Faith and Force: Book review

FAITH AND FORCE: A Christian Debate about War by David Clough and Brian Stiltner. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2007. 304 pages, bibliography and index. Paperback; $26.95. ISBN: 9781589011656.

Faith and Force is an unfortunate title for this book. The “and” gives the impression of two separate areas of life; faith is not a separate area because it permeates all of life. However, this title was chosen, I suspect, for its alliteration rather than its theological purpose as both authors seek to show how their faith integrates with their different positions.

David Clough and Brian Stiltner have produced an excellent and innovative book. They come from different perspectives as well as different sides of the Atlantic. Clough, a Methodist at St. John’s College, Durham, UK, expounds and defends a pacifist position. Stiltner, a Roman Catholic at Sacred Heart University, USA, takes a just war position.

The impetus for this book is the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Two friends found themselves on opposing sides of the debate and long e-mail debates ensued. These debates formed the basis of Faith and Force. Each of the chapters is co-written and then followed by the e-mail type discussions which retain much of a conversational character and highlight agreements and disagreements.

The key questions addressed are: When, if at all, is it right for a country to go to war? Should a person serve in the armed forces? How much money, if any, is legitimate to spend on the military? These are urgent questions since millions of lives and dollars are at stake.
Along the way, clear and insightful discussions are directed at topics like developing a war-ethic (chap. 1), the issue of weapons’ proliferation (chap. 4), and the menace of terrorism (chap. 5).
It is a little disappointing for this neo-Calvinist not to see any major interaction with Reformed authors on the just war position as it avoids the problems of a natural law approach. Nevertheless, this book is highly recommended, not only for its ethical discussion, but also as a model for debate and discussion. Ethics involves a reflective and dialogic process and these aspects are exemplified in this book. The authors have provided useful resources in thinking about the ethical issues of war from two different Christian traditions.

Despite my reservations with the book’s title, it would be great to see a series of books using this as a model such as Faith and Global Warming, Faith and Evolution; though I suspect these debates might not be as cordial as this particular book.

Steve Bishop

Published in Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith March (2008)

Publisher's details here

Book website here

Science and Grace: Book review

SCIENCE AND GRACE: God’s Reign in the Natural Sciences by Tim Morris and Don Petcher. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2006. 352 pages. Paperback; $17.99. ISBN: 1581345496.

Tim Morris and Don Petcher, professors at Covenant College, have had a long-term interest in the relationship between science and their Christian commitment. It was this interest that led them to create “Science in Perspective,” a course at Covenant College, and it was out of this course that this book developed. Both write from a Reformed perspective and yet this book would appeal to Christians of any persuasion and even to open-minded non-Christians.

The book is split into three sections. The first section looks at “Science and Christian belief in the postmodern context.” What is refreshing about this chapter is that the authors take postmodernism seriously and do not write it off as a philosophical aberration that science will eventually disprove.

Chapter 3 looks at five “dissenters,” Christians who have rejected the Enlightenment Project of the neutrality and objectivity of reason and therefore of science: Blaise Pascal, Johann Georg Hamann, Charles Hodge, Abraham Kuyper, and Herman Dooyeweerd. All of these dissenters agree that there is a need to reconsider the role of faith in relation to reason. Faith commitments are important in the development of science. If there are two different kinds of science—that of the believer and that of the nonbeliever—then how can we work together? Morris and Petcher answer: common grace.

Section two examines “Jesus Christ, the Lord of creation” and considers God’s relation to his creation. Chapter 4 looks at the Trinitarian character of God and his covenant with his creation. The extremes of immanentism or pantheism and transcendence or deism are avoided. The Trinitarian God works in the creation in a covenantal way. This means that the world is not a predictable machine. The next chapter looks at the concept of miracles and God’s freedom in the universe. Morris and Petcher rightly regard miracles as being part of God’s providence; a miracle is an “outworking of God’s purposes.” In the final chapter in this section, “The laws of nature and the gospel of grace,” they see the laws as a “faithful unfolding of God’s covenant promises” that reflect creation’s creatureliness and contingency.

The final section, “Investigating his dominion,” analyzes our place in the “doing” of science. The authors ask, “What does loving God and neighbor entail in the natural sciences?” They see science as an opportunity for obedience to the great commandment (Mark 12:30–31). It is a refreshing and inspiring perspective. Materialism and reductionism are resisted and they capture the wildness of creation that has been lost in the “Modern domesticated version” of science.

Throughout the final section is a lot of wisdom and wise advice, for example: “the use of scientific evidence in apologetics may inadvertently cede to science the ultimate truth authority” (p. 270) and “our ultimate allegiance as scientists is not to our scientific disciplines as such but to Christ’s church” (p. 191).

The penultimate chapter looks at “The kingdom of Christ and the culture of science”; science is seen as “a cultural enterprise that reflects God’s favor and yet calls for His judgment at the same time” (p. 306). The final chapter provides a clarion call for Christians to work out their science in the context of their Christian commitments. There are twenty-four pages of notes, a bibliography of 149 works and an eight-page index.

This is one of the best books on science and Christianity I have read. If you only read one book on science and Christianity this year, make it this one. The authors take seriously Kuyper’s claim that there is no inch of secular life that Christ does not declare, “It is mine.” They look at what this claim might mean for the biological and physical sciences, but as they do so, it has implications for all of the sciences—theology included. This is a book that demands slow, careful, and prayerful study for any Christian involved in academic study.

Steve Bishop

Published in Perspectives on Science and Faith March 2008.

More details here.

John Calvin rediscovered

James Bratt discusses a book he co-edited: John Calvin Rediscovered: The Impact of His Social and Economic Thought (Westminster/John Knox Press, 2007): mp3

The religious heritage of rights talk: Witte and Wolterstorff

John Witte Jr and Nicholas Wolterstorff discuss religion and human rights. Quicktime movie (228 MB) and mp3 (59 MB). This was a CCCS sponsored event.

The kingdom as Jubilee

‘Jesus’ concept of the kingdom was borrowed extensively from the prophetic understanding of the Jubilee year’ J H Yoder (Politics of Jesus p. 36)

God’s work in creation set a precedence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, rest; this is seen in the Sabbath day Deut 5;12-15 and the Sabbath year Lev 25:17

Barnabas (Paul’s apostolic companion) takes it further in The Epistle of Barnabas 13: 3, 4, he writes:

‘... And God made in 6 days the work of his hands; and he finished them on the seventh day, and he rested the seventh day, and snctified it. Consider my children, what this signifies he finished them in six days. The meaning of it is this; that in
6, 000 years the Lord God will bring all things to an end.’

Sabbath year of sabbath years = Jubilee Lev 25:8ff extra rest!

4 themes characterise Jubilee:
(i)rest
(ii)forgiveness of debts
(iii) liberation of slaves and the oppressed
(iv) redemption of property

Jesus and jubilee
Lk 4: 18,19 Jesus’ first public sermon – announcing the arrival of the kingdom – couched in jubilee terms

It is claimed that AD 26 was the actual year of the Jubilee – the jubilee age has arrived.

