Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain?
The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together
against the Lord and against his Anointed, saying,
Let us burst their bonds apart and cast away their cords from us.
He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord holds them in derision
Then he will speak to them in his wrath,
and terrify them in his fury, saying
As for me I have set my King on Zionn, my holy hill
Psalm 2:1-6

Let us pray for the wounded,
Let us grieve for the dead,
Let us stop those that do evil,
Let us keep our eyes fixed on the Lord.

Please pray for the families and wounded of Fort Hood.

Kingdom of God Outline: In Full

Here ya go.

Mark Jones and Christian Charity

I've been super busy this week, but I did come across this post by Mark Jones. Frankly, I couldn't agree more. Here is a sample:

In the end, while I don’t agree, for example, with a Klinean view of the covenant of works, there’s no way I’m going to lose sleep over someone who espouses a Klinean view of the covenant of works. To me, that debate is an intramural Reformed discussion, which is best talked about over beer or two or …

Thankfully, dealing/chatting with Dr. David Rim at Moody taught me the importance of charity in academic discussions (though practicing charity can be difficult at times!).

NT Intro Paper

I have finally settled on a topic for my NT Introduction Exegesis paper. I will be exploring the theme of Jesus' recapitulation as Israel and the fulfillment of all righteousness as it pertains to the new exodus imagery in Jesus' baptism in Matthew 3:13-17. I will propose that Jesus' baptism was not merely a simple identification with the people who were to repent and be cleansed (because the kingdom of heaven is near) nor was his baptism simply an example of the forthcoming practice of Christian baptism (though these nuances/aspects are not necessarily excluded). Instead, Matthew evokes Exodus imagery in his baptism. The baptism of Jesus symbolizes Israel's passing through the Red Sea and subsequent temptation in the wilderness. Anyways, more to come at a latter date!

Piper isn't the only one to say it!

This is how Vos begins chapter 8!

We have already seen, that not the thought of man's welfare, but that of the glory of God was supreme in our Lord's teaching concerning the kingdom. While emphasizing this, we must not forget, however, that to him this thought was inseparably connected with the idea of the greatest conceivable blessedness for man. That God should reign was in his view so much the only natural, normal state of things, that he could not conceive of any true happiness apart from it, nor of it without a concomitant state of happiness for those who give to God the first and the highest place. This is in general the connection between the kingship of God as a rule over man, and the of as a possession for man, a connection not obscurely indicated in the saying, Matt. vi. 33. With the kingship of God all other things must come, for, as Paul later expressed it: ''If God be for us, who shall be against us ?" (70)

God will Bless Your Obedience. A Proper Motive for Obedience?

Vos answers this question in his book on Jesus' Teaching Concerning the Kingdom of God,

The first thing to remember is that we have no right to declare the desire for reward as a motive in ethical conduct unworthy of a high standard of morality and therefore unworthy of the better element in our Lord's own teaching. This would be the case only, if it figured as the only or the supreme motive, and if other motives of a disinterested God-centered kind did not exist side by side with or above it. If our Lord appealed to the fear of punishment as a deterrent from evil, why should he not have appealed to the desire for blessedness and reward as an incentive to the good? May we not believe that Jesus himself was strengthened in enduring his suffering by the prospect of the promised glory ? cf. Heb. xii. 2. Does anybody think that in his case this interfered in the least with his making it his meat and his drink to do the Father's will? (pg. 66-67)

This is why Vos is so good!

The Merging of Church and State Isn't Good for the Church

...so says theologian Stephen Colbert. I happen to agree.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Word - Symbol-Minded
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Michael Moore

Vos: America at a Disadvantage in Seeking to Understand God's Kingdom

“The main reason for the use of the name [Kingdom of God] by Jesus lies undoubtedly in this, that in the new order of things God is in some such sense the supreme and controlling factor as the ruler in a human kingdom. The conception is a God-centered conception to the very core. In order to appreciate its significance, we must endeavor to do what Jesus did, look at the whole of the world and of life from the point of view of their subserviency to the glory of God. The difficulty for us in achieving this lies not merely in that we are apt to take a lower man-centered view of religion, but equally much in that by our modern idea of the state we are not naturally led to associate such an order of things with the name of a kingdom. According to our modern conception, especially in its republican form, the institution of the state with its magistrate exists for the sake of the subjects, even the king, in a constitutional monarchy, may be considered as a means to an end. In the ancient state this is different. Here the individual exists for the state, and in the Oriental monarchy the state is centralized and summed up in the person of the ruler"

Book Review: War Against the Idols

Carlos M N Eire’s War Against the Idols describes the reformation of worship that took place from Erasmus to Calvin. For Eire, the reformation of Christianity in the sixteenth century involved a transformation from the Catholic religion of immanence to the Calvinist religion of transcendence. Eire argues,

John Calvin, in defending the heritage of the Reformed attitude toward idolatry, forged a new, scripturally based, theological metaphysics in which the boundaries between the spiritual and the material were more clearly drawn than ever and that his reaffirmation of the centrality of the “spiritual” worship with its consequent denial of compromise provided a solid ideological framework for much of the social and political unrest that accompanied the spread of Calvinism.[1]

Eire seeks to explain how the theology of the Reformation informed a sociopolitical ideology that lead to action, conflict and change. He concerns himself with what changed in Christianity, nor how it changed but rather the ideas behind the changes.

