Monday, December 12, 2011

Final clue

Beat the girls!

Make a run for it!

The donuts are in the classroom, behind the screen!
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, December 2, 2011

12/2: Godhaunted rock

kISS



---
Avril LavigneL "I'm With You:



-
MISFITS, IN GOD WE TRUST

Sentenced to a barren waste, wo-oh-oh
Imprisoned somewhere deep in space, wo-oh-oh
For in God we still believe, wo-oh-oh
Left to die we watch them leave

Lift our heads to the sky
He won't let us die
We will survive
Wheeling our swords for the Lord

Prisoners of faith cannot be
Tearing our chains we break free

With a burst of light the walls are blown away
The one who's captured us with life, they'll pay
And the blood we leave behind won't wash away
[ Lyrics from: http://www.lyricsfreak.com/m/misfits/in+god+we+trust_20485731.html ]
Another time, another place, wo-oh-oh
A planet Earth now lost in space, wo-oh-oh
They live in fear, for peace they yearn, wo-oh-oh
For those who don't, their souls will burn

So reach for the sky
For our Lord we will die
We will survive
Wheeling our swords for the Lord

Father, your voice we have heard
We raise up our swords, speak the word

For we have seen the face of Hell and still believe
That the sword to kill the beast He's given me
So how many more must die that one may see

For we have seen the face of Hell and still believe
That the sword to kill the beast He's given me
So how many more must die that one may see
Yeah

--

Wiki:
Jerry Only and Doyle, meanwhile, moved to Vernon, New Jersey to work at their father's machine parts factory full-time. Only had married and had a daughter and became more serious about hisChristian faith, regretting some of the things he had done with the Misfits. In 1987 he and Doyle formed the short-lived Kryst the Conqueror, a Christian heavy metal band with barbarian imagery.


erry became a born again christian after the misfits broke up. calling himself mocavius the great (huh?) he dubbed the name "jerry only" dead and created a band that could only be described as christian metal. the man who once said of glenn danzig's success, "singing praises for satan is just about the biggest failure i imagine,"  link

Interview about Jesus here
-------------------
[Chorus:]
Before I Sleep I Pray To The Lord
A Soul To Keep
And If I Should Die
Before I Wake
I Pray To The Lord
My Soul To Take
For Goodness Sake
[Repeat]

Yeah I Wrote My

Will Just The Other Week
And Whats Funny, It Was Only One Sheet
And I Know Its Only One Me
But I Hope I Am Everything My Son Be
Im Trying To Live Right, Stay On That Drama Beat
But Im In The Fast Lane, In The Front Seat
I Wonder Will I Loose Control Of The Mazarati And Hit Some Tree Just Being Young Me
Is There A Heaven For G's And Soldiers? I Cant Go To Hell, Cause I'd Take Over
I Feel It Approaching, But I Aint Scared
I Made That Bed, And I Should Rest In Peace

[Chorus:]
Before I Sleep I Pray To The Lord
A Soul To Keep
And If I Should Die
Before I Wake
I Pray To The Lord
My Soul To Take
For Goodness Sake
[Repeat]

Yeah And Everytime I See The Sunshine
I Drop Down And Give Thanks At Least One Time
Feel Like Im Living On The Front Line
Im Feeling Like Every Second Is Crunch Time
I've Had Breakfast, Will I Make It To Lunchtime?
And I Ain't Joking, So Dont Be Looking For Punchlines
Will I Be The Next Victim Of A Gun Crime
I Dont Know The Answer, Thats Why I Brung Mine

Riding By Myself Late At Night
Pistol On My Lap At Every Single Red Light
Yeah I Made My Bed Right, So When I Do I Should Sleep Tight
In Peace I Rest

[Chorus:]
Before I Sleep I Pray To The Lord
A Soul To Keep
And If I Should Die
Before I Wake
I Pray To The Lord
My Soul To Take
For Goodness Sake
[Repeat]

Bury Me A Gangster Cause Thats What I Live
Dont Cry For Me I Gave The Best I Could Give
I Can Only Do Me, So Thats What I Did
And I Cherish Every Breath Of My Kid
And I Dont Wanna Go Before She Grow, That Aint Cool
But In This Game Of Life I Dont Make The Rules
Shit, So Thats Why I Get Twisted
So I Cant Feel It When It Hit Me
And My Moms Dont Need That On Her
But I See Death Around The Corner
And If He, So Happens To Make His Way Around The Block
You Gotta Answer The Door When He Knock
Believe That

[Chorus:]
Before I Sleep I Pray To The Lord
A Soul To Keep
And If I Should Die
Before I Wake
I Pray To The Lord
My Soul To Take
For Goodness Sake
[Repeat]



--
LADY GAGA:
Interview wBarbara Walters:



Interview w/Larry King: here

Watch the above interview first, then this:







"After Forever"

Have you ever thought about your soul - can it be saved?
Or perhaps you think that when you're dead you just stay in your grave
Is God just a thought within your head or is he a part of you?
Is Christ just a name that you read in a book when you were in school?

