From the email promotion:

Whether you are familiar with Dr. Craig Keener or this is your first introduction to his work, we are delighted to announce an upcoming Bible webinar with the professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary.

Well-known for his research on the Jewish and Greco-Roman context of the New Testament, Dr. Keener will join us for a two-day online seminar to teach us more about the Jewish context of key books and passages of the Bible. It will be a wonderful teaching series that you will not want to miss!

Here is the fourth and final session, entitled “The Jewish Context for the Book of Revelation.”

Image: Patrick Fore

From the email promotion:

Whether you are familiar with Dr. Craig Keener or this is your first introduction to his work, we are delighted to announce an upcoming Bible webinar with the professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary.

Well-known for his research on the Jewish and Greco-Roman context of the New Testament, Dr. Keener will join us for a two-day online seminar to teach us more about the Jewish context of key books and passages of the Bible. It will be a wonderful teaching series that you will not want to miss!

Here is the third session, entitled “The Jewish Context For The Gospel Of John.”

Image: Patrick Fore

 
Session 4: The Jewish Context for the Book of Revelation

From the email promotion:

Whether you are familiar with Dr. Craig Keener or this is your first introduction to his work, we are delighted to announce an upcoming Bible webinar with the professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary.

Well-known for his research on the Jewish and Greco-Roman context of the New Testament, Dr. Keener will join us for a two-day online seminar to teach us more about the Jewish context of key books and passages of the Bible. It will be a wonderful teaching series that you will not want to miss!

Here is the second session, entitled “The Jewish Context for the Sermon on the Mount and the Book of Matthew Continued.”

Image: Patrick Fore

 
Session 3: The Jewish Context For The Gospel Of John
 
Session 4: The Jewish Context for the Book of Revelation

From the email promotion:

Whether you are familiar with Dr. Craig Keener or this is your first introduction to his work, we are delighted to announce an upcoming Bible webinar with the professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary.

Well-known for his research on the Jewish and Greco-Roman context of the New Testament, Dr. Keener will join us for a two-day online seminar to teach us more about the Jewish context of key books and passages of the Bible. It will be a wonderful teaching series that you will not want to miss!

Here is the first session, entitled “The Jewish Context for the Sermon on the Mount and the Book of Matthew.”

Image: Patrick Fore

Session 3: The Jewish Context For The Gospel Of John
 
Session 4: The Jewish Context for the Book of Revelation

A fresh look at how emphasizing full life can transform how we do mission.

Without life all else that may be considered of value is nothing. African people are not easily convinced of the hegemony of science that seems to sideline life itself. Once undermined, the rather groundless assumption that life only exists in a chemical host, is easily replaced by questions regarding the nature and activity of spiritual powers. So-called holistic mission often runs in the face of African reality through drawing on the products of a Western dualism that Africa does not share. Dualistic understandings result from faith in a high God, something that is best advocated from a vulnerable approach to mission.

Note: The author’s experience of Africa is limited. His comments refer to some of the African people and contexts with which he has personal familiarity.

Introduction

This article takes an original approach to the question of how to do mission in Africa. It is designed to help a missionary or potential missionary from the West to avoid some of the foibles that can stand in the way of effective ministry. It intends to help the West to see itself in an African mirror. It intends, through under cutting some Western mythology, to enable the Western reader to see Africa more clearly. It identifies and exposes issues that tend to discourage the development of deep and lasting intercultural relationship. Thus it intends to encourage healthy relationship.

This article points to limitations of the scientific/dualistic worldview that is very common in the West. It deems belief in science to be a pragmatic option undergirded by faith. It goes on to consider implications for understanding life that arise from the realisation that life itself falls outside of the realm of scientific discovery. Implications of the above are applied to the missionary encounter with African people. The weaknesses of dualism and science in engaging African worldviews are exposed. Some implications of these weaknesses are explored.

