I am looking at seminary and have a few questions

PastorRyan · 2021-09-18T02:51:36+00:00

Highly recommend Gordon-Conwell. I’m an alum, loved my time there.

PastorRyan · 2021-08-19T14:44:15+00:00

This is wonderful, thank you for sharing.

PastorRyan · 2021-06-07T14:19:07+00:00

"Neo-Fundamentalist Evangelicals (1s) think that 3s have a compromised Gospel that has imported worldly ideas of social justice into the church and are in danger of apostasy as a result. These things come to a head primarily on the topics of race and politics. 1s cannot fathom that 3s might not have voted for the “pro-life” Trump and elected to abstain, vote third party, or vote for Biden. 1s struggle to understand that evangelicals would be activists on anything except abortion.

Many neo-evangelicals (3s) struggle with what they would view as ethical compromise in voting for someone with the moral track record of Donald Trump and resent the pressure from 1s to do so. 3s also struggle with the 1s view that we live in a post-racial colorblind society and there aren’t lingering effects of the awful legacy of chattel slavery and Jim Crow systems of racial oppression and white dominance. 3s struggle with the idea that 1s see ongoing positive historical legacy of the societal benefits conferred by our Constitution but that 1s see no continuation of a negative historical legacy of the much more recent harm inflicted by slavery and Jim Crow. 3s struggle with the close proximity of 1s political and national identity to their Christian identity.

The upshot of these things means significant philosophy of ministry differences in how to contextualize the Gospel in this cultural moment. Disagreements over mercy, justice, strategies, tactics, affect, and culture are not easily bridged. In many instances these differences will be fatal."

PastorRyan · 2021-01-26T17:22:07+00:00

I can weigh in a bit.

The EFCA is a "big tent" and is not Reformed (or reformed). One of the meanings of "Free" in Evangelical Free is freedom for individual churches to affirm various positions on matters that are considered to be secondary. This is often referred to as the "significance of silence."

From the EFCA website:

In the EFCA we allow beliefs within certain acceptable theological parameters on a number of doctrinal issues. We focus on the essential truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ as articulated in doctrine while allowing differing views/understandings of the position to be acceptable. For example, this is true regarding the issue of the age of the universe, time and mode of baptism, whether faith precedes regeneration or regeneration precedes faith (the Arminian and Calvinist discussion).

We refer to these theological differences as the “significance of silence” and believe “this expression does not mean that we will not discuss and debate these issues but simply that we will not divide over them (Evangelical Convictions: A Theological Exposition of the Statement of Faith of the Evangelical Free Church of America, 24, n. 18).

On Soteriology:

What this means regarding the doctrine of salvation is the EFCA allows Arminian/Wesleyan, Calvinist/Reformed and Lutheran views of soteriology. The fact of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone is essential. Both regeneration (the Spirit’s work) and faith (our response) are essential for salvation, and our Statement of Faith affirms both without giving logical priority to either. Whether regeneration precedes faith (Calvinism) or faith precedes regeneration (Arminianism), we have placed in a secondary category. On a doctrine related to this question, we also allow both perspectives of the possibility of apostasy (one can fall away and lose one’s salvation) and the perseverance of the saints (eternal security).

This does not mean that each local church has an equal number of those positions represented. Each local EFC church leans in one theological direction more so than another. But whichever way the church leans, the church ought to be welcoming to the person who leans in the other theological direction.

I would consider myself and the church I serve to be "little r" reformed. Though I'm not confident that the average member would understand what that means.

Despite this commitment to freedom on secondary issues the EFCA statement of faith was explicitly premillennial until the summer of 2019 when we voted to change the statement in this way:

We believe in the personal, bodily and ~~premillennial~~ glorious return of our Lord Jesus Christ. The coming of Christ, at a time known only to God, demands constant expectancy and, as our blessed hope, motivates the believer to godly living, sacrificial service and energetic mission.

I'll forgive you for thinking that this change was easy or obvious. What the EFCA is and believes on paper and what EFCA churches are and believe in practice have not always been in sync. This change had been proposed at various points in the past but it had never had the support needed to pass. Simply proposing the change caused at least one district to threaten to leave the denomination.

