Reading transitions

I only started reading (books that did not have pictures in them), really reading when i hit 20 and that was after my conversion (they call it) to Christianity (being a follower of Jesus). But i started reading stuff by Benny Hinn, Kenneth Hagin, Roberts Liardon to name a few. I was into all things charismatic. But when i entered bible school, the books there were not unlike any kind of books you could find in bookstores (at least where im from). My lecturers made us read systematic theology and books on OT and NT survey. Being new and just started to reading the space of 4 years, it looked an impossible feat especially with my steady diet of charismatic bent books. But it was really amazing that there was a transition from reading a somewhat dented diet of rash theology to stuff that were of substantial substance. But then it took a while for me to get my hands on stuff by N. T. Wright, Vanhoozer, Richard Hays, Miroslav Volf, Scot McKnight to name a few. Forking out money for these books was the hard part but it was something that was needed (especially in the world of theological studies). But reading theological books take a lot of work (especially for this reader), i'm still trying my best to read through Vanhoozers book (that is sort of the curse if you start reading too late!). I'm wondering if there are people out there who went through some sort of reading transition in their life as well.

5 Views on the Historical Jesus

I was alerted by Nijay K Gustapa upon reading his blog on this upcoming book from IVP entitled "The Historical Jesus: 5 Views". The list of scholars include Robert Price, John Dominic Crossan, Luke Timothy Johnson, James D. G. Dunn and Darrell Bock. This book will definately make it's way to my book shelf when it come out! 

Books for the Journey

I need some help in deciding this, so i would value your comments. I'm 95% certain that I'll be attending seminary to pursue my theological studies in the coming weeks. Why 95% you may ask? I still have to turn up for an interview with a seminary representative nextweek so I guess that accounts for the other 5% ammount of 'I might not make it'. But nontheless I'm positive I'll be accepted.

So here is my question. I am a book lover and to part with my books, that's like taking me off life support. Because I wont get the luxury of bringing my collection of books with me, I'm wondering what type of books would be helpful to add in my suitcase if I go? Knowing that you might not know what books I have on my shelf I'll ask the question in a general note, "If you wre packing to another place to study theology and have to decide on the right books for the journey what books would you pack with you based on your book collection?"

Not Even God...when Disappointed

I keep coming back to the chapter "Bonhoeffer on Disappointment" in a book edited by Brian Rosner entitled "Consolations of Theology". That particular chapter (the one i noted above) is the one that Rosner wrote and it was brilliantly done as he writes how Bonhoeffer dealt with disappointment. I'll probably do a post on that chapter as a whole somewhere in the distant or near future but I'd like to draw our attention on this particular passage from the book.

On a subheading that reads "Popular Strategies" on dealing with disappointment Rosner mentions four ways in which people in general deal with it. The first being 'wallowing in regret' followed by 'seeking to curb desire', the third 'seeking a substitute' and the last being 'giving up hope for the thought of hope in the afterlife'. But as Rosner writes, Bonhoeffer never resorted to these popular ways in dealing with disappointment.

On the third popular startegies on dealing with disappointment, as i mentioned above, Bonhoeffer did not cave in and followed the popular way on dealing with disappointment, in that he did not seek a substitute to find momentary happiness as a consolation for unattained or unfulfilled desire or longings. Rosner writes "Seeking compensation elsewhere when our desires are frustrated also seems logical enough."(116) I find this true of how we ussually deal with disappointment, we might have a compulsion to buy things, fill ourselves with activities that are filled with 'fun', in a temporary way to combat a wounded heart. Read the following exerp from Rosner here which blew me away on what Bonhoeffer thought about this:

"With respect to seperation from love ones, aware of the pain that he may be prolonging, Bonhoeffer nontheless avers: "Some people...find compensation in short-lived pleasures that offer redier satisfactions...When we are forcibly seperated for any considarable length of time from those we love, we simply cannot, as most can, get some cheap substitute through other people- I don't mean because of moral considerations...we have to suffer unspeakably from the seperation, and feel the longing till it almost makes us ill. That is the only way...in which we can preserve unimpaired our relationship with our loved ones." He insists that "nothing can make up for the absence of someone whom we love." Not even God: "It is nonsense to say that God fills the gap; he doesn't fill it, but on the contrary, he keeps it empty and so help us to keep alive our former communion with each other, even in the cost of pain."" (116)

I wrote this in the margins of my book after reading this passage, a spur in the moment kind of thing: This third point embraces pain (longing) to the fullest/ at it's fullest level. There is absolutely no compensation for our longings...in the end they (our longings) become a drive in us (in a way that it pushes us).

