Like the Friday Photo, but early..

Yosemite, about this time of year, but probably 15 - 20 years ago. View from the Tunnel overlook at about 9AM.

Funny story behind this photo. My buddy and I would go up to Yosemite to shoot pics, and we didn't really expect it to get cold. Or rain. Or snow. Which it all did the night before I shot this pic. We rented a canvas tent "cabin", which is fine during the summer...I think we each slept with 6 - 8 army blankets.

So I got up the next morning, and there was snow on the mountains, but not in the valley. I went back to the cabin to wake up my bud, and he wanted to sleep. I jetted off to shoot and got lots of shots, cause I was still using 35mm film at this time.

I got up to the Tunnel overlook and there were a few photogs there already, most of them using large format. I get out and set up the tripod and start cranking, getting the fog moving through the valley. They are still setting up their shots. I think that the fog disappeared before they were able to shoot it.

I never forgot that moment, even when I moved onto large format - setup quick and get the shot!

So when I got back to the cabin, my bud was kinda mad at me for leaving him at the cabin. But we went out and got more shots, but the scenes had changed from earlier in the day.

My bud got kinda mad when I got my slides back and he saw what he missed.

Redemptive-Historical Method

OBJECTIONS TO THE APPROACH cont'd
by Tim Keller


Remembering the Two Authors
Rodney A. Whitney reiterates what we have just said about the two opposite errors in exegesis, but he bases each one in an incomplete doctrine of the Scripture. He writes that there have always been two basic emphases or approaches to Biblical interpretation. The first he calls this the 'Historic Approach" to Bible interpretation. This stresses the fact that each text has a very human author. This approach asks 'What did the human Biblical author intend to say? What did it mean to the original author and audience?" To discover this, the interpreter looks at the linguistic, literary. and historical evidence. But Whitacre also speaks of the 'Organic Approach" to Bible interpretation. This stresses the fact that all of Scripture has a divine author. This approach asks: 'What does the divine Biblical author intend for us to hear? Why did he put this in the Bible for us?" To discover this, the interpreter looks at all the Bible (especially texts that are most like and most unlike it) and at Jesus Christ, who (as we have seen) the overall message of the Bible is about.

a. The Extreme Forms.
At the extreme end of an 'Organic-Only" approach, we have wildly Allegorical Interpretation. Whitacre gives an example of this in a famous interpretation of Ps. 137:-9 by the medieval church. “0 daughter of Babylon..happy is he.. who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks." The allegorical interpretation goes like this. Jesus is the Rock. Babylon represents evil and sin. So we are being told to take even our littlest sins and most embryonic sinful thoughts and dash them on Christ. This interpretation connects to other parts of the Bible (Christ as the Rock, the need for purity and holiness) but it makes no attempt to connect to the original historical meaning of the text.
(2) At the other extreme of a 'Historic-Only" approach. We have most scholarship in the world today--the Historical-Critical Interpretation. It makes no attempt to align or integrate what Paul says with what Isaiah says. There is no concept of any divine authorship or divine unity. Any attempt at harmonization is scorned and disdained. The meaning of the ancient texts is locked away, therefore, in a very ancient time and has nothing to do with us directly. Any normative or systematic theology is impossible.

b. Moderate Forms. Within the mainstream of the evangelical world these two extremes are rightly discarded. But two more moderate forms of the two poles creates real confusion among orthodox students of the Bible today.
(1) First, there is a moderate Historical-Critical approach which does allow for 'harmonization' with other texts for the purpose of Systematics, but is not comfortable with reading any meanings out of a text that the human author did not know of. Because this view believes in the divine authorship of the entire Bible it will accept that an OT author was talking unwittingly about Jesus, but onlv when a NT author tells us that he was.
(2) On the other hand, the Redemptive-Historical approach, which stresses more the organic unity of divine authorship, believes that many texts mean more than the human author intended. By the Holy Spirit's inspiration, an OT text may tell us about Jesus Christ and we may discover this, even if no NT author tells us so.

c. Criticisms. Of the 'Redemptive-Historical' approach:
First, there is a real danger of allegorizing. If you are not 'controlled' in your interpretation by first establishing the human author's intention, then your imagination can just run wild and you can get anything out of it.
Second, since you are always looking to 'find Christ' in the text, you may miss the very real practical applications and moral exhortations that are there. The people will get an inspiring picture of Jesus, but not get any real practical direction in how to live their lives.
Third, it could be hard for your lay people to learn how to interpret the Bible with this method. When you are done they’ll say: 'My! I could never get all that out of a text." And they'll be right.

(2) But the criticisms of the ‘Historical-Intent Only’ approach are, I believe, more trenchant.

First, as we mentioned above the New Testament writers continually interpret the Old Testament using the 'Organic' or "Redemptive-Historical" approach. They are constantly reading Psalms and other parts of the Bible as being about Christ, even when those texts have no clear 'Messianic Prophecy" in them. This was clearly a 'model' with which the NT writers were interpreting the OT. Why not use the model? The objection that 'they were inspired, we
are not' assumes that no one else in the early church was reading the Old Testament in a thoroughly Christological way. But all indications are that they were.

Second, the historical approach often speaks of the Christo-centric approach being 'arbitrary', but it's own method is much more speculative than it seems to realize. Of course it is somewhat speculative to answer the question "what does this text tell us about Jesus?" when we know that the author didn't intend to tell us overtly about Jesus. But on the other hand, it is somewhat speculative to try to reconstruct the original condition and historical setting as well. We are never sure we are right about the original audience. It takes a great deal of imagination and guess work to posit authorial intent. So the grammatico-historical exegesis is not as scientific and objective as it might first appear.

Third, we must be able to preach Christ from a text or we have the problem of 'synagogue' sermons. We are preaching the same sermon that could be preached in a synagogue-"Here is the righteous law. Do it and you will live." For example, how should we preach Jacob wrestling with the angel? There is no place where a New Testament writer sees this as a type of Christ. In the stricter view, then. We cannot preach this text as being about Christ at all. We must say that we learn here things like: a) life is filled with difficulty but we should persevere, or b) we need to wrestle with God in prayer. But that is what could have been preached centuries before Christ came. It is a sermon that would fit as well in a synagogue.

Fourth, the 'Historical-Intent Only' approach implies that the Church was not able to interpret the Bible properly until very recently we had the historical tools to discern original settings.

The Difference between an "Allegory" and a "Type"
If then we see that a Christological reading of the Bible is a wise and right way to go—the biggest practical issue that comes us in this discussion is-how can you tell the difference between a "type" and an "allegory"? The Redemptive-Historical approach finds types of Christ in OT texts even where a NT writer does not indicate that there is one. How can you be sure you are not allegorizing? Based on the writings of Clowney and Rod Whitacre's paper, here is a summary of the difference.

