For a number of reasons that I don't need to get into here, I am still finishing up some work from the Fall semester, but I will be done that by the middle of this month. And that's good, because tomorrow is the first official day of the Spring semester (and my final semester) here at Reformed Theological Seminary. In May, I'll be graduating with a Master of Arts in Theological Studies. Normally a two-year degree, I have spread it out over three. But it really is hard to believe that almost three years have gone already.

I'm looking forward to this semester. I will have two classes on campus, and two virtual classes. They are listed below, the first two being the ones I am taking on campus.

• Educational Ministry of the Church
• Exposition of Hebrews
• Systematic Theology IV (Ecclesiology and Sacraments)
• History of Missions

It will be a relatively light semester, which is good, because these next few months also require me to try and figure out what we will be doing come May. I've made mention of our plans a number of times on the old blog, and I have started to get in touch with some different people and make some contacts to get things rolling. To reiterate, what I am looking for is a position in a church where I could be involved with the educational and teaching ministry. Needless to say, it's both exciting and a little stressful. We could be in for some big changes in the middle of this year. But God has continually shown His faithfulness to us and we trust His leading. We can't wait to see what He has in store for us next.

Loading mentions Retweet

Just a couple weeks remain before I begin my final year of study at Reformed Theological Seminary. It’s hard to believe it’s gone by so quickly. Among other things, this means I have had to start giving some serious thought to what will happen in May of 2010 after I graduate.

Initially, my plans were to immediately transition into a doctoral program in historical theology, looking at ecclesiological developments in the Reformation or post-Reformation period. However, over these last few months as I have been doing some reading and research to try and figure out more specifically what I would like to study within that broad field, I have found myself overwhelmed by the amount of material out there. This, along with a number of other factors, has led me to realize that at this point I am rather unprepared to go on to this level of study. I need some more time to do some focused reading and research in preparation, and so am postponing going this route for a few years.

What does that mean for now, then? I will be looking for work in the interim. More specifically, I’m looking to do some sort of vocational ministry work for the next few years. There are a couple of reasons for this. First, before I decided to go the academic route, I had planned on going into pastoral ministry. In the past while, however, based on the advice of others and plenty of thought on my part, I have come to think that perhaps I should spend some time doing ministry in a church context before I make a definitive decision not to pursue that long-term. Additionally, many students of theology will tell you that the best teachers they had were pastors at one point.

Second, I have been involved in the educational ministry at our local church and have thoroughly enjoyed serving in that role. So much so, in fact, that if I could find a position with a title like “Pastor of Educational Ministries,” I would probably jump at the chance. Except for the fact that I am not from a Missouri Synod Lutheran Church, this position sounds like it would be absolutely ideal for me. I might tweak one or two things, but I could see myself fitting very comfortably into a role like that.

And so that’s where we stand right now. While Robin and I like the idea of having things planned out and everything set in place, we are a bit adventurous at the same time and seem to thrive when things are uncertain. Although we don’t have any idea right now where we’ll be headed next year, we are confident that God will again show us the path He would have us go down, and we’re excited to see where it will lead. We are not committed to any city or country, and want to make ourselves available to wherever He would use us. To that end, we are open to going almost anywhere.

That being said, I’ve begun to keep my eyes and ears open for any possibilities and opportunities that are out there, although I am really venturing into uncharted territory here. Nonetheless, it will be exciting to see what unfolds this year. Over the next few months I’ll begin compiling a resume/CV, which I will post here along with some more information about me. Also (and perhaps this is more for those of you who know me), if you happen to hear of anything you think might interest me, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Loading mentions Retweet

We here at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando were privileged to have Dr. Herman Selderhuis, professor of church history at the Theologische Universiteit Apeldoorn, deliver the Kistemaker Lectures about a month ago on the topic of John Calvin. This year, 2009, marks the 500th anniversary of Calvin's birth and there are a large number of events and conferences going on to celebrate that. Dr. Selderhuis gave four lectures under the heading, "The Discovery of John Calvin." The lectures are available for download here (note: you'll need to have iTunes installed), and I encourage you to listen to them. There is a lot of valuable and interesting material there.