What do you think of the exerpt above from the book? Or particularly the statement that said "It is nonsense to say that God fills the gap; he doesn't fill it, but on the contrary, he keeps it empty and so help us to keep alive our former communion with each other, even in the cost of pain."

The God I Don't Understand- Chapter 1

Let's begin Chapter 1: The Mystery of Evil of Christopher Wright's book with some thoughts and reflection.

If you're into comics and superheroes, maybe some would agree with me that the first series of Batman movies (those that stared Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer and George Clooney) has to be said as a bad adaptation of a superhero character to the big screen. But come 'Batman Begins', I was totally blown away by the storyline. I especially like how Bruce Wayne evolved into the mysterious Batman. It was one of the ultimate origins story of a superhero adapted to the big screen and with that minimizes the mysterious character that superheroes have.

But as for evil as explained by C.H.Wright in his book, it's origin is somewhat difficult to pin point. I've heard people use texts like Isaiah 14:4-21 and Ezekiel 28:1-17 as reference points to how evil or rather Lucifer's fall from grace came about. On these two texts C.H.Wright says that "they were written originally to describe the defeat and death of historical human kings, and so it is a dubious exercise to build detailed doctrinal statements about the devil or the "underworld" upon them." (40) But although that may be the recurring fact about the two bible passages "they have a spiritual counterpart that is recognizably satanic." (40) For a more clearer description of Satan and his demons read Jude 6, 2 Peter 2:4 and Revelation 12:7-9.

So, what are we to make of trying to understand evil and let alone it's origin to get a better understanding on things? For C.H.Wright, "evil does not make sense. "Sense" is a part of our rationality that in itself is part of God's creation and God's image in us. So evil can have no sense, since sense itself is a good thing." (42) Evil is not something that has any part of anything God created so therefore evil is "an intruder, an alien presence that has made itself almost (but not finally) inextricably "at home"." (42) Because Evil is foreign it makes no sense and should stay at the point of making no sense.

I must admit that I am frustrated with not being able to understand evil and it's origin and especially when C.H.Wright tell us to park at the space where we simply embrace the fact that evil should not be understood and that it simply makes no sense. But I do see the wisdom in taking this slant to making amends to our brains that always seeks understanding.

C.H.Wright goes on to say that "...God...has chosen not to explain the orgin of evil, but rather wants to concentrate my attention on what he has done to defeat and destroy it." (43) But this does not negate our desperate emotions to ask deep and frustrating questions on the mystery of evil. We are all the more encouraged to do so.

Evil will always have the capacity to pry our emotions out in the open but we are to take comfort that we are not meant to understand it but to work with God in trusting what he did and what he is doing to defeat it.

The God I Don't Understand-Introduction

I should state that I was drawn by the book because stuff happening in my personal life that makes me echo the title of the book "The God I Don't Understand". But i have to say that I have always been drawn to books that revolve around this type of subject matter, books like "Disappointment with God" come to mind by Yancey. These types of books explore these mysteries and questions that our heart longs in seeking answers to them. We all seek reasonable answers i might add. In bible school, i tried my take on the question but I was way off target, come to think of it. But this question keeps on nagging every time the belief in God is put up front. The question about evil and how God, if he is all good would allow suffering.

I thought I'd try something different with this particular book. After I've read a chapter, I'd blog about it. So some sort of experimentation going on here. I'd probably post something that really gripped me rather than do a blow by blow exposition on a chapter.

Christopher Wright who wrote the book wrote at the end of the introduction part of the book about what he biblical precedent he hopes to archive for this book, and he uses Psalms 73 to explain this. The psalm starts on a positive manner affirming Israel's faith in God (v.1) but moves on to the author's struggle with God's ways of handling things (v.2-14).

