My plan to read through the Bible in 2011 is the Read the Bible for Life plan. I weighed lots of options, but chose this one for the simple fact that it is so very different than anything I’ve done before. I expect to very much enjoy the chronological arrangement of the Old Testament books. I expect to be annoyed by the attempt to harmonize the New Testament gospels. However, I want to give this plan a shot.
In general, my blog posts come from my daily Bible reading. So, the posts I make will likely follow the calendar put forth in the plan.
If you do not have a reading plan, and would like to read with someone else, I’d encourage you to consider reading through with me. I’ll keep up, Lord willing, and I’ll post some devotional thoughts along the way.
2011 Daily Bible Reading
It’s time to get your daily Bible reading plan together for 2011. If you want to read the Bible through in the year, you should find a plan that fits you. There are lots of different plans to choose from, and those plans are available in different formats. Do you want to listen to the Bible read for you? That’s available. Do you want the reading emailed to you? That’s available. Do you want to get the readings in your RSS reader? That’s available too.
The point here is that you should find whatever kind of plan fits you so that you can be intentional about your 2011 Bible reading.
I would recommend that you check out the ten different plans offered on the Crossway ESV web site.
I also very much enjoyed using this plan for the last few years. It offers a variety of different readings, but only 25 per month. Thus it allows for missed days or days off without adding to your stress level.
Denny Burk has also put together a calendar of readings that keeps you from jumping around
through multiple books daily.
If that doesn’t float your boat, try this set of plans from Crosswalk.com.
I can’t say what kind of plan is the best for you. The big point is that you very much should consider what you need to do for 2011 in order to be very intentional about handling the word of God.
Jesus on Scripture
I came across the following in my perusal of If You Could Ask God One Question:
As far as Jesus is concerned, even the tiniest mark on the page of the Old Testament holds unique power. According to him, whether you call it “the Law”, “Scripture” or the “Old Testament”, one thing holds true: it comes from God, and its authority is unquestionable.
Paul Williams and Barry Cooper. If You Could Ask God One Question (New malden, UK: The Good Book Company, 2007), 22.
Grudem on Punishment and Our Suffering
One of the conversations that I have found myself having on occasion with counselees regards the issue of the punishment of God. A person will be suffering for one reason or another, and they will assume that their suffering is the punishment of God on their lives for something they did in their past.
Often I will try to help the person to recognize that, if they are in Christ, all the penalty for all of their sin has already been fully punished in Christ on the cross. Yet it is still hard for them to see that God is not adding some extra punishment to them.
Of course I understand that God chastens his children. He disciplines all he loves. But he disciplines us for our good and his glory. God never gives a Christian the penalty for his or her sin. That penalty was paid in Christ as our substitute.
I was happy, then, to come across the following in Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology regarding this very issue:
Throughout our Christian lives we know that we never have to pay any penalty for sin, for that has all been taken by Christ (Rom. 8:1). Therefore, when we do experience pain and suffering in this life, we should never think it is because God is punishing us (for our harm). Sometimes suffering is simply a result of living in a sinful, fallen world, and sometimes it is because God is disciplining us (for our good), but in all cases we are assured by Romans 8:28 that “God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose” (nasb).
The positive purpose for God’s discipline is clear in Hebrews 12, where we read:
The Lord disciplines him whom he loves….He disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. (Heb. 12:6, 10–11)
Not all discipline is in order to correct us from sins that we have committed; it can also be allowed by God to strengthen us in order that we may gain greater ability to trust God and resist sin in the challenging path of obedience. We see this clearly in the life of Jesus, who, though he was without sin, yet “learned obedience through what he suffered” (Heb. 5:8). He was made perfect “through suffering” (Heb. 2:10). Therefore we should see all the hardship and suffering that comes to us in life as something that God brings to us to do us good strengthening our trust in him and our obedience, and ultimately increasing our ability to glorify him.
Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic Theology : An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 811.
Calvin on Isaiah 9:6
Isaiah 9:6 (ESV)
For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given;
and the government shall be upon his shoulder,
and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
John Calvin on Isaiah 9:6 –
Now, to apply this for our own instruction, whenever any distrust arises, and all means of escape are taken away from us, whenever, in short, it appears to us that everything is in a ruinous condition, let us recall to our remembrance that Christ is called Wonderful, because he has inconceivable methods of assisting us, and because his power is far beyond what we are able to conceive. When we need counsel, let us remember that he is the Counsellor. When we need strength, let us remember that he is Mighty and Strong. When new terrors spring up suddenly every instant, and when many deaths threaten us from various quarters, let us rely on that eternity of which he is with good reason called the Father, and by the same comfort let us learn to soothe all temporal distresses. When we are inwardly tossed by various tempests, and when Satan attempts to disturb our consciences, let us remember that Christ is The Prince of Peace, and that it is easy for him quickly to allay all our uneasy feelings. Thus will these titles confirm us more and more in the faith of Christ, and fortify us against Satan and against hell itself.