As I listened to them, I noted some of the more interesting things I heard, which I reproduce here (along with the approximate location where you can find it in the lecture).

1. Calvin did not want his theology to be known as Calvinism. As time went on, Calvin was aware of his increasing influence in the world of the Reformation, and was worried that people would begin to idolize him or his theology. As it were, Calvinism was actually a term given to Calvin's theology by Reformation-era Lutherans, and it was applied in a derogatory manner. So, Selderhuis suggests, call yourself Reformed instead.
   (Lecture 1, ±27:00-28:00)
2. It is often the case that people just equate Calvin with the Institutes. But in order to get an accurate portrayal of his whole system of thought and theology, we need to read all of his works together.
   (Lecture 2, ±3:00-4:00)
3. Calvin believed that the preaching of the Word should be accompanied by the showing and signing of the Word in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper each week. When you think you are being very Calvinistic by celebrating the Lord's Supper four or five times a year, you are actually being very loyal to the anti-Calvin leaders of the time in Geneva who opposed Calvin's desire to partake of the Supper each week.
   (Lecture 2, ±19:00-20:00)
4. We primarily use the Institutes as a theological work, but Calvin did not write it as a theological treatise, per se. It was meant, first and foremost, as a pastoral work that would lead people to a deeper understanding of the Christian life. For Calvin, doctrine and piety went hand in hand.
   (Lecture 2, ±46:00-47:00)
5. The Institutes, both originally and as we have them today, are published in large volumes, which one would likely not read in its entirety. In the mid-1500s, a Frenchman published a summary of the Institutes, a summary which gave heavy attention to the issues of the day, such as predestination. That is why Calvinism today has this caricature of being fatalistic or deterministic. If you read the Institutes in their entirety, however, you notice that the largest section of the whole work is devoted to prayer. The Frenchman who published the summary, however, thought that was not an issue. The point is, then, don't read just the summaries, but go ad fontes—back to the sources.
   (Lecture 2, ±50:00-52:00)
6. Martin Luther thought Calvin's short treatise on the Lord's Supper to be very helpful. This should not be all that surprising to us, because the understanding of the Lord's Supper in many Reformed churches actually tends toward a Zwinglian understanding instead of a Calvinistic one. Calvin combined the strengths of both Zwingli's and Luther's understanding of the Supper, and saw his view as quite in agreement with Luther.
   (Lecture 3, ±11:00, 17:00-18:00)
7. Finally, Calvin was convinced that if Luther had lived longer, he would not have sided with the Lutherans. The followers of Luther became quite militant after his death, and deviated considerably from Luther's theology.
   (Lecture 3, ±32:00-33:00)

I did not mention anything from the fourth lecture, but if you are of Dutch ancestry, you will find that one particularly humorous, as Selderhuis pokes a bit of fun at some of the perspectives of Dutch Reformed folk, especially on their understanding of the Sabbath.

All in all, it was a great blessing to have Selderhuis here. His perspectives on Calvin were enlightening and refreshing. Download the lectures, and enjoy what he has to say. He also has a new biography of Calvin that has just been released, which you can purchase here.

Loading mentions Retweet

Theologians have always struggled to come up with a definition of theology. Deriving the definition from its etymological root has led some to define it merely as the study of God--a definition, of course, that has nothing inherently wrong about it, but does lead to some degree of ambiguity. One of the more important questions that arises from this is, how do we approach this study of God?

Throughout his years of study, John Frame, professor of systematic theology here at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, has come to define theology as "the application of God's Word by persons to all areas of life." In his book, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God, he says that in general theology refers to "study of, knowledge of, speaking of, teaching of, [and] learning about God" (77). However, that broad definition has led to different historical understandings of theology, from the radically subjective theology of Friedrich Schleiermacher to the overly objective idea of theology found in Charles Hodge.

