Who is the Neo-Reformed Zealot?

Reading the NYT’s recent article on Mark Driscoll and Scot McKnight’s blurb on NT Wright’s new book I thought I’d compile two lists of where I think the ‘neo-reformed’ are at and why in many ways we present something of a weird paradox to the rest of the Christian landscape as they try to figure us out:

Neo-Reformed (Things people don’t like):

1. We believe in the supremacy of God and his glory in all things.

2. We believe in the 5 solas.

3. We still believe in the inerrancy, authority and sufficiency of Scripture.

4. We are Calvinists – duh!

5. We still believe that people who die without Christ go to eternal conscious punishment.

6. We believe that the gospel is a word – i.e. you can’t ‘preach’ the gospel with actions – you can only proclaim it and live consistently with it.

7. We’re still complementarians.

8. We think that it is possible to develop a truthful systematic theology.

9. We will not budge on the importance of penal substitutionary atonement.

10. Yes, we think it is still possible to be a heretic and yes, there are quite a few those around in the church today.

Neo-Reformed (Things people like):

1. We have a largely open-handed approach to culture.

2. We’re always keen to re-think current practices.

3. Mission is a top priority for us.

4. In light of #3, we have a passion for church planting.

5. We’re more accepting of outsiders than previous conservative groups.

6. We’re into social justice and mercy ministry in a big way.

7. We’re greener than previous conservative groups.

8. #1, #6 and #7 are based on the fact that alongside our doctrine of Total Depravity and the brokenness of our world we’ve attempted to recapture the beauty of humanity and the creation through our understanding of the Image of God and Common Grace respectively.

9. Our Gospel includes the restoration of all things (See Tim Keller’s ‘The Gospel in All its Forms‘)

10. And horror of horrors – a lot of us still think NT Wright is a pretty good author and theologian even if we don’t always see eye to eye.

Scot McKnight is Clearly Concerned about Us

How else can you explain his rather uncharitable comments about us ‘neo-reformed’ in his blurb on NT Wright’s new book? I must confess I’m a little ticked off.

Top 8 for 2008: Everything

Who was I kidding? There’s no way I’m going to find the time to write a series of ‘top 8 for 2008′ posts between now and the end of the year so instead I’ll simply cram them all into one post. So here you have it, my top 8 for 2008 of everything!

Top 8 things I did or experienced in 2008:

1. Got married! (October)
2. Got engaged! (March)
3. Started planning and implementing a church plant (All year – but especially last three months)
4. Heard Piper, Driscoll, Chandler and Mahaney at the Resurgence Conference at Mars Hill in Seattle, spent time at the Journey Church in St Louis and met a whole lot of great peeps from Acts 29, and others, in the States (February)
5. Was taught Deuteronomy by Gary Millar – the best Old Testament teacher I’ve been taught by to date (September)
6. Road up Sani Pass – my first real 4×4 experience behind the wheel (October)
7. Decided to stay in Cape Town long term – gotta love this city (March)
8. Had my thinking about the gospel deepened and enriched ten times over by Tim Keller through numerous mp3s, articles and the odd blog comment (throughout the year)

Top 8 Blogs I followed in 2008 (See my 2007 list here):

1. Church Planting Novice – Jonathan Dodson. A newcomer to the list, this blog has been perfect for where I’m at in my thinking at the moment. So much wisdom and insight from a guy on the ground.
2. Between Two Worlds – Justin Taylor. Last year’s number 1 drops down one place – but still a great blog.
3. Tim Chester. Up from last year’s number 7 spot. Tim’s writing never stops enlightening, challenging and encouraging all at the same time.
4. John Scheepers. Give it up for the Saffa bloggers! John is a friend of mine who writes a great blog and brings a welcome voice to the South African Christian blogsphere.
5. Drew Goodmanson. Down from #2 – sorry Drew. Drew doesn’t post very often, but when he does its almost always worthwhile.
6. Justin Moffat. Another newcomer to the list. Justin writes an informative and challenging blog with an Anglican slant – I’ve enjoyed it a lot this year.
7. Michael Jensen. Michael drops down from last years 3rd but still turns out great post after great post. Plus he sent me a copy of his new book which I’ll be reviewing here shortly.
8. Jason Allen. Jason was one of the first people I became ‘blog friends’ with when I started blogging. I’ve always enjoyed his blog and the sanity he brings to some current trends that rage through the church blogging world.