a. Typology: (1) Clowney - type is based on something in the text of symbolic significance and to the human author and in the Scriptures in general. There must be evidence that the author saw a feature or figure as having some significance of syrnbolism. For example, is the fact that the chord Rahab uses to mark and protect her home (Joshua 2) is scarlet significant to the author? Or does the color red symbolize blood or sacrifice in general in the Bible. If not (and I don't think we can demonstrate that it does), then we cannot preach that the chord- represents the blood of Christ protecting us from justice and wrath--as some people have done.' However, we can preach the blood on the doorposts of the Israelites that way (Exodus 12). Can ' we preach that God's choice of Leah as the mother of the Messianic seed is a type of God's salvation through weakness and rejection (Matt. 1 : 1 - 17; 1 Cor. 1 :26ff.)? We would have to demonstrate that the author of Genesis knew that Judah was the bearer of the Messianic strain and that therefore it's corning to Leah rather than Rachel was an act of grace. I believe we can (Gen.49: 10). Can we preach that Isaac represents Christ? Yes, because in the Old Testament the first-born had redemptive significance; Every first born belonged to God, etc. (Whitacre) A type is also based on connections between macro features and figures. It sees similarities between persons (prophets, priests, kings), events (Passover, exodus), and patterns of practice (saving through rejection, weakness). For example, in 2 Kings 5, we see a type of Christ’s revelation in the exclusivity of the prophet Elisha. Naaman must go to Israel, and he must wash in the Jordan. Because the Lord's salvation is a revealed salvation, we must submit to that revelation. On the other hand, we see a type of Christ's salvation in the prominence of the servants. Naarnan keeps going to kings, but God sends his salvation through the weak and marginal. He must go to a weaker country than Syria. He learns of his salvation through a servant girl who was victimized by his military, he only avoids disaster when his own servants reason with him to listen to Elisha. Because salvation comes through weakness and the powerless, we receive it by repentance/ faith alone and so refuse to worship worldly power and wealth. So types focus on 'macro-patterns' of revelation rather than descending to details.

b. Allegory: (1) Allegory, by contrast, seeks no basis in the author's original intent. Of course, it reads everything as symbolic, but it makes no attempt to show through linguistic or literary analysis that the feature it fixes on was of some symbolic significance to the human author. In other words, it ignores the human nature of the Bible and treats it as if it were simply a supernatural text. (2) Secondly, allegory focuses on microfeatures such as words or even numbers. It may take the two coins that the Good Samaritan left with the innkeeper
as the two sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper left by Jesus to sustain and heal us. It may take the 'little ones' of Ps.137:8-9 as our sinful thoughts or our 'little' white lies. Instead of seeking to identify broad patterns of salvation with Jesus' pattern, it fixes on details.

More Sunflowers...

/
I picked this sunflower and brought it home with me - but the farmer who owns the field allows people to do this - as long as you pay.

A little late in the season, but they still look very cool enmasse.

Preaching Christ or preaching about Christ?

There is a difference between preaching Christ and preaching about Christ. Preaching Christ is presenting him so clearly and directly that the people experience the sermon this way: “It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified” (Galatians 3:1). Preaching about Christ is presenting ideas related to him. It’s a good thing to do. But preaching Christ is more profound, more daring and more helpful.

In Intellectuals, page 31, Paul Johnson wrote of the poet Shelley, “He burned with a fierce love but it was an abstract flame and the poor mortals who came near it were often scorched. He put ideas before people and his life is a testament to how heartless ideas can be.” It is not enough for us preachers to burn with a fierce love. We must burn with a fierce love for Christ the crucified Friend of sinners and for the sinners right there before us who need that Friend. Ideas about Christ can even be heartless. But Christ crucified befriends sinners, and they feel it.

Calvin comments on Galatians 3:1, “Let those who want to discharge the ministry of the gospel aright learn not only to speak and declaim but also to penetrate into consciences, so that men may see Christ crucified and that his blood may flow.” Christ’s blood flowing into the human conscience, setting people free as they sit there listening to the sermon – that is preaching Christ.

One way to test ourselves is to ask, What are the people who hear me preach walking away with? Have they seen Christ himself during this sermon, or have they only interacted with ideas about Christ? As a preacher, I cannot make people engage with him. I wouldn’t want to try. But I can and must preach in such a way that he stands forth as obvious and available to the people right then and there.

-Ray Ortlund

Additionally, he provided this for further explanation:

"Preaching Christ includes ideas and concepts, of course. But it goes beyond that by presenting him, displaying him and offering him as a living reality and presence in the moment. This is rare and wonderful. A grace."

Redemptive-Historical Method

By Tim Keller
OBJECTIONS TO THE APPROACH
In light of the RHM approach, there are two opposite exegetical errors to avoid. Let's recall the words of Sidney Greidanus: "We can define 'preaching Christ' as preaching sermons which authentically integrate the message of the text with the climax of God's revelation in the person, work, and teaching of Jesus Christ .. '

Moralizing. If on the one hand, we fail to relate the text to the saving work of Christ we fail both hermeneutically and pastorally.
1) Hermeneutically. We fail to truly reveal the meaning of the text. If every part of the Bible testifies to Christ, then until we discern how a text tells us about him we do not know what it really means.
2) Pastorally, we fail to truly guide the listeners into any real holiness. If they hear us, in isolation, simply telling them how to raise their children, face trials, pray fervently, or create a healthy church--we give them the (totally false) impression that they can be right with God and others through their own efforts.

Allegorizing. If, on the other hand we fail to "authentically integrate" the message of the text with the saving work of Christ, but rather only point out superficial likenesses between the text and Jesus ("As Rahab took shelter under the red cord, so we should take shelter under the blood of Christ")--we also fail hermeneutically and pastorally.
1) Hermeneutically, allegorizing is a 'quick fix' substituting for hard thinking about the meaning of the text. Allegorizing either can lead to doing too little work on the micro-context (you don't spend enough time penetrating to the author's original intent for his readers) or can lead to doing too little work on the macro-context (you will simply refer to superficial features rather than preaching the great 'longitudinal' Biblical-theological
themes like temple, covenant, kingdom, substitution).
2) Pastorally, allegorizing has the same weaknesses. Too little emphasis on the micro-context leads to a lack of practical application. For example, if we jump to Christ' too soon we miss the exemplary value of the text. On the other hand, if we put too little emphasis on the macro-context and make the connection to Christ superficial, we end up with a moralistic sermon anyway. Allegorizing only arouses sentimental feelings. It does not confront self-righteous pride and self-righteous fear.

The concern about allegorizing.
While the proponents of RHM are very concerned about moralizing, it opponents think that the main danger (and main objection) to the RHM is the danger of allegorizing. An example that Sidney Greidanus uses is from Augustine.

'The door [in the side of the ark] surely represents the wound made when the side of the crucified was pierced with the spear ... This is the way of entrance for those who come to him.." Citv of God 13.21

"Allegorizing" has two very bad effects. 1) It makes for completely arbitrary interpretation. Instead of living under the authority of the Word, we can get nearly any message from a text we wish. 2) I t fails to honor the meaning and message of the human author whose conscious intent is the vehicle for God's revelation. Modem interpreters, both of an orthodox and liberal bent, eschew allegorizing by concentrating wholly on the original intent of the human author as the only sure and certain benchmark. But there are dangers on the other extreme as well.

Preaching Christ

/

“My friends, I do not believe it is preaching Christ and him crucified, to give people a batch of philosophy every Sunday morning and evening, and neglect the truths of this Holy Book. I do not believe it is preaching Christ and him crucified, to leave out the main cardinal doctrine of the Word of God, and preach a religion which is all a mist and a haze, without any definite truths whatsoever. I take it that man does not preach Christ and him crucified, who can get through a sermon without mentioning Christ’s name once; nor does that man preach Christ and him crucified, who leaves out the Holy Spirit’s work, who never says a word about the Holy Ghost, so that indeed the hearers might say, ‘We do not so much as know whether there be a Holy Ghost.’ And I have my own private opinion, that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and him crucified, unless you preach what now-a-days is called Calvinism. I have my own ideas, and those I always state boldly. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism. Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in his dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable conquering love of Jehovah; nor, I think, can we preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the peculiar redemption which Christ made for his elect and chosen people; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation, after having believed.”

-Charles H. Spurgeon, Christ Crucified
Spurgeon’s Sermons, Vol. 1, pg 88-89

Great Quote!

