Theology from Narrative
In our Old Testament Theology seminar, we recently began discussing the book An Old Testament Theology: an exegetical, canonical, and thematic approach by Bruce Waltke (with Charles Yu). In the preface of their book, the authors suggest that one of the reasons that Christians have a hard time understanding the Old Testament is that in the Old Testament, information about God is presented in a narrative (story) format, not in a systematic, propositional format. Since this discussion, I have been thinking about developing an understanding of God (theology) from narrative.
I am using the phrase “theology from narrative” instead of the more popular “narrative theology” because the latter has taken on a technical meaning. I do not want to confuse this technical meaning with our discussion here, although the two may be related.
In the opening discussion of the Old Testament, Waltke states:
Much of the Old Testament is artistic narrative. Through narrative the prophet historian aims to shape the people of God according to Israel’s covenant ideals: Abrahamic, Sinaitic, and Davidic… Israel’s history is full of plots and intrigues, but the inspired narrators expose the human heart and God’s responses. Their narrative plots educate the reader not by preaching or sermonizing, but by showing and enthralling. The narrators rely on a well-disposed, active reader who takes the plot to heart and lets it be inscribed in the soul. (pg 9-10)
Thus, the theology of the Old Testament is presented to the reader in story form – not in a systematized form. By the way, “story” or “narrative” is not the same as fiction. A story can be true or false.
Furthermore, Waltke suggests that most Christians today do not know who they are because they do not read the Old Testament as the story of their own history, but instead attempt to force the text of the Old Testament to fit structures within which it was never intended to fit:
The Old Testament contains much that seems trivial to the modern Christian. That is because we fail to understand the functions of these texts. Aside from teaching us about God, sin, and the need for redemption, a significant portion of the Old Testament recounts the history of the people of God. These are the narratives that constitute the memories of the Christian community. These memories inform our identity as Christians. Thus, Abraham is our spiritual father. His story becomes part of our past…
This is one of the most powerful functions of the Old Testament; unfortunately, it is also one of the least understood among the community of faith. In sum, a goal of this theology (speaking of their book) is to help the covenant community understand their identity as the people of God within the context of the memories and hopes proclaimed in the Old Testament…
Correlatively, I hope to transform the Old Testament from a portrait gallery of isolated icons of the faith like Abraham and Moses to a dynamic, unified narrative in which by-gone heroes of faith and today’s saints – and that encompasses all who are made holy by faith in Jesus Christ – participate. The heroes of the Old Testament began the story, those of the New Testament carried it forward, and the church continues it until God finishes it. This unified history will give the reader a synoptic view of the Old Testament and help make sense of its parts.
To many Christians the Old Testament is an unfamiliar and untamed terrain. Although occasional panoramic peaks of grandeur jut out, its landscape appears to them to be mostly barren rocks and flat desert plains. Moreover, dangers lurk for those who seek to tame the land through strict doctrinal systems; the ground rebels against their hands. (pg 14-15)
In this long passage (and I apologize for the length of the quote, but the entire section is necessary to get the authors’ point across), Waltke consistently stresses the fact that the Old Testament is a narrative and should be treated as a narrative. There are certainly dangers in treating the text as a story (even though it is a story), but as they say, there are also dangers in trying to systematize the text into “strict doctrinal systems”.
If we are to understand God through the story, then any type of summary of the story will necessarily leave out details. Perhaps the one who summarizes decides that those details are not important, but that is an interpretive decision, not a neutral decision. Similarly, there are hermeneutical and interpretive decision that must be made about which parts of the story apply only to the characters in the story (Noah building the ark, for example), and which parts of the story apply to everyone (Abraham being justified by faith, for example). Again, these are not neutral decisions.
There is a reason that we are given Scripture in narrative form. And, here, I would argue that even the New Testament is given to us primarily as narrative – even the epistles have a narrative backdrop that must be taken into account in order to understand what the author is saying. Any time we summarize Scripture we necessarily create a system that does not completely match the text of Scripture, and therefore is not completely revealing what we need to know about God. In fact, in many cases, summaries and systematizations may actually contradict what is taught through the story of Scripture.