When you think about death do you lose your breath or do you keep your cool?
Would you like to see the Pope on the end of a rope - do you think he's a fool?
Well I have seen the truth, yes I've seen the light and I've changed my ways
And I'll be prepared when you're lonely and scared at the end of our days

Could it be you're afraid of what your friends might say
If they knew you believe in God above?
They should realize before they criticize
that God is the only way to love

Is your mind so small that you have to fall
In with the pack wherever they run
Will you still sneer when death is near
And say they may as well worship the sun?

I think it was true it was people like you that crucified Christ
I think it is sad the opinion you had was the only one voiced
Will you be so sure when your day is near, say you don't believe?
You had the chance but you turned it down, now you can't retrieve

Perhaps you'll think before you say that God is dead and gone
Open your eyes, just realize that he's the one
The only one who can save you now from all this sin and hate
Or will you still jeer at all you hear? Yes! I think it's too late.


00-


Linkin Park's salty worship



Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, December 1, 2011

11/30: Metallica Comes to Church, What is Church Anyway?

Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, November 27, 2011

11/28:11/22: Atonement: Peanuts, Matrix, Mark Baker

Today: discussion of four views of Jesus' death/theologies of the atonement, we'll spent the least amount of time on the first, the traditional view, which we pick up next class.

  • Penal substitution
  • Christus Victor
  • "Marry Me"
  • "Occasional Atheist"
  • "Temple Tantrum for all Nations"



 We watched Ray Van Der Laan, "Roll Away the Stone" for the "Marry Me" story.

See   COFFEE, NOT JESUS
for the "Occasional Atheist Story".  And note that when Jesus died, he quoted (Intertexted) Psalm 22,,,which reads in the Message Bible like a depressed man's journal:

1-2 God, God...my God! Why did you dump me
      miles from nowhere?
   Doubled up with pain, I call to God
      all the day long. No answer. Nothing.
   I keep at it all night, tossing and turning.

 3-5 And you! Are you indifferent, above it all,
      leaning back on the cushions of Israel's praise?
   We know you were there for our parents:
      they cried for your help and you gave it;
      they trusted and lived a good life.

 6-8 And here I am, a nothing—an earthworm,
      something to step on, to squash.
   Everyone pokes fun at me;
      they make faces at me, they shake their heads:
   "Let's see how God handles this one;
      since God likes him so much, let him help him!"

 9-11 And to think you were midwife at my birth,
      setting me at my mother's breasts!
   When I left the womb you cradled me;
      since the moment of birth you've been my God.
   Then you moved far away
      and trouble moved in next door.
   I need a neighbor.

 12-13 Herds of bulls come at me,
      the raging bulls stampede,
   Horns lowered, nostrils flaring,
      like a herd of buffalo on the move.

 14-15 I'm a bucket kicked over and spilled,
      every joint in my body has been pulled apart.
   My heart is a blob
      of melted wax in my gut.
   I'm dry as a bone,
      my tongue black and swollen.
   They have laid me out for burial
      in the dirt.

 16-18 Now packs of wild dogs come at me;
      thugs gang up on me.
   They pin me down hand and foot,
      and lock me in a cage—a bag
   Of bones in a cage, stared at
      by every passerby.
   They take my wallet and the shirt off my back,
      and then throw dice for my clothes.

 19-21 You, God—don't put off my rescue!
      Hurry and help me!
   Don't let them cut my throat;
      don't let those mongrels devour me.
   If you don't show up soon,
      I'm done for—gored by the bulls,
      meat for the lions.

 22-24 Here's the story I'll tell my friends when they come to worship,
      and punctuate it with Hallelujahs:
   Shout Hallelujah, you God-worshipers;
      give glory, you sons of Jacob;
      adore him, you daughters of Israel.
   He has never let you down,
      never looked the other way
      when you were being kicked around.
   He has never wandered off to do his own thing;
      he has been right there, listening.

 25-26 Here in this great gathering for worship
      I have discovered this praise-life.
   And I'll do what I promised right here
      in front of the God-worshipers.
   Down-and-outers sit at God's table
      and eat their fill.
   Everyone on the hunt for God
      is here, praising him.
   "Live it up, from head to toe.
      Don't ever quit!"

 27-28 From the four corners of the earth
      people are coming to their senses,
      are running back to God.
   Long-lost families
      are falling on their faces before him.
   God has taken charge;
      from now on he has the last word.

 29 All the power-mongers are before him
      —worshiping!
   All the poor and powerless, too
      —worshiping!
   Along with those who never got it together
      —worshiping!

 30-31 Our children and their children
      will get in on this
   As the word is passed along
      from parent to child.
   Babies not yet conceived
      will hear the good news—
      that God does what he says.



--
Note this last line could well be translasted "It is finished. Recognize that?

See:

"The Lord Be With You...Even When He's Not!"






Theopoedia: Theories of Atonment (click)
---
Wiki:


----Matrix Revolutions...ending:

Click here to watch all 4 parts at once..

OR

Part 1 (click here)
(Check the cross over Neo's head at 1:26 at that click)
-----------------------
Part 2: is embedded below..
Check the crosses at 2:00 amd 2:56
What Scripture at  3:15?

