I encourage you to read these thoughts over at A Jester Unemployed about inevitable disasters. No one can look at all the misery on television without examining his or her own life and facing the questions we usually try to avoid but will have to face eventually. You may have friends and relatives who are asking deeper questions now about life, meaning, and God than ever before. If you do, I hope you'll pass that post along.
I also encourage you to give to the relief effort if you haven't already done so (you can give online through these links). This is our chance as a blogging community to pull together and do something good despite all our differences. To read more about what's happening in the wake of the hurricane, see here. So far, the blogosphere has responded generously–see here for the current total for this weekend's drive.
Thank you, and may God use you today to touch your friends and family with His kind truth in love.
Posted in Amy's Posts, Main Page, Miscellaneous 
1 Comment »
September 2, 2005 Posted by Roger Overton
closeAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
Tonight was the first time I’ve been able to watch the news since hurricane Katrina hit. I’ve of course heard about how devastated New Orleans and the surrounded areas are, but pictures are so much more powerful. The number of lives permanently altered cannot be calculated. The amount of suffering goes beyond what words can describe.
In times like these, the rational responses to evil and suffering in the world do little to comfort those who are in the midst of the difficulties. Still, I think there are some points to be made for us to better understand the degree of suffering being faced. In light of any natural event that causes suffering, the degree of suffering is in some capacity based on the reactions of those facing it and their surrounding communities.
In the case of Katrina, some of the reactions we’ve seen from the people in New Orleans have worsened the suffering. It’s amazing to hear of rescue workers, construction workers, and civil servants being fired at. To hear about buildings, even an entire shopping center, being intentionally set on fire. These actions have slowed the incoming aid since any aid going in must be accompanied by ample security.
Even worse, there is an underlying ideology that deepens the tensions. I’ve heard that 25-30% of the population of New Orleans lives below the poverty level. This means that there is a significant portion of the population depending on government aid (welfare) for their bread and butter. This has led to a growing frustration among many of the dislocated people because they believe they deserve to be supplied with food and drink. They are in fact demanding it, not begging for it, but demanding it as if it were owed to them. This leads to anger and lessens the chances of patience and civility as aid and support is distributed.
There are, however, also the reactions of the surrounding communities that also affect the degree of suffering. On one hand, we see the reaction of some Islamic websites rejoicing in the disaster claiming that “Private Katrina” has joined their jihad. But there have also been some 20 foreign countries that have offered physical and monetary aid. God has put in place several institutions to mitigate the impact of suffering in the world. One is government, but another is also the church body. We as brothers and sisters in Christ have a responsibility to help those who, especially at this time, can do little to help themselves.
There is a continuing need now for food, water, and medical supplies. Organizations such as Samaritan’s Purse and Feed the Hungry are doing a great job in this area. But there will also be a long-term need for housing and re-establishing the economies in the devastated areas. So my organization of choice is Habitat for Humanity. At this point, it seems that anything we can give, in just about any form, will be effective in helping to ease the pain and suffering being experienced as you read this post.
Posted in Main Page, Roger's Posts, Theology 1 Comment »
I just listened to a radio interview with Brian Flemming, creator of The God Who Wasn't There–a film making the case that Jesus never existed. When asked why he made this movie, Flemming responded, “To end Christianity as we know it. What we really need is a world without faith.”
Is it your belief that seekers care only about the way we live our lives and not about evidence or facts? Yes, we need to represent Jesus well by demonstrating loving character, and yes, our lives can be persuasive in many ways, but factual questions need to be answered by facts. I guarantee you that the people who will be disturbed by Flemming's movie aren't going to be comforted by your character. The seekers who come across this movie as they're looking into Jesus will be led astray if no one presents the opposing arguments–regardless of how we're living our lives. No person wants to devote his or her life to something that is false.
I know that many people–even some of you–deny the value of anyone learning apologetics, but I plead with you to reconsider. There's a real need for servants of Christ to minister to people's intellectual questions and struggles, clarifying the truth and refuting false claims. This is made clear in Titus 1:7-11:
For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward,…holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict. For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers…who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain.
The ability to teach the truth and refute false ideas is named by Paul as one of the key qualifying characteristics of elders. Why? This is more than just a need to be right or a desire to control. Look at the passage and you'll see that this is what it comes down to: real people are hurt by false ideas.