When we want people to understand God, our best option is to present them the story as presented by Scripture, not to present them with a list of summary statements. I agree with Waltke that focusing on systematized theology leads to a general ignorance about Scripture and about God. As he says, “The consequence of a general ignorance about the Old Testament among the people of God is a pervasive reduction of the full message of the New Testament to a basic gospel of atonement and individual ethics.” (pg. 16)
Thinking about Injustice
A very familiar passage is found in Micah:
What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? (Micah 6:8 ESV)
Since I’m planning to participate in two upcoming synchroblogs that deal with justice, I’ve been thinking about justice and injustice. A conversation that I had last weekend triggered even more thoughts about injustice.
A friend of mine is a vegetarian. Every time the topic is brought up, she would say that she would love to explain why she is a vegetarian sometime, but the time never came up… until this weekend. She explained that she was a vegetarian because of her concerns about injustice – particularly, concerns about the treatment of animals. She made it clear that this was something that she wast struggling with herself, and she was not making a blanket statement that eating meat was bad. In fact, she said that once she had settled the issue in her mind, and once she was convinced that she was consciously thinking about the source of the meat, she would probably begin eating meat again. However, for now, she has decided not to eat meat so that she would not perpetuate any animal cruelty that may be involved.
Recently, I had a conversation with another friend who is very concerned about human trafficking. She is helping to start a student group on campus whose goal is to educate people about trafficking around the world. Again, I have been affected by her passion to reduce injustice.
I appreciate their concerns about injustice, which has helped me further my own thinking about injustice. We know that there is injustice in the world. And, we know that many times oppression, forced labor, child labor, etc. is used to produce many of the products that we use from day to day. To be honest, I am not ready to give up those products, but my friend’s decision to give up meat has caused me to begin thinking through many buying decisions. I am beginning to recognize more and more that the products that I choose to buy or not buy may tend to perpetuate injustice or perhaps even encourage justice. Previously, most of my buying decision have been based on economics. I would buy the most economical product.
I was raised with the Republican-Christian mindset that economics and religion should be connected. Certainly, there is a grain of truth in that statement. My relationship with God will affect the way that I use money. However, my relationship with God is not necessarily connected to a positive or negative national economy, nor to my own accumulation of wealth. It seems that for many – and I would include myself in this group, though perhaps this is changing – the accumulation of personal and national wealth has become a spiritual gauge.
On the other hand, my relationship with God should definitely affect my relationship with other people and the way that I view people. God’s love cannot coexist with the unjust treatment of people. Thus, as God expresses his love more and more through me, I should expect to become more and more concerned with justice and injustice. I wish that I could say that I currently “do justice” in all of my decisions and actions. But, I can’t say that. However, I continue to see God moving my heart in that direction.
A Revolutionary? Who? Me?
This post is part of a synchroblog organized by Glenn from “re-dreaming the dream” called “Revolutionaries Synchroblog“. When I first read that topic, I thought, “A revolutionary? Who? Me? I’m not a revolutionary!”
According to Wikipedia (which is quickly becoming the Great Big Book of Everything), a revolutionary is “a person who advocates or actively engages in some kind of revolution.” (Don’t you just love circular definitions?) A revolution is “a significant change that usually takes place in a short period of time.” By these definitions, am I a revolutionary? Well, let’s see how Glenn describes “revolutionaries”:
Who have been wounded through serving and separating from “church as they have known it.”
Who are feeling alone, wondering if there is something wrong with their theology, if they suffer from some personality disorder, or if they are doomed to isolation.
Who are former church leaders or staff members trying to find a new sense of direction.
Who eventually want to return to community and fellowship, but not get mired down in the system they left behind.
Who long for a faith community that is vibrant, accepting, and real, that joins in God’s kingdom in practical ways where they live and beyond.
