Around the Blogosphere
Topic Blogging
Reading: The Christology of John Owen by Richard Daniels
Enjoying: apple juice & cookies. I guess its bad to eat while at the computer.
Listening: just an assorted playlist. Yellowcard at the moment.
Some of the posts you will be seeing are from during my month-long hibernation, and some are current (like this one). There is someone sitting at the computer right now (though that doesn't mean we're necessarily sure who). So while this blogreading is current, other posts may be more or less. Your mileage may vary.
On to the blog reading
Justin Taylor has several significant posts to catch note of. He has two important interviews linked, with Mark Dever first and then Trueman. The above mentioned playlist should be dropped for these. We are familiar with Way of the Master radio (especially Minnesotan Todd Friel and Kirk Cameron (yes, that one), and Dever's critique of their project holds a lot of potential for us. Dr. Carl R. Trueman (history at WTS) is to be especially enjoyed.
Though Mr. Taylor linked to it on his blog, one of the biggest gems in his treasure load is a paper he posted to his site devoted to The Puritan. Mr. Matthew Mason has surrendered his Master's dissertation entitled, "The Significance of the Systematic and Polemical Function of Union with Christ in John Owen’s Contribution to Seventeenth Century Debates Concerning Eternal Justification." If the following fields intrigue you: justification, John Owen, faith/works, Richard Baxter, 17th Century theology, historical theology prolegomenon, then you should be thrilled with this paper. Thank you, Messrs. Mason and Taylor.
Reminder: pray for Dr. David Powlison. His additions to Pastor John Piper's "Don't Waste Your Cancer" are definitely worth the read. Especially appreciated is what he has to say regarding percentages of surviving.
Dr. Leithart shows how Gabriel Josipovici takes stock of "the oddity" of the story-arcs in the biblical narrative. Mr. Josipovici and Dr. Leithart note the Palti's of the biblical account - those characters introduced just in time to dismiss them, employed only to leave them unobtained. While several characters fit the mold - such as the above mentioned Palti, or, as they suggest, Tamar and Judah - perhaps none fits as well as John the Baptist, overlooked par excellance. He, the greatest among men, gets little Scripture time compared to the likes of King Ahab, Cyrus, et al. How are we to account for this?
Josipovici attributes this frustration not to a problem with the text, but to problems with our expectations as readers. We want consolation; we want things to be neatly tied up and explained. But the Bible does not console. It is "above all realistic." This realism, he suggests, is evident in the way that election is dealt with in Scripture. Scripture does not present election to raise questions about the arbitrariness of God; Scripture simply assumes the reality of unexplained inequities in life, and sets about to present various responses to that, focusing on the questions "How do we respond to the unfairness of life? How do we respond to the privilege of being chosen, of being the favourite child, say, and how do we respond to the disappointment of being rejected, of not being the parents' favourite?"
The appearance and disappearance of characters in the story has a similar function. It shows us that the story that the Bible is tracing - the story of David, in this case - is not the only story going on. While we go on with the story of David, Palti's presence in the story shows that there is a larger world that we are not following, and this has the effect of "decentering" the reader. Josipovici says that "the Bible is a radically decentred book: it seems to deal with a straight line going from Adam to David to exile to return, but every now and again it opens a window onto another landscape, even if, as here, only for a moment. We are made to feel that we are not . . . the centre of the universe, but only a tiny part of it."
Hmmm... Yes, perhaps. But the emphasis on election is interesting. Perhaps Mr. Josipovici is only highlighting the flipside of the coin, but surely election in nuda is not enough of a description. A whole book in the Writings devoted to Naomi and Ruth? Election is not strong enough; rather, it must be those in the royal bloodline. Surely there are stories more eventful than Ruth's (a la the Maccabbean revolts), but what is important about her is that she, an unclean, barren, husbandless Moabitess, is the missing link to David, and ultimately, to the Messiah. So instead of "'decentering' the reader," the Bible is actually re-centering history around God's redemptive purposes. To the extent that Mr. Josipovici and this project are saying the same thing, we apologize. But a strong contention remains - to say the Bible is "open[ing] a window onto another landscape" or trying to show this is "not the only story" is quite upside down. On the contrary, we are all quite aware of other stories - namely, why doesn't my story get more airtime; in this sense the Bible is meta-narrative: it refocuses and redirects attention to little goings-on in the corner of Palestine thousands of years ago.
Despite disagreements, Dr. Leithart is excellent on Derrida, though better when he quotes him. That there may be an aporia in responsible action - especially a Kantian one - strains us a bit, through we resonate with Dr. Leithart's desire to see faith as necessary to the formula. At least we can agree with him on one thing: pigeons are smarter than college psych majors, especially when it comes to aesthetics and Van Gogh.