--
part 3Here


part 4:

  see also:

 


--

Christus Victor

Christus Victor (Christ the Victor) is a view of the atonement taken from the title of Gustaf Aulén’s groundbreaking book, first published in 1931, where he drew attention back to the early church’s Ransom theory. In Christus Victor, the atonement is viewed as divine conflict and victory over the hostile powers that hold humanity in subjection. Aulén argues that the classic Ransom theory is not so much a rational systematic theory as it is a drama, a passion story of God triumphing over the powers and liberating humanity from the bondage of sin. As Gustav Aulén writes, “the work of Christ is first and foremost a victory over the powers which hold mankind in bondage: sin, death, and the devil.”[1]
The Ransom Theory was predominant in the early church and for the first thousand years of church history and supported by all Greek Church Fathers from Irenaeus to John of Damascus. To mention only the most important names Origen, Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, and John Chrysostom. The Christus Victor view was also dominant among the Latin Fathers of the Patristic period including Ambrose, Augustine, Leo the Great, and Gregory the Great.
A major shift occurred when Anselm of Canterbury published his Cur Deos Homo around 1097 AD which marks the point where the predominate understanding of the atonement shifted from the ransom theory to the Satisfaction Doctrine in the Roman Catholic Church and subsequently the Protestant Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church still holds to the Ransom or Christus Victor view. This is built upon the understanding of the atonement put forward by Irenaeus, called “recapitulation”.[2]
As the term Christus Victor indicates, the idea of “ransom” should not be seen in terms (as Anselm did) of a business transaction, but more of a rescue or liberation of humanity from the slavery of sin. Unlike the Satisfaction or Penal-substitution views of the atonement rooted in the idea of Christ paying the penalty of sin to satisfy the demands of justice, the Christus Victor view is rooted in the incarnation and how Christ entered into human misery and wickedness and thus redeemed it. Irenaeus called this “Recapitulation” (re-creation). As it is often expressed: “Jesus became what we are so that we could become what he is”.  LINK
 --
Where  else does a "Christus Victor": show up in literature/film?
C.S. Lewis, "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" :


From WA:


Atonement Series: Ransom / Christus Victor




The Ransom Theory
The ransom theory is the oldest atonement theory. It is sometimes called the classical theory or the bargain theory. It was developed and articulated by early church fathers such as Irenaeus, Origen, and Augustine. The ransom theory holds that when Adam and Eve sinned, they placed themselves under the dominion of Satan. To free humanity, Jesus gave himself as payment to Satan. Satan agreed to the deal, and put Jesus to death in place of humanity. Yet since Jesus was without sin, Satan overstepped his bounds. Jesus rose from the dead, liberated humanity, and conquered Satan and his kingdom.

In explaining the Ransom Theory, Pope Gregory the Great wrote:
matching deceit with deceit, Christ frees man by tricking the devil into overstepping his authority. Christ becomes a “fishhook”: his humanity is the bait, his divinity the hook, and Leviathan [Satan] is snared. Because the devil is proud, he cannot understand Christ’s humility and so believes he tempts and kills a mere man. But in inflicting a sinless man with death, the devil loses his rights over man from his “excess of presumption,” Christ conquers the devil’s kingdom of sin, liberating captives from the devil’s tyranny. Order is reinstated when man returns to serve God, his true master.” (1)
Christus Victor (Christ the Victor)
The Christus victor theory is closely tied to the ransom theory. It was articulated by Swedish theologian Gustaf Aulen. Aulen argued that payment to Satan is not the focus of the classical theory. Rather, the focus is on Jesus liberating humanity from the power of death and sin.

Adherants
The Eastern Orthodox church holds to the ransom view. Many in the Western church find it helpful, but most do not accept it as a stand alone view.

Criticisms of the Ransom Theory:
  • Not enough focus on God
  • makes God a debtor to Satan.
  • Tricking Satan seems to imply deceit on God's part.
Verses Used to Advocate the Ransom Theory:

  • For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time. 1 Timothy 2:56
  • You were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body. 1 Corinthians 6:20
  • For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many -Mark 10:45
  • For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. -Colossians 1:13-14
Examples in music and literature:
  • The Champion (Carmen) - Jesus defeats Satan in a cosmic battle represented by a boxing match.
(1) Quoted from The Story of Christian Theology, by Roger Olson, page 323
LINK
--
Penal Substitution or Christus Victor, Clinton Arnold:


Penal Substitution or Christus Victor (on theories of the atonement) from :redux on Vimeo.

---
N. T. Wright, Atonement Theories:


---
See also:
Penal Substitution vs. Christus Victorhttp://therebelgod.com/cross_intro.shtml

--
Temple Tantrum view:

remember that the temple tantrum wasn't against commercialism as much as against racism

(see  11/8).  Now study the "RIP" inclusio in Mark's gospel, noting which veil was ripped.

See "temple tantrum/ which curtain was torn?"

Then consider an additional view:
"Behind the second curtain was a room called the Holy of Holies"
-Hebrews 9:3







We all know "the curtain of the temple was torn in two as Jesus died."

