Effective this post, I’m going into radio silence for approximately one month. Well, not exactly. I mean, for one thing, this isn’t radio. And for another, I hope I’ll not be altogether silent over the next month, but there are no promises, either.

What’s the occasion? Well, let’s just say that the outcome of the event that transpires in the next month is the single most definitive turning point for me so far and will largely determine what I do for the rest of my life. Am I overstating things? Hardly.

I hate that this comes now when my blog traffic is at a record high. But as I said above, I’m not planning on unplugging completely: I will still be on to respond to comments as necessary, maybe put up a link I’ve found, summarize a thought going through my head, etc. So don’t take me off your blogroll yet.

If you would, whenever (if ever) this blog comes to your mind in the next month, drop to your knees and send out a fervent prayer on my behalf - or at least whisper, “Lord, help jog Steve’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad memory.” Thanks!

~Steve

I was in college. In my fourth of five years, I heard about a professor who was fairly “liberal” in theology. A friend of mind took his class on Revelation, and was disturbed by how good the arguments were that Revelation was written about first century events. When my friend explained to me in brief terms the professor’s argument, I, too, was apalled - and intrigued. Something about the whole thing rang true. However, I would put it somewhat on the backburner for a little while.

By the time I was out of college, I was ready to dive in and find out if there was anything to this belief system. A few internet searches, and I found that the name for this scandalous view was “preterism”. I looked at a lot of arguments, asked a lot of questions. I discovered that there are two main types of preterists. Partial preterists see only some of prophecy as related to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 and hold out for a future something or other (usually the Second Coming and the Resurrection) in the future. Full preterists, the main type of preterist with whom I corresponded on the theological forums, believe that all eschatological events were fulfilled in those events of the first century. Around this time I was starting to see the Bible as literature rather than as a magic text independent of its original cultural context. I saw that the prophetic diction in the New Testament was not a brand new creation, but that it was built upon the tradition of the Old Testament prophecies, and with this revelation and what it did to the Olivet Discourse (Mat 24-25), I was a preterist. Of some sort, anyway.

Then came to a momentous (and stupid) decision: I would decide whether full preterism was true or not by praying and then reading through all the epistles, trying to see if it all made sense from a full preterist standpoint. I didn’t get all the way through before the inevitable happened: I could not reconcile the relevant eschatological passages as I understood them in my fully dispensationalist mindset with the view of preterism. Surprise, surprise, huh?

Ok, it’s been long enough for me to do another meme, and because I am a good sport, I will respond to both memes I was tagged with by one merciless (mercilessly funny, that is) blogger friend of mine, Kev at Special Kind of Stupid (you want a laugh? check him out!). Unfortunately, my answers will not be particularly funny. But come on, Kev, just be glad I’m doing these at all

Well, I got a Macbook. I’ve been spending a lot of time getting acquainted with it, and no time on my PC. My blog has suffered, because instead of posting online I had been using blog editing software called Zoundry. Great program. Well, it doesn’t offer Mac support, so I’ve been looking into other options. Then it occurred to me that I might as well post this one here within my browser. Trouble is, I’m somewhat addicted to having a stand-alone editor, so I can hardly stand to write any more right now. I will tell you that Qumana, which is free, works ok, but it has no support for the <—more—> tag that allows the first part of the post to appear on the main page with a link to the full post at the end. Because I have frequently used and fully intend to continue using this feature, due to my extra long posts, I cannot stick with Quamana. I haven’t really found any other free options that work. Any suggestions?

“Knowledge puffs up.” This phrase is customarily pulled out of the rest of 1 Corinthians 8:1 and cast as a slur upon those like myself intrinsically driven to seek more learning and understanding. Even the immediate context of this phrase in 1 Corinthians 8 shows, however, that not only is knowledge necessary, but that it is actually deficient, incomplete knowledge that puffs up, knowledge devoid of love (for more on this, see this great article from bible.org).

A lover of learning is the type of person who, while his eyes pass over the landscape, notices each glint and out-of-place shadow, and is all but incapable of resisting the urge to investigate. Sometimes I really don’t like being the type who questions things. I fear that it appears I’m doing it for fun, or because I think it’s cool to “question everything”, or because I assume everyone is wrong but I. I fear this because I’ve identified those motivations in other people who like the limelight of being unique; yet I can honestly say that I would hardly put myself through the hassle of critiquing views held by the majority or especially by those I love for no other reason than a little self-aggrandizement.

But this Christmas I began to consider the two groups of people to whom the birth of Jesus was announced. The first group was the Jewish shepherds. They were minding their business, faithfully tending to their responsibilities. They weren’t seeking anything except the protection of their livelihood. They saw the angel and heard the voices of the heavenly hosts, and at once left to find the newborn Christ.

The other group was the Magi from the East, from as far away as Persia. These Gentiles were of a completely different faith, being a priestly class from the Zoroastrian religion. They were astrologers whose dedication to the study of their writings and what they thought the stars and planets told them was so great that they trekked up to a thousand miles to confirm it. Chances are great that they did not see Jesus until at least a couple years later. These men were seekers. There was no special annunciation given to them: God spoke to them through their own learning. This gives me no end of encouragement.

