As an educated Baby Boomer (but not an American history major), I found much of the narrative informative. For instance, at the pivotal Battle of Kings Mountain, there was only one British officer present who led Loyalist regiments against the Patriots. Throughout the series the Loyalists were presented fairly, as persons who followed their conscience, not as fools or villains, although some, like Colonel Tarlton, were.

George Washington is highlighted as man of tact and courage, indispensable in keeping the poorly supplied Continental Army and its untrained militias together. The series stressed that the American victory ultimately came because the Americans wore the British out, not that they had won many battles.

Washington’s choice of resisting being crowned after the war and retiring to Mt. Vernon, plus his refusal to run for a third term, were shown as pivotal for the democratic development of our nation. We can be especially thankful of this in view of the tragedies and tyrannical governments that followed the 1960s era of independence from French and British colonial governments where insurgent generals often became cruel and long-lasting tyrants.

On the other hand, The American Revolution made a frank presentation of Washington’s involvement in land speculation of Indian-owned territory and his order for the destruction of towns and crops of the Indians in Western New York. The description of that campaign was especially difficult to watch, as it must have been for many of my Baby Boomer contemporaries. We were not normally taught these negative aspects about Washington, even though such things are now routinely taught in practically every American history course. Washington’s role as slave owner was also clearly shown, including how he meticulously administered the return of runaway slaves to their owners at the end of hostilities.

This differs with the traditional versions we Baby Boomers learned as high-school and college students. You can find such a perspective in the video, “The First American” (2015) put out by the Gingrich Foundation and hosted by Newt and Callista Gingrich along with a roster of conservative luminaries. In this presentation, the only reference to Washington’s relationship with slavery was about his will, in which he freed his slaves. Also not mentioned were the campaigns against the Indians. However, to be fair about the latter, some sort of military action was necessary to secure the New York and Pennsylvania fronts from constant Indian raids.

But conservative critics do have real reasons for their claim that Burn’s The American Revolution was partly a “hatchet job” (pun intended). A detailed review by Dan McLaughlin in the National Review, “No, Ken Burns, the United States Is Not an Iroquois Nation” (Nov 22, 2025), cites several historical errors including a big ideological misinterpretation.

Most disturbing was the absence of any description of English constitutional history in forming the opinions and attitudes of the Colonists. All but the most uneducated Colonists were aware that their “rights as Englishmen” were related to the Magna Carta and its interpretive development. They also knew that the English Civil War overthrew and executed one King, and later the “Glorious Revolution,” idolized by most colonists as a triumph of Protestantism, deposed another. All of this makes the colonial attitude towards their rights and their King historically located and understandable. None of this was mentioned in The American Revolution. This reflects a Leftist disdain of constitutional history as “bourgeois” and irrelevant. Indeed, this is the most serious error and omission of the series.

Despite these flaws, I would affirm that The American Revolution reflects in a major degree the biblical perspective of history. That is, that heroes have serious flaws, but are still providentially used by God. In the Bible the real hero of the Old Testament is God, with multiple “supporting characters” who are imperfect and sometimes disreputable. Moses sinned by destroying the tablet of the Ten Commandments. His brother Aaron, first High Priest, lied about his role in forming the golden calf. In fact, the heroes in the Book of Judges, who were chosen by God to save the Israelites from destruction and oppression, had major flaws, as in Samson and his inability to keep his pants up. David, certainly Israel’s best king, is not spared narrative criticism. His adultery and murder of Uriah was exposed by the prophet Nathan and detailed in the book of Second Kings (chapter 12). And although David repented (Psalm 51) he could not avoid the consequences of his sins. These included a rebellion against him by his son Absalom and ultimately a divided kingdom.

In the New Testament, we see Peter denying Christ three times. After Pentecost, when he was indeed strengthened by the Holy Spirit, he slid away from the freedom of the Gospel and cowardly appeased the “men from Jerusalem” (Galatians 2:11-14).

So perhaps the “heroes” of the Bible were mostly like our Washington. He was the Father of a nation, hero in battle, master of fortitude and resiliency in the midst of setbacks But he also had the flaws of accepting slavery even though he knew it was evil, and perpetuating injustices towards the Indians.

