I am sorry there have been no updates today. My wireless signal would not work at Freed. It would connect to their network but would not give me an outside line. There were other people there who were able to get out. I have a pretty good feeling my computer was specifically blocked on their network. Maybe someone at FHU did not like my reviews.
Today's update is going to be short and to the point. The chapel speaker created a huge stir to which Earl Edwards had to get up and mildly rebuke him. I'm listening to the lesson again as we speak so I can give greater detail. Right after lunch I caught Alex Bayes in Loyd Auditorium. I totally disagreed with the entire background of the speaker and thus his entire lesson was based on a bad foundation. His main point was that Peter, in John 21, was just making a choice between better and best when he went back to fishing. The entire context of John 21 is the wavering faith of Peter. Jesus is driving to make Peter commit to "follow me." Peter went back to his old way of life before Jesus had called him, he went back to fishing. This was not a choice between better and best this was a returning to the old way of life! The good side was that he was animated and passionate about what he spoke. The zeal was wonderful. The foundation needed some work though.
After that I listened to James Gardner on the variation of language on John 21. Again he made the same mistakes as the previous speaker. He was doing a word study on agapao and phileo and his conclusion is that the variance in the language is insignificant. He stands on ground with good language scholars like D.A. Carson who believes there is no significance. To make this short, again the context is ignored. Context always overrules words. The context of Peter's wavering faith is obvious. John's usage of the two words and the various nuances can be clearly seen when they are studied out. Can the differences in words be taken too far - absolutely! However, in this text the context seems clear. Oh yes, I almost forget, he said that Peter and Jesus had this discussion in Aramaic so therefore they didn't use any of these words. That is a big stretch. Where does he get that this conversation was in Aramaic and not Koine Greek?
The people seemed to disappear after these sessions. Open forum was sparse and uneventful today. Sorry there was no live blog, but I could not get a connection. If I get time I may blog a few comments about it. At least last year it was more exciting with the whole hand clapping debate. All in all I felt pretty down today. I've been looking for that passionate textually based thunder sermon and have been left wanting. I keep thinking, "Is this the best we can do?" Disappointed is the best word I can come up with at the moment.
Showing posts with label Freed Hardeman University. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Freed Hardeman University. Show all posts
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Wednesday Night FHU Madness
OK... probably not madness. After a great meal at Corky's we made our way back to FHU for the evening lecture. We were going to eat at Corky's last night but changed our minds since Logan's had a two complete steak dinners for 14 bucks deal. Glad we did as Corky's was even closer to the tornado that ripped through Jackson (more on this later).
When we got to Freed I found out that Harold Redd was going to be preaching. Up to this point I have never heard of him. He was preaching on the humility of Christ from John 19.
The long and short of it is I’m not sure where he was going or how he got there. The main thing I got was that Jesus was a rejected king. Tonight I was able to pay fairly good attention and I still was unable to really discern where he was going. He never really got with it. He never really showed why what he was saying was relevant. He did not show how it affects me (speaking in the plural application sense).
At this point I have to admit that the keynotes have been sadly disappointing to me. Sure there are good things to grab from each of them like this jewel from tonight, “The Jews wanted the Scriptures without Jesus; Today men want Jesus but they don’t want the Scriptures.” But OVERALL there is no clear purpose, no exposition of the text, no illustration of the text, and no real practical application of that text. One speaker this year boasts on his blog about making “the all-star game” by speaking at Freed this year. Is this how our All-Star preachers perform? If so where do I sign up to bet on the other team (and no I don’t endorse gambling).
After the evening service we stuck around for a few minutes to listen to Pickin’ and a Singin’ because CJ wanted to see the show. That last about one song and he and Reagan Jett changed their minds. On the way back to the hotel we decided to drive up and see where the Tornado hit. It is amazing how close it was to us. I would say an eigth of a mile or less and you see the destruction. Valerie (my wife) pointed out a metal poll that was snapped in half. The entire area was flattened. One crazy thing is that a building on one side of the street had windows blown out of it while a car dealership on the other side looked like nothing had happened. Scientist still can’t tell us how, when, and where a Tornado will hit for sure nor can the stop them, but they know Global warming is real and WE HAVE TO STOP IT. Righttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt.
Good Night and God Bless,
Caleb
When we got to Freed I found out that Harold Redd was going to be preaching. Up to this point I have never heard of him. He was preaching on the humility of Christ from John 19.
The long and short of it is I’m not sure where he was going or how he got there. The main thing I got was that Jesus was a rejected king. Tonight I was able to pay fairly good attention and I still was unable to really discern where he was going. He never really got with it. He never really showed why what he was saying was relevant. He did not show how it affects me (speaking in the plural application sense).
At this point I have to admit that the keynotes have been sadly disappointing to me. Sure there are good things to grab from each of them like this jewel from tonight, “The Jews wanted the Scriptures without Jesus; Today men want Jesus but they don’t want the Scriptures.” But OVERALL there is no clear purpose, no exposition of the text, no illustration of the text, and no real practical application of that text. One speaker this year boasts on his blog about making “the all-star game” by speaking at Freed this year. Is this how our All-Star preachers perform? If so where do I sign up to bet on the other team (and no I don’t endorse gambling).