And most assume it was the curtain separating the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies, meaning Jesus provides direct access to God.

Good and true that he does that, and it is the proper "evangelical answer"..

but what if the temple torn in two was not the second curtain (or second curtain only),
but the first..

what would the implications be?

The first curtain separated the outer court from the Holy Place; the second curtain, Scripture speaks of dividing the Holy Place and Holy of Holies..

So Jesus here would be dying not only to give us direct access to God, but to provide "direct access to direct access" to the foreigner/outcast/leper/prostitute....the folks who normally couldn't step beyond the outer court into the Holy Place, let alone the inner place, the Holy of Holies.

Why don't most evangelicals know there was a first curtain? And recognize that we may have re-built it in our time..

Most think Jesus's "temple tantrum" was due to his being ticked off about folks selling stuff in church. But he didn't say "Quit selling stuff in church" , but "My house shall be a house of prayer for all nations," quoting Is 56:6-8, whose context is all about letting foreigners and outcasts have a place..hmmm. He was likely upset that not that Dovesellers and money changers were doing business selling and changing , but that they were doing so in the "outer court," the only place where "foreigners" could have a pew at "attend church." They were making the temple area "a den of thieves" not (just) by overcharging for Doves and money, but by robbing folks..'all nations'... of a place to pray..and to "access access" to God.

I am glad at least a few pastors( here and here and here) are brave enough admit to their congregations that there were two curtains, and that this "alternative view" might be correct.

Consider and stretch re: the curtain issue below by way of three excerpts below...
perhaps the 3rd article jacks things up by building the case from the very shape of Scripture. Cheers!

>Note:See also Howard M. Jackson's "The Death of Jesus in Mark and the Miracle from the Cross," NTS 33, 1987)

>R.C. Sproul also comments:
"It actually does not matter much which curtain was torn, for the tearing of either one can incorporate the meaning of the tearing of the other."

THREE ARTICLES:
1)from http://www.geocities.com/gmmaurer/yeshua.html:

Many people teach that the curtain that was torn in the Temple was the curtain that separated the Holy of Holies from the Holy Place. Did you know that there were two curtains in the Sanctuary?
Hebrews 9:3 “Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place,” And Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance has this to say about the second “curtain” (the Greek word used here is “katapetasma”) in the Sanctuary: katapetasma { kat-ap-et’-as-mah} “The name given to the two curtains in the temple at Jerusalem, one of them at the entrance to the temple separated the Holy Place from the outer court, the other veiled the Holy of Holies from the Holy Place.”

There were two curtains in the Sanctuary. I don’t think that
the curtain that separated the Holy of Holies from the Holy Place was the
curtain torn in two [Matthew 27:50-51]. Rabbi Sha’ul (the apostle Paul) reminds
us that Messiah (Yeshua) is not divided or torn in two [1Corinthians 1:13]. All
of this would mean that God is calling all believers (male and female) in the
New Covenant to become ministering priests before Him -
-G.M. Maurer


2)Jesus is crucified. When he dies, the temple curtain is torn in two, from top to
bottom, the sky darkens, an earthquake shakes the earth. As anyone might
remember who saw the Jazz Singer with Neil Diamond, a Jewish father might tear
his clothes when his son dies... so, in effect, God tears the veil when his
beloved son dies. There were two curtains associated with the Temple. One was a
huge tapestry that hung outside with an image of the night sky woven into it.
The other was the veil that hung inside the temple that separated the Holy of
Holies from the rest of the temple... which temple curtain tore? I thought David
Ulansey's analysis was interesting, found here.
(Note, the analysis is copied below as
quote #3)
-Dan McAfee, link

3)THE HEAVENLY VEIL TORN: MARK'S COSMIC "INCLUSIO"
by David Ulansey [Originally published in Journal of Biblical Literature 110:1 (Spring 1991) pp. 123-25]:

In the past few years, several different scholars have argued that there was a connection in the mind of the author of the Gospel of Mark between the tearing of the heavens at the baptism of Jesus (Mk 1:10) and the tearing of the temple veil at the death of Jesus (Mk 15:38). [1] The purpose of the present article will be to call attention to a piece of evidence which none of these scholars mentions, but which provides dramatic confirmation of the hypothesis that the tearing of the heavens and the tearing of the temple veil were linked in Mark's imagination. [2]

To begin with, we should note that the two occurrences of the motif of tearing in Mark do not occur at random points in the narrative, but on the contrary are located at two pivotal moments in the story-- moments which, moreover, provide an ideal counterpoint for each other: namely, the precise beginning (the baptism) and the precise end (the death) of the earthly career of Jesus. This significant placement of the two instances of the motif of tearing suggests that we are dealing here with a symbolic "inclusio": that is, the narrative device common in biblical texts in which a detail is repeated at the beginning and the end of a narrative unit in order to "bracket off" the unit and give it a sense of closure and structural integrity.