Well, I have not been wounded by the church, though, like all people, I have been hurt by the actions or attitudes of others. I do not feel alone, because God has surrounded me by a great family and wonderful friends. I am not attempting to find a new sense of direction. I do not feel mired down by a system – not usually.
However, the last definition definitely fits me: “I long for a faith community that is vibrant, accepting, real, that joins in God’s kingdom in practical ways where they live and beyond”. As I’m longing for this faith community, I also see God forming this faith community among those believers that he’s brought me into contact. In other words, I long for something that God is already doing in my life and the lives of the people around me.
In that sense, I am not “advocating or actively engaged in” a significant change. So, what am I involved in? I am not trying to change the church so that it looks more like my idea of the church. So, what am I involved it? I am involved in trying to follow Jesus Christ – to walk in the Spirit – to please God by my life. This life, by definition and by passion, causes me to interact with the people around me, and I do desire to see us grow together in maturity toward Jesus Christ. So, perhaps that is the “revolutionary” change.
Some have said that I’m a rebel… or radical… or even an idealist. Some have suggested that I’m simply experimenting with the church. I can understand how some people would see me in this way. I don’t blame them.
But, in reality, I’m not trying to rebel against anyone or anything. I’m simply trying to live in obedience to God. Similarly, I’m not attempting to be radical; I’m not trying to live my life in the various extremes. I’m simply trying to determine what pleases God, and then live that kind of life. Also, I’m not trying to start a “church experiment”. Instead, as I study what Scripture says about the church, I actually try to live that. Perhaps it appears to be an experiment because others are not treating the church in the same manner.
So, am I a revolutionary? Perhaps… it probably depends on your perspective. However, I’m not trying to change you or anyone else. Instead, I’m trying to live as a Christ follower – a disciple. If you are a child of God, then I would love to live this life in Christ along side you.
——————————————————-
Here is a list of other bloggers who are participating in the “Revolutionaries Synchroblog”:
Glenn with “Revolutionaries Synchroblog – Harvey“
Jeff G. with “So you want to change“
Erin with “Are we there yet, Papa Smurf?“
Alan with “A Revolutionary? Who? Me?“
Jane with “Onward Christian Soldier“
Jeromy with “A Safe Place to Experiment“
Barb with “Glenn’s Revolutionaries Synchroblog – My Response“
Jonathan with “Re-Emerging Church“
Jeff M. with “The Great Shift – and My Unwitting Part In It“
Kathy with “Surviving Spiritual Vertigo“
Aaron with “Why I Stayed“
Jim with “There is no spoon“
Sarah with “My story of following him out“
Sin and the church – Part 4
In this series, I’m asking the question, “What should believers do when they discover that another believer has committed sin?” In this final installment, I want to look at a few attitudes that are necessary for us to deal with sin in a biblical and godly manner. I do not suggest that this list is exhaustive. However, I do believe that these attitudes are extremely important for dealing with any kind of sin.
1. Love – We must approach someone who is actively sinning in an attitude of love. Sin fractures relationships – both relationship with God and relationships with others -, and we should desire to reconcile those broken relationships. Thus, approaching someone with the purpose of exposing their sin is not the proper motivation. A desire to show that a person is not as good as people think is not the proper motivation. A desire to get rid of a leader that we do not like is not a good motivation. We should only approach someone who is sinning out of love.
2. Humility – The attitude of humility begins by recognizing our own sinfulness and our tendency to yield to temptation. Thus, Paul’s warns the Galatians that those who are restoring someone caught in a sin should do so while watching out for themselves. This attitude of humility will also tend to dispel any thoughts of self-righteousness, as we recognize that the grace of God is the only reason that we are not caught in the same sin.
3. Understanding – Love and humility – that is, care for the other person and a recognition of our own sinful tendencies – will lead to an attitude of understanding instead of an attitude of condemnation. It is possible to both welcome and accept a brother or sister caught in sin without condoning sin itself. God does this for us.