After the evening service we stuck around for a few minutes to listen to Pickin’ and a Singin’ because CJ wanted to see the show. That last about one song and he and Reagan Jett changed their minds. On the way back to the hotel we decided to drive up and see where the Tornado hit. It is amazing how close it was to us. I would say an eigth of a mile or less and you see the destruction. Valerie (my wife) pointed out a metal poll that was snapped in half. The entire area was flattened. One crazy thing is that a building on one side of the street had windows blown out of it while a car dealership on the other side looked like nothing had happened. Scientist still can’t tell us how, when, and where a Tornado will hit for sure nor can the stop them, but they know Global warming is real and WE HAVE TO STOP IT. Righttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt.
Good Night and God Bless,
Caleb
FHU Wednesday Lectures
We got up late this morning after not getting to bed until after 2:00 due to the tornados. This morning I caught the first few minutes of the chapel service. To make an evalution of the lesson would be unreasonable since I did not hear it. From the start he seemed captivating. The last thing I heard as I was turning off my computer to get ready to leave the hotel was the speaker quoting, you guessed it, good ol' Will Barclay.
ANNOUNCEMENT - Next year all FHU Chapel talks will feature the reading of William Barclay's commentaries. Please be sure to attend. This is a joke for those of you who may be wondering.
I made it to FHU and I'm sitting down for Jack P's lecture on whether or not John wrote the pericope fo the woman caught in adultery. He opens up by saying he will let us all in on the ending from the beginning, "I don't know." I'm upset because I just realized that Chuck Webster is speaking next door. That's where I should be.
UPDATE:
Jack P was Jack P. Not having much sleep I will be the first to admit that I didn't follow him. You have to be paying attention the whole time and I was not able to. The result being I'm not exactly sure what he said but what I did hear was great.
UPDATE:
After Jack P I stayed in the same room to hear Dan Winkler. What passion. You can tell he really feels what he is speaking. If only we could hand out prescriptions of it to the rest of the speakers around here! He talked about the personal side of Jesus from John 13ff. My only complaint is that he moved outside of John to express the human side of Jesus and his emotions. This was not necessary as John has plenty of it, and if he would have stayed in John it would have been more exegetically sound. The only other thing is he had four sections to his lesson and he spent so much time on the first that he literally flew through the last three sections. One of the best sessions I've attended this year. BTW - it was packed. No open seats and people sitting and standing in the back and down the aiseles as well as the sides entering the lecture hall. I'm sure the fire department would have shut us down.
ANNOUNCEMENT - Next year all FHU Chapel talks will feature the reading of William Barclay's commentaries. Please be sure to attend. This is a joke for those of you who may be wondering.
I made it to FHU and I'm sitting down for Jack P's lecture on whether or not John wrote the pericope fo the woman caught in adultery. He opens up by saying he will let us all in on the ending from the beginning, "I don't know." I'm upset because I just realized that Chuck Webster is speaking next door. That's where I should be.
UPDATE:
Jack P was Jack P. Not having much sleep I will be the first to admit that I didn't follow him. You have to be paying attention the whole time and I was not able to. The result being I'm not exactly sure what he said but what I did hear was great.
UPDATE:
After Jack P I stayed in the same room to hear Dan Winkler. What passion. You can tell he really feels what he is speaking. If only we could hand out prescriptions of it to the rest of the speakers around here! He talked about the personal side of Jesus from John 13ff. My only complaint is that he moved outside of John to express the human side of Jesus and his emotions. This was not necessary as John has plenty of it, and if he would have stayed in John it would have been more exegetically sound. The only other thing is he had four sections to his lesson and he spent so much time on the first that he literally flew through the last three sections. One of the best sessions I've attended this year. BTW - it was packed. No open seats and people sitting and standing in the back and down the aiseles as well as the sides entering the lecture hall. I'm sure the fire department would have shut us down.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Open Forum Live Blog
*More Recent Comments Appear First*
- Updates will be coming but I'm stuck in a basement. More to come as soon as I can.
- I have tos top live blogging. Battery is dying! Sorry. I was waiting for Elkins and he is not about to dissapoint. He is making his way there now!
- Another guy gets up and appears to be reading from a card… maybe? And talks about working in jails. He then talks about stuff from discussions yesterday. He then rambles on for a while. He says let’s live within the boundaries and do the things that are lawful. He is talking about clapping.
- Earl speaks about the veils from the perspective of working in foreign countries. Nothing too important here just talks about cultural differences
- Another guy gets up… speaks of educated missionaries. Same stuff.
- A bunch of questions about Veils. He says it’s a matter of culture. If you live in a culture where there is a sign of authority you need to do it otherwise it is violating the meaning of the passage. He says people have a right to do it if they want but it’s a matter of choice like Romans 14. He also says that you cannot practice this passage in 1 Corinthians unless it wraps around and hangs down. The things you see on most heads of people in “covering churches” do not meet the definition of these words. I would tend to agree. I will also say we blow this discussion off way to easy instead of discussing it in more detail.
- Question is about questioning Christ’s doctrine. Ralph defines doctrine as teaching and says some think the word is a bad thing.