While Frame would be much more comfortable aligning himself with a figure like Hodge, he does argue that Hodge goes too far. Hodge's thoroughly objective approach to theology led to him aligning theology with the other natural sciences. Hodge stated in his Systematic Theology that theology "is the exhibition of the facts of scripture in their proper order and relation, with the principles or general truths involved in the facts themselves, and which pervade and harmonize the whole" (Hodge, vol. I, 19). Theology in Hodge's understanding was to be the gathering of the facts of Scripture and to demonstrate the truth by arranging them in a proper order. He was making deliberate efforts to distance himself from the likes of Schleiermacher, and Frame is gracious toward him for doing so. But in the end, Hodge actually deprives the Word of God of some of its uniqueness and power and makes theology far too intellectual.

"The job of the theologian," says Frame, "cannot be to give the first or most definitive description of Scripture in human language. Why? Because Scripture has already done that" (78). If the Word of God is the speech of God, then no human language is sufficient to offer the definitive interpretation of that speech. The Bible is sufficient to do that for itself. Frame argues that we need to

recognize that Scripture is language, that it has its own rational order, that it gives a perfect, normative, rational description and analysis of the facts of the redemption. It is not the job of theology to supply such a normative description and analysis; that account has been given to theology by revelation. Theology, then, must be a secondary description, a reinterpretation and reproclamation of Scripture, both of its propositional and nonpropositional content. Why do we need such a reinterpretation? To meet human needs. The job of theology is to help people understand the Bible better, not to give some sort of abstractly perfect account of the truth as such, regardless of whether anyone understands it or not. Rather, the job of theology is to teach people the truth of God (79).

One of the reasons, then, that we need to be careful of how much stress we place on the task of theology is because we are human. Scripture can and must be used confidently by us, but we must also maintain a posture of humility and recognize that "our theologies are not even the best formulation of truth-for-people for all times and places; Scripture is that. Our theologies are merely attempts to help people, generally and in specific times and places, to use Scripture better" (80).

And herein lies Frame's conception of application: doing theology means teaching in the biblical sense. He notes that the idea of teaching in the New Testament is "coupled with an adjective like hugiainos (healthy), or kalos (good or beautiful), or with some other indication that the teaching is conducive to spiritual health...it is not a narrowly intellectualist or academic discipline" (81). This means that, in contrast to a lot of today's preaching, we do not need separate the idea of the meaning and application of a text, but instead recognize that

every request for 'meaning' is a request for an application because whenever we ask for the 'meaning' of a passage we are expressing a lack in ourselves, an ignorance, an inability to use the passage. Asking for 'meaning' is asking for an application of Scripture to a need; we are asking Scripture to remedy that lack, that ignorance, that inability. Similarly, every request for an 'application' is a request for meaning; the one who asks doesn't understand the passage well enough to use it for himself (83).

If we devote ourselves to the work of theology, we are not setting out to discover the truth, but we are serving the people of God with the truth that has already been revealed. That is why, Frame concludes, "it is best to say that the basis of theology is the Word of God. There is no other discipline or body of knowledge that mediates between the Word and the theologian" (88). Any conception of theology that is either too subjective or too objective ultimately undermines the authority of Scripture. Our theology is to help to renew, transform, and mold the hearts of those who seek to live their life in Christ and to bring them to a fuller understanding of and love for his Word. Nothing more, nothing less.

Loading mentions Retweet

Ryan and I had the privilege yesterday to sit down with Dr. John Frame, professor of systematic theology and philosophy at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, to discuss his experiences and thoughts on seminary education. What we talked about centered around two documents he has written--Learning at Jesus' Feet: A Case for Seminary Training, and Proposal for a New Seminary. He gave us some very insightful material and offers some great advice to those currently in or thinking about attending seminary. Ryan asked the questions and directed the interview while I handled the camera.

Here is the a short clip with Frame giving some advice when thinking about seminary. You can view the full-length video (and find out why Frame is sitting in front of an organ) by visiting the GoingToSeminary.com website.

