Of Bald Men and Bears

Nebraska looked fantastic last week against Nevada, winning handily at 52-10. Our offensive line made me reminisce to the days of Tom Osborne's "Pipeline" (a group of beefy linemen who actually came to Hastings one day and autographed some of my Husker paraphernalia...but I digress). I was extremely concerned about our running back situation coming into this season, but I am not too worried about that any more. Actually, our wide receiving corps looked worse than our running backs, dropping perfectly placed passes. Defensively, our team (especially Steve Octavian) looked great, and I think that our defensive line should hold its own better than was expected over the course of this season.

So, I think that we should have a good game today against Wake Forest. I expect us to run fairly well, although nowhere near as successfully as last week, and I don't think that our receivers will drop as many balls this week. I am expecting us to have improved by a couple of notches, and I think that today we will see the unveiling of what most of our season will look like: a very good team, much closer to what we hoped for in Callahan's regime than we have seen to date.

I expect our defense to play hard, and I think that our secondary will step up to play better than they have in the past. Still, I think that Wake Forest's offense will put up a fair number of points. I am highly optimistic, but I don't want to be unrealistic.

My prediction: Nebraska 41, Wake Forest 20.

---

I have been reading Recalling the Hope of Glory, by Allen P. Ross (my Hebrew professor and my professor in Worship Leadership for this semester), which is a book that attempts to map out a biblical theology of worship. I have heard vastly differing reports on the quality of the book, but I am very much appreciating it, having read through the third chapter.

The title of his book is quite descriptive of the theme of his book: the biblical theology of worship is extremely reminiscent of the paradise of Eden (he points out, for example, numerous textual and thematic links between the design and construction of the temple and the creation of the Garden), but it also anticipates the hope of glory in Jesus Christ. We worship both by looking back at God's act in creation--and in his re-creation of the world in Christ's resurrection--and by looking forward to the glory that awaits us when Christ returns.

This book is the textbook for my Worship Leadership class this semester, so we will be reading it over the course of the next couple of months. As an FYI, Dr. Ross teaches the class not only from the book, but also from a perspective of looking at how different churches over the course of church history have put these worship principles into practice. His goal, Lord-willing, is to write a second volume on worship where he will discuss these issues. From what we have discussed in class so far, I think that second volume will be very helpful as well.

Labels: Bible, Books, Church, Football, Nebraska, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 7:37 AM | Permalink | Comments

This morning, I wrote a paper for my Ethics class on "The Morality of Jephthah." It was an extremely interesting topic, and the paper didn't turn out too badly, so I thought I would publish it for your voluntary perusal. You can read it here.

It will be important for you to know Aristotle's categories in assessing the morality of an action, so you'll want to read the text I'm referencing in my paper, which is here. You will only need to read pages 6 and 7 to understand what I'm talking about, but the whole chapter is well-worth the read. Enjoy!

Judges 11:29-40:

²⁹Then the Spirit of the LORD was upon Jephthah, and he passed through Gilead and Manasseh and passed on to Mizpah of Gilead, and from Mizpah of Gilead he passed on to the Ammonites. ³⁰And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD and said, "If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, ³¹then whatever comes out from the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Ammonites shall be the LORD’s, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering." ³²So Jephthah crossed over to the Ammonites to fight against them, and the LORD gave them into his hand. ³³And he struck them from Aroer to the neighborhood of Minnith, twenty cities, and as far as Abel-keramim, with a great blow. So the Ammonites were subdued before the people of Israel.

³⁴Then Jephthah came to his home at Mizpah. And behold, his daughter came out to meet him with tambourines and with dances. She was his only child; besides her he had neither son nor daughter. ³⁵And as soon as he saw her, he tore his clothes and said, "Alas, my daughter! You have brought me very low, and you have become the cause of great trouble to me. For I have opened my mouth to the LORD, and I cannot take back my vow." ³⁶And she said to him, "My father, you have opened your mouth to the LORD; do to me according to what has gone out of your mouth, now that the LORD has avenged you on your enemies, on the Ammonites." ³⁷So she said to her father, "Let this thing be done for me: leave me alone two months, that I may go up and down on the mountains and weep for my virginity, I and my companions." ³⁸So he said, "Go." Then he sent her away for two months, and she departed, she and her companions, and wept for her virginity on the mountains. ³⁹And at the end of two months, she returned to her father, who did with her according to his vow that he had made. She had never known a man, and it became a custom in Israel ⁴⁰that the daughters of Israel went year by year to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in the year.

