ShelfLife

• Home
• About

32 Responses to “Typical”

1. # GMFon Sep 14th 2009 at 11:16 am

   Very encouraging and honest discussion topic brought to light here. Looks like this blog will not be afraid to ask some tough questions. Looking forward to participating in future discussions. Nice work Mr. Tarnow.

   [Reply]

2. # Aaron Hortonon Sep 14th 2009 at 12:30 pm

   I am so excited to read tonight! Read your blog about the first assignment, and can’t wait! Thanks for going through this book with us.

   [Reply]

3. # Jackieon Sep 14th 2009 at 1:56 pm

   Thanks for the insight. I haven’t started reading the book yet, but I look forward to reading it so I can grow in my understanding of my faith.

   [Reply]

4. # Jenon Sep 14th 2009 at 2:05 pm

   Not sure if this is related since I haven’t read the chapeter yet but reading your blog it made me thinki of this. I was at a Billy Graham event at Texas Stadium (Irving one) years ago and he preached the most simple version of the gospel and I remember thinking, “That’s it?”, like he could do a better job of explaining it but thousands of people walked down to the stage to accept Christ. The longer I’ve been a believer the more I realize that the gospel really is that simple, it just seems like it should be more complicated. When the Holy Spirit is moving in someone’s life something we think isn’t overpowering proof can still be used to reveal truth and convict their hearts. I do agree that we should spend the time to look up answers to questions people ask when we don’t know either. When I think of my own personal conversion it wasn’t anything anyone said or any intellectual reasoning that brought me out of the pit, but that doesn’t mean it won’t be for someone else. Just like everyone learns differently and a teacher learns different styles to reach all of those kids in their class, we should learn different styles to reach others for Christ.

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 15th, 2009 at 8:50 pm

   Good comments Jen. I remember when I left Atlanta and moved to Dallas to start seminary, one of my friends put his hand on my shoulder, looked me in the eye and said, “Now Adam, you are going to go spend all this time studying the Bible and Theology – however – don’t ever forget that the gospel is so simple that a child can understand it.” It is a great reminder that the gospel of salvation is so simple. However, as you and I know, the moment of salvation is just the beginning of this here and now life with God (articulated much better by Matt below). Unfortunately, some of the most powerful “trendsetters” in our culture (i.e. learning institutions) have labeled a life of faith as unreasonable and therefore dismiss most of what Jesus taught as a “matter of faith” rather than an actual body of knowledge. So, I think what Moreland is doing with this book is really beneficial. Ultimate? No. But very necessary and very beneficial for the kingdom. I’m excited to see how our little church will benefit.

   [Reply]

5. # Paul Muncyon Sep 14th 2009 at 9:37 pm

   Thanks for starting us off, Adam. One of the things that helped in my rebirth after 25 years of agnosticism was Todd’s statement that we did not have to check our brains at the door in order to believe in the Bible and in this Jesus. I don’t know how far afield we want to go with this, but I couldn’t help but be interested in an interview with Dan Brown, author of The Da Vinci Code, that appeared in the Parade section of Sunday’s Dallas Morning News. In answer to the question, “Are you religious?”, his answer ended with …”The Bible doesn’t make sense. Science makes much more sense to me. And I just gravitated away from religion.” In answer to the next question, “Where are you now?”, he replied, “The irony is that I’ve really come full circle. The more science I studied, the more I saw that physics becomes metaphysics and numbers become imaginary numbers. The farther you go into science, the mushier the ground gets. You start to say, ‘Oh, there is an order and a spiritual aspect to science’.” That encourages me to continue the equipping process for myself. I’m looking forward to the rest of the book.

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 15th, 2009 at 8:35 pm

   Hey Paul – thanks so much for your comments. That’s a really interesting quote from Dan Brown. It reminds me of different things I’ve heard from Tim Keller (Pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian in NYC) and Nancy Pearcy (author of Total Truth) in regards to scientism and naturalistic philosophy: basically, every worldview has some element of “faith” (i.e. they believe something that cannot be easily “proven” and therefore seems a little mushy), so, it’s a little unfair for relegate faith to this “lower” level that is less superior to reason, especially when every worldview has some element of faith. The issue becomes what are your reasons for believing what you believe. Can you post a link to that interview for us? I’ll bet others would be interested in reading it as well.