Loading mentions Retweet

The illustration below demonstrates the following: Assuming that I am at point "a" on the following diagram, and my vehicle is at point "b", I maintain that it is perfectly legitimate to walk across the grass, in a direct line, to get to point b. Others I know maintain that instead, one must follow the sidewalk as outlined with the yellow line in the diagram below. Not only does this take considerably more time, it serves to demote the purpose of the grass to little more than ornamental landscaping, an idea perpetrated only since the advent of suburban America. To restrict grass to the category of "decoration" is an idea I wholeheartedly reject.

Loading mentions Retweet

You know without a doubt that you are living in the 21st century when your 82-year-old philosophy professor answers his cell phone in the middle of class.

Loading mentions Retweet

You know you go to a Reformed seminary when seven out of your eleven textbooks are printed by P&R Publishing.

Loading mentions Retweet

Some people have taken to calling a theological seminary a "theoretical cemetery". What they mean by that is that going to seminary has the potential to turn into a very spiritually dry time for some. So how do you avoid the dangers of that? After all, you are training for vocational ministry, where you are supposed to shepherd God's flock in one way or another.

Seminary instruction gives you a ton of information. I know for myself it has sometimes felt like information overload. I am having to take in so much, that it almost bogs me down. All this stuff goes in your ears, and clumps together in your mind, and you don't really have any time to sort through it. We need to make active choices so that we don't become solely focused on what we take in intellectually. Getting through seminary is not just about passing tests. It's about learning to live out what you've taken in, making the Word of God really dwell in you so that it molds you and forms you completely.

But how? The place to start is prayer. Especially in Reformed seminaries, this has long been one of the major downfalls: the lack of focus on a disciplined, cultivated, and deeply committed spiritual life. Only when we get down on our knees will real learning begin. Also, it is important to develop deep relationships with people who can hold you accountable (and vice versa), and whom you can challenge and be challenged by. Go out for coffee, talk about these things, process them together.

One of my professors suggested that something worth considering is taking your time to get through seminary so that you don't succumb to the spiritual numbness. For instance, my program right now is two years, so why not spread it out a little longer, to three or three and a half years? That way you don't need to be swamped, and you really get the time to process through the stuff you take in. That enables you to better understand it, learn how to apply it, and use it to glorify and serve God.

I think it's actually a wise idea. Some people frown on stretching the time length of your education, because it will turn you into a slacker, or things like that, but I think it's beneficial. From a practical matter, going part time instead of full time makes financially managing higher education easier. It also allows you time to get involved in other things such as your church, your community, and your family. It also gives you time to focus more intensely on a few subjects at a time instead of having to fly through several.

I don't know yet if I'll do this, but it's something I'm considering. I'm doing something like 13 or 14 credit hours right now, so if I dropped down to 8-10, it would maybe add an extra year to the degree, but I think it would be better. That way I could also go get a part-time job at a coffeeshop or something like that, and make a little extra money on the side too. Robin I don't want to move right away after two years. We came a long way, and we want to enjoy our time here. Robin has a great job, we've gotten involved in a church, so we want to stay for a while.

Well, that's rambling, maybe a little lacking in coherency. It was talked about in a class a few days ago (HT: Reggie), and I thought it was worth sharing and discussing.

Loading mentions Retweet

I love libraries. Especially libraries full of subjects I am interested in (such as a seminary library) where I can spend many hours just browsing titles, opening the occasional book to read portions of it. I particularly enjoy the smell, which may be indiscernible to some, as it is rather faint. I don't know that I can describe it, but some of you may know what I'm talking about.

And I especially love beautiful libraries. (HT: Gideon Strauss)

Here at RTS Orlando, we are privileged to have in our library Roger Nicole's collection, which amounts to something like 30,000 volumes. Maybe it's because I love history, but walking through his collection is something I especially love to do. It's filled with a wealth of historical resources---up to this point, the oldest book I have found there was published in 1794; I'm convinced there will still be something older. But it is an impressive collection, and since so much of it is theological and historical, it's a great place for me to be in. I only hope that the next school I go to has a truly beautiful library. This one has content, but is a little lacking in aesthetic appeal.

Books are just the best. I love what Erasmus once said (though my wife will make duly certain that I don't live according to it):

When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes.

Loading mentions Retweet