- Question about the necessity of needing a Bible degree to be a missionary. He says of course not. But you need to think about the world we live in and being professionally trained and you need to put yourself in a situation where you can minister to your fullest. It’s an expediency (matter of opinion) matter though. Sounds good. It’s still interesting to me that all of the great missionaries I can think of off the top of my head were not known as the most educated. Not to downplay education as I am someone who is continuing to pursue it. In my opinion I think we need to rethink how we educate not if we need to do it. The new covenant is an education one (Jer 31:31ff).
- The standard yadda yadda before the forum begins
- Waiting for the Ralph joke
- And he delivered
- How can so many people see the Bible differently? Ralph answers that some want to twist the Scriptures. He also notes that some is ignorance; some is willful, etc…. He then states that anytime the body of Christ is fragmented Christ is not happy. I don’t agree with this at all. It seems to me he is trying to play for pity on his hand clapping deal. Was Christ not happy when they had to fragment away the man from the church in Corinth in 1 Cor 5? Sometimes removing and division is good. Christ makes the division between good and evil.
- Updates will be coming but I'm stuck in a basement. More to come as soon as I can.
- I have tos top live blogging. Battery is dying! Sorry. I was waiting for Elkins and he is not about to dissapoint. He is making his way there now!
- Another guy gets up and appears to be reading from a card… maybe? And talks about working in jails. He then talks about stuff from discussions yesterday. He then rambles on for a while. He says let’s live within the boundaries and do the things that are lawful. He is talking about clapping.
- Earl speaks about the veils from the perspective of working in foreign countries. Nothing too important here just talks about cultural differences
- Another guy gets up… speaks of educated missionaries. Same stuff.
- A bunch of questions about Veils. He says it’s a matter of culture. If you live in a culture where there is a sign of authority you need to do it otherwise it is violating the meaning of the passage. He says people have a right to do it if they want but it’s a matter of choice like Romans 14. He also says that you cannot practice this passage in 1 Corinthians unless it wraps around and hangs down. The things you see on most heads of people in “covering churches” do not meet the definition of these words. I would tend to agree. I will also say we blow this discussion off way to easy instead of discussing it in more detail.
- Question is about questioning Christ’s doctrine. Ralph defines doctrine as teaching and says some think the word is a bad thing.
- Question about the necessity of needing a Bible degree to be a missionary. He says of course not. But you need to think about the world we live in and being professionally trained and you need to put yourself in a situation where you can minister to your fullest. It’s an expediency (matter of opinion) matter though. Sounds good. It’s still interesting to me that all of the great missionaries I can think of off the top of my head were not known as the most educated. Not to downplay education as I am someone who is continuing to pursue it. In my opinion I think we need to rethink how we educate not if we need to do it. The new covenant is an education one (Jer 31:31ff).
- The standard yadda yadda before the forum begins
- Waiting for the Ralph joke
- And he delivered
- How can so many people see the Bible differently? Ralph answers that some want to twist the Scriptures. He also notes that some is ignorance; some is willful, etc…. He then states that anytime the body of Christ is fragmented Christ is not happy. I don’t agree with this at all. It seems to me he is trying to play for pity on his hand clapping deal. Was Christ not happy when they had to fragment away the man from the church in Corinth in 1 Cor 5? Sometimes removing and division is good. Christ makes the division between good and evil.
FHU Tuesday Lectures
Once again the first lecture I caught was chapel. I’m going to have to get the others on DVD or watch the podcast of the Loyd Auditorium lectures. It started off with the never ending announcements. One guy got up and introduced the speaker and mentioned that it is normally Billy Smith’s job. He is out because he had a stint put in a week or so ago. I should mention that this is the day when one of the seniors in the Bible Department speaks in chapel. They have all the Bible faculty and majors up on stage. It seemed really sparse. Just an eyeball estimate but it looks like their Bible department is way low on students compared to past years. The announcement was that this was done “to brag” about their Bible department and students. It was done in good taste to show how proud they are of their Bible program. He said that the speaker they choose is hard but it displays “The best and the brightest.”
The speakers name was Nathan Wolf. They had him and his family all stand up. I was sitting way up in the nose bleeds so I couldn’t really make him out well but he looked “older” for a college student. His text was John 5:36: “But the testimony which I have is greater than the testimony of John; for the works which the Father has given Me to accomplish—the very works that I do—testify about Me, that the Father has sent Me" (Jn 5:36). He was speaking on “Believe the works.”
I have to admit up front that I have to juggle two kids while I listen and try to take notes and remember what is said. I place that caveat in case some of my criticism is unwarranted as the speaker said something and I missed it. However, my overall feeling is that this was a completely blow opportunity to exegete John 5:36. Very little time was spent in John 5:36. The trust of this passage is that there is another “witness” (marturia) that Jesus is the Christ who should be believed so that the individual reader can have life (John 20:30-31). From my recollection this passage was never even mentioned and it’s the whole point of the book. No time was spent establishing the “marturia” of John (1:7, 19; 3:11, 32, 33; 5:31, 32, 34, 36; 8:13, 14, 17; 19:35; 21:24) and the word is used twice in this verse. Jesus mentions in this text that the Father “sent” (apostello) me. Apostello is very important in the theology of John to establish Jesus as the Christ that brings life, and yet no reference or development of Jesus being “sent.”