An Introduction to Hebrew Poetry
Scholars estimate that between one-third and one-half of the Bible is written in poetry; yet very few Christians seem to give much consideration to this style.
Recognizing Poetry
Poetic passages are often recognized by scholars because of two main components:
· Figurative language – Poetic passages use more figures of speech, similes, and metaphors than do prose passages. While prose passages will use figures of speech, the complexity and frequency of figures of speech are greater in poetry.
· Parallelism – Poetic passages are often written with short lines that play off of each other. These can occur in groups of 2, 3, or even 4 lines of poetic text. The point is that elements of one or more lines are balanced, repeated, or expanded in the following lines.
Types of Parallelism
In the 19th century, Robert Lowth listed three categories of Hebrew parallelism which have been used to help people think through Hebrew poetry. Though Lowth’s categories have been modified and at times rejected by scholars as far too simplistic (rightfully so), they offer a helpful starting point for modern Bible readers. Lowth’s categories include:
· Synonymous parallelism – The parallel lines say essentially the same thing with different words. Be careful not to assume that the second line is an exact restatement. Often the second line will help to clarify the reader’s understanding of the first.
Example: Proverbs 9:7 (ESV)
Whoever corrects a scoffer gets himself abuse, and he who reproves a wicked man incurs injury.
· Antithetical parallelism – The second line of the pair teaches us with opposites from the first line. This is not to say that the first line is being contradicted, but that another angle of the truth is being examined. For example, if the first line of a parallel offers a blessing for right actions, the second line might offer a curse for evil actions.
Example: Proverbs 9:8 (ESV)
Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you; reprove a wise man, and he will love you.
· Synthetic (or formal) parallelism – The second line does not repeat the first, but expands
on the thought of the first. This might include a line that completes the thought of another. It might repeat part of the first line while expanding with thoughts not in the first line. This category is a sort-of catch-all category in which lines are obviously intended to go together in a poetic way which are neither synonymous nor antithetical.
Example: Psalm 46:1 (ESV)
God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.
Features of Poetry
Hebrew poetry can have a great variety of features that distinguish it. Only 1 follows:
· Chiasm – Not a type of parallelism but more a technique, a chiasm parallels a previous line in a reverse (a, b, c, c, b, a) order. The name derives from the Greek letter chi, which looks like our letter X. Chiasms can occur with the points of two lines or the balancing of opposite lines in a larger section of Scripture.
Example: Isaiah 11:13b (ESV)
Ephraim shall not be jealous of Judah, and Judah shall not harass Ephraim.
Why Notice Poetry?
· Strong emotion – Writing in poetry indicates a level of emotion from the author that may not be present in prose. We should recognize this in order to take the passage of Scripture with the emotion intended by its author.
· Figurative language – Because poetry often uses figurative language, we should be sure to recognize poetry in order to better interpret the meaning of the text.
· Memorization – It is likely that texts were written in poetic couplet in order to aid in their being committed to memory.
· Prevalence – Scholars estimate that between ½ and 1/3 of Scripture is written in poetry. Since so much of God’s word is in this style, we must take it seriously.
· Beauty – Poetry enhances the beauty and emotional connection of the text.
See George L. Klein, “Poetry” in Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996).;
Mohler, Giberson, and the "Saving" of Christianity
Karl Giberson has responded to Albert Mohler’s response to Giberson’s attack on Mohler’s honesty regarding the issue of Christianity and evolution. In this response, we see something of extreme importance that I would like to take a moment to ponder. First, let us see the two concluding paragraph’s from Giberson’s most recent open letter to Mohler:
*
Here is an example of what I am talking about. You and I both agree, as a simple matter of fact, that we are sinful creatures. I look within myself and see dark tumors of pride, greed, mean-spiritedness, lust. I covet the praise of all those atheists over at The Huffington Post. I suspect you can say the same thing, perhaps forgoing the praise of the atheists. On this factual matter we agree. I think we might also agree that the salvation that God has provided in Jesus empowers us to rise above those things and to not be weighted down with the terrible knowledge of just how sinful we are. We are forgiven as we embrace the saving power of Jesus. Is it not here that we find the central truth of our faith? Our sinful nature is a simple reality. G. K. Chesterton said it was the only empirically verifiable truth of Christianity. And it is certainly a clear biblical teaching. But is it not possible that we might have different ideas about how we came to have that nature? Does the saving power of Jesus vanish if sin becomes something that developed through natural history, rather than appeared all at once in the Garden of Eden? It seems to me that there is a conversation to have here, beyond simply drawing a line in the sand. Satisfactory answers to questions like these are truly “How to be a Christian and Believe in Evolution.”
