Blogging can be wearisome ...

I get tired of blogging some times. It's so virtual, so flat. And it often miscommunicates who the blogger is, because it creates a false persona (because blog posts tend to emphasize certain aspects of a person [and often not their best features] over against others). I bet if I met some of you folk in flesh and blood, you'd (and I'd) be surprised ;-). Anyway, I grow weary ...

American Calvinism: Its Staying Power

I haven't done a post on Calvinism for awhile; so this represents that, just a short off the cuff reflection on why I think Calvinism (in its classic or Westminster instantiation---in its various expressions, i.e. Covenantal, Baptistic, etc.) has stayed around for so long within Christendom. I think I'll use something of a theses format (or even bullet point) for this post.

1. The first reason I think Calvinism has stayed around for so long is not primarily a theological reason (although, of course, it is related); I think Calvinism, at least in America (where I write from), was of such seminal import in the founding (so called) of  America (early on), that this heritage (with all of its structural and cohesive power) has simply made in-roads (at a sub-conscious level, often) within the American psyche. I think this is so---and here is a theological piece---because of American Calvinism's (which is at a popular level best signified by the theology that 5 point Calvinism presupposes) because of Calvinism's conception of God (doesn't everything come back to God?). Philosophically, American Calvinism operates from a conception of God that thinks of God as monad, or as a unitary substance (or in individualist terms); and that this God is primarily defined by singular brute power and assertion of this power which are given expression through contractual-law-like ways. If you think about it; this is how American's view themselves---that is, as rugged individualists who sell their mode of individualism (in the market place) through self-confident assertiveness which is captured by contracting with others in order to make a profit. I see this as an inimical aspect that Calvinism has brought to the American psyche; it is the idea of the indomitable human spirit, which ironically finds its correlation and analogy in the individually denominated indomitable godly spirit of the individual, monadic, God whom 'orthodox Calvinists' worship.
2. The second reason I think Calvinism has staying power is because of its emphasis on God's grace; so this is a theological reason. This is something that has drawn me to Calvinism, in particular. That is, the intention of thought that understands God's grace and movement in grace towards creation as the ultimate ground upon which God relates to the world. 
3. The third reason; because it emphasizes that the Bible (sola scriptura) is the ordained place of God wherein He communicates to us. This should be appealing to all Christians, of all stripes. I think Calvinism, in general, has a unique position on this that is admirable and something that has drawn me personally to this tradition.
4. The fourth reason is its desire to be christocentric (however that might be described). At least in its Covenantal form (which I am closest too, except of course my Covenantalism comes from the kind of Barth and Torrance) it looks to a so called christocentric hermeneutic of the text of Scripture. Again, this admirable and I would think appealing to almost any Christian---at least in principle, maybe not (of course) in actual nuts and bolts practice (and I mean in the way that Calvinists might employ this as they do, hermeneutically).
5. And the fifth reason I think Calvinism has staying power is because of their ferocious usage of social media; whether that be through the radio, pod-casts, blogs, websites, etc. They have more of a presence this way than any other theological tradition that I have noticed. So, in our information age; at least American Calvinists have taken full advantage of so called social media, and in so doing I think they have ensured their staying power in this way---whether that be for good or ill.

There are many other reasons why Calvinism has staying power. As you might have noticed though, my little points above start with a social point and end with one (an inclusio ;-). It's not that I don't think the theological isn't of prime importance (or that we could have the social reality without the theological); it's just I think, like anything, appeal and exposure to the human situation is going to provide the strongest in-roads into the lives of the masses for a particular constructs staying power. And on this front, from its inception (in America), I think Calvinism has massive appeal; whether that be because it appeals to a certain mode of being human (and I don't think the best mode, i.e. individualism), and or because it is scintillatingly present through various packagings on the web (which I obviously am trying to appeal through ;-)---I think Calvinism is here to stay, at least in America.