4. Forgiveness – Forgiveness is very important, but we often overlook forgiveness, or we wave our hand at it as if forgiveness is not necessary. Forgiveness is necessary and it should be spoken to the individual. Let them know that we forgive them as God forgives them.
I would like to add one final thought about sin and the church. We must make the distinction between sin – that is, disobedience to God – and cultural taboos. Every action that we dislike is not sin. If we do not make this distinction, then we are setting our own opinions of attitudes and behaviors on the same level as God’s. To mention two examples, neither drinking alcoholic beverages nor smoking cigarettes are sin. The behaviors may be unwise. They may be unhealthy. They may be dangerous. They may demonstrate other sins such as addiction or drunkenness. But, the activities themselves are not sin, even though they are not accepted in certain cultures.
Sin is devastating. Sin is pervasive. Sin is unnecessary. We can walk in the Spirit and not sin. However, when a brother or sister sins, the church – other believers – must deal with this sin in a godly manner. Let’s not find ourselves sinning in our actions and attitudes when we are trying to help another brother and sister who is sinning.
——————————————————–
Sin and the church – Part 3
When I began this series, I asked the following question: “What should the church (that is, believers) do when they discover that another believer has sinned?” Then, after looking through several passages – especially the Sermon on the Mount and James 2:10 – I concluded that all of us have sinned, and all of us continue to sin. Though God has made a way through Jesus Christ and his indwelling Spirit for us to live sinless lives, we do not walk in complete obedience to him – we are not perfected yet. Therefore, I can ask my original question as follows: “What should sinners do when they discover that another sinner has sinned?”
It is important for God’s people – that is, followers of Jesus Christ – to recognize their own sinfulness before attempting to interact with another believer who is sinning. Many times, it seems, Christians do not recognize their own sinfulness, and instead they approach other sinners with an attitude of self-righteousness.
I’ve talk with many Christians who struggle with sin. Sometimes, these people struggle with “big” sins – that is, sins that the church considers to be unacceptable – not acceptable sins like pride or anger or selfishness or covetousness. No, I’m talking about sexual sins among others. Most of the time, these believers who are struggling with “big sins” are repentant. As I’m discipling them, I tell them that the best thing they can do is confess their sins to the church and ask the church to help them deal with their temptation.
What response do I get? Most of them say that they cannot even return to the group of believers with which they once met, much less confess their sin to them. Why? Because they know they will be condemned by these followers of Jesus. How do they know this? Because they have seen how the church has condemned other brothers and sisters who have committed “unacceptable sins” – that is, sins that are not acceptable to the church.
The church is more than happy to accept those who are proud, resentful, angry, selfish, covetous, etc, even when they are not repentant. But, if someone repents of an “unacceptable sin”, that person is condemned and rejected. This is not the scriptural way to deal with sin.
If we should not deal with repentant brothers and sisters with condemnation – even for big sins – then how should we deal with them? To ask my question again: “What should the church (sinners) do when they discover that another believers (sinner) has sinned?”
——————————————————–
Developing a Biblical Ecclesiology Lecture
Yesterday, I had the awesome opportunity to present a lecture on ecclesiology. Dave Black asked me to speak to one of his New Testament classes on the topic “How has my view of the church and issues related to the church changed in the last few years?”
Besides being honored by the opportunity to speak, I was also thrilled to be able to present a more complete view of my understanding of the church. Here on my blog and in occasional conversations, I usually talk about one or two specific issues related to the church, but I rarely have the opportunity to present an overview of my ecclesiology. I used this lecture as an opportunity to present a more complete explanation of my ecclesiology, as well as an explanation of why I began looking into issues related to the church.
I started the lecture by looking at a few issues of hermeneutics, and asking the following question: When it comes to ecclesiology, do we start with our practices and justify our practices from Scripture; or do we start with Scripture and allow Scripture to both inform and form our ecclesiology? I think the results of these two ways of approaching ecclesiology will lead to vastly different understandings of the church. I also discuss the nature of the church, the meeting of the church, the leaders of the church, and the work of the church.