The last exegetical criticism I would like to address is the definition of “works” (ergon) in John 5:36. I was waiting for a quote from Bauer, and then maybe Thayer, or maybe even Vine. Better yet I was looking for a definition of works from John’s usage. Instead “works” was defined by quoting Adam Clark’s Commentary. You all know how I feel about commentaries already, but put on top of this ergon is defined by quoting a commentary. What’s really the tragedy is that Clark defines works as “miracles.” The rest of the lesson is developed around the miracles of Jesus. There is a big problem with this. Ergon is used a lot in John (3:19, 20, 21; 4:34; 5:20, 36; 6:28, 29; 7:3, 7, 21; 8:39, 41; 9:3, 4; 10:25, 32, 33, 37, 38; 14:10, 11, 12; 15:24; 17:4). What makes this so significant is that ergon is applied to non-miraculous events. John 3:19, for instance, mentions the works (ergon) of men are evil. He is not talking about miracles. In John 6:29 the text says, “This is the work of God, that you believe.” Is belief a miracle? I could say more but I think you get the point.
The whole presentation was pretty lifeless – no apparent passion for the message. There was a lack of emphasis, if any, upon “belief” which is the center of the Gospel. Put on top of this YET ANOTHER QUOTE from Will Barclay’s commentary! I’m being sarcastic here, but maybe we should just invite him to come speak (if he were alive). He stated a good question, albeit on a bad definition of works, “Why did Jesus come performing miracles?” This was going in the right direction. John says it was so we would believe and have life (John 20:30-31). Is this Freed Hardeman’s “best and brightest?” If so I’m worried about my generation of preachers.
UPDATE: I just got done listening to a lecture on the Muslim view of Jesus by Mark Hooper. Up to this point I do not believe I have ever heard or heard of him. If I heard correctly he has done mission work in India. His lecture was good. He talked about the positive aspects of the Muslim view of Jesus and then talked about how they deny the deity of Christ. It was very interesting hearing about his encounters with various Muslims. Good for what he was trying to do – introduce their views of Jesus. I found it interesting that Jesus is the only sinless prophet and that they believe in Christ return (the outcome is very different as you can imagine). At the end he took questions. One thing he said raise my eyebrows about Muslims not having to be called Christians. I’m not sure I followed so I won’t say much except I need to listen to it again.
UPDATE:
The next lecture I caught was by Jack P. Lewis on "does the wind blow or the spirit move." Like usual it was a very technical discussion as the topic calls for. When I sit down and listen to him speak I wonder what our brotherhood would look like without him. His deep appreciation for the text and that influence on his work is remarkable. He is a great scholar. To be able to say that I was able to hear Jack P. Lewis is going to mean something very special to me someday. In fact it means a lot now. As to the lecture he seemed really peppy for Jack P and even told some funny jokes. You have to love him.
The speakers name was Nathan Wolf. They had him and his family all stand up. I was sitting way up in the nose bleeds so I couldn’t really make him out well but he looked “older” for a college student. His text was John 5:36: “But the testimony which I have is greater than the testimony of John; for the works which the Father has given Me to accomplish—the very works that I do—testify about Me, that the Father has sent Me" (Jn 5:36). He was speaking on “Believe the works.”
I have to admit up front that I have to juggle two kids while I listen and try to take notes and remember what is said. I place that caveat in case some of my criticism is unwarranted as the speaker said something and I missed it. However, my overall feeling is that this was a completely blow opportunity to exegete John 5:36. Very little time was spent in John 5:36. The trust of this passage is that there is another “witness” (marturia) that Jesus is the Christ who should be believed so that the individual reader can have life (John 20:30-31). From my recollection this passage was never even mentioned and it’s the whole point of the book. No time was spent establishing the “marturia” of John (1:7, 19; 3:11, 32, 33; 5:31, 32, 34, 36; 8:13, 14, 17; 19:35; 21:24) and the word is used twice in this verse. Jesus mentions in this text that the Father “sent” (apostello) me. Apostello is very important in the theology of John to establish Jesus as the Christ that brings life, and yet no reference or development of Jesus being “sent.”
The last exegetical criticism I would like to address is the definition of “works” (ergon) in John 5:36. I was waiting for a quote from Bauer, and then maybe Thayer, or maybe even Vine. Better yet I was looking for a definition of works from John’s usage. Instead “works” was defined by quoting Adam Clark’s Commentary. You all know how I feel about commentaries already, but put on top of this ergon is defined by quoting a commentary. What’s really the tragedy is that Clark defines works as “miracles.” The rest of the lesson is developed around the miracles of Jesus. There is a big problem with this. Ergon is used a lot in John (3:19, 20, 21; 4:34; 5:20, 36; 6:28, 29; 7:3, 7, 21; 8:39, 41; 9:3, 4; 10:25, 32, 33, 37, 38; 14:10, 11, 12; 15:24; 17:4). What makes this so significant is that ergon is applied to non-miraculous events. John 3:19, for instance, mentions the works (ergon) of men are evil. He is not talking about miracles. In John 6:29 the text says, “This is the work of God, that you believe.” Is belief a miracle? I could say more but I think you get the point.