   [Reply]

6. # Matthewon Sep 14th 2009 at 10:53 pm

   I appreciate Jen’s comment because I find it reflective of what much of Christian culture professes. For now (in what will be a failed attempt to seek brevity), I’ll just speak to this part of our new conversation..

   We too often identify intellectualism myopically as merely one of many available tools to the evangelist for the persuasion of the convert. This simply misses the mark. It is, indeed, the Holy Spirit that opens the eyes to receive the truth of Christ of whom God calls to Himself; the repentance of the sinner is by no means the unguided product of crafty or well structured sermon. Having said this, it seems impossible to be called to believe in something that is so ill-defined as “you need to get right with God” or “accept Jesus in your heart.” (See pages 49ff & 59ff for more on this…)

   Still, this moment is not what we are primarily talking about when we discuss Christian intellectualism. The acceptance of Christ is not the point at which our minds are satisfied and thus to stop seeking the questions of Christ and His dominion. To cease consideration of Christ and the workings of the Divine upon conversion is truly the shame of the modern church, largely resultant previously from the Second Great Awakening and currently sustained through the overly focused “seeker” model that does much to sensationally tailor services to the seeker while all but forgetting the need to build up and train the Christian for a life of maturity and ministry.

   It is, instead, at conversion that we really catalyze the true beginning of our intellectual responsibility to pursue Truth. As heaven and earth intersect within us through the ministry of the Holy Spirit, truth has just become accessible and true wisdom finally attainable. We have just begun. We instantly find ourselves in Genesis 1 for our own birth into Christ’s kingdom; He has created life out of death. So, now what?

   Willard fleshes this answer out immediately in his introduction through his reference from Paul’s letter to the Colossians, claiming that “the outcome is that we increasingly are able to do all things, speaking or acting, as if Christ were doing them” (11). This is why the modern church is so mediocre in pursuing holiness and conversely so exceptional in mirroring the trappings of this world. At conversion, we think we have finished our consideration of Christ and that all is left is to apply. Yet we have little truth for application. We have no context of understanding. We then subject ourselves to teachers primarily driven through their personal opinion resultant from their own historical illiteracy, linguistic incompetency, lack of serious doctrinal study, and absence of ecclesiological authority. Their words are most often empty, occasionally dangerous, and yet almost always sweetened through their proof texted sermons; however, the church largely has no ability to discern their teachings.

   As so many of our Christian leaders are themselves intellectually void, how does one expect the parishioner to excel in his love for God in a right way? Perhaps reading this book will at least serve as a glimpse to some of the importance of seeking Truth. From there, one will find a wealth of instruction and training for the serious Christian. Though the church may not always reflect it, we have a wealth of pedagogues, both antecedent and contemporary. Some, however, might be wondering why it even matters…especially if this is not at all about conversion.

   The answer is worship. Specifically, the answer is found in being a resurrection people, called from death to life to live as a beacon and vision for what God accomplished through Christ in his death and resurrection. Moreland calls this being “salty.” It is to interact in a world groaning for redemption in a way that effectively proclaims that God is good, redemption has come, and Christ is on the throne. It is to be not only objects of redemption but to now also be agents of redemption, ushering in the kingdom of Christ. Ashamedly, this gets lost through abhorrent eschatology, much of it popularized through entertaining yet theologically muddled children’s books. Here again is revealed the importance for a discerning mind to separate the culture (even that of the fundamentalist church) from the call of Christ to His people. It seems difficult for Christians to seriously engage in worshiping God when they have no idea why He has them here or why they are ultimately to pursue truth in the grand scheme of God’s plan and workings through history. Yet, I digress. Wrapping things up…

   To pursue truth, though, is to pursue beauty, justice, and love. It is to live as God created us to live, as we await His recreation of heaven and earth. None of this, however, is possible without loving God with your mind, without seeking out and meditating upon His truths. How are we to proclaim (much less appreciate) the resurrection, baptism, the eucharist, the prophets, the law, grace, the ascension, the cross, etc if we do not know that of which we speak? How can we worship that which we do not know? God desires relationship with us to the point of Christ on the cross. He knows us and yet still pursues us. When we cease to seek him, to learn of Him and from Him, we are essentially turning over and falling asleep as He is whispering life into our fragile ears.

   A professor of mine once said something very pertinent to our discussion:
   “The most important thought you will ever think is what you think when you think about God. For what you believe about God determines every other facet of your life.”