In the middle part of the psalm Wright explains that the author does two things. First, he explains that the psalmists although raises perplexing questions he does not go overboard for fear of "betraying God's people" (22). The second, as Wright explains again, the author of the psalm "goes to worship in the house of God with God's people. There, in the context of worship, his perspective is changed and he sees things in the light of God's ultimate will and moral government." Wright further states again that the psalmist "lets us hear both his struggling lack of understanding and his restored, worshiping faith." (23)

The part that caught my attention was when Wright mentions in the middle part of the psalm, namely the first half that is verse 15. This part raises wisdom in how we are supposed to carry out our hard fought questions especially on a public platform; books, blogs, sermons, teaching. Write states that

"There is a proper pastoral limit to the voicing of protest- as God reminded Jeremiah on one occasion (Jer 15:19) and as Isaiah warned his listeners (Isa 45:9-13). I have prayed constantly in working on this book that i may not transgress that limit. I want to explore questions that the bible itself wrestles with, but i want to build up God's people, not betray their faith." (22) (emphasis mine)

I think this does serve as a reminder for us especially in the blogspehere when we are relaying views, not necessarily on evil, suffering and God but on any other subject matter for that sake. But at points though, when i think of the psalms, there are some that push the limit, like the one where the psalmist wants God to dash the heads babies of the Babylonians. But it does make me ask what is a pastoral limit to voicing protest? Protest in a sense that asks God some deep questions on why he is not acting up to who we believe and learn that he is.

Reading through the times

I went out and bought myself Christopher Wright's new book "The God I Don't Understand" and after reading the introduction and the first chapter of the book, i can safely say that it will be a pleasant read indeed. So I'll be planning a review of the book as soon as I'm done with it. I'm also reading Carl McColman's book entitled "Spirituality: A Postmodern and Interfaith Approach to Cultivating a Relationship with God" and will also come up with a review of the book thanks courtesy of TheOoze Viral Bloggers. Based on what i read, it's a good book as well. I'm still waiting for another book to come.

Trying as much to read as well as reflect on what I'm reading but it's hard when you have other things happening that kind of push you to the edge sometimes. So I hope that would not effect good thoughts and reflections as well as reviews of books that I'm reading. I'm sure i don't wan' to mess those up.

S. F. R. J. (Thoughts & Reflections) Chp 1: Joining Mary at the Feet of Jesus

Just so you know, the initials S.F.R.J stands for 'Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus'. So the time you see these initials you will know that these particular posts are ongoing discussions, reflections and thoughts on that particular book.

This chapter sets the frame on two Jewish understandings on the use of these sentences ‘sitting at his feet’ as well as ‘anointing’ (in this case Mary anointing Jesus). Using these two examples, the authors are communicating to us the importance of studying Jesus in his Jewish context. It is interesting for them to use Mary to open up the pathway of following this rabbi named Jesus and subsequently framing the depiction of discipleship to Jesus the Messiah in the two sentences I mentioned above.

Take ‘sitting at his feet’ for example:

“If we were first-century visitors, we would have recognized the significance of something else in that story. It was customary for rabbis to sit on low pillows or chairs while they were teaching. Their disciples would sit on the ground or on mats around them. That’s how the phrase “sit at his feet” became and idiom of for learning from a rabbi…So when Mary was described as “sitting at Jesus’ feet”, she was being described as a disciple.” (14)

Without the Jewish understanding of this particular sentence 'sit at his feet' we miss something profound and essential. A simple understanding would just depict Mary as an avid listener or willing to hear Jesus teach. These understandings might be right but coupled with Jewish eyes, the words that were once simplistic and had some sort of mundane imagery turns into a rather enlightened portrayal; discipleship.

...as well as ‘anointing’:
“By anointing him (Jesus) with expensive fragrances, Mary may well have been making a statement about who she believed Jesus was, proclaiming him as Messiah.” (16)

Anointing was clearly framed to Jews on occasions where kings and priest were put into office. It is interesting to observe that the authors link Jesus’ riding the donkey and his anointing in parallel with Solomon’s episode in 1 Kings 1:38-40. It is explained that the fragrance of Jesus being anointed by Mary would have lasted for days and that his fragrance was surely evident wherever he went. Jesus smelled like royalty. (18)

These depictions are fascinating because without cultural background of first-century Judaism, these insights would never have popped up to the imagination. Something that the authors were able to convince us at the beginning of the chapter is that there is a growing need of reading and understanding scripture in the light of its first-century background. Thinking through this chapter arouses my curiosity back again to the gospels and the deconstruction of what we have always thought certain passages meant.

There is a list of the online conversation discussing the book. Click here to see the other blogs that are discussing about the book!