I am Alive

This author has over 25 years been increasingly immersed in African ways of life. Instead of having his own children he has informally adopted African children. Instead of using English at home he uses African languages engaging with those children. Instead of driving a car he rides a bicycle to visit villages of Western Kenya. Instead of seeing his identity as being to bring better things from the West to Africa, he endeavours to live God’s word in a contextually relevant way. Whether or not he has succeeded in this, his life outlook has definitely been influenced by the process. Those who like to see non-Western inputs into Western scholarship, Christian or otherwise, should bear in mind the above source of some perhaps otherwise unconventional approaches taken by this author.

I am alive, and life is all I have. Yes, I may have money, I may have a house, I may have a good reputation, I may have a family, but the value of all of these and everything else I have hinges on one thing – that I am alive. Should I no longer have life, then I could no longer consider myself to be in possession of the above things. In that sense; and that is really a most important if not the most important sense: life is all I have.[1]

Increasingly in the West it seems as if ‘science is it’. Everything seems to be measured by the dimensions of science. Even social disciplines such as anthropology, sociology, economics, psychology measure themselves against science; the more scientific the better. Some folks known as positivists or naturalists claim only to believe in that which is scientifically measurable. To them, what falls outside of the perceptible realm of science really does not exist. For them – value in life is evidently other than life itself. How strange! How peculiar – to value humanity according to what is not its essence.

All science is a product of life. There has never been a scientist who has not been alive. Yet true science seems to be done by those who ‘pretend’ that they are not. True scientists attempt, that is, to remove the influence of their being alive from the object of their investigation. Thus they convert, in their minds, that which they see as living beings, as if they were not alive at all. Thus is the foundation for objectivity. There is an assumption that things exist, whether or not they are perceived. The universe as a result becomes a place that pre-existed, in which people happen to have found a place. People have become a product of statistical chance. This is an amazing reversal; instead of starting with us or I as people have for centuries, science endeavours to suppose one’s non-existence, and then to theorise how one might have come to be.[2]

Science has its uses

Science has its uses, but may be a terrible slave-master. Science undoubtedly has its value. It has also had and continues to have many disciples. There seem to be people who believe that the ultimate purpose in life may be serving the needs of science. This belief is upheld despite the evident fact that the realm of science excludes life itself. Science presumes life to be meaningful but can provide no evidence for its meaningfulness. Science builds on a foundation laid by someone else: It seems to be clear that certain religious beliefs necessarily provide (and provided) a foundation from which science was able to emerge. I suggest that science can be an abuse of that foundation. It denies peculiar forms of European Christianity that underlie its own roots (Weber 1930).[3]

Part of the Rightly Understanding God’s Word series by Craig S. Keener.

Take a course on biblical interpretation with New Testament scholar, Professor Craig S. Keener.

Editor’s Note: Craig Keener originally intended for this portion of his course on biblical interpretation to appear at the end of Chapter 1: Context (Spring 2003), and before Chapter 2: Learning Context (Summer 2003). However, Pneuma Review editors did not receive it in time to publish it in the print edition of the journal. It is our pleasure to include this revision, twelve years later, to complete this excellent series in its new digital format.
Raul Mock
February 24, 2015

Objections to Context

I should deal here with one objection to context that arises in some circles. Some people quote Scripture out of context and then claim they are right because they have special authority or a special revelation from God. But they should be honest in claiming that this is a special revelation rather than the Scripture. All revelations must be judged (1 Cor 14:29; 1 Thess 5:20-21), and God gave us a Bible in part so we could test other revelations. No one has the right to short-circuit hearers’ rights to evaluate their claims from Scripture by claiming a revelation about Scripture’s meaning which the hearers cannot evaluate by studying it for themselves. Otherwise anyone could claim that Scripture means anything! Any view can be supported based on proof-texts out of context; any theology can make its reasoning sound consistent; Jehovah’s Witnesses do this all the time. We dare not base our faith on other people’s study of the Bible rather than on the Bible itself.