   In response to Adam’s questions:
   1. It is easy for me to get lazy and distracted.
   2. A mix of N.T. Wright, Kierkegaard, Edwards, Dostoyevski, Ratzinger, Murray, Horton, Moltmann, Calvin, Tutu, Piper, Ladd, Augustine, Luther, Tolstoy, Donne, Hannah, Wallace, Stott, Lewis, Barth, Wilberforce, Zwingli, and many other faithful men.
   3. There is life in knowing God.
   4. Not at all to any healthy church that promotes doctrine and theology. Yes to a church who are outside of authority and identified primarily through their pastor, which is too easy to find in non-denominational protestantism. Such must be guarded against, and yet, a threat to this institutional church is likely a good thing to Christ and his Church.

   [Reply]

   

   Watermark Reply:
   September 15th, 2009 at 5:20 pm

   I’ve added threaded comments. Thanks for the post on http://www.anthologicalprolegomena.com – Scott

   [Reply]

   

   Matthew Reply:
   September 15th, 2009 at 7:31 pm

   Welcome. This is a great resource for WM.

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 15th, 2009 at 9:41 pm

   Matt – thanks for joining the conversation. I haven’t seen you around the neighborhood lately. Was your professor A.W. Tozer? Wasn’t he the author of that quote? Oh well, you know what they say, “Originality is the fine art of remembering what you hear but forgetting where you heard it.”

   Thanks for taking the time to write so much (and write so clearly). I’m sure you’ve heard this before, but you appear to be a very gifted writer/thinker, so I look forward to your contributions. Plus, you appear to have a little angst which I always think is cool

   “It is, instead, at conversion that we really catalyze the true beginning of our intellectual responsibility to pursue Truth.” I like the use of the word “responsibility”. In the past (and even still today), I will come across a passage that is confusing or a concept that doesn’t make sense and it is so easy to “outsource” trying to think through the issue to someone else. As you pointed out, the process (or responsibility) has just begun at conversion, because we now have the necessary software to be able to think through real life issues with God.

   “This is why the modern church is so mediocre in pursuing holiness and conversely so exceptional in mirroring the trappings of this world.” I’d be interested to hear your thoughts and experiences about churches you’ve seen or been a part of that actually create culture rather than mirror culture? I’ve heard that “should statement” before (i.e. the church should create culture rather than imitate it), and it makes a lot of sense, however, I feel like I haven’t seen very many examples. I can think of being a part of the 7:22 bible study, lead by Louie Giglio in Atlanta during the late 1990s and how completely different that entire movement was from anything I had experienced in the world (I started to attend that study about 2 years after I became a believer). I will say that some of the things Jackie and I have learned at Watermark appear to be very counter-cultural: the value this church places on conflict resolution, and the value this church places on marriage, to name two. I see (and commend) Watermark for trying to create culture in these two small areas.

   “We then subject ourselves to teachers primarily driven through their personal opinion resultant from their own historical illiteracy, linguistic incompetency, lack of serious doctrinal study, and absence of ecclesiological authority. Their words are most often empty, occasionally dangerous, and yet almost always sweetened through their proof texted sermons; however, the church largely has no ability to discern their teachings.” That’s some good angst there, brother. Well said. Do you think the American mega-church is the best context to achieve what Moreland is advocating for in this book? Don’t the context and environment sometimes overly-influence the program? You and I can make a lot of progress when it’s just us sitting across a table drinking coffee. Add others the table, and the dynamic of the conversation changes dramatically. I pray that the church will be able to creatively find a way to make progress despite its size and not feel handcuffed by the environment.

   “The answer is worship.” Amen. As Paul said, in view of what Christ has done, offering our entire self is our reasonable act of worship. I pray that more intellect is never the end result. I never want intellect to become my functional savior. It will never satisfy like the Almighty and will never forgive me when I fail it.

   [Reply]

   

   Matthew Reply:
   September 16th, 2009 at 8:02 am

   Adam,

   First quick response, re: the quote.

