The Joys of Seminary

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.

One Baptism

This morning at a church I was visiting, I witnessed for the first time an infant baptism. When I realized mid-service that one was coming, I actually became really nervous and excited for what was about to take place. I had been anticipating my first infant baptism for a long time, and I was not disappointed: it was a beautiful and holy thing to see.

Ironically, before I knew that an infant baptism was coming, I had seen that same baby squawking during a hymn, and my mind went to Matt. 21:16, where Jesus quoted the Septuagint version of Psalm 8:2: “Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise.” Thinking about how the baby was participating in worshiping the Lord with her parents, I wondered if she had been or would soon be baptized as a member of the covenant community. About ten minutes later, my question was answered.

Reading…

Since I first heard about “Federal Vision” Theology, I’ve read quite a bit about it on two blogs, The Presbyteer and Blog and Mablog. (Blog and Mablog has something just about every day on the controversy; both this blog and the Presbyteer’s are very strongly pro-Federal Vision theology.) Also called “Auburn Avenue Theology” or the “Monroe Doctrine” (Auburn Avenue is the church in Monroe, LA, where much of this theology is being developed), there are some very interesting developments that could significantly shape the landscape of Reformed Theology over the next decade, and perhaps even for many years to come.

[Edit, 1/26/07, 10:37 am: In a comment below, The Presbyteer clarified his position on the matter; also, I realized that Doug Wilson, the author of Blog and Mablog, is not only supportive, but he was one of the contributors for my book on the pro-Federal Vision side. Just wanted to make that clear, lest I misrepresent anyone.]

But, that doesn’t mean that this stuff is simple. There are some things these people are saying that seem very logical and natural extensions of the theology that led me to paedobaptism, but there are some things I read and cringe a little bit. The stuff that makes sense seems extremely helpful; the stuff that bothers me seems potentially disastrous.

So, to get a better understanding of the issues, I picked up The Auburn Avenue Theology Pros and Cons: Debating the Federal Vision from the Samford University Library. The book is filled with five papers from “pros,” five from “cons,” and responses to each paper from the respective “other side” after a weekend of in-person debate and weeks of e-mail exchanges with each other. The whole conference was designed to get rid of misunderstandings surrounding the issue and to get to the big issues. I have only read the first few essays, but I finish up my Puritan Spirituality class this morning, and I will try to spend a good part of the day continuing to read it. My goal is to finish it before my Spring semester classes start on Tuesday, but I can’t promise anything. I’ll let you know my thoughts in a few days.

---

Also, in case you were wondering, I haven’t forgotten about the third part to my “Outward Sign, Inward Reality” post series (read part one and part two here)–I simply am trying to make sure that I have a really good grasp of the issues before I slap something down I my blog. This Auburn Avenue Theology stuff, for example, is really making me think through a lot of the issues involved in what I would write for the third part. So, I’m making progress toward writing more about baptism, but I’m not even comfortable writing an interim report at this point. “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness…”

Did you know…?

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.

Living by Hearsay

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…

I Love Nebraska Update

For those who were interested, I received the following e-mail today from Sen. Burling about what I had sent him concerning his bill to change the state song:

Dear Jacob,

Thank you for contacting me with your opinions on Legislative Bill 345 to change the Nebraska State Song. I introduced this legislation to provide a forum for the opponents and proponents to express their wishes on the subject.

Please never hesitate to contact me with your opinions and concerns in the future.

Senator Carroll Burling
District 33

That might be the least committed statement a human being could possibly make.

Seriously, though, from my time working as a page in the Legislature, I do know that they take very seriously these sorts of e-mails, phone calls, and letters. He was being very honest when he urged me contact him whenever I have opinions. In my experience, most of Nebraska’s legislators similarly want to hear from their constituents.

As cynical as we might be about politics in general, I have a lot of respect for how the Legislature works.

Denarii and Denial of Self

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.

Ein’ Feste (Wart)Burg

Luther’s Study
Originally uploaded by ahansen54.

Today my daytrip was to the Wartburg castle, just outside of Eisenach. The castle is most famous for being the year-long hiding place of Junker Jörg (Martin Luther’s pseudonym while in hiding) after his appearance at the Diet of Worms. Here, in the span of ten weeks, Luther made the first translation of the New Testament from its original Greek into German.

