Ready to go? The second semester looms…

Now that the next semester is looming (!) and the holidays all but gone, I present a short book list for those intending to take the courses I am offering in February.

1. PENTATEUCH

This is a first year course: an over-all sketch study of the first five books of the Bible. The textbook is    Introduction to the Pentateuch by Roger Whybray which you can purchase quite cheaply at http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/SearchResults?an=whybray&bi=0&bx=off&ds=30&sortby=3&sts=t&tn=pentateuch&x=32&y=3. Check elsewhere on the site for further details of the Pentateuch course.

2. INTRODUCTION TO CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE

This is another 1st year course, comprising a brief survey of the major emphases of Christian theology. The textbook is Introduction to Christian Doctrine by Millard Erickson and can be purchased at http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/SearchResults?an=millard&sortby=3&sts=t&tn=doctrine&x=0&y=0

3. REFORMATION HISTORY AND THEOLOGY

This is a 3rd year module, with a strong emphasis on the theology and church praxis of Calvin. It should be of particular interest to those who have studied PURITANISM. The textbook is Timothy George’s  Theology of the reformers  and this can be purchased at  http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=952827979&searchurl=an%3Dgeorge%26bi%3D0%26bx%3Doff%26ds%3D30%26sortby%3D3%26sts%3Dt%26tn%3Dreformers%26x%3D62%26y%3D11

4. WISDOM LITERATURE

This module covers a sometimes neglected area of OT research study. We will provide an overview of the major Biblical Wisdom books: Job, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, together with a selection of Psalms and some extra-Biblical texts in the Apocrypha and other ancient writings. The text-book is  William Brown, Character in crisis: A Fresh Approach to Wisdom Literature  which can be purchased quite cheaply at  http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/SearchResults?an=brown&bi=0&bx=off&ds=30&sortby=3&sts=t&tn=character+in+crisis&x=46&y=9

5. OT TEXTS: HABAKKUK

This is a more advanced option. We will be attempting a detailed exegesis of the entire text. Though we will be using an English translation, it will be helpful if you have done at least one module of elementary Hebrew. One of the best recent commentaries (in my opinion) is Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah (New American Commentary) by Kenneth L. Barker and Waylon Bailey (Hardcover – Oct 1998). Click on the link for the Amazon option.

The sovereignty of God: an Arminian perspective

This article was posted over at Arminian Perspectives by Kangeroodort. In the article he discusses the differences between Calvinists and Arminians on this issue. He asks a question that I have asked in the past. In fact, when I first started to study Reformed Theology this was one of my first objections.

Kangeroodort said

Is a God who can only control His universe through cause and effect bigger or smaller than a God who can allow for true contingency in His creatures and still accomplish His will?

Likewise, Arminians consider that this view magnifies God’s power, in at least two interrelated ways.

1. God was able to create a being who was not merely “determined,” but an actor who also “determines” things, a being who is free and in His own image. He of the only true sovereign will was able to endow man with a will that really has the power of decision and choice.

2. God is able to govern the truly free exercise of men’s wills in such a way that all goes according to His plan. A God who created a complex universe inhabited by beings pre-programmed to act out His will for them would be great. But one who can make men with wills of their own and set them free to act in ways He has not determined for them, and still govern the whole in perfect accord with His purpose is greater.” [page 43, italics his]

This was my position. I can still understand the argument. After all, in what way is God more powerful…when He controls everything or when He allows his creatures to have free will and He is still able to have His will accomplished? The answer seemed obvious. It makes so much sense, doesn’t it? Well on the surface it does. But there is so much more to this. The biggest problem I now see with this position is that it does not accurately account for the depravity of man. The depravity is total meaning that it permeates our whole being to the point of enslaving our will. Click here to read a more thorough discussion of Total Depravity. When we understand the true condition that our will is in we can understand that we can not have free will.

A.W. Pink explains it this way in Ch. 7 of The Sovereignty of God. He said

To will is to choose, and to choose is to decide between two or more alternatives. But there is something which influences the choice; something which determines the decision. Hence the will cannot be Sovereign because it is the servant of that something. The will cannot be both Sovereign and servant. It cannot be both cause and effect. The will is not causative, because, as we have said, something causes it to choose, therefore that something must be the causative agent. Choice itself is affected by certain considerations, is determined by various influences brought to bear upon the individual himself, hence, volition is the effect of these considerations and influences, and if the effect, it must be their servant; and if the will is their servant then it is not Sovereign, and if the will is not Sovereign, we certainly cannot predicate absolute “freedom” of it.

All men have free will but they are only able to make choices within and in cooperation with their nature.  For unregenerate people that nature is the sinful nature inherited from the Fall.  For regenerate people that nature is the new nature given to them at the point they are made alive and freed from the bondage of the sinful nature.  The new nature is one that seeks after God and can respond when the Gospel is proclaimed to them.

Post from Everyday Christian

The Bluffer’s Guide to Theology

Can you identify everyone here?

A free Mars Bar for the first student email…

Find a solitary fact about each of the following and drop it into party conversation when the going gets slow: Athanasius, Arius,Montanus,Augustine,Anselm,Francis of Assisi,Tyndale,Wycliffe,Erasmus,Luther,Zwingli,Melancthon,CalvinBezaOwen GoodwinWesley,Whitfield,Edwards,Finney,Pusey,Newman,Muller,Spurgeon,

Barth,Bonhoeffer,Bultmann,N.T.Wright

John Piper: The Supremacy of Christ

Here’s a ten-minute clip of one of the great exponents of relevant theology of our day:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYGLl0gO1dk

Worried? Notes on forthcoming exams

Worried? No need.