Kevin Vanhoozer Interview

From the title I think you must have wondered that I interviewed Kevin Vanhoozer. But truth be told, I got this from another blog. Click here to follow the link. Vanhoozer is one of my favorite theologians although i'm still working out on understanding some of the things he is saying. So a tad of appreciation and frustration all jumbled up into one here. If you know some of his writings could you please guide me through some of his books. I started reading "Is there a meaning in this text" a few months back but it's definitely a hard read. I probably need some foundational knowledge to get thorough it for this time being, so if you can help me do tell me something about the book to add enthusiasm to my reading. And according to the interview that particular book, Zondervan will release a 10th anniversary addition with a new introduction by Craig Bloomberg and a 3500-word preface by Professor Vanhoozer! So if you haven't bought the book yet wait for that one to be released. Coming next year as well, two new books by Vanhoozer will be released! Details again from the interview. So a lot to look forward to!

Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus (Thoughts & Reflections) Introduction

Let me begin by thanking Lois Tverberg (co-author of "Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus") for being gracious enough to send me a copy of the book (especially when I'm in Malaysia, that is a considerable great distance from the States!) and giving me the opportunity to blog about it! A special shout out to Kurt as well over at Groans From Within who was thoughtful enough to recommend my blog as a possible reviewer of the book. Do follow his discussion of the book over at his blog:

Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus Intro; Can we find a more Jewish Jesus?
Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus 1; Do You have the 'anointin'?

Today I will start to do a blow by blow reflection as well as some thoughts on each chapter of the book. So if you have the time, join in the conversation. Your comments will be greeted with open arms. If you haven't been following, I have already done a review of the book here on my blog which you can see here.

Thoughts and Reflection

One of the things that has bothered me whenever I read the gospels before was the puzzling effect that it had on my mind. This has been a lifelong (well maybe not lifelong, i just tend to exaggerate sometimes) struggle for me from time to time. I had a hard time reading the Sermon on the Mount because it seemed to run counter with Paul's gospel. At some points Jesus seemed a far more striker Lord then some might want him to be; 'meek and mild'.

At points I simply get frustrated with Jesus' parables and sayings, simply foreign. Foreign might be an understatement but, foreign might be a better description for labeling Jesus' words. Why foreign? Because Jesus lived in a time when our values did not exist. He lived in a cultural background that had different thought patterns than what we might have now. Another factor to the foreignness of Jesus is, his nationality; he was a Jew.

In the introduction page, the authors says that,“The goal of this book is not so much to help you understand Judaism as to help you hear Christ’s life-changing words with greater clarity and force.” (8) With this, one could come to the conclusion that studying Jesus' Jewishness brings together clarity and force to words that would have been lifeless or sounded clueless to our ears. But some people might cringe to this proposal. Take these quotes from Piper in his book "The Future of Justification" on sources bearing in mind Jesus' cultural context,

"...the interpreter may misunderstand the first-century idea." (34)

"...while it may accurately reflect certain first-century documents, nevertheless it may reflect only one among many first-century views." (35)

"...while the New Testament writer may embrace the external idea in general, a scholar might misapply it to the biblical text." (36)

The overall view is that it is simply impossible to reach a consensus on what is true of Jesus' first-century context and therefore the probability of distorting the text is considered high. Though I am aware of the difficulty of this should navigating our way to clearly understand God's words in the context of his chosen people deter us from taking the plunge? Lois and Ann continue on to say that,

“We have also been careful to place Jesus within his first century Jewish context rather than that of later ages. We hope the end result will be of help to pastors, students, and lay people who find their reading of the bible all the more fascinating and life transforming as they come to appreciate and understand the Jewish context that shaped it.” (8)

For me, based on Lois and Ann's findings which they have projected in the book, their take on Jesus' first-century background is refreshing breath of fresh air. Although those who might be curious to find out where they got their sources could look up the page on the books that they researched through. I would not go as far as saying that they have covered all the bases on first century issues because i'm not an expert in this field yet (hopefully someday) but there is a degree of humility resonating all throughout the book.

To conclude this post, Jesus' Jewish context might be a new field of study, but non the less a minefield you might want to look at seriously simply for the fact that clarity abides there. This calls for a restructuring in how we used to view Jesus. For me personally, understanding Jesus in his Jewishness makes things more clearer.