1. Celebration (jubilation) (Lev 25 v 9) - sounding of the trumpet: a proclamation everyone around knew about it.
2. Atonement (v 9) - all that we do rests upon what Jesus has accomplished in and through the cross.
3. Family (v 10) - all returned to their families; the oppressed go free
4. Work/ rest (v 11) - our work is shaped by obedience to God; the importance of rest - no workaholism here!
5. Reliance upon God (v 12) unless God blesses we starve!
6. Economics (v 14ff) land (v )- the gospel is for all of life, it affects how we buy and sell, the economic powers etc: all of life is to be redeemed.
7. Release from debt - 'forgive us our debts'. Debts were forgiven. Good news for the poor.
8. Stewardship of the land (v 23) - environmental concern
8. Care (v 35).
9. Above all it was a restoration - people were restored, redeemed.

Release and restoration characterises the jubilee themes - a message taken up when Jesus declared jubilee (aka the year of the Lord's favour) in Lk 4.

Eschatalogical anticipation - a foretaste of the 'not yet' now. Echoes of the exodus too (v 8, 55, etc)

Rest

Lk 12:22-31 cf Lev 25: 20-22.
There is much emphasis in our society on work – but not enough on rest. Paul Marshall writes:

This rest is more than recuperation and preparation for work. It is a God-given human response in its own right.

We are the image of God – God works and then he rests.

Rest is not just what we do in our spare time, it’s not just a holiday, or a day off; it is so much more:

Hebrews 3:7-4:10
sabbath rest

We rest from out labours – in more than one sense of the word. Rest is a reminder that we can’t do it in our own strength.

When most people ‘rest’ we consume; the numbers in the mall are testimony to that fact. I’m no different, I hate the mall, but I love amazon!


Forgiveness and liberation

Lk 11: 4 release (aphiemi) our debts (opheilema = monetary debts); as we release everyone that is indebted to us ie practice Jubilee

Mt 18: 23 the kingdom of heaven is like... Jubilee!
verse 27 aphiemi
(aphiemi LXX in Lev 25)

Redemption of property
land = wealth, capital
Lk 12: 32-34 sell your possessions and give to the poor
Mk 10:21 rich young ruler ‘ practice jubilee’
Lk 19: 8-10 Zacheus

The implications of Jubilee

1. It is God’s new order bursting in
economic, social, religious, political, ... cf Gal 3: 28

All areas under the influence of Jubilee – hence and image of the kingdom.

2. It shows God’s concern for the poor and oppressed

Provision for the poor:
(i)0% interest rate
(ii) third year tithe given to the poor
(iii) debts were cancelled every seven years
(iv)debtors sold into slavery were to be released every seven years
(v)fallow land was available for the poor

Jubilee prevented exploitation of the poor and oppressed – it not only provided for them it gave the a new start.

Early Israel was an egalitarian society. Later the gap between rich and poor increased; they moved away for the jubilee principles (Is 58; Amos 2:6)
It prevented Israel becoming permanent slaves.

3. It shows God’s concern for the earth
‘the land is mine’ underlines the Jubilee
It is a reminder that we are stewards
It enabled the land and the animals to rest.

4. Restoration
Amos 3:21 restoration of all things
Rom 8, Rev 21 the whole earth is to experience release and liberty – at the Jubilee of Jubilees!



Bibliography

R.B. Sloan, Jr, The Favourable Year of the Lord: A Study of Jubilary Theology in the Gospel of Luke. Schola Press: Austin, Texas, 1977. Pp. 213

Dooyeweerd study guides

I have recently resumed my study guides to two of Dooyeweerd's books:

• The Christian Idea of the State and
• A Christian Theory of Social Institutions

I also intend to return to Roots of Western Culture guide shortly.

Two other study guides in progress are:

• Roy Clouser's Knowing with the Heart by Gregory Baus and
• Jim Skillen's The Scattered Voice by Derek Melleby

Odds and sods

• The soon to be released ESV Study Bible has a web site and more details.
• Doug Groothuis on the "new" atheism.
• UK Christian bookshops now have a blog
• so too do the Evangelical Philosophical Society.
• For the latest Accordance news click here.

A brief musical interlude ....

From the new DVD.
The UNcon was the first time that Daevid Allen, Steve Hillage, Tim Blake, Gilli Smyth, Mike Howlett, Miquette Giraudy and Didier Malherbe had all been together on stage and performed since the 1977 Gong reunion in Paris.

J P A Mekkes on Reformational wiki

Rudi Hayward has posted a useful brief biography of J P A Mekes (1898-1987) and an outline of his thought on Reformational wiki. After a spell in a POW camp, Mekkes worked for the Dutch equivalent of the FBI and then became on of the first professors appointed by the Association for Calvinistic Philosophy. He influenced Bob Goudzwaard, Dick Stafleu and Egbert Schuurman among others.

McKnight on work

Scot McKnight is working through Darrell Codsen's excellent little book on work: The Heavenly Good of Earthly Work.

I'm really pleased that Scot is drawing this book to people's attention. It's one of the few books that treats work as being worthwhile in itself and not viewing work as a just a mission field, a place to share the gospel.

B J van der Walt Transformed ch 4

Taking captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ

This is the fifth in a series of posts looking at B J van der Walt’s Transformed by the Renewing of Your Mind (ICCA: Potchesftroom, 2001)

• Overview
• Chapter 1
• Chapter 2
• Chapter 3

In this chapter van der Walt attempts to ‘explain what Christian scholarship entails’. It is not an easy task – either explaining it or doing it. However, it is an essential task!

He starts by looking at the importance and character of education. He describes it thus:

Education ... always implies a deliberate and conscious attempt on the part of the educator to lead the child, student or adult to a particular goal according to certain norms. To educate means to exert real formative power and to give actual direction to the development of the individual. Education, therefore, is a normative task – even in the case of those who deny this fact in their propogation of so-called neutral education (p. 131)

He then looks at the nature of higher (tertiary) education and the difference between everyday pre-theoretical thought and scientific thought. A simple but apposite illustration shows the difference:

Who knows more about the sick baby: the mother or the medical doctor? The answer of course that neither knows more: the mother and doctor have different forms of knowledge of the sick baby. Intuitively and pre-scientifically the mother suspects that her baby has chickenpox. The doctor’s scientific training, however, enables him to diagnose it definitely as chickenpox.(p 135)

Before looking at how to take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ, van der Walt examines some common misconceptions in practising Christian scholarship: the dualistic, modernistic and postmodernistic approaches.

In the dualistic view the Christian is both a Christian and a scholar. It is not always easy to keep these together. In the moderistic approach science is viewed as being neutral, the application of the correct scientific method will guarantee neutrality. However, as van der Walt shows, this is false: religious presuppositions are part of every scientific process. The postmodernistic approach with its emphasis on a pluralism of stories is a far more subtle and dangerous than the previous two. Christianity is now merely one of the many different ‘acceptable’ approaches. This means sacrificing the word of God on the altar of postmodern relativism.

Dualistic approaches seek to unit Christianity and the sciences, a modernistic approach rejects Christianity for the sake of science and postmodernistic approaches accept Christianity as one of many equally valid approaches. Whereas, a Christian approach seeks to transform the sciences. Christianity is not an icing on the cake (to evoke the title of another book) but permeates the whole of the cake – like salt or yeast. Every science should be practised in the light of God.