Labels: Bible, Philosophy, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 6:01 AM | Permalink | Comments

Yesterday in my theology class, my professor expressed his disagreement with Augustine's conception of the nature of evil. Augustine essentially argued three things:

1. God created all things, so that nothing exists that God did not create.
2. God created all things to be Good.
3. Therefore, from (1) and (2), evil cannot be a creation of God, and therefore evil cannot exist in the way that Good exists. Therefore, evil is not the presence of something in its own right, but the lack of the Good that God originally instilled in his creation.

When we examined this argument in a class I took in my undergraduate years, I found it very persuasive. My professor, however, argued that it would be silly to say that evil doesn't exist since the Bible affirms evil as a terrible reality. He likened Augustine's thought with the Christian Scientist understanding of sickness, where they say that, in reality, there is no such thing as sickness, so that we are all healthy--we simply have to believe in the reality of our health through faith. With respect, I don't think that's what Augustine was getting at.

It seems unfair to say that Augustine was denying that evil exists (rightly understood) in the world, since he spends an entire book, his Confessions, talking about how he and the rest of humanity are sinful wretches. So, he wasn't saying that there is no such thing as evil in the world, but he is merely saying that what we call evil is actually a condition where some Good that should be there is not.

This is vastly different from the Christian Scientist understanding of sickness, because, to extend the metaphor, Augustine wouldn't deny that people are "sick" spiritually. This is important, because many liberals today argue that everyone in the world is, in reality, saved (so that no damnation "exists"), and that we merely need to accept the reality of the salvation that we already have. Augustine, in stark contrast, would say that we have a very real problem, but the problem is not the existence of "sickness"--our problem is the lack of "health." That doesn't mean that we don't need to be "cured," but it does mean that we are trying not so much to get rid of our "sickness" as we are trying to re-establish our "health," even if getting rid of the "sickness" is a necessary first step in restoring the "health."

Augustine was trying to avoid the dualism that asserts that both Good and evil have existed from all eternity, a dualism where believers are encouraged to support the "good" god against the "evil" god. C. S. Lewis rightly points out in Mere Christianity (and other places) that, if such a theology were correct, there would be no real reason for us to see good as having primacy or superiority over evil, since both sides have equal claims on our lives. Evil cannot exist in the same way that Good exists, since that puts evil on equal footing with Good. Thus, Lewis talked about evil as "twisted" (i.e., corrupted) Good, and I think that he is closely following Augustine on this subject.

So, as I pondered this issue, I thought of a great illustration from the movie The Neverending Story. In the movie, the conflict is that a world called Fantasia is slowly being consumed by something called the "Nothing." I recall the book saying something to the effect of "If you looked at the Nothing, you felt as if you had gone blind." This wasn't blackness or space, since both of those are something--the Nothing was nothing at all, and that was the problem in the story.

In one sense, the Nothing was a very real problem (i.e., it "existed") because it was destroying all of Fantasia; however, in another sense, the problem with the Nothing was that it didn't exist, and that it was causing more things not to exist. Accordingly, in Augustine's thought, evil is a very real problem (i.e., it "exists") that has destroyed everything, to some extent, that God created to be Good; however, in another sense, the problem with evil is that it doesn't exist (since God only made Good things to exist), and it is causing more of the Good in the world not to exist.

In The Neverending Story, the solution could never have been simply to get rid of the Nothing--or, at least, this would never have been a satisfactory solution since too much had already been destroyed. Instead, the solution could only come about through a restoration of the Good. In our world, God could never have saved us simply by getting rid of evil as though removing our evil would leave us with Good--our incompleteness demanded that salvation could only come through New Creation, where God would recreate humanity and all the rest of creation to be perfectly Good. Put another way, it was never enough for Jesus simply to die on the cross as a punishment for our evil--the resurrection to new life was necessary in order to restore to us the Good we had lost at the Fall.

