N.T. Wright Conference on Galatians

N.T. Wright

This summer, N.T. Wright will be speaking at a conference on Paul’s letter to the Galatians & Christian Theology at St Andrews in Scotland.

Dates are July 10-13th.

Click here for all the details.

Wright is well worth hearing. As most of you know, I highly respect him.

I’d like to encourage all of you to click the “share buttons” below (or “share links” below if you are subscriber) and share this with as many people as possible.

Tom and I would deeply appreciate it.

We would like Christians all over the world to know about this event. So please share this post liberally. :-)

If you haven’t yet read the interview I did with N.T. Wright recently, click here to read it.

Click here to view my favorite books by Wright.

The Young Man and The Cowboy

To lighten things up a bit on the blog this week, here’s a short story that a friend sent me.

A cowboy named Bud was overseeing his herd in a remote mountainous pasture in California, when suddenly a brand-new BMW advanced out of a dust cloud towards him.

The driver, a young man in a Brioni suit, Gucci shoes, RayBan sunglasses and YSL tie, leaned out his window and asked the cowboy . . .

“If I tell you exactly how many cows and calves you have in your herd, will you give me a calf?”

Bud looked at the man, obviously a yuppie, and then looked at his peacefully grazing herd. He calmly answered, “Sure, why not?”

The yuppie parks his car, whipped out his Dell notebook computer, connected it to his Cingular RAZR V3 cell phone, and surfed to a NASA  page on the Internet. He then called up a GPS satellite to get an exact fix on his location which he immediately fed to another NASA satellite that scanned the area in an ultra-high-resolution photo. Continue Reading…

Best Christian Books of 2011

Beyond Evangelical: Part VI

 ”Evangelicalism is like a swimming bath: most noise at the shallow end.”

~ J. Blanchard

We are at the point in our beyond evangelical series that I’m ready to post an essay entitled “The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Evangelicalism” by my friend Hal Miller.

Read it carefully. It’s a mind blower. I make a few important comments at the end.

Every form of Christianity tries to be faithful in its time. The problem comes in trying to discern when its time has passed.

Forty years ago, Carl F. H. Henry made that discernment in The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. In his eyes, fundamentalism had become trapped in a mire of antagonism toward the world around it. Fundamentalism had become closed to the world and therefore irrelevant to the world. Its time had passed.

Back when the movement began in the early twentieth century, fundamentalism saw itself as an ark of refuge from the intellectual floods of the modern age. Critical study of the Bible was making it seem more and more a human book—perhaps a merely human book. Nineteenth century science had cast doubt on the Christian account of reality.

True, Christianity had survived the new astronomy of the sixteenth century and the new physics of the seventeenth century with renewed vigor. But when Darwin’s new biology came into vogue, some Christians began to wonder whether things had gone too far; the fundamentalists gathered up some gopher wood and started building. Continue Reading…

A Personal Note to My Subscribers & Readers: One Month Reflection

We are now at the one month point since I’ve resumed blogging after taking an 8-month blog sabbatical. I’d like to pause and reflect by sharing ten things with you . . . all of which I feel are important. I believe you will also.

1. First, I’d like to say “thank you” to each of you who subscribe to this blog. Especially those of you who share my posts with others. I’ve really enjoyed my return to blogging, and I hope you have as well. You’ve blessed me greatly with your encouraging and insightful comments.

2. One day this month, we will be having “Shameless Promotion Day” on the blog. I will be giving every reader an opportunity to promote their website or blog to our blog audience (which is quite large). You won’t want to miss the opportunity. But it will only last one day; so you get one shot.

3. Since I resumed blogging on January 17th, the subscribership to this blog has almost doubled. In fact, I just found out that this blog ranks #10 out of all Christian blogs in RSS subscribers.

Frank Viola's Blog

While many of you are RSS subscribers, I would encourage you to also subscribe by Email.

There are two reasons: Continue Reading…

The Art of Being a Jerk Online: 9 Sure Ways

If you’re past the age of Mosaics and Busters, you might want to make sure you’re sitting down. In fact, you may want to hold on to your chair real tight. I’m using a style of language here that some may not understand and misinterpret. I’m doing it make a point. So Frankie says relax before you read on . . .

“Jerk: Slang . a contemptibly naive, fatuous, foolish, or inconsequential person.” Not a cuss word. Source.

According to recent studies (you know, the same ones that show that research is known to cause cancer in rats), if two Christians disagree with one another online for more than three consecutive days, there is a 97.3% chance that one of them will end up calling the other a “child of Satan” or a near-equivalent.

