Hard to understand?

“The Bible is very easy to understand. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand, we are obliged to act accordingly.” Kierkegaard

Beyond the Bible?

Last year I read and was disturbed by I Howard Marshall's Beyond the Bible: Moving from Scripture to Theology. In this short book, Professor Marshall attempts to offer guidance for the task of applying scriptural insight to contemporary issues.

What I found disturbing, though, was that the book seems to give us a hermeneutic which allows us to reinterpret the teaching of Scripture so that at times it says something far different from what it originally said and meant.

The reinterpretation seems to allow us to say what Jesus or Paul would have said, or should have said, had they lived today. What a shame that they were not free to say what God had intended!

Some time before I had read William Webb's Slaves, Women & Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis,which also seems to allow us a way of avoiding some of what the Bible teaches by envisioning where it was leading.

So I was interested to read Four Views on Moving Beyond the Bible to Theology, which interacts with Marshall's book and includes chapters by William Webb, Walter Kaiser, Daniel Doriani and Kevin Vanhoozer. I haven't finished this book yet, but again find Webb's contributions unsatisfying. Kaiser's principlizing model does seem also give modern readers an out whereby we can find the principle behind what Scripture says, but deny the apparent original force of its teaching.

Kaiser may use this method to rewrite what the Bible appears to teach on the roles of men and women and women's ministry, but others could easily take it further to white out other teachings which are found objectionable by Twenty-first Century folk.

Daniel Doriani's chapter is refreshing and encouraging and shows how we can "go beyond the Bible" without departing from its teachings: we can find principles for living today which were not originally addressed in the Bible, but which do not contradict the old book, but can be shown to be in harmony with it.

Dr Doriani points out that we can learn from narrative in the Bible, as well as from commands, promises and warnings. It has often been said that we shouldn't make doctrine out of narrative. Yet, the Bible is a narrative.

He says that the characters in the Bible and the stories are intended teach us what to do and what not to do. Sometimes the narrator tells us whether the character or story is intended as a good or bad example.

Where the narrator does not tell us, we can compare the passage with the rest of what the writer presents as positive or negative, or go further by reading what the rest of Holy Scripture has to say.

Evaluating relative importance of Bible teachings

In the ESV Study Bible, there is an interesting overview of Bible doctrine by Erik Thoennes. In this article, he has a short statement on discerning the relative importance of theological issues. Thoennes groups these into four categories:

(1) absolutes define the core beliefs of the Christian faith;
(2) convictions, while not core beliefs, may have significant impact on the health and effectiveness of the church;
(3) opinions are less-clear issues that generally are not worth dividing over; and
(4) questions are currently unsettled issues. These categories can be best visualized as concentric circles, similar to those on a dart board, with the absolutes as the “bull's-eye”

But how do you decide which is which? Isn't everything important? What should we be prepared to give ground on? What really matters? What is worth standing for?

Phoennes gives some guidance here:

Where an issue falls within these categories should be determined by weighing the cumulative force of at least seven considerations:
(1) biblical clarity;
(2) relevance to the character of God;
(3) relevance to the essence of the gospel;
(4) biblical frequency and significance (how often in Scripture it is taught, and what weight Scripture places upon it);
(5) effect on other doctrines;
(6) consensus among Christians (past and present); and
(7) effect on personal and church life.
These criteria for determining the importance of particular beliefs must be considered in light of their cumulative weight regarding the doctrine being considered. For instance, just the fact that a doctrine may go against the general consensus among believers (see item 6) does not necessarily mean it is wrong, although that might add some weight to the argument against it. All the categories should be considered collectively in determining how important an issue is to the Christian faith. The ability to rightly discern the difference between core doctrines and legitimately disputable matters will keep the church from either compromising important truth or needlessly dividing over peripheral issues.

I appreciate these guidelines, but they still leave me wondering how you know what is less important, and whether it is acceptable to compromise over the lesser issues.

Speaking of the Old Testament ...

If you would like some input on how Christians should read the Old Testament, you will find Christopher Wright's Old Testament Ethics for the People of God a great stimulus to your thinking.

The link gives you the table of contents, the introduction, the first chapter and a some extras and should whet your appetite.

I have read the first three chapters and am looking forward to the rest. Well worth your time.

