Ant

IT was wet!!!, originally uploaded by a_dOgshOw.

IT was wet!!! Our college, George Whitefield, held a day of evangelism. it was a chance for the students to go out into the community to meet people and chat to them about Jesus. For some of them, it was the first time they would do something like this. And so it was a real paradigm shift in terms of thinking about reaching the lost for the sake of the Gospel for some of the students.

I was wondering what you might think of walk up evangelism? In other words, just walking up to someone and asking them a few questions hoping to chat about Jesus? Does it work? Does it need to work? Does it have a place in the context of the local church?

Either way, it was great day and my friend Chester and his wife Ka as well as myself were able to have tea with some people and we all fell into a very fruitful conversation about religion, God, the environment and Jesus.  Did i mention it was raining the whole time!?!  Yes, it was!

Pictured here is Steph, Ka, Chester, Kim and myself (L-R).

IMG_0843Edit, originally uploaded by a_dOgshOw.

Its colourful!

Book Review

Difficult Doctrine of Love- DA Carson

God is Love- Chapter 2

John writes, “God is love” (14:8, 16).  I wonder what that brings to mind when a verse like this read.  For me, I have to stop myself from casting it into a mould that I think is definitive and true.  The reason being that my understanding of love is probably pretty bad!  What’s more, I have a sneaking suspicion that my understanding of biblical love may be a little less nuanced than what is presented in the Scriptures.

Carson understands this point, we have all have a particular grasp of what we think love means but this may be because we have distorted it according to the experiences we have had with it in relating to this world.  Thus we fail to take into account a holistic, biblical understanding of this doctrine.

So how do we proceed?  How do we begin to understand John’s idea that God is love without missing the bigger picture?  In this chapter he helpfully outlines how not to proceed.

I think we have all heard a sermon, talk or someone speaking about the different Greek words that are used for love, brotherly love etc. 
Carson makes the point that in days gone by, older methods of systematic study of the Bible would include a Word study.  Taking the word and finding its meaning and thus importing that meaning into whatever text that it appears.  This method is discussed in his book, Exegetical Fallacies.  His conclusion?  This is a false method of understanding various doctrines as it breaks down when we use a wooden definition of a word and import it into various texts with differing contexts.  For instance the same word agape in the John passage is used by Paul when describing the love that Demas had for the world (2 Tim 4:20) in the verb form.  The problem is apparent, how can the positive love that John sees as inherent to the nature of God be the same love that Demas has for the world and is condemned for by Paul. 
Carson’s point?  “We cannot begin to fathom the nature of the love of God by something as superficial a methodologically flawed word studies.” 

So if this is wrong way to go, what is the right way?  Text within context.  The simplest and most profound exegetical tool anyone who reads the Bible must understand and master.  Keep the passage and the Doctrine within the context that it is placed. 
Carson look as at John 15: 16-30 as a case study to make his point.  This is partly because essential to understanding Johannine theology is in grasping two important facets of John’s Gospel.  Firstly, the Son by his obedience to the Father, doing only what his Father gives him to do and saying only what the Father tells him to say, is a way in which Jesus reveals the Father perfectly demonstrating the nature and the love of God (in our passage of John 15: 16-30).  Secondly, this self revelation of God through his Son is not only indicative of the Love that God shows for mankind but demonstrated the immense love He has for His Son.  This creates the standard of God’s love and comes to bear upon our minds when John says, “He so loved the World that he sent his Son”.  Can you see the connection?  The intra Trinitarian love and relationship of the God is the paradigm for which we must understand God’s love.  How do we know what that would look like?  Jesus reveals it on earth in his life, ministry, teachings, death and resurrection.  It is the kind of relationship that Christ demonstrates with His Father that then becomes the bench mark for understanding the nature or God when we say He is love.  Carson carries on with the text fleshing out some of the ideas within it, but I’ll leave that to you to work on.

Finally he concludes with two observations.  The first is linked to the Father revealing his plans to the Son.  Some have argued that there was gradual revelation that the Father gave to Jesus, that in his pre-incarnate state of the Son was not shown all that God had planned.  This is linked to a discussion over our passage of the difference between the Incarnate Word and the pre-incarnate Word.  This view sees that the title Son was only given to the incarnate Jesus and not before.  At the end of this
Carson concludes that the biblical texts show that at no point in the Trinity was there lack or various levels of love: in eternity past the Father loved the Son and the Son loved the Father.  There has always been a love relationship within the Trinity expressed in the life of Christ.

The second thing that
Carson brings out is in fact very helpful.  Although there is an equal love between Father and Son, there is equal status or being between Father and Son (against Arianism), there is however a marked distinction between the Father and Son.  The Father is the One who sends, commands and instructs.  The Son in obedience follows all that the Father has shown.  This aspect of the relationships never reversed. 

This has some interesting implications for Christian discipleship.  As God’s people we are to relate to God in a similar manner, our obedience to his will is a demonstration of our love for him, thus our life with God is relational as well as constitutional.  God’s self revelation in Christ sets the paradigm for understanding how we relate to God. Thus John picks up on the idea that Jesus sees us not as slaves but as friends (John15:14-15).