With that in mind, here are nine sure-fire ways to perfect the art of being a jerk online:

1. Move from arguing the substance of a disagreement to attacking the person with whom you disagree. (This is called an ad hominem argument. Attack the messenger while you disagree with their message. People often do this when they can’t win an argument.)

2. Assume what other people think and believe rather than asking them directly. And state your assumption about what they think and believe as though it were gospel fact to others. (Did I say without asking the person whose name you’re dropping directly about what he/she believes or thinks? I’m always amazed when Christians do this.) Continue Reading…

Christian Smith: Interview on “The Bible Made Impossible”

Christian Smith is a professor at Notre Dame and a prolific author. Smith shares an accolade with F.F. Bruce, N.T. Wright, and Scot McKnight. Each author has written books that made both my 100 Best Christian Books Ever Written and my 100 Best Academic Christian Books lists.

A double threat!

I maintain that one of the best books ever written on church practice (ecclesiology) is Christian Smith’s, Going to the Root. (I quote Smith four times in Reimagining Church.)

And one of the best books on how Christians should approach the Bible is Christian Smith’s new volume, The Bible Made Impossible.

I heartily recommend both books to every follower of Jesus. Christian Smith

What I like best about Smith’s newest book is that it argues for understanding Scripture through a Christological lens (i.e., employing a Christocentric hermeneutic). When my next book is unveiled later this year, you’ll better understand why I appreciate Smith’s point so much. :-)

What follows is my interview with Christian Smith. He talks about his new book, answers critics, and unveils his writing routine. Continue Reading…

Living in the Divine Parenthesis: Are Good Works Bad?

Recently, I delivered a message to a group of Christians in their 20s and 30s. I entitled it “Living in the Divine Parenthesis.” Among other things, I tackled the issue of good works and the seasonal nature of a local church.

Ever since I’ve been a Christian, I’ve been taught two different things regarding good works. In my early years as a believer, my spiritual tutors told me that “good works” (also referred to as “good deeds” and “doing good” in the New Testament) was a religious duty and obligation.

Consequently, I (and everyone I knew) viewed good works with a legalistic lens, seeing them as demands that we must fulfill in our own strength and power.

If you want to make God happy, you have to do “good works,” which are the evidence of real faith (so I was told).

Later, I was exposed to another Christian tradition that reacted against this understanding. This tradition taught that good works was anathema. “We’re under grace, so good works isn’t something we have to worry about.” Therefore, those Scriptures that talked about “doing good” were associated with legalism, so we were told to ignore them. Continue Reading…

Beyond Evangelical: Part V

“The hallmark of an authentic evangelicalism is not the uncritical repetition of old traditions but the willingness to submit every tradition, however ancient, to fresh biblical scrutiny and, if necessary, reform.”

~ John Stott

We continue our series on “beyond evangelicalism.” If you’re new to the blog, click here to read the previous parts.

Some Christians today are using the phrase, “the new evangelicals.”

Last year, Gabe Lyons (author of The Next Christians) called me on the phone to ask me what I thought about his new book (which he kindly mailed to me). What I’m writing in this post and in the next installment (Part VI) of our series is what I said to him in that conversation.

I dare suggest that there are two main types of new evangelicals today. One is not new at all. The other is, well, new in a sense.

Let me first address the evangelicals that are not new. This group of Christians used to be called “neo-evangelicals” during the 1950s through the 1980s.

F.F. Bruce, G.E. Ladd, Bernard Ramm, Harold Ockenga, and Carl F. Henry were just some of the movers and shakers of the neo-evangelical movement.

The neo-evangelicals criticized fundamentalism as being separatist and confrontational with the culture. Continue Reading…

Hearing One Side of a Story

I remember it well. A zealous but naïve follower of Jesus in my mid-20s. That was me.

One of my friends had been part of the church to which I belonged. He had recently moved to another city and joined another group.

He called me on the phone from the other state to unload. He told me how he had been mistreated by this other group. And he singled-out one particular person who was (according to him) the source of his pain.

As I listened to him vent, my blood began to boil. I was angry at this group . . .  and I was angry at the particular person who mistreated my friend.

Some time went by, and I was talking to another friend who knew more about the situation than I did. One thing led to another, and I found myself on the phone with the very person from that other group whom (I had thought) mistreated my friend.

As I listened to this man carefully, my blood began to boil again. But this time, I was angry at my friend. And more, I was angry at myself for drawing a conclusion based on hearing only one side of a story. Continue Reading…