The whole presentation was pretty lifeless – no apparent passion for the message. There was a lack of emphasis, if any, upon “belief” which is the center of the Gospel. Put on top of this YET ANOTHER QUOTE from Will Barclay’s commentary! I’m being sarcastic here, but maybe we should just invite him to come speak (if he were alive). He stated a good question, albeit on a bad definition of works, “Why did Jesus come performing miracles?” This was going in the right direction. John says it was so we would believe and have life (John 20:30-31). Is this Freed Hardeman’s “best and brightest?” If so I’m worried about my generation of preachers.
UPDATE: I just got done listening to a lecture on the Muslim view of Jesus by Mark Hooper. Up to this point I do not believe I have ever heard or heard of him. If I heard correctly he has done mission work in India. His lecture was good. He talked about the positive aspects of the Muslim view of Jesus and then talked about how they deny the deity of Christ. It was very interesting hearing about his encounters with various Muslims. Good for what he was trying to do – introduce their views of Jesus. I found it interesting that Jesus is the only sinless prophet and that they believe in Christ return (the outcome is very different as you can imagine). At the end he took questions. One thing he said raise my eyebrows about Muslims not having to be called Christians. I’m not sure I followed so I won’t say much except I need to listen to it again.
UPDATE:
The next lecture I caught was by Jack P. Lewis on "does the wind blow or the spirit move." Like usual it was a very technical discussion as the topic calls for. When I sit down and listen to him speak I wonder what our brotherhood would look like without him. His deep appreciation for the text and that influence on his work is remarkable. He is a great scholar. To be able to say that I was able to hear Jack P. Lewis is going to mean something very special to me someday. In fact it means a lot now. As to the lecture he seemed really peppy for Jack P and even told some funny jokes. You have to love him.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Open Forum Live Blog
*More Recent Comments Appear First*
- That was pretty much the end of the open forum. I give it a 3 on a scale of 1 to 10. Ralph needs to slow do and articulare better. And I'm longing for good comments from the mics. Maybe tomorrow eh?
- A fellow who was a missionary in I believe it was India, got up and talked for a long time. Not really sure what his point was. He then moved on to talk about how people had come in to try and destroy their work by teaching anti-cooperation doctrine and then he moved to the liberals who came in teaching that false doctrine of the instrument of hand clapping. He then said the brethren there rejected that unbiblical practice.
Ralph mentions he addressed this all last year and you can get it on CD along with everyone else’s comments on it. He says that he did hear it on CD and couldn’t be here last year because he was doing mission work overseas. He then says he just wants to know of Ralph has repented yet. You can then hear a pin drop for a couple seconds and this is then followed by a few scattered hand claps.
Lipe makes his move to the microphone to do his usual squash of the discussion. This is followed by… you guessed it, Elkins! I knew he was coming and here he is. He says that he won’t talk about the clapping thing since they don’t want to, just listen to the CD and hear his comments from last year. He then just backs up what Ralph said about how not revealing all information is not lying.
My thoughts…. It was funny to see this guy bring it up like this. Before the open forum I said, “I wonder how long it will take for someone to bring up hand clapping.” Not long apparently! I still think there is confusion on the issue and Freed just wants to not address it. Can you imagine if Ralph said that you can use a trumpet in singing? They would not tolerate it. Yet there are those who believe that clapping IS always an instrument and is therefore sinful to use in singing. That really is where the debate should be, however, it seems to be that this has been forgotten in the whole heat of the discussion. I think it’s a bit disingenuous for them to not talk about this when they would readily pick up a discussion on instrumental music. My final thought is that most comments made on this subject are opinions. Very few are digging into the text. It’s an epidemic.
- OK... live blogging is going to stop for now. I will sumarize at the end. Caleb Junior needs the computer to distract him so he sits still for the rest. Check back!
- I'm waiting for Garland Elkins to make his appearence. I know it's coming... waiting....
- Question: Is it ok for a Christian to lie if it’s a matter of life and death?
Ralph talks about Abram’s lies about his wife. He also mentions Isaac’s similar lie. He then mentions Rahab the harlot. He says 1 Sam 16:1-3 is one of the stickiest passages. It appears that God is telling him to deceive the people. Ralph says that this leads him to believe that you don’t have to tell every thought you know in order to be truthful.
God is a God of truth and doesn’t lie. We are to be people like God. Our Yes be yes and no be no. We are honest.
Conclusion is that it’s not wrong to not reveal all information but if asked you can’t lie. Ralph points out that some benefited form lying (in this life). He said that’s not the question.
Good point. People prosper in the world all the time even though they are evil. We don’t base good and evil, right and wrong, and integrity upon worldly standards of results. We look to the end. Job teaches a great lesson on this.
- Question about giving. I really didn’t follow. Gilmore talks too fast. I think the conclusion was giving on the first day of the week is the Apostolic pattern to be followed.
- Question: In general the question is about what happened to the gentiles in the OT. They weren’t under the old law so how did they receive forgiveness.
Ralph’s general response was that the gentiles where not under law and Paul says (somewhere in Romans) that without law there can be no sin. His conclusion is that God had a way that he dealt with them and it’s fuzzy.