The Founding Fathers’ faults have been routinely taught in American schools for decades now. Most recently, The New York Times’ “The 1619 Project” exaggerated these to the point of mendacity. The ill effects of such a negative focus will be felt in American educations for decades to come. It has resulted in a noticeable, some say catastrophic, decline in patriotism among the younger generation. (What will be the outcome of some future conflict with China fought by a demoralized and unpatriotic draftee Army?)

We can never revert to the traditionalist narrative of neglecting the negative aspects of American history – that would be both impossible in a free society, and more importantly, unbiblical. The Trump administration has begun to undo some of the gross exaggerations by attempting to mold educational textbooks and curriculum to a patriotic position. But American education is largely a state issue, and reversing decades of the exaggerated anti-American narrative and “The 1619 Project,” now embedded in the attitudes of teachers, would be an especially difficult task. Saying this, I commend reasonable attempts, as for example those done in Florida and other conservative states to correct the anti-American narrative with more balanced textbooks and curricula.

Since if we are not likely to get back the traditional patriotism of “The Greatest Generation” which lived through and fought the Second World War, what type of patriotism can come from a biblical perspective? That would be a reasonable love of country that cherishes its good points and achievements, but does not hide its sinful mistakes. St. Augustine, who did not use the term patriotism but rather love of one’s own homeland, noted: “So long as we are in this mortal body, we are away from the Lord… and we love, as is natural, our own land where we live for a time” (The City of God XIX.17).

Augustine also noted that our love of country was to be subordinated to our loyalty and love for the Kingdom of God, and he was especially aware of the temptation to glorify early kingdoms to the point of idolatry. This happened significantly in the Roman Empire when its citizens were required to offer incense to the Emperor – and many Christians were martyred for not doing so.

I talked about Mexico and how God must be pleased with how – after conquest and much injustice to the Indians by the Spaniards – Mexico has developed a largely “mestizo” culture, where their races have been blended and are now living harmoniously. Other countries, like Bolivia, have no done so well. I also noted how successive Mexican governments since the Revolution of 1917, which many Mexicans idolize, had begun a tradition of government corruption that was never effectively confronted. This led to the present danger of having Mexico divided into a collection of drug “principalities” where gangster lawlessness prevailed. Their patriotism and prayers for Mexico must continue in spite of an imperfect home country.

Then I called on them to love and respect their present homeland where they had come to live and work. Here they establish businesses without having to bribe the police or government bureaucrats. America fought wars for freedom which destroyed both Fascism and Communism, something to be immensely proud of.

And yes, American culture has many faults. But again, my congregants had the biblical obligation to pray for the American presidents and state governors and its governments. It was especially important to pray for wisdom in the American presidents with their ability to begin and end wars. At the time, several in my congregation already had children in the Armed Forces (that was fifteen years ago, I wonder if any died in Afghanistan or Iraq).

All of which is to say, there can be an Augustinian-Christian approach to patriotism that takes into account mankind’s universal sinfulness in its different national manifestations, but celebrates one’s national achievements.

PR

Craig S. Keener, Suffering: Its Meaning for the Spirit-Filled Life (Baker Academic, November 11, 2025).

Craig Keener: Seeing what dominates our culture’s interests reinforced my feeling that the church in the U.S. is largely unprepared for suffering. Although the Bible talks a lot about suffering, sometimes when it strikes people who have heard only messages about blessing, they can feel that God has not treated them as he promised. While we have foretastes of the kingdom today, such as healings, the kingdom isn’t consummated yet. There’s still sickness and suffering and death in this world. Jesus, prophets and apostles also modeled for us how to face suffering.

PneumaReview.com: Suffering can take many forms. What kinds of suffering do you address in your book?

Craig Keener: As you say, suffering comes in many forms; I could therefore illustrate the principles with only some of them. Because persecution features dominantly in the New Testament, and it remains a living reality (even to the point of martyrdom) among Christians in many parts of the world today, that naturally features heavily in the book. But we also suffer from other sources. Some accounts from refugees fleeing other sorts of violence or suffering are heartrending. Most of us have encountered, or know others who have encountered, health or financial challenges for which our theology of healing and blessing do not, sometimes, satisfactorily address. Broken families are among the many other struggles that Christians may face.

