galatian transvaluation

In Galatians 6:14, Paul states: "May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world."

The Dean, F. F. Bruce, wrote about this sentiment, "For one who makes the cross his supreme, indeed his solitary, ground of boasting all the accepted standards of social life are necessarily turned upside down: a total 'transvaluation of values' has taken place'" (271, emphasis mine).

At first, I thought this was a simple turn of a phrase in order to make a point. But then I remembered that the notion of transvaluation comes from somewhere else. It is Nietzsche, elaborating in The Antichrist, who uses this concept to assert Christianity as "ill-constituted and weak" and that which goes against nature and life. So it is interesting that The Dean would find connective tissue in these two concepts. Of course, his commentary does not elaborate (or even mention) Nietzsche and his writings, for Bruce is clearly concerned with Paul's message here. But is it safe to figure that a true transvaluation has occurred in Paul's thinking?

Obviously we can only use words in our attempts to describe that which Paul is thinking and writing - he never heard of the phrase transvaluation before. What Bruce is pointing to here is what many other authors and speakers have deemed the 'upside-down kingdom' which Jesus inaugurated. Paul is no longer evaluating humanity or the human condition by worldly standards (kata sarx), but through one's relationship to the cross. And the cross takes the world's values and places them on their collective heads.

And while for Nietzsche this was counter-nature by elevating the weak over the strong and exalting the "ill-constituted and weak" over health and life, Paul understood how the foolishness of God is wiser than the wisdom of everyone else. Paul's entire framework is based upon the notion that the way of the world has already transvalued God's created order, and thus the cross comes along to re-transvalue it to its rightful place. Not through the order of might-makes-right, which does not deliver on all of Nietzsche's promised ideals, but through the power of love to change hearts and lives and worlds.

And, I never am able to read this verse without reciting to myself the famous words of Isaac Watts:

Forbid it, Lord, that I should boast

Save in the death of Christ, my God;

All the vain things that charm me most,

I sacrifice them to his blood.

cultural translation

In his recent work, The Lost World of Genesis One, Old Testament scholar John Walton argues for an understanding and approach to the ancient biblical texts and cosmology which adequately and appropriately understands the particular period from within. To that effect he states, "So if God aligned revelation with one particular science, it would have been unintelligible to people who lived prior to the time of that science, and it would be obsolete to those who live after that time" (17).

The comment is most immediately connected to the origins debate, and it is a summons to understand the ancient biblical texts as they are, without placing the weights of modern debate over top of them. This is perhaps most evident in the seemingly endless debates regarding evolution and creationism which gives undue stress to what Genesis 1-2 is actually trying to say. Our modern inquiries must not be allowed to erase the ancient mind.

Translation not only involves texts, but also contexts - cultures, histories, perspectives, available knowledge - and that is something which we must value in our quest to understand Scripture. As Walton states, if God used our modern science to communicate with ancients it would have made no sense. The same is true if God used science yet-to-be-understood to communicate with us. Yet we, in so many ways, continue to think that the Bible is only for our culture and our generation.

This is also very true of studies on Revelation, for rather than understanding Second Temple Jewish Apocalyptic, we join the long line of believers who have mistakingly thought that these were descriptions of our period of time and nothing else. This ceases to be translation, looking more like hubris than anything genuine truth-seekers would engage.

The point is this: to enter into the biblical narrative we must momentarily leave ours. Only after we do this can we rightly understand the text and make the appropriate analogy to ourselves.

I have noticed that it is, by and large, only the Christian church which has fallen for the false promises of 'relevance,' with other religions and movements around the world unapologetic for the ancient tone of their faith. Muslims do not apologize for the Koran, Hindus are not worried about the age of their ancient texts being outdated, countless New Age movements actually push the so-called mystery of their old origins as a selling point. All while the Christian church has followed the path promising the most return for the least work.

Thus, it is important to become reacquainted with the ongoing and unending work of cultural translation when we read the biblical text, trusting in the timeless truth to be made known through our efforts. What makes this attainable is that the same Spirit which inspired the authors to write the text will be the same Spirit which enables us to read it.

of content and context

For many years I held on to what I thought was a secret. And I was greatly intimidated when I thought that this part of me would be exposed. I don't do well in Scripture memorization. There, I said it. It's out. And I'm not doomed . . . at least, not yet.