It is only be virtue of the intra Trinitarian love of God that worked out its plan of redemption in fullness of time that we are able to call ourselves, Friends of God. 

It comes, originally uploaded by a_dOgshOw.

God of Wonders!

Difficult Doctrine of Love

D.A Carson

Chapter One

On Distorting the Love of God

Carson begins his first chapter by making the point that the doctrine of God is made difficult to understand, not necessarily because it is beyond comprehension or explanation as if locked away in the great mystery of emotion.  But people have managed to distort the concept of God and therefore distort what his love is.

He gives five brief reasons for his idea.

Firstly, he sees that the Doctrine of love is made difficult because of the plurality of opinions of whom or what God is; therefore defining the love of God becomes even more difficult.Secondly, Carson sees the disbelief and questioning of other characteristics of God that are essential to Christianity and a biblical understanding of God’s Love.  Thus, God’s wrath, his sovereignty, providence and personhood are all questioned in some way and diminished.  Not only is the beginning of creating a God in our own image, but this naturally affects how we understand his love.  In a sense God becomes more human.Thirdly, the effect of an ever shifting Post-modern epistemology within the Western culture at least, has made it difficult to critically evaluate false doctrines.  Thus Carson asserts that in a Post modern context people believe that the only heresy left is that there is such a thing as heresy.  I guess this is a small example of how Post modernity may not stand up to its own scrutiny.   So, since a Post modern context enforces the idea that all religious views are equal and winning someone to your own is seen as arrogant and evil, the love of God falls prey to a kind of syncretistic sentimentalizing that falls far short of a biblical view of God’s love.  Fourthly, Carson frustratingly breezes past an essential comment.  He basically asserts that because people tend to concentrate on a single aspect of the nature of God over an above other aspects of his nature and character, they inevitably alienate other aspects by pitting them against each other in a way that is unnatural and unbiblical.  So, in other words, God’s love and God’s wrath are created as equal opposites since our brains (for lack of a better explanation) cannot fuse together the justice of God, the evil of this world and his gracious love.  The reason I think is that humans are very rarely able to balance ideas about God and the Bible in a sort of 3 dimensional manners.  We see things in linear, boxed categories that often come to exclude each other.  We then import that into our systematics creating a version of God that has gone schizophrenic.Fifthly, Christians can often make the mistake of over looking the distinctions of how the bible presents that love of God.

Different ways in which the Bible presents the Love of God.

At this point Carson looks at a number of passages that contain the theme of God’s love expressed in various ways.  I will not expound on these at length, but they each serve to illustrate his fourth and fifth point.  Because we tend to emphasize one proposition over and above other propositions, we naturally alienate the various propositions that Biblically fit together.  And so he surveys a number of ways in which the bible presents God’s love.  I guess the question might be, have you concentrated on one aspect of this doctrine?  I’ll list some of the passages he quotes, do some homework and check them out.

1)      There is a peculiar love between the Father and Son, and Son and Father.  John 5:20 and 14:31 display a unique and paradigmatic intra-Trinitarian love.

2)      God’s providential love over all he has made.  God’s love for his creation is expressed in declaring it good (pre-fall Genesis 1-2) but even now as he provides for it.

3)      God’s salvific love toward his Creation.  John 3:16, the kosmos reveals that God is interested in restoration not only of a particular part of creation but of all.  Paul’s understanding of God’s restoration plan in Col 1:15-23 is telling.  Notice the order in which he presents God’s restoration, Universe, church individual.  (More of that in a later post)

4)      God’s particular effective, selecting love toward his elect.  This is a distinct theme from the others, God’s choosing of
Israel was not arbitrary nor compulsive.   There was nothing the caused God to love them, they brought nothing that could earn his love, rather He loved them out of his desire to glorify Himself in their redemption (Deut 7: 7-8 cf. 4: 37).  So when
Israel is contrasted in the Bible with the nations or universe, it has nothing to do with their ethnicity, but rather God has chosen to love them.  In a similar way, God has love the Church, the Bride (Ephesians 5:25).

5)      Sometimes God’s love is said to be directed toward his own people in a conditional way- conditional on their obedience.  This is in a nutshell the basis of the relationship that God cut with
Israel.  Jude exhorts his readers to “keep yourself in God’s love” v21.  Relating to God is based on a covenantal relationship of obedience to him.  Our obedience is a reflection of our love for him, without his grace in our lives to obey (ie love him) his wrath would only be known.

            The rest of the chapter Carson helpfully strings these five assertions together.  He makes that point that leaving one on its own becomes a restrictive grid that alienates the others.  The point being, keep the full counsel of God in its multi faceted presentation of God in balance as we seek to explain the Creator’s love to others.  He also makes the point that the bible does not compartmentalize these ideas of God’s love.  They are nor separated loves of God. 

            He draws his conclusions upon two evangelical clichés:

1)      God’s love is unconditional: Yes and no.  God’s love is unmerited but disobedience will not go unpunished. 
Israel learnt this the hard way.

2)      God loves everybody equally: God lovingly provides for all creation, but his election of some shows a marked distinction between his creation and his people.

The House of Coffee, originally uploaded by a_dOgshOw.

My favourite coffee house in Kalk Bay…

And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.

 Praise God for our Great Salvation and Hope on this Easter day!