Questions about these false ideas inevitably come up when we're discussing Jesus with people who don't know Him. Many will use these questions as an excuse to avoid Jesus–possibly for their entire lives–unless we lovingly and skillfully remove these barriers. Can you refute Flemming's movie? Are you prepared to meet the needs of those who have questions about the truthfulness of Christianity? Or the next time someone comes to you struggling with these questions, will your answers sound like this?
Apologetics may not be your gift, but I hope that after looking at this film's website, you'll see the need for answers and support those in the Body who have been called to take on this challenge.
Posted in Amy's Posts, Apologetics, Culture, Main Page 15 Comments »
August 31, 2005 Posted by Roger OvertoncloseAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
|
It’s almost difficult to think about the Chronicles of
Narnia critically from a literary perspective. I recall being read The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe
(LWW) by my 2nd grade teacher and being entranced by the story. When
I finally purchased the Chronicles set for myself I made it a point to purchase
the exact same edition from which I was read. Many people, I’m sure, feel this
same sort of bond with the books that seem to transcend critical thinking since
they grip our hearts so firmly.
|
A Reader’s Guide Through the Wardrobe: Exploring C.S.
Lewis’ Classic Story challenges us to take a critical look at the first of
the Narnian stories. The authors begin by making it clear in the introduction
that this guide should be used after initially reading LWW purely for
enjoyment. The rest of the book is divided into two parts. Part One contains 18
chapters following each chapter of LWW.
Part One is called the “Guided Tour.” Each chapter
introduces some aspect of literary device that Lewis utilized, such as foiling,
archetypes, foreshadowing. Throughout the chapters reflective quotes from Lewis
and Lewis scholars are interspersed to add insight. There are plenty of
scattered study questions as well, all of which are geared toward helping the
reader think through the different elements in LWW.
Part Two offers extended background information and follows
a more typical book format. Chapter 19 looks at how the Chronicles came to be
written. Chapter 20 examines the reception of the series, including a number of
criticisms that have been leveled against Lewis. The final chapter outlines the
Christian elements in LWW. There is also a brief biography of Lewis and
appendix on the order by which to read the series at the end.
For the most part, this book pleasantly surprised me. I
wasn’t sure what to expect out of a reader’s guide, since I haven’t read one
before. It essentially teaches readers how to think about the book, while
leaving what to think about it mostly to the reader. The guide was consistently
interesting and insightful into both Lewis and literature in general. The
authors compliment each other terrifically- Leland Ryken being a literary
specialist and Marjorie Lamp Mead being a Lewis scholar.
The only part of the book that I thought could use
improvement was the last chapter on the Christian vision of LWW. While there
were some noteworthy points made in it, it didn’t seem to have the solid
structure and flow of content the rest of the book has. With that only
exception, A Reader’s Guide Through the Wardrobe is an excellent tool
for helping those of us already romantically familiar with Lewis’ masterpiece
to take our affections to the next level. With the insights from Ryken and
Mead, I believe I can now appreciate Narnia, as well as other fictional
literature, more profoundly.
Posted in Book Reviews, Main Page, Roger's Posts 3 Comments »
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, ever the practical realist, wrote in Life Together about living in–and glorifying God through–the hard realities of Christian communities. Here, he notes the necessity of shattering our utopian expectations of life with our fellow Christians:
Innumerable times a whole Christian community has broken down because it had sprung from a wish dream. The serious Christian, set down for the first time in a Christian community, is likely to bring with him a very definite idea of what Christian life together should be and to try to realize it. But God's grace speedily shatters such dreams. Just as surely as God desires to lead us to a knowledge of genuine Christian fellowship, so surely must we be overwhelmed by a great disillusionment with others, with Christians in general, and, if we are fortunate, with ourselves…Only that fellowship which faces such disillusionment, with all its unhappy and ugly aspects, begins to be what it should be in God's sight, begins to grasp in faith the promise that is given to it. The sooner this shock of disillusionment comes to an individual and to a community the better for both.
It's difficult to love real people in real churches when you're trying to attain an ideal that does not exist. Embracing the reality of our own sinfulness and the sinfulness of others is the only way to enter true fellowship–with all members completely dependent on Christ for forgiveness, hiding nothing from each other, experiencing conflict and forgiveness, and extending grace to others because we receive grace from Him. A church that is focused on building the perfect community will never have the patience to recognize and work on the community that already exists. Bonhoeffer continues:
Every human wish dream that is injected into the Christian community is a hindrance to genuine community and must be banished if genuine community is to survive. He who loves his dream of a community more than the Christian community itself becomes a destroyer of the latter, even though his personal intentions may be ever so honest and earnest and sacrificial.
