Text, Community & Mission

Some of my favorite bloggers to read are charismatic so I hope they can share their opinion on this issue.

While I previously held to a cessationist view, after doing some of my own study I no longer do.  The arguments for absolute cessation of certain gifts of the Spirit as described in the NT are no longer convincing to me.  Therefore, I think that if practiced with in the realm of an overall Christian ethic and the standards laid out by Paul, I think that the so-called “sign” gifts can play a role in local churches.  While I realize that there are many churches and movements that misuse or neglect the NT teaching on how these gifts should handled by the Church, I think there are other churches and movements that get it right.  But I also see the use of these gifts as a secondary issue in the NT, something that I am quite sure many of those churches that rightly incorporate all the gifts in their worship would agree with.

Having said all of that, heres my question to my charismatic friends:  What do you think about someone who acknowledges the rightful use of the “sign” gifts in the Church’s worship, but has never experienced any of them personally? I am not looking for an experience, just wondering what you think about a person like me who recognizes their validity but does not share in their participation.

Keener, Craig S. The Gospel of John: A  Commentary. 2 vols. Peabody, MA:  Hendrickson, 2003.

I would like to thank Hendrickson for furnishing this review copy.

Craig Keener’s contribution to NT scholarship grows by the year.  He has already a massive commentary on Matthew, with another socio-rhetorical Matthew volume coming soon, a multi-volume work on Acts in the works and two less technical works on Revelation and 1-2 Corinthians.  If the new Matthew and forthcoming Acts commentaries are on the same level of his previous works and this 2 volume John work then Keener’s status will rise and be counted with the likes of Fee, Carson and Marshall as one of the premier commentators of this generation. (more…)

This is the last chance to get The Saving Righteousness of God from Wipf and Stock for 40% off! with the code BIRD09!

Chapter 6: Justification as Forensic Status and Covenant Membership & Chapter 7: Justification to the Doers of the Law

The introduction to this chapter makes very clear what Bird wants to accomplish.  He directly states that he will attempt to show that the forensic “vertical” declaration of righteous standing of the traditional point of view and the Gentile inclusion covenant membership of the NPP are both essential for a proper understanding of Paul’s teaching on justification.

Bird again runs through a series of text, Acts 15, Gal 3 and Phil 3 in order to determine whether or not Paul was opposing merit theology or Jewish nationalism.  What is produced is ethnocentric nomism, “the view that Jewish identity is the locus of salvation (hence ethnocentrism) and that one must perform the law so as to enter the Jewish constituency and be vindicated at the eschaton (hence nomistic).  This differs from legalism in that the works performed are part of a covenantal framework that contains grace and define the identity of God’s people.  Ethnocentrism differs from covenantal nomism in that the desired end-state is eschatological salvation and not merely covenant status” (117).  As noted in the review of the previous chapter, I think this is an excellent understanding of the Judaism Paul opposed.  This understanding, therefore acts as both Paul’s defeater of synergism and nationalism.  Again, see previous chapter for my thoughts on synergism vs. nationalism. (more…)

Chapter 5: When the Dust Finally Settles: Beyond the New Perspective

The fifth chapter contains two lists with descriptions: “Areas of Critique” and “Areas of Concurrence”.  In the first section there is “Merit Theology”, “Election and Eschatology”, “Works of Law”, “Nationalistic Righteousness”, “Righteousness as Covenant Membership”, “Justification and Regeneration”, and “Additional Criticisms.”  I will now point out some areas of disagreement with Bird’s critique.

In the “Merit Theology” section it should first be noted that Bird does comment that the terms “legalism” or “works righteousness” are not appropriate for 1^st century Judaism.  His own understanding of 1^st century Jewish religion is confusing.  He claims variegated nomism, which I find to be a term that can seems to not have much meaning since both sides claim it as their own.  His critique of NPP views on Judaism comes off strong but in reality he is much closer them, expect for a realization of the arrogance found often in texts than the classical Reformed position.  For Bird, Jews did not loose sight of grace, they still knew they were God’s people via election.  However, they saw their Law keeping as being the requirement for staying in good covenant standing with God.  Those who kept the Law were often proud of their accomplishments.  This is not far from the description offered by many of the more recent nuanced NPP scholars.  Bird seems to want to claim a stronger connection with the traditional understanding of Judaism than he actually describes. (more…)