At BioLogos we have made our peace with evolution, and it has been liberating and even faith-affirming. We encourage conversations to further that agenda and make no excuses for that. We are not destroying Christianity. We are saving it.
*
Giberson, in his attempt to defend his position, declares that if he and Mohler can agree that they are sinners who need Jesus, Mohler should not demand that Giberson relinquish a belief in evolution in order to be considered an orthodox Christian. Sadly, in his article, Giberson has let go of one of the foundational points that Mohler warned against when speaking of Giberson and his ilk. Giberson and his cronies at BioLogos, for the sake of what they consider to be scientific honesty, are letting go the one, true source of authority; they are relinquishing the Scripture for science.
When Giberson declares that it is no big deal for a person to believe that sin entered the world somewhere other than the Garden of Eden, he is saying more than he intends. To say that sin did not enter the world at the garden with Adam and Eve is to declare the Scripture to speak lies. Not only does Genesis 1-3 clearly indicate that sin entered the world in the garden, but Romans 5:12-ff makes the same declaration. The biblical argument for our need of a savior and Christ’s saving us is quite often centered on the fact that death entered the world through one man’s sin and salvation has come to men via the glorious righteousness of the Son of God (Romans 5:12, 17-19). For Giberson to say that his denial of this teaching is no big deal is for him to declare the Scriptures to be false, untrustworthy, and practically useless for genuine knowledge of how we are to relate to God. Thus, Giberson would then have to eventually logically land in a place that makes his own heart, logic, and imagination the ultimate source of truth about the God who has created us. I understand that Giberson has not said this much, but his logic must inevitably lead him there as a denial of biblical authority and inerrancy will always make human reasoning, understanding, and imagination the central authority once the Scripture has been dethroned.
For years, theological liberals have been voicing the same kinds of arguments as Giberson puts forth. In his landmark speech, “Shall the Fundamentalists Win” (1922), Harry Emerson Fosdick also wanted to save Christianity for a modern-thinking world. Sadly, those who reason as Fosdick and Giberson ultimately must leave behind the teaching of Scripture, undercutting its authority and replacing it with the authority of modern science, psychology, or culture.
Think simply about the question of original sin. The Bible says that sin entered the human race through one man. The Bible says that the only way to be forgiven of our sin is by God’s grace through faith in Christ. If we relinquish our belief that sin entered the world through one man, how then can we cling to a belief that we are correct about the person and work of Christ? In attempting to rescue Christianity from looking foolish in the eyes of some scientists, we actually undercut all trust in the word of God. That undercutting will always lead people down dangerous paths as they deny doctrine after doctrine after doctrine for the sake of “saving” Christianity.
Make no mistake about it, if we are willing to drop our belief in an inerrant Bible for the sake of appeasing secular science, we will lose more than the first step of ground that we give. Once a Christian backs off of inerrancy, they will back off of Christ’s teachings, of Christ’s exclusivity, of Christ’s necessity. We cannot give this ground without sliding into an abyss that is truly bottomless.
I applaud Dr. Mohler for his strong stance and unwillingness to give ground regarding the BioLogos issue. It is Mohler’s faithful tenacity that has exposed the clear, Scripture-denying liberalism that is at the heart of the BioLogos project. These events have also shown us once again the importance of being extremely wary of anyone who would attempt to “save” the faith by jettisoning the doctrines clearly spelled out in the word of God.
Platt on God’s Plan to Reach the Nations
David Platt, Radical: Taking Back your Faith from the American Dream (Colorado Springs: Multnomah, 2010), 156, speaks of God’s plan to get the gospel to the nations in Romans 10:14-15:
So there you have it—the simple divine plan for taking the gospel to all peoples of the world.
God sends his servants.
His servants preach.
People hear.
Hearers believe.
Believers call.
Everyone who calls is saved.
Now look back at this progression and ask one question: Is there any place where this plan can break down? Think about it. Obviously everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.No breakdown there. Everyone who believes will call.Many who hear (not all, but many) will believe. People will hear the gospel when we preach it to them. And God is most definitely still in the business of sending his servants. That means there is only one potential breakdown in this progression—when servants of God do not preach the gospel to all peoples. We are the plan of God, and there is no plan B.
Of course, God has the power to write the gospel in letters across the clouds so that all people can learn about Jesus and believe in him. But in his infinite wisdom, he has not chosen this route. Instead he has chosen to use us as ambassadors who carry the gospel to people who have never heard the name of Jesus.
Mr. Nice Guy
The folks at “Way of the Master” have a video up on Youtube that might help in sharing the gospel with someone who believes that they are basically a good person.
Post Super Summer Post Roundup