PneumaReview.com: All people are susceptible to some forms of suffering. Should Christians expect the possibility of more suffering in their lives because of their faith?

PneumaReview.com: How would you respond to a person who says that suffering is a sign that one has failed God or is out of His will?

Craig Keener: That makes nonsense out of Paul’s lists of sufferings and defies the message of the cross. Granted, some kinds of sufferings are biblically normal for Christians (opposition to our faith) and some are biblically abnormal (punishment for non-Christian behaviors, 1 Pet 4:15). But we have plenty of biblical examples of God-followers who suffered from things from which God often delivers; for example, Elisha died from sickness and Paul left Trophimus sick at Miletus.

PneumaReview.com: What teachings or trends in the church today downplay the biblical teaching about suffering?

Craig Keener: I’ve not run into many people who actually teach that Christians will never suffer; but in circles that teach almost exclusively about blessings, some Christians seem to get that idea. I’ve heard some versions of “prosperity teaching” that simply mean that we should trust God to supply our needs for our lives and callings, and I certainly agree with that. But there are also the many versions (what Michael Brown calls “carnal prosperity teaching”) that claim material prosperity as a selfish promise. There are some who insist that everyone with faith will always get healed—although it’s evident that, given enough time, everybody in history, no matter how much faith, without exception, eventually dies.

PneumaReview.com: Do you think ministerial training in the West should place more of an emphasis on the possibility of one suffering for their Christian ministry?

Craig Keener: So many seminary and Bible college graduates go out ready to change the world and are out of ministry after a few years. It would help them to graduate with open eyes. Church people can be mean. We walk with many other church people through their heart-wrenching hardships. We may face opposition from various sources. A church with financial challenges (or even without them) may not pay as much as ministers can get elsewhere (I worked in a restaurant and pastored for free). We also can face discouragement when exaltation does not come as fast as social media sensations might lead us to expect. But faith means not just following God’s call or a heart for ministry when things are going well; it means trusting the God who is trustworthy no matter what.

PneumaReview.com: Please share some things that believers in the persecuted church can teach the church in America.

PneumaReview.com: How can we practically help others when they are suffering?

Craig Keener: It helps us to remember that the sufferings of the present are not worthy to be compared with the glory that awaits us; the struggles of this world are birth pangs (Rom 8:22) from which God will bring forth the perfect world to come. It helps to know that in God’s plan, all things work for good, for us ultimately sharing Christ’s glory and image (8:28-29). But these are things we need to learn before we suffer, because not everybody is in a good place to hear them during their suffering. In all cases, though, we can weep with those who weep (Rom 12:15). Loving people means sharing with them as fellow members of the same body, walking with them, as best as possible, in their pain. In that setting, we can also join them in seeking healing and restoration, and reminding them of the hope that we too find in the face of our brokenness.

PR 

Publisher’s page: https://bakerpublishinggroup.com/products/9781540969439_suffering

Further Reading

Craig Keener, “How to Succeed at Suffering: Lessons from the Gospel of Mark” Influence (February 14, 2024)

“Why Do Christians Suffer?” WTC Theology (TheoDisc/YouTube, October 1, 2025)

This is the second “misreading” book that E. Randolph Richards has written. The first one was Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes which he wrote with Brandon J. O’Brien. For this second volume he has teamed up with a different writer, Richard James (this is a pseudonym, it is used for safety reasons because of the part of the world where he works). As the subtitle of the book indicates the authors write about some concepts that were very well-known in the biblical world, but are not as well-known in Western culture. I am referring to: patronage, honor, and shame. They also write about kinship, benefactors and clients, and boundaries. The people of the biblical world understood these concepts and practices. As the authors point out on more than one occasion, these matters of culture did not need to be spelled out, the people of the biblical world understood them and could see them at work in Scripture (page x-xi, 8). However, Western readers do not see them or assume them (page xi). Because of this we may miss them when they are at work in biblical passages. As the authors articulate these concepts they point out the differences that exist between collectivists’ cultures and individualists’ cultures. America and modern Europe are individualist cultures, most African, Eastern, Middle Eastern, and South American cultures are collectivist (page ix). The cultures we find in the Bible were collectivist (page x, 8).