Labels: Bible, Books, Movies, Philosophy, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 6:36 AM | Permalink | Comments

I just had a dream that someone hacked into this blog and posted something to the effect of, "I'm appalled that Jacob hasn't written anything since Monday, especially since he has told us that he really wants to keep this thing updated. I'm not sure we can trust him any more." If the Lord has skilled any of you in dream interpretations--for do not interpretations belong to God?--I would be interested in what that means. Personally, I think that it had something to do with the 4-Alarm Spicy Chicken Sandwich that I had from Wendy's at 10:00 last night.

In other news, I am currently back in Nebraska for my Spring Break. I had an incredible flying experience on Delta through Cincinnati (both completely on time; good in-flight snacks; no layover to speak of; my luggage got in), and my parents and brother picked me up in Omaha to drive me back to Hastings. Yesterday was a long day (two tests and a paper due), so I am excited for a little R&R.

Although I have a 700-page book on the Reformation that I need to read in order to write a paper that is due next Thursday, I'm really wanting to read two books for fun. The one I haven't started yet is called Virtue and the Voice of God: Toward Theology as Wisdom, by Daniel Treier. I've continued to ponder the concept of wisdom in the Bible, and this looked like a great book to provide fodder for my thinking.

The second book is Progressive Dispensationalism by Craig Blaising and Darrell Bock. I'm reading this for two reasons: (1) I don't have a very good idea of how Progressive Dispensationalism differs from the type of Dispensationalism that I know (I read Charles Ryrie's Dispensationalism Today, now called Dispensationalism, when I was trying to decide between Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology); and (2) Beeson will be hosting Darrell Bock in April for our Biblical Studies Lectures, and I want to read something by him in order to get more out of the conference. I read about 130 of the 300 pages on the plane last night, and I was actually very pleased with how "progressive" Dispensationalism is becoming. I'll write more about it later.

Labels: Blogs, Books, Fun, Life, Nebraska, Seminary, Theology, Travel

Posted by Jacob at 8:15 AM | Permalink | Comments

This evening, the Nebraska Cornhusker baseball team will travel today to Tuscaloosa, AL to play the Alabama Crimson Tide, and I'm going to be there. I talked some seminary friends into making the hour-long drive from Birmingham to see the game--some are Alabama fans, and some are just along for the ride.

One of the Alabama fans I'm going down with passed me this little poem, and I wanted to print it here in order to give you a taste of life down here in Alabama:

If you wanna know the password for where
     the streets are paved of gold
It ain't but one little phrase and that's
     "Roll tide, roll."

I could be in for a long drive.

Labels: Alabama, Fun, Life, Nebraska, Seminary, Sports, Travel

Posted by Jacob at 7:19 AM | Permalink | Comments

This past year that I have been in seminary in Alabama, I have still tried to keep up with the Daily Nebraskan, the school newspaper from my undergraduate institution, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. On Wednesday, they ran an editorial asserting that the Bible should be read as literature and nothing more. I wrote a letter to the editor in response, and they printed it today. You can read my letter here.

Labels: Bible, Books, Life, Nebraska, Philosophy, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 4:04 AM | Permalink | Comments

I mentioned awhile ago that I was writing a paper to contrast baptism and the Lord's Supper in Baptist and Presbyterian thought. I just finished the paper, although, as I began writing it, I realized that I only had enough space to focus on baptism. Here is one of the better sections:

This definition [i.e., baptism as a sign and a seal of the covenant of grace] obviously limits Presbyterian sacramental theology from the Catholic notion that baptism works of itself (ex opere operato), but it also moves beyond even the more substantive levels of Baptist theology. Notice here a fine, but important, distinction between the theology of Presbyterians and that of Baptists: Baptists understand baptism to be symbolic—a kind of pronouncement of something already accomplished in the life of the baptized. Presbyterians, on the other hand, believe that baptism points the candidate to what God promises to accomplish through faith, which is the reality behind the sign. For Presbyterians, “the efficacy of baptism is prospective,”1 but for Baptists, the efficacy of baptism is retrospective. This aspect of Presbyterian theology is behind the Westminster Confession of Faith statement that “The efficacy of baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered,”2 and it plays a significant role in justifying the practice of infant baptism.