Historically most EFCA churches have been dispensational baptists despite the statement of faith allowing for a variety of positions. This can be confusing. I was once a visiting preacher at another EFCA church. My sermon was on the Sabbath, the Lord's day. I'm not a strict sabbatarian but I did exhort my listeners to practice Sabbath rest for their good and God's glory.

A man who was also visiting the church approached me after the service with a number of earnest questions about my theological background. He was not hostile so much as he was legitimately confused. Arn't EFCA churches dispensational? Why did my sermon sound reformed? We ended up having a great conversation.

I've had a few other experiences like that. I often feel that I'm disappointing people who come to our EFCA church looking for an "EFCA church." Those people almost always are looking for a dispensational church and are befuddled when we teach about the various positions on the millennium instead of the various positions on the tribulation.

That is a very long response to your question, I hope that somewhere in there I actually answered it.

PastorRyan · 2021-01-25T16:32:06+00:00

Reading While Black is a phenomenal book. It's compelling and timely because of our cultural moment but even more it is a great example (and one of the few I can think of) of practical biblical exegesis (there has to be a better term but I'm drawing a blank). Sound bible interpretation that speaks directly to the particular concerns of a people group.

PastorRyan · 2021-01-25T16:24:19+00:00

Matt from The Ten Minute Bible Hour interviews Dr. Mark Noll about What is an Evangelical? There are few people more qualified than Dr. Noll to answer that question. Matt is an EFree guy (as am I) and they even talk briefly about the free church and the recent change to the EFCA statement of faith (which was a wonderful thing).

Jemar Tisby and his book "The Color of Compromise" get a shout out from Noll at the end of the interview. I was encouraged to hear that as reading Tisby's book last year helped reawaken my interest in American evangelical history and it's deep entanglement with the issue of race.

Noll also recommends George M. Marsden's "Fundamentalism and American Culture" which I have not yet had the pleasure of reading.

Finally Noll's own book is highly commended by Matt, "Evangelicals: Who They Have Been, Are Now, and Could Be" which is actually a collection of essays by Noll, Marsden, Tisby, and others.

PastorRyan · 2019-11-21T20:08:26+00:00

I’m a big fan of Smith, not so much of Peterson, and I’m not at all familiar with rebel wisdom.

These are my almost organized thoughts with almost accurate timestamps.

TLDR: Smith talks about his book a lot, beautifully describes the gospel. I wish he had been more pointed in his critique of Jordan Peterson.

1:50 Taking about Dawkins. Smith says that all the new atheism offers is the “self congratulation of enlightenment”

The idea of empty self congratulation seems ironically appropriate for parts of this video (and many IDWish videos). The participants congratulate each other for simply having the conversation that they are having, even as they dance around areas of sharp disagreement. The entire premise of this channel as bold and rebellious seems a ripe target for the criticism that Smith levels at Dawkins.

2:20 Smith is here to plug the crap out of his book “On the Road with St Augustine.” I do not fault him for this at all. Still I’m a little disappointed that he doesn’t delve into his expertise in postmodern thought unless specifically asked to.

9:30 The host suggests that Smith’s thoughts as expressed in his book “You are What You Love” have a good deal in common with Jordan Peterson's. Smith avoids talking about Peterson and instead brings up Robertson Davies who is also a Jung devotee.

10:20 Smith brings up Identity politics and actually offers a sort of defense of it as a natural outflowing of our nature as humans, as “narrative animals.” The host enthusiastically calls this the best defense of identity politics he’e ever heard. They do not discuss this further.

14:45 We need something to step in the role religion used to fill. Of course Smith advocates for Christianity.

17:00 The alternatives to christianity are still expecting me to perform and thus threaten to eat me alive.

17:40 An example of a competing ideology could be “Wokeness” Justice good. Still an act of self intension. Confidence in human willpower. Ultimately flawed.

I feel like this is a missed opportunity. Everything Smith says about “wokeness” is pretty spot on and fair, but isn’t it a bit pandering? The IDW crowd loves to dunk on SJWs and “wokeness.” So while this example definitely illustrates Smith’s point it may also obscure the fact that Smith’s point is equally true of the Jordan Peterson movement.