When asked what he did during his year in the Wartburg, he reportedly replied, “I fought the devil with ink,” referring to his translation. Sadly, many tourists during the last four hundred years (the first “so-and-so was here” I saw etched into the wall was from 1602) have taken his statement a bit too literally and took home souvenir pieces from a large ink-stain on his wall, leaving a large hole. They also destroyed his original desk, and thus the one you see in the picture is a different one from his parents’ house.

Luther’s small study isn’t much bigger than my own small room in Göttingen, so if he can do it for a year, so can. Although I probably won’t be changing the course of history by putting the Bible in common hands for the first time. Or will I….?

No, I won’t.

I Love Nebraska (But Not Like This)

I had heard in the news that Nebraska Legislative Senator Carroll Burling (my senator, representing the 33rd District) had introduced a bill (LB 345) that proposes to change the state song from “Beautiful Nebraska” to some country song performed by a woman in our district. I hadn’t heard the song until today, when I read some commentary on this particular bill at another blog. I suppose this bill, in itself, might be an argument in favor of term limits.

At least with “Beautiful Nebraska”–which, beyond a shadow of a doubt, is cheesy–we can defend our state pride by pointing out that it was written a long time ago, when all songs were cheesy. I read that one of Burling’s motivational factors was to provide a “contemporary sound” (or something like that) to our state song. Well, if this is contemporary, I want a time machine. “I Love Nebraska” is simply awful. It almost makes me want to stay in Alabama. (Almost, mind you.)

Listen to it for yourself:

---

UPDATE (10:21 AM, 1/20/07): I wrote the following e-mail to Sen. Burling in opposition of LB 345. If you would like to contact your state senator, you can get their e-mail addresses here. This, of course, assumes that you know the district in which you live. If you don’t, you can find your district number here.

Hon. Senator Burling–

I understand that you have introduced LB 345, which would change our state song from “Beautiful Nebraska” to a newer song called “I Love Nebraska.” I appreciate your efforts to update our state song to something more contemporary, but, having heard the song and seen the music video (available on the internet), I must state my strong opinion that this particular song is NOT the right song to replace the old one. I stand in OPPOSITION to this bill.

From an artistic point of view, there are poorly written lyrics and forced rhymes. From an aesthetic point of view, there are many Nebraskans (including myself) who genuinely dislike country music as a genre, but I don’t even think that this is particularly good country music.

Finally, I have a hard time imagining children learning this new song in schools. I myself learned “Beautiful Nebraska” while I was growing up in Nebraska public schools, and it was a song that is capable of being sung by choirs and even children. “I Love Nebraska,” however, is a performance-oriented song, and its nature wouldn’t really allow any but country music soloists to sing it. That hardly seems fitting for a state song.

So, I would request that you request to withdraw the bill or move that it be postponed indefinitely. Please do NOT continue to support this bill.

Thank you for all the hard work you are doing as my senator!

Jacob Gerber
Hastings, NE

Not Just for the Birds

Over Christmas break, I accidentally subscribed to a month of Blockbuster’s movie delivery service–basically, I didn’t cancel my free trial subscription in time to keep it a free trial. I hate doing stuff like that, but I decided to make the best use of it I could. This summer, I saw movies like It’s a Wonderful Life and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington for the first time, and I genuinely enjoyed them, much to my surprise. So, when I realized my Blockbuster subscription snafu, I decided to begin watching so many of the classic movies that I have never seen.

That’s where Alfred Hitchcock comes in–I had been wanting to watch his movies since I saw a documentary about them around five years ago. So, I watched Rear Window a few nights ago, which was pretty good. I wasn’t overly thrilled with it, but it was pretty good. It didn’t quite produce the feeling of suspense that I was expecting, although it was a movie that kept me in suspense until the end about whether any murder had been committed. Hitchcock did a very good job refraining from tipping his hand until the very end.

Today, however, I watched The Birds, and I loved it. The plot is simple: flocks of birds begin gathering ominously in a peaceful California town. Then, all of the sudden, the birds begin viciously attack the people–men, women, and children alike. Seriously, who makes a movie about swarming, violent, and deranged birds? Yet it worked so well. The scariest part of the movie is to consider how many of those same birds we walk past every day without even noticing them.

Another impressive part of the movie is how Hitchcock never finally explains what it was that makes the birds attack. It seems that, in most movies that I have seen, an integral part of the plot is the slow unraveling of an elaborate explanation behind the conflict in the story. Then, the resolution of the movie depends on doing something equally elaborate to solve the conflict. In The Birds, though, Hitchcock leaves just about every possible question unanswered.

Nothing is resolved. Birds blitzkrieg. I loved it.