The paper is nothing earth-shattering, but I did spend a lot of time on it. So, if you would like a copy, let me know through e-mail or a comment, and I will be more than happy to send it to you.

---

1-William B. Evans, “'Really Exhibited and Conferred...in His Appointed Time': Baptism and the New Reformed Sacramentalism,” in The Presbyterion 31:2 (Fall 2005): 88, my emphasis.
2-WCF, 28.6

---

Because of the brilliant suggestion my good friend made, I have posted the paper on Google Docs. There are some minor formatting issues, but the text is now available to any who wish to see it. Just remember my disclaimer: it's nothing earth-shattering.

Labels: Baptism, Bible, Church, Life, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 7:08 AM | Permalink | Comments

I have a very exciting week coming up. First, I picked up my good friend Dan, who goes to seminary at Gordon-Conwell, from the airport at Atlanta yesterday. He's staying with me until Wednesday. He partly came to visit me and to see my seminary, but his main justification is that...

Second, Beeson Divinity School is hosting their annual preaching conference. Our speaker will be Cleophus LaRue, the associate professor of preaching at Princeton (apparently they have an amazing preaching department there, even if their theology and biblical studies departments aren't exactly producing lots of good things to preach).

Then, on Friday I fly out to Chicago to visit my girlfriend. It should be an amazing time--I'm finally going to get to see Moody Bible Institute, where she goes to school, not to mention getting to see her for the first time in a month and a half.

It should be a very good week.

Labels: Alabama, Life, Seminary, Travel

Posted by Jacob at 6:47 AM | Permalink | Comments

I am writing a paper for my church history class that will contrast sacramental theology in the Westminster Confession of Faith and one of the Baptist confessions--probably the Baptist Faith and Message of 1925. In my research, I just came across an excellent essay by G. Todd Wilson called "Why Baptists Should Not Rebaptize Christians from Other Denominations." As you read this, remember that, when he speaks about baptism's "biblical intent," he is writing in the belief that the New Testament teaches that new believers should be baptized as a symbol of joining the faith community of the church:

If we opt for that alternative [i.e., rebaptism], however, we are put in the uncomfortable position of insisting that while baptism is not essential for salvation, it is essential for membership in a Baptist church. We must also take this view in the realization that we are giving baptism a different meaning from its biblical intent, and this weakens our appeal to the authority of the Bible for our faith and practice. Furthermore, if we change the meaning of baptism, can we really insist that others are not free to do the same, even if they choose to baptize infants? (44)

It does seem that Baptists cannot logically say that both of the following are true: (1) biblical baptism is only the kind of baptism that is administered as a sign of entry into the community of faith; and (2) those who were (unbiblically) baptized as infants, but have been members of the community of faith for years, must be rebaptized before becoming members of a Baptist church. Wilson makes an excellent point that the rebaptism of (2) is not the "biblical" baptism of (1), nor can it be, by definition.

I wonder if this argument would have made any different in John Piper's recently failed attempt to admit certain infant-batized Christians to membership in his Baptist church (see here and here).

Here is the second quotation, which, I think, stands alone:

In this same regard it is interesting to compare our practice of baptism with our emphasis in the Lord's Supper. In baptism we have focused upon the form and letter, but in the Lord's Supper our concern is with the spirit and substance. We have held firm on the mode of immersion, but we have ignored the "one cup" and "one loaf" so vitally significant to the meaning of the Lord's Supper in the biblical account, not to mention that we also substitute grape juice for wine. Our rigidity in baptism is so different from our freedom regarding the Supper, and this marked inconsistency deserves attention. The integrity of our Christian symbols is at stake. (45)

I would encourage believer-baptists and infant-baptists alike to read the entire article, if possible. Here is the bibliographic information:

Wilson, G. Todd., “Why Baptists Should Not Rebaptize Christians from Other Denominations.” In Proclaiming the Baptist Vision: Baptism and the Lord's Supper, edited by Walter B. Shurden, 41-47. Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 1999.