He identifies five stages in Christian scholarship which are summarised in the diagram below.


Christian scholarship should be ‘marked by fidelity to God’s revelation’. This is the light that illuminates our ‘scientific filters’.

In the next section he looks at the role of the Bible and how it is authoritative and how it is a light. He concludes this chapter with a look at the place of theology in its relationship to philosophy. Theology is an ordinary scientific discipline with limited authority.

Tom Wright in the NewStatesman

Tom Wright is interviewed in the NewStatesman by Sholto Brynes:

Tom Wright's literal belief in the Resurrection makes him a hero to conservative Christians worldwide. Here he declares war on militant atheists and liberals, and explains why heaven is not the end of the world.

Sunday's coming ....

[HT Christian thinker]

André Troost 1916-2008

André Troost was one of the second generation reformational scholars. He died on 19th March 2008.

He was born in 1916 in the Netherlands. He studied theology at the Theological Seminary in Kampen and at the Free University (VU) in Amsterdam. His PhD, obtained in 1958, was on casuistics and situation ethics (casuïstiek en situatie-ethiek). He was a pastor from 1946. From 1958 to 1967 he looked after the pastoral needs of students in Rotterdam. In 1964 he became a professor in socila ethics at the VU and then in 1967 as professor of general ethics. He became the professor for Calvinistic philosophy at Rotterdam in 1972.

He is the author of The Christian Ethos (translated into English by Kobus and Yvonne Smith) (Bloemfontein: Patmos, 1983).
'The idea of creation order in Western thought' Theological Forum XXI (4) (1993).

Tom Wright: heaven is not our home

More from Tom Wright on heaven and bodily resurrection - this time from Christianity Today.

There is no agreement in the church today about what happens to
people when they die. Yet the New Testament is crystal clear on the matter: In a classic passage, Paul speaks of "the redemption of our bodies" (Rom. 8:23). There is no room for doubt as to what he means: God's people are promised a new type of bodily existence, the fulfillment and redemption of our present bodily life. The rest of the
early Christian writings, where they address the subject, are completely in tune with this.

AoLR update

The following have recently been added to All of life redeemed:

Mark Roques and Arthur Jones:

• What is Distinctive about the Reality Bites Approach to Schools Work? I. Telling the Stories of Culture-Transforming Christians


• What’s Distinctive about the Reality Bites Approach to Schools Work? II. Engaging in ‘Immanent Critique’ of Secularism

Duncan Roper 'The earth as a garden for all creatures' (2008) Stimulus

Craig Bartholomew on AoLR

I have now added - thanks to Dave Beldman - the Craig Bartholomew pages on All of life redeemed. Craig is the H. Evan Runner Professor of Philosophy and Biblical Studies at Redeemer University College, Ancaster, Ontario, Canada.

At present there is a list of Craig's articles and books with links to several of his papers on the web.

Why was Jesus crucified?

Introduction
One of the questions that has occupied the "Third Questers" is: Why was Jesus crucified? A myriad of ideas have been proposed. Almost all agree that Jesus was "crucified under Pontius Pilate".

Of one thing we can be sure the cross was not a mistake! It was essential to the purpose and plan of God in redeeming his creation. Why did Jesus die? "Because God willed it!" The answer to our question will also depend upon who we ask: the crowd, the Jewish leaders, the Romans and Jesus (as well as the myriad of theologians and historians through the ages) would all give different answers. Reality is multifaceted.

Martin Hengel (1977) summarises his survey of crucifixion as follows:

• Crucifixion was widespread in the first century
• Crucifixion was a political and military punishment
• It was used because of its powerful effect as a deterrent
• It satisfied the lust for revenge
• It represented the uttermost humiliation, aggravated by the fact that the victims were rarely buried
• The Romans used it on all dangerous criminals and members of the lower classes.

We can be sure then that Jesus died the death of a victim of a political system. The death of Jesus marks God's solidarity with the oppressed. Commenting on this Richard Bauckham says: "It is as one of the victims that in his love he reaches all of us."

An Overview of the Literature
S. G. F. Brandon (1967) regarded Jesus as a revolutionary sympathiser who was killed as a messianic pretender. Hyam Maccoby (1986), who claims Jesus was a Pharisee, thinks that by asking why a Jew from Galilee would meet an end on a Roman cross. Galilee, perhaps because it was not under direct Roman rule, had been a centre of rebellion (a point also made by Vermes). This leads Maccoby to conclude that Jesus was the latest in a line of rebels; he therefore suffered the same fate as Judas of Galilee and his supporters: he was crucified by the Romans on a charge of sedition.

Ed Sanders totally undermines Brandon's and Maccoby's arguments when he notes that Jesus' disciples weren't rounded up and likewise executed. The disciples remaining free implies that Jesus was not crucified for revolutionary intent against Rome.

For Geza Vermes (1973), Jesus is a first-century charismatic Jew, a "paramount example of the early Hasidim or Devout", others included Hanina ben Dosa and Honi the Cirle-Drawer. Vermes in an attempt to exonerate the Jews comments:

It was not on a Jewish religious indictment, but on a secular accusation that he was condemned by the emperor's delegate to die shamefully on the Roman cross.

That accusation was that "Jesus was a political agitator with pretensions to being the king of the Jews".

Ellis Rivkin (1984) thinks that we should not ask who but what crucified Jesus. His answer: "it emerges with great clarity, both from Josephus and the Gospels, that the culprit is not the Jews, but the Roman imperial system".

E. P. Sanders (1985), "a liberal, modern, secularized Protestant, brought up in a church dominated by the social gospel", in his seminal study Jesus and Judaism affirms two "facts": "Jesus was executed by the Romans as would-be 'king of the Jews', and his disciples subsequently formed a messianic movement which was not based on the hope of military victory". For Sanders two phrases are important: "physical demonstration" and "noticeable following". The physical demonstration was Jesus' "cleansing" of the temple: "simply speaking against the temple - prophesying its destruction - would lead to punishment and at least the threat of death". His noticeable following made it "expedient to kill Jesus, rather than flog him simply as a nuisance and release him".

Francis Watson (1985) with Sanders sees Jesus' attitude and actions towards the temple as the reason for his death. He regards the idea that Jesus was convicted on a purely religious charge and was condemned only reluctantly by Pilate as "historically highly unlikely", he contends that it was fabricated by Gentile Christians "who did not wish either themselves or their master to be regarded as political subversives". For Watson then, "The answer to the question of why Jesus was crucified seems to be his threat against the temple". He justifies this answer by examining the examples of other eschatological prophets that met with the same fate: John the Baptist(c AD30), Jesus the son of Ananias(c AD62), Theudas(c AD44/5), unnamed prophets that appeared during the procuratorship of Felix (AD 52-60) and an unnamed Egyptian.

It is highly unlikely that the threat to the temple is the only cause of Jesus' death; though it is one very important factor. If it were the controlling factor it is certain Luke would have made much more of the incident in the Temple.

N. T. Wright (1989) develops the view of Schweitzer. Schweitzer held the view that Jesus' death was a direct consequence of him taking upon himself the "messianic woes"; for Wright Jesus' death was the result/fulfilment of Jesus' outworking of his mission as a prophet, as announcer of the kingdom, as messiah, as the son returning to the vineyard. Jesus dies Israel's death and so is enthroned as Israel's king.

