Liberty University has embroiled itself in something of a controversy. LU invited controversial pastor, Mark Driscoll, to campus to speak at chapel, and LU’s Board of Trustees meet to decided whether LU’s invitation was acceptable, in light of controversy surrounding Driscoll. Peter Lumpkin, a blogger well-connected with LU’s Board, reported that the Board voted unanimously to indicate the invitation was not appropriate and Driscoll was not welcome on campus as a speaker.
Ten weeks into this little blogging experiment, and on the edge of a new year filled with new challenges and new hopes, I wanted to take a moment to say “thank you“ to all of you who have taken the time to partner with me on this journey. You’ve made this far more enjoyable than I dared to even imagine it could be, and I hope that my efforts in the coming year will reward your kind and appreciated commitment to this project.
Yours in Christ,
Scott
N.T. Wright is coming to Willowcreek!
Now, for those of you who don’t know the “Good Bishop,” I realize that this may not mean much of anything to you. But I would argue that 100 years from now, N.T. Wright will be viewed in the same way that we now view St. Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Johnathan Edwards, etc… In other words, when history finally renders its judgement of Wright’s work, I believe that he will take his rightful place with the giants of the faith.
And that brings me to my point. Earlier this week, I found myself pondering why I was so giddy. Clearly, I wasn’t going to get the opportunity to meet the man (although I secretly hope that it might still happen!). So why was I so jazzed? Did I honestly expect to learn something “new” in the 45 minutes he has to teach?
It was Thursday afternoon when the answer hit me. It’s not Wright that has me so excited. What has me so pumped this week is the simple fact that I attend a church that would actually invite Wright to speak. I attend a church that wants to challenge it’s people with a world class scholar. I attend a church that understands the nature of the Great Christian Tradition. I attend Willowcreek Community Church. And for the first time in a long while … I am overwhelmed with gratitude for the ministry of my home church.
Day five on our quick run through the New Testament and here are my observations …
First, a brief note on translations. As some of you know, I am doing my reading from N.T. Wright’s recently released translation of the New Testament. Now Wright is clear that no translation should be considered the definitive translation, and he goes as far as to say:
“… [even if you know Greek itself, but especially if don't] you should always have two English translations open in front of you. No one translation – certainly not this one – will be able to give you everything that was there in the Greek …”
The reason I point this out is that his phrasing in certain well-known passages is actually causing me to slow down and really think issues through. And for that, I am exceptionally grateful for his work as well as for his wise counsel regarding the utilization of a multiplicity of translations.
This brings me to my first real observation on the text itself. Look at how Wright translates Acts 2:42: “They all gave full attention to the teaching of the apostles and to the common life, to the breaking of bread, and the prayers.” Something about the way he opens this particular verse really spoke to me. It starts by saying: “They all gave full attention.” But “full attention” to what?
As I look at that list and consider the words “full attention”, I realize that I probably give the most attention to the teachings of the apostles, slightly less attention to the common life, still less attention to the breaking of bread, and a shocking lack of attention to prayer itself … Once again, I am struck by the same impression I had when I read through Matthew. My “discipleship” bears little resemblance to the discipleship prescribed by Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels and again in the book of Acts. What about you friends? Do these things get your “full attention?” Or do you give them cursory nods on Sunday and a few other occasions during the week?
My second observation actually comes out of my teachings at the Classical Consortium. This year, in Classical Rhetoric II, we took at look at various sermons preached in the book of Acts. And then we analyzed the common features of these sermons and compared them to our presentations of the Gospel today. Quite often, in today’s culture, we tend to present the Gospel as something that can be brought alongside culture. In other words, we present it in a way that causes the reader to believe that they can have “eternal life” and the idyllic, American life complete with a house, two cars, a dog and a white picket fence. If drawn out, it looks something like this:
But when we look at the bulk of the New Testament material, it becomes clear that this sort of “synthesis” between the Story of the Gospel and the story of the culture just is not possible. Because the Story of the Gospel is in direct opposition to the story of the dominant culture. If we were to draw it out, it would something like this:
Now, take a look at what I read in Acts 3:8-12.
“Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit. “Rulers of the people and elders,” he said, “if the question we’re being asked today is about a good deed done for a sick man, and whose power it was that rescued him, let it be known to all of you, and to all the people of Israel, that this man stands before you fit and well because of the name of the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, whom you crucified, but whom God raised from the dead. He is the stone which you builders rejected, but which has become the head cornerstone. Rescue won’t come from anybody else! These is no other name given under heaven and among humans by which we must be rescued.”
Here, in these five simple verses, you see Peter pulling out all the stops. First, he assails the Jewish leaders and charges them with crucifying Jesus and rejecting the “cornerstone.” But Peter’s work was not done. In his very next breath, he takes on the Romans who had adopted an early pronouncement by Augustus Caesar in 17 BC that “Salvation is to be found in none other save Augustus, and there is no other name given to men in which they can be saved.” So here, Peter presents the Gospel, and in doing so, he takes shots at the two leading cultures that dominated the world of his day.
So as I finished my reading of Acts, I found myself wondering: What would a radical encounter between the Gospel and the dominant culture of today look like? What “sacred cows” would have to be slaughtered in the lives of many Christians? And what would it cost us to engage in that kind of work?
So for those of you who are reading along with me, here are my initial thoughts regarding my “brisk run” through John. The first observation I will pose in the form of a question: does the Gospel of John lend itself more easily to synchronization with the Pauline epistles then the so-called Synoptic Gospels (e.g. Matthew, Mark, and Luke)? I ask this because much of the “discipleship” presented through John is focused on “belief in the Christ” as opposed to the Synoptics where “discipleship” seems to be focused on “praxis” – or action.
Second observation. Orthopraxis (or “right actions”) cannot exist without orthodoxy (or “right belief”) because every action is precipitated by some measure of belief, no matter how small. On the other hand, can orthodoxy exist without orthopraxis?
Thoughts?
Finished my read through the Gospel of Matthew and three things are really standing out in my mind right now:
So what about you guys? What’s standing out to you in your readings?
“It’s good to read right through chapters, sections and entire books at a single sitting. The ‘books’ which make up the New Testament weren’t written to be read in ten-verse sections at a time; imagine what would happen if you tried to listen to a symphony that way, or to read a novel at the rate of a single page once per week.” (N.T. Wright)
Oct. 27 The Gospel of Matthew
Oct. 28 The Gospel of Mark
Oct. 29 The Gospel of John
Oct. 31 The Gospel of Luke
Nov. 1 The Acts of the Apostles
Nov. 2 Romans
Nov. 3 1 Corinthians
Nov. 4 2 Corinthians
Nov. 5 Galatians
Nov. 7 Ephesians
Nov. 8 Philppians
Nov. 9 Colossians
Nov. 10 1 Thessalonians
Nov. 11 2 Thessalonians
Nov. 12 1 Timothy
Nov. 14 2 Timothy
Nov. 15 Titus
Nov. 16 Philemon
Nov. 17 Hebrews
Nov. 18 James
Nov. 19 1 Peter
Nov. 21 2 Peter
Nov. 22 1 John
Nov. 23 2 John
Nov. 24 3 John
Nov. 25 Jude
Nov. 26 Revelation
