with a 90; from which I will subtract all other Marks. Therefore, in our example, if you should have had 56 lines of original writing and you had only 49, you have a 13 point mark down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)