   Actually, it was something I heard Bingham often say. Support:

   http://qualisest.com/2009/02/20/read-your-bible-this-march.aspx?ref=rss
   http://community.icontact.com/p/discipleschurch/newsletters/name_official/posts/in-n-out-burger-and-the-beauty-of-disneyland2
   http://www.aarongreenway.com/devotionals/1999/081999.PDF
   http://www.facebook.com/john.buerger?ref=ts#/john.buerger?v=info&viewas=681690133&ref=ts
   http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendId=29223043&page=2fa

   I believe you are thinking of a very similar quote that is from Tozer, which likely inspired Bingham’s:

   “What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us. Low views of God destroy the gospel for all who hold them.” (from The Knowledge of the Holy)

   So, it is true what they say about originality…you can pass that along to Bingham if you want (though his words do have a different spin and were more pertinent to what I was writing…)

   [Reply]

   

   Matthew Reply:
   September 16th, 2009 at 9:08 am

   Here we go…

   Tozer:

   Clarified.

   Responsibility:

   Good insight…very good.

   Mediocrity of the Church Pursuing Holiness / Culture:

   I think the key word in my phrase “conversely so exceptional in mirroring the trappings of this world” would be the word trappings. I’m not really trying to talk about creating a new culture vs imitating the one we have; instead, I am claiming that the average parishioner looks no different than his non-Christian neighbor when it comes to the statistical negatives, i.e. divorce, materialism, etc. Barna studies illustrate this well enough.

   If we did, however, want to broach such a conversation, I’d claim extreme hesitancy with the idea that the church should create a separate culture. Think of Christ – He lived and perused among a sinful culture, and yet, he did not fall into that culture’s trappings. Think also of Daniel. In Daniel’s case he did some things differently on a cultural level, and yet, it was all done within a very prominent role within a larger culture. I don’t think it’s about creating a separate culture as much as pursuing holiness in the culture God has placed us; so that, within this present setting, we can be “salty.” As for what WM is doing well, I think that is much like Daniel – how can we, being equipped by and responsible to God’s truth, live within our present culture to be a light, not hidden under a bush (hiding the light under a bush, of course, would be creating our own culture and exercising it within some compound out in the country…which would not be good). This, though, goes back to the question of why we are here, and relatedly, how we should impact our given culture.

   Low Quality Teachers:

   Let’s group these into two groups:
   First, the issue of ecclesiological authority. This is the inherent effect of churches splitting off of churches that split off of another church that split off, etc. What you end up with is a large number of churches totally disconnected and without any authority for the pastor. Wise churches will develop a strong elder board; however, this is not necessarily the norm. There are many churches that align to a specific school or seminary, which is interesting. Protestant churches, however, non-denominational especially, will always struggle with this and have a more difficult time mitigating an absence of authority. Ironically (or not), they also tend to struggle much more with serious doctrinal training and historical literacy. So, let’s move onto there.

   Taking historical illiteracy, lack of study, and inability to read the languages, we find that this is a more recent reality. I’m not trying to spew angst, but merely, stating a fact in comparison to the historical church. Allow me also to isolate Protestants in this, as Anglicans, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox Christians still place a very high expectation on serious study as well as on the immense importance of consulting the vast cumulative wisdom that has come through Christ’s church through time and space (history). As for language study, I think this is probably a push among a data set of all who have advanced training. So, allow me to focus on Protestant Christians for ease of this conversation.

   This is not (none of this section) intended to spew angst but merely recite a present reality. It used to not be like this. In the last days of great Christian Intellectualism, there were three types of American men that went through advanced university studies: Medical Doctors, Attorneys, and Pastors. Those were your doctorates. There was not only high expectations academically of pastors but there was also high acceptance within the academic circle. Look at this list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ivy_League_university_presidents) of Ivy League Presidents and look at the commonality between most schools until the early twentieth century. Let that sink in.

   Studies were also quite rigorous, needless to say. My point is that the training (and expectation of) Protestant ministers have declined greatly the last hundred or so years. Again, picking on non-denominational churches especially, you see much to often random guys just starting their own church. Much of this comes from consumeristic preferences, which is a shame. I think that time at seminary makes it easy to assume that is just the natural and assumed path for many; however, most American pastors have no formal academic training. That is staggering.

   So, yeah, we have a culture of ill-equipped pastors (at least in comparison to previous standards). As we have lost a Christendom partially defined through great intellectual teachers and laymen who are leaders in intellectualism, we see that those two groups are, indeed, related.

   Specific Questions and Coffee

   Q: “Do you think the American mega-church is the best context to achieve what Moreland is advocating for in this book?”
   A: No. I think the American mega-church is one of the greatest detractors and liabilities of Christendom today. Not a fan.