If you are interested in hearing this lecture (and seeing the PowerPoint presentation that went along with the lecture). you will find links here: www.alanknox.net/resources. Please, pay no attention to the web site. I am not ready to make this site public, but I needed a location to store these files. If you have a comment concerning the lecture or the notes, feel free to leave the comment here.
Sin and the church – Part 2
In this series, I’m looking at the topic of sin and the church. Primarily, I’m asking the question, “What should the church (that is, believers) do when they discover that another believer has sinned?”
In the first post (“Sin and the church – Part 1“), I suggested that neither the holiness nor the purity of the church is dependent upon our actions or inaction. Instead, these are determined by God, in his setting us apart from the world (holiness) and giving us the righteousness of Christ (purity).
To me, this is very important, because as we read through Scripture, we are continually indicted and convicted of being sinners. Last Sunday, I had the opportunity to teach from Matthew 5:27-32:
You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell. It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery. And whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (Matthew 5:27-32 ESV)
In the previous passage of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:21-26), Jesus convicted everyone of murder. He says that if you have hated your brother, then you are guilty of murder. Similarly, in Matthew 5:27-32, Jesus tells us that we are all guilty of adultery in our hearts. While the physical acts of murder and adultery are certainly sin and while they certainly bring about bad consequences in a person’s life, the lust and hatred in a person’s heart is sin, even if the person does not act on the lust and hatred.
For a moment, consider only Matthew 5:31: “But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery.” Imagine a situation where a wife does absolutely nothing wrong (yes, an impossible situation, but imagine it anyway). The wife has no “sexual immorality”, so the “exception clause” (whatever that means) does not apply. Yet, if the husband decides to divorce the wife, Jesus says that the husband has made the wife an adulteress. We can “explain away” Jesus’ words if we want to. But, to me, his pronouncement demonstrates the pervasiveness and inevitability of sin. Primarily, he demonstrates that none of us are innocent. (By the way, this does not get the husband off the hook. I think Jesus had some very negative words to say to those who cause others to sin.)
Of course, even if someone suggests that they have never had lust for another person or never hated another person, James 2:10 makes it clear that we are all both murderers and adulterers:
For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. (James 2:10 ESV)
Remember that James is talking to believers. He is writing to the church and reminding them that they are guilty of breaking the entire law. We are all murderers, adulterers, liars, and thieves. We all dishonor our parents. We all fail to love God. We are all idolaters.
The question from the beginning of this series was, “what should the church do when they discover that another believer has sinned”? This question now becomes the following: what should sinners do when they discover that another sinner has sinned? Putting the question in this light makes it seem different somehow, and perhaps it better demonstrates how we should deal with those who sin.
——————————————————–
A Completely Biblical Church
I’ve decided to begin a new church which I’m calling a Completely Biblical Church – since it is originating completely from Scripture. Trust me… this is completely legitimate… not a joke at all… I wouldn’t lie to you… not today, or all days.
To determine the practices of this church, I’ve scoured Scripture and determined practices that most churches ignore, using the same hermeneutical principles used to determine church practices by other churches today. Here are a few of the new practices along with the texts which demonstrate that these are scriptural practices:
- No church meetings will be held in rooms that are at ground level or below. All meetings will be held above ground level.
He will show you a large upper room furnished and ready… (Mark 14:15)
And when they had entered, they went up to the upper room, where they were staying… (Acts 1:13)
There were many lamps in the upper room where we were gathered. (Acts 20:8)
- Regardless of the start time, every preacher or teacher will continue speaking until midnight (or someone falls out of a window, whichever comes first).
[W]hen we were gathered together…, Paul talked with them…, and he prolonged his speech until midnight. (Acts 20:7)
- Songs will only be sung silently (in the heart). In public, songs will only be spoken out loud.
[S]peaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord in your heart… (Ephesians 5:19)
[S]inging psalms and hymns and spiritual songs with thankfulness in your hearts to God… (Colossians 3:16)
- The people of the church will eat together every day.