Top 8 Books for 2008 (books I read this year – most of them are older than 2008 – please note that the books are a little one-sided topically because most of my reading this year revolved around my dissertation):

1. Total Church – Steve Timmis and Tim Chester. Ok so I first read it in 2007 but I’ve read it several times this year because of my dissertation and I still think its the most important book I’ve ever read on ecclesiology.
2. The Reason for God – Tim Keller. The first apologetics book that I feel comfortable giving to my friends.
3. Planting Missional Churches – Ed Stetzer. Great book with practical insight. Really helpful for where I’m at.
4. The Forgotten Ways – Alan Hirsch. Really good yet at times frustrating. I’m on the same page as Hirsch with a number of things – I guess I’m just a bit more conservative on one or two others.
5. Breaking the Missional Code – Ed Stetzer and David Putman. Another great help on all things missional.
6. On the Incarnation – Athanasius. I delved into a bit of church history this year and thoroughly enjoyed this one.
7. The King of God’s Kingdom – David Seccombe. Dr Seccombe (Doc) was my New Testament lecturer this year and so I got a chance to have a crack at his book. It’s a great overview of Christ in the gospels.
8. Jesus and the Victory of God – NT Wright. Vintage Wright – I don’t agree with him at every point but this is an important book.

Top 8 places I visited in 2008

1. Seattle, Washington, USA
2. St Louis, Missouri, USA
3. Castleburn, Drakensburg, KZN
4. Sani Pass, Lesotho
5. Lost City, Sun City, North West Province
6. Franschoek, Western Cape
7. Betty’s Bay, Western Cape
8. Durban, KZN (my old stomping ground)

That’s my year in a nutshell. It’s been the year with the biggest changes in my life to date. Not only did I get married but we decided to stay in Cape Town and plant churches here rather than in Durban. Things have come a long way in the last 12 months – here’s to an equally exciting 2009.

Merry Christmas all – have a great one!

Continuity in the New Creation?

I used to believe what Gavin Perkins, of the Sola Panel blog, is arguing for here. However unlike him I’m not so sure I can neatly interpret 2 Peter 3:10-13 anymore – as he has interpreted it. I think one of the comments left about that same passage’s use of ‘the flood’ (v6) puts a bit of a spanner in the works for our traditional evangelical interpretations and so Tom Wright might not be completely wrong after all.

UPDATE: Make sure you read the comment stream on Gavin’s post - an interesting discussion is developing.

NT Wright on GAFCON

Bishop Tom Wright has some comments on the recent GAFCON. Here’s part of his conclusion:

“In short, my hope and prayer is that the spiritual energy, the sense of celebration, the eagerness for living and preaching the gospel, which were so evident at GAFCON, can and will be brought to the forum where we badly need it, namely, the existing central councils of the Anglican Communion. I understand only too well the frustration that many have felt at these bodies. But if GAFCON is to join up with the great majority of faithful, joyful Anglicans around the world, rather than to invite them to leave their present allegiance and sign up to a movement which is as yet – to put it mildly – strange in form and uncertain in destination, it is not so much that GAFCON needs to invite others to sign up and join in. Bishops, clergy and congregations should think very carefully before taking such a step, which will have enormous and confusing consequences. Rather, GAFCON itself needs to bring its rich experience and gospel-driven exuberance to the larger party where the rest of us are working day and night for the same gospel, the same biblical wisdom, the same Lord.”

By and large he seems to be quite supportive of GAFCON, and rightly so given his theological stance. I just wonder though, and I say this as a Tom Wright fan, if he fails to really understand that the GAFCON crew are completely tired of dealing with the ‘forum’ he suggests. They’ve tried to bring their exuberance to the larger party with little success and they’re now no longer convinced that there is this ‘great majority’ of faithful Anglicans pulling the same way that they are with the same gospel.

NT Wright under Fire in the Media

Bishop NT Wright has come under a little heat in TimesOnline this morning with regards to his view on the embryo study plan. Atheist writer, David Aaronovitch, thinks Tom Wright has been making outrageous claims about atheists and secularists lobbying for the right to kill unborn babies and elderly folk. We await a response from the Bishop…

(HT – David MacGregor)

10 Things You Never Knew About NT Wright

 

The good ol’ bishop Tom Wright doesn’t mention these things too often.

(HT – Byron)

NT Wright on Sola Scriptura

The following question was recently posed to NT Wright: How does the doctrine of sola Scriptura influence your work and your method?