The reason why I thought this was embarrassing (and it sometimes continues to be) is that with my training, experience, degrees and employment I am supposed to know this type of thing. But the entire enterprise of keeping chapter and verse in neatly ordered files continues to escape me, even when I've tried to work on it. And it's not all lost, I do have some of the "big" passages down (those I've gone over in preaching, teaching and research about a million times . . . ), and there will always be the fond memories of Sunday School Scripture memorization still lingering on. But the ability of making a point by appealing to specific chapter and verse within Scripture is reserved for someone else. And therein lies my dilemma.

While some people are busy making their case with pointed Scriptural exposition I am often found fading into the background without the impressive ability to do so. Until one day when I discovered something very important . . . a very large percentage of people who can do this actually have little to no sense of the context of what they are citing. In other words, someone might be able to tell you what is found in Romans 5, but they could not begin to tell you why Romans 5 exists!

In The Blue Parakeet, McKnight refers to the distinction of loving the Bible and loving the God of the Bible, and I believe this is my own little version of it. I remember once when I had been hired to work at Denver Seminary Bookstore and was being given a tour of the 'employee areas' - one of which contained a copier/printer which served the entire campus and was (I'm convinced) designed by God himself. For obvious reasons it was located in a secure room and I was given the security code which, at the time, was 15020. The 'mnemonic' which I was told to remember this was Genesis 50:20, "What you have meant for evil, the LORD has meant for good." It's pretty good, but I confess that at the time (lifelong Christian, BA in Bible, halfway through MA in Bible) my first thought was a wandering, "Woah, Genesis has 50 chapters?!? Yeah, I guess so . . ."

This is the level at which pointed study is lost on me. Or, is it that this is the point that trivial information doesn't stick as much as the message of Scripture. Since I have confessed my failures in biblical studies, let me *humbly* save face here . . . I know the themes and events of Scripture well. Really well. It's the numbers-game that makes it appear differently. But, I have to wonder: Of the two problems, which would I rather have? Yes, I would love to have both the chapter and verse memorization AND the contextual point of the narrative . . . but it's just not happening. So I am pursuing the one which gets to know the story, and the God behind the story.

Over the years I have shared this with increasing openness and have been given encouraging and empathetic responses. So much was this the case that I began to change my approach to teaching and interacting with Scripture to help people get the whole of Scripture before working on the detailed points. In my course syllabus for introductions to Bible (especially for the students who are not Bible majors/minors), I have included:

_____

"For those who are unfamiliar with Scripture . . . there is often a feeling of being overwhelmed at the amount of material contained in the Bible, and the number of stories and events which everyone but you seems to already know. Don't worry, many churchgoers often appear to be more knowledgeable than they actually are! Often, their familiarity comes not from having mastered the Bible but from having heard these things many times for many years. Your task is to unveil the richness of Scripture for yourself and to discover God's story regardless of your current situation."

_____

That's me and my slow-witted-of-a-genius-mind, and it has to do with my wiring. I will continue in my quest to commit as much of The Bible to memory as I can . . . knowing that I will fail on many chapter-and-verse competitions, but succeed in embracing and embodying the kingdom of God increasingly day-by-day. It was liberating to finally allow the Spirit to convince my heart that the point of biblical knowledge is not winning arguments or demonstrating mental superiority, but knowing him . . . in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and somehow . . . attaining to the resurrection of the dead.

bringing up girls

James C. Dobson, Bringing Up Girls (Carol Stream: Tyndale, 2010).

Typically this blog is reserved for matters of biblical studies, church, theology and occasional oddities. But I wanted to share a brief review of what has proven to be a volume of great impact on my own life. Now being the father of two lovely young girls I find myself constantly wondering if I am doing things "right" - or how are things going in my ability to raise my daughters. This question can go multiple ways, ranging from physical and psychological development to spiritual and emotional growth. Still, the concern for me (and countless others) has instilled a drive to learn and prepare.