Books that deconstructed the monkey

I figure it would be a good idea to write a post listing some books that began the evolution of this blog as well as my thoughts and renaming it "Deconstructing the Monkey". When i started the blog the title i put up was "My Creed" (ala Jesus Creed; I'm a McKnight fan apparently) but it felt unoriginal. I think when we start something that happens. So, here is a list of books that effected my head and the ideas projected on this blog in no particular order:

• The Emerging Church- Dan Kimball
• Jesus Creed- Scot McKnight
• Christ Plays in Ten Thousand Places- Eugene Peterson
• No Perfect People Allowed- John Burke
• Irresistible Revolution- Shane Claiborne
• Good News and Good Works- Ronald J. Sider
• Simply Christian- N. T. Wright
• Evil and the Justice of God: N. T. Wright
• A New Vision For Israel- Scot McKnight
• Velvet Elvis- Rob Bell
• The New Christians- Tony Jones
• Lost In Transmission- Nicholas Perrin
  
• The Blue Parakeet- Scot McKnight
  
• The Last Word- N. T. Wright
• A Generous Orthodoxy- Brian McLaren
• Blue Like Jazz- Donald Miller
• Searching For God Knows What- Donald Miller
• The Lost Message of Jesus- Steve Chalke, Alan Mann
• The Secret Message of Jesus- Brian McLaren
• Jesus Mean and Wild- Mark Galli
• Jesus and the Victory of God- N. T. Wright
• The Reason for God- Tim Keller
• The Moral Vision of the New Testament- Richard Hays
• The Jesus I never Knew- Philip Yancey
• Celebration of the Disciplines- Richard Foster
• Divine Conspiracy- Dallas Willard
  
• Inspiration and Incarnation- Peter Enns
• Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus- Ann Spangler, Lois Trevberg

There are other books, and to list them all down would take up a lot of space. So, i guess i should stop here for the moment.

Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus (a review)

I somewhat vaguely remember the time when I was able to merge the words ‘Jesus’ and ‘Jewish’ together. Jesus was always depicted as a white guy with straight blond hair, blue eyes, neatly trimmed beard and a flowing white robe. But thanks to Philip Yancey’s “The Jesus I Never Knew”, it suddenly made sense that Jesus was indeed a Jew and being a Jew, lived in a Jewish setting and a Jewish way of thinking. That was my introduction into Jesus and his Jewish context. Given the amount of understanding I had then, I had a hard time stranding the thoughts of the book together. Not that Yancey was an awful writer, but I did not have enough introductionary knowledge to jump into the conversation.

But fast forward now, authors like N. T. Wright and Scot McKnight have been authors that had helped me immensely in sojourning the field of the first-century context of Jesus. But only after reading some short introductionary articles on the web by these authors and countless others was I able to understand some of the terms and views that were presented.
To be able to dive into a certain field of study it is important for any student to start with a book detailing introductions on that certain subject. I’m happy to state now that this book, “Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus” by Ann Spangler and Lois Tverberg is a godsend because it is a helpful book in the veins of an introduction to the Jewish background of Jesus.

The book is divided into 14 chapters and with helpful Appendices pages, notes and indexes. At 272 pages, I would say the book is about the right size for an introductionary book, not too thin and it’s not too thick either (although personally I prefer another 50 or more pages.)

The authors state that they have been “careful to place Jesus within his first-century context rather than of the later ages” and hope that the book would be of help to “pastors, students and laypeople who find their reading of the bible all the more fascinating and life transforming as they come to appreciate and understand the Jewish context that shape it”. I think the authors do exceptionally well in doing what they described without getting the reader entangled with details of dates as well as myriads of views on cultural background. Their approach is concise as well as accessible. For example in chapter one on the word anointing, particularly in the passage where Mary anoints Jesus with expensive perfume, the authors state that there is another side to understanding this than just the description that Mary was only doing it, un-be-knowingly, to prepare for Jesus’ burial (Matt 26:12). Anointing carries the meaning that Jesus was the anointed one, taking the context of how anointing in Jewish eyes and senses captured the moment. Passages in the OT also are brought into attention to build on the meaning. I don’t think readers will find it difficult to strand together as well as explain. They are simply concise and informative.

That is just one of the countless examples though. Moving on, an initial observation again toward the book is its presentation of the values and customs of the Jewish people which do more than just appease the appetite of the mind. The Jews valued community more base on what I read. In a chapter on haverim, which simply means a student having a study partner for male student and haverah for female student, we get the picture that Jews look at the process of studying differently. They preferred to study in community, together with a group and debates were part of their study nature. Such a different study culture compare to my Malaysian context, especially with debate taking primal role in studying.