Labels: Baptism, Books, Church, Communion, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 4:31 PM | Permalink | Comments

This summer, I read the book Biblical Interpretation: Past and Present by Gerald Bray (incidentally, Dr. Bray was my professor this January for my Puritan Spirituality class). This line, more than any other in the book, has had me thinking since I read it:

The modern tendency to regard Proverbs as a collection of useful but rather boring advice, Ecclesiastes as the work of a jaded humanist and the Song of Songs as a piece of erotica shows how little the Wisdom tradition is understood or appreciated nowadays, in sharp contrast to earlier times, when these three books were regarded as among the choicest in the whole Scripture. Literal interpretation has removed these books from everyday church use, and they have almost ceased to be a part of the canon for all practical purposes. (p. 160)

So, what should we make of the Wisdom Literature that God gave to his people?

As I have been thinking about this, I have been wondering if we Christians are too interested in a narrow conception of "truth." When modernism rolled onto the scene, claiming scientific ability to get to the bottom of every mystery in the universe, its first task was to rid the world of "superstitious" things like Christianity. So, we Christians responded in kind: we began to direct much research toward rationalistic fields such as textual criticism (trying to get the Hebrew and Greek texts as close to the originals as possible), archaeology (trying to get definitive proof that biblical events happened in just the way that biblical writers portrayed them), and apologetics (trying to use logic and reason to demonstrate the truth of Christianity, essentially beating the scientific naturalists at their own game).

Now, these things are all good in themselves, and we have made tremendous advances in these fields. The problem, though, is that Christianity now tends toward being an intellectual, scientific philosophy rather than being a life built upon the fear of the Lord through the person and work of Jesus Christ. So, when we evangelize, we often (consciously or unconsciously) try merely to persuade people of a certain number of facts about God and about Jesus. When we make disciples out of our converts, we generally try to stuff them with Christian information.

Of course, I would be a fool if I said that I were the first to point this out. Many have become so disillusioned with this intellectual-only approach to Christianity that they have rejected the intellectual part altogether and insisted that Christianity is totally about "relationships," both with God and with other people--these are the postmoderns and the emergents. In response, some Christians have reacted by an even greater emphasis on biblical exegesis, theology, and teaching-heavy preaching. I find myself in the latter category.

But what of wisdom? In my Old Testament Survey textbook, in the section on the book of Job, John Walton writes:

An interesting contrast of focus can also be seen in modern lists of God's attributes. They often emphasize omniscience (knowing everything) instead of infinite wisdom. They tend to focus on omnipotence (being all-powerful) perhaps at the expense of sovereignty (control and maintenance). (p. 338-39)

I wonder if both intellectual, modernistic Christians as well as relational, postmodern Christians need to grow in their understanding of God's wisdom. Instead of trying to evangelize and disciple so that people merely give their intellectual assent to Christian theology, or instead of trying to reduce Christianity to its lowest common denominator, we Christians should give a renewed emphasis to our study and interpretation of Wisdom Literature.

I am becoming increasingly persuaded that one of our biggest needs as a Church is to seek Jesus Christ in order to gain wisdom rather than facts, virtue instead of narrow dogmatism, and the fear of the Lord instead of flawless theology. This doesn't devalue truth, but rather heightens its value because it puts truth in its right context. Furthermore, this doesn't devalue relationships, but finally gives us a framework within which we might understand what exactly our relationships should look like.

So, instead of doing yet another scientific study of the book of Romans or a fuzzy reflection on Jesus' friendships in the gospels, let's read and study and pray through Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. We might not only discover why the early Church and the Old Testament Hebrews were so enamored with these books, but we also might come to know God in ways in which we find ourselves desperately lacking.

Labels: Bible, Books, Church, Philosophy, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 8:26 AM | Permalink | Comments

Classes began today for the Spring semester. Well, I actually only had one class (Church History: Reformation-Present), but it's going to be a doozy. We will have to read almost 3000 pages of books (not counting all the other books we will read to write two 10-page research papers), including a lovely 700-page tome called Creeds of the Churches. This book is bursting with--you guessed it!--creeds, church council decisions, confessions/statements of faith, and even a couple of early church letters thrown in for good measure. The book spans Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, Baptist, and Methodist traditions, so I suppose that it will be worthwhile to read, but it will also be extremely boring at parts.