Indeed, in his 1987 article, "The Rending of the Veil: A Markan Pentecost," S. Motyer points out that there is actually a whole cluster of motifs which occur in Mark at both the baptism (1:9-11) and at the death of Jesus (15:36-39). In addition to the fact that at both of these moments something is torn, Motyer notes that: (1) at both moments a voice is heard declaring Jesus to be the Son of God (at the baptism it is the voice of God, while at the death it is the voice of the centurion); (2) at both moments something is said to descend (at the baptism it is the spirit-dove, while at the death it is the tear in the temple veil, which Mark explicitly describes as moving downward), (3) at both moments the figure of Elijah is symbolically present (at the baptism Elijah is present in the form of John the Baptist, while at Jesus' death the onlookers think that Jesus is calling out to Elijah); (4) the spirit (pneuma) which descends on Jesus at his baptism is recalled at his death by Mark's repeated use of the verb ekpneo (expire), a cognate of pneuma. [3]

According to Motyer, the repetition by Mark of this cluster of motifs at both the baptism and the death of Jesus constitutes a symbolic inclusio which brackets the entire gospel, linking together the precise beginning and the precise end of the earthly career of Jesus. Seen in this context, the presence at both moments of the motif of something being torn is unlikely to be coincidental. However, at this point an important question arises: if there was indeed a connection for Mark between the tearing of the heavens and the tearing of the temple veil, which veil was it that he had in mind? For the fact is, of course, that there were two famous veils associated with the Jerusalem temple.

It has been debated for centuries which veil it was that Mark was referring to: was it the outer veil, which hung in front of the doors at the entrance to the temple, or the inner veil which separated the Holy of Holies from the rest of the temple? [4] Many interpreters have assumed that it was the inner veil, and have understood the tearing of the veil to have been Mark's way of symbolizing the idea that the death of Jesus destroyed the barrier which separated God from humanity. Recently, however, favor seems to have shifted to the view that it was the outer veil, the strongest argument for which is that Mark seems to have intended the awestruck response of the centurion to the manner of Jesus' death (Mk 15:39) to have been inspired by his seeing the miraculous event of the tearing of the veil, but he could only have seen this event if it was the outer veil that tore, since the inner veil was hidden from view inside the temple. [5]

In his 1987 article "The Death of Jesus in Mark and the Miracle from the Cross," Howard Jackson argues that the question of which veil it was that Mark was referring to can be easily answered if we acknowledge that there was a link in Mark's imagination between the tearing of the heavens at the baptism of Jesus and the tearing of the temple veil at his death. For, says Jackson, if there was a parallel in Mark's mind between the tearing of the heavens and the tearing of the temple veil, then Mark must also have intended there to be a parallel between Jesus at the baptism and the centurion at the crucifixion: just as Jesus witnessed the tearing of the heavens, so the centurion witnessed the tearing of the temple veil. But, as we have already noted, the centurion could only have witnessed the tearing of the veil if it was the outer veil, since the inner veil was hidden from view. Thus it must have been the outer veil that Mark had in mind. [6]

Jackson's argument is suggestive although certainly not conclusive. However, there exists a piece of evidence which Jackson does not mention in his discussion which, I believe, provides decisive proof that Mark had in mind the outer veil of the temple, and which also provides rather spectacular confirmation of the existence in Mark's imagination of a link between the tearing of the heavens and the tearing of the temple veil.

The evidence to which I refer consists of a passage in Josephus's Jewish War in which he describes the outer veil of the Jerusalem temple as it had appeared since the time of Herod. According to Josephus, this outer veil was a gigantic curtain 80 feet high. It was, he says, a
Babylonian tapestry, with embroidery of blue and fine linen, of scarlet also and purple, wrought with marvelous skill. Nor was this mixture of materials without its mystic meaning: it typified the universe....
Then Josephus tells us what was pictured on this curtain:
Portrayed on this tapestry was a panorama of the entire heavens.... [7] [emphasis mine]



In other words, the outer veil of the Jerusalem temple was actually one huge image of the starry sky! Thus, upon encountering Mark's statement that "the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom," any of his readers who had ever seen the temple or heard it described would instantly have seen in their mind's eye an image of the heavens being torn, and would immediately have been reminded of Mark's earlier description of the heavens being torn at the baptism. This can hardly be coincidence: the symbolic parallel is so striking that Mark must have consciously intended it.

We may therefore conclude (1) that Mark did indeed have in mind the outer veil, and (2) that Mark did indeed imagine a link between the tearing of the heavens and the tearing of the temple veil-- since we can now see that in fact in both cases the heavens were torn-- and that he intentionally inserted the motif of the "tearing of the heavenly veil" at both the precise beginning and at the precise end of the earthly career of Jesus, in order to create a powerful and intriguing symbolic inclusio.





We discussed Matt 28:16-20, noting sppecially that "Make disciples of all NATIONS...or could be translated, GENTILES"..

--

Resources on the Atonement

From FPU"S Mark Baker:

Baker: Resources on the Atonement - Fresno Pacific Biblical Seminary

From FPU"S Mark Baker:

Baker: Resources on the Atonement - Fresno Pacific Biblical Seminary

 

PODCAST: Mark Baker talks to Tony Jones about Atonement:

  • 29 Minutes

Download to iPod Here’s the mp3 file for download RSS Add to iTunes | XML Feed

 -------------

 

Books

Recovering the Scandal of the Cross: Atonement in New Testament and Contemporary Contexts
Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross: Contemporary Images of Atonement

How Does the Cross and Resurrection Provide Salvation?