   Q: “Don’t the context and environment sometimes overly-influence the program?”
   A: Definitely. See my above statement about being overly seeker friendly, and then let’s couple that with catering to soft Christianity.

   As for a table with coffee, I think that’s a brilliant idea. It might be fun to have a coffee talk time midway through this book and then at the end for those who want to talk about stuff face to face. I’m all for it.

   Worship / Intellect

   Agreed. What we strive for is knowing God, not merely knowing about God. However, the former somewhat requires the latter. The Biblical text, however, makes it clear that the demons know God (informationally much better than any of us right now!), so this is not the end. Truly knowing God must in the end translate to loving God and loving our neighbors.

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 16th, 2009 at 9:13 pm

   Low quality teachers –

   I like what you are saying there and I believe your observations are spot on. Having (like you), spent some time in formal training (at Dallas Seminary), I always found it un-motivating when I was taking certain classes and I heard over and over again how a many of the classes were “not practical” and therefore not valuable. That sentiment was pretty consistent from very different folks (church members, church staff, teaching pastors, and other seminary students). Collectively the zeitgeist was “just memorize what you need to memorize and read what you need to read so you can get through these classes.” I was pretty immature and a little too impressionable when I entered seminary, so I might not be the best test case, but all of those comments certainly had a big impact on my motivation to truly learn certain subjects. However, I don’t know why I’m still a little hesitant to say that formal academic training is necessary for all Protestant pastors. I think my fear is that too much formal training would lead to pastors who can only communicate on a level that misses so many people. However, I will say (as you have also said), most local Protestant churches in American have much ground to make up in this area, so for now, any little bit of progress is good. Great list of the university presidents, by the way. Very interesting.

   Coffee –

   We are definitely going to have to plan something during the week of 9/28. It will be good to put faces and names together and have some off-line conversations.

   [Reply]

   

   atarnow Reply:
   September 17th, 2009 at 6:41 am

   As I was thinking a little more this morning, I believe the reason I feel a hesitancy or fear about too much formal training for Protestant pastors is because I’ve seen so few examples of people who have a high level of intellect AND a high level of ability to love people and love God. Without realizing it, I believe that if I had to choose between high EQ (emotional intelligence) or high IQ, I would rather have high EQ. As one quote I recently read states rather candidly: “EQ gets you through life, IQ gets you through school.”

   I guess this is subclass of the “sacred vs. secular” split. The early church leaders (and Christ) appeared to embody both very well. As you said above: “Truly knowing God must in the end translate to loving God and loving our neighbors.” I really hope we (the body) can embrace these two very opposite things (or at least they appear to be opposite, on the surface) which will ultimately result in loving God, loving others and further the kingdom.

   [Reply]

   

   Matthew Reply:
   September 20th, 2009 at 2:46 pm

   Yes, but don’t choose between the two. Such an hypothetical situation by no means abdicates the responsibility to pursue both. We are to love God with all of our mind and heart. We are to worship Him in Spirit and truth.

   Too often, Christians think this is a one-or-the-other proposition, where they do receive a choice as to which one they will primarily commit to. We have not such a choice.

   To the degree of which God gave you a brain and put you into a context with other people, you must pursue both.

   Besides…

   If you choose to love people yet do not with all your might search God’s truths, then you really don’t have much to offer. Certainly not wisdom. Such a Christian is merely equipped to say “Oh, I’m very sorry for you” (yet can give no wisdom) or “I’ll be praying for you” (and they won’t but if they do it will be quite whimsical) or “Let’s start an accountability group and project to one another that we believe the Christian life is a very trite list of do’s and do-not’s” (okay, maybe they don’t say this, but we know it’s true). The degree to which you close your mind to God is the degree to which you have nothing to offer his people and further propel this sad state the church is in – tell me how choosing EQ over IQ really loves his people…

   It doesn’t. It may make you feel better or make them feel warm for a bit, but it does not love them. Not really.

   Instead, such laziness (which it is, because anyone can pick up a book and can learn to a degree…and again, are responsible to that degree) condemns those you say you love.

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 21st, 2009 at 8:00 pm

   Very well said Matt. Thanks.

   

   Matthew Reply:
   September 16th, 2009 at 9:09 am

   Oh, and lastly…

   Though I tried to downplay the angst on mediocre pastoral leadership, you could very fairly attribute angst more to the children’s book / fundamentalism comment…I left the door wide open on that.