“Jesus’s teaching consistently attracted the irreligious while offending the Bible-believing, religious people of his day. However, in the main, our churches today do not have this effect. The kind of outsiders Jesus attracted are not attracted to contemporary churches, even our most avant-garde ones. We tend to draw conservative, buttoned-down, moralistic people. The licentious and liberated or the broken and marginal avoid church. That can only mean one thing. If the preaching of our ministers and the practice of our parishioners do not have the same effect on people that Jesus had, then we must not be declaring the same message that Jesus did.” - Timothy Keller, The Prodigal God

Cause he's my dog...

And then one from last winter....

Redemptive-Historical Method - Locating/Reading the Text

THE REDEMPTIVE-HISTORICAL METHOD

From Tim Keller -

2. LOCATING/READING THE TEXT IN ITS TWO CONTEXTS
Sidney Greidanus writes. "We can define 'preaching Christ' as preaching sermons which authentically integrate the message of the text with the climax of God's revelation in the person, work and teaching of Jesus Christ..” This definition assumes that every text has a 'micro' and a 'macro' context.

To understand any particular text of the Bible, we must first put it into the 'micro' context—its historical and linguistic setting, in order to discern the immediate intent of the human author. This is what in the 20th century has come to be known as the 'grammatico-historical' method, and it is crucial. We must use every tool we have to discern what the original author meant to say to the original readers of the text. We study the use of language, we study the historical context. We put the text in the context of the whole book, and so on.

But every Biblical text also has a 'macro' context--its place in the entire Bible which has as its purpose, the revelation of Christ as the climax of all God's redeeming activity in history. We must not only ask: 'what did the human author intend to say to his historical audience?' but also 'why did God in 'scripturate' this as a way of pointing to the salvation of his Son?

So the Redemptive-historical method of interpretation insists that we put each text not only into the context of its original setting and author-intent but also into the context of it’s 'the big story of salvation' as traced above. The interpreter must 'locate' the text, recognizing what place it holds in the developing salvation-story line (i.e. what stage in redemption-history is occupies.) So what does that mean? I suggest the following two practical measures.

A. First. It means recognizing the text's 'limitations'. This may sound a bit shocking-- isn't all Scripture inspired? Of course, but revelation is progressive. If we fail to put a text in its redemptive-historical context, we will run into trouble. For example, if the purpose of the Elijah narratives (as one minister put it] "is to teach us how to walk close to the Lord and be courageous", then we have some problems with the prophet's behavior! Should we go out and kill false teachers as Elijah did with the prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18)? If we see the purpose of 1 Kings 18 to be mainly instruction on how to live--and if we preach it as such--we will either be simply confused and embarrassed by Elijah's conduct or we will mislead Christians into a holy war mentality (!) ignoring the different stage of redemptive history in which we are now (Matt 26:52). But if the focus of every Biblical text is not on us and our behavior but on God and his saving activity, then the purpose of Elijah's ministry is to point us to salvation in Christ. We can say about Elijah. "Jesus told us to put up our swords and the cross shows us that the kingdom of God moves forward now in sacrificial service. But we do learn here that all religions are not alike!” So we must be aware of the 'limitations' or incompleteness of every stage in redemptive history before Christ.

b. Second. It means teasing out all the text's clues to how salvation 'works'. The traditional 'exemplarist' approach to the Bible (not just the Old Testament. but the New Testament! See note 2 below) tends to look for traits of moral behavior in every text. It asks: 'What do I learn here about prayer? Obedience? How to deal with self-pity? How to raise my children? How to conduct myself sexually? How to handle discouragement?" But if the purpose of every text is to point to God's saving purposes--then we must approach every text asking: “What gospel-pieces are here? What does this text show us about how salvation works? What does it tell me of grace, faith, the nature of sin, the attributes of God as they bear on our relationship to him, the nature of conversion, the results or marks of conversion?" It is only if we do this first that we can then treat the
moral-example aspect of the text properly.

c. Third, it means showing how the salvation 'pieces' only 'come together' eventually in Christ. For example, we may point out that Elijah was of course very courageous on Mt. Camel--but he was only courageous because he knew about God's saving purposes. Unlike Baal and all the pagan gods. the true God did not need worshippers to cut themselves and compel his attention and answers to prayer through their efforts. He knew that with only a word of prayer. God would hear and answer. But this incident participates in the Big Plot-Line of salvation's story. It raises the question: "why would the true God be so utterly different than the gods of the world's religions? why would he listen to his prophet without him cutting himself or dancing furiously or providing a perfect moral performance? Why" The only way the interpreter can answer this is to point ahead in the Scripture to how the plot-line resolves itself. It is because of Jesus who was cut literally to pieces for us and who made a perfect sacrifice for sins so that God can come to us and work with us despite our imperfections.

Note 1. Here then we get to the essence of the issue of 'moralism' and application. On the one hand you could so fear 'moralism' and put so much emphasis on the 'limitation' and partial nature of former ages of revelation that you read the text as nothing more than a 'type' of Christ. You may not allow any 'exemplary' force at all to the text to impinge on the listener. This is, however, to forget that every stage in revelation is a stage in redemption-history, very part of the Bible tells us something about how God's salvation 'works'. We learn things about grace, repentance, faith. obedience in every era. On the other hand, 1) just as it is clear in the gospels that the that we are not simply supposed to imitate Christ's example but believe and rest in his work for us (which is the only way we ever will follow his example), and 2) just as it is clear in the epistles that our imperatives ('do this') are based on indicatives ('because you are this'), then 3) whenever we preach on any other character in the Bible we must only exhort people to 'be like' him/her on the basis of faith in the one to whom he/she points.

Note 2: We must not think that 'putting the text into the One Story Line' is something you only have to work on with Old Testament texts. It is just as possible to preach New Testament texts--even Gospel accounts about Jesus--without reference to the overall story line of salvation. It is extremely possible to simply show how much Jesus loves and forgives or how great he is. appealing directly to sentiment, without showing how the particular text points to the longitudinal themes of sin. justice, redemption, and his saving work. It is possible to lift up Jesus simply as an example to emulate. Another example: it is well known that often Paul lays out the 'doctrine' in the early part of his letters and 'practical application' in the latter part. (This is an oversimplification. but a relatively helpful one.) It is extremely easy to preach a sermon on Ephesians 4 about the 'Marks of a Healthy Church' without grounding it in the Christology of Eph I. The same could be said for preaching on 'Love' in 1 Cor 13 without grounding it in the dissension of the Corinthians and its doctrinal solution--the cross (1 Cor 1). In all such cases the preacher is giving listener the strong impression that what it will take to have a healthy church (or a loving life) is simple moral effort.

Note 3: We must not think that 'putting the text into the One Story Line' means that we have to identify one 'longitudinal theme' as the central, controlling theme of the Bible. Many people have tried to demonstrate this. The best candidate is probably the theme of the 'kingdom' and a close second is 'covenant'. No t only do most Biblical theologians disagree with this on hermeneutical grounds. I think it is pragmatically unwise. Every theme has its own nuances and if we choose one theme as the theme we tend to become unbalanced in our understanding of the gospel. We may over-stress the mystical or the legal or the individual or the corporate.

Cause they're cute...

