An Historian Examines the Resurrection (Video)

In this short clip from the 'Life of Jesus' series, John Dickson explains that while there's no hard proof for the resurrection of Jesus, we do have the sort of historical evidence that a resurrection would leave behind. (Found on the Centre for Public Christianity website). An appropriate reminder for Easter.




See also this post:  Reasons to believe the Biblical accounts about Jesus

How NOT to Raise money for New Churches

I have been a member of the Sydney Synod now for ten years. One of the things I appreciate most about the Synod is that it is generally committed to following the Bible as God’s Word and to considering our theological commitments before making decisions. Which is why I am disappointed with the decision made by the Synod last year to impose a levy on every parish to raise funds to buy land for new churches in ‘greenfields’ areas.

A levy is a tax for a specific purpose. This levy has been charged at 2.24% of each parish’s Gross Operating Receipts meaning that it will raise $2 million in 2013. It is taken in 10 monthly installments (commencing in March) along with Parish Cost Recovery charges and is allocated to the Mission Property Committee. While the initial approval is only for one year it is intended to make this an ongoing charge.

I want to make clear that I am NOT disappointed because we are committed as a Diocese to planting churches in new growth areas. Nor am I disappointed that the Synod decided this project should have priority over many other worthwhile projects. What IS disappointing is that we chose to raise the funds by imposing a levy on the parishes.

Genesis 1 - The Main Ideas

I have recently been doing Bible studies on campus at UWS Bankstown on Genesis 1. Because of the limited time it always seems such a rush and there are often questions from students at the end which we don’t get to answer in full. In this post I will outline some of the main points that ARE made in Genesis 1. In a future post I will try to answer some questions about the relationship of these points with modern science.

It is important to remember that Genesis was written down probably 3,500 years ago at around the time Moses lead the people of Israel out of Egypt. Although it is clearly God’s word to US, we need to remember it was initially directed to THEM. Therefore it is not surprising that many things taught in Genesis 1 directly challenge the common creation stories of the Ancient Near East – from (for example), Egypt, Babylon, Sumeria and Akkadia. While not ‘borrowing’ from these accounts, Genesis teaches about God, humans and the creation in a way that highlights the differences to these alternative accounts - while having some similarities.

The most significant similarity with other creation accounts is the common ‘cosmology’ and ‘scientific’ understanding. Put simply, Genesis assumes the ancient (pre-scientific?) understanding of the structure of the cosmos – using the ‘scientific’ understanding that was common at the time. In particular this assumed the existence of the chaotic ‘waters’ (or deep) which had to be gathered into the seas and still exists above the heavens and below the earth, but is now providing water to nourish the lands. We can perhaps think of ‘the heavens’ as a dome shaped surface above the earth which holds the ‘heavenly objects’. We see many traces of this in the text of Genesis 1. This ought to make us cautious in trying to make the creation account accord too closely with our modern (or post-modern?) cosmologies – especially fixing times and dates associated with the age of the earth, the existence of the first humans and so on.

Verses 1-2 – An Overview. These verses stand as an introduction and overview of the whole chapter. The emphasis is on ‘creation’ by one God (as opposed to the many gods involved in other accounts). The ‘heavens and the earth’ is a term that means ‘everything’ and not simply the sky and the land. Verse 2 seems to describe the state of things before God begins his work. It is worth noticing that the ‘creation account’ does not start with ‘nothing’ but with ‘formless and empty’ – darkness over the surface of ‘the deep’ (chaotic seas?) and the Spirit of God over the waters.

Keller and Carson on Slavery - as pulled together by Andy Naselli

Following up from  my previous post on the issue of Slavery in New Testament times, I came across this post from Andy Naselli addressing the issue of the nature of slavery in the Greco-Roman world.  Here is his introduction:

"Many modern readers assume that slavery in the New Testament is equivalent to the race-based slavery of the African slave trade. While not defending the Greco-Roman institution of slavery, Tim Keller and Don Carson explain why it’s important not to equate it with the race-based slavery that we may be more familiar with."

He is pulling together comments from Tim Keller and Don Carson (via Lee Strobel).

Timothy Keller, Every Good Endeavor: Connecting Your Work to God’s Work (New York: Dutton, 2012), 213–14, 280–83.  (This new book looks interesting - perhaps more another time!)

Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ: A Journalist’s Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 166–69):

This is a great reminder of the importance of not making assumptions about what the Bible writers meant when they use words we think we understand - especially 'hot button' words like 'slavery'.

Definitely worth reading the whole article!  (http://andynaselli.com/keller-and-carson-greco-roman-slavery-race-based-slavery).