I guess that's what I get for taking a class from a guy who is just finishing up his Ph.D. work at Westminster Theological Seminary.

Of my other four classes, I only have the syllabus for my Hebrew II class. My professor is going to allow us to skip the final if we get A's on all the quizzes and tests through the semester. That's going to be extremely difficult to pull off, but I have already been studying a ridiculous amount for the quiz that we are going to have tomorrow (it will cover the first semester's material).

It feels good (and slightly painful) to get back into the swing of things.

Labels: Alabama, Books, Church, Life, Seminary

Posted by Jacob at 8:33 PM | Permalink | Comments

Two items of great interest that I happened upon in the past twenty-four hours:

1. Did you know that Covenant Theological Seminary (the denominational seminary of the Presbyterian Church in America) offers entire sets of lectures for several of their classes for free in mp3 format? With everything from Ancient & Medieval Church History to Youth Ministry, you can essentially sit in on whole classes from Covenant through your iPod. (So far, I have put three classes on mine.) The program is called "Covenant Worldwide."

   What an opportunity! I honestly am so impressed that a seminary would essentially give away its bread and butter that I'm adding a permanent link on our blog to that web site. Perhaps adding a link isn't that much, but I really hope that many take advantage of this.

2. Did you know that Yahoo! now offers an interesting way to raise money for charitable causes with a search engine called GoodSearch? Essentially, you select a charity, and every internet search you make through GoodSearch earns that charity about $.01 (the money comes from advertisers, not you). A penny isn't really a lot, but it obviously adds up if you have lots of people performing all their searches through that site. A very interesting concept, but I don't know if it would tear me away from Google.

Labels: Church, Seminary, Technology

Posted by Jacob at 4:19 PM | Permalink | Comments

At the end of Part 2 of Pilgrim's Progress, when Mr. Stand-fast is summoned by his Master, who "was not willing that [Stand-fast] should be so far from him any longer." As Stand-fast readies himself to die by crossing the River, so that he might enter the Celestial City, he says:

This River has been a Terror to many, yea the thoughts of it also have often frightened me. But now methinks I stand easy, my Foot is fixed upon that, upon which the Feet of the Priests that bare the Ark of the Covenant stood while Israel went over this Jordan. The Waters indeed are to the Palate bitter, and to the Stomach cold; yet the thoughts of what I am going to, and of the Conduct that waits for me on the other side, doth lie as a glowing Coal at my heart.

I see myself now at the end of my Journey, my toilsome Days are ended. I am going now to see that Head that was Crowned with Thorns and that Face that was spit upon, for me.

I have formerly lived by Hearsay, and Faith, but now I go where I shall live by sight, and shall be with him, in whose Company I delight myself...

Labels: Books, Devotion, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 4:06 PM | Permalink | Comments

Last semester, I wrote a paper for my biblical hermeneutics class that analyzed Matthew 20:1-16, the parable of the vineyard laborers. Many people (notably Craig Blomberg, who wrote the New American Commentary on Matthew) understand the parable as teaching that there are no levels of rewards in heaven--all are treated equally, despite how they have lived their lives.

Personally, I find this to be a very difficult thesis to support, both in light of the parable itself (which I will deal with shortly) and in light of other Scriptural teaching. The most obvious example would seem to be 1 Cor. 3:10-15, where Paul tells us that our life's work will one day be revealed either as gold, silver, precious stones, wood, and/or hay--some of our work will last forever, and other parts of it will be burned up in the Judgment. But even in the very same chapter of this parable (Matt. 20:20-28), Jesus speaks that there are some who will sit at his right hand, and some who will not; he goes on to say that there will be a direct correlation between those who will be the greatest in heaven and those who are the least in this life. (More on this after I address the parable of the vineyard laborers.)

So, I argued instead (based largely on a discussion with Warren Wiersbe) that the parable is about limiting God by seeking to get a contract from him on what we will gain from our service. Briefly, my rationale goes like this: the first group of laborers get the landowner to agree (v. 2) on a denarius for their work, but all the other groups of laborers simply agree to work for "whatever is right" (v. 4). In the end, those who had simply agreed to work out of faith in the employer's fairness get much more money than they deserve--they gain a denarius for working less than an entire day, when the standard wage of that period for an entire day's work was a denarius.

