Author: Lisa Spencer

Interpretations that pull us apart

Lisa Spencer1 Comment

split_personalityIs our humanity made up of three parts meaning trichotomy (body, soul and spirit) or two parts, meaning dichotomy (body and soul/spirit). From a theological and philosophical perspective, dichotomy makes the most sense. Trichotomy splits are humanity in ways that reek of Gnosticism and challenge the process of regeneration/sanctification. If our immaterial components are comprised of soul and spirit, which part is linked to our personhood (including will, intellect and emotions) and how does regeneration affect that in ways that aren’t ontologically schizophrenic?

Those defending trichotomy quickly cite certain proof-texts, like 1 Thess. 5:23 as proof that we are made up of three parts. A friend passed on this article recently and highlighted this quote that I thought really addressed why this is not good proof;

The trichotomist must admit, along with the dichotomist and in agreement with Berkouwer, that there is a certain ‘imprecision’ at times in the Bible’s use of the relevant terminology. One has only to consider the several New Testament quotations of Deuteronomy 6:5, for example, to see this. Where Luke 10:27 reads that we should love God with all our heart (kardia) and soul (psychē) and strength (ischys) and mind (dianoia), Matthew 22:37 reads that we should love God with all our heart and soul and mind, omitting strength, while Mark reports in 12:30 that we should love God with all our heart and soul and mind and strength (reversing the order of the last two Lukan words), and in 12:33 that we should love God with all our heart and understanding (syneseōs) and strength, using another word for ‘mind’ and omitting ‘soul’ altogether. In all, five different words are employed without even mentioning the body. Surely, no one would insist, on the basis of these series of words connected by ‘and,’ that each of these words refers to an immaterial, ontologically distinct entity, and that therefore Luke was a quintchotomist, Matthew was a quadchotomist, and Mark was a sexchotomist. With Berkouwer we must all admit that these parallel admonitions are simply saying that we are to love God with our entire or total being.

So much for using the actual words to prove the case. And to say that our total being is split in two, is ontologically and theologically challenged. Thanks Elizabeth for passing this on.

You can read the entire article here. Wayne Grudem also provides good food for thought on the subject in his Sytematic Theology (pp 472-482).

The Myth of Non-Theology and Neutrality

Lisa Spencer2 Comments

reading-the-BibleAs I observed a few discussion threads over the past few days on Christian topics, a theme tends to emerge. Some Christians disdain any mention of theology, doctrine or hermeneutics. You’ll get one pitted against each such as theology vs true faith or doctrine vs scripture. A typical statement goes like this that one person told me – “theology and doctrine has its place but that is not the substance of our faith.” Yes, Christ is the substance of our but to think theology and doctrine is not is both naive and not true. Not true.

Every Christian has a theology, a set of doctrine and a hermeneutic. Everyone!

Theology is whatever we think about God.

Doctrine is what we believe that theology teaches.

Hermeneutics is how we interpret what theology teaches.

If you say the substance of your faith is Jesus Christ, then you have to come to some conclusions about what that means, who he is and how you arrive at your conclusions. This is the task of theology and without it, you have no reasonable basis to come to any conclusions about the Christian faith.

This also supposes that you have some way of interpreting the facts about the Christian faith. From a Protestant perspective, this presumes that one is basing their understanding on the Bible, recognizing that it is the testimony of Jesus Christ cover to cover, breathed out by God to give us his word through the pens, personalities, and literary style of 40 authors (2 Tim. 3:16-17).  The problem then is not knowing what it is and believing that we have complete neutrality when approaching the Bible or using other means to determine our faith. We all have some way of formulating what we believe and why we believe it. Continue reading →

Blessed Assurance?

Lisa Spencer1 Comment

I was thinking of some hymn makeovers for prosperity teaching, which seems fitting since it makes Christianity over into something unrecognizable.

money on the altar

Then there’s Blessed Assurance

Verse 1

Blessed assurance, all wealth is mine

Oh what a foretaste of dreams so divine

Heir of such riches, brought on my God

Sowing my seed and receiving in love

Verse 2

Perfect submission, is God to my tests

Cuz he just wants me happy and blessed

Watching and waiting, speaking it now

His obligation to my word vow

Chorus

This is my story, this is my song

Praising my purpose, all the day long

This is my story, this is my song

Destiny awaits me, all the day long

Ok, so maybe that is a bit extreme but not the underlying philosophy that subjects God’s actions to words we speak and encourages misplaced trust in our actions, instead of in God’s all sufficient work in Jesus Christ.

Does Jesus Really Take Away All My Shame?

Lisa Spencer20 Comments

suffering and griefI’m about to get real…and honest. If you’re looking for a nicely packaged, sweet-smelling pretty Christianity, you won’t find it in this post. I’ve actually been wanting to write this post for awhile but couldn’t quite put a solid structure on it. But thanks to a couple of articles that have come across my radar awhile back and an article and unfortunate discussion thread I saw today, I was reminded of this post that sat as a draft for a couple of months. So I thought it was time to address something that I experience on a regular basis and know that pollyanna puffy cloud or otherwise trite formulas don’t quite cover it.

I came across this article a couple of months ago from the Resurgence blog, Jesus Over Shame. Jen Smidt writes of her battle with shame that she finally stuck a flag in the ground and marked that territory with Jesus.

If you are carrying the weight of shame, Jesus is calling you to give that burden to him and rest in the new identity he has given you. Because of shame, you may feel unqualified to speak truth into areas where you have influence. Whether you’re a Bible teacher, a neighbor, an employee, or a stay-at-home mom, you lead others. Don’t allow shame to silence you, but instead live in the freedom of Jesus’ grace, which eradicates shame. Don’t use shame to motivate yourself or those you lead. Point people to Jesus, who conquered shame.

Christian, from this day forward, choose Jesus over shame, every time.

That’s sounds quite simple, doesn’t it? After all, Scripture tells us that “there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ” (Romans 8:1). And we must take serious that our sin debt has been paid by the one time sacrifice on the cross (Heb. 10:13). And my personal favorite, “he has cancelled the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands” (Col 2:15). In Christ, we are certainly new creations (2 Cor. 5:21). Continue reading →

Why I Think L.A. Preachers Need a Reality Show

Lisa Spencer1 Comment

l.a. preachersI know that sounds strange coming from me, but let me explain. I came across this article from Thabiti Anyabwile over at The Front Porch, a new site to foster discussion around biblical faithfulness in the black church. Thabiti gives a break down of the scenes from the trailer. He then concluded with a section asking what are we to make of all this?

In a comment to The Christian Post, Noel Jones responds to criticism by saying the show is “no evangelical tool”. He explains:

“My original intention was (for) it to be a tool to help bring the minds of Christian people to the place where they give some balance to who their pastors are and how they deal with their pastors,” said Jones. ”The only reason I signed up was to help to reduce the iconoclastic proclivities that church members have about their pastors to the point where if they break any of the rules that the church members are breaking, they completely throw them away.”

Thabiti responds by saying this;

To be clear, an ‘iconoclast’ is someone who destroys icons. A ‘proclivity’ is a strong tendency, a bent, a habit, usually toward something negative. What Jones intended to say is he wants to reduce the tendency to idolizing—making idols of—pastors and church leaders. That’s a good aim. There’s not much “iconoclastic proclivity” on display in these churches—just the opposite. Continue reading →