Funny Thanksgiving quote!

I celebrated Thanksgiving in an old-fashioned way. I invited everyone in my neighborhood to my house, we had an enormous feast, and then I killed them and took their land.

-Jon Stewart

Karl Barth, Abraham Kuyper, and Common Grace paper

This is a thesis for a paper that I will be writing. I will be blogging through this paper and would appreciate any feedback and criticism's that you deem appropriate. Thanks

Andrew

Kuyper, Barth, and the Religions

A Theological Dialogue on “Common Grace” and its Implications

Karl Barth’s theology is often interpreted in the shadow of his debate with Emil Brunner on “Natural Theology.” For some Kuyperian’s this has led to the rejecting of Barth on the grounds that his theology has nothing to contribute to Kuyper’s doctrine of “Common Grace.” This is an unfortunate misconception that has created much tension between these two traditions. The purpose of this paper is to closely examine the doctrine of “common grace” as it relates to Abraham Kuyper and Karl Barth and to bring these two theologians into dialogue. I will do this by arguing that there are strong continuities between Abraham Kuyper’s doctrine of “Common Grace” and Karl Barth’s work on Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. I will argue that although Barth never considered the category of “Common Grace,” his work on Mozart gives some indication of this doctrine and that we must make sense of this.  My primary argument is not that Barth has been misinterpreted, but that his work on Mozart can serve as a sufficient resource and starting point for a new dialogue between Barthian’s and Kuyperian’s. This paper will serve to show Karl Barth’s theology as being compatible with the Kuyperian doctrine of “Common Grace” and present the theological implications of both traditions for inter-faith dialogue.

Book Review: "Reading Paul" by Michael Gorman

Gorman begins Reading Paul by asking the question why read Paul? Because, Paul speaks on behalf of God to humanity. For Gorman it is essential that Paul be read as scripture, contextually and contemporarily.

Chapters 2-4

Gorman examines Paul by looking at his apostleship, his letters, and his gospel. Gorman understands Paul pre-conversion, to be a product of Jewish zealous nationalism, and on the other hand Paul’s post-conversion life to be the antithesis of zealousness. Gorman views Paul’s apostleship as informing his letters, which are examples of his ministry built on his missionary work and continued through his pastoral letters. Gorman then makes an impressive argument that Paul’s gospel is theo-political in nature. He argues that Paul’s gospel conveys the story of salvation from Israel to the eschaton, that Jesus is sufficient and “if Jesus is Lord, Caesar is not,”[1] and that Christians are called to live a life of cruciformity.

            I will now examine the next eight chapters, by number, individually and briefly.

5 Gorman sees Paul as having an apocalyptic vision with an overlapping of the present age with the “age to come.” Gorman emphasizes that in the overlapping of ages Christians are to live their new life in Christ and are to look back at the incarnation, death, and resurrection, but also to look forward to the future return, resurrection, and renewal. 6 Gorman shows that Paul understood God in terms of Old Testament scripture. For Paul God is eternal, loving, holy, just, faithful, relational, etc. Gorman believes God’s work in Israel and Paul’s experience of Christ and the Spirit are what influence what Paul is proclaiming as God’s gospel. Gorman then argues that Paul presents a gospel enabling a three-in-one, (Trinitarian), experience of God and His gospel. 7He then argues that the cross is more than a symbol; it is the definitive revelation of God. He believes that we must see Christ crucified as a sacrifice and the fulfillment of covenant. This is essential to Gorman’s understanding of Paul because it supports his view of the cross as “horizontal” and “vertical.” Gorman sees Paul as presenting Christ’s sacrifice as having human implications in relation to Christ and neighbor.

8 Gorman expounds on the necessity of the resurrection as completion of the crucifixion. He interprets Paul as qualifying the acceptance of the Gentiles in light of Jesus, the “one” resurrected human. Gorman emphasizes the resurrection not as “resuscitation,” but as resurrection to life. Gorman once again presents Paul’s view of Jesus theo-politically as the replacement of the pax Romana. 9 Chapter 9 is the sequel to 8 where Gorman emphasizes the efficaciousness of the cross. Gorman compares the government as a means for order, but for Christians the cross is the means for order amongst human chaos, it is true justice. He argues that for Paul justification is by faith and allegiance to Christ, not to Caesar, and our justification is embodied in our crucifixion in and with Christ.

10 Here Gorman expands on the idea of being “saints”. Christians are called to be the Church, which for Gorman is in a multicultural and countercultural sense, the body of believer’s universal. Gorman understands Paul’s view of the Church to be formed by the cross and lead by the Spirit. 11 Gorman argues for the “Cruciform” Christian life. Although this is not language used by Paul, it is language created after the model of Paul’s theology. He believes that the cross is not only the means for salvation, but a model for being. Cruciformity is humanity’s existence in Christ, the formation of the individual and community in faith, hope, and love. Gorman argues that this is the model for Paul’s spirituality, which exists in life with God through the Son and by the Spirit.