Chapter 4: Incorporated Righteousness

Chapter 4 begins with an introduction to the history of the teaching of imputed righteousness.  Bird posits that the Reformation teaching on justification did have some roots in Augustine but much was new.  He identifies three areas of primacy: 1. Justification refers to the believer’s legal status.  2. The distinction between justification, sanctification and regeneration.  3. Justification is caused by the righteousness of Christ being imputed to believers.  The later is most famously known through Luther’s description of an alien righteousness.  From here Bird moves from Melanchthon to Calvin, detailing the contribution of each.  The different stances taken by Reformed confessions and the Puritans are discussed as well as the view of John Wesley.

The next section moves to the modern debate.  He introduces Gundry’s initial rejection of imputation as a Biblical teaching and moves to Siefrid, who does reject imputation, but does recognize that it has been overemphasized.   (more…)

Don’t forget about Wipf & Stock’s is offering 40% of SOG with the code BIRD09!

Chapter 3: Raised For Our Justification

The centrality of the resurrection has seen kind days recently, and one of the reasons for an increase in attention to the resurrection is the NPP’s understanding of its role in justification.  Bird begins his treatment on the resurrection and justification by explaining how the central role of the cross in justification cannot be detached from the resurrection.  He notes that in one aspect this has been done in Evangelical theology, where the resurrection is only portrayed as the vindication of Jesus’ life, message and death.  Yet, Bird claims, in Paul, the resurrection does more.  Again, an excellent history of interpretation is provided detailing the work of Walter Kunneth, who called for a unity in the Christ-even, but seemed to stress the resurrection, David Michael Stanley who saw the resurrection as the cause of justification via Christ’s role as the New Adam, Markus Barth, who stresses the Christ-event as the act that justifies, although he seems to deemphasize the role of faith as the avenue of justification, Richard Gaffin, who holds justification, adoption, sanctification and glorification together as different aspects of the resurrection, and Mark Seifrid, who holds the resurrection and Cross together as God’s verdict of both condemnation and acquittal.

Following the history of interpretation, Bird explains from three primary texts how the resurrection relates and works in justification.  The first text on the block for Bird is 1 Cor 15.17, where a denial of a future resurrection is a denial of Jesus’ resurrection and therefore a denial of the forgiveness of sin.  The connection here is conceptual not linguistical.

Rom 1-5 is the most comprehensive section in Paul detailing justification.  The argument in Rom 1-5 is centered on 4.25.  In view are the two uses of diav.  In the first, Bird argues for a retrospective reading, but in the second a prospective reading.  This understanding would then stress the process of justification in accordance with the result, so that the verdict in the present is in anticipation of the verdict in the eschaton when the resurrection of the body will be the implementation of justification.  The theme of justification and resurrection continues in chapter 5 where the justifying life for men is dependent upon Jesus’ role as the second Adam, a role that He received via the resurrection.  In chapter 6, it is dying and rising with Christ that transfers believers into the new age.  In chapter 8, the Spirit will raise believers into their new bodies that result in righteousness.

The third and final passage Bird investigates is 1 Tim 3.16.  The first question is the meaning of ejdikaiwvqh.  Bird opts for “justified” over “vindicated.”  He sees this passages a Christological reflection on Isa 53.11.  From what follows I will include two quotes from Bird’s description as any explanation of mine will not be as good as his own explanation at this point:

“Just as Christ’s resurrection was understood as the first-fruits of the general resurrection…so to [sic] his justification-vindication is the protological enactment of the justification of believers.  Consequently, in Jesus’ resurrection the eschatological verdict of the final day had dawned.  This means that since Christ’s resurrection is his justification, others are justified in so far as Christ’s justification is distributed to them.”

To this excellent description I would only add, for clarification, that the justification that is distributed to believers in the present is a declaration of a future reality that will be realized at the reception of their resurrection on the last day.