God hates visionary dreaming; it makes the dreamer proud and pretentious. The man who fashions a visionary ideal of community demands that it be realized by God, by others, and by himself…When things do not go his way, he calls the effort a failure. When his ideal picture is destroyed, he sees the community going to smash. So he becomes, first an accuser of his brethren, then an accuser of God, and finally the despairing accuser of himself.
Dan Kimball says something similar in this recent post. The disillusionment is necessary if we're to settle down to learn what God would have us learn, rejoicing in our weakness, thankful for His strength, humbled by our sin; but we have to move on through this, or we'll end up wandering from church to church, spiritually alone and trapped in bitterness. We don't need to chase after a vision when, in truth, our struggle with God through the difficulties of reality reveals His power and glory and shapes our character far more than would our participation in the (mythical) perfect community.
Posted in Amy's Posts, Main Page, Religion (General) 3 Comments »
August 29, 2005 Posted by Roger OvertoncloseAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
“The load, or weight, or burden of my neighbour’s glory
should be laid daily on my back, a load so heavy that only humility can carry
it, and the backs of the proud will be broken. It is a serious thing to live in
a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most
uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it
now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a
corruption such as if you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day
long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these
destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is
with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all
our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all
politics. There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere
mortal.”-C.S. Lewis, 1941
Apart from the command of Jesus to teach of Him we should
also be motivated by the eternal state of our neighbor, out of love for them. I
have problems with the idea that we are “helping each other to one or other of
these destinations,” as if we are on some sort of salvific scale upon which we merely
lean one direction or the other. However, I think the point Lewis made in this
address is one that should be heard by contemporary Evangelicalism.
Far too often when we are motivated to share the Gospel with
someone that motivation is mostly focused on the devastating consequences of
the non-Christian not being saved. We fear for their eternal soul, and so we
are inspired to warn them of their peril. But how often are we motivated more
by burden of their potential glory?
I need to be clear; I’m not at all speaking of the content
of the message we share, merely our motivation for sharing it. My experience is
that when I am most inspired to share the Gospel with someone it is out of
concern that they will face eternal punishment rather than out of hope that
they might experience eternal glory. Certainly motivation rooted in this
concern is valid and Biblical, but I wonder how my approach might be different
if I focused as well on the hope of eternal glory. And since I believe many
within contemporary Evangelicalism engage evangelism from this perspective, I
wonder how our approach as a community might be different.
By glory Lewis did not mean arrogant pride or some
sort of bright light. Rather, glory is a bestowed fame, the outward show of
divine appreciation. Just as an artist who has completed a fine work shows off
his art with deserved pride, so God takes pride in those whom He has saved. It
is the glory of this divine appreciation, the completed creation standing
before his Creator, of which Lewis spoke. And it is the weight of this glory
that should drive our passion for proclaiming the Gospel.
Posted in Main Page, Roger's Posts, Theology 2 Comments »
August 26, 2005 Posted by Roger OvertoncloseAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
Reformation 21 has posted issue 2 of their online magazine. This September issue features two articles on the Emergent Church:
•What's Emerging in the Church? Postmodernity, The Emergent Church, and The Reformation
•Mother Church
This owes a hat tip to Jeff Downs. Now we finally know what he's been up to instead of blogging.
Video files from this year's OxBridge
have begun to be posted. As usual, most of the lectures were on C.S.
Lewis, but the overall theme was “Making All Things New: the Good, the
True, and the Beautiful in the 21st Century.” While there is a
fascinating collection of lectures already available (generally $8
each), the best is yet to come. On Day 6 of the conference they
re-enacted the famous debate between C.S. Lewis and Elizabeth Anscombe.
This is the debate that supposedly shattered Lewis and led him to
significantly edit Miracles.
As if that's not cool enough, they also convened in the University
Chapel of St. Mary for Joss Ackland's reading (re-enactment) of Lewis'
sermon The Weight of Glory.
Another noteworthy item will be the interview with Antony Flew by Gary
Habermas. Flew was present at the original debate between Lewis and
Anscombe.
The latest issue of the Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood has been posted (PDF version is free!). It is entirely dedicated to responding to the recent Egalitarian work, Discovering Biblical Equality.
Though they don't respond to every chapter, this appears to be a rather
definitive critique of the best arguments offered by the Egalitarians.
