Reflecting on School–Part 2 December 20, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Education, School, Spirituality.add a comment
My second class this semester was on the Parables and Wisdom Sayings of Jesus. I must admit, I was a bit skeptical of this class at the beginning of the semester; I took a Parables class (via Distance Ed) at TEDS, so I had experience looking at the parables. In addition, it was built upon a source critical view (2 Source Hypothesis) that I was not so sure of (as I had done some work reading its critics this past year–still an issue with which I am wrestling) and was designed as a masters class (as opposed to a doctoral seminar like one of my classes, I take 4-5 masters classes in my program) so some of the content would be “review”-ish. After meeting with the professor before the term began, though, I realized that I could learn some different methodology and approach to the parables. My previous course was more of a “harmonization” and “structural” approach to parables, noting the semi-allegorical nature of them (as argued by Craig Blomberg). This course engaged the parables in light of their different redactions by the evangelists (and Q–which I understand better now); I have a better understanding of the themes of the unique parables and placement of each. Blomberg also taught more in line with comparison to rabbinic parables, while this class focused on them in Hellenistic background, with Greco-Roman imagery and parallels highlighted; I began to use some of these sources in my own work. This course emphasized the image of the parable independently of its placement, commenting words, etc. in the parable. While I am not so sure of the distinction between “Jesus’ parable” and “the evangelist’s parable” at times, it served to potentially rethink some of the parables or consider multiple ways of viewing them. Above all, this class has given me another tool in my belt to understand the parables, as well as some of the “wisdom sayings” (short sayings) of Jesus. Our discussion on the Historical Jesus made me realize how the title “Distinctive Jesus” would be a better way of clarifying the true intention of this movement (but that might be another post, more in line with next semester).
Now, how did it impact my soul? Still thinking through that one, I guess. I have realized that much scholarship on Jesus is based upon certain assumption and presuppositions of the interpreter, which was somewhat reaffirming. My professor said that the parables are “bridges to discipleship” and that has been one element that stuck with me; as I teach the parables (and teach IN parables), I need to make sure that I am making it a bridge to help people follow Jesus better. It is not about abstract, theoretical and theological truths but about helping people follow and walk with Jesus better. Now that I think about it, that would seem to be the take away from my exposure to Jesus’ teaching through this academic class.
Losing Focus…. October 16, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Education, Spirituality.add a comment
The past week and a half or so has been a struggle gaining focus in my life and academic work. In some ways, I am being sucked into academia, being more concerned at times about work as opposed to knowing God and making Him known to the world through my studies. However, I have a chance today to teach at City Seminary, this Sunday with the kiddos at church (3 years old-1st grade…..wish me good providence!), and in a few weeks to preach again in Watseka. I hope these will keep me grounded as I had been warned as suggested. It is refreshing to go to a Bible study or talk with a friend about the true meaning of Scripture, may I continue to do this as I engage in this academic journey, remembering who called me here.
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.
The Ehrman Strikes Back…. August 5, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Books, Education, Spirituality.add a comment
Bart Ehrman is at his work of dispensing scholarship to the masses again with Jesus Interrupted. If the point of Misquoting Jesus was to show people that the original words of the Bible are forever lost and that there were many changes that have occurred (often for theological/social reasons, for example exalting Christ and denigrating women), then the point to this book is that the Bible is a very human document, not the Word of God. For example, he states that it is filled with contradictions in facts (chapter 2), variant views on the same ideas—like whether we should keep the law (Matthew) or do not need to keep it (Paul) (chapter 3), and that it was written not by eyewitnesses or the names attached to the work but much later (chapter 4). In addition, very little can be known about the historical Jesus (chapter 5). In fact, Ehrman goes on to say that Christianity on the whole is a very human religion; its ideas are not from the revelation of God but come from human understandings and a struggle for a certain view of orthodoxy, etc., which includes how the Bible came to stand as it is (chapters 6-7). That being said, Ehrman does not see this approach as showing that faith is not possible; he is an agnostic not because of this view of Scripture but because of the problem of evil (chapter 8). It takes approaching Scripture from a different point and “picking and choosing” what would be of relevance today. Ehrman notes that even though the information he presents is widely known and taught in graduate schools and seminaries, pastors do not seem to employ it. He does not think it should be the basis of pulpit ministry (which is a devotional approach) but that it should be integrated in Sunday school classes, etc.