Wright offers the most convincing arguments for the death of Jesus. It is Jesus desire to redeem Israel (and the rest of creation) that sets him on a collision course with the Jewish leaders and the ruling Romans: his death was inevitable. For the Romans he represented a threat to the stability of Israel. For the Jews he attacked almost everything that made them Jewish: the temple, the sabbath, the laws of separation; his increasing popularity meant that he had to be disposed of. And for Jesus he was fulfilling the will of his Father who had sent him for such apurpose: he was the lamb slain before the foundation of the world.

Gustaf Aulen addressed this issue from the theological angle. In his seminal work he outlined two theories of atonement that dominated theological discussion for centuries: an objective model and a subjective model; associated with Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury (c.1033-1109) and the Frenchman Peter Abelard (1079-1142) respectively. Aulen also restated a third type of view the Christus Victor model, which received scant attention for centuries; this was largely because of the vehement controversy between the classic and the Latin models - each were only interested in scoring theological points off each other, hence a possible third - and more dramatic - view was ignored and neglected.

The Anselmian Latin model
This model was first formulated in Anselm's Cur Deus homo (Why Did God Become Human?). Put simply this "objective" view of the atonement sees God as the object of Christ's work on the cross: God is reconciled to humanity, by the substitutionary death of his son. Jesus died in our place, he suffered our punishment.

The Abelardian model
The subjective Abelardian model places the emphasis on the example of Jesus. The cross is a demonstration of God's love; and Jesus provides us with a perfect pattern for moral development. This model became dominant in the nineteenth century with the advent of rationalism and the accompanying scepticism of the miraculous.

The "classic" Christus victor model
This classic model was dominant for the first thousand years of Christianity. In it God is the reconciler and the reconciled: God in Christ is reconciling the world to himself. As in the Anselmian model humanity is in a desperate situation, they cannot save themselves. Unlike the Anselmian model the force from which humanity needs deliverance is not God's wrath, rather the bondage of demonic forces. Jesus' victorious conflict on the cross over the devil and his cohorts brings a new state of affairs: God is now reconciled with his creation.

Each view contains some grain of truth. The Anselmian view on its own is far too exclusively individualistic: emphasis is placed on personal sin but the presence of structural evil (e.g. sexism, racism, exploitation of the planet) are ignored. The Christus victor model is required to remedy this deficiency. The powers that lie at the heart of much of the structural sin are defeated by the cross on this model; thus enabling structural disobedience to be confronted. This view is also far too anthropocentric; again this deficiency is remedied by the Christus victor model: this provides theological justification for a cosmic reconciliation. Another deficiency in the Anselmian view is that it underestimates Jesus' life and ministry - this is the strength of the Abelardian view. Although taken alone the Abelardian view fails to deal adequately with the presence of evil (personal or structural).

None of the above theological views should be rejected they are all to varying degrees biblical (Christus victor more so and the Abelardian least so). However, it seems that neither view does justice to the corporate nature of the death of Christ: in Christ we all died, in Christ the cosmos is reconciled. Ultimately the cross is a paradox: in apparent defeat victory is completed; humanity in accepting the once-for-all death of Jesus is redeemed, the penalty paid, and creation can be once more reconciled to God It is fully appropriate that the cross has become the symbol of Christianity.

Blah: Walsh and Keesmat

Authors@Google: Tim Keller

[HT Reformissionary]

Why did Jesus [have to] die?

John Piper in his book available here lists 50 reasons:

The Past Accomplishment of Christ’s Work

Salvation From, Through, and to God

Chapter 1 – To Absorb the Wrath of God
Chapter 21 – To Reconcile Us to God
Chapter 24 – To Give Us Confident Access to the Holiest Place
Chapter 25 – To Become for Us the Place Where We Meet God

The Work of a Perfect Saviour

Chapter 2 – To Please His Heavenly Father
Chapter 3 – To Learn Obedience and Be Perfected
Chapter 4 – To Achieve His Own Resurrection from the Dead
Chapter 43 – To Unleash the Power of God in the Gospel

The Redemption of God’s Own Possession

Chapter 8 – To Become a Ransom for Many
Chapter 20 – To Deliver Us from the Present Evil Age
Chapter 23 – So That We Might Belong to Him
Chapter 42 – To Disarm the Rulers and Authorities

The Vindication of God’s Righteousness

Chapter 9 – For the Forgiveness of Our Sins
Chapter 10 – To Provide the Basis for Our Justification
Chapter 11 – To Complete the Obedience That Becomes Our Righteousness
Chapter 12 – To Take Away Our Condemnation

The Fulfilment of God’s Law

Chapter 7 – To Cancel the Legal Demands of the Law Against Us
Chapter 13 – To Abolish Circumcision and All Rituals as the Basis of Salvation
Chapter 26 – To Bring the Old Testament Priesthood to an End and Become the Eternal High Priest
Chapter 31 – So That We Would Die to the Law and Bear Fruit for God

The Present Experience of Christ’s Work

A New Self


Chapter 14 – To Bring Us to Faith and Keep Us Faithful
Chapter 15 – To Make Us Holy, Blameless, and Perfect
Chapter 30 – That We Might Die to Sin and Live to Righteousness
Chapter 34 – To Enable Us to Live by Faith in Him

A Living Faith

Chapter 32 – To Enable Us to Live for Christ and Not Ourselves
Chapter 33 – To Make His Cross the Ground of All Our Boasting
Chapter 36 – To Create a People Passionate for Good Works
Chapter 37 – To Call Us to Follow His Example of Lowliness and Costly Love

A Relationship of Love

Chapter 5 – To Show the Wealth of God’s Love and Grace for Sinners
Chapter 6 – To Show His Own Love for Us
Chapter 27 – To Become a Sympathetic and Helpful High Priest
Chapter 35 – To Give Marriage Its Deepest Meaning

A Freedom and Liberty in Life

Chapter 16 – To Give Us a Clear Conscience
Chapter 28 – To Free Us from the Futility of Our Ancestry
Chapter 29 – To Free Us from the Slavery of Sin
Chapter 39 – To Free Us from Bondage to the Fear of Death

A Hope for the Whole World

Chapter 38 – To Create a Band of Crucified Followers
Chapter 44 – To Destroy Hostility Between Races
Chapter 45 – To Ransom People from Every Tribe and Language and People and Nation
Chapter 46 – To Gather All His Sheep from Around the World

The Future Consummation of Christ’s Work

Final Victory Over Sickness and Death

Chapter 17 – To Obtain for Us All Things That Are Good for Us
Chapter 18 – To Heal Us from Moral and Physical Sickness
Chapter 40 – So That We Would Be with Him Immediately After Death
Chapter 41- To Secure Our Resurrection from the Dead

Eternal Life in the Presence of God

Chapter 19 – To Give Eternal Life to All Who Believe on Him
Chapter 22 – To Bring Us to God
Chapter 47 – To Rescue Us from Final Judgment

Eternal Joy in the Glory of Christ

Chapter 48 – To Gain His Joy and Ours
Chapter 49 – So That He Would Be Crowned with Glory and Honour

Logos for Mac alpha version

Logos for Mac is now out in alpha version. I downloaded a copy but all the resources I copied over have come out locked and I can't find a way to unlock them!