“Recovering the Scandal of the Cross,” the book I co-authored with Joel Green, contends that if the New Testament writers use diverse images to proclaim the saving significance of the cross, then we should too!
A short article that uses real-life examples to show the value of using a variety of atonement explanations
Viewing penal satisfaction theory as the one correct explanation of the atonement has made it difficult for many to see the diversity of images in the New Testament. It also impedes our ability to develop alternative contemporary images. I have written an article that points out some of the problems with using the image of penal substitution as the foundational explanation of the atonement, and offers an alternative foundational narrative of the atonement: Two Foundational Stories of the Cross: How They Affect Evangelism
How do we help people embrace a wider understanding of the cross and resurrection? In addition to offering in-depth biblical and theological explanations like those in “Recovering the Scandal of the Cross,” and sharing well developed contemporary images like those in “Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross,” I have found it helpful to briefly list a variety of ways that Jesus' life, death and resurrection provide salvation.
A List of Biblical Images of How the Cross Saves
Ten Ways the Cross Saves: Brief Explanations
A List of Fourteen Things that Jesus' Death Accomplishes, as Seen in New Testament Texts

Shame and the Atonement

Many people have expressed appreciation for the discussion of shame and the cross in chapter six of “Recovering the Scandal of the Cross.” Therefore, in “Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross” I intentionally sought some examples of people proclaiming liberation from shame through the cross (chapters 12-15 in the book). In addition to those resources Mako Nagasawa has some helpful presentations on this topic.
Penal Substitution: Why it Doesn’t Work with Asian Americans
Beyond ‘Near’ and 'Far’: Jesus Overcomes Shame and Alienation

Images of Atonement

The book, “Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross” explores the need for contextualized atonement theology, offering creative examples of how the cross can be proclaimed today in culturally relevant and transformative ways. As I develop or encounter other contextualized images of atonement I will add them to this site.
“Jesus and Harry Potter: Disarming the Powers,” Laura Neufeld, December, 2010
“The Office,” Dan Whitmarsh, April 2010
"Lifehouse Everything Drama
“The Pit,” Dan Whitmarsh, April 2009
“Liberated from Darkness and Lies to Light and Truth: The Matrix as Metaphor of the Cross,” Michael VandenEnden, March 2009
“The Kingdom of the Lion,” Danny Gray, December 2008
“Aunt Lizzie’s Wedding: A Parable of Love,” Paulette Lovelace, June 2007
“Blood Breaks the Barriers,” Daniel A. Bunker, April 2007
“Freedom From the Cycle of Retaliation,” Scott Carolon, April 2007
“Down a Slippery Slope,” Paulette Lovelace, April 2007
“The Black Quilt,” Eliberto Mendoza, April 2007
“Saving Significance of the Cross in a Honduran Barrio,” Mark D. Baker, Mission Focus Annual Review 14 (2006) 59-81.

--

See:

elated:




Jesus died naked..but not in Christian art and movies 

Two-stage shaming, Naked at the Cross ...


Recovering the Scandal of the Cross

 

The Beautiful Victory of the Cross and the Table of Aslan Table of Aslan

 


Posted by at No comments:

Monday, November 21, 2011

11:21: Prep for Parable Analysis

Don't miss today,  because:

We'll spend the whole class today helping you prep for the next big assignment!

(besides, no class WEDNESDAY!)

You'll want to bring your quiz  (We will NOT take it as a quiz, but use it for discussion)and notes from Fri to class today.



NOTE: No class Wed, so you may want to spend that time on your assignment.
-------------




Analytical Paper: “Parable Analysis”                                                              update:Due Mon Dec 5

This paper is intended to demonstrate the skills you have gained in working with a passage of scripture, including analyzing, interpreting and communicating. It is a research paper that should show interaction with contemporary scholarship that can be found in journal articles, commentaries, Bible dictionaries, and monographs. No web sources are allowed. At least 6 correctly cited sources must be used with 3 or more published after 1970. Consistent use of any citation format is acceptable, such as MLA, APA, or Chicago. See the Academic Support Center for additional guidance. The paper should provide the following using the categories as section headers:

§  a clear statement of what you think is the meaning and impact of the parable
§  summary and assessment of scholarly interpretations of the parable
§  analysis and supporting reasons for your interpretation of the parable
§  statement of where the theme of the parable is found elsewhere in Matthew’s gospel
§  brief statement of the importance of the parable’s theme for the Christian community

§  4-6 pages, typed, double-spaced (approx. 1200-1800 words)
§  40 points
§  Due at the beginning of the class period

PROCESS
1) You will be assigned one of the following parables

                   
25:1-13                  Kingdom of Heaven is like..  (stage right side of room)
25:14-30               Kingdom of Heaven is like..   (stage left side of room)

2) Conduct your own analysis of the parable
The aim is to be able to state in a sentence the quality of the kingdom that Jesus is trying to get across in the parable. You should be able to state as the thesis of your paper “In the parable of xxx the characteristic of the kingdom is …” The characteristic should be stated as whether the kingdom is small, large, violent, peaceful, future, present, inclusive, exclusive, or whatever it is that you decide. Do not restate the analogy, e.g. do not say it is like “a mustard seed”. That is the analogy, but not the characteristic. Each analogy develops a particular characteristic. Jesus is trying to teach them about something they cannot see and must use things that they know to help them understand. It is likely that he is contrasting it to kingdoms as his audience would know them, so think about what he might be challenging.