   [Reply]

7. # Scotton Sep 15th 2009 at 12:05 am

   Would you say you are (or have been) typical (i.e. anti-intellectual)?

   Up until college, then challenging questions about Christianity forced me to dig deeper. I was blessed to find some Christians who took reason and the Bible seriously. God used them and their apologetics to help strengthen my faith and now reason plays a crucial role in my thinking.

   Who have been some of the biggest influences in helping you to explore this aspect of the spiritual life?

   C.S. Lewis, G.K. Chesterton, and R.C. Sproul

   What are some of the benefits you’ve experienced personally from “asking and thinking”?

   Some of the benefits have been an increased knowledge of God and therefore a stronger relationship with Him. My faith has also been strengthened by asking and thinking things through. I’ve also found that I’m better prepared to share my faith and answer skeptic’s questions.

   Do you believe “asking and thinking” pose any threats to the church?

   Not really, as long as the asking and thinking comes from a genuine desire for truth. Asking and thinking also might shake some people from merely being nominal Christians which is a good thing for the church.

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 15th, 2009 at 9:47 pm

   Thanks for your thoughts Scott. I too, at times, feel better prepared to engage in dialogue with skeptic’s but I certainly walk away from many of those conversations with more questions than answers sometimes. I’m always amazed at what good questions people really have. I find it ironic that often times a skeptic can do more to motivate me than a preacher.

   [Reply]

   

   Scott Reply:
   September 16th, 2009 at 1:01 am

   I agree and I’ve definitely been motivated by some good questions from skeptical friends.

   Some of those challenging questions start to leave the realm of reason and move on to areas of trust and belief.

   How do you think J.P. Moreland would say we should handle those situations when we are still trying to be “accessible” through reason, yet are dealing with matters of faith that are potentially beyond the reaches of human reason?

   Thanks for the reply and for sharing your thoughts.

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 16th, 2009 at 8:55 am

   That’s a good question Scott. My guess (and I want to emphasize that this is merely a guess), is that Moreland would encourage us to “pray without ceasing” in those situations. We know that reason in and of itself has a limit and unless it is fueled and anointed by God, reason alone cannot lead someone to see that there is a Creator God, and that this Creator God is the God of the Bible and that Jesus is this Creator God’s son who came to the earth to teach us about this Creator God and to provide personal access to this Creator God.

   How have you handled some of these situations?

   [Reply]

   

   Scott Reply:
   September 16th, 2009 at 11:14 pm

   Thanks Adam. I used to handle these situations by trying even harder to find all the answers so I could “prove” Christianity. Over time I’ve realized that it doesn’t really work that way, as Paul discusses in 1 Corinthians 2:14. So it’s good to be reminded to continually pray for those that are struggling with the Christian faith. As you say above, reason has limits unless it’s “fueled and anointed by God.”

   A more recent way I’ve tried to handle these situations is to do what Timothy Keller explains in his book The Reason for God where he talks about getting someone who is doubting a belief to deconstruct their doubts and realize their doubt is really based on a belief already held.

   I think this is especially powerful because it can show someone who is struggling with having beliefs in the first place that they actually already have some. The real question then becomes why they believe what they already believe and the issue is brought back into the “accessible” realm of reason.

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 17th, 2009 at 5:38 am

   I have been greatly influenced by Keller in this area too. Have you seen his lecture/Q&A that he did at the Google corporate headquarters? Watching him answer skeptic’s questions during the last 30 minutes of this video is pretty impressive (not necessarily his answers, but his tone, body language and “heart” I think are great).

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kxup3OS5ZhQ

   [Reply]

   

   Scott Reply:
   September 17th, 2009 at 8:38 pm

   No, I will check that out. Thanks!

8. # Herbon Sep 15th 2009 at 12:15 pm

   Prof. Tarnow: A question for you:

   On page 50, J.P. Moreland discusses how the verses below demonstrated that Jesus’s intellectual skill in debates by showing that he understood his opponent’s point of view and appealed to common ground as well as his willingness to stand up for God’s truth with well thought out answers but I would ask for a different reflection on these verses.

   Verses from the Bible:
   34Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36″Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[b] 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[c] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

   Question: in light of your reading of J.P. Morland’s book, how do you weigh the importance and value of loving the Lord your God with “all of your heart and with all of your soul” against “with all of your mind”?