I find myself appreciating Jewish liturgy and their formal prayer which some are read from scripture or passed down from tradition which was refreshing. I have also gained some understanding about how Jews viewed the law as we often call it not as a set of rules but a book that God gave out of his grace to show them how to live. I think there are some things in the book that might just shake the sock off our thinking and I hope would ultimately revise of deconstruct previous held positions and reconstruct better grounded views of scriptural understanding and faith. Another thing that made the book accessible was that it had these short concise frames on the sides to explain Jewish words and terms if readers were unfamiliar with them. This sure beats the constant flipping to the back of the book which explains the terms. This book has both the side bar meanings which are concise as well as an appendix page for meaning of the words in a more detailed manner.

Overall, I was not disappointed by the book at all. I was at first skeptical when I first became aware of the book, of whether it would be able to attain to a standard that I had for a book on the subject of dating Jesus in his first-century Jewish context. I think that is the danger if we just stick to a selected group of writes in whom we trust regarding their scholarship. But I have to say that the information in this book has been very helpful, and that is to say the least. I would easily recommend the book to anyone having no background on the subject. But I would not just say this book is just for beginners, it’s for anyone curious enough to dive into the study of Jesus’ Jewish context. You will be richly bless by Ann and Lois’ insights. The book might renew also your desire in “sitting at the feet of rabbi Jesus”.

The same Review is also on amazon. See here.

And starting next week, I will be blogging my reflections and thoughts on each chapter of the book.

THE UNLIKELY DISCIPLE: A Sinner’s Semester at America's Holiest University

This book by Kevin Roose sound interesting. The book is entitled, "THE UNLIKELY DISCIPLE: A Sinner’s Semester at America's Holiest University", which i should add does has the capacity to catch our attention. I enjoyed the video and if there was a possibility I'd get my hands on the book for sure. I'm just curious. You can check his website.

Stay tuned: "Sitting at the feet of Rabbi Jesus"

One of the great things about getting involved in the blogging is having such privileges of posting reviews, reflections, thoughts on books, moreover, if you get the chance to get copies for free. So starting next week I will be posting a review and some reflections on this book entitled "Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus" by Ann Spangler and Lois Tverberg. It's a smashing book to say the least, and the main attraction about the book is it deals on issues of viewing Jesus in his Jewish context. I'll refrain from explaining more at this point though and will keep them for the coming week.

For more information about the book and also the authors go to their website at Our Rabbi Jesus. Or simply go to the Zondervan page.

InterVarsity Press interviews Wright and a book

I was browsing InterVarsity Press' web page searching for book and I stumbled on this interview that N. T. Wright had with the publishers on his book "Justification". You can check the book out on the web page by clicking here and you can download free sample chapters from the book as well.

And while I'm on this, i might direct your attention to this book entitled "The Next Evangelicalism" by Soong-Chan Rah. What caught my attention was this piece of information about the book, "In this book professor and pastor Soong-Chan Rah calls the North American church to escape its captivity to Western cultural trappings and to embrace a new evangelicalism that is diverse and multiethnic." Scot Mcknight blurbed about the book as well (although i don't think that it would cause any commotion like the one he did for Wright). So, anything that McKnight endorses is worth reading. For more information go here.

Chasing Francis

I've just finished reading this fictional tale of a pastor getting himself acquainted with the rummaging of postmodernity and the question of how to live his faith in that brooding environment. It has a classic emergent/emerging storyline which appeals to the conversation. The book is entitled "Chasing Francis" and is written by Ian Morgan Cron. I think this book sort of echoes Brian Mclaren's book "A New Kind of Christian", although I'm just guessing this at the moment. But one thing about Cron's book is it's fascination with Francis of Assisi, whose life plays a guiding role in bringing life to the book.

The story starts with the introduction of the main character, Chase Falson, who is depicted as a successful mega church pastor. Falson soon becomes disillusioned with faith as it is played along the lines of certainty and the neat portrayal of Christianity. The death of one of his church member's child had deeply affected him and soon shatters the pretention of meaning on which he broke down in the middle of his 'certainty' and neat theological stance that he had always understood Christianity to be. This soon fueled the church board to give him time off because he was seen as abandoning faith altogether.