Odds and sods

Convert web pages to mp3 [HT Digital Inspiration]
Free G K Chesterton Orthodoxy mp3 [HT free Christian Resources]
The Passion timeline
10 essential Mac apps to install after a reformat to that list I'd want to add the brilliant pdf reader skim

Tim Keller on 'Belief in an age of skepticism' at the Veritas Forum:


[HT Reformissionary]

Music for a Sunday afternoon

Food for thought

[HT CRM]

Tyndale toolbar

At last a tool bar for Mozilla or ie (does anyone still use ie?)for biblical scholars and theologians; click on the image for a link:

The supremacy of Christ

John Piper on the prosperity gospel

Powerful stuff:



[HT reformergent]

Sigur Rós 'Heima' [At home]

A 97 min film of Sigur Rós playing live concerts 'at home' in Iceland:



[HT reformissionary]

Pagan Christianity - re-review

The nice people at http://www.ptmin.org/ have sent me a review copy of the new and expanded edition of Frank Viola’s Pagan Christianity. I reviewed the first edition here.

At first glance there are one or two changes – the cover now boasts a large ‘Pagan’ with roots growing out of it and is a major improvement on the bland green cover of the previous edition. George Barna is now a co-author, there is now a eleven-page bibliography (though only five have been written since the first edition – and of the five, four are by Barna or Viola; the rest reveal a distinct lack of primary sources). Other useful additions include a ‘delving deeper’ section at the end of each chapter, this is a brief Q&A – questions arising from the chapter are posed and answered.

The substance of the book is largely unchanged. They argue that many of church practices have their roots in paganism (he still doesn’t define what he means as pagan). There is much in this book that is insighful and helpful – he rightly identifies that much of what we do in what passes for church is not conducive to participation and interaction between fellow members of the body of Christ. My concern is that in the polemical tones of this book this message will be lost and ignored by those we need to hear it most.

The new edition has done nothing to alleviate my concerns stressed in my previous review:

It seems to me, though, that at times Viola is guilty of the genetic fallacy; it is wrong to condemn a practice based on its history, however dubious that history may be. The origin of something does not necessarily have any bearing upon its truth. Clothes are the direct result of rebellion against God – does that mean that wearing clothes is wrong? Practices must be damned or praised on their present merits not their previous history.

Why should we return to New testament models of church services or (non)buildings? Are the models intended to be normative or are they merely descriptive? Is Viola embracing some form of reverse chronological snobbery? It also assumes that we know what the first century church was like! The few glimpses we have in the New Testament hardly provide a blueprint; though they do provide some helpful pointers. And it does seem far away from what we have in the institutional churches today.

Elsewhere Viola has described what he perceives to be a NT church pattern it is broadly one that is modelled on 1 Corinthians. And I have great sympathy for this model. But how do we know if the the Corinthian model was used at Rome, Athens or Jerusalem? I suspect that the first-century practices are not quite so uniform as Viola thinks.

That said, I do believe Viola, despite the populist and polemical approach, has an important message for the body of Christ – I only hope those that need to hear it hear it and respond.

Christian Pat and his charismatic cat

[HT Paul Roberts]

Principles and positivization: Dooyeweerd and rational autonomy

Glenn Friessen replies to Michael J Moor:

This is a response to Michael J. DeMoor’s article “Rational Autonomy and Autonomous Rationality: Dooyeweerd, Kant and Fichte on Subjectivity, Objectivity and Normativity,” Philosophia Reformata 72 (2007) 105-129. DeMoor argues that although Dooyeweerd opposed Kant’s idea of the autonomy of thought, he nevertheless relied on the idea of rational autonomy for the active positivizing of norms. DeMoor finds similarities between Dooyeweerd and Fichte with respect to these three issues:

1. Our consciousness depends on reflexivity or self-consciousness;
2. The correlation between subjectivity and objectivity;
3. The autonomy or spontaneity of the agent, by which “binding norms are freely applied to oneself.”

Odds and sods

Bishop Tom Wright on 'What happens when you die?" and interview with Martin Bashir on ABC News. [HT Jon Swales]

A list of Genesis resources at Monergism

The poverty and justice Bible from the Bible Society [HT Tullian Tchividjian]

Tullian also has a summary document on what Christian schooling 'is having so little culture influence'.

The webware 100 finalists

Living green slides

These are the slides that accompanied my talk below.

| View | Upload your own

Living green

Living green – an inconvenient truth part 4
Reading I Thess 3

These are my notes for a talk I gave a few weeks ago; it was the fourth in a series of four talks on being green. I'll post the PowerPoint shortly.

This is the last in the series of being green. Forget everything else you have heard, ignore all the previous speakers, what do they know? If you want to know how to be a green Christian, I’m your man, follow me. ....

At this point half of you are about to walk out of the door in outrage, half are about to stone me and the other half .... (I never did understand fractions...)

Of course, I'm only joking! I'm not here as a model example - ask my wife or kids - and yet Paul said almost exactly the same things; and he wasn't joking!

1 Thess 3
7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example.
9 We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to make ourselves a model for you to follow.

How can he say that? It’s outrageous!

But in essence this is what the gospel of the kingdom is all about? - it's not rules to be obeyed its examples to follow.

How much of an example are we?
Can people look at us, as they did Paul, and see Jesus?

The church is called to be an example - an example to the world. We should be the best at being green - we are the ones who are to show the world the gospel of Jesus. A gospel that touches - or at least should touch - every area and aspect of life.

Pull back the curtains and see all that God wants. Let him be the divine optician and adjust our prescription lenses so we can have 2020 vision. Let’s see things as God see them – get rid of our blinkers, ask God to remove them.

Elsewhere Paul says we are to be the fragrance, the aroma of Christ:
2 Cor 5:
14 But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumphal procession in Christ and through us spreads everywhere the fragrance of the knowledge of him.
15 For we are to God the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing.

How do we smell?

The gospel is about being and doing not saying.
We are human beings before being human doings!
But obedience is part of the gospel (again from the passage we had read earlier):


2 Thess 3:
14 If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed.
15 Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.

Strong words, do we live up to them? How many people have we warned recently?
Paul also commands us to work out our salvation. We have to work at it.

Phil 2:
12 Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling,


But this gospel is no gospel of works! It’s not a gospel of being green – we don’t work out our salvation by recycling or buying the right products.
It's a gospel of grace.
We are given the grace to do it - if God calls us he also anoints us.

The Ten Commandments are no longer commands: you shall not- they are promises: you shall not – Why? because we have his Spirit and his strength that enables us not to.

We can do these things not because we should but because we can!

Love [God], and do what you like! (Augustine Homily 7 on Epistle of John section 8)

We can do what we like - because if we love God we will be doing what God wills!
We have him in us - his resources are ours; the weak are now strong - we have his strength to do it.

It's all about grace not guilt! We do it out of grace not out of guilt. Let’s not be green because of guilt!

I love what Francis of Assisi is alleged to have said - ‘Preach the gospel and if all else fails use words’.

