The Misunderstood Jew August 29, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Uncategorized.add a comment
Amy-Jill Levine (a Jewish NT scholar) wrote a book called The Misunderstood Jew: The Church and the Scandal of the Jewish Jesus. Focusing on Jesus and his place in Second Temple Judaism directly connects to many of my research interests so it made for an interesting read. Levine first seeks to groudn Jesus within the Judaism of his day; he was a Jew and this cannot be forgotten. One only can truly make sense of his teachings within his Jewish context. Since the New Testament traces the Jewish faith of Christianity turning into more of a Gentile majority, this Jewishness begins to get lost. Often scholars sterotype the Jewishness of the day as an empty, cold, and oppressive system that Jesus confronts and changes; Jesus is the opposite of this system; therefore, it is not just the “anti-Jewish” passages (which scholars can debate the exact meaning) that makes Christianity at times anti-Jewish as preachers focus on these elements and, furthermore, people understand Judaism today on this basis (Second Temple Judaism was not exactly the Judaism of the OT and today’s Judaism is not the same as those). This is not completely true because of the diversity of Judaism at the time of Christ; just as there are joyless Christians today, there were joyless Jews but just as there are Christians who really get the gospel, there were Jews who really understood who the God of Abraham was. We should not sterotype in this regard. She then calls for interfaith sort of discussions recognition the different canons, practices, and interpretations of the groups; since they have different canons (though related) and different traditions, there should be less focus on who is right, as they interpret through different lens in general.
In many ways, this book seeks to unpack some of the “cash value” of what I have been learning about Second Temple Judaism and how it affects the NT and differs from OT and 21st century Judaism. I have seen how I have fallen into some of the traps of ”anti-Jewish” speaking even without knowing and want to better understand Jewish and represent his context better. There is a definite continuity between Jesus and his followers and the OT and the way that the OT was interpreted at the turn of the times (BC to AD/BCE to CE). What Levine does that I would never be able to do is speak about this through a Jewish lens and discuss ways that, unknowingly, we misrepresent Judaism; one must be in a group to truly understand all of its nuances. Which leads me to this question–while Dr. Levine is a fine NT scholar, does the fact that she is a Jew, not a Christian, cause her to misrepresent or mis-represent that church (not necessarily the NT) at times? Just something I pondered while I read this book.
Lewis’ Screwtape Letters August 28, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Books, Spirituality.add a comment
Though I have referred to it before, I had never read C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters until recently. As I read through the letters of the demon Screwtape to his new-tempting nephew Wormwood, I was pleasantly surprised at the insight and focus of these letters, which show the ways that Christians are attacked and often stumble in their faith. Things like the hypocrisy and shallowness of the church, radicalness of different ideas that take one away from Jesus Christ, complacency or apathy when it comes to important issues, etc. were some of the things that are mentioned–and these things are definitely still true today. This leads me to believe that the experiences of early/mid 20th century England and early 21st century America are not that different; in some ways, it is the same issues in our world just recreated each day in new ways. And naming these sorts of dangers is important so that we can confront them. It is also interesting how well this teaches about spiritual warfare and the like through a narrative method; it is a fictional account that embodies and teaches much spiritual truth. May I be attuned to these truths.
What happened to my compassion? August 25, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Spirituality.1 comment so far
I have noticed over the past few weeks that my compassion and concern for others has been wavering and wavering. I have had a tendency to judge others, to consider myself better than others, and to be annoyed/perturbed/short with others. Which makes me wonder–where has my compassion gone? I am no longer looking for the reasons why people are certain ways or thinking through the possibility of doing things ways differently than I do–or for that matter, that people are imperfect and therefore human systems will be imperfect. Why is my day nearly ruined when I have to wait in line at the grocery store because people’s credit cards don’t work right or because of traffic on the road? Why is my schedule and convenience the most important things in my minds?
Better yet, what is the cure? Is it the gospel hope in the fallenness of the world that is being transformed and reconfigured by Christ, that is in the process of happening but not there yet? That I am as broken as others and that I am not the end-all, be-all of the world? I am trying to bring my thoughts there….but it is a daily struggle.
God and Empire August 24, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Books, Politics, Spirituality.add a comment
A growing interest of mine (and of other NT scholars) is the anti-Roman empire rhetoric in the NT. John Dominic Crossan deals with this idea in his God and Empire. In some ways, the impetus is the growing amount of people that the USA is an empire, perhaps even the new form of the Roman empire. This alerts Crossan, as the Bible seems to speak against empire. He finds that violence and oppression is found in every empire. While the OT seems a bit ambigous about whether violence ushers in the kingdom of God, the message of Jesus, according to Crossan, is that violence does not do so. However, American Christians (often associated with pretribulation rapture sort of views) seem to really have an idea that the end will be a violent battle between good and evil, with God winning. Crossan says that this is not what Jesus teaches, nor Paul when one examines his actual writings (not the Deutero- or Pseudo-Pauline letters). The church early on, though, adopted this violent filled, empire sort of rhetoric, with Revelation speaking against Rome but in some ways adopting this same sort of view. Christians need to snap out of this and realize that non-violence, turning the other cheek, taking up one’s cross, etc. is the way that God’s spiritual kingdom comes.