   P.S> How do these 3 ways to loving God differ?

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 15th, 2009 at 10:07 pm

   Herb – I resent the professor comment – you know I dropped out of seminary. Also, anyone else reading these comments needs to know that Herb is on vacation in Mexico with his family right now. That is how dedicated he is – he will even respond to a blog will on vacation (in fact – he’s going to write the entry on Thursday).

   So, here is my attempt to answer your question on Matthew 22:35-40: I don’t think that loving God with all of our heart, all of our soul and all of our mind differ much at all.

   Here is my reasoning:
   (1) If, as Moreland discusses in Chapter 3, the soul is the “immaterial” us, or the true “us” and (2) the mind is a faculty of the soul (i.e. the mind is part of the soul) (3) and if the words for mind and heart are often times used interchangeably in the New Testament, which means Jesus could be saying the same thing, then (4) maybe all Jesus is telling us to do is love Him with ALL of ourselves. Maybe the church has lost touch with, forgotten or not realized what a vital role the mind plays in the soul and that Jesus wants us to use our entire self (immaterial and material) to love and worship Him?

   I’d be interested to hear your thoughts, how do you think they differ?

   [Reply]

9. # Herbon Sep 16th 2009 at 2:13 pm

   Adam
   Being the “deep thinker” that I am, I felt the need to go to my Mexican Monestery for “soleful contemplation” of the Scripture and its meaning at Pueblo Bonito Resort at Sunset Beach, Cabo San Lucas. I am sending to you my Blog entry for Thursday for you to upload which will set out my thoughts. Herb

   [Reply]

   

   Adam Tarnow Reply:
   September 16th, 2009 at 2:28 pm

   It’s tough to be you Herb, really tough. I appreciate your piety.

   [Reply]

10. # Davidon Sep 16th 2009 at 7:57 pm

    I haven’t started the book yet, but the topic intrigues me. In response to your questions:

    1) I have been atypical.
    2) The biggest influences have been some of the priests in Catholic school and CS Lewis
    3) The benefits of “asking and thinking” are many. In addition to many others, I think it leads to the awareness that:

    a) There is a Creator
    b) I sin and I can’t stop on my own
    c) I need Grace
    d) “Asking and thinking” is not enough. I need revelation and a personal relationship with the Lord, as well.

    4) In the long run “asking and thinking” pose no threat to the church.

    I am interested to find out what the scope of the book is. I think that if it only deals with using reason to address the Word, or the existence of God then the scope will be too narrow in relation to the command given us in Matthew 22:37.

    Did not Einstein love God with his mind when he discovered new wonders of God’s world and then shared those wonders with us?

    Did not Wilberforce love God with his mind as he gave all those speeches in the cause of abolition?

    Doesn’t a Bible translator love God with his mind as he performs his work?

    Maybe it is because I feel so feeble in using my mind to understand Him that I am also beginning to see the commandment as a call to action.

    [Reply]

    

    atarnow Reply:
    September 16th, 2009 at 9:20 pm

    Welcome David, as I’ve told you before (sorry to be a broken record), I think you are going to really like the book. I don’t think the scope is as narrow as you fear. I look forward to your insights. By the way, did you see Herb’s post? No mention of the thousands of cigarettes like he promised.

    [Reply]

11. # Katieon Dec 27th 2009 at 12:04 pm

    I agree with Moreland’s insights on Corporate Worship (p.159-p.164.) Worship should be after the message instead of before. Why do we worship before the message?

    [Reply]

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (hidden) (required)

Website

Click to cancel reply

Notify me of follow-up comments via e-mail

• 

• Recent Posts

  • Chapter 14 and Epilogue
  • Chapter 13 – Resurrection
  • Chapter 12
  • Chapter 11
  • Chapter 10

• Recent Comments

  • Katie on Chapter 13 – Resurrection
  • Katie on Chapter 12
  • Suzanne on Chapter 11
  • Katie on Chapter 11
  • Adam on Chapter 10
  • Katie on Chapter 10
  • Paul Pierce on Chapter 8

• Archives

  Select Month April 2010  (1) March 2010  (5) February 2010  (5) January 2010  (4) December 2009  (2) October 2009  (3) September 2009  (6) August 2009  (1) July 2009  (1)