This is true. It’s obvious God extended grace to gentiles as the entire book of Jonah shows, as well as other passages. Exactly how he did it is not always made clear, nor does it need to be. God’s seed promise was through Israel and Israel is the line through which Christ came. God’s dealings with Israel teach us enough to learn how God sees people. I think the key is to understand that Romans 1:16-17 shows that God has justified by those who come to Him through faith – believing He can do something for them that they cannot do for themselves.
- First Question: Is it meaningful to have the open forum because it seems like this generation doesn’t like to deal with controversial things.
Ralph believes the time is coming when discussion about biblical subjects is going to happen more. We are in a swing and right now people don’t want to talk about these matters but they will want to more in the future. Maybe he is right.
I think he blew a chance to examine the mindset of people in this generation and why they would think the way they do.
- Guess what, the cheesy joke is now coming. Everyone pay up!
- Ralph Gilmore is being introduced. My prediction he will start out with some cheesy joke. I'm taking bets.
- David Lipe is giving the standard spill he gives every year. What is open forum. Disagree but don’t be disagreeable. Oh yes, and FHU and the answers are not official answers from God. Good to know!
- That was pretty much the end of the open forum. I give it a 3 on a scale of 1 to 10. Ralph needs to slow do and articulare better. And I'm longing for good comments from the mics. Maybe tomorrow eh?
- A fellow who was a missionary in I believe it was India, got up and talked for a long time. Not really sure what his point was. He then moved on to talk about how people had come in to try and destroy their work by teaching anti-cooperation doctrine and then he moved to the liberals who came in teaching that false doctrine of the instrument of hand clapping. He then said the brethren there rejected that unbiblical practice.
Ralph mentions he addressed this all last year and you can get it on CD along with everyone else’s comments on it. He says that he did hear it on CD and couldn’t be here last year because he was doing mission work overseas. He then says he just wants to know of Ralph has repented yet. You can then hear a pin drop for a couple seconds and this is then followed by a few scattered hand claps.
Lipe makes his move to the microphone to do his usual squash of the discussion. This is followed by… you guessed it, Elkins! I knew he was coming and here he is. He says that he won’t talk about the clapping thing since they don’t want to, just listen to the CD and hear his comments from last year. He then just backs up what Ralph said about how not revealing all information is not lying.
My thoughts…. It was funny to see this guy bring it up like this. Before the open forum I said, “I wonder how long it will take for someone to bring up hand clapping.” Not long apparently! I still think there is confusion on the issue and Freed just wants to not address it. Can you imagine if Ralph said that you can use a trumpet in singing? They would not tolerate it. Yet there are those who believe that clapping IS always an instrument and is therefore sinful to use in singing. That really is where the debate should be, however, it seems to be that this has been forgotten in the whole heat of the discussion. I think it’s a bit disingenuous for them to not talk about this when they would readily pick up a discussion on instrumental music. My final thought is that most comments made on this subject are opinions. Very few are digging into the text. It’s an epidemic.
- OK... live blogging is going to stop for now. I will sumarize at the end. Caleb Junior needs the computer to distract him so he sits still for the rest. Check back!
- I'm waiting for Garland Elkins to make his appearence. I know it's coming... waiting....
- Question: Is it ok for a Christian to lie if it’s a matter of life and death?
Ralph talks about Abram’s lies about his wife. He also mentions Isaac’s similar lie. He then mentions Rahab the harlot. He says 1 Sam 16:1-3 is one of the stickiest passages. It appears that God is telling him to deceive the people. Ralph says that this leads him to believe that you don’t have to tell every thought you know in order to be truthful.
God is a God of truth and doesn’t lie. We are to be people like God. Our Yes be yes and no be no. We are honest.
Conclusion is that it’s not wrong to not reveal all information but if asked you can’t lie. Ralph points out that some benefited form lying (in this life). He said that’s not the question.
Good point. People prosper in the world all the time even though they are evil. We don’t base good and evil, right and wrong, and integrity upon worldly standards of results. We look to the end. Job teaches a great lesson on this.
- Question about giving. I really didn’t follow. Gilmore talks too fast. I think the conclusion was giving on the first day of the week is the Apostolic pattern to be followed.
- Question: In general the question is about what happened to the gentiles in the OT. They weren’t under the old law so how did they receive forgiveness.
Ralph’s general response was that the gentiles where not under law and Paul says (somewhere in Romans) that without law there can be no sin. His conclusion is that God had a way that he dealt with them and it’s fuzzy.
This is true. It’s obvious God extended grace to gentiles as the entire book of Jonah shows, as well as other passages. Exactly how he did it is not always made clear, nor does it need to be. God’s seed promise was through Israel and Israel is the line through which Christ came. God’s dealings with Israel teach us enough to learn how God sees people. I think the key is to understand that Romans 1:16-17 shows that God has justified by those who come to Him through faith – believing He can do something for them that they cannot do for themselves.
- First Question: Is it meaningful to have the open forum because it seems like this generation doesn’t like to deal with controversial things.
Ralph believes the time is coming when discussion about biblical subjects is going to happen more. We are in a swing and right now people don’t want to talk about these matters but they will want to more in the future. Maybe he is right.
I think he blew a chance to examine the mindset of people in this generation and why they would think the way they do.
- Guess what, the cheesy joke is now coming. Everyone pay up!
- Ralph Gilmore is being introduced. My prediction he will start out with some cheesy joke. I'm taking bets.