His laying off by the church board leads him to a journey or rather a pilgrimage to Italy where he found how it was a Christian lived. With the help of some monks they introduce Falson to the life of Francis of Assisi, someone who was "…a Catholic, an evangelical street preacher, a radical social activist, a contemplative who devoted hours to prayer, a mystic who had direct encounters with God, and someone who worshiped with all the enthusiasm and spontaneity of a Pentecostal. He was a wonderful integration of all the theological streams we have today…"(55). This brings to mind another of Mclaren's work "A Gracious Orthodoxy".

With the quote above in mind, I think I have done enough (I hope) to explain the main thrust of the book. The fictional story plays around these themes and presents a need for us to embrace a more holistic outlook of our Christian faith and engagement as followers of Jesus. It also falls along the lines of a critique of the modern church in its, all too often, narrow description of being a Christian and the church. But with that, this quote would redeem the negative critique of Christendom in a more fashionable way,

"Francis, you changed the church (in fact, you reevangelized it)-not through being critical but through forming a community that confounded it. For the last few years, I've been a self righteous critic of the church and all of Christendom, and I need to give that up. Sister Irene told me the other day that "no one else is your problem but you." Maybe I should try to live the "gospel without gloss" and keep my mouth shut?" (155)

But I would add that keeping our mouths totally shut would not also contribute to changing the status quo. I think what it means here is we have a responsibility more in living out what we believe as opposed to just a mere criticism of the present condition of church.

All in all, I enjoyed the book immensely because the story does in some ways reflect a journey I am all too familiar with. I would gladly recommend it to anyone who has time to read and reflect with an open heart and mind. You might find yourself also, like Falson, chasing Francis.

Faith-Sacrifice-Testing-Faith

I have been really slacking on two post series that i started (one on Peter Enns book and the other one on Virgin Birth). Sometimes you do something and the emotional pull of things that happen around you hits like a wave. At these times I'm pretty glad that i could still gather some thoughts here and there. If I'm lucky, i can think straight and come up with some worthy thinking on a post, well at least worthy to me that is.

Stuck in a rut at the moment and it really is draining my energy. Sometimes i wonder how Abraham does it. His walk of faith is remarkable not to mention the strain of years. I'm reading through Eugene Peterson's "The Jesus Way" and the chapter on Abraham is pretty amazing (although i had trouble reading the chapter on Moses. Really messed with my head. Anyone read the book? I could use your insights here.).

Let me quote some profound stuff that I read on Abraham chapter

"Untested faith does not yet qualify for faith." (57)

"The test is the catalyst in which our response to god, the raw material of faith, is formed into a life of faith. Or not. If the test dissolves whatever we were calling faith into romanticized sludge or pietistic ooze, we are blessedly rid of what will dissipate our life in self-deception."(57)

In other words, faith to be faith must be tested to examine the quality. Testings purify or more likely, sheds the unnecessary ounces that we gather to be faith. I really like what is said here. But it is another thing if we are to embody this sort of thinking. I would add another thing though. Maturity in faith is spelled 'Trust'. After all the sacrifices and testing going on and purging faith, or what you though faith was, the refines fire works through and yields a life of trust. Sometimes there is a slight wish that mature faith or trust to yield its fruit in an instant. I would like it that way. Wouldn't all of us?

The road from infant faith to maturity in faith is laden with sacrifices and testings, the things that happen in the in between of life. But yet, after we have arrived to maturity in faith, we stary another journey again. The only difference is we dont really have to struggle between the goads too much.

At the end of the chapeter Peterson brings up this line

Lk 22:42 “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”

My initial response now would be, "Lord increase my faith." But I know he would just say, "It's not about me increasing your faith, it's about you discovering it." I'd like to think that's what he would say.

The View from the Mastaba

This article by Gary M. Burge on how the cultural context of the gospels colors our reading of the NT, in this case the Gospels, is a good reminder to us on the how we labor through find the meaning of the text with regards to what we are to consider as solid historical/cultural facts. As daunting as the task, it is nonetheless rewarding. Burge mentions a splendid book; "Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes:Cultural Studies in the Gospels" by Kenneth E. Bailey, which is on my bookshelf. I haven't gone through it yet though. Hope you will benefit from the article.