Once again, I applaud Ehrman for the fact that he is trying to bring “spiritual literacy” to the world; he wants people to know what’s in the Bible and to be able to dialogue about it thoughtfully. In addition, he notes the disconnect that often exists between what is taught in seminaries and what is then taught in churches. We have similar ideas on those levels. That being said, I am not a fan of the understanding of the Bible that Ehrman seeks to promote (hopefully you knew I was going to say that if you know me!). There is diversity in Scripture—but the question is whether there is also unity. “Conservative” scholars like myself see that within the diversity, there is a unified whole—the message of Jesus Christ. If one wants to find contradictions that cannot be resolved, one will find them; if one wants to find resolutions or how they are different reflections on the same truth in light of the context, one can find those as well. You get what you look for on this basis. I think much more can be known about Jesus than Ehrman claims, and also that traditional views of authorship can be affirmed. The “battle for the Bible” was not as controversial as Ehrman seems to paint it to be.
What I see as I read Ehrman and others is a historical “snobbery.” We can find these contradictions, but those of previous generations were always duped by them. Those much closer to the circumstances were worse judges than us because of our critical tools like Gospel parallels and better knowledge of the world and morality. We are in a position to judge the Bible and pick what we like, not on its own basis of how to apply but according to what we find useful. The irony is that the very people who duped us so long—these people came from the same culture that was duped. Furthermore, the disciples of Jesus were not exactly clever people in the reports that we have and in the social picture of the world. But they were able to either 1) cause the biggest fraud in the history of civilization or 2) convince people smart enough to follow them so that they might dupe us (Ehrman does not seem to think that Paul created Christianity, he helped refine it but ideas were given to him). The funny thing about this view is that the early church was smart while the later church was dumb (or maybe a dumb, smart, dumb sort of progression). I find that the Bible could be the heritage of “uneducated” peasants that then takes over the world to be an unconvincing explanation of its nature.
Perhaps what I find most fascinating is Ehrman’s claim that those who are educated about this in seminary (my seminary did not give these views!) do not apply it to ministry. Could this be because they recognize that this understanding of the Bible does not actually serve the church? When one does integrate this approach, why even preach from the Bible? Why not preach from whatever writings you find useful, as you will pick and choose anyway? I do see this as being true in my experiences discussing things with people from mainline churches. I guess I don’t see what Ehrman’s vision would be for the Bible in churches—which might be because his view would see the church as a place where our specific agendas and views are pushed across, as opposed to a revelation and perspective from the outside—God Himself!
The End of Sunday School? July 31, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Education, Ministry.add a comment
There is an article in the Wall Street Journal from June on the closing of Sunday Schools in American church . As one who has directed Sunday School classes for youth and adults, I figured I needed to read this.
The basis: “The decline in Sunday schools appears to be gradual but steady. A study by the Barna Group indicated that in 2004 churches were 6% less likely to provide Sunday school for children ages 2 to 5 as in 1997. For middle-school kids, the decline was to 86% providing Sunday school in 2004 from 93% in 1997. Similarly, there was a six-percentage-point drop in Sunday schools offered for high school kids — to 80% from 86%. All in all, about 20,000 fewer churches were maintaining Sunday-school classes. And the future does not look bright: Only 15% of ministers regarded Sunday school as a leading concern. The younger the pastor, the study showed, the less emphasis he placed on Sunday school.” [Interesting side note: any study on Adult Sunday School classes?]
Other interesting quotes: “Catholics relied on parochial schools and special weekday classes to teach the faith, but Protestants had Sunday school.”… “In short, Sunday school was a civilizing experience that assured some level of religious literacy.”
An interesting note was that the type of Sunday school class might have been the problem; while giving kids some spiritual literacy, they did not go very deep and often were just exercises of rote memorization. That doesn’t fly today–for good reasons (ineffective, inefficient programs are never good). In addition, there are other demands on time for children and adults (particularly on weekends). There could also be the element that since less and less people have spiritual literacy, less and less people see it as being important (and the way we structure churches does not show it as being important). This might contribute to the decline.