As the book unfolds the authors draw from Scripture and their own experiences. Since they have lived in different cultures they have first-hand examples of the thoughts and practices of people who live in a collectivist cultures. It makes for some interesting reading.

E. Randolph Richards

They offer some other interesting insights as well. For example, they point out the different ideas that people have about the story of Joseph in the Old Testament. People from individualist cultures focus on Joseph’s rise to power. In the face of all kinds of setbacks and obstacles he becomes a prominent person. That grabs our attention. People from collectivist cultures tend to focus more on Joseph’s restoration to his family than his rise to power (page 11).

The differences between individualist and collectivist cultures is further brought out with a contemporary example. A pastor in Beirut was concerned because someone from his church had stolen a book from the church library. He knew who had done it. In the West we would be concerned about getting the book back. This pastor’s concern was not so much about getting the book back as maintaining the good name of the church in the community. He did not want his church members to be known as thieves. He found a way to speak to the thief in a nonthreatening way that helped the man save face, be reconciled to his church community, and maintain the good reputation of the church in the community (pages 174-175, 186).

This book is filled with insights into the biblical texts, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. Many of these insights could be easily overlooked by Western readers because we are not familiar with the cultural constructs of Eastern, collectivist cultures that the people in the biblical world had. I like books like this. They open a window of understanding into the biblical text that we might not otherwise see. If you are interested in deeper Bible study or the cultural background of the Bible this is a book you will enjoy. One thing we as believers do not want to do is misread Scripture. Instead, we want to correctly interpret it (2 Tim. 2:15). This book will help us do that.

Reviewed by John Lathrop

Publisher’s page: https://www.ivpress.com/misreading-scripture-with-individualist-eyes

Image: Bourne Baljit

1. Discover Biblical Precedent.
2. Investigate for Scriptural Harmony.
3. Scrutinize for Sound Doctrine.
4. Confirm with Experience.
5. Examine the Fruit.
6. Receive Supernatural Discernment.
7. Note Examples and Lessons from the Past.
8. Sift and Weigh for Divine Equilibrium.

As we look at these principles, to make it simple, spiritual discernment is a bit like driving a car. We need to learn when to press down the accelerator, apply the brakes, or continue to move forward with alertness and caution. The illustration of approaching a traffic light while driving helps to picture the process of discernment: Green Light means Go for discernment. Red Light means Stop; go no farther. Yellow light means slow down and get ready to stop. A blinking yellow light is a modified green light when crossing some busy intersections, meaning continue to proceed with caution, looking both ways in case there are crosswinds or someone else wasn’t paying attention to the lights.[i]

Discernment Principle 1: Discover Biblical Precedent

Is the teaching, practice, or manifestation clearly found in Scripture? “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:16-17). Biblical precedent may be demonstrated in one of three ways: 1) Commands—a direct command to do or not to do something (for example, the Ten Commandments); 2) Principles—guidelines for common or normal practice (for instance, most of the proverbs are observation of life truth, not commands); 3) Examples—demonstration through something that is said or done or not said or done (illustrations, real life instances, patterns, experiences). Based on these, we then can ask two questions:

• Do any biblical commands, principles, or examples clearly question or condemn this teaching, practice, or manifestation? This is an automatic red light.

• Do any biblical commands, principles, or examples permit or sanction this teaching, practice, or manifestation? This may be a green light, but it also may be a blinking yellow light that requires looking in all directions for further confirmation.
  ]]> https://pneumareview.com/basic-biblical-principles-of-discernment/feed/ 0 https://pneumareview.com/tears-towards-a-biblical-theology/ https://pneumareview.com/tears-towards-a-biblical-theology/#comments Mon, 18 Sep 2017 21:57:33 +0000 http://pneumareview.com/?p=13442 Introduction

  Tears universally exist across cultures and throughout history. The Bible records many examples of tears both from humans and from God. In this paper I will explore tears in culture and in various religious traditions. I will explore tears in theology and describe some possibilities for improving churches based on a theology of tears. This work is not an exhaustive view of tears in the Bible or in theology. It will, however deal with the key ideas and theological conflicts concerning the subject. Specifically, I will provide a biblical hermeneutic of crying to assist the church to minister to those who cry.

