2008-11-16

The remarkable story of the moments before the execution of John Rogers, a martyr for the sake of the truth under Bloody Mary. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/challies/XhEt/~3/454308891/that-shall-be-known.php

JT provides links to all five posts in the series on verbal aspect. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/454341003/basics-of-verbal-aspect-in-biblical.html

Phillips points to Doug Wilson and his comment on evangelicals and abortion, and how it was formerly a given among evangelicals that you simply do not defend abortion, which isn't the case anymore - once you can't see the big E on the chart, you're blind. http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2008/11/nicely-put-doug-wilson-on-evangelical.html

Paul Helm briefly looks at the concept a post-modern critique of science as another power struggle (a post-modern criticism is that knowledge claims are power claims). Global warming is brought up as an example. He then meanders over to apply this to the use of Christian knowledge to gain power or controlfreakery. The antidote is servanthood - not just recognizing the difference between the results and the efforts - the sowing and watering and the giving of increase, but really believing it, and adopting, in one sense, an indifference to the outcome. "Controlfreakery sticks like tar." http://paulhelmsdeep.blogspot.com/2008/11/taking-line-iii-state-of-fear.html

Schreiner continues his review of The Blue Parakeet. While warning against traditionalism and exhorting people to the Scriptures as final authority, McKnight neglects to mention that the burden of evidence is strongly on someone wishing to diverge from 2000 years of near- unanimous interpretation. While reminding us to read things in light of the Bible's story, he doesn't emphasize the Christocentricity of the Scriptures. The appeal to story runs the risk of being reductionistic, and seems to leave a fog with regard to moral principles in Scripture, and about how law and moral rules fit in. While cautioning against making the pieces 'all fit' which apparently leads to 'arrogance,' he goes too far. "Systematic theology, historically, is an attempt to capture what scripture as a whole teaches. It should be informed by biblical theology, and it has sometimes ignored the storyline of scripture, but such abuses do not rule out the task of systematic theology as a whole. " McKnight doesn't think people should talk about the Bible as authority or need to speak in terms of submission to it because it should be a delight. The problem is the NT treats the texts authoritatively (it is written) and we are duty bound to obey whether we want to or not. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/genderblog/~3/451080296/A-Review-of-Scot-McKnight-s-The-Blue-Parakeet-Part-III

Apparently McKnight doesn't actually use his hermeneutic (that was then, this was now) to justify women in pastorship, oddly enough, and rather uses 'it was always this way so it should be now.' He appeals to various ministries of women in the NT, but "McKnight's examples do not establish that all ministry positions are open for women." Complementarians must be careful not to overreact, of course, to egalitarian claims. Schreiner produces various short answers regarding the key complementarian/egalitarian texts, and points out the speculative nature of 'background reconstructions' of 1 Timothy 2:9-13, and observes that there are numerous appeals to creation order in the NT.  http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/genderblog/~3/453061154/A-Review-of-Scot-McKnight-s-The-Blue-Parakeet-Part-V

Scheiner concludes his review of the Blue Parakeet: "One of the things McKnight does well is to remind us of hard cases in scripture-issues where there isn't a simple answer, whether it is divorce, capital punishment, or the sabbath. At the same time, his own hermeneutical method is not very helpful. To say "that was then and this is now," and that we need a pattern of discernment as we are led by the Spirit in community is insufficient. " ... "it is surprising that McKnight, who stresses the storyline of the Bible, says virtually nothing about the flow of redemptive history in assessing how the Bible applies today" ... "He seems to treat every command of the Bible with the same kind of flat-earth hermeneutic, without considering where the command is found in the story-without considering how the different epochs of the scripture relate to one another." Schreiner points to some oversimplifications and unhelpful 'that was then, this is now' interpretations of texts, and then says, "My point is that the hermeneutical process is much more complex and rich than McKnight suggests. We must do biblical theology (and systematic theology as well!) before applying scripture to our contemporary context." It also appears that he is unaware that complementarians base their arguments on created order, not the fall. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/genderblog/~3/452160333/A-Review-of-Scot-McKnight-s-The-Blue-Parakeet-Part-IV

Engwer points to a very worthwhile excerpt of Cyprian to some suffering Christians. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/lest-we-forget.html

Here's an interesting discussion on the nature of the Mosaic Law. Of note: Ancient laws didn't function like modern laws. They "were paradigmatic, giving models of behaviors and models of prohibitions/punishments relative to those behaviors, but they made no attempt to be exhaustive. Ancient laws gave guiding principles, or samples, rather than complete descriptions of all things regulated. Ancient people were expected to be able to extrapolate from what the sampling of laws did say to the *general* behavior the laws in their totality pointed toward. Ancient judges were expected to extrapolate from the wording provided in the laws that did exist to *all other* circumstances and not to be foiled in their jurisprudence by any such concepts as ‘technicalities’ or ‘loopholes.’" http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/11/genre-of-mosaic-law.html

Campbell continues his series on verbal aspect, picking up with the present indicative, and he argues that "Verbal aspect provides a more powerful way of understanding the present indicative than simple tense does" on account of anomalies like the historical present, which is a present tense verb referring to the past.

Campbell concludes his series with some tips for exegesis based on verbal aspect. "How does all this fit in with other Greek tools that we use, such as Mounce and Wallace, for instance? It’s an important question, especially for teachers. Maybe one way to approach it is that each book helps at different stages. Mounce offers a "gloss" for verbs; a way to translate and get going, which is appropriate for beginning students. Wallace offers a range of Aktionsart descriptions; a more nuanced approach to what verbs are doing, which takes students to the next level. My book offers an analysis of what’s going on beneath the surface, and shows how this works out on the surface (and is somewhat parallel to Wallace on the Aktionsart descriptions). So, different tools do different things. " http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/typepad/pQHu/~3/453122492/basics-of-verbal-aspect-5-of-5-by-constantine-campbell.html

Walton argues that there isn't any basis for - and much against based on the Hebrew term used - the idea that Cain's sacrifice wasn't acceptable because it wasn't a blood sacrifice. For example, we might look to the grain offering in Leviticus, which is described using the same term as that used for Cain and Abel's offerings. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/typepad/pQHu/~3/453358178/hebrew-corner-12-cains-sacrifice-by-john-h-walton.html

Here is JT's summary of some reviews of the Blue Parakeet. http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/BetweenTwoWorlds/~3/453109433/reviews-of-scot-mcknights-blue-parakeet.html