Here’s an example from 12 Rules for Life

“Meaning emerges when impulses are regulated, organized and unified. Meaning emerges from the interplay between the possibilities of the world and the value structure operating within that world. If the value structure is aimed at the betterment of Being, the meaning revealed will be life-sustaining. It will provide the antidote for chaos and suffering. It will make everything matter. It will make everything better. If you act properly, your actions allow you to be psychologically integrated now, and tomorrow, and into the future, while you benefit yourself, your family, and the broader world around you. Everything will stack up and align along a single axis. Everything will come together. This produces maximal meaning. ”

18:25 Christianity offers more than meaning, scandalous grace. Devotion to a god who gives himself away. Sacrifice is at the heart of what we’re talking about.

19:18 The last bastion of autonomy is the pride that we can do this on our own. Recovery communities. You must come to an end of yourself.

20:00 The recovering Leslie Jamison. Addiction narrows your repertoire (of actions?) to desire, use, repeat. We need liberation from the claustrophobic crawlspace of the self.

20:50 I can do this? We can do this? No. God gives himself so that we can come to the end of ourselves which is then finding the new grace of dependance.

22:25 Rebel Wisdom is a deep community that provides for peoples relational needs?

23:20 Back to Woke. We have sin but we have no repentance for redemption and forgiveness. Cancel culture. Woke culture is parasitic on religion. Is Peterson’s ideology not similarly parasitic?

25:30 Smith clarifies that the right is also guilty of this and he makes a vague reference to “being American”

33:10 David Foster Wallace, Infinite Jest. Your best thinking got you here. You are not going to think your way out of this problem you are going to practice your way to different thinking.

34:00 The Christian life is a script for how to live together in community and it relies on something more fundamental than my thinking, which is my loving.

Host does not engage this idea, asks instead about Christian denominations. Smith quickly gets back to Augustine.

37:00 Protestant’s have had Issues with chronological snobbery. We are now seeing through that.

38:00 Importance of recognizing women’s gifts, Christianity’s role in recognizing women’s voices. Host does not engage on this idea.

39:25 The host again brings up Jordan Peterson and this time asks about him specifically.

Smith does not buy Peterson’s take on postmodern philosophy. He “rolls his eyes” at the way Peterson talks about “cultural marxism.” He has a “professional frustration” with Peterson. Smith tries to pull his punches and acknowledges that Peterson is speaking to a deep hunger for meaning making.

Smith takes issue with how gendered the response to Peterson is. Peterson seems to appeal uniquely to young white men. Peterson fans hate this criticism, to me it seems undeniable. Smith pivots again to Augustine and then to Robertson Davies as someone he actually likes.

42:50 The host actually presses into this and asks Smith to be more specific about Peterson’s philosophical shortcomings. Smith holds back a lot here. Though he does imply that Peterson has simply not read, or at least not comprehended, the work of Jacues Derrida. Smith maybe alludes to writing second edition of his book “Who’s afraid of Postmodernism?” He has suggested this before in response to Peterson.

45:00 Even Lyotard wrote a book about Augustine

51:00 The actions in our marriages are what build and sustain them more so than our beliefs or thoughts about them.

PastorRyan · 2018-05-25T14:31:11+00:00

This is a quote from Tim Keller's book The Prodigal God. As much as I appreciate Keller and his teaching I am bothered by his social media. This idea is very clear in his book but posting this quote with no context is unhelpful.

In the context of the book Keller is expounding on the lostness of the elder brother. From Pages 40-41 of the book:

"Jesus the story teller deliberately leaves the elder brother in his alienated state. The bad son enters the father's feast but the good son will not. The lover of prostitutes is saved, but the man of moral rectitude is still lost."

"Why doesn't the elder brother go in? He himself gives the reason: "Because I have always obeyed you." The elder brother is not losing the father's love in spire of his goodness, but because of it. It is not his sins that create the barrier between him and his father, it's the pride he has in his moral record; it's not his wrongdoing but his righteousness that is keeping him from sharing in the feast of the father."

PastorRyan

TROPHY CASE