- David Lipe is giving the standard spill he gives every year. What is open forum. Disagree but don’t be disagreeable. Oh yes, and FHU and the answers are not official answers from God. Good to know!
FHU Monday Lectures
Monday update –
Today the first lecture we made it to was in the chapel (It’s hard to make the earlier lectures with two kids that are under the age of four). David Sargent spoke on “Believe John” form John 5:33. The theme this year is all on the Gospel of John.
David spoke about who John the Baptist was not. It seemed to me his main point was that John was trying to point away from himself and to Jesus as the Christ. Even though his assigned text was John 5:33 he preached out of John 1:19ff. He talked about how John said he was not the Christ, or Elijah, neither was he the Prophet. He said that they were looking for Elijah based upon Malachi 4:5. He then says that John the Baptist was saying this was not him. What’s interested to me is that he did not attempt to rectify the apparent contradiction with Matthew 11:14, “And if you are willing to accept it, John himself is Elijah who was to come.”
It was a shame that John 20:30-31 was not pointed to as the purpose behind John’s gospel – “that you may believe that Jesus the Christ the Son of God.” It is faith in Jesus as the Christ that John is striving to develop from start to finish in his Gospel. In John 1:34 John the Baptist says, “I myself have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God.” John the Baptist is a witness to who is seeking to instill belief in the reader that Jesus is the Son of God who can give them life! There were many exegetical ties that are really exciting all through the John the Baptist sections in the Gospel of John, and in my opinion these were neglected.
There was a lengthy quote from William Barclay’s commentary about John the Baptist being the one to introduce Jesus as the Bridegroom. It rubbed me the wrong way and maybe unnecessarily. It helps to understand that I don’t place commentaries on the altars that most do and read them infrequently let alone do I quote them in a sermon. From an illustration point of view it fits its purpose – I guess.
The thrust of the lesson was quite accurate – that Jesus is the Christ. The delivery lacked passion. The content seemed lacking. The nonuse of the wonderful exegetical ties with the John the Baptist passages and the rest of John was a crime. Of course… it’s my opinion.
Caleb
UPDATE:
I just got done listening to Stan Michell preach on "Practicing Love in a Multi-ethnic Society" from John 4:7-14. His accent was great (why is it that one someone preaches with an accent they automatically receive 2 more style points?). He talked about doing mission work in Zimbabwe and did a good job of relating the biblical subject to the world we live in.
There is a lot I could say but I will just address one of them. His last point was that the blood of Christ is the only solution to racial prejudices. He said the answer is not the government, social programs, the help section of book stores, or government school education – it’s the cross that eliminates all ungodly prejudices and allows all men to see each other as equals. Great message.
UPDATE:
Doc Woods (Clyde M. Woods) just spoke on John 1:1 and the Watchtower Societies erroneous translation which denies the deity of Christ. The first part of the lecture was entirely too complex for anyone who has not had at least two years of Greek. This could have been aided with some PowerPoint slides illustration what a predicate nominative was in the Greek and how it functioned. Most people were probably lost. Then he transitioned into a much broader discussion of JW’s and their way of translating. He showed, by quoting one of their translators, that they had no business translating the Greek. He was a bit “unsmooth” in his presentation which somewhat surprised me.
Today the first lecture we made it to was in the chapel (It’s hard to make the earlier lectures with two kids that are under the age of four). David Sargent spoke on “Believe John” form John 5:33. The theme this year is all on the Gospel of John.
David spoke about who John the Baptist was not. It seemed to me his main point was that John was trying to point away from himself and to Jesus as the Christ. Even though his assigned text was John 5:33 he preached out of John 1:19ff. He talked about how John said he was not the Christ, or Elijah, neither was he the Prophet. He said that they were looking for Elijah based upon Malachi 4:5. He then says that John the Baptist was saying this was not him. What’s interested to me is that he did not attempt to rectify the apparent contradiction with Matthew 11:14, “And if you are willing to accept it, John himself is Elijah who was to come.”
It was a shame that John 20:30-31 was not pointed to as the purpose behind John’s gospel – “that you may believe that Jesus the Christ the Son of God.” It is faith in Jesus as the Christ that John is striving to develop from start to finish in his Gospel. In John 1:34 John the Baptist says, “I myself have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God.” John the Baptist is a witness to who is seeking to instill belief in the reader that Jesus is the Son of God who can give them life! There were many exegetical ties that are really exciting all through the John the Baptist sections in the Gospel of John, and in my opinion these were neglected.
There was a lengthy quote from William Barclay’s commentary about John the Baptist being the one to introduce Jesus as the Bridegroom. It rubbed me the wrong way and maybe unnecessarily. It helps to understand that I don’t place commentaries on the altars that most do and read them infrequently let alone do I quote them in a sermon. From an illustration point of view it fits its purpose – I guess.
The thrust of the lesson was quite accurate – that Jesus is the Christ. The delivery lacked passion. The content seemed lacking. The nonuse of the wonderful exegetical ties with the John the Baptist passages and the rest of John was a crime. Of course… it’s my opinion.
Caleb
UPDATE:
I just got done listening to Stan Michell preach on "Practicing Love in a Multi-ethnic Society" from John 4:7-14. His accent was great (why is it that one someone preaches with an accent they automatically receive 2 more style points?). He talked about doing mission work in Zimbabwe and did a good job of relating the biblical subject to the world we live in.