   

  Tears in History, Culture and Religion

  Humans enter the world with tears, and tears provide a primary means of communication for the early parts of life. Kimberly Christine Patton and John Stratton Hawley observe, “Among the very earliest expressions of distress in the infant’s range, tears remain a profound existential signifier at all stages of human life, particularly in the face of fear, loss, or despair. Crying is a response of the parasympathetic nervous system that helps return the stimulated organism to homeostasis.”[i] While some primate infants exhibit behavior similar to human crying to summon parental care, humans are the only animals able to cry as adults.[ii] From an evolutionary viewpoint, adult crying manifests as a means of signaling defenselessness and surrender or of summoning help from others within the crier’s social network.[iii] Adult human tears appear as a uniquely human behavioral phenomenon.

  Repression: The repressed tears of those desiring to appear powerful result in the infliction of pain on the weak.

  Humans often repress tears. Most cultures view crying as weak behavior and gender crying as female. Elisabeth Kübler-Ross observes, “Tears are one of the many ways we release our sadness, one of our many wondrous built-in healing mechanisms. Unfortunately, too often we try to stop this necessary and primal release.”[iv] Repressed tears prevent a person from expressing his or her feelings of helplessness and summoning help from others. The result of repression of tears manifests in unhealed persons and in destructive behaviors including addictions and harming others. Ernest Becker observes the human tendency to deny painful realities and replace the healthy processing of reality with destructive behaviors. He writes, “Even if the average man lives in a kind of obliviousness of anxiety, it is because he has erected a massive wall of repressions to hide the problem of life and death. His anality may protect him, but all through history it is the ‘normal, average men’ who, like locusts, have laid waste to the world in order to forget themselves.”[v] Humans cry as an involuntary behavioral response to inner conflict involving feelings of helplessness and the need for social support. Unfortunately, many persons repress tears due to social mores or gender expectations. Society usually genders tears as feminine, and subsequently views tears as a sign of weakness in males. Crying seems to signal the surrender of the crier, or crying appears childish. Unfortunately, the repressed tears of those desiring to appear powerful result in the infliction of pain on the weak.

  God gives the church the gift of tears.

  Human adults experiencing inner pain and conflict normally cry. Repression of tears results in deeper feelings of pain. Kübler-Ross writes,  “Unexpressed tears do not go away; their sadness resides in our bodies and souls.”[vi] Socially, however, many equate tears with weakness, and they remind those observing the tears of their own ambiguities and finitude. Humans in modern society almost universally repress tears. The repression of tears results in a society that refuses to be healed. Society transfers its inner hurt onto others, and a cycle of grief begins and the pain increases. The process of grieving and lament as expressed in human crying could intervene. Crying serves as an involuntary response to overwhelming stimuli and ambiguity resulting from overwhelming problems of injustice and death. Crying involves releasing illusions of control and acknowledging ambiguities and denials. Crying subsequently summons and acknowledges powers greater than the crier. These greater powers may be others within a person’s social network, or God. A crier admits powerlessness and calls for power from outside self. Crying recognizes personal finitude and summons the transcendent. Tears require a hermeneutic of interpretation from the crier, the observer, and from society.
  ]]> https://pneumareview.com/tears-towards-a-biblical-theology/feed/ 0 https://pneumareview.com/exploring-the-african-seedbed-in-biblical-history-christian-heology-and-spirituality/ https://pneumareview.com/exploring-the-african-seedbed-in-biblical-history-christian-heology-and-spirituality/#comments Mon, 01 May 2017 14:20:22 +0000 http://pneumareview.com/?p=13084 Dr. Antipas L. Harris (Twitter: @drantipas ) moderated the Global Think Tank on “Exploring the African Seedbed in Biblical History, Christian Theology and Spirituality” at the 2017 Bishop TD Jakes International Pastors and Leadership Conference.