Many quarters of the church nowadays, at least in America, hold instruction in and critical examination of our faith at arms’ length; few denounce those pursuits outright, but most look sideways at it, fearful of becoming “puffed up”, afraid that what they learn might make them want to live out the faith even less. They look at academic, liberal theologians and equate the first adjective with the second. What they don’t do is acknowledge that there is definitely no shortage of liberals and libertines from among the unlearned masses as well. The issue is not of knowledge making the truth-seeking Christians “puffed up”, but of satisfaction with an insufficient amount of the truth of God; this is equally a problem with the learned who are distracted by empty truths and with the ignorant who are content with what gets them their next experience. It is the truth of God that saves: belief in Christ’s lordship and confession thereof are what matters, and even the “experience” side of the equation is dependent on antecedent knowledge of the existence of the thing to be experienced.

I sometimes envy the unquestioning, simple-trust sort of believers whom I know. They just believe and that’s it: this sort of belief, while tending too far towards “blind faith” and utterly impossible to pass on to unbelievers, is apparently sufficient for their own lives and helps them worry less over details. Similarly, the shepherds, being Jewish, were privy to the honor of experiencing the angelic visitation; but don’t forget that the point of the visitation was revelation, which is itself knowledge. God wants us to know so that we can experience. For this reason, God wishes to educate even those in the humblest circumstances. Those who seek, who delve deeper and deeper — God is faithful to lead us the whole thousand miles to bring us to the same place. Thank God for that.

Merry Christmas, everyone!

Technorati : Christmas, education, knowledge, learning, theology

Since we already had both a girl and a boy, and since we knew their sexes well before their births, Renee and I were happy to be surprised with our third child. The announcement, “It’s a ____,” never meant so much before. So here it is: “It’s a girl!”

Here’s a little footage of our precious baby daughter, Wendy.

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBcbdKIJXWQ[/video]

Time of birth: December 2, 2:02 AM

Weight: 8 lbs., 5 oz.

Length: 21 in.

Loveableness: ∞

Many of you will be happy to hear that this post is not about preterism (check the category and tags!). It’s more about the importance of developing the Christian mind. It was, however, my recent discussion of preterism that brought this to my thoughts, so I will use my struggle with full preterism as an example.

I certainly didn’t come quietly into full preterism. Since my first encounter with it, I kicked against the goads for about five years before I could no longer say that I struggled against full preterism.

This is not to say that I do not still struggle with it. There are some things one cannot understand about a subject without first accepting it on its own terms. I have accepted full preterism fully, and will now continue to wrestle with it for the rest of my days. Even before being entirely convinced of preterism, I had to accept it provisionally in order to see more clearly what claims it was making and why. This sort of engagement with things we are at odds with is an important stage and a necessary component of maturing as a Christian.

I’ve always rolled my eyes when I encountered the “Revelation” nuts in the church: obsession with the day’s headlines, thinking that they elucidate the details of the fulfillment of end-times prophecy, this bugs the ever-loving stew out of me.

I realize I’ve been talking a lot of eschatology lately. I don’t want to give the impression that I’m a one-trick pony or that I’m unhealthily devoted to discussion of this particular doctrine. I thought I’d dedicate a post explaining why I’ve been talking about this, and why I am not likely to completely stop posting about eschatology in the future (although I’m sure it will slack off here and there).

I never could stomach codswallop, and especially widely celebrated codswallop. It’s always been natural for me to be critical of things handed to me to believe, even when I understand that the majority believes it. And then sometimes I discover that I have unquestioned, inaccurate presuppositions on a subject. Now, when I realize that I have been eating food with a hair in it, I make absolutely sure that I have purged my mouth by rinsing it with drink and stuffing it with a prodigious amount of uncontaminated food. So it was with my eschatology. Having long since rinsed my mouth out and cleared away the bunk I believed before, for the last few years I have been on the mission of preparing and chewing up the replacement meal. I am using this blog as a way of probing everything and getting my own ducks in a row, but also of answering the questions of some friends who have lately been asking questions.

Although my interests are by no means limited to one or two topics, I do bury myself in one or two at a time until 1) I reach a dead end, 2) I’m distracted by the luster of another topic, or 3) I obtain a measure of comfort with what I believe on that topic. And when this last is achieved, the teacher in me makes me dig just a bit deeper so that I can explain it to others.

This is where I am with eschatology. I am fully aware that there are some divisive topics which do not request to be voiced abroad, or if so, more as a heads-up full disclosure than a “Repent of your contrary belief!” sort of thing. Christianity can tolerate a lack of homogeneity of belief on a number of peripheral topics.

But eschatology is different. Not only does futurism needlessly make Christianity a laughingstock with its endless failed predictions, it’s based solely on a ludicrous hermeneutic for Scripture interpretation that undermines even our Lord’s own credibility. Moreover, my eschatology needs to make substantial gains in acceptance within the Church if its chief implication, the victory of Christianity throughout the world, is to be realized any time soon.

So please don’t roll your eyes when you see me writing about this particular topic, and please do make sure that you’ve tried to understand why it means so much to me and that you are satisfied that you have given it the level of importance that it deserves.