There is a lot I could say but I will just address one of them. His last point was that the blood of Christ is the only solution to racial prejudices. He said the answer is not the government, social programs, the help section of book stores, or government school education – it’s the cross that eliminates all ungodly prejudices and allows all men to see each other as equals. Great message.
UPDATE:
Doc Woods (Clyde M. Woods) just spoke on John 1:1 and the Watchtower Societies erroneous translation which denies the deity of Christ. The first part of the lecture was entirely too complex for anyone who has not had at least two years of Greek. This could have been aided with some PowerPoint slides illustration what a predicate nominative was in the Greek and how it functioned. Most people were probably lost. Then he transitioned into a much broader discussion of JW’s and their way of translating. He showed, by quoting one of their translators, that they had no business translating the Greek. He was a bit “unsmooth” in his presentation which somewhat surprised me.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Freed Hardeman University Lectures
This week I flew out to Nashville, Tennessee with my wife and two sons. We made the voyage to attend the annual Freed Hardeman University Lectureship. Since we arrived in Nashville we have been staying at my sister and brother-in-law's house in Nashville. It's already been an exciting on the go trip. Since we have been here we have visited friends of ours in Columbia, Spring Hill (former members at the West Visalia congregation where I used to serve), Nashville (former members from the congregation in Ripon where I am now), as well as meet lots of new people.
Tonight we made it to our hotel in Jackson, Tennessee and tomorrow the lectures begin for us. One of our elders, Jack Hawes, and his wife Pinky, also made the trip out for the lectureship. I'm excited to get the chance to spend this time with them at the lectureship. This morning when I was sitting in Bible class my cell phone started ringing (I had it on vibrate). After the first call was immediately followed up with a second I knew it wasn't good news. We have an elderly member who was in a nursing home and got an infection. Just before we left for Nashville she went into the emergency room. She passed away Saturday night at around 10:00 p.m. . It's never easy taking those phones calls. What's really not easy is that David Lee (our other elder) is the only one there to do all the comforting with the family. The good news is he is more than capable. I’m reminded of the Holy Spirit inspired words from Solomon:
Death always brings a time of introspection – at least it should!
I almost forgot but I didn't preach today - weird... but nice. Sometimes you get tired of hearing yourself and need to hear others. This morning we attending the Crieve Hall congregation in Nashville and this evening we attended the Spring Meadows congregation in Spring Hill where Dale Jenkins preaches. Both congregations used the paperless hymnals (songs with the notes projected on the screen) and I really liked it. Everyone is looking up and singing out instead of into a book.
My dad preached for me in Ripon this week. The hope is I don't have too much destruction to go and clean up when I get home :). I needed this break from preaching (it's not good when even you don't like to hear yourself preach). The great news is that I know I will be energized and ready to hit the road running again when I get back to my family in Ripon. I really do miss them already.
Sow the Seed Faithfully,
Caleb O'Hara
UPDATE: I will try and blog daily about the lectureships and tomorrow I'm going to see if I can liveblog the open forum. Stay tuned...
Tonight we made it to our hotel in Jackson, Tennessee and tomorrow the lectures begin for us. One of our elders, Jack Hawes, and his wife Pinky, also made the trip out for the lectureship. I'm excited to get the chance to spend this time with them at the lectureship. This morning when I was sitting in Bible class my cell phone started ringing (I had it on vibrate). After the first call was immediately followed up with a second I knew it wasn't good news. We have an elderly member who was in a nursing home and got an infection. Just before we left for Nashville she went into the emergency room. She passed away Saturday night at around 10:00 p.m. . It's never easy taking those phones calls. What's really not easy is that David Lee (our other elder) is the only one there to do all the comforting with the family. The good news is he is more than capable. I’m reminded of the Holy Spirit inspired words from Solomon:
"A good name is better than a good ointment, And the day of one’s death is
better than the day of one’s birth. It is better to go to a house of mourning
Than to go to a house of feasting, Because that is the end of every man, And the
living takes it to heart. Sorrow is better than laughter, For when a face is sad
a heart may be happy. The mind of the wise is in the house of mourning, While
the mind of fools is in the house of pleasure." (Eccl 7:1-4)
Death always brings a time of introspection – at least it should!
I almost forgot but I didn't preach today - weird... but nice. Sometimes you get tired of hearing yourself and need to hear others. This morning we attending the Crieve Hall congregation in Nashville and this evening we attended the Spring Meadows congregation in Spring Hill where Dale Jenkins preaches. Both congregations used the paperless hymnals (songs with the notes projected on the screen) and I really liked it. Everyone is looking up and singing out instead of into a book.
My dad preached for me in Ripon this week. The hope is I don't have too much destruction to go and clean up when I get home :). I needed this break from preaching (it's not good when even you don't like to hear yourself preach). The great news is that I know I will be energized and ready to hit the road running again when I get back to my family in Ripon. I really do miss them already.
Sow the Seed Faithfully,
Caleb O'Hara
UPDATE: I will try and blog daily about the lectureships and tomorrow I'm going to see if I can liveblog the open forum. Stay tuned...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