Paul can say I'm your model, because he is the image of God. We are God's aroma - do we smell of the gospel?

As God’s image bearers we should!

I want to look a little more at being the image bearers of God, because this will help us in understanding how to live in God’s world.

So, what does it mean to be the image of God?
There are four options: resemblance; relationship; representative; and rulership.

Resemblance Until the 1940s this was the theological consensus: the image of God consisted in humanity's form. In some way the image means we mirror some aspect of God: we resemble him in some way. Be it physical or spiritual or some combination of the two. Here the term is used as a noun. Imaging God is something we are. For Thomas Aquinas, the great (but misguided) Scholastic theologian of the Middle Ages, the image consisted in human rationality, The Reformer Martin Luther saw it in terms of morality and John Calvin in terms of both rationality and morality.

The problem with this viewpoint is that the OT never makes a distinction between the physical and spiritual parts of humanity. Everything is spiritual (as Rob Bell reminds us). The spiritual as something ‘other-worldly’ is a Greek trojan horse smuggled into Christianity. In Hebrew thought it is the whole person that is the image of God, not some aspect. All of life is spiritual.

Relational The adherents of this position see the image consisting in some form of relationship: the ability to have a relationship with God; or, our relationship male to female.

Representative/ counterpart Here the image is taken to be a verb: humans are to image God. We are his representative on earth. To image God means we represent him, perhaps as ambassadors, or vice-regents.

Rulership implies that to be the image of God involves a task: imaging God is seen in ruling and subduing the rest of creation.

Each of these positions carry an element of truth, some more so than others. Werner H. Schmidt summarises it well:

'Accordingly, the likeness to the image of God in man can be understood as deputizing for God on earth. Perhaps the concept of the "image of God" cannot be strictly defined at all, because in the tradition itself we catch the note of several themes: the appearance of God, his actualization, his representation, his representation by another, and also that of governorship on his behalf.'

To image God is both a verb and a noun: we image God and we are to be imagers of God. The first implies that it is something we are, the second something we do.

But being before doing.

Included within its meaning is the task to subdue and rule the creation: this is not a mandate for dominion but responsible stewardship.

Part of the calling to be human is to steward creation and this involves living green.
It means developing and cultivating creation according to God-given norms.
Most green thinking involves aback to nature philosophy, there is no room for progress. This is where the Christian worldview is different. It is not a back to the garden mentality – the scriptures start off in a garden but end up in a city: there is development.

There are two sides to the developing and opening up of the creation: the kingly and the servant. The kingly is implicit in Genesis 1:27f; the servant in Gen 2:15. Both aspects are important, both are required to fully understand our task of filling/ developing/ opening up creation.

Subduing and ruling are then to be done as God's representatives: he is our role model. It is not domination or exploitation, but leadership as servanthood as demonstrated by Jesus the servant king (he’s the one we are imaging after all).

One thing is immediately obvious: creation is not merely for humanity. The world exists for the glory of God.

All things exist and have their meaning in God.

The earth is not ours to do with it as we see fit. It is God's creation, and as God's delegates we are to take care of it on his behalf; we are accountable to God for its treatment of the earth.
Dominion cannot therefore mean domination, it is to be done as image bearers of God gently and caringly unfolding and developing the potential locked in God's creation.

It is to be done with freedom within limits. God’s law is full of care for the creation – it also contains restrictions on human use of the earth:

• No blood of any animal may be eaten (Lv 17: 10-14)
• Fields are not to be reaped to the border (Lv 19:9)
• The grower may only harvest from trees five years old (Lv 19: 23)
• Fruit trees may not be used for siege works (Dt 20:19)
• A kid may not be boiled in its own mother's milk (Dt 14:21)
• An ox is not to be muzzled when treading corn (Dt 22:6)
• The land is to lie fallow regularly (Lv 25: 1-12)
• All the tithe of the land is the Lord's (Lv 27: 30-33)


Developing and cultivating the creation is a God-given activity, which is to be done in dependence on God and his Holy Spirit. It cannot be an activity independent of God. Neither is it is to be used for domination or destruction of the earth but to be exercised by us in our role of image bearers of God to unfold and continue the work of creation with freedom but within clear limits.

The church should be able to say we are model of the kingdom of God - the kinging it of Jesus is manifested through us!

We are to rule and subdue the creation - but we are to do it as stewards.

It’s not just a matter of being green; it is being faithful. Faithful in fulfilling the creation mandate – to develop and cultivate the earth, to tend and take care of the earth as responsible stewards as image bearers of God, as God’s representatives on earth.

The Church is God’s redeemed community – we are to live out and demonstrate God’s love for the world.

Is this how we read John 3:16: God so loved the [people of the] world?

How can we show God’s love for the world?

Being green – if by that we mean taking care of the earth – is part of it.

We are called to bring redemption to the world – not to redeem individuals out of the world.

The kingdom of God is about a new transformed world, heaven comes down to the earth, the meek are to inherit the earth – let’s pray that because of our responsible rulership they won’t be disappointed!

The 50 best crime writers?

The Daily Telegraph has a list of '50 crime writers to read before you die'. It's not a bad list - I've read about half of them. But there are some glaring omissions: Ian Rankin, Jack Harvey, Peter Robinson and Mark Billingham are the ones that spring instantly to mind. Perhaps they are a little too left wing for Telegraph readers! But then who isn't?

Odds and sods

These are worth checking out:

Jason Clark has a post from the author of The Evangelical Universalist: Evangelical universalism oxymoron?

Sets 'n' service looks at Tim Keller's The Reason for God ch 2, 3, 4 and 5.

The Christ Files - including an interview with Richard Bauckham. [HT Chrisendom]

Jon Swales on Galatians and worldview.

Tom Wright on law and faith

[HT Jon Swales]

Odds and sods

Ben Witherington has a piece by Warren Smith on Oprah's new age Christ course based on A Course in Miracles. Smith; he writes:

As a former New Age follower and devoted student of A Course in Miracles, I eventually discovered that the Course in Miracles was—in reality—the truth of the Bible turned upside down. Not having a true understanding of the Bible at the time of my involvement, I was led to believe that A Course in Miracles was "a gift from God" to help everyone understand the "real" meaning of the Bible and to help bring peace to the world. Little did I know that the New Age "Christ" and the New Age teachings of A Course in Miracles were everything the real Jesus Christ warned us to watch out for. In Matthew 24 Jesus warned about false teachers, false teachings and the false "Christs" who would pretend to be Him.

Ben Goldacre on the latest fad to hit some schools: braingym

Tim Keller's The Reason for God is now out - I've ordered my copy. There is a supporting webpage.
Also check out Reformissionary's Tim Keller resources page

Dooyeweerd is recommended on a UCCF's new theology network: they observe:

It's not just his name that's hard... this book will make you bleed from the ears, but turn your world upside down.

How true!

Jon Swales has a brilliant summary of Tom Wright's view of hell from the superb Surprised by Hope.

Michael Patton, from Parchment and Pen, has a great piece on 'defining' the emergent church.

Andrew Goddard - including a quote from Jonathan Chaplin - on the ArchBp and Sharia [HT David Field]

Powered by ScribeFire.