  Education is crucial to spiritual and ministerial development.

  More than 8,000 people attended. The response to the Global Think Tank has been outstanding! People are very interested in integrating “learning with their burning.” Indeed, education is crucial to spiritual and ministerial development.

  Included on the panel were Dr. Clifton Clarke (Fuller Seminary), Dr. Lisa Bowens (Princeton), Dr. Jamal-Dominique Hopkins (Gordon-Conwell).

  

  Left to right: Clifton Clarke, Lisa Bowens, Jamal-Dominique Hopkins, and Antipas Harris.
  Image: Potters House

  ]]> https://pneumareview.com/exploring-the-african-seedbed-in-biblical-history-christian-heology-and-spirituality/feed/ 0 https://pneumareview.com/dont-forget-the-poor-a-biblical-approach-to-addressing-poverty/ https://pneumareview.com/dont-forget-the-poor-a-biblical-approach-to-addressing-poverty/#comments Thu, 25 Aug 2016 22:06:34 +0000 http://pneumareview.com/?p=11969

  What has God called you to do? In this chapter from Your Call to Work & Mission: Following Jesus 24/7, Johan Mostert challenges all followers of Jesus to remember those trapped in poverty and take practical steps to demonstrate God’s love for them.

  Evangelism, global missions, and discipling others—topics from the previous section—are urgent. They excite and energize committed Christians. This chapter shifts the focus of following Jesus in discipleship to an area that often causes discomfort—that of working with the poor. It seems counter-intuitive to work with poor people when Christian leaders and literature often—and rightly—emphasize vital Great Commission concerns of church planting, church growth, and impactful evangelism.

  

  “Don’t Forget the Poor: A Biblical Approach to Addressing Poverty” by Johan Mostert is chapter 11 in Stephen Lim, ed., Your Call to Work & Mission: Following Jesus 24/7 Whole-Life Discipleship (AGTS, 2015). Available from the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary online bookstore.

  Our natural tendency is to seek out influential and well-off persons in the church who have the potential to promote and fund our proposed ministries—instead of individuals with few resources. Also, we often think first of the capital needs of a future church project rather than the need for relational capital that is so evident among poor people—such as caring, mutually upbuilding relationships, community-building, mentoring, and people who demonstrate biblical values. Even as we strategize to reach the world for Christ and to disciple believers, why in the world would the biblical writers insist that we “not forget the poor” (Gal. 2:10, KJV)?

  To answer this question, let us review the prevalence of the biblical insistence on focusing on the poor. One of the clearest indications of the prominence of the poor and the marginalized in the gospel of the Kingdom is the way that Jesus identified with them. In the Parable of the Sheep and Goats (Matt. 25:31–46), He makes the stunning declaration that when we serve the needy, we are actually serving Him. If we forget the poor, we are forgetting Jesus! In addressing the needs of the destitute, we do not move away from the heart of the Kingdom message, but recognize this as an essential way of serving the Lord.

  In the Early Church, we see the beginnings of a division of missions focus: Peter, James and John concentrate on preaching to their own people, the Jews, while Paul seeks to reach Gentiles as well. This creates serious tension between them, as Paul seeks to break free from Jewish rituals and proclaim a gospel of faith and grace. Paul says that after their meeting to resolve their differences, the only thing that the other disciples ask him to do is to remember the poor (Gal. 2:10). They give Paul the freedom to pursue new courses of action; however, he must not neglect the importance of serving the needy. With this, Paul is in full agreement.

  

  A young Afghan girl begging in the street in Kabul, Afghanistan, September 2008. Photo by Mikhail Evstafiev via Wikimedia Commons.