Here’s some notes on the final exams in Modern Church History and Introduction to Christian Doctrine
 Modern Church History
We will follow the same pattern in MCH and in Doctrine as we went through in the Pentateuch preparation. As follows:
10 short answer questions (20 %)
5 paragraph questions (50%)
1 (out of 3) essay questions (30%)
 
The short answer questions will probably be famous names (cf that list etc) / date recognition (1815, 1869, 1962 etc)/ events (, Vatican 1 etc)
 
The paragraph questions will be explaining events (Tractarians, Chartists, Darwin controversy, Liberalism, Fundamentalism)
 
The essay questions will be a choice (Context and outcome of vatican 1 and 2/ Cause Course and Consequence of 1st or 2nd Awakening/ Impact of Industrial revolution on English religion etc)
 
Introduction to Doctrine
Short answer questions: famous names/ theological names (Harnack,Bultmann. kenosis, pneumatology,  etc)
 
Paragraph questions: on theological themes
 
Essay questions on ;larger doctrinal themes: authority, revelation, scripture/ christology/ doctrine of God/ pneumatology (Holy Spirit in the Bible etc)
 
Christology
Just a reminder to Year 3 Christology module: there is no final exam but TWO ASSIGNMENTS (Jesus in John 1 and Christ to Constantine are due by June 4th (Sorry: this is final cut-off date…. we cannot accept late submissions on this one, because of marking exigencies)

Christian Doctrine Seminar: ANTHROPOLOGY

Here is the promised  Doctrine Seminar powerpoint  on Christian  anthropology.ppt with its background notes anthropology.doc in Word format.

Response: The Church of the Covenant

 The church is the heir and fulfilment of Israel. The heart of Israel’s creed was given by Jesus to his church as its own: “Hear O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength” (Mark 12:12f). Peter referred to Christians as the “elect… sojourners of the Dispersion” -an expression describing the old Israel- and then proceeded consistently to apply those descriptions of Israel to the church (1 Peter 1:1; 2:5-10). The writer to the Hebrews calls the new covenant in Jesus which brought the church into being, a covenant with the “house of Israel” (Heb 8:8). Paul called Christians “the true circumcision” (Phil 3:3), the “children of Abraham” (Rom 4:16-25), “the commonwealth of Israel” (Eph 2:12), and, explicitly, “the Israel of God” (Gal 6:6).

Pope Benedict: Covenant, Church, Israel

From Cardinal Ratzinger’s 1997 essay on the Catechism’s treatment of the relation between the Church and Israel:

The mission of Jesus consists in bringing together the histories of the nations in the community of the history of Abraham, the history of Israel. His mission is unification, reconciliation, as the Letter to the Ephesians (2:18-22) will then present it. The history of Israel should become the history of all, Abraham’s sonship is to be extended to the “many”.

What is the church? (Notes from a talk)

 

These notes from a talk I gave on the nature of the church may help you think through your Doctrine assignment. Let me know if you would like further information. They are posted on the website of our church plant at http://riversmeeting.wordpress.com

•  The Nature of the Church: Popular conceptions: a club (Society of the Prevention    of  Cruelty to People?, a religious show? The NT conception of the Church ecclesia, the Hebrew idea of assembly qahal; temple of the Spirit. Characteristics: divine not human, fellowship not institution; corporate not individualistic; universal not local;  body of the living Christ; exisitng not for her own sake but solely for the glory of God. 
• The Life of the Church : Man’s tragedy and God’s solution; Pentecost and unity; proclamation and witness; fellowship and family; service and worship.
• The Historic Roots of the Church: The Covenant and its response; grace and responsibility; worship; the new covenant in Jesus.
• The Lord of the Church: The apostolic testimony to Jesus; pre-existence and incarnation; the servant Lord; the cross; the resurrection and ascension; the centrality of Christ.
• The Faith of the Church: Jesus is Lord!;an inclusive lordship; a real lordship; the final manifestation of his lordship.
• The Worship of the Church: what does worship mean? The necessity of corporate worship; the place of ritual?; the elements of worship; the sacraments.
• The Mission of the Church: the centrality of mission; the motive for mission; the sphere of mission; the dynamic for mission.
• The Unity of the Church: the church is one; disunity is always sinful; excuses for disunity; unity is not uniformity; unity is God’s gift; eucumenicity and the generous spirit.

Between Two Horizons: Spanning New Testament Studies and Systematic Theology

Check out this important book edited by 

Joel B. Green and Max Turner at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/080284541X/thenewtestamenga

Customer Review:

I like this book because it has helped me immensely on why I should continue reading my Bible.

The central thesis of this collection is to argue for the need to find a biblical hermeneutics that will contribute to theological understanding–this being the supreme purpose of the whole enterprise of Christian biblical studies. This might not sound worth mentioning to millions of Christians around the world especially to this part of the globe. But according to the authors, there have been a long parting of the ways between biblical studies and the quest for religious truth (ie theology). Biblical scholars can have no religious commitment and the result of scholarly works can have no meaning for the life of the church. This is the problem the authors want to fix. The solution offered is termed “theological hermeneutics”.