“Consequently, union with Christ is union with the justified Messiah and the now Righteous One.  Jesus by fact of his resurrection is the locus of righteousness and redemption…and believers are justified only because they have been united with the justified Messiah.  Whereas believers formerly shared the verdict of condemnation pronounced on Adam, now they partake of the verdict of justification pronounced of Christ.  The believer passes through the eschatological judgment by virtue of their association with Christ in his death and is quickened into the eschatological life through his resurrection.  The union is symbolized through baptism but the conduit is, as always for Paul, through faith…It is union with Christ in his death and resurrection that constitutes the material cause of justification.” (Emphasis original).  There is a short discussion on how the resurrection acts as the guarantee of future judgment, as the risen Christ is also the future judge.  The chapter ends with a conclusion where some implications are drawn out: the participatory and judicial aspects of Paul are linked, mainly via union with Christ, and that the cross is often stands as a metonymy for the Christ event.

This chapter adds much to the continuing renewal of a strong resurrection theology in the American Church. While many claim they have always had robust understanding of the resurrection of Christ, a common view of the resurrection in many Evangelical circles is one of Jesus’ super-miracle proving He was God, or a sign of God the Father’s acceptance of the sacrifice on the Cross.  While the resurrection is certainly not less than these, it is so much more.

I think Bird’s is right on in his description of the resurrection as the first fruits and its connection with justification.  However, I might add the following nuances:  The justification of the believer is a declaration that is made in the present about something that will happen in the future.  Believers will be justified, or vindicated, or shown and made right by the resurrection of their own bodies on the last day.  The current declaration of justification is in anticipation of the realization in the future; therefore justification is mainly an eschatological event.  The existence of the declaration of righteousness in the present is due to the realization of justification that Jesus received at His resurrection.  Therefore, justification as an eschatological event has been brought into the present age with the resurrection of Jesus acting as His own justification.  When a believer is united with Jesus, they receive the declarative status of justification in the present that will be made tangible when they receive their own resurrected body in the end.  Therefore, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is basis for both the present declaration of justification and the future implementation via the resurrection.

Questions:

1. You say: “Justification is both a present reality and yet awaits a future consummation.” It seems to me that justification is mainly an eschatological event as it is bound up with the final judgment and our resurrection, so that the current reality of justification is an anticipatory declaration of future event.  Could you comment on any agreement or disagreement you may have with that statement?

Mike Bird: I think I can agree with that. Justification has a now and not-yet

aspect, but the not-yet aspect does not mean the verdict is in jeopardy

or is liable to change. God has declared the verdict of the final day in

advance to those who have faith in Christ, belong to his church, and

experience the presence of the Spirit.

2. I have heard some Reformed leaders say that understanding justification as a future eschatological event in anyway is Catholic.  You seem to have an excellent understanding of historical theology, could you give some history of understanding justification as having an eschatological aspect?

MB: Such persons are being reactionary and don’t know either the Scriptures

or Historical Theology. If you read authors like Ridderbos, Ladd, and

Morris (hardly hard corps Catholics), you’ll notice that they all

integrate eschatology into justification.  Historically speaking, some

Reformed thinkers run the danger of collapsing justification entirely

into the present and do not leave room for the verdict to be formally

enacted in our own justification.

3. You comment a lot on the state of Evangelicalism in the West.  In the USA I still see a lot of people who still only understand the resurrection as I mentioned above (Jesus’ super-miracle proving He was God, or a sign of God the Father’s acceptance of the sacrifice on the Cross).  Could you comment on the common understanding of the resurrection in churches in the UK or Australia?

MB: Australia is a lot to different to the USA. It is more secular, more

areligious, and the churches suffer less from nominalism and more from

lethargy.  But in terms of reducing the resurrection to a miracle that

proves that Jesus is God, the same misconception exists on both sides of

the Atlantic.

The other day I received two unsolicited packages from Jim Baird at B&H containing two advanced reader copies of William Dembski’s new book The End of Christianity.  Even though I did not request the book, and have a ton of others I need to get to, this title looks quite interesting.

Since B&H sent 2 copies I have decided to have a selfish contest to give away the second.  I am currently working through a multi-part series reviewing Logos for Mac.  I am not sure exactly how many parts it will have but probably 3 or 4.  So here’s the contest: On your blog announce and link to my current and forthcoming posts reviewing the software.  Whoever creates the most links will win.  You can put up a new post and link for each of my posts, make a new widget on you blog linking to the post, or even throw indiscriminate links into other posts of yours that have nothing to do with me or Logos. Get creative.  Whoever creates the most links will win.  The only catch is you have to review the book by November when it is released.