On the other hand (the shocking part of the parable), when the first group of laborers complain about getting only a denarius, the reply of the landowner is twofold: (1) "Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius?" (v. 13, my emphasis)--in other words, the landowner points out that he had acted absolutely fairly in rewarding them according to their prior agreement; and (2) "Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?" (v. 15)--it is the landowner's prerogative to pay his laborers more than they "deserve."

So, in my opinion, here is the point of the parable:

• First, God is absolutely just--not even in the way he dispenses his grace can he be charged with being unfair.
• Second, it is wrong to treat God as though he were a hard master from whom we need a contract if we are to be treated fairly, because this view of God reduces the way we live as Christians to nothing more than punching a clock so that we might earn "wages" in heaven. Not only is it wrong to treat God this way, but we lose out on experiencing the fullness of the grace of God.
• So, the proper attitude of a Christian is to do whatever God calls us to do whenever he calls us to do it, all the while completely trusting in his goodness toward those who love him and are called according to his purposes--we should not be driven by a bottom line in our obedience to God.

I write all this because, as I was reading again through Matt. 20 yesterday, I noticed that this is essentially the same message that Jesus teaches James, John, and their mother at the end of this same chapter in Matt. 20:20-28. Here, Jesus gives us standing orders to make ourselves the least among the brethren in order that we might be counted the greatest in the kingdom of Heaven. The problem is that, if we do this with a goal of earning a great reward ("Sure I'm able to drink your cup, Jesus--shouldn't that buy me a good seat in heaven?"), we will eventually find out that we missed the point. That sort of a life is an attempt to bargain with God for something (in this case, position and prestige in heaven) rather than living with complete confidence in the Master's fairness and generosity.

It seems, then, that we have a paradox: how can we possibly live with a goal of being first in the kingdom of Heaven (something Jesus seems to encourage, since he himself is the one who gives away the secret to being first, and since that secret--i.e., becoming a servant--is at the heart of all of his ethical teaching for us) when living with the sole purpose of gaining a reward was the mistake of the first group of vineyard laborers?

As I meditated upon this question, I noticed the following verses, which serve as Matthew's transition between the parable of the vineyard laborers and the story of Mother Zebudee (that is, this is the only thing between the two stories I have been discussing):

17And as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside, and on the way he said to them, 18"See, we are going up to Jerusalem. And the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death 19and deliver him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified, and he will be raised on the third day." (Matt. 20:17-19)

I think Matthew included this statement at this place for a purpose--the resolution to the tension between the vineyard laborers and the Sons of Zebudee is found in this aspect of Jesus' life. He alone obeyed his Father's will perfectly for his entire life (i.e., he worked the entire day in the vineyard), and he did so by making himself the slave of all, for "the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Matt. 20:28). So, it should come as no surprise to us that:

9Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:9-11)

If we would be first in the kingdom, we must become a slave (like Jesus did) with humility that seeks servanthood in order to deny self and glorify God in all things (like Jesus' humility). If we would be first, we must become more like Jesus both in our actions and in our attitudes.

Labels: Bible, Devotion, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 2:06 PM | Permalink | Comments

An excerpt from my homework:

Prudence: And what is it that makes you so desirous to go to Mount Zion?

Christian: Why, there I hope to see him alive, that did hang dead on the Cross; and there I hope to be rid of all those things, that to this day are in me, an annoyance to me; there they say there is no death, and there I shall dwell with such Company as I like best. For to tell you truth, I love him, because I was by him eased of my burden, and I am weary of my inward sickness; I would fain be where I shall die no more, and with the Company that shall continually cry, Holy, Holy, Holy.

--John Bunyan, The Pilgrim's Progress

Labels: Books, Devotion, Seminary, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 3:53 PM | Permalink | Comments

Today, I fly back to Alabama for the January term and the Spring semester of seminary. It will be hard to leave Nebraska again because being home has reinforced just how much I love this state. It is amazing how much God can tie our hearts to a particular place, even as he calls us to be somewhere else.