Crossan brings up some good points. Is America a new empire? How should this affect Christians? How does a violent end make sense of the lamb who was led to slaughter? Should the battle imagery of Revelation be seen as more symbolic than concrete? Have Christians too readily adopted the view of empire instead of the anti-empire polemic that fills the NT? I am wrestling with these things, in addition to how to approach Revelation and the wrath of God seen over and over again there.
What I find interesting about much mainline scholarship, though, is that it is able to dismiss elements of Scripture (“Paul didn’t really say that”) or look to small aspects of Scripture of just getting it wrong (which seems to be Crossan’s view of Revelation) without having to deal with the fact that the early church and, really up until the 17th century or s0, saw all these things as being compatible. Could we be the ones who have it wrong? I admit, it is difficult to deal with Revelation 19 and the fact that the vultures eat the flesh of those defeated in the final battle, of the slaughters in Canaan, etc. but I am convinced that I need to deal with all of what is found in the Scriptures, whether I like it or understand it or not. Maybe I am naive, but if so, I think my naiviety makes my method of scholarship more, not less, difficult.
The Secret Message of Jesus August 21, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Books, Spirituality.add a comment
I finished reading Brian McLaren’s The Secret Message of Jesus. I have had a love/hate (though hate is a strong term) relationship with McLaren’s works, as I liked them to start but really got concerned that he deviates from some key biblical doctrines; after taking a break from him, I was able to come to this book with a fresh perspective. I am always hesistant when someone phrases something about the Bible as ”secret” or “hidden” these days, because it usually deals with a conspiracy theory sort of idea, that the church or someone has been blocking it from getting out. I thought this might have been what McLaren would say, but he points to secret in the sense that the parables conceal truth and people must strive to understand it (Matthew 13:13), the very reason that Jesus used parables. I can agree with that; I also like how he pointed to miracles as the demonstration of the message, as living parables in the life of Jesus. He seeks to situate Jesus within his historical and cultural context, always things to be applauded. On the whole, the vision he presents (following Dallas Willard and N.T. Wright) is that of the message of Jesus permeating our lives and living in light of the present reality of the kingdom. Maybe since I have been influenced by those thinkers, it was not ground-breaking. Jesus’ message is so revolutionary, he had to speak it in “riddles” as it threatens every establishment!
McLaren does a good job of trying to get us to examine the teachings of Jesus, but it seems to me like the overlooks the cross; he deals with Paul’s discussion of it as a scandal and as a weakness but does not seem to point to the fact that the cross deals with sin; he affirms the historicity but not the interpretation of the cross as in Mark 10:45, Matthew 26:28, or Romans 3:21-26 (he only deals with Ephesians and Colossians talking about the cross overcoming the evil forces…but what about our individual sin). He does not attack this view per se (as he does not really deal with these passages), but he almost makes it an either/or, either Jesus is about bringing the kingdom now or about dealing with original sin, with the kingdom being where we go when we die (see p.210). That is where I think he misses the point; he does not combine the teachings as we see in 1 Peter 2, the cross is both the way of the way of salvation from sins as well as the example for us as we live out the kingdom.
I liked this book more than I thought I would; it is a good corrective who think that the cross is only about forgiveness and dealing with our sin, but it must be augmented by books like Stott’s The Cross of Christ that deal heavily with the substitutionary atonement element of the cross. We need both to have a fully orbed Christian life, to truly understand the cross of Christ and the message of Jesus.
Footnote: After reading scholars such as Ehrman and Crossan, though, I have to say that I appreciate McLaren more in the sense that he affirms more about the Bible than many mainline scholars would. For example, Paul actually wrote these letters and Jesus actually said these things. So I needto be less harsh on him in the future.
A lot to learn… August 20, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Ministry, School.add a comment
Yesterday, I had my orientation with other students for the Loyola Department of Theology. It was a good time, as I feel like I am getting to know some other new PhD (as well as masters) students, almost making us into a cohort. In case you are wondering, there are only 7 or 8 new students in the PhD program, with only 2 of us in my field. One of my classes will only have 3 people in it! I had a good conversationwith one of my professors over lunch, giving me encouragment in my studies and also making me realize how much I have focused on Jewish backgrounds in my studies of the gospels without thinking through as much of the Greco-Roman (which are actually two different elements in many ways) background in these works as well. A great example of why I am at school, I have a lot to learn and figure out, and glad to be at a spot where I will learn some different methods and tools to further my examinations of the Bible. So for those who think that after 7 years of academic study in the Bible, in addition to all the reading I do, I know it all….I realize I am even farther away than I thought!