3) Support your thesis
Support your thesis by features of the text. If the parable has action, then determine how the characters and actions provide support. If it is a more simple comparison, then discuss the quality that links the item to the kingdom. In a way, these are “simple” analogies: “this is like that”, though not everyone agrees on what is being compared. A second way to support your thesis is to demonstrate how that quality is found or discussed elsewhere in the gospel. Matthew tends to use repetition of key themes so this is a useful check. Consider the historical background and what Jesus’ audience might know about other kingdoms and how his notion of a kingdom might support or challenge those kingdoms.

4) Check what others think
People have written much about the parables and have offered a range of interpretations for each. Use at least six different scholarly sources to see what others have thought about your parable. You need not agree with them (in some cases you definitely should not), but they may offer insights that you have not considered. The sources can be from commentaries, monographs or journals in the library. A few key commentaries on Matthew have been placed on reserve. You will need to ask for them at the main desk. Write a short statement clarifying what the author thinks the message of the parable is and a few key supporting points. Think about whether the position agrees or disagrees with your own and why it might be different. Some things to watch for are whether the position addresses the nature of the kingdom or whether it made the parable to be about the church, an individual life, or something else not directly related to a kingdom. Sometimes the answer sounds good and personally beneficial, but may not be about a kingdom. Remember to ask yourself about what a kingdom would look like with that characteristic or quality.

5) Write your paper
Please use the following format. You are asked to use the headings exactly as printed below.
I. Introduction with Thesis (10)
II. Options from Scholarship (20)
III. Support(s) from Parable Analysis (20)
IV. Support(s) from Recurring Themes in Matthew (15)
V. Conclusion (10)
VI. Bibliography (5)

6) Proofread
I find that reading a paper aloud is a very helpful way to catch errors or poorly worded sentences. Try reading your paper to someone else or have them read it to you. Spell check is very helpful, but watch out for when a word is spelled correctly, but it is the wrong word. Another simple rule is to make sentences shorter and less complex. Paragraphs should deal with single ideas that are stated at the beginning of the paragraph.

---


-

++See Friday;s post about library research if you missed class Fri.
++You'll want to look at the tab at top of this website called
 How to study a text via Three Worlds

++Good place ro start is with Matthew's place in the overall structure of Matthew:

-Note, it's in the "with you" inclusio...so that metatheme will show up
-Note: it's one of the 5 teaching blocks, so it will have something to do with Jesus as New Moses
(Compare what Matthew says after this chapter (26:1-2) with what is said about the First Moses (Deuteronomy 32:45).  Note parallelisms between first teaching block and the last (Both about kingdom: both on mountain; one about this age, one about the next, etc
-Note it's in the 2nd division of the gospel, so it's about Subversion of Empire

++It's helpful to watch/listen to your parable, and note what happens before and after:


++Here's some help on parables in general:



++Don't forget our 13 Pointers on Parables
see  10/31 ..Look for the "loud fart," etc.




Here

--Some commentaries especially helpful
  • Michael Green, Matthew for Today
  • Robert Farrar Capon, Parables of Judgement
  • Bible Background Commentary- NT
--Remember: use only books/articles from our library, focusing on the comemntaries on reserve under JCC and/or Greg Camp.  These can be searched online under Greg's name at http://librarycatalog.fresno.edu/
    --Note: From Ernie's lecture on Friday , it sounded like journal/momograph articles are not allowed.
    But they are, and since he didn't show you where to find them, they are included in the general search page; also some of them from our library are online as PDFs (so these would be the only online sources allowed), find them at fresno.edu>Services>Hiebert Library>Electronic Databases  (then search "Matthew 25" or your parable.
    ++Here's an expert on the historical background of parables:
    Posted by at No comments:

    11/18 Library/Parables orientation

    • Morning class: meet in Marpeck 108
    • Afternoon class: meetin WEC 116
    For practical help on your upcoming Parable Analysis
    (update: now due Dec 5).
    Note: bring the quiz you are given in in the oientataion to clas on Mon
    (We will NOT be taking it as a quiz, but using it for discussion).

    If you have to miss class today, be sure to get notes from someone...and I will post some here later.