More gems from Charles Simeon

My endeavour is to bring out of Scripture what is there, and not to thrust in what I think might be there. I have a great jealousy on this head: never to speak more or less than I believe to be the mind of the Spirit in the passage I am expounding

This one comes from Scott Mackay, involved in university student ministry in New Zealand.

Coincidentally, my dad, Stanley McKay, was always known as Scot.

Charles Simeon (1759 - 1836) was converted to faith in Christ while he was a student at Cambridge University. He became the minister of Holy Trinity, Cambridge, where he overcame resentment and prejudice to exercise an influential evangelical ministry.

Simeon’s approach to preaching has been discussed by J.I. Packer in an essay entitled ‘Expository Preaching: Charles Simeon and Ourselves’. This was first published in Churchman in 1960, is reprinted in Packer’s Collected Shorter Works (Vol 3), and is available online here.


Simeon’s preaching, asserts Packer, was truly expository, even though he usually preached from short texts. Expository preaching, Packer says, is not to be defined according to length of text but according to the relationship between the text and the sermon. If the principle aim of the preacher is to speak authoritatively from God to the people by bringing out of the inspired text what is really there (rather than, say, using it as a motto, or a peg upon which to hang ‘holy thoughts’), then his preaching is expository.

The example of Simeon, as evidenced in the 2,536 sermon outlines he has left, suggests a number of lessons:-

1. An expository sermon should follow the ordinary basic rules of sermon construction. An expository sermon is not merely a running commentary on the text. Simeon insisted that it must have ‘unity in the design, perspicuity in the arrangement, and simplicity in the diction’. And, since a sermon is meant to instruct, it must not be longer nor more difficult than the hearers can tolerate.

Then again, even though a sermon is meant to instruct, it is not a lecture. The mind must be informed in a manner that affects the heart - comforting the hearers, or leading them to acts of piety, repentance, and holiness.

2. An expository sermon should be textual in character. The substance of the sermon should come out of the passage, and not be imposed on it. “I never preach,” said Simeon, “unless I feel satisfied that I have the mind of God as regards the sense of the passage.” He objected to the tendency in his day for both Calvinstic and Arminian preachers to read their respective systems into the text. Although he preached from short texts, rather than from the longer passages favoured by many expository preachers, he insisted that the text should make complete sense: preaching from just one or two words would be impertinent and foolish. As Packer says, ‘the prime secret of freedom
and authority in preaching, as Simeon was well aware, is the knowledge that what you are saying is exactly what your text says, so that your words have a proper claim to be received as the Word of God.’

3. The expository sermon must have a doctrinal substructure. Even though, as just noted, Simeon strongly objected to the artificial imposition of any doctrinal system on to the text, and even though a sermon should not be turned into a doctrinal lecture, or be overloaded with theological terminology, nevertheless the expositor should know his doctrine, and be able to open up his text in the light of the more general truths and principles revealed by God. An individual text is to be expounded in the light of the analogy of faith, ‘i.e., in terms of the broad framework of doctrinal truth which the Bible embodies.’ Simeon’s sermons abound in formulations of the great doctrines of the Christian faith - God, creation, sin, the plan of salvation, atonement, the church, and so on.

4. The expository sermon must have evangelical content. It will set forth the gospel as both a revelation and a remedy. In continually seeking to cast light on the twin themes of sin and grace expository preaching will seek to humble the sinner, exalt Christ, and promote holiness. For Simeon, as for Paul, Christ crucified was the sum and substance of the message. ‘The preacher is not handling his texts biblically, Simeon would say, unless he is seeing and setting them in their proper relation to Christ. If the expositor finds himself out of sight of Calvary, that shows that he has lost his way.’

5. The expository sermon must have a theocentric perspective. The real subject of Scripture is not man and his religion, but God and his glory. We tend to preach about man - his needs, problems and responsibilities. Consequently, our thoughts of God are small and sentimental. But Simeon would tell us that we cannot hope for God to honour our preaching unless we honour him by giving him his rightful place.

Let the preacher conscientiously observe these five things in his preparation. And let him be in earnest about the need to glorify God and seek his grace. This earnestness will come, not from correct methodology, but from the preacher’s walk with his God. As Donald Coggan wrote of Simeon:-

“The quality of his preaching was but a reflection of the quality of the man himself. And there can be little doubt that the man himself was largely made in the early morning hours which he devoted to private prayer and the devotional study of the Scriptures. It was his custom to rise at 4 a.m., light his own fire, and then devote the first four hours of the day to communion with God. Such costly self-discipline made the preacher. That was primary. The making of the sermon was secondary and derivative.”

from JEMblog

Charles Simeon (1759-1836)





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Charles Simeon was born on September 24, 1759. He attended school at Eton and enrolled at King's College, Cambridge, in 1779. Although baptized as an infant, his family was not particularly religious and neither was Charles, until an experience during his first few months at university.