What I see is a couple of points to consider:
-How should we give adults and children spiritual literacy? Are we doing anything to give children and adults spiritual literacy? Do we need more than a sermon and a “small group” Bible study (which seem more about community than content)? Is Sunday morning the best time, or do we need to go to a more “Catholic” model or another sort of model–or night–(which they note are being developed) for this sort of cultivation of spiritual literacy?
-How do we improve our educational techniques in this, in that the average Sunday School teacher has little (if any) educational training? Clearly, lecture is not the best but neither is just simply sitting around and talking. This was a challenge in my experiences.
Posting this as I think through it…..comments, as always, welcome.
A Gem from German…. July 9, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Education, Spirituality.add a comment
I was translating an excerpt of Helmut Thielicke’s writing on the parable of the prodigial son. It was longer than I was hoping (usually they are 1-2 pages, this is 3), but I enjoyed it. Why? Read this wrong translation (there might be a few errors and I might have taken some liberty with it, but it’s my best efforts right now:)
“But Jesus wants to show us that he is precisely different and that a complete release should be given to us. “You are in the right,” he says, “you were lost, when you looked on yourself. Then who has not lied, murdered, committed adultery? In whom does that not lie as a lurking thought in the heart? You are in the right, if you acknowledge yourself as lost. But see: now something has happened, which you would have never been able to do in your heart, which is simply prepared for you. Now is the kingdom of God in your midst, now the Father’s home is opened wide. And I—I am the door, I am the way, I am the life, I am the hand of the Father. Who sees me, sees the Father. And what then do you see, if you see me? You see someone who has come to you in the depths, whereas you could not go up to the heavens. You see that God has thus loved the world that he gave into this depth me, his son, that he let it cost something to himself, to help you, that it came through the pain of God, that God must undertake something against himself, in order to deal with your guilt, in order to take the abyss between you and me seriously and, nevertheless span it. You see all that, when you look at me!”
What a gem!
First Day of School July 1, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Education, School.add a comment
Well, Monday night was my first day of classes at Loyola University Chicago. The first time I have been at a non-evangelical school in 9 years or so. The first time I have been to a really big school. The first time I have been at a Catholic school, though it many ways it seems more like a secular school. So, what was it like?
I was a little surprised to find out that my class was on the 7th floor of a building (Damen Hall, soon to be destroyed as it is affectionally known as the radiator buiding because it looks like a radiator you would have in your home). I have never been to a school that has 7 story buildings. I figured out that the campus does not seem bigger than my other campus, just more condensed (because of the urban setting) and also with bigger buildings in general. I took the escalators up the building to the 7th story (another first). In many ways, the building (I will have most of my classes in a different building) felt more like a high school building than a college building; the classroom with its small desks seemed more like a high school classroom (but I guess Milner had similar desks at Cedarville) and I even saw lockers on the way up the escalators (not sure what for). While the material was not really challenging (German is more review for me), the classroom also had a different sort of feel. Obviously, students are there for different reasons than in college or seminary.
The library was nice; I sat and read by the window by the lake (a definite perk). The professor was nice and has a sense of humor (she is not German, Bulgaria….so it is not like Dr. Schanbel last semester who shows that German’s can have a sense of humor). Other students seemed to have already formed a community, though I met another new student and got to know a couple of returning students as well.
It was a good day, I was nervous getting there but that is more of the newness factor. But I am glad I am there and it will definitely be an experience.
Constantly Trying the New…Or Being in for the Long Haul June 30, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Education, Spirituality.1 comment so far
This weekend, Beth and I hung out with some old friends, showing them our new place (as we have been doing over the past few weeks). They are both teachers so it is enjoyable talking with them because of a similar passion in education, developing persons, and just liking to laugh along with them. Part of what is interesting is that I see the major differences between public education and true Christian education/nurture. I constantly want to ask, “Why is that important to teach them?” when it comes to some issues (like discipline, ethics, behavior), as I constantly want to know what foundation others see for ethics and what is important. We had a conversation about the shift to evaluate students on skills instead of on rote knowledge and my friend mentioned that knowing who Robert E. Lee is is important. I believe so as well, but shouldn’t we ask the question, “Why?” Is it just to make good citizens of this country? Well, how do we define “good”? But that’s another issue than what lead me to think about the conversation.