See you in March, Nebraska.

Labels: Alabama, Life, Nebraska, Seminary, Travel

Posted by Jacob at 6:06 AM | Permalink | Comments

On about four different occasions, I have experimented with switching from Microsoft Office to a free office software called OpenOffice.org (yes, its name actually looks like a web site address). On each of those occasions, I quickly became frustrated with a few minor issues, and I switched back. And why not? Microsoft Office was made available to me, as a student of the University of Nebraska, for something like $5.

Now, however, the situation is a little bit different. For Christmas, I received a new laptop computer to replace the one I had been using for four years. I was thrilled with the computer, but I quickly realized that it had no office software, and Microsoft doesn't exactly encourage installing their software on multiple computers. So, I either shell out $100+ to get a word processor (the only thing I really use), or I take another stab at OpenOffice.org.

But, as Providence would have it, I ran across a book today when I was hanging out at the Hastings library: OpenOffice.org for Dummies. I'm going to try to read through the important stuff before I have to go back to Birmingham (I leave Saturday). Maybe my fifth time (with the help of a book with a demeaning title) will be the charm! We'll see how it goes...

---

In other news, I had tried to register for the class "Puritan Spirituality" for the January term, but I was only able to get on the waiting list. Yesterday, I got a phone call telling me that a bunch of people had defaulted on their seats in the class by not paying their bills, so I got in! I will be spending the next two weeks with Richard Baxter's The Reformed Pastor and John Bunyan's The Pilgrim's Progress. Try not to become envious of me.

Labels: Books, Life, Seminary, Technology, Theology

Posted by Jacob at 12:46 PM | Permalink | Comments

As of today, I am almost completely finished with my classes for the semester--I only have two classes left to attend on Tuesday. In all, my first semester of seminary has gone almost frighteningly quickly. Here is an attempt to quickly recap the semester.

My classes: Hermeneutics (how to study the Bible), Hebrew, Old Testament Survey, Church History, Spiritual Formation, and Introduction to Theological Studies (essentially a library course).

Favorite class: Tough call, but probably Old Testament Survey. We covered Genesis through Esther this semester, and my professor did a wonderful job of showing the context, theological emphases, and preaching points of each of the books.

Best class: Hebrew. For quite some time, I have dreamed of reading the Old Testament in its original language. I still can't, but I'm a heck of a lot closer than I was. I cannot describe the satisfaction of reading my English Bible only to wonder what exactly the text is trying to convey, and then to be able to look up the original text and usually get a pretty good idea. I still have a long way to go, but I feel like I have an infinitely better sense of how the Old Testament works than I ever did. Oh, and my professor for Hebrew is a stud--we use the grammar that he wrote.

Biggest eye-opener: The fact that I know nada about church history. Good grief, I was embarassed to find out how deeply the roots my ignorance grew regarding what all happened in the church before the Reformation. This will need to change for me, and when I have a church, I am determined to make sure that my congregation learns at least something about church history.

Best seminary activity: The "J. I. Packer and the Future of Evangelicalism" conference held at Beeson on September 25-27 of this year. The speakers included Mark Dever, Chuck Colson, Richard John Neuhaus, James Earl Massey, and J. I. Packer himself. Perhaps I will have time over Christmas vacation to review my notes and blog some impressions that I gained from the conference. A-maze-ing.

Earliest morning: 2:30 a.m. Even for those of you who know that I am an early riser, that could be a shocker. Actually, it wasn't too bad.

Latest night: 1:30 a.m. I stayed up late finishing a big paper on the development of baptism within the early church. The only problem with staying up that late was that I did it on the same day that I had gotten up at 2:30 that morning--I pulled a 23-hour day. I think I almost died, but for the grace of God.

Quick lessons/recap:

1. The books of Chronicles can blow your mind--you just have to read them correctly.
2. Important things happened between Jesus and John Calvin. Honestly.
3. Don't drink too much coffee in the afternoon, even if you had to get up really early that morning.
4. Nebraska is indisputably my favorite place on earth.

Labels: Alabama, Life, Seminary

Posted by Jacob at 1:44 PM | Permalink | Comments