12Gorman now presents the fullness of Paul’s eschatology. For Paul this is the anticipation of the future glory of God. Gorman notes misinterpretations of Paul’s eschatology in relation to politics, violence, and war. Rather this is the culmination of the “new age” and inauguration of judgment and salvation, the resurrection of believers, and renewal of creation. 13Lastly, Gorman revisits the question why Paul? Gorman’s answer is that Paul speaks about God, about the gospel, about the mission of the Church, and the living of the Church in faith, hope, and love. Paul calls his readers to employ his gospel and to live his message of cruciformity in God, through Christ, and by the Spirit.

In Reading Paul I appreciate Gorman’s ability to accomplish the intended task of the book. He gives a practical and applicable framework for reading and understanding Pauline literature and theology without using overly academic language, which welcomes the academy, the pastorate, and the laity. I greatly appreciate his views on justification and feel that he presents a middle ground between the “New Perspective” and the “traditional perspective.” He emphasizes the faith of the individual, but also the communal and horizontal aspects of faith, justification, and cruciformity. One area of Gorman’s work that I must criticize is his over emphasis on the theo-politcal message of Paul. Gorman presents sufficient evidence for his claims, but I am afraid that if Paul’s message is viewed as too theo-political in nature it creates a bias framework for interpreting Paul’s theology. Paul has much more to offer the Christian community than a theo-political message. Paul’s gospel may have theo-political overtones and implications, but the heart of his message is the cross. It is important that we understand Paul’s implications for public life and non-violence, but Paul’s readers must first understand the cross. Apart from this criticism I affirm Gorman’s representation of Paul and his gospel. Gorman gives sufficient evidence for his arguments and presents a well-informed robust view of Paul’s letters, apostleship, and theology. I would recommend Gorman’s book as a precursor to any person interested in the letters of Paul.

---

[1] Michael J. Gorman, Reading Paul. (Cascade: Eugene, 2008) 44

Unfortunate Circumstances

Well, this Wednesday I asked my wife Megan if she would mind running to the store to pick up some coffee. She said yes and about five minutes later during my workout I got a call from Megan saying that she had been in a bad accident. The first thing that came to my mind was, is she hurt? The answer fortunately was, no! Thankfully Megan was okay, but our car is not so okay. The front end was totally smashed in and the car is with out a doubt totaled. Thankfully the other person in the other car was not hurt as well. All in all this has been a terrible situation. But, what I am learning is that it is situations like these that make us learn to rely on one another and most of all rely on God. The accident put everything into perspective and I began to ask myself what if Megan had have been hurt? Am I being the best husband I need to be? Am I putting school before my wife? Is my spiritual life and relationship with God in the right place? I had to ask myself all of these questions and reevaluate things in my life. I was having lunch with my mentor Dale and we were talking about the accident and I told him that I had asked myself these questions. Our conversation was very fruitful and our discovery was that if our lives are focused on the glorification of Christ, If we put Christ before all things, the result will be one of bearing much fruit. If I am seeking the Lord, I will without doubt be a better husband, be a better friend, be a better student, and most of all be a better witness to the grace of Jesus Christ. Sometimes it takes unfortunate circumstances for us to realize that we are in dyer need of the grace and provision of Christ.

Justice and the Church. Give me thoughts?

The practice of social justice within the Church has taken rise over the last couple of years, which is a good thing. But, I have also become weary of the emphasis and direction in which the Church is going. I find that we now have churches who's members or even pastors have non-profits on the side. I find this odd. I don't see the need to separate acts of justice and social organizations from the Church. That is exactly what the Church should be doing. Good works and justice should be the result of our faith. Although this is true we cannot substitute justice for Christ, but in Christ there should be justice. In light of this I would even go as far as to say that there are some who have turned social justice into an idol, they have replaced Christ with justice. It has become more and more common to see the Church emphasizing justice over the gospel. This is troubling. Is bringing people out of oppression or serving justice sufficient for the Christian life? My answer is absolutely not. Is bring people out of oppression and fighting for justice part of the Christian life? Absolutely yes! Justice without the gospel is empty. The Gospel is what gives justice sustenance, it's what gives those who are oppressed a hope that one day in the "Holy City" God will vindicate them. I believe that to serve our brother's and sister's is to serve Christ, but our service must be done in the name of the Gospel and not in the name of justice. I do believe that the Church must fight for justice , but the Church must fight for justice not for the sake of justice, but for the sake of Christ. GIVE ME YOUR THOUGHTS AND IDEAS ON THE TOPIC OF JUSTICE AND THE CHURCH.