The ethics of climate change

James Garvey, the author of The Ethics of Climate Change is interviewed by Nigel Warburton.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Christianity and politics

"He should be concentrating on winning souls into the Church of England rather than getting involved in politics."
Mark Pritchard Tory MP on Rowan Williams comments on Sharia law.

Rowan Williams' interview on the BBC
His lecture Civil and Religious Law in England: a Religious Perspective

Update: Jamie Smith has some excellent observations here.

Christians wrong about heaven ...

... says Bishop (no, not me .. the Bp of Durham) in Time magazine interview; the thing is he's Wright - Tom Wright.

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Dawkins Letters

David Robertson, the author of The Dawkins Letterss:

Powered by ScribeFire.

Os Guinness on Christians and culture

Os Guinness on why Christians are not having a greater impact on the shape of culture:

The reason Christians are not making a bigger difference in our world is not because Christians aren’t where they should be. That’s only a small part of the problem. In other words, we should have more Christians in law, more Christians in higher education, and more Christians in media, medicine, and music. But that’s not the main problem. The main problem is that Christians aren’t what they should be right where they are.

[HT Tullian Tchivdjian]

God's two books

A while back I posted something on God's (so-called) two books. 'An historian working on this right now' has posted two great comments. She/ He writes:

...."everything in Creation goes into the book of created things ("creaturae"), including the history of the church."

and

" ... another point: the Bible is also a creature (i.e., created thing). So the book of Scripture is actually a recursion of the Book of Nature."

You can read the full comments here.

Powered by ScribeFire.

heaven and earth

Paul Norridge at Instamatic theology has highlighted some excellent resources:

* Richard Middleton's article "A New Heaven and A New Earth: The Case for a Holistic Reading of the Biblical Story of Redemption" does exactly what it says on the tin.
* Douglas Moo has a great paper on environmental issues in the context of the New Testament: "Nature in the New Creation: New Testament Eschatology and the Environment". I also recently discovered the mp3 of an associated talk.

Dooyeweerd biography/bibliography in German

This German biography and bibliography of Herman Dooyeweerd is from Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon it is written by Gunter Brandorff.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Shall the body strive and not be crowned?

Chris Gousmett has an electronic version of his PhD thesis on-line: 'Shall the Body Strive and Not be Crowned? Unitary and instrumentalist anthropological models as keys to interpreting the structure of Patristic eschatology'. It looks at the development and structure of eschatological views in Patristic thought, as expressed through the correlation with their views of human nature (body/soul problems). This thesis explores how the problem of synthesis between Biblical and pagan thought came to expression in a particular aspect of theology and philosophy, and is an attempt to work out a reformational interpretation of how views in anthropology and eschatology developed within a synthesis dynamic.

Odds and sods

• Calibrate your screen monitor with screen check
• Mindmeister - a web-based tool for mindmaps online
• Get google docs in the sidebar
• MP3s from text- Vozme
• The ultimate student resource list - well almost they forgot to add a copy of the New critique is essential!
• Pages from Hecto Avalos's book The End of Biblical Studies
• An excellent piece by Jon Swales on Plato and Christianity
• Scott McKnight on Tom Wright's superb Surprised by Hope
• JETS table of contents now on-line thanks to Rob Bradshaw
• SYNEIDON Research project [HT Rob Bradshaw]
• Missional A-Z (part 1)
• Jamie Smith is in York
  

Powered by ScribeFire.

Saving God's green earth

This website has some useful resources to be a little more greener.

Andrew Hartley's book

Andrew Hartley's book Christian and Humanist Foundations for Statistical Inference: Religious Control of Statistical Paradigms is now out published by Wipf and Stock. Details are available here.

B J van der Walt: Transformed Ch 3

Transformed by the renewing of your mind

The title chapter as it were began life as a paper delivered at the International Conference of IAPCHE at Dordt College, Iowa in 2000. The subtitle 'The challenges of Christian higher education on the African continent in the twenty-first century' ably summarises the chapter. Van der Walt tackles them in reverse order.

The situation on the African continent is first described. This makes sobering reading. Export of manufactured goods is virtually zero. In the sub Sahara there are 12 telephones per 1000 people. 184 million have no access to water. 184 million have no access to safe drinking water. I could go on ...

He then looks at the situation regarding higher education in Africa. A Christian approach to education is very much absent. This is largely due to a dualistic worldview, one that is characterised by escapism, pietism, ecclesiasticism and secularism. sadly this is true of much Christianity in the UK. The UK too has little in the way of Christian education in the schools, colleges or universities. A Christian worldview is seen as the icing on the neutral academic cake. christian education requires a 'transformation of the sciences from within evey discipline. He makes a telling comment of Africa, and one that also holds for the UK, 'Secularism's influence has become so pervasive on our continent that we don't even recognise it'.

Romans 12:1-2 is then examined as a starting point for a basic vision. "It is a clarion call for the transformation of the whole of life' (p. 114). It contains a warning, a command and a promise.

The warning regards the secularisation of the world; our response should be transformation of, not isolation from or conformity with, culture.

The command indicates where we are to start. The whole body is to be presented as a living sacrifice and our minds are to be renewed. The use of the imperfect tense in Rom 12:1,2 'indicates that God requires an on-going, continuos reformation. If we don't reform, we will conform to the deformation of the world' (p. 113).

The promise is that we will approve, accept God's will.

Van der Walt then outlines ten excellent criteria for transformational scholarship; it should be:

• visionary
• integral
• rigorous
• critical
• open
• relevant
• culturally sensitive
• communal
• global
• modest

He concludes this chapter with a proposal for the establishment of an African Centre for Christian Higher Education.

Faith has its Reasons at Bible.org

Powered by ScribeFire.

Jon Swales switches

(The to be Revd) Jon Swales has now switched his blogging platform from livespaces to wordpress. He is slowly working through Mark's gospel; this is definitely a blog to add to the rss reader. Read him here.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Defending God's earth

This is a slightly revised version of an article published in Woman Alive in 1996.


Environmental issues are rarely out of the public eye. One that has caught the press attention recently is the Newbury bypass. The anti-bypass campaign has become a focus for civil rights as well as for environmental issues. There have been 720 arrests and it has cost the Highways Agency around £1.5 million in security.

However, compared with the States the campaign seems rather tame. There environmental groups are prepared to die and even kill in "defence of mother earth". Their motto is "Earth First!" They engage in ecoterrorism such as spiking trees, sabotaging roads, dismantling helicopters and destroying bulldozers. For them the real terrorists are the polluters and desecrators of nature.

All this raises important questions for Christians. Should we be involved in environmental action? If so, how far should we go? Should we be involved in civil disobedience?

Some Christians would say that we should not be involved in environmental care. Many reasons are given, but as we peel them back they seem to be no more than excuses:

Excuses for non-involvement

The problems are far too complex and too enormous for me to make a difference.
The size of the problems are irrelevant. We are not necessarily called to make a difference; God calls us to be faithful to him. He will look after the results.

"Going green" means being part of the New Age movement.
This is no more true than going door-knocking means being a Jehovah's Witness. New Agers do not have to have the monopoly on environmental care - after all the earth is the Lord's.