/



/

Spurgeon on Preaching Christ

Spurgeon on Preaching Christ

“I believe that those sermons which are fullest of Christ are the most likely to be blessed to the conversion of the hearers. Let your sermons be full of Christ, from beginning to end crammed full of the gospel. As for myself, brethren, I cannot preach anything else but Christ and His cross, for I know nothing else, and long ago, like the apostle Paul, I determined not to know anything else save Jesus Christ and Him crucified. People have often asked me, “What is the secret of your success?” I always answer that I have no other secret but this, that I have preached the gospel,—not about the gospel, but the gospel,—the full, free, glorious gospel of the living Christ who is the incarnation of the good news. Preach Jesus Christ, brethren, always and everywhere; and every time you preach be sure to have much of Jesus Christ in the sermon. You remember the story of the old minister who heard a sermon by a young man, and when he was asked by the preacher what he thought of it he was rather slow to answer, but at last he said, “If I must tell you, I did not like it at all; there was no Christ in your sermon.” “No,” answered the young man, “because I did not see that Christ was in the text.” “Oh!” said the old minister, “but do you not know that from every little town and village and tiny hamlet in England there is a road leading to London? Whenever I get hold of a text, I say to myself, ‘There is a road from here to Jesus Christ, and I mean to keep on His track till I get to Him.’” “Well,” said the young man, “but suppose you are preaching from a text that says nothing about Christ?” “Then I will go over hedge and ditch but what I will get at Him.” So must we do, brethren; we must have Christ in all our discourses, whatever else is in or not in them. There ought to be enough of the gospel in every sermon to save a soul. Take care that it is so when you are called to preach before Her Majesty the Queen, and if you have to preach to charwomen or chairmen, still always take care that there is the real gospel in every sermon.”

-CH Spurgeon, The Soul Winner.

Today in Christian History - Sept 14

Early church father John Chrysostom, the greatest preacher of his age, dies in exile when, in poor health, he is forced to travel on foot in bad weather.

John Chrysostom is one of my heroes. I can read the Holimies of John today and still pull many practical lessons from them.

Biography from the Saint John Chrysostom webpage:

The legion of saints of the Church is comprised of men of extraordinary ability whose talents may have been dissimilar but many of whom seem to have shared a common genius for oratory. Yet out of this vast assembly of eloquent speakers, whose reputation might have rested on their gift of expression alone, the one for whom the title "Chrysostom" (in Russian, "Zlatoust"), or "golden-mouthed" was reserved, was John of Antioch, known as St. John Chrysostom, a great distinction in view of the qualifications of so many others.

Endeared as one of the four great doctors of the Church, St. John Chrysostom was born in 347 in Antioch, Syria and was prepared for a career in law under the renowned Libanius, who marveled at his pupil's eloquence and foresaw a brilliant career for his pupil as statesman and lawgiver. But John decided, after he had been baptised at the age of 23, to abandon the law in favour of service to the Saviour. He entered a monastery which served to educate him in preparation for his ordination as a priest in 386 AD. From the pulpit there emerged John, a preacher whose oratorical excellence gained him a reputation throughout the Christian world, a recognition which spurred him to even greater expression that found favour with everyone but the Empress Eudoxia, whom he saw fit to examine in some of his sermons.

When St. John was forty-nine years old, his immense popularity earned him election to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, a prestigious post from which he launched a crusade against excessiveness and extreme wealth which the Empress construed as a personal affront to her and her royal court. This also gave rise to sinister forces that envied his tremendous influence. His enemies found an instrument for his indictment when they discovered that he had harboured some pious monks who had been excommunicated by his archrival Theophilos, Bishop of Alexandria, who falsely accused John of treason and surreptitiously plotted his exile.

When it was discovered that the great St. John had been exiled by the puppets of the state, there arose such a clamour of protest, promising a real threat of civil disobedience, that not even the royal court dared to confront the angry multitudes and St John was restored to his post. At about this time he put a stop to a practice which was offensive to him, although none of his predecessors outwardly considered it disrespectful; this practice was applauding in church, which would be considered extremely vulgar today, and the absence of which has added to the solemnity of Church services.

St. John delivered a sermon in which he deplored the adulation of a frenzied crowd at the unveiling of a public statue of the Empress Eudoxia. His sermon was grossly exaggerated by his enemies, and by the time it reached the ears of the Empress it resulted in his permanent exile from his beloved city of Constantinople. The humiliation of banishment did not deter the gallant, golden-mouthed St. John, who continued to communicate with the Church and wrote his precious prose until he died in the lonely reaches of Pontus in 407.

The treasure of treatises and letters which St. John left behind, included the moving sermon that is heard at Easter Sunday services. The loss of his sermons which were not set down on paper is incalculable. Nevertheless, the immense store of his excellent literature reveals his insight, straightforwardness, and rhetorical splendour, and commands a position of the greatest respect and influence in Christian thought, rivaling that of other Fathers of the Church. His liturgy, which we respectfully chant on Sundays, is a living testimony of his greatness.

Random Pics from the Farmstead

'Redemptive-Historical' Method - Description

From Tim Keller

A BASIC DESCRIPTION OF THE APPROACH

"1. DISCERNING THE 'SALVATION STORY-LINE'

'Biblical theology' or the RHM posits that "it is the nature of biblical revelation that it tells a story rather than sets out tuneless principles in the abstract. If we allow the Bible to tell its own story, we find a coherent and meaningful whole”. The central story of the Bible is the story of redemption of salvation (thus the term 'redemptive-historical' method). The story is how 1) God initiates a saving work that we cannot do for ourselves 2) in order to a) create a new people for himself out of lost humanity and b) a new creation out of a marred and broken world. To do this takes justice and power on God's part, but also love and mercy. Only in Jesus Christ is it ultimately revealed how God's holiness and love can work together for saving purposes. Then, In him, all the themes--God's initiating grace, his redeeming provision, his presence with his covenant people. His renewing kingdom, and all others--come to a climax and fulfillment in the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus. There is no part of the Bible nor text of the Bible that does not participate in these longitudinal 'salvation' themes.

The pre-fall and fall accounts (Genesis 1-3) show us the world as God designed it to be and the reasons it has fallen from its original design. Thus this part of the Bible shows us why salvation in Christ is needed, and what that future restoration will look like.

The post-fall narratives (Genesis 4- 1) show the inadequacy of human effort or God's judgment alone to bring about renewal of the world. God's design for creation seems thwarted by human sin. The story-line and plot of the Bible goes dark very quickly. There is little hope.

The patriarchal narratives, however, show us hope. We see God beginning to intervene in the world's life. Some protagonists (besides God) appear--Abraham, Joseph, etc. We see the embryonic shape of his saving purposes: his sovereign, free grace, his intention to create a new humanity--a new people for himself, the necessity and nature of faith, the promise of a land, of blessing, of God's presence, of mission, and of a future Messiah. It is obvious that the protagonists relate to God through faith and grace, not works--but much the redeeming provision is cryptic and unclear. Why can God continually forgive and work with and be present with people that he should destroy? Why doesn't he destroy them as he did in the accounts of the Flood and of Babel? The Biblical story plot 'thickens'.

The exodus and the giving of the law clarify both how radically gracious God is (since the deliverance from Egypt happens before the giving of the law) and yet how inexorable the law and justice and righteousness of God are. God gives both the law and the sacrificial system as a pointer to the substitutionary atonement which will be his redemptive provision. The tabernacle now makes God's presence among his people a permanent thing. The law (as well as the wisdom literature) reveals God's interest in justice in the world and his desire for a people who are distinct in every respect--a truly 'new humanity1--who will be a light attracting the nations. The nature of the coming kingdom is clarified and focused also in the history of the leaders of Israel. Despite times of decline (the judges) there are times of rising hope that the saving purposes of God will be fulfilled and the world will turn back to God. These hopes climax in the career of David.

But the post-David prophetic period makes clear that God's grace, redemption. covenant, the promise of a land and a kingdom will not be fulfilled by physical Israel or its human prophets, priests. heroes and kings. The decline of Israel brings us the prophets who 'move the story line' along in two ways. Negatively, they expound and develop the great longitudinal saving themes by way of critique of Israel. As they castigate and condemn the rebellious nation in ‘covenant lawsuit’ they provide greater insight into the mission of the people of God in the world, the social and personal righteousness God is ‘after’ in His people, and also the twin mistakes of licentiousness and self-righteousness /legalism. Positively, the prophets begin to (more clearly than ever) point ahead to how God will fulfill all his promises in eschatological fullness in the future. The first major prophets Elijah and Elisha have a remarkable ministry of unprecedented 'signs and wonders'. Under their hands, 'the blind see. the lame walk. The dead raised, and good news is preached to the poor.' These are signs of the powerful restoration the kingdom will bring. A final rebuilt temple, an ultimate return from exile, a consummate and perfect kingdom--are all now in view.