“Strange Fire”? Not in a Global Pentecostal Context of Ministry

An international panel of ministry veterans responds to John MacArthur’s Strange Fire

Dony K. Donev with Dennis Balcombe, Hanny Setiawan and Marius Lombaard

John MacArthur, Strange Fire: The Danger of Offending the Holy Spirit with Counterfeit Worship (Nelson Books, 2013).

Almost one year ago, internationally known author John MacArthur began campaigning for his new book Strange Fire. With lots of material written beforehand by many who had not even read the book, the actual premiere was at a conference with the same name, not without some scandal to help its wide popularization. But scandal was hardly needed when the book classified most (if not all) Charismatics around the world as heretics. Тhe bottom line for MacArthur’s work was deconstruction modern day Charismatic theology and exposing it as unbiblical.

Do Pentecostal churches really offer a “strange fire” as MacArthur proposes? Could charismatic extremes practiced by some be evident in all Charismatic churches and classical Pentecostal denominations? And is it possible to declare a world wide movement of half a billion strong as heretical by observing random examples among less than 3% (three percent) of its representatives residing in North America?

The premise of this ad hominem attack is surprising, when even in Pentecostal scholarly circles we have long debated some Charismatic praxis as wrong and destructive to the movement as a whole. So, when an outsider to Pentecostalism as MacArthur jumps in and claims all Pentecostals are bad because some Charismatics have been found in the wrong, the normal response is simply to disagree. Especially when these extremes do not concern Pentecostalism globally, but as MacArthur himself admits, are defined to a North American context of ministry and even more strict and limited Charismatic circle of neo-Pentecostalism.

The purpose of this article, therefore, is to present the view of Classic Pentecostals, as deferred from the variety non-Pentecostal Charismatics. And to discuss MacArthur’s assumptions in an international Pentecostal context, though Strange Fire refuses to view Pentecostalism as the global power it has become. Perhaps, the very weakness of any theological work that seeks international recognition, but fortifies its argument only within the perimeter of westernized theology. To provoke an even deeper discussion, the study explores five of the major arguments of Strange Fire within the ministry context of Pentecostals from Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia.

Apostolic Relevance or a New Apostolic Reformation?

Admittedly, MacArthur strongest point within his attack on Pentecostals is outlining Peter Wagner’s New Apostolic Reformation movement. And even quoting Vinson Synan, who was invited to join the network for $69 a month, but declined with the response, “I could not afford to be an apostle.” But how concerned is the larger Pentecostal world about this apostolic movement? And how important is NAR in global Pentecostalism today?

In this chapter from the Rightly Understanding God’s Word series, Craig S. Keener concludes Context of Genre with Part 4, the book of Revelation. What can we learn from this book that so many Christians have disagreed about?

As appearing in Pneuma Review Winter 2006.

Take a course on biblical interpretation with New Testament scholar, Professor Craig S. Keener.

For an introduction to the Context of Genre, see the Spring 2005 edition of the Pneuma Review.

Revelation

Revelation is a particular kind of prophecy; because of its special importance and the interest it generates, I have devoted an entire section to its discussion. Revelation is a mixture of prophecy and apocalyptic (a special kind of prophecy that appears in Daniel, parts of Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah), delivered in a letter format.

On any book like Revelation, there will be serious differences of opinion, and we must be charitable in our disagreements. Nevertheless, it is worth exploring to see what the methods introduced previously can teach us, and how they can take us beyond many of the views that have circulated widely. Reading Revelation as a whole (paying attention to whole-book context) and in light of its background (Old Testament and other background) will help us avoid or correct many of the common mistakes we have often inherited from others.