Want free training on how to effectively engage people in conversation as winsome representatives of Christ? Greg Koukl will be teaching his Tactics in Defending the Faith
mentoring curriculum for video taping on September 10th in Rolling
Hills, CA. This half-day seminar (8am-2pm) is completely free of charge.
John MacArthur borrowed Phil Johnson's blog to make some powerful points about the Christian use of new media.
Since I don't think I've commented on it before, I should mention that
though I almost always learn something at PyroManiac, what I really
love about the blog is Phil's creative use of pyro-related graphics. He
deserves a cookie for integrating intelligence and creativity. As Amy
knows, I love Subway cookies. Mmmmm m….
Posted in Main Page, Miscellaneous, Roger's Posts 1 Comment »
Well, I'm sure that got your attention! I'm strongly for people attending seminary, but there is a trap I fell into while studying apologetics that I hope I can help all of you seminarians avoid as you're studying the truths of God this year.
Here's what happened: the subjects I studied gave me incredible joy; thinking about God and His fingerprints on the world was (and is) so deeply satisfying, and it was important to me to take in as much as I could since everything I learned was opening up new opportunities to explain the truth about God to people at work. But then, as studying took more and more of my time, I began to spend less and less intimate time with God. I couldn't keep up with everything, and I made the mistake of assuming that taking in edifying information and using it to serve God was the same as spending time alone with Him. Thinking my spiritual bases were covered, I increasingly exchanged the second activity for the first. This mistake eventually led me into the most spiritually miserable time of my life.
What I didn't realize was this: when I thought about God for the purposes of school, I was taking in information and sorting it–all the while thinking about how I would use that information effectively–then sending it on its way through the proper channels. My focus was on serving others. This is a good thing, but very different from settling down and opening up my heart to God, allowing him to shape me without the constant thoughts in my head about how I'm planning to pass the information on to others. I needed to be humble, quiet, and open before God and His Word with no other agenda–just me and Him with nowhere to hide.
As it turned out, though studying theology and apologetics did increase my excitement and love for God when I also had that close time with Him, it couldn't sustain me without it. Strangely, I had let that time go because it seemed selfish and, I'm embarrassed to say, unproductive to simply enjoy God. Everything turned around when, starving for God, I finally understood where I had gone wrong.
Recently, I came across a quote by George Müller (cited by John Piper in Desiring God) that expresses well what I found to be true:
I saw more clearly than ever, that…the first thing to be concerned about was not, how much I might serve the Lord, how I might glorify the Lord; but how…my inner man might be nourished. For I might seek to set the truth before the unconverted, I might seek to benefit believers, I might seek to relieve the distressed, I might in other ways seek to behave myself as it becomes a child of God in this world; and yet, not being happy in the Lord, and not being nourished and strengthened in my inner man day by day, all this might not be attended to in a right spirit…
Now I saw, that the most important thing I had to do was to give myself to the reading of the Word of God and to meditation on it…searching, as it were, into every verse, to get blessing out of it; not for the sake of the public ministry of the Word; not for the sake of preaching on what I had meditated upon; but for the sake of obtaining food for my own soul…
Thus also the Lord is pleased to communicate unto me that which, very soon after, I have found to become food for other believers, though it was not for the sake of the public ministry of the Word that I gave myself to meditation, but for the profit of my own inner man.
May none of you ever lose sight of this!
Posted in Amy's Posts, Main Page, Miscellaneous, Religion (General) 2 Comments »
Roger begins work on his M.A. in Philosophy of Religion and Ethics at Talbot Seminary today (best of luck, Roger!); so in honor of his embarking on this new endeavor, I thought I would address a couple of common misconceptions about this great school.
I attended graduate school at Biola University (in conjunction with Talbot). When I mention this fact, I often get a comment in response that goes something like this: “Oh…Talbot. Yes, well, that's a nice place to go if you only want your beliefs reinforced, but if you really want to learn to question and think for yourself, you should go to [fill in the blank].” Or: “I don't think I could go somewhere where everyone thinks the same way and you aren't allowed to question.” Sadly, the assumption is made that any Christian school with conservative leanings must be enforcing its views by preventing any other view from being heard and by keeping the students from thinking too much.