All Cambridge students were required to receive communion at least three times each year during their time in university. After arriving at Cambridge, in January, and learning of this requirement, Simeon wrote in his diary:

"Satan himself was as fit to attend as I; and that if I must attend, [and to receive Holy Communion] I must prepare for my attendance there. Without a moment�s loss of time, I bought the old Whole Duty of Man, (the only religious book that I had ever heard of) and began to read it with great diligence; at the same time calling my ways to remembrance, and crying to God for mercy; and so earnest was I in these exercises, that within the three weeks I made myself quite ill with reading, fasting, and prayer�" (Memoirs, p.6)
Although Simeon made his January Communion, he continued to feel he was unworthy. He reflected, concerning his former sins, that he was "so greatly oppressed with the weight of them, that I frequently looked upon the dogs with envy." He found he had so many sins, that he despaired of ever fully making restitution for them.

During Holy Week, Simeon was reading "Bishop Wilson's" book, which was speaking of the Jewish sacrifices in the Old Testament, and of the sacrifice whereby the sins of the people were laid upon the head of the goat (scapegoat) that was brought as an offering. Simeon experienced a revelation:

"What! may I transfer all my guilt to another? From that moment on I sought to lay my sins on the sacred head of Jesus, and on the Wednesday began to have a hope of mercy; and on the Thursday that hope increased; and on Friday and Saturday it became more strong; and on the Sunday (Easter Day, April 4, 1779) I awoke early with those words upon my heart and lips, �Jesus Christ is risen to-day; Hallelujah! Hallelujah! From that hour peace flowed in rich abundance into my soul; and at the Lord�s Table in our chapel I had the sweetest access to God through my blessed Saviour." (Memoirs, p.9)
The 1770s were difficult time to be an evangelical Christian in a university. The Anglican Church was in the midst of dealing with the new Methodist movement. The universities were, simultaneously, bastions of the established Church of England and seedbeds of Enlightenment rationalism, neither of which made them sympathetic to religious fervor. A few years before Simeon's arrival at Cambridge, a group of students at Oxford had met on Sunday evenings for extemporaneous prayer and mutual encouragement. When a professor complained of "certain Enthusiasts in that Society, who talked of regeneration, inspiration, and drawing nigh unto God," the students were expelled.

Simeon recalls in his memoirs that after his conversion, "for 3 years I knew not any religious person [at the university]." Despite the difficulty, Simeon believed he was called to ordained ministry, and he was ordained shortly after graduation by the Bishop of Petersborough.

At this point something happened that would affect the remainder of Simeon's life: The vicar of Trinity Church, Cambridge, died in October, 1782, just as Charles Simeon, now a graduate, was preparing to leave Cambridge. Simeon had often walked by the church and said to himself, 'How should I rejoice if God were to give me that church, that I might preach the Gospel there and be a herald for Him in the University.' His dream came true when the Bishop appointed him 'curate-in-charge' (being only ordained a deacon at the time). He preached his first sermon there on 10th November 1782.

The lonliness as a Christian that Simeon experienced as a college student was replaced by the active opposition of his new parisioners. The congregation did not care for Simeon's biblical preaching and would have preferred the assistant, Mr. Hammond, to become rector of the parish. They showed their displeasure toward Simeon by not attending and locking the small doors of their pews (which most churches had at the time). At times, they even locked the doors of the church to prevent Simeon from holding additional services. Simeon persevered, however, and remained rector of the parish for 54 years, gradually winning over his parishioners and making a great impact that reached well beyond Cambridge.

In April, 1831, Charles Simeon was 71 years old. He had been the rector of Trinity Church, Cambridge, England, for 49 years. He was asked one afternoon by his friend, Joseph Gurney, how he had surmounted persecution and outlasted all the great prejudice against him in his 49-year ministry. He said to Gurney, "My dear brother, we must not mind a little suffering for Christ's sake. When I am getting through a hedge, if my head and shoulders are safely through, I can bear the pricking of my legs. Let us rejoice in the remembrance that our holy Head has surmounted all His suffering and triumphed over death. Let us follow Him patiently; we shall soon be partakers of His victory" (H.C.G. Moule, Charles Simeon, London: InterVarsity, 1948, 155f.).