After leaving an already-stellar academic career in child psychology and development at USC, Dr. Dobson followed divine calling and began Focus on the Family, a ministry dedicated to the establishment and protection of healthy families. His radio broadcasts, televisions interviews, speaking events and numerous books have solidified him in the fabric of evangelical America. There are many who are quick to decry him and even vilify him, but they rarely show any merit and often prove that they are of such little character themselves by the manner of their attack.

In 2005 Dobson produced Bringing Up Boys, to much success and acclaim. The book was barely half-finished when the calls began to come in for a similar volume on girls. After much time, research, writing and effort we now have both volumes to help us through this gender maze - especially as parents.

There is much to commend for Bringing Up Girls. Dobson covers a wide range of topics, and is always able to keep the full spectrum of childhood in focus - for instance, he is ever-mindful of speaking about infants and toddlers while also demonstrating how adolescent and young-adult girls and women are impacted by the issue at hand. Further, he writes with a very readable and instructional style, never dumbing down the data but keeping the concepts readily available for the reader. As a parent (who did not score particularly well in Psychology 101), the information and data given here was always understandable and placed well within its proper context.

The book as a whole is designed to give parents (and now grandparents or other guardians) the perspective on how girls grow and develop, so that each parental figure can adequately use the tools of their own personality to positively guide and direct the process. In other words, the overall aim here is to allow each parent to be themselves in a positive way for the child to grow. It does not take special superpowers to make an impact on children - positively or negatively - but it does take the right approach and the right frame of mind.

Bringing Up Girls frequently addresses the unique role of fathers in the life of girls. And here we find one of the greatest deficiencies in our modern culture. Time and again the research demonstrates what Scripture has said all along: that both Mom and Dad are vital to the physical, emotional, psychological, spiritual growth and development of children (here it is specifically girls). As someone who has always believed in this cultural lifestyle I was staggered to learn just how deep and intricate such relationships run throughout the growing processes of girls. It is also quite humbling to know that God has given fathers this place. I have said many times (and continue to do so), You may or may not care for his politics, but when it comes to the state and decline of the family over the past forty years, James Dobson is right.

Further, the book will prove to be indispensable in providing parents guidelines for helping their girls navigate the dangers of the surrounding world - from bullies and bulimia to tantrums and television. The secret lies in Dobson's repeated concern for allowing girls to have the self-confidence which comes from a stable home, involved parents, an instilled self-worth, and an awareness of the God who created them and surrounded them with his deep and affectionate love.

My wife and I consider ourselves blessed that this volume was produced at a time when our little girls are just starting out on this journey of life, and we thank God for Dr. Dobson and his tireless work for the family as a unity of godliness in this world.

playing offensive

Vince Lombardi once famously said to his players, in an effort to get them back to the fundamentals of their game, "Gentlemen, this is a football. Our goal is to get this ball across that line and to prevent the other team from doing the same." Over the course of time a handful of preachers have been inspired by this story and have gone to their pulpits with a message regarding the widespread biblical illiteracy of our culture and made a call for the church to return to its most fundamental truth.

I am one of those preachers.

"Ladies and gentlemen, this is a Bible."

I believe that this statement is a powerful challenge to the current state of the church and said so very directly and passionately as the climax of my inaugural sermon as Senior Pastor of my current church. I have since been told that my statement was "offensive" - by a few Christians who were in attendance at the meeting. I suppose that I didn't quite know how to take such feedback in the moment that I heard it. I mean, where do you go with that? Then it hit me . . .

Of course it was offensive. The Bible happens to be the most offensive document which has ever met humanity on the road of unrighteousness. It is a direct and open challenge to everything that we are as humanity, tearing and ripping at our fallen flesh with the message of destruction and judgment. And for those who are seeking to have their ears tickled it will be nothing more than that.

But this book is also the most loving message that the universe has ever seen. It is the foundational revelation of truth and salvation. It contains the message of the only true hope for the world. It, along with Spirit, is the source and guide for life. And for those who are tenacious for its message it will unleash the full fury of heaven.