Two aspects of these typical comments always come to mind as soon as I hear them expressed. First, these statements completely ignore the question of truth (which ought to be the very first question). Imagine a young science student trying to choose a graduate school. Someone asks her, “What about Cal Tech?” She responds, “No way! Everyone has the same views of the rules of math and the laws of physics there. I don't just want my views of these things reinforced–I want them questioned!” You can see from this illustration that the important educational value for her to determine is not whether or not the professors teach new ideas that challenge her accepted views, but whether or not what they're teaching is actually true. For the student to disregard the central question of whether or not the new ideas are true and object to the value of Cal Tech simply because they teach what she already believes is silly. If what they're teaching is true, then the fact that her already-held ideas agree with theirs obviously isn't a problem.
I think deep down everyone knows this is the case, and so I suspect that those who make these types of comments to me are probably just saying in a PC way that they think the views of Talbot are wrong. Of course they would like Talbot's views to be challenged by their own (as I would like to challenge theirs!) because they believe their views are the correct ones and should be taught everywhere. But my guess is that the views of their seminaries very much reflect their own views which are not often challenged by professors who have the views of Talbot, so this accusation against Talbot is somewhat unfair. I think most seminaries have mild diversity within greater similarities of thought amongst their professors, as does Talbot. (And yes, it's true–there is diversity of thought at Talbot!)
Second, it strikes me that they haven't considered the possibility that a free exchange of ideas and a vigorous examination of those ideas may actually lead to a theologically conservative view of Christianity. Maybe clear, open thinking–and not oppression–is responsible for the students' conservative views. A quote in Phillip Johnson's book The Right Questions actually prompted me to write this piece for Roger because it reminded me of my experience at Biola. Johnson says, “I have told many lecture audiences that opening minds is the only appropriate way to defeat [insert culturally dominant idea here]. An oppressive philosophy should be defeated only by removing the oppression, not by substituting a contrary form of oppression.” In the same way, my experience at Biola was not one of professors dogmatically forcing ideas down my throat, using their own oppression to defeat other dominant ideas. They argued against certain philosophical ideas, yes, but in a way that increased discussion and demanded critical thinking on our part, and not by oppressively hiding from us all other points of view. An atmosphere of open questioning and examination of ideas was highly encouraged, and we were taught to demand sound reasoning from our professors before adopting their (or anyone else's) ideas as our own.
When I think of my experience in the apologetics program at Biola, my first thoughts are not of the facts I learned. Facts come and go from my mind. The lasting impact Biola had on me was teaching me how to think. I will forever be grateful for the skills I learned (and picked up from watching my professors) in analyzing and evaluating ideas–in thinking clearly and precisely about spiritual and philosophical matters and interacting honorably with those who disagree with my views. As a result of this training, I've been able to handle any new intellectual challenge on my own; and more importantly, the Holy Spirit has shaped me powerfully as I've learned how to think clearly about the Words God has given us. Thanks to my experience at Biola, my relationship with God has deepened substantially.
This is the truth about Talbot. So here's to you, Roger–you're going to love it!
Posted in Amy's Posts, Apologetics, Main Page, Miscellaneous 4 Comments »
August 21, 2005 Posted by Roger OvertoncloseAuthor: Roger Overton
Name: Roger Overton
Email: rogeroverton@hotmail.com
Site: http://ateamblog.com
About: Roger Overton is currently pursuing a Masters degree at Talbot School of Theology. He has addressed various churches, schools and youth camps throughout the United States. Roger was co-editor of The New Media Frontier (Crossway, 2008) and God and Governing (Wipf & Stock, 2009).
Roger can be emailed at rogeroverton@hotmail.com.See Authors Posts (570)
I would like to humbly suggest this one, courtesy of John Depoe (though the hat tip actually goes to the Prosblogion). It's got everything—a devastating critique of McLaren's A is for Abductive,
an absolute treasure trove of recommended reading, and much thoughtful
interaction on the topic of Christian scholarship. Added bonuses
include: a reference to (and mild criticism of) J.P. Moreland's plenary
talk (“Truth, Contemporary Philosophy, and the Postmodern Turn“) at last year's ETS; a personal anecdote revolving around the trenchant critique of Plantinga's supposed refutation of the historical argument for Christianity (this was the plenary at the 2004 Pacific SCP
that, according to Richard Swinburne, was [this is a paraphrase, but
close enough I think] exactly what he would've said [in response to
Plantinga], except better); and appearances by Doug Groothius and Keith
DeRose, among others. Enjoy …
Posted in Apologetics, Emerging / Emergent Church, Main Page, Philosophy, Religion (General) 9 Comments »
content rss
Recent Comments