Jesus didn't get involved in environmental issues, so neither should we.
Jesus never wore trousers, does that mean we don't have to? Jesus was a person of his time; the environmental problems that we face today were not a major problem 2000 years ago in rural Palestine. Were he born in our time he would certainly have had things to say. He did get involved in his Father's world - his incarnation and resurrection are testimonies to that.

The Earth will get worse and worse there is nothing we can do about it, until Jesus returns and creates a new earth.
Such end-time fatalism is not supported by a careful reading of the Scriptures. The fate of the earth is not destruction but rather transformation. There will be a continuity between this earth and the new earth, in the same way as there is a continuity between our present bodies and our resurrected ones.


A Biblical Framework for Environmental Care

For Christians the guiding principles must be those of the Scriptures. The problem is that there are no obvious chapters or verses to quote. We need to discern the whole direction and tenor of the Scriptures. One way of doing this is to use the framework of creation, fall and redemption.

Creation
The Bible declares unambiguously: "The Earth is the Lord's" (Ps 24:1). It is this concept that is basic to a Christian environmental ethic. It is God's world: he created it, he loves and cares for it.

God commissioned humans, as his image bearers, to rule and subdue the earth. The language of subduing and ruling is very strong, in one place subdue is translated as rape (Esther 7:8). The meaning of these words must, however, be understood from their context. Subduing and ruling are to be done as image bearers of God, he is our role model: it is thus less exploitation and more specifically leadership as servanthood. It is God's earth, it is not ours to do with it as we see fit: we are stewards, as such we are accountable to God for our treatment of it. We are to serve the creation so that it can develop as God intends it. This involves caring and defending the earth as well as developing and cultivating it.

Fall
But then came sin. The first sin in some way affected the whole of creation. All environmental disasters can be traced back to the fall and to sin. Thus our stewardship becomes all the more difficult, it becomes a painful toil (Gen 3:16).

Human struggle with the earth is taken up in subsequent chapters in Genesis. Cain's murder of his brother means that the ground will no longer yield its crop (Gen 4:10-14). The prophet Hosea takes up the same theme: sin results in the land mourning (Hosea 4: 1-3).

Redemption
However, the fall is not the end. God, the author, enters his own story. Throughout the Old Testament we have in the flood story and in the Jubilee legislation glimpses of God working to redeem his creation. But it is ultimately in Jesus that redemption is accomplished.

Jesus' work on the cross redeemed the whole of creation. Nothing is exempt from the reconciling power of the cross. There is the potential of reconciliation for all of creation (Col 1:20). The work that Jesus began on the cross he will finish when he returns. The fate of the earth will not be one of destruction but of renewal, of transformation.

How far should we go?

Thus there seems to be a strong biblical basis for environmental care, it is part of our calling as stewards. God cares for it and so should we. But how far should we go in defence of God's earth?
1. Put our own house in order.
How can we live more benignly upon the earth? Recycle, reuse and repair where possible; and consume less. When tempted to consume ask yourself:

• Do I really need it?
• Why do I want it?
• Is it produced with just principles?
• How does it affect the environment:
• in the way it will be used and in the way it was produced?
• Will it promote responsible stewardship?

2. Get your local Church involved.
Consider joining with others to study what the scriptures say on environmental issues, pray, compile lists of resources, start a recycling scheme or encourage people to use it if one is already available.

3. Look broader
Educate yourself: but don't believe all that you see or read, every organisation has some axe to grind.

Use your democratic rights: vote in local and general elections, take up specific issues and lobby local government and MPs. The postage stamp is a powerful weapon.


Civil disobedience?

The Newbury anti-bypass campaign, involved many people in civil disobedience. Is this an option for Christians? Many point to Romans chapter 13 as demanding unconditional obedience to government. Government is established by God to be God's servant, to do justice (Rom 13: 1-5). And yet we are not called to blind obedience. Government is to be a servant, when it tries to become an oppressive master (e.g. Rev 13) we cannot obey. Without civil disobedience by Hebrew midwives Moses would have died at birth, and in many countries the gospel would not be preached. Civil disobedience for the Christian consists in obeying God rather than human authority (Acts 5: 29).

A Christian then can engage in civil disobedience, but there are also God-given constraints. It should be: a last resort; non-violent (harming neither people or animals, and property only minimally); an opposition of policies, not people; and done fully realising and accepting the consequences; arising from it.

Hence, involvement in campaigns such as the Newbury bypass are not off limits for Christians, but we cannot always accept our cobelligerents' worldview (see table) and sometimes our policies would drastically diverge. Involvement must arise out of a commitment to the lordship of Christ over his earth and not from selfish reasons.

Getting to the roots

For the Christian the root of all environmental problems is the fall, most can be traced back to greed and idolatry. Without tackling that problem we will, to an extent, be fighting a rear-guard action. Nevertheless, the defence of God's earth is part of our responsibility as stewards; but it is God first rather than earth first.

Everything is spiritual

At last someone else has taken up the neo-calvinist message: 'all of life is religion'.
[HT Jon Swales]

The theological ramblings of an Anglican ordinand

This blog by Jon Swales is well worth checking out. He's - as the blog title aptly suggests - an Anglican ordinand studying at Trinity College, Bristol. Plenty of worldview stuff and Tom Wright too!
Update: he's now blogging here

Odds and sods

David Lewis on divine evil [HT David Field]: "A God that would condemn any moral being to hell eternally and determinately is plainly unjust."

Vote on the image of God!

Paul Helm on 'Saving the planet'

American Theological Inquiry - a new online journal [HT Faith and Theology]

Four types of emergent churches and thinkers

Groothius's review of The God Delusion

Hector Avalos, author of The End of Biblical Studies (Prometheus 2007), responds to J P Holding on Debunking Christianity

Powered by ScribeFire.

The four horsemen

Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens in a round table discussion. [Ht Internet Infidels/ Debunking Christianity]

Hour 1 - Google Video | Quicktime (78.7 MB) | Torrent | Audio Only (mp3, 26.6 MB)
Hour 2 - Google Video | Quicktime (73.6 MB) | Torrent | Audio Only (mp3, 27.1 MB)

Andrew Basden pages

I am pleased to announce the launch of the Andrew Basden pages on All of life redeemed. Andrew is Professor of Human Factors and Philosophy in Information Systems at the Salford Business School, at the University of Salford he also maintains the invaluable Dooyeweerd pages. He is the author of A Philosophical Framework for Understanding Information Systems. There are 16 papers of Andrew's available in html form:



1999. On the ontological status of virtual environments
1999. A new framework for sustainability
2001. Beyond emancipation
2001. A philosophical underpinning for IT evaluation
2002.The critical theory of Herman Dooyeweerd?
2002. A Philosophical Underpinning For ISD
2003. with A. Trevor Wood-Harper A Philosophical Enrichment of CATWOE
2003.Enriching critical theory
2003.Levels of guidance
2004. Emancipation as if it mattered
2004. On Appealing to Philosophy in Information Systems
2005. Enriching humanist thought
2006. Information systems as a life-world
2007. 'Fresh light thrown on the Chinese room'
2007. A brief overview of Dooyeweerd's philosophy
2007. Frameworks for understanding IS and ICT