Of Providence and Prayer August 17, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Church, Spirituality.add a comment
It is always amazing hte things that that God merges together. Yesterday, I was thinking about some of the struggles I have had lately in maintaining the vibrancy of my prayer life and, lo and behold, the sermon at church on Sunday was about prayer–by one of my favorite professors. While it was not a “ground-breaking” sermon that revolutionaries my prayer life or practice, it was a good confirmation, a subtle rebuke and encouragement, at what I should be thinking about as I ned to spend some time thinking through my prayer life and digging deeper into it. Amazing how you get what you need 
Making excuses…. August 15, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Spirituality.add a comment
I have always tried to be a person who does not make excuses, who faces reality. One of the things that I have noticed in life recently, however, is how often I make excuses and blame others–usually only mentally–for my mistakes, discomforts, and shortcomings. In many ways, I feel like I am a walking embodying of Eden–shifting the blame for my mistake because someone else did something to provoke me to make a mistake. I don’t want to admit my own mistakes and don’t want to admit my blame shifting–because I do not want to admit sin. The good news is that I continually pray every day “forgive me my sins” (though I do need to do a better job of thinking of forgiving others…) and go to a church that has a confession of sin every week–reminding me that I am a sinner. This blame shifting is the latest sin I have discovered in my heart–and all the more reason to give thanks to God through Jesus.
Jesus Creed August 14, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Books, Spirituality.add a comment
I have been looking forward to reading Jesus Creed by Scot McKnight since I heard him discuss it in chapel at TEDS a few years back. The concept of the book is pretty simple; Jesus took the creed of Judaism (Deut 6:4) and added the need to love our neighbors (Lev 19:18) as well in Mark 12:28. Therefore, the goal of the Christian life is to love God and love others; the heart of spiritually is to do both. This then weaves itself out in things like the Lord’s Prayer and the Lord’s Supper, as well as things other stories. The rest of the book presents the Christian life as the outworking of this, looking at stories of the kingdom, values needed in the kingdom, and how to live into it in faith and in union with Christ. He does a good job of weaving biblical stories, stories from church history, and current examples from Christians around the world. It is readable and something I enjoyed is that there are passages in every chapter to read on your own, from which the ideas in the chapters spring. This book is in the same vein as Dallas Willard, John Ortberg, and the rest, but in some ways with even better scholarship (not to knock on them, but to enhance McKnight’s strength). Enjoyable, encouraging, and challenging. For me, something I was challenged as I walk away was to utilize the Lord’s Prayer more and to think through it more as I pray, looking at how I can seek to love God and love others through it.
The Language of God August 13, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Education, Random, Spirituality.add a comment
The relationship between science and faith has often been a contentious one–can one be a believer and a scientist in light of the theory of evolution as well as the strong naturalistic bent of much of the discipline? This is really what leads Francis Collins, the head of the Human Genome project and a Christian, to write this book. It is essentially two parts; the first is his spiritual journey from atheism to Christianity and the second is his views of the relationship between science and faith. It was interesting (as always) to hear someone who came from atheism to Christianity. Two key things stuck out in this section. First, he had always avoided the issue of God and faith for much of his life; it seems that is a comon approach. Secondly, the moral argument for the existence of God, as articulated by C. S. Lewis, really seemed to shape Collins’ journey and faith. On the whole, it is a layperson/common man approach to apologetics (as he has sections on some of the problems of evil). I hope that people realize it is more of a experiential approach to apologetics.
The second half is the more fascinating of the two parts, as he deals with the relationship between science and faith. In this section, Collins first looks at areas of science and how they point him to faith, such as the origin of the universe, and more of a biological look through evolution and the genome project, with DNA being the “language of God.” Then, Collins deals with the different options of faith and science, with some having science trumping faith (atheism), some having faith trumping science (creationism), some have science having divine help (intelligent design), and another way posited by Collins: BioLogos (science and faith in harmony). Collins says that faith and science look at different areas; each answer questions that the other does not and cannot by its limits. He criticizes creationist views that seem to present God as the great “deceiver,” giving age to the world that is not real (for example, stars that have burned out).Collins also has a strong critique of the Intelligent Design movement, noting that much of the claims made have actually been disproven; it is not good science but really another form of “God of the gaps,” with the gaps no longer existing over the past few years. In his mind, faith is not a “God of the gaps” but really looking at the unanswerable questions and seeing the explanations offered by faith. He, therefore, sees evolution as completely compatible with Christianity; he notes that Genesis 1-2 is not a scientific treatise but looking at the who and the why, not the how and the when. Therefore, they are compatible.
I agree with a lot of what Collins says (though I need to read more on the exact nature of the current accepted view of evolution), but the problem I see on the whole is with where he seems to go with Adam and Eve. He seems to think that Adam and Eve were not the first humans, as there were other humans on earth at that time (p.207). He almost seems to think (I don’t think he out and out says its) that Adam and Eve is more of a moral story than a historical Fall. However, what would we make of Romans 5 or 1 Corinthians 15; it seems that the Fall came through the first humans and passed on to all. If there were other humans, why are all fallen? I see some problems with Collins views in this area, though, on the whole, I like a lot of what he says about the relationship between faith and science. They don’t need to be enemies; in fact, they can be allies. Dr. Collins, thanks for helping to show this from the scientific side.