And day by day…, they were sharing their food with glad and generous hearts… (Acts 2:46)
- Only young people under 30 will allowed to be leaders.
Let no one despise you for your youth, but set the believers an example in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity. (1 Timothy 4:12)
- Only those with stomach ailments will be allowed to be leaders. Those with other types of ailments will be considered under special circumstances.
No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments. (1 Timothy 5:23)
- All women will give birth in pairs (or more), while a man from the church helps them.
Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored side by side… (Philippians 4:3)
- All prayers will be spoken while kneeling with the hands raised.
For this reason I bow my knees before the Father… (Ephesians 3:14)
I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands… (1 Timothy 2:8)
- A “conversion” will only be considered valid if the “converted” actually falls down on his or her face. If the fall draws blood, the person’s conversion will be considered extraordinary and the person will immediately be entered into a leadership training program and put on a lecture circuit.
But if… an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, the secrets of his heart are disclosed, and so, falling on his face, he will worship God… (1 Corinthians 14:24-25)
- When meeting to pray, the prayer will not end until the meeting place begins to shake.
And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken… (Acts 4:31)
We will continue to study Scripture to determine what activities should be practiced by the members of this church and how those activities should be carried out. Why? Because, we want to make sure that everything we do is completely biblical using the common hermeneutic of today.
If you would like to be part of this church… there’s something wrong with you. Get help immediately.
Sin and the church – Part 1
This series is not about the amount of sin in the church – not exactly. This is not a rant about divorce and adultery and homosexuality and pride and hypocrisy among Christians. Instead, in this post, I’d like for us to think about this question: what should the church (that is, believers) do when they discover that another believer has sinned?
Originally, this was going to be a single post about the issue of adultery. As I’ve mentioned previously, we’re studying through the book of Matthew. We’re currently working our way through the Sermon on the Mount. In the Sermon – especially in chapter 5 – Jesus teaches about sin, in an authoritative manner that amazes the people who hear him. I believe Jesus demonstrates clearly that all of us are murderers, adulterers, liars, and brother-haters. In other words, he shows us the extent of our sin – and it is very extensive.
In this series of posts, I want us to think about sin and how the church should deal with sin. What should we do when someone among the church commits sin.
As we think about this question, let’s recognize two things: 1) the church is holy and 2) the church is pure. Holiness and purity are separate issues, even though they are generally combined, which causes alot of confusion and misunderstanding.
The church is holy (“separate”, “set apart”) because the church has been separated from the world by God. God set the church apart. This is not something that we do; this is an act of God. Now, the way that we live should demonstrate that we are different from the world, but the way that we live does not make us holy. God makes us holy. We are saints (“holy ones”) because we have been given that designation by God.
Also, the church is pure because believers have been forgiven of their sins by God. The church has been made righteous. Again, this is not something that we do. Scripture is very clear that we cannot make ourselves righteous, regardless of how hard that we try. Once again, our lives should demonstrate our purity, but the way that we live does not make us righteous. God makes us righteous. We are righteous because we have become the righteous of God in Christ.
As we think about sin, these two points are very important. Adultery or murder or stealing or any other sin does not make the church un-holy or impure. If sin made the church un-holy or impure then the church would never be un-holy or impure until Christ returns. Thus, dealing with sin is not a matter of protecting the holiness or the purity of the church.
As we continue this series, we’ll continue to ask the question, “How should the church deal with sin?” I hope you decide to take part in the discussion.
——————————————————–
Holiness and Purity in the Church
On Monday, I’m planning to publish a blog post about adultery and the church. Primarily, I want to discuss dealing with believers who commit adultery (and other sins). But, in the process of writing that blog post, I realized that my understanding of holiness and purity in the church may be different than others.
So, I ask my readers the following questions: What does it mean for the church to be holy? What does it mean for the church to be pure? How does the church become holy and pure? How does the church maintain holiness and purity?