While there have been several valuable pieces concerning the Muslim cartoons that wrought havoc in Europe (notably Piper's), this may be an interesting piece for those of us who know little about the artist who composed the inflaming sketches. Apparently, there is a connection between the artist's philosophy and that of recently-deceased Ayn Rand's.The bad news: Pastor Tim Porter is all but closing his Eschatological Journeys. The good news, however, is that he is much more faithfully posting to his church's blog, entitled Convergence. The further good news is, of course, that the quality is maintained despite the change in URL.
(HT: Twylah @ Here We Stand)
Reading about the Oscars got me thinking. Where is the movie about the kid who died young and spent eternity tormented by demons because s/he had believed in Hollywood?
This blog is run by Blogger, which brings up a few things we are very thankful for. Initially, the "are-you-sure-you-wish-to-leave-without-saving" note you get when you accidently hit a button without having saved your really long blogpost... like what just happened. Another thing that is very appreciated is the |Next Blog>>| button on the toolbar. Does anyone just waste four hours a half hour seeing what other blogs are out there? Anyone? Buehler? Some really fun blogs we've happened upon:
Graceless: Lucifer's Story
What happens when an admitted non-Christian attempts to imaginatively tell the story of Lucifer's rebellion while loosely holding to a traditional Protestant vantage point? This blog, that's what.
Anonymous Lawyer
Laugh out loud funny, with PG-13 to R to PG rated language. Cynicism and corporate boredom at its best. Greg Bahnsen would have deconstructed this worldview in five seconds flat, but this is too funny.
A Rainbow Flag in Narnia
A man's attempt to wrestle with his Lutheran commitment to Christianity and his growing homosexual desires/identity. Not having many homosexually-sinning friends, this is very illuminating. The most fascinating is to see his attitude as he starts the blog, and then his attitude towards his homosexual desires in the most recent posts.
Islam as I see it
A blog dedicated to preaching Islam to those who are curious or do not know various parts of the Muslim faith. A very reasonable, Qu'ran-centric blogger. His comments section is open, providing a wonderful dialogue tool.
----
"It is self-evident that, until the sinner breaks off from sins by repentance or turning to God, he cannot be justified in any sense. This is everywhere assumed, implied and taught in the Bible."Charles G. Finney
(HT: Riddleblog)
Q. 70. What is justification?
A. Justification is an act of God’s free grace unto sinners, in which he pardons all their sins, accepts and accounts their persons righteous in his sight; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but only for the perfect obedience and full satisfaction of Christ, by God imputed to them, and received by faith alone.
Westminster Larger Catechism, Q. 70
----
Mr. Tim Challies has a brilliant little discussion stemming from his recent reading in J. P. Moreland's Love God With All Your Mind. The main thrust of his ponderings derives from the role of the Spirit in the life of the mind. His bottom line question follows: is the primary role of the Spirit in helping us understand the meaning of the text, or rather in aiding believers apply the meaning to everyday life.(?) Hidden in the question is a further query wondering if too many Christian "rely" on the Spirit for understanding the Bible, letting libraries of exegesis and textual aids go unused, while our spiritual exegesis remains flimsy.
We can, of course, agree with both ideas. And to whatever extent Moreland is advocating a "learned believer," he has the Bible on his side. Texts that advocating "increasing in knowledge" aren't all of a sudden Gnostic. It is no accident that Proverbs is about very non-"spiritual" wisdom, and that Solomon received his wisdom from the Lord of Salvation.
However, to the extent that Moreland advocates a neutral, me-and-my-brain approach to exegesis, he is equally wrong. The Spirit is the power of Christ holding all things together, and He is the sole Being holding the neurons of our minds, the ink on the pages, and the logic behind it all, together. It is fruitless to divorce the Spirit from any of these acts. This is, at heart, the same problem in the glossalia debates, since there is only a difference in degree of the Spirit's work in this blog-typing as opposed to someone (hypothetically, of course) speaking in tongues; a philosophy paper and a "word of knowledge." When Jesus promised that the Spirit would lead us into all knowledge (John 16:13), He wasn't kidding.
At the same time, the Spirit is equally essential to the application of Scripture. The doctrine of the noetic effects of sin shows how, even upon grasping the correct meaning of Law and Gospel, we will do our damnedest to avoid these and, with the Apostle, to suppress the truth in unrighteousness. Our application of Scripture - i.e., our sanctification - is predestined (Romans 8:29) insomuch as the Scriptures point to Christ, which is the object of our election, to be conformed to His image. The call of God is by the Spirit of God, and as He calls us to holiness, "He will surely do it"(I Thessalonians 5:24).
To this both/and we shout hallelujah. If C.S. Lewis' diagnosis - that we are far too easily pleased - is true, than we will more often than not miss the extent into which Jehovah is already involved in far more than we can grasp. And thankfully, He is far more involved than our piddly little explanation above does justice too.