An overly PC world, lost in its own self-worth, will define offensive as nothing more than a rude message that only speaks of human failure. But to those with ears to hear, this Bible will prove itself to be playing offense - taking the reality of our situation and recording God's proactive movement to make everything right once again.

the radical disciple

John Stott, The Radical Disciple (Downers Grove: IVP, 2010).

"As I lay down my pen for the last time at the age of eighty-eight . . ."

One of the most influential Christian leaders of the Twentieth Century has given us his final work, and is retiring from public service in the kingdom. He does so having made an extensive contribution to the worldwide church, as a pastor and church leader as well as a scholar and theologian.

This book is a brief statement on the nature of the Christian life, which is an appropriate place for Stott to close out his career. Although it is small in size, there is great challenge found in this volume. Its subtitle is Some Neglected Aspects of Our Calling - a presentation of those areas which define the church, but which have often gone unnoticed and under-emphasized. There are eight chapters, which each take a particular area for investigation and challenge: Nonconformity, Christlikeness, Maturity, Creation Care, Simplicity, Balance, Dependence, Death.

The overall focus of the book fits with the title, and is geared to move the reader to a more dedicated commitment to the demands of kingdom life and growth. While there might be points at which the modern reader would choose to part company with Mr Stott (his assumption of the impact of anthropogenic global warming might not be so readily accepted by those of us who know that the facts are not supportive of the theory), overall his emphasis and message is good.

This is among the final fruits of a life given to the service of the kingdom, given to us by one who himself has chosen to be - every step of the way - a radical disciple.

self-defined parameters

I recently had a conversation with a woman who explained to me that her family has made the decision to "worship God in their own way" by staying home on Sunday mornings and making it a family-day where they relax and enjoy.

The details of this story haven't been changed or altered since it is such a common culturally-based statement that it really could refer to just about anyone. The notion is often repeated by many who would rather just keep on doing what they are doing and feel good about it. It is not-too-cleverly veiled in this gushy sentiment of worshipping God, seeking some sort of higher validation for their choices. Of course, the problems with this line of thought abound . . . as I did begin to gently point out over the course of our ensuing conversation.

Perhaps what concerns me most about this phrase is that those who hold to it will probably never fully understand the weight of their words. Here's how I mean that:

1. Worship is something which, by definition, is the giving of ourselves in an act of sacrifice to another entity. We worship by leaving the confines of ourselves and ascribing to something which is other. It is difficult to fault someone for missing this point in our culture, however, since much of our church life is built around flimsy ideas such as 'meeting-our-needs' and 'styles-which-I-like' instead of life-changing encounters. Still, the notion that we are worshipping God by creating pleasant experiences for ourselves (i.e., making a comfortable life for our own enjoyment) is clearly missing the point.

2. Worship cannot be built on the idea that God needs us. This is true not only of corporate Sunday gatherings, but also Monday-through-Saturday lifestyles. It is not that God needs our time, talents and abilities . . . It is that we need God in every conceivable way. Far too often - both among churchgoers and nonchurchgoers - we think that God is going to be satisfied with whatever we decide to throw his way, and then we can move on with things. After all, what does he expect, right? Sadly, we've written off the story about Cain and Abel's offerings as childish and have followed their path to spiritual demise.

3. Worship either acknowledges a Sovereign Creator or it doesn't. This is simply stated, but often missed in ridiculous complexities of our fallen nature. To say, "We worship God in our own way" implies that there is a recognition of a higher authority, but at the same time denies that authority's right to supremacy. The question then becomes, Why do you admit the presence of a god and identify his need to be worshipped only to ignore the parameters he has given us for living?

4. Worship does not consider equality with God something to be grasped. He is God and we are not, thus he gives us direction and we are not in a position to overwrite the desires of the Almighty. If we were, then he would not be almighty, nor would he be sovereign.

Simply stated, we are more concerned with our self-definied parameters of worshipping God than following his law. We would rather heap blessings upon ourselves through our own comfortability than fulfill the desires of our Creator's heart. And this is unacceptable Christianity, hypocritical Theism and ridiculous spirituality. (In actuality, it has much more in common with New Age spirituality than it does with the gospel.)

God forgive each of us when we decide that we will worship him "in our own way" rather than following the path of Jesus, who endured suffering, shame and scorn that we might attain life.