Author and pastor John Piper, relates the following incident from Simeon's life:

In 1807, after twenty-five years of ministry, Simeon's health failed suddenly. His voice gave way so that preaching was very difficult and at times he could only speak in a whisper. He remarked that after a sermon he would feel "more like one dead than alive." This condition lasted for thirteen years, until he was sixty years old. In all this time Simeon pressed on in his work. The way this weakness came to an end is remarkable and shows the amazing hand of God on Simeon's life. He tells the story that in 1819 he was on his last visit to Scotland. As he crossed the border he says he was "almost as perceptibly revived in strength as the woman was after she had touched the hem of our Lord's garment." His interpretation of God's providence in this begins back before his weakness. Up till then he had promised himself a very active life up to age sixty, and then a 'Sabbath evening.' Now he seemed to hear his Master saying:
I laid you aside, because you entertained with satisfaction the thought of resting from your labour; but now you have arrived at the very period when you had promised yourself that satisfaction, and have determined instead to spend your strength for me to the latest hour of your life, I have doubled, trebled, quadrupled your strength, that you may execute your desire on a more extended plan.
So, at sixty years old, Simeon renewed his commitment to his pulpit and the mission of the church and preached vigorously for seventeen more years until two months before his death on November 12, 1836.
Simeon's is best known as a great Bible expositor, and example revitalized preaching in the Church of England and set a standard for generations down to the present day. His magnum opus is his twenty-one volume Horae Homiletica— a collection of expanded, sermon outlines from all sixty-six books of the Bible.

Among the many people influenced by Simeon was the Evangelical leader, Henry Martyn (1781-1812), who, inspired by Simeon, abandoned his intention of going into law and instead devoted his life and his considerable talents to preaching the Gospel as a missionary in India and Persia. The great British statesman William Wilberforce (1759 - 1833), also influenced by Simeon, became the most prominent figure in the abolition of slavery throughout the British Empire.

Another part of Simeon's legacy is the founding of the Church Missionary Society in England, and the University and College Christian Fellowship, which, in turn, led to the founding of the Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship in the United States and Canada, and the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students, with branches in many countries. Though he was a faithful pastor and preacher who spent his whole ministry in one parish in Cambridge, England, his influence extended throughout the Anglican and Evangelical Christian world.

from The Anglican Library

Honouring God in Grey Areas

This is another helpful article from Pulpit Magazine. Many of these articles are written by John MacArthur, as is the one I’m including below.

If the issue you are wondering about is not specifically addressed in the Bible, then it’s helpful to ask these questions from 1 Corinthians to help you in deciding what to do. Asking these questions (and others like them) will help you make a wise decision based on sound biblical principles.

1. Will it benefit me spiritually? First Corinthians 10:23 says, “All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things edify.”

2. Will it put me in bondage? First Corinthians 6:12 says, “All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything.” Any questionable practice that can be habit‑forming is not wise to pursue.

3. Will it defile God’s temple? First Corinthians 6:19-20 says, “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.” We should not do anything with our bodies that would dishonor the Lord.

4. Will it cause others to stumble? First Corinthians 8:8‑9 says, “Food will not commend us to God; we are neither the worse if we do not eat, nor the better if we do eat. But take care lest this liberty of yours somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.” One should refrain from using his freedom in an area which might cause others to sin. For “by sinning against the brethren and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. Therefore,” Paul said, “if food causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again, that I might not cause my brother to stumble.”

5. Will it help the cause of evangelism? First Corinthians 10:32-33 says, “Give no offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God; just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of the many, that they may be saved.” We must think of the effect any practice might have on our testimony to the lost.

6. Will it violate my conscience? First Corinthians 10:25‑29 contains three references to abstaining from a certain practice “for conscience’ sake.” And Romans 14:23 says, “He who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.” If we are not sure whether an action is pleasing to God, we should not do it. That way our conscience will remain clear and our relationship to God will not be hindered.

7. Will it bring glory to God? First Corinthians 10:31 summarizes all these principles by saying, “Therefore, whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.”