The ministry of Jesus in the gospels shows us how Jesus is the fulfillment and climax of all the longitudinal themes of God's salvation. In him all the 'plot tensions' are resolved. (How can God's promises be conditional--upon our obedience. yet unconditional--upon his grace?) In him all the protagonists of history are re-capitulated and succeed where they previously failed. In his life-story we have the world-salvation story re-told. We have darkness, a light and promise. A rising hope which is dashed on Good Friday, and then an unlooked for victory out of defeat.) Finally, the primacy of grace always present in the former ages, is now crystal clear in the ministry of Christ. His ethical example to us is secondary and based on his saving work for us. We are not saved through our imitation of him. But (ironically) in his substitutionary 'imitation' and representation of US.

The church now lives in the "overlap" of the ages between the first and second comings of Christ. So the 'story of salvation' is not over, despite its climax in Christ. There is an intensification and progression of all the longitudinal themes now and yet an incompleteness for the kingdom of God is 'already' but 'not yet'. So on the one hand, the Christian community itself is now God's temple--we have the Holy Spirit and presence of God. The mission of the people of God as a light to all the nations is now overt rather than implicit. The people of God are now multi-national, multi-ethnic. Much of the wisdom (from the wisdom literature) and the righteousness (from the law) can now characterize us as individuals and a community through the power of the Spirit. But, on the other hand our ethical and life-paradigm now is the cross. In the church age the kingdom moves ahead through loss and poverty and rejection and service and weakness.

The new heavens and new earth are the ultimate end of God's redemptive work in Christ. The RHM helps us see that the goal of God's work in Christ is not escape from the world but the renewal of the whole world. Heaven will re-unite with the earth and the whole world will become a giant holy-of-ho1ies.

Summary: It is Jesus that makes all these stories one story. Only when we understand all the previous stories and pointers (types) do we realize the richness and fullness of who Christ is. But on the other hand, only when we understand him (anti-type) do we understand what the pointers and all the other stories were about. We cannot fully understand one without the other. So for example, when in John 3 Jesus says he is like the serpent lifted up in the wilderness he puts the Serpent-in-the-wilderness into the Big Story. Yes. the purpose of the comparison is that the serpent incident sheds light on how Jesus saves us (e.g. it only takes a look, he is made like and treated like the sin that is killing us. etc.)--but on the other hand it means that we can't understand the incident of the serpent without realizing that it points us to Christ. Jesus shows us that the Bible is not an interesting set of isolated stories, each story telling us something different about how to live. Rather, Jesus unifies all the chapters into one story."

One year ago...

One year ago my son was born.

This pic I was able to take while the docs were taking him out via C-section.

Drug War Zone - Howard Campbell

The book is written from the viewpoint of an American Anthropologist, who has extensive contacts on both sides of the El Paso/Juarez border. Initially a slow read, the book picks up pace when the interviews begin. The strength of the book is in the various interviews the author has with both sides of the aisle: narco-trafficers, dealers, police, informants, border agents. The best stories are the ones that have been lived by the teller – some are funny, and some are downright scary. At times the author seems to let the teller give too much background or extraneous information that clouds the narrative. Some tellers leave you wanting more information, while others seem to languish or even repeat themselves. Not much is given in the way for solution to the drug war: only one story from a former border patrol agent who now believes the war is futile,

As others have pointed out, ”the author clearly defines all of the unfamiliar terms used in the interviews, but the inclusion of a glossary of key words and phrases would have been useful. More maps and pictures would have helped as well.

Campbell writes, at the time his book went to press, more that 1,600 killings had been reported in Ciudad Juarez in 2008, making in the bloodiest year in the city's recorded history. Sadly, this record no longer stands, as 2009 saw more than 2,500 killings. Drug War Zone is a valuable attempt to understand the causes and consequences of these statistics.”

Redemptive Historical Method

From Tim Keller - Chapter 1 - Expounding Christ

"There are two basic approaches to discovering the unity of the Bible in an effort to answer the question: "what does the (whole) Bible teach about....?" One approach is the Systematic-Theological method (STM) which deals with the Scripture topically. It organizes what it says by asking: "what does the whole Bible teach about God? sin? the Holy Spirit? the Church? marriage and family? Prayer?" It looks at every text on a topic and synthesizes them into a set of statements or principles. The Westminster Confession of Faith. for example, is largely the product of the STM.

Another approach is the 'Biblical-Theological' or (better) 'Redemptive-Historical' method (RHM) which deals with the Scripture historicallv. It deals "Diachronically" rather than "synchronically" with the Bible. It sees the Bible less as a depository of individual pieces of data that must be organized and summarized and more as a history of God's salvation--a redemption-history. It notices, for example that the Bible shows little or not concern for historical events that the world would consider momentous. Instead. it only concerned with those events that reveal the unfolding saving words and actions of God. (e.g. How the 'biographies' of Jesus--the gospels--spend up to 50% on the last week of his life.) The Bible is
not primarily not a source of information about how to raise a family or handle money but a redemption-history.

Thus the RHM organizes what the Bible teaches by looking less at category-topics and more at 'longitudinal themes' that re-appear in each historical epoch and thus asks: "how does creation, the kingdom the temple/presence of God, the people of God, the covenant, the promises, the atonement-develop in every age and climax in the work of Christ?" (There is no ultimate reason why these two approaches have to contradict. but we will look more at the relationship of these two methods below.)

Bryan Chapell uses the acorn to illustrate the RHM. If to you I describe the acorn just as it is(it is 1 inch long, brown, has two parts) without explaining what the acorn has the potential to grow into(there is an entire tree within it!) I have not helped you to understand the acorn. If I describe Moses or David as men of faith but do not show you how they point to the ultimate Moses or David then I haven't really helped you understand these men or their stories.

Summary. In other words. the RHM believes that the purpose of every part of the Bible and therefore every text is to bear witness to who Christ is and what he came to do. Every text is about Jesus.

RATIONALE FOR THE APPROACH
I . The direction of Jesus.
When Jesus met the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, he discovered that they were in despair because their Messiah had been crucified. He responds. "'how slow of heart to believe all the prophets have spoken!'... and beginning with Moses and all the Prophets he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself." (Luke 24:25-29) Later he appears to his disciples in the upper room. and we are told "He said to them This is what 1 told you while 1 was still with you: everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms. ' Then he opened their minds so they could understand the
Scriptures." (Luke 24:44-45). Jesus blames the confusion of the disciples on their inability to see that all the Old Testament is "all" about him and his salvation. Another place where Jesus makes this same assertion is Jn 5:31-47. Jesus says that the Father has testified to him in the Scriptures (v.39). But he confronts his hearers with how they do not understand the Scriptures' testimony. He says, for example, that they think they follow Moses, but "Moses wrote about me." (v.46). The Law of Moses can only be understood as it points to Christ.