No Apologies: The Christian Faith

So called Christian Apologists of our day give way way too much credence to their supposed counter-parts; the new Atheists (and whoever else antagonizes)! I grew up in this kind of Fundamentalist sub-culture (ironically some of the most ardent apologists for the Christian faith today would not self-identify as Fundamentalists; like N. T. Wright; Richard Bauckham; Michael Licona; and a host of others not so well known); the kind of culture that lives out of fear, fear that the Christian antagonist might turn a leaf over and find the Jesus code or some such thing (something that in

their mind would overturn the veracity of the Christian faith in one fell swoop). Granted, much of our Christian ecumenical dogma comes from the musings of early Christian apologists; but I think it is too quick to suggest that there is an immediate parallel between those apologists and the apologists of our day. Most of the Patristic apologists fought Christian heresy, and sought to hash out a Christian grammar where there was none. Today, Christian apologists seek to establish a foundation for the rationality of the Christian faith by demonstrating through evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, that he was a real person, and that the Jesus the Apostles and the early Church proclaimed was not a fabrication.

But who is convincing who? I thought Christians were already Christians?! And I thought Pagans were already Pagans?! And that the Pagan is a Pagan because she loves herself, and thus fabricates myths and idols that reflect herself and thus something to worship (herself). If this is the problem, then what good does it do to spend hours and hours and hours and hours of study and debate; and thousands and thousands of dollars promoting such things? That said, I am not naively suggesting that there aren't any responses to the unbeliever; or that we shouldn't be able to help along Christians who have doubts themselves. I am not suggesting a retreat into a blind pietistic fundamentalism; I am suggesting that the conversation needs to be reset!

Christians need more self-confidence in and through the confidence that comes through constant and continual encounter with the living Word of God, Jesus Christ! We don't need to shore up our beach heads of doubt and fear by trying to meet the questions that the unbeliever has fabricated for the Christian to answer; we answer to Jesus, and we take our cue from him. We think from him. The categories of thought that we think Christianly through are determined as we press into him; not Richard Dawkins or Bart Erhman, for goodness sake!!!

What do the contemporary Christian Apologists think will happen if we simply ignore these so called new Atheists and Christian critics; will they win (whatever that means)? Isn't this the advice our parents gave us as kids when other kids with big mouths were trying to bully us; didn't they say to ignore them (since they are just seeking any kind of attention they can get)?

I think Christian Apologists, even if they have a confident intonation in their voices; promote a culture of fear and angst amongst Christians. Why? Because these Christian Apologists have given way too much credence to their so called counter-parts. And the average Christian sees this and thinks "wow, these antagonists must really have something important to say against Christianity!"

My prescription: We need way more Christian Theologians, and way less "Christian Apologists!" This is not a false dichotomy!

¹⁶ For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. Romans 1:16

¹⁸ For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. ¹⁹ For it is written:


   “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
   the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”
 
 ²⁰ Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? ²¹ For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. ²² Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, ²³ but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, ²⁴ but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. ²⁵ For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

  ²⁶ Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. ²⁷ But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. ²⁸ God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, ²⁹ so that no one may boast before him. ³⁰ It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. ³¹ Therefore, as it is written: “Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.” I Corinthians 1:18-25

There is no power in any thing other than proclaiming what the world (e.g. 'The New Atheists' and Biblical Critics, like Ehrman) considers weak and foolish; the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We need abduction not deduction. I just think we don't like being called fools; that explains the whole Apologetic faith to me.

PS. I know most of the Christian Apologists intentions are good; but because they have failed to engage the Christian Faith as Theologians and theologically, they must seek other ways to close that gap between "their faith" and its factual reality---so they think. I had doubts, severe doubts quite some years ago; I turned to these kinds of Christian Apologists. In the end they gave me a God who I had to constantly defend, and a Scripture that I made true; I finally became too exhausted by this mode, and thankfully was introduced to 'Christian Trinitarian Theology' ... what a relief! If you are still struggling along with the Christian Apologists; won't you join me in the refreshing waters of Trinitarian Theology (my favorite instance of this is Evangelical Calvinism)?

John Webster, Biblical Interpretation: Some Reflection

Here is how John Webster sums up his discussion on the relation of ‘The Word’ (Jesus) to biblical interpretation (hermeneutics). Webster

has been arguing against the usual modes of hermeneutical consideration, as anthropology; and through a resourcement of Barth, he is presenting a ‘way’ that provides for a thick dogmatically oriented mode of hermeneutical theory.