This is his response:

Well, in terms of method, sola Scriptura is what I’ve always tried to do, basically. You could put it negatively… If you find yourself thinking down a track where you think, Oh, well, if I go there, that’ll mean ditching this bit of the Bible or that bit, then all sorts of warning lights flash and say, “You probably shouldn’t be going there!” It may be that you’ve misheard your own mind, as it were, and there may be a way through this because there are always puzzles that we hit, but basically, my aim has been to expound Scripture and to expound Scripture in such a way that I do not set one Scripture over against another.

However, I have to say, and my work on the authority of Scripture, which you probably know – a little book called The Last Word in America. Silly title, by the way. That was Harper’s folly to call it that. It wasn’t my idea. Fancy having a book called The Last Word! I mean… it’s very silly. If I was going to write a book called The Last Word it would be on Christology, not on Scripture. “In the last days, God has spoken to us by his Son…”

But I’ve been trying to stress that the risen Jesus does not say to the disciples, “All authority on heaven and earth is given to the books you chaps are going to go off and write.” He says, “All authority on heaven and earth is given to Me.” So that if we say that Scripture is authoritative, what we must actually mean is that the authority which is vested in Christ alone is mediated through Scripture.

That’s a more complicated thing than simply having a book on the shelf, full of right answers that you can go and look up. It’s more a way of saying that when we read Scripture and determine to live under it, we are actually saying we want to live under the sovereign lordship of Jesus mediated through this book.

When you say it like that, then all sorts of other things happen as a result, like what is the sovereign lordship of Jesus all about? Is it simply to fill our heads with right answers to difficult questions? Well, right answers to difficult questions are better than wrong answers to difficult questions. But no, the authority of Jesus Christ is there to transform and heal and save the world, to make the kingdoms of the world become the kingdom of our God and of his Christ. So the question then is, how does the authority of Scripture serve that purpose?. And that’s actually much more interesting than simply using Scripture to settle or raise indeed doctrinal disputes within the church.

Read the rest of the interview here.

Gentiles and Judgment

In Mark 10:33-34 Jesus predicts his death. Up to this point though in the narrative of Mark he hasn’t mentioned that the Gentiles are going to ‘mock him and spit on him’ and ultimately kill him. The mocking and spitting seems to be drawing on Isaiah 50:6 and it seems that Jesus is marrying the two concepts of ‘Son of Man’ and ‘Suffering Servant’ (something I think that NT Wright fails to do in his overarching view of atonement, the christus victor view – but that’s another blog post altogether).

What I’m interested in though is the specific mention of the Gentiles – why the mention? My initial thoughts are that in the Old Testament Israel’s rebellion and sin was punished by the historical invasions of Gentile nations. I wonder if Mark wants us to pick up on this? Previously in redemptive history Gentiles were used by God to punish sin. Is it not a hint in the text of Mark that Jesus is going to the cross so that sin might be punished and so we have this mention of Gentiles who will, in the langauge of Isaiah, mock and kill the suffering servant? (Has anyone read Peter Bolt’s book The Cross from a Distance – does he pick up on this in that book?)

Who is the man?

I’ve been studying Romans at college this semester, it has honestly been the most challenging and engaging course i have done in my Theologocial training.  Today we looked at Romans 2:1-29, and again i was struck by how badly this book has been preached in many churches today. Paul’s argument is a monumental polemic for the fairness of God’s judgement. One of the questions that so many of the commentators ask is who Paul has in mind in v1.  The Gentiles? The Jews? Or is he addressing the moral pagan?  Yet, the identity of Paul’s hypothetical opponent in this diatribe and chapter falls into perspective in v5: ALL store up wrath for themselves, and judgement will be revealed at the coming of Jesus Christ.

 But what has really struck me is Paul’s emphasis on works, by our works shall God determine who finally enters his Kingdom (v6).  This is a critical point and i found it surprising that Wright in his commentary does not pick up on the NPP agenda at this point (ie following a works-righteousness theology) but rather follows Moo very closely.  So in his resulting illustration of the two groups we are left scratching our heads as Paul seems to allude to a works-righteousness theology as he seems to contrast a group who will receive glory (v7, 10) and who will be judged (v8-9)…if not for v5 which programs this whole section.  Which is why Paul can say that God shows no favouritism; because even if you look like v7 and 10 its really not enough!  Why? because of v5 we can never meet those standards! Which is why a new righteousness needs to be revealed (3:21ff).  (He goes on to blow the Jewish worldview to pieces in v12-29 by showing their historical hypocracy and how they are still in state of judgement).  And yet our works are such an integral part to our salvation; as the evidence of it. This i think is something that we as evangelicals will leave out so easily because we have reduced the Gospel to something that it is not.  We have confused the message of the Gospel with the mechanics of the Gospel.  And so we have concluded that the Gospel is justification by faith alone. This is the heart of the Gospel as how the Gospel works but in itself is not the Gospel.  The Gospel is the message of the Messiah, King Jesus, come to reveal the Kingdom of God.  This includes the great Judgment day as integral to the Gospel message. Which makes the Gospel much bigger than we tend to preach it!