  When Readers Digest interviewed mega-church pastor, Rick Warren, he verbalized what so many of us have realized, “I’ve got three advanced degrees. I went to two different seminaries and a Bible school. How did I miss the two thousand verses in the Bible where it talks about the poor?”¹

  ]]> https://pneumareview.com/dont-forget-the-poor-a-biblical-approach-to-addressing-poverty/feed/ 0 https://pneumareview.com/darren-sarisky-theology-history-and-biblical-interpretation/ https://pneumareview.com/darren-sarisky-theology-history-and-biblical-interpretation/#comments Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:35:00 +0000 http://pneumareview.com/?p=11963 Darren Sarisky, Theology, History, and Biblical Interpretation: Modern Readings (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015), 490 pages.

  Darren Sarisky received his PhD from King’s College Aberdeen, UK, and he currently holds a position as Junior Research Fellow at the University of Cambridge, UK where he also teaches Christian Doctrine. Presently, there is an upheaval over theological interpretation, with some backlash occurring against this seemingly new development. In this confusion, it is not clear what the differences and similarities are between historical and theological approaches to the Bible. In so doing, it gathers together several classical and contemporary statements of the differences and similarities between historical and theological approaches to the interpretation of the Bible. Theology, History and Biblical Interpretation is a collection of twenty seminal essays that reflect the state of historical vs. theological interests over the past two hundred years of biblical interpretation from the Enlightenment to the present day.

  Sarisky realizes that there is both a theological and historical aspect to the text of the Bible, and this reader focuses on the question of which factors drive the process of reading, and especially how historical and theological coefficients combine harmoniously (at least that is the ideal scenario). There is a broad movement in the Academy today over the theological interpretation of Scripture. Systematic theologians, for example, are increasingly turning to Scripture, whereas in the past they have might have dialogued more so with other theologians or philosophers, and they are producing their own commentaries that reflect engagement with biblical exegesis. Moreover, mainstream biblical scholarship is giving greater attention to theological questions that the text under investigation raises, and a number of contemporary texts have been published that prioritize theological issues. In addition, historical scholars increasingly are focused upon the role of exegesis in past doctrinal debates. Miroslav Volf has commented that the return of biblical scholars to the theological reading of the Scriptures, and the return of systematic theologians to sustained engagement with biblical texts – in sum, the return of both to theological readings of the Bible – is the most important development in the late twentieth century. Volf’s comments are apropos to this volume. These trends raise the question immediately of what theological interpretation actually is. What is the rationale for each approach? Do the approaches conflict, or can they effectively be reconciled?

  This reader encourages both students and scholars to explore these important questions by bringing together some of history’s most influential discussions of the issues as well as some of the most distinguished attempts of the contemporary era. Indeed, Sarisky indicates that a grave problem results from absolutely differentiating between the two approaches, theological and historical. A theological reading, after all is also historical by definition. Instead of polarizing theology and history, this reader seeks to approach texts with a different question in mind: how do theology and history function within the account of interpretation that the author is proposing? Sarisky notes that any account of interpretation involves some phenomenon to be interpreted, someone who is available to interpret that phenomenon, and some interaction between these first two realities.

  ]]> https://pneumareview.com/darren-sarisky-theology-history-and-biblical-interpretation/feed/ 0 https://pneumareview.com/international-society-of-biblical-literature-meeting-2015/ https://pneumareview.com/international-society-of-biblical-literature-meeting-2015/#comments Tue, 04 Aug 2015 20:09:21 +0000 http://pneumareview.com/?p=10369

  Pastor Cletus Hull tells us about the International Society of Biblical Literature meeting in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

  

  Puente de la Mujer (“Women’s Bridge”) rotating footbridge in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

  

  Buenos Aires, Argentina

  I am back from my trip to Argentina and I had a great experience.

  The Meeting was held from July 19-26, 2015 in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

   

  The paper was titled “The Pneumatology of Paul in 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 Grounded with his Christology in 1 Corinthians 1:18-25.”

  

  Presenting my paper on the cross and the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 1and 2.