To sum up: because God in Jesus Christ speaks, because Jesus is God’s living Word, then the ‘hermeneutical situation’falls under the rule: ‘We do not know God against his will or behind his back, as it were, but in accordance with the way in which he has elected to disclose himself and communicate his truth’.52 Once this is grasped, then doctrines begin to do the work so frequently undertaken by anthropology or theories of historical consciousness in determining the nature of the hermeneutical situation, thereby making possible the ‘formed reference’ which is the basic mode of theological depiction. [John Webster, "Hermeneutics in Modern Theology: Some Doctrinal Reflections," Scottish Journal of Theology, 328]

In other words, modern hermeneutical proposals that seek to propound a theory of biblical interpretation that aren’t first given shape by a direct encounter with the Word (Jesus), dogmatically; will always fail to encounter Jesus for who he actually is because the interpretive event is not dominated by him, but them.

A Classic Calvinist thinks I need to repent: God's Impersonal Glory V. His Personal, 'In Christ'

*Here is a short post I originally wrote when I was in the midst of battling my cancer. It was given impetus by interaction I had been having, at that point, with a guy who attends The Master's Seminary (John MacArthur's seminary in Southern California). He believed (and probably still does) that I was in sin because I was having an ongoing dialogue with the LORD about my cancer; I told this fellow that at points I was angry with the LORD, and didn't understand why he would let this happen to me. This fellow thought this was a sinful response; i.e. because I was voicing my

frustration and anger with the LORD, in personal discussion with Him (the LORD), as my LORD. This guy from Master's was sure that I was harboring a sinful attitude, and thus in need of repentance. Here's that post (it was supposed to be the beginning of a series of posts, but I never got to those).

As a result of an email I recently received, I am going to do a series of posts on God’s glory and suffering — this will be a slow series, and will depend on my state of mind in the near future (in other words I am processing all kinds of stuff right now). I think it is very important to have an understanding of God’s glory that is shaped by His life of love in Christ by the Spirit. Which means that glory is not a principle outside of love and personal relationship; but in fact it is its inverse. In other words, God’s glory cares about intimate and personal details (like the sparrows or us). I’m afraid that there is thinking out there that sees “God’s glory” as an impersonal force that has nothing to do with “us;” when in fact the Incarnation says just the opposite.

In other words, what’s at stake here is how we correlate something like: “Man’s chief end is to glorify God” with Jesus Christ’s revelation of God’s glory as He ministered His life to those around Him while on earth (or even in His mediation to Israel in salvation history). I think there are competing things going on between the “Westminster Shorter Catechism’s” understanding of “glory and glorify,” and who we see revealed in Jesus Christ in the Incarnation. This will be the jumping off point for the posts ahead . . .

Be A Participant ...

Here is an honest question; I am not trying to patronizing about this, so please don't read me that way. But why do most Christians in America (I'll pick on American Christians since these are those I have experience with) never move beyond baby Christianity? Why are most Christians okay with simply being the "laity," and not driven to cultivate the saintly status as Christian which they have been granted as a result of union with Christ? I know that fundamentalist anti-intellectualism is still highly present even in its Evangelical form, and so this might help answer my questions as far as understanding a socio-cultural aspect of this problem. But maybe the answers to my questions are more simple; maybe it is simply because most American Christians are lazy. I know, I know (tell me about it!), life is extremely busy and we have many priorities that often are used as the excuse for not digging deeper with Jesus. But this seems to be a weak excuse! Didn't Jesus tell Martha that she should be like Mary and sit at his feet; isn't this the priority that Jesus would have for us? Didn't Jesus say to seek him first and his righteousness, and all these other "priorities" will be added unto us?

Anyway, I know this sounds like a rant; but it really comes from a heart of concern! I feel like so many Christians are ripping themselves off by settling  for baby pabulum and the milk of the Gospel (cf. Heb. 5); instead of growing mature and feasting on the meat of the Gospel. There really is no excuse for this. Unfortunately, as a result of the Fall, and continuing to live in this in-between time (between the first and second Advents of Christ); knowing God in Christ involves toil and work. As we are all Priests unto God in Christ (the 'Priesthood of All Believers'), we have the responsibility and stewardship of working at our walks with Jesus. We need to move beyond the basics, and get deep and situated in the depth dimension of the wonderful reality of what it means to truly be a Christian. Don't settle for cultural Christianity, or lazy Christianity; battle on, and press into the kingdom of the Son of His love; act as if you a participant in God's life in Christ by the Spirit! Why? Well, because you are ...

*rant.