This can be a massive paradigm shift for anyone who has not realised this and has incredible pastoral and envagelistic implications. But the key to preaching or teaching this text is to use Paul’s own polemical device keeping as the sting in the tail as it were in v16. The secrets of men will be judged. It does not matter what you look like on the outside (yet it does) because God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ!

The Games Christians Play

I’ve been trawling through blog posts dealing with the ensuing atonement wars and I’ve become increasingly irritated by a common thread I see running through. Everyone keeps pitting their theological heroes against each other. It’s all N.T. Wright says this or N.T. Wright says that – and in defending ‘Pierced for our Transgressions‘ some bloggers have made mention of the long list of endorsements from the who’s who of evangelicalism (in fact I think I even did that – see I irritate myself!?!?). Its like this big power war.

And it doesn’t just happen over the issue of atonement but it happens in all areas where people disagree – these appeals to ‘power’ figures. This makes me think that people aren’t always concerned with coming to a God honouring conclusion but rather concerned with bullying people into their position. Now I must qualify and say that there is great value from learning from those more learned than us, and citing them when making points – but there’s a difference between that and pitting these Christian celebrities against one another in our low-level power struggles. And I hope you’re not reading this and saying ‘oh yes people who do that are terrible’ because I think we all do it. In the blogsphere I interact with Reformed folk, Charismatic folk, Emerging folk, those for Penal Substitution and those against – and you know what – you all do it! And so do I!

I think we need to dialogue more around texts of the Scriptures – I think we need to have more forums of people discussing the Bible – on the Bible’s basis – have discussions about the context, the grammar, the redemptive history of the passage, the way it would have been understood by the original readers, the difference Jesus makes to our understanding etc. etc. I think the reason that this doesn’t happen often (even on my blog) is because it’s hard work – and blogs are a quick and easy forum for discussion.

This is a rebuke for me as much as it is for anyone else who comes across it. Let’s get back to the Bible and get back with humility and a deep desire to understand.

Links and the Like

Back to blogging after a long weekend in the ‘burbs away from an internet connection. Here are some links to keep you going until I write a proper post.

Quite ironic that I re-posted something about Mark Driscoll and people taking pot shots at him a few days ago, because he’s managed to kick up another storm – here’s the skinny on it. From my side, I’ve watched the video and don’t really see too much wrong with it – I kinda enjoyed it – sorry Bill.

In light of the other storm going on (the penal substitution one), Adrian Warnock interviews Liam Goligher (not the guy from Oasis). Adrian also highlights the goings on in the PCA regarding NT Wright’s teaching.

Someone finally says something about Zimbabwe, but then Joe Carter complains about how many problems Americans have to deal with already. (HT – Justin Taylor)

More on Wright

How can Wright call Pierced for our Transgressions, (PFOT) ‘hopelessly sub-biblical’ and at the same time endorse Steve Chalke’s book? Remember that this sub-biblical book (PFOT) is endorsed by Peter O’Brien, Howard Marshall, J I Packer and Don Carson who I’m sure are in the habit of regularly endorsing ‘sub-biblical’ books!?!? This actually gets my goat. Read Douglas Wilson and get the scoop from his side.

NT Wright and Penal Substitution

Here’s a link to the reason that Tom Wright is beginning to disappoint me a bit, here’s what David Field thinks, here’s a link to the book that Wright thinks is ‘sub-biblical’, and here’s what I mentioned about the book in February.

N.T. Wright according to Hamilton

Jim Hamilton, assistant professor of Biblical Studies at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, does his own Q & A on the very popular figure of N.T. Wright. Hamilton suggests that in the future Wright may become the most influential New Testament scholar since Bultmann. The Q & A is definitely worth a read.

(HT: Justin Taylor)