  About the paper: The cross of Christ crucified symbolized the central theme of Paul’s ministry. In his letter to the Corinthians, the apostle commenced his correspondence with “the message about the cross” and “power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18, NRSV). The proposal for this paper utilizes the method analogia scripturae. Set within the wisdom motif of the Greco-Roman world, this study is dedicated to the examination of the apostle’s Christology in the context of 1 Cor. 1:18-25 and the Pneumatology in 1 Cor. 2:9-16 as both pericopes are juxtaposed in his epistle. Essentially, the thesis concerns the grounding of the Pneumatology of Paul with his Christology in 1 Corinthians. The Corinthian church required clarification and pastoral wisdom with their pneumatic experiences; thus, Paul recognized that a strong theology of the cross complemented their encounters with the Spirit. The question for biblical studies involves a lively tension of the Pneumatology of the Spirit with a robust Christology. Because the power of God throughout this passage has the cross as its paradigm, the structure of the paper leads to the significance of the apostle’s pneumatological contribution of the cross and Christ crucified (1 Cor. 1:18; 2:2). For this reason, a strong Christology must ground the Pneumatology of the Pauline corpus. This study in biblical literature commences a new discussion in ecumenical dialogue between pneumatic experiences in the church and christological issues in scripture.

  Rev. Dr. Cletus Luther Hull, III  D.Min.
  PhD Student, Biblical Studies
  Regent University
  www.cletushull.com
  July 29, 2015

   

  The Society of Biblical Literature, according to their website, was founded in 1880 to foster biblical scholarship. The 2016 annual meeting will be held in Seoul, South Korea from July 3-7, 2016. For more information about their annual international meetings, see: https://www.sbl-site.org/meetings/internationalmeeting.aspx

  ]]> https://pneumareview.com/international-society-of-biblical-literature-meeting-2015/feed/ 0 https://pneumareview.com/john-macarthurs-strange-fire-a-brief-biblical-response-by-jon-ruthven/ https://pneumareview.com/john-macarthurs-strange-fire-a-brief-biblical-response-by-jon-ruthven/#comments Fri, 01 Nov 2013 09:08:37 +0000 http://pneumareview.com/?p=587 Are Pentecostals offering Strange Fire? (Panel Discussion)

  John MacArthur, Strange Fire: The Danger of Offending the Holy Spirit with Counterfeit Worship (Nashville, TN: Nelson Books, 2013), 333 pages, ISBN 9781400206414.

  As we shall see, John MacArthur’s abhorrence of “further revelation” via prophecy and related spiritual gifts derives, not from scripture, but from the frustration of Calvinists under Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658) of watching so many of their members defect to the Quakers, the crazy charismatics of the time. People were falling down, making a lot of noise and encountering Jesus in visions, prophecies, and healings. Sound familiar? Calvinist scholastics responded to this outrage with the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF)—often now regarded as the gold standard of Calvinist theology.

  Despite the charismatic experiences of even some of the authors of the WCF, and especially their founder, John Knox, whose charismatic experiences were abundant and powerful, the dogmatists managed to ram through this narrow, unpopular paragraph in 1646, which, was to be imposed by threat of death on the British Isles—including Catholic Ireland. This curious history is thoroughly documented in a revised PhD dissertation by Garnet H Milne, The Westminster Confession of Faith and the Cessation of Special Revelation (Milton Keynes, UK: Paternoster, 2007). See review in Pneuma 31:2 (2009), 318.

  1. … It pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal Himself, and to declare that His will unto His Church [Heb 1:1] and afterwards for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing [Prov22:19-21; Lk1:3; Rom15:4; Mt 4:4]; which makes the Holy Scripture to be most necessary [2Tm 3:15; 2Pt 1:19]; those former ways of God’s revealing His will unto His people [miracles, prophecy] being now ceased [Heb1:1-2]. [Emphasis mine]

  When the WCF was presented to Parliament for approval, the suspicious representatives bounced the document back, quite reasonably fearful that this document was asserting itself as a substitute for scripture itself. They demanded that the writers support every claim in the Confession with a clear grounding in the Bible. The writers grudgingly complied, though their exegetical skills fell far short of supporting their elaborate theologizing. If you can make sense of how these scripture verses they added [in brackets] support the dogmatic claims in this paragraph, then you are a far more insightful exegete than I.

  ]]> https://pneumareview.com/john-macarthurs-strange-fire-a-brief-biblical-response-by-jon-ruthven/feed/ 19