2. The example of the apostles.
The apostolic writers are famously 'Christ-centered' in their interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Paul and the writer of the Epistles to the Hebrews. for example, continuously quote Psalms as the words of Christ--and not just 'Messianic' or 'Royal' Psalms where the speaker is some clearly Messianic figure. For example, Hebrews 1 : 14 quotes Psalm 9 1 : 1 1 - 12-"For he will command his angels concerning you.. SO that you will not strike yourfoot against a stone." But
when we as readers look at Psalm 91 we see absolutely nothing that would indicate the subject is Jesus or some Messianic figure. How can the Hebrews author know that this Psalm is about Jesus? Some would say--'he was inspired by the Holy Spirit'. Of course that is true, but that begs the question. Though all Biblical writers were inspired as they said everything wrote, the question is--did it require supernatural knowledge to know everything they wrote? For example, they were inspired when they said that 'Jesus rose on the third day', but did it take divine revelation to know that it happened? Were there not lots of others. 'uninspired' Christians who knew this and preached this as well?

Now the question is--did it take supernatural knowledge to know that Psalm 91 was about Jesus? Perhaps. But it is just as likely that the early church knew that everything in the Scriptures was about Jesus. Therefore both apostles and everyone else were able to interpret the whole Bible Christologically. What we have in these New Testament usages of the Old Testament then shows us how the entire early church read the Bible. It gives us warrant and direction to read the Bible in the same way.

The gospel writers also quote passages from the Psalms and Prophets that clearly show they-read the words of the Scripture as being all about Jesus. Peter writes: "Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and the circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow....They spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit..into which things even angels long to look." (1Peter 1:10-12) he shows that the 'Spirit of Christ' in the prophets was pointing to the person and work of Christ in their writings.

So it is not likely that Jesus or Peter are simply talking about isolated explicit predictions of the Messiah (cf. Gen.3: 15; Is.9:6; 53). That wouldn't do justice to the comprehensiveness of the language employed. Jesus says that "all the Scriptures" point to him and that each part--the Law, the Prophets. and the Wisdom literature--are about him (Luke 24:44-45). It is particularly interesting that he would say that the 'Law" is about him! We might understand how he could say that the prophetic literature was about him-but the Law? What we have here is that all the major themes. major figures, major genres, and major story lines are reflective of and
fulfilled in him.

SUM: Every part of the Bible about the historical unfolding revelation and accomplishment of the gospel salvation through Jesus Christ. Paul shows in Galatians 3 that there is a complete unity in the Bible. There is a story within all the Bible stories. God is redeeming a people for himself by grace in the face of human rebellion and human desire for a religion of good works.

3. The problem of 'moralism'.
The ultimate reason that we expound Christ in every passage is because that's the truth! The whole Bible is about Christ. That is the 'theological-hermeneutical' reason for the RHM.

But there is a 'theological-pastoral' reason as well. Bryan Chapel1 points out in a taped message that we are to preach Christ to 'complete' the hearers (Col 1:28: NIV-'perfect is better rendered 'complete'.) This means that our preaching assumes fallenness and incompleteness in the listener. Chapell goes on to say that any sermon that does not focus on Christ and his saving work. but only provides 'marks of a good church' or 'marks of a strong family' or 'how to pray' is to provide a 'sub-text' message that the listeners can complete themselves or make
themselves acceptable to God. Even if the preacher does not say that. even if the preacher says many true things about the text--if the preacher does not put the text into the overall message of salvation by grace and the finished work of Christ. the listener will automatically hear through a moralistic 'grid'. A sermon that only tells listeners how they must live without putting that into the context of the gospel gives them the impression that they are complete enough to pull themselves together if they really try hard.

Any exposition of a text that does not 'get to Christ'but just 'explains Biblical principles' will be a 'synagogue sermon' that merely exhorts people to exert their wills to live according to a particular pattern. Instead of the life-giving gospel. the sermon offers just one more ethical paradigm to crush the listeners."

Sunflowers

Bible Story

Ed Clowney -
"There are great stories in the Bible ... but it is possible to know Bible stories, yet miss THE Bible story. The Bible has a story Line. lf we forget the story line ... we cut the heart out of the Bible. Sunday school stories are then tol...d as tamer versions of the Sunday comics, where Samson substitutes as Superman. David...becomes a Hebrew version of Jack the Giant Killer. No, David is not a brave little boy who is't afraid of the big bad giant. he is the Lord's Anointed..God chose David as a king in order to prepare the way for David's Great Son, our Deliverer and Champion..

If we ever tell a particular Bible story without putting it into the Bible story (about Christ), we actually change the meaning of the particular event for us. It becomes a moralistic exhortation to 'try harder' rather than a call to live... by faith in the work of Christ. There is, in the end, only two ways to read the Bible: is it basicallv about me or basicallv about Jesus? In other words. is it basically about what I must do, or basically about what He has done? If I read David and Goliath as basically giving me an example, then the story is really about me. I must summon up the faith and courage to fight the giants in my life. But if I read David and Goliath as basically showing me salvation through Jesus, then the story is really about Him. Until I see that Jesus fought the real giants (sin, law, death) for me, I will never have the courage to be able to fight ordinary giants in life (suffering, disappointment. failure, criticism. hardship). The Bible is not a collection of 'Aesop's Fables", it is not a book of virtues. It is a story about how God saves us."

New Picture

/


I guess that these are Zinias?

Seven Churches of Revelation - Laodicea

\


14 " And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, ' These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God: 15 "I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. 16 "So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. 17 "Because you say, 'I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing' -- and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked -- 18 "I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, [that] the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. 19 "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. 20 "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me. 21 "To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne. 22 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."

Ramsay:
"Laodicea was placed as a guard and door-keeper on this road, near the foot of the Lycus Glen, where it opens on the main valley of the Meander. The hills that bound the glen on the south run up northwards to an apex, one side facing northwest, the other northeast; this apex lies between the river Lycus (the Wolf), and its large tributary the Kapros (the Boar), which comes in from the south and passes near the eastern gate: the Lycus is about three miles to the north of the city.

The hills rise not more than one hundred feet above the glen; but they spring sharply from the low and level ground in front; and, when crowned by the well-built fortifications of a Seleucid city, they must have presented a striking aspect towards the glen, and constituted an admirably strong line of defence. Laodicea was a very strong fortress, planted right on the line of the great road; but it had one serious weakness. It was entirely dependent for water-supply (except in so far as wells may have existed within the walls, of which there is now no trace) on an aqueduct conducted from springs about six miles to the south. The aqueduct was under the surface of the ground, but could hardly remain unknown to a besieging army or be guarded long against his attack. If the aqueduct was cut, the city was helpless; and this weakness ruined the character of the city as a strong fortress, and must have prevented the people from ever feeling secure when threatened with attack."

"There is no city whose spirit and nature are more difficult to describe than Laodicea. There are no extremes, and hardly any very strongly marked features. But in this even balance lies its peculiar character. Those were the qualities that contributed to make it essentially the successful trading city, the city of bankers and finance, which could adapt itself to the needs and wishes of others, ever pliable and accommodating, full of the spirit of compromise."

Seven Churches of Revelation - Philadelphia

/


7 " And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write, ' These things says He who is holy, He who is true, "He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens": 8 "I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name. 9 "Indeed I will make [those] of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie -- indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you. 10 "Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth. 11 "Behold, I am coming quickly! Hold fast what you have, that no one may take your crown. 12 "He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. And I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And [I will write on him] My new name. 13 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."

Ramsay:
"The Pergamenian king selected an excellent situation for the new city. A long vale runs up southeast from the Hermus Valley into the flank of the central plateau: this is the vale down which comes the river Cogamis to join the Hermus...this is the path by which trade and communication from the harbour of Smyrna and from Lydia and the northwest regions are maintained with Phrygia and the East. It was at that time an important road, rivalling even the great trade-route from Ephesus to the East; and in later Byzantine and medieval times it was the greatest trade-route of the whole country. Its importance is now continued by the railway, which connects Smyrna with the interior.