    Search library first at
    fresno.edu>Services>Hiebert Library>enter "Matthew" in the search bar and enter>usulayy skip the resulots on next page (Encore), but scroll to bottom right and click "Classic Catalog"> Keyword: Bible-N.T.-Matthew

    Books on reserve under JCC and Greg Camp

    Most books are BS 257, BS 491.2-3
     ,BT375

    Ernest Carrere  is glad to help:

    Reference & Public Services
    Phone: 559-453-2131
    Fax: 559-453-2124
    Email: ernest.carrere@fresno.edu
    Posted by at No comments:

    Monday, November 14, 2011

    11/14: lthe least of these

    How  would you go about discerning/deciding who are "the least of these, my brothers" I\in Matthew 25?  Take ten minutes studying the passage froma  Three Worlds model, and come up with a working answer, or at least the right questions (literary, historical) that would lead you to the answer.

    THEN..

    read/view some interpretations below

    1)

    The Least of These My Brethren by Mitchell Lewis


    2)Colbert:

    especially from 6:08:



    3)

    Who are 'the least of these'?  by Andrew Perriman


    4)For the least of My Brethren"   by  The Saunders
    ..---
    Other possible resources:



    --Note: How does Jesus?Matthew use the term "brother" or "My brothers."
    Find out here

    --Does he mean "brothers" or "brothers and sisters"?  Click
    Posted by at No comments:

    Wednesday, November 9, 2011

    Subversion of Empire: Eschatologically Speaking

    As you may remember from the test study guide here, these questions will be on the test from the video below that we watched today:
    a))What does the video teach us about "subversion of empire?"
    b)How is it an example of "Three Worlds" theory in  bible study?
    c)How far into his sermon was the preacher before he even mentioned which book of the Bible it was based on?Why do you think he did that?
    d)What do you learn here about Ephesus?
    e)What do you learn here about Roman Empire?
    f)What kind of practical application did this sermon make for our "contemporary world?"



    Related

     ---

    of course Christians will be left behind

    Preface (sigh); Don't hear what I'm not saying. I am not necessarily saying there is no "rapture," etc. I am just saying read this one particular scripture in context. No hate email necessary.


    It astounds people when I tell them that

    no one

    reading the famous "one will be taken; the other left behind" 'rapture' passage..

    (in context; and without everything you've ever heard that it said influencing what you hear)

    will read it as Christians being taken/raptured.

    It is the most obvious interpretation in the world that in this Scripture:

    the Christians are left behind.

    !

    Try it out! Follow the flow and logic; read text and context prayerfully and carefully.

    There's a reason this passage was not spun this way in the early church (B.L.H.-"Before LaHaye")


    the flood came and swept them all away, so too will be the coming of the Son of Man. Then two will be in the field; one will be taken and one will be left. Two women will be grinding meal together; one will be taken and one will be left. Keep awake therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming.

    And Rossing:


    Only by combining this passage together with First Thessalonians can a dispensationalist begin to piece together their notion of 'left behind'...But here's the problem with their use of this passage in Matthew: Dispensationalists make the leap of assuming that the person 'taken' in this passage is a born-again Christian who is taken up to heaven, while the person 'left' is an unbeliever who is left behind for judgement. This is a huge leap, since Jesus himself never specifies whether Christians should desire to be taken or left! In the overall context of Matthew's Gospel, the verbs 'taken' and 'left' (Greek paralambano and apheimi) can be either positive or negative.

    In the verses immediately preceding this passage, Jesus says that his coming will be like the flood at the time of Noah, when people were 'swept away' in judgement. If being 'taken' is analogous to being 'swept away' in a flood, then it is not a positive fate. That is the argument of New Testament scholar and Anglican bishop N.T. Wright:

    'It should be noted that being in this context means being taken in judgement.
    There is no hint here of a , a sudden event that would remove individuals from terra firma...It is, rather, a matter of secret police coming in the night, or of enemies sweeping through a village or city and seizing all they can.'
    (NT Wright, Jesus and The Victory of God, p. 366

    If Wright is correct, this means that 'left behind,' is actually the desired fate of Christians, whereas being 'taken' would mean being carried off by forces of judgement like a death squad. For people living under Roman occupation, being taken away in such a way by secret police would probably be a constant fear....McGuire suggests that the 'Left Behind' books have it 'entirely backward.'. McGuire, like Wright, points out that when analyzed in the overall context of the gospel, the word 'taken' means being taken away in judgement, as in the story of Jesus' being 'taken' prisoner by soldiers in Matt 27:27. 'Taken' is not an image for salvation"

    (Rossing, pp 178-179)




    ‘But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son,nor the Son');"; but only the Father. For as the days of Noah were, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark, and they knew nothing until the flood came and swept them all away, so too will be the coming of the Son of Man. Then two will be in the field; one will be taken and one will be left. Two women will be grinding meal together; one will be taken and one will be left. Keep awake therefore, for you do not know on what day at what hour');your Lord is coming. But understand this: if the owner of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into. Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an unexpected hour. '
    -Matt. 24

     

     

     

    --

     

     --

    "Eschatology
                   without geography
                            degenerates into 
                religious 
                science fiction"
    =Eugene Peterson,"Under the Unpredictable Plant:
     An Exploration in Vocational Holiness,"
    context

     



    • RERead Matthew 24-15
    • Finish Upside Down Kingdom
    Posted by at No comments:
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)