4 or 5 point pamphlets or the whole biblical narrative

An excerpt from Donald Miller's "Searching for God Knows What";

"Earlier the same year I had a conversation with my friend Omar, who is a student in a local college. For his humanities class, Omar was assigned to read the majority of the Bible. He asked to meet me for coffee, and when we sat down he put a bible on the table as well as a pamphlet containing the same five or six ideas Greg had mentioned. He opened the pamphlet, read the ideas, and asked if these concepts were important to the central message of Christianity. I told Omar they were critical; that, basically, this was the gospel of Jesus, the back bone of Christian faith. Omar then opened the bible and asked, "If these ideas are so important, why aren't they in this book?"
"But the scripture references are right here,"I said curiously, showing to Omar that the verses were printed next to each idea.
"I see that," he said. "But in the bible they aren't concise like they are in this pamphlet. They are spread out all over the book."
"But this pamphlet are the summations of the ideas," I clarified.
"Right," Omar continued, "but it seems like, if these if these ideas are that critical, God would have taken the time to make bullet points out of them. Instead he put some of them here and some of them there. And half the time, when Jesus is talking, he is speaking entirely in parables. It is hard to believe that whatever it is He is talking about can be summed up this simply." " (p 152)

Taking Jewish context into consideration

I'm going through John Piper's "The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright" at the moment and just arrived at chapter 3. Obviously I'm taking my time to read and think through the book. One thing that I found notable to note at the moment upon the few pages that I have just skimped through is that Piper 'disregards' reading the NT taking into consideration of it's Jewish context. Although he criticizes Wright's heavy usage of first-century thought in understanding Paul and also the NT and gives some needed warnings on leaning too much on it in our reading and understanding I'm not convinced with his argument. Reading the first chapter kind of gave way to the framing of his ideas and understanding the doctrine of justification which seems obvious taking the cover of his book into consideration.

One of the things that has attracted me to Wright's writings and thought of Jesus and the NT is namely the framework that he uses to frame the understanding. I like the stance of understanding Jesus in his Jewish context. I would say it illumines the NT to the point of understanding it better. Why so?

Let me frame this in one of the struggles I had with the bible and my christian faith. Being a new christian, one of the things that bothered me was Paul's constant use of "first for the Jew, then for the Gentile". Although I was happy being a follower of Jesus, it bothered me that reading the NT there was a lot of Jewish stuff having notable mention (I secretly wished that I was a Jew to be honest because Gentiles seemed second class citizens!). The framework of Jews working for their salvation (self righteousness) and the notion of Jesus coming to fulfill the righteous requirement of the law because we could not fulfill it was something I found incomplete. Even the gospel message that explained Genesis 1-3 where we in the beginning were supposed to have relationship with God and sin came in the was by route of the Fall. God's remedy was to send Jesus to die for our sins and we to believe in this wonderful sacrifice.

In all this framework shaping our christian faith, it seemed that there was no room for the OT, particularly in God's election of a nation, Israel, as God's plan of redemption. The gospel presentation that I was taught cut out this vital element of God's plan by simply throwing Jesus in the picture without any reference to his Jewish upbringing and thought life as a Jew. The OT and NT seemed very different reflections on God and by far miles apart.

My first encounter with taking Jesus' Jewishness seriously was Philip Yancey's "The Jesus I Never Knew". I'm sorry to say that I thought that this understanding was revolutionary, something new even. I think it shows how far we have wandered off in taking Jesus' Jewish context seriously, at least that is how I would state it. My journey in taking Jesus' Jewishness seriously was further aroused reading an article from Christianity Today (February 8, 1999 edition) with a special section entitled "The New Theologians". The article focused on 5 theologians of note; Richard Hays, Kevin Vanhoozer, Miroslav Volf, Ellen T. Charry and N. T. Wright. I like the article so much that I vowed to own and read books by these authors of whom I put as my new heroes. I can say that this was the day that I stared to think that being a scholar was cool or in the eyes of some the day I was converted to dweeb land. I can safely say that I own a substantial amount of their works in my library (I have 3 of Hays', 4 of Vanhoozer's, 1 of Volf's and Charry's and the bulk of Wright's work!). Of all the authors mentioned here it was my reading of Wright that propelled and compelled me further in really taking Jesus' Jewishness seriously.

Reading the bible after reading it 'Wrightly' has made the bible more readable in the sense that the context and framework that Wright proposes for us to gives understanding of God's big picture; His grand story of redemption (Genesis- Abraham and Israel- Jesus and the Church).