Moreover, the Imperial Post-Road of the first century, coming from Rome by Troas, Pergamum and Sardis passed through Philadelphia and went on to the East; and thus Philadelphia was a stage on the main line of Imperial communication.

Philadelphia emerges into world-wide fame through a conspicuous disaster. It was situated on the edge of the Katakekaumene, a district of Lydia where volcanoes, now extinct, have been active in recent geological time, where the traces of their eruptions in rivers of black lava and vast cinder-heaps are very impressive, and where earthquakes have been frequent in historical times. In A.D. 17 an unusually severe earthquake destroyed twelve cities of the great Lydian Valley, including Sardis and Philadelphia. Strabo, who wrote about two or three years after this disaster, says that Sardis suffered most at the moment, but gives a remarkable picture of the long-continued terror at Philadelphia. Apparently frequent shocks were experienced there for a long time afterwards...This state of panic set in at Philadelphia, and continued when Strabo wrote, A.D. 20. Many of the inhabitants remained outside the city living in huts and booths over the vale, and those who were foolhardy enough (as the sober-minded thought) to remain in the city, practised various devices to support and strengthen the walls and houses against the recurring shocks.

Philadelphia assumed the name Neokaisareia: the New Caesar was either Tiberius (as compared with Augustus) or Germanicus (as compared with Tiberius). The name Neokaisareia is known both from coins and epigraphy during the ensuing period. At first the old name was disused and the new name employed alone; then the old name recurred alongside of or alternately with the new; and finally about A.D. 42-50 the new name disappeared from us. Philadelphia was the only one of the Seven Cities that had voluntarily substituted a new name for its original name: the other six were too proud of their ancient fame to sacrifice their name, though Sardis took the epithet Caesareia for a short time after A.D. 17

Thus Philadelphia was distinguished from the other cities by several characteristics: first, it was the missionary city: secondly, its people lived always in dread of a disaster, “the day of trial": thirdly, many of its people went out of the city to dwell: fourthly, it took a new name from the Imperial god.

Philadelphia, during the second century and the third, more than recovered its prosperity; and under Caracalla it was honoured with the title Neokoros or Temple-Warden in the State religion. This implies that a Provincial temple of the Imperial cult was built there between A.D. 211 and 217; and henceforward the Commune of Asia met there occasionally to hold some of its State festivals."

Seven Churches of Revelation - Sardis

/


Revelation 3:1 "And to the angel of the church in Sardis write, ' These things says He who has the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars: "I know your works, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead. 2 "Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die, for I have not found your works perfect before God. 3 "Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you. 4 "You have a few names even in Sardis who have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with Me in white, for they are worthy. 5 "He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels. 6 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." '

Ramsay:
"Sardis was one of the great cities of primitive history: in the Greek view it was long the greatest of all cities. At the beginning of record it stands forth prominently as the capital of a powerful empire. Its situation marks it out as a ruling city, according to the methods of early warfare and early kings; it was however more like a robber’s stronghold than an abode of civilised men; and in a peaceful and civilised age its position was found inconvenient. In the Roman period it was almost like a city of the past, a relic of the period of barbaric warfare, which lived rather on its ancient prestige than on its suitability to present conditions.

As the capital of the great kingdom of Lydia, Sardis had a history marked by frequent wars. In it the whole policy of a warlike kingdom was focused. To fight against Lydia was to fight against Sardis. The master of Sardis was the master of Lydia...

Antiochus the Great captured Sardis through the exploit of Lagoras (who had learned surefootedness on the precipitous mountains of his native Crete). Once more the garrison in careless confidence were content to guard the one known approach, and left the rest of the circuit unguarded, under the belief that it could not be scaled

The rock, however, on which Sardis was built was only nominally a rock. In reality, as you go nearer it, you see that it is only mud slightly compacted, and easily dissolved by rain. It is, however, so constituted that it wears away with a very steep, almost perpendicular face; but rain and frost continually diminish it, so that little now remains of the upper plateau on which the city stood..

Sardis suffered greatly from an earthquake in A.D. 17, and was treated with special liberality by the Emperor Tiberius: he remitted all its taxation for five years, and gave it a donation of ten million sesterces (about 400,000 pounds).

..when the Seven Letters were written, Sardis was a city of the past, which had no future before it. Its greatness was connected with a barbarous and half-organised state of society, and could not survive permanently in a more civilised age. Sardis must inevitably decay. Only when civilisation was swept out of the Hermus Valley in fire and bloodshed by the destroying Turks, and the age of barbarism was reintroduced, did Sardis again become an advantageous site. The acropolis was restored as a fortress of the kind suited for that long period of uncertainty and war which ended in the complete triumph of Mohammedanism and the practical extermination of the Christian population (save at Philadelphia and Magnesia) throughout the Hermus Valley."

"Especially on the day of a Triumph white was the universal colour-though the soldiers, of course, wore not the toga, the garb of peace, but their full-dress military attire with all their decorations—and there can hardly be any doubt that the idea of walking in a Triumph similar to that celebrated by a victorious Roman general is here present in the mind of the writer when he uses the words, “they shall walk with me in white.”

Real Preaching

From Tim Keller:

Dr. D.M.Lloyd-Jones, hardly a trendy type in article on how Edwards effected him, makes a major critique of evangelical-expository preaching as currently taught many places. "The first and primary object of preaching is not only to give information It is, as Edwards says, to produce an impression. It is the impression at the time that matters, even more than what you can remember subsequently. In this respect Edwards is in a sense. critical of what was a prominent Puritan custom and practice. The Puritan father would catechize and question the children as to what the preacher had said. Edwards, in my opinion, has the true notion of preaching. It is not primarily to impart information; and while you are writing your notes you may be missing something of the impact of the Spirit (He mentions how discouraged people taking notes preaching--'this is not a lecture' Welsh growl.) As preachers we must not forget this. We should tell our people to read certain books themselves and get the information there. The business of preaching is to make such knowledge live."

Edwards Thoughts on Revival fits in: 'The frequent preaching that has lately obtained has in a particular manner been objected against..It is objected that..so many sermons in a week is too much to remember and digest Such objections against frequent preaching. if they be not from an enrmty against--re1igion are for want of duly considering the way that sermons usually profit an auditory. The main benefit obtained by preaching is by impression made upon the mind at the time, and not by an effect that arises afterwords by a remembrance of what was delivered. And though an after-remembrance of what was heard in a sermon is oftentimes very profitable; yet
for the most part. that remembrance is from an impression the words made on the heart at the time: and the memo y profits. as it renews and increases that impression' (Thoughts on revival).

Sum: If it is true that auditors are now less rational and more interested in 'encounter' and 'experience', and so on--Edwards and Lloyd Jones' advice is even more on target than ever before. Not iust to make the truth clear, but to make the truth real

Seven Churches of Revelation - Thyatira

18 " And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write, ' These things says the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and His feet like fine brass: 19 "I know your works, love, service, faith, and your patience; and [as] for your works, the last [are] more than the first. 20 "Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. 21 "And I gave her time to repent of her sexual immorality, and she did not repent. 22 "Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds. 23 "I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works. 24 "Now to you I say, and to the rest in Thyatira, as many as do not have this doctrine, who have not known the depths of Satan, as they say, I will put on you no other burden. 25 "But hold fast what you have till I come. 26 "And he who overcomes, and keeps My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations -- 27 'He shall rule them with a rod of iron; They shall be dashed to pieces like the potter's vessels' -- as I also have received from My Father; 28 "and I will give him the morning star. 29 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."