(You may also be interested in my post on the struggle to eradicate modern slavery.)

Christmas Message from Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney

Peter Jensen's final Christmas message as Archbishop of Sydney speaks on the topic of reconciliation - an important issue for Aussies. He speaks about our need for reconciliation with God and with our neighbours - including indigenous Australians.



Thanks Peter for taking every opportunity to present the good news of Jesus.

Paul Barnett on Raising Financial Support (2 Corinthians 9)

I was thinking recently about how we should approach fundraising for ministry and took a look at Paul Barnett's commentary on 2 Corinthians. The apostle has a lot to say about this matter in chapters 8 and 9, and there is much in Paul Barnett's commentary that is helpful in understanding the context and the issues. (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997)

While the apostle urges (and cajoles?) the Corinthians to give generously - including using the example of the Macedonian 'beggars' in 8:1-9 - he gives an important rider in 9:7: 

 'Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.'

Paul Barnett comments:

But what criteria does Paul give to assist the Corinthian contributor in deciding the level of his gifts? Paul's guiding principle is that such giving is not made "reluctantly or under compulsion." Here the latter element would contribute to the former; contributions given "under compulsion" would be made "reluctantly". (This would be to "sow reluctantly," as in v. 6.) Such a compulsory contribution would indeed be an "exaction" (v. 5), which to preserve the precious doctrine of grace is the very thing Paul seeks to avoid. God's grace is to be reciprocated "voluntarily" (8:3), "freely" (9:5) and "generously" (9:6); any legalistic impost is inimical to this principle.  (Italics added)

It is interesting that Paul Barnett sees the issue of compulsion in giving as something which can undermine the doctrine of grace and is therefore to be avoided.

What this means in our local situation is that all appeals are voluntary (and anonymous), allowing each individual to respond to God's grace and the particular need as they are able and as they are moved by the Spirit.

I suspect that at the diocesan level we ought to apply the same principles - vigorously promoting the need yet allowing individuals (and churches) to respond as they are moved.

.

Giving Thanks for John Chapman

Anyone who claims to know something about Sydney Anglicans or the strength of the Evangelical church in Sydney in the last quarter of the 20th Century would have to know something about the life and work of John Chapman.

I heard "Chappo" speak many times - including under the big top at Katoomba, at other conferences, in local churches, doing Beach Mission Bible studies and at evangelistic events. John Chapman was one of my teachers at Moore college - teaching the 2nd year preaching subject. More than the lectures I remember his personal feedback sessions after listening to one of my sermons - a real learning experience! He was unique and irreplaceable, but he inspired a generation to be better evangelists, better preachers and better Christians.

It is worth taking the time to watch his memorial service held at St Andrews Cathedral on Saturday 24th November 2012.

The order of service can be found here.

An audio version of Phillip Jensen's sermon can be found here.

The biography by Michael Orpwood, Chappo, For the Sake of the Gospel was published in 1995 and can be ordered from Evangelism & New Churches.

The SydneyAnglicans article about the event can be found here.

Are Sydney Anglicans really Anglican?

There are many Anglicans around the world who would answer no to this question - and there are many outside the church who wonder why we are the way we are. In recent years we have had TV shows, articles and  books that have asked questions, made accusations and painted a picture of a dangerous and deluded sect. Many have suggested we should change our views to conform to the majority or quit Anglicanism altogether! How should we respond? The answer for Michael Jensen was to write Sydney Anglicans: An Apology. (Read the first chapter here.)

Michael Jensen is both a 'son of the Diocese' and a gifted theologian in his own right. He is able to understand  the complaints of the opponents and the views of those inside. He can therefore address the history and the theology of Sydney Anglicans with an insider's knowledge. This 'Apology' is written as a defense of many of the defining features of 'Sydney Anglicanism'.

In his first section on 'the Bible', Jensen addresses whether Sydney Anglicans are fundamentalists, why we read the Bible the way we do, our doctrine of revelation and the importance of preaching. His second section on 'the Church' addresses our doctrine of church, our identity as Anglicans, the church and the world, the ministry of women, lay administration of the Lord's supper and the role of the Anglican Church League.In each chapter he looks at some particular critiques, revises the history, considers the sociology and explains the theology. He also reflects on areas where Sydney Anglicans need to take care that they do not take on the worst aspects of what their critics see.

What I love about this book is the way that Michael ties in the history with the theology. The book is not a simplistic summary of the issues but lays a solid foundation in understanding what is at stake. In this way it serves to advance our theological understanding on many important issues. This is a book that will have a much longer-lasting value than any of the criticisms that prompted the author to write - and for this I think we can thank the critics that have prompted such a helpful 'apology'.