Here the synopsis from the back cover:

Truly there is no greater suffering or triumph of love than Christ’s sacrifice for us on the cross.  This is traditional orthodoxy.  We’ve heard this before.  Sermons repeat is endlessly.  But do we really believe it?  And if we do believe it, should we?

In his new book, best selling author Dr. William A. Dembski addresses Christianity’s toughest question…and answers it!  With fresh insights Dembski enters the debate about how a good God can allow evil and suffering and produces a book that some scholars have described as “ground breaking”

I have used Logos on PCs before and I had also used the PC edition on a Windows emulator on a friend’s Mac but as a Mac guy I was never too interested in the software.  When I  heard that Logos was about to produce a Mac edition I was quite interested.  I have been using Logos for the Mac now for about a month and this will be the first a few posts reviewing the new product.

When I first received the DVD for installation, there was a slight problem.  The Libronix system installed just fine, but when I went to install the text that were included in the library I kept having a system error.  After consulting the Logos support staff, who were quite friendly, helpful and fast, I was informed that the texts are on the deeper level of the 2-Level DVD and disc drive may not be able to read it as an older drive.  The agent I spoke sent me the CDs (overnight!) so I could complete the install.  As I said, I had run Logos on Parallels before and it did not run very smoothly, but the new native Mac engine runs beautifully.  After the initial installation problem that was quickly remedied, I have not experienced a single problem running the program.

In addition to the excellent customer service and support I have already mentioned Logos has many videos and forums (most, though not all, are transferable to the Mac edition) to discuss how to best make use of all their product offers, and special section just for the Mac edition.  One great thing about the Mac edition is that if you already have Logos on a PC and now want to switch it over you Mac you only have to buy the Mac engine ($60 seems pretty fair to shift all your Windows to Mac) and crossgrade.  The one downside is that not everything works on the Mac edition.  According to the website:

“Nearly all resources will work on Logos Bible Software for Mac. The exceptions are the three syntax clause display resources (i.e., The Andersen-Forbes Phrase Marker Analysis of the Hebrew Bible, The Lexham Syntactic Greek New Testament: Sentence Analysis, and The OpenText.org Syntactically Analyzed Greek New Testament: Clause Analysis), audio and video resources, PBB resources, old LLS resources (most of which have been updated to the new Libronix format), and old PDF resources.

Some addins like the Compare Parallel Bible Versions Addin are built in to Logos for Mac. None of the additional addins available for purchase on Logos.com (like the Sermon File Addin, Lectionary Viewer Addin, the Greek and Hebrew Pronunciation Addins, etc.) will work on the Mac version at this time.” Read all about the crossover here.

Since it says “at this time” I am hoping they are working on making these available to Mac users.  All in all the installation, set up and support with Logos Scholars for Mac has been extremely encouraging.  The only reservation I would have i to suggest that if your Mac is more than a year old, ask for the CDs when you order instead of the DVD.  Up next will be an overview of the contents of software.

As usual the good Bishop frankly, truthfully and fairly confronts the issue.  The following statement about halfway through the article is immensly important and must be applied to other social situations in the Church and the US.

“Justice never means “treating everybody the same way”, but “treating people appropriately”, which involves making distinctions between different people and situations.”

HT: Jesus Creed

Wilson, Walter T. Pauline Parallels: A Comprehensive Guide. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2009.

If there is one thing every Bible student has heard numerous times, and every Bible teacher has said even more often is the absolute necessity of understanding the Biblical text in its context.  Pauline Parallels: A Comprehensive Guide, a new volume from Westminster John Knox Press by Walter Wilson, is a tremendous resource for understanding Paul in his context.  This work is actually patterned after the 1975 and subsequent 1984 revision of Fred Francis and Paul Sampley’s work by the same title.

The layout of the book is very simple.  Wilson goes paragraph by paragraph through the 13 canonical letters attributed to Paul with the text of the paragraph in the NASB with the parallels following.  There are first parallels from within the same letter (unless the parallel is in the previous or preceding paragraph), (more…)