They mentioned that educational institutions seem to constantly trying some new idea in terms of discipline, curriculum, evaluation, testing, etc. and then change it in two years. Kids never have consistency and we never really know if something is working or not. Instead of trying something for the long haul, we want the quick fix and the new magic formula. That’s true of us as leaders of the church (you can look at a pastor’s shelf and find so many, “Today” books and new ideas, espescially in youth ministry). We aren’t always in it for the long haul (and the congregation functions same way, this isn’t working, so we need a new leader). And this is true of the Christian life. How many books have I started and never finished? How many plans have I made for my daily time of connecting with God and then given up? We are looking for the quick fix and when something does not work after a few days (or it gets difficult), we give it up! I was very convicted of that myself. Instead of the quick fix, we need to apply good things to the long haul. The risk is we might “waste” a number of years of our life. But is it really wasted? And I think that consistency might be better than constant change.
(Side note: the movement away from memorization of knowledge seen in schools is also true in the church. For example, we often stress less and less about memorizing things from the Bible and having an overarching Bible knowledge. The past saw knowledge as a way to be more spiritual. Now it is almost a lack of knowledge is more spiritual. As my friend said, though, there are certain things that you need to know….but applying it to the Bible, you need to know it as it will help you understand and connect with God. It is not in the knowledge that the gain is found, it is in what you do with the knowledge).
Not New Years Resolutions…but Re-Evaluations January 5, 2009
Posted by bdennert in Education, Random, Spirituality.add a comment
As it seems true of most people, I did not make New Years resolutions. I know a problem I would have with them would be trying to do them in my own strength (always a problem for me!). So, instead of making resolutions, I have sought to do some re-evaluation in my life and see if I can make some minor adjustments in my life will make me more happier…but also (and more importantly) more productive for the kingdom of God. In some ways, it is applying what I have learned from the last year into my life this year.
One thing that I want to do is to get more into the biblical texts and more into their original languages. Basically, I want to apply all the years of learning in Bible college and seminar to the text. I read about scholars and hear the lectures of Dr. Yarbrough and I want to have a better foundation in the texts, so that I might draw better connections in the texts. I want to do more word searches when I am preparing to teach. One thing I hope to do is read the Septuagint more; this morning my devotional time from Isaiaha 40 was from the ESV and the LXX (with the English translation provided by Sir Lancelot Brenton…I wish I could be a Sir!). I need to refresh my Hebrew in the process as well; if nothing else, this sort of study will force me to spend more time in the text and make me ask questions.
I want to do a better job of reading on the side. This might be reading for fun, or reading some of the classics of the Christian faith, or being inspired by the great works of academics.
I want to relax more this year. That is something that I am doing well on break, but what will happen after that. Part of this, I think, will be in staying in better contact with old friends and acquaitances. Hopefully, I will send more e-mails, more messages, and make more phone calls this year.
They are not resolutions, but re-evaluations. The New Year is a time to look back and look forward, to make adjustments, and to dive more deeply in the grace of God.
Christian Academic and the Postmodern Spirit June 27, 2008
Posted by bdennert in Education, Ministry, Spirituality.add a comment
I went up to Trinity yesterday to meet with a professor in regards to my school program there in the fall (and beyond) as well as the to meet up with an old friend. My conversation with Dr. X was very interesting, as we started talking about Ph.D possibilities. It is interesting how the world views evangelical institutions as second class schools. It is interesting how many graduate schools will not let “evangelicals sit at the table.” Besides the fact that this would be academic discrimination in ways (whatever happened to not discriminatory according to creed), it flies in the face of the postmodern spirit, doesn’t it? If truth is contextual and cultural, then why do we marginalize a context and culture (evangelical Christian)? In addition, why is a group that readily acknowledges its viewpoint and convictions (part of the postmodern ethos) be disqualified because they acknowledge them and seek to integrate them in terms of their education and life. Doesn’t postmodernity say this is true of everyone? I am sure I am off base at some point, but I think there is a lot of truth to what I have been pondering.
What I also find interesting is the respect given towards Catholic schools (both in secondary and post-secondary levels) but the disrespect given for Christian schools. What’s the difference….I don’t know, but maybe someday I can figure it all out.