Seeking to establish from what sort of worship the Reformation changed European religion, Eire begins with a summary of Late Medieval Lay Devotion. Laity of the Late Middle Ages had intense piety. The clergy blended the sacred and the profane in the cult of the saints and the veneration of the Eucharist. In the cult of the saints, profane humans were elevated to the sacred. Their position between worlds allowed those still living to access the Divine through the mediation of their elevated brethren. The Eucharist took the sacred and incarnated it again in materials with which the mortals could interact.

Erasmus of Rotterdam emerged as an early critic of Late Medieval piety. Eire explains, “Though not a Protestant iconoclast, Erasmus was… in agreement with some of their basic assumptions regarding worship.”[2] Erasmus idealized primitive Christianity. He grew concerned that the veneration of the saints distracted the laity from pure devotion to God. However, Erasmus saw devotion to the cult of saints as an indifferent matter, one that neither added to nor destroyed real faith.

Eire next turns to the early Reformers and their views of worship. Protestantism distinguished between right and wrong worship. Protestants sought to worship the Creator rather than things created. Eire begins his discussion of Protestant iconoclasts with Andreas Karlstadt. Karlstadt took Erasmus’ critique to the level of moral imperative. Where the Dutch Humanist saw indifferent misdirection, the German Reformer saw dangerous idolatry. Karlstadt’s iconoclasm simmered in the absence of Luther, who returned as unrest began to boil in Wittenberg to mute Karlstadt’s cry for the removal of idols.

In Zurich, Ulrich Zwingli forged a similar understanding of images as idolatrous. Starting from Humanist presuppositions, Zwingli concludes that the true object of Christian belief was to have God as the ultimate focus of faith and worship. Although Man was made to respond properly to God, he substitutes false ends in his worship. For Zwingli idolatry was anything that usurps the place of God in worship. The images were taking the place of God and would have to be removed. While explicitly leaving the duty of image removal to the legal authorities, Zwingli preached boldly against images.

Eire tells how Iconoclasm spread, sometimes violently through several Swiss cities. Eire argues that the removal of the images serves as a visible sign of the embrace of the Reformation in a visible, radical and democratic way. Eire describes the process as it took place in Bern, Basel, Neuchatel and Geneva.

As John Calvin enters the argument, Eire seeks to set the historical stage. Eire describes French Humanism as held by Lefevre d’Ataples. Eire explains the Catholic backlash against the movement toward Iconoclasm.

Eire relays Calvin’s theology of worship. For Calvin knowledge of God and worship of God go hand-in-hand. Proper worship of God is Man’s true purpose. Calvin believed the only proper worship of God was the spiritual worship informed by God’s commands in Scripture. Proper worship could only be evaluated from the Divine perspective; the subjective experience of the worshipper was irrelevant.

Calvin systematizes the Reformed teaching on worship and clarifies several important points. He insists that the fault for idolatry lies on Man, not the material world he substitutes for the Divine. Calvin emphasizes the role of proper worship over against other considerations.

Eire’s War Against the Idols provides a helpful summary of Reformed thought on worship, specifically as it relates to the issue of Iconoclasm. He skillfully traces the development of the ideas as they emerge in the early Humanists and Reformers. However, as Eire arrives at Calvin, the subject of his thesis, he abandons development in favor of description. As compared to the emergence of earlier thinkers, Calvin appears to be hatched fully formed in his theological thought.

Considering the time given to theological works, propaganda art and social upheaval, Eire pays too little attention to the role of preaching in Reformation Iconoclasm. The ideas seem to jump straight from the Reformers’ minds to the actions of the angry laity.

The final section of Eire’s book and thesis concerning the contribution of Calvin’s anti-idolatry theology to violent opposition to power, specifically in France and Scotland feels flimsy and tacked on. In these statements, we have a more controversial assumption with less rigorous argumentation.

On the whole, Eire provides a helpful summary of the Reformed objection to Catholic worship, but he fails to achieve the extremely high goals of his thesis.

---

[1] Eire, Carlos M N War Against the Idols (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986) p3

[2] Eire Idols 28

The Reformed Reader on Greg Beale and Inerrancy

Here is a helpful post by the guys over at the Reformed Reader with respect to Greg Beale's book which was (largely) in response to Pete Enns. To be honest, I haven't been all that impressed with Beale's response to Enns. For example, this interview by Christ the Center comes to mind. I have found Poythress, Silva, and Vanhoozer much more helpful on issues related to epistemology and its bearing on hermeneutics.