Ramsay:

"In 282 Philetaerus revolted and founded the Pergamenian kingdom. At first he was encouraged by Seleucus in order to weaken Lysimachus; but soon this bond of a common enmity was dissolved at the death of the enemy, and then Thyatira was a useful garrison to hold the road, first in the interest of the Seleucid kings and afterwards on the Pergamenian side. So long as the kings of Pergamum were masters of Thyatira they were safe from Seleucid attack; but if the Syrian kings possessed that key to the gate of the Caicos Valley, Pergamum was narrowed in its dominion and weakened in its defences. Thus, the relation between the two cities was necessarily a very close one. The condition of Thyatira was the best measure of the power of Pergamum.

This historical sketch is necessary, in order to show the character of Thyatira and the place which it holds in history. It came into existence to be a garrison-city; and its importance to the two rival dynasties who alternately ruled it lay in its military strength. But no city has been given by nature less of the look or strength of a fortress than Thyatira. It lies in an open, smiling vale, bordered by gently sloping hills, of moderate elevation, but sufficient to overshadow the vale. It possesses no proper acropolis, and the whole impression which the situation gives is of weakness, subjection and dependence. The most careless and casual observer could never take Thyatira for a ruling city, or the capital of an Empire. It is essentially a handmaid city, built to serve an Empire by obstructing for a little the path of its enemies and so giving time for the concentration of its military strength.

The coinage of Thyatira is a good index of the character of the city. As a military colony, in its earlier stage of existence, it struck various classes of coins, including cistophori. This coinage came to an end before 150 B.C.; for the military importance of Thyatira lay in its position as a frontier city; and that ceased after 189 B.C. It was not until the last years of the reign of Claudius, 50–4 A.D., that it began again to issue coins. They gradually became more numerous; and in the latter part of the second century, and in the third century, the coinage of Thyatira was on a great scale, indicating prosperity and wealth in the city.

It is therefore not surprising that more trade-guilds are known in Thyatira than in any other Asian city. The inscriptions, though not specially numerous, mention the following: wool-workers, linen-workers, makers of outer garments, dyers, leather-workers, tanners, potters, bakers, slave-dealers and bronze-smiths. The dealers in garments and the salve-dealers would have a good market in a road-centre. Garments were sold ready made, being all loose and free; and from the mention of dealers in outer garments we may infer the existence of special trades and guilds for other classes of garments. The woman of Thyatira, a seller of purple, named Lydia, who was so hospitable to St. Paul and his company at Philippi (Acts 16:14), belonged doubtless to one of those guilds: she sold not simply purple cloth but purple garments, and had emigrated to push the trade in Thyatiran manufactures in the Macedonian city. The purple in which she dealt cannot be regarded as made with the usual dye, for that was obtained from a shell-fish found chiefly on the Phoenician and the Spartan coasts. The colour in which Lydia dealt must have been a product of the Thyatiran region; and Monsieur Clerc, in his work on the city, suggests what is at once seen plainly to be true, that the well-known Turkey-red was the colour which is meant. This bright red is obtained from madder-root, which grows abundantly in those regions. It is well known that the ancient names of colours were used with great laxity and freedom; and the name purple, being established and fashionable, was used for several colours which to us seem essentially diverse from one another."

Old Photo - Newer Scan

Water over Rocks. Taken around Malibu CA at sunset. The camera got really wet on this shot.

Seven Churches of Revelation - Pergamon

Reconstructed Temple of Trajan at Pergamon

12 " And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write, ' These things says He who has the sharp two-edged sword: 13 "I know your works, and where you dwell, where Satan's throne [is.] And you hold fast to My name, and did not deny My faith even in the days in which Antipas [was] My faithful martyr, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells. 14 "But I have a few things against you, because you have there those who hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality. 15 "Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. 16 'Repent, or else I will come to you quickly and will fight against them with the sword of My mouth. 17 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes I will give some of the hidden manna to eat. And I will give him a white stone, and on the stone a new name written which no one knows except him who receives [it."] '


The Great Altar of Pergamon is in the Pergamon Museum, Berlin. The base of this altar remains on the upper part of the Acropolis. It was perhaps to this altar, believed dedicated to Zeus, that John of Patmos referred to as "Satan's Throne" in his Book of Revelation (Revelation 2:12-13).

Ramsay:
"Beyond all other sites in Asia Minor it gives the traveller the impression of a royal city, the home of authority: the rocky hill on which it stands is so huge, and dominates the broad plain of the Caicus so proudly and boldly. The modern town is below the hill, where the earliest village was.

It is difficult to analyse such impressions, and to define the various causes whose combination produces them; but the relation of the vast hill to the great plain is certainly the chief cause. It would be impossible for any stronghold, however large and bold, to produce such an impression, if it stood in a small valley like those of Ephesus and Smyrna, for if the valley and the city were dominated by the still greater mass of the enclosing mountains. The rock rules over and as it were plants its foot upon a great valley; and its summit looks over the southern mountains which bound the valley, until the distant lofty peaks south of the Gulf of Smyrna, and especially the beautiful twin peaks now called the Two Brothers, close in the outlook. Far beneath lies the sea, quite fifteen miles away, and beyond it the foreign soil of Lesbos: the view of other lands, the presence of hostile powers, the need of constant care and watchfulness, all the duties of kingship are forced on the attention of him who sits enthroned on that huge rock. There is here nothing to suggest evanescence, mutability, and uncertainty, as at Sardis or Ephesus; the inevitable impression is of permanence, strength, sure authority and great size. Something of the personal and subjective element must be mixed up with such impressions; but in none of the Seven Cities does the impression seem more universal and unavoidable than in Pergamum."

"In 133 Attalus III bequeathed the whole kingdom to the Romans, who formed it into the Province of Asia. Pergamum was the official capital of the Province for two centuries and a half: so that its history as the seat of supreme authority over a large country lasts about four centuries, and had not yet come to an end when the Seven Letters were written. The impression which the natural features of its position convey was entirely confirmed to the writer of the letters by its history. It was to him the seat where the power of this world, the enemy of the Church and its Author, exercised authority. The authority was exercised in two ways—the two horns of the monster—civil administration through the Proconsul, and the State religion directed by the Commune of Asia.

The first, and for a considerable time the only, Provincial temple of the Imperial cult in Asia was built at Pergamum in honour of Rome and Augustus (29 B.C. probably). A second temple was built there in honour of Trajan, and a third in honour of Severus. Thus Pergamum was the first city to have the distinction of Temple-Warden both once and twice in the State religion; and even its third Wardenship was also a few years earlier than that of Ephesus. The Augustan Temple is often represented on its coins and on those struck by the Commune. As the oldest temple of the Asian cult it is far more frequently mentioned and figured than any other Asian temple; it appears on coins of many Emperors down to the time of Trajan, and is generally represented open, to show the Emperor crowned by the Province."

"In the Anatolian ritual the god was the Asklepian serpent, rather than the human Asklepios. Thus in Figure 23 the Emperor Caracalla, during his visit to Pergamum, is represented as adoring the Pergamenian deity, a serpent wreathed round the sacred tree. Between the God-Serpent and the God-Emperor stands the little figure of Telesphorus, the Consummator, a peculiarly Pergamenian conception closely connected with Asklepios.

Asklepios the Saviour was introduced from Epidauros in a comparatively recent period, perhaps the fifth century. He appears on coins from the middle of the second century B.C. and became more and more the representative god of Pergamum. On alliance coins he regularly stands for his city."

"Pergamon's library on the Acropolis (the ancient Library of Pergamum) is the second best in the ancient Greek civilization.[4] When the Ptolemies stopped exporting papyrus, partly because of competitors and partly because of shortages, the Pergamenes invented a new substance to use in codices, called pergaminus or pergamena (parchment) after the city. This was made of fine calfskin, a predecessor of vellum. The library at Pergamom was believed to contain 200,000 volumes, which Mark Antony later gave to Cleopatra as a wedding present"