Revelation is not meant to be an obscure book. It may not be meant to satisfy our curiosity regarding all end-time details, but it certainly is a very practical book that presents God’s demands on our lives. Thus it opens by promising a blessing to those who heed and obey its message (Rev 1:3)—which presumes that we can at least understand enough of it to obey it! An angel told Daniel that the book of Daniel would be sealed up and understood only in the end-time (Dan 12:9); by contrast, the angel told John not to seal up his book, because the end-time was near (Rev 22:10). Revelation may be “hidden” to those who think they need a special key in someone’s teaching to unlock it. It is certainly unclear to those who interpret it only in light of current newspaper headlines—which require us to readjust our interpretations every year or two. But it is not as hidden to those of us who read Revelation straight through and understand it in its whole-book context. All Scripture should be profitable for teaching and instruction in righteousness from the time it was written (2 Tim 3:16-17)—so whatever else it might mean, at least Revelation must mean something relevant for our lives today.

A History of Misinterpretations

Too often people in the past two centuries have used “newspaper hermeneutics” to understand Revelation—that is, they have interpreted it in light of current events. This is why many prophecy teachers have to change their interpretations of the book so often. That they recognize that Jesus could be coming soon, hence that prophecy is being fulfilled now, is commendable, but assertions that some current event definitely fulfills a biblical passage only leads to disillusionment when today’s headlines end up in tomorrow’s trash bin.

Christians have argued about how the Last Days would unfold since before the New Testament was written down (see John 20:23). Should you disagree with Professor Keener’s eschatology or how he interprets certain passages, please do not miss his goal of bringing us to a place of greater biblical balance. Though we may disagree regarding the End Times, we need to keep our Christian love and unity in Christ at the forefront.

Professor Keener originally designed this course on Hermeneutics for use in Nigeria and not for traditional publication. Desiring to make it available to a wider audience, he has granted permission to publish this course in the Pneuma Review. Dr. Keener grants permission for others to make use of this material as long as it is offered without cost or obligation and that users acknowledge the source.

Portions of this course follow these recommended works: How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart (Zondervan). Revelation, NIV Application Commentary by Craig S. Keener (Zondervan, 1999).

May this study be a blessing to you.

In this chapter from the Rightly Understanding God’s Word series, Craig S. Keener continues with a study of the type of inspired literature found in the teachings of Jesus, the gospels, letters to churches and individuals, and prophetic passages.

As appearing in Pneuma Review Fall 2005.

Take a course on biblical interpretation with New Testament scholar, Professor Craig S. Keener.

For an introduction to the Context of Genre, see the Spring 2005 edition of the Pneuma Review.

Jesus’ Teachings

Jesus’ teachings are not a broad genre like poetry or narrative; in fact, they mix together elements of different kinds of genres. Jesus was, among other things, a Jewish sage, so he often uses the teaching style used by Jewish teachers in his day: for example, rhetorical overstatements, wisdom proverbs (see previous section), and parables. At the same time, Jesus was a prophet, and sometimes gave oracles like prophets did (“Woe to you, Capernaum!”) Of course, as the Messiah, Jesus was more than a prophet or a sage, and he often spoke with greater authority than either prophets or sages did. Yet he also used many teaching techniques that were familiar to his people in his day.

For our example, we will take Jesus’ teaching on divorce. Many people assume that what Jesus said on a particular occasion covers every situation, but while that is often the case, sometimes Jesus himself provided different perspectives for different kinds of situations. Thus we recognize that while Jesus wants us to love him more than our parents, we “hate” them only by comparison with our love for him (Lk 14:26); elsewhere he instructs us to provide for them in their old age (Mk 7:10-13).

First we should examine the “why” of Jesus’ teaching, as best as possible. In Jesus’ day the Pharisees debated among themselves as to the grounds for a husband to divorce his wife; the stricter school said a man could divorce his wife if she were unfaithful to him, but the more lenient school said he could divorce his wife if she burned his bread. In Jewish Palestine (as opposed to Roman laws), husbands could divorce their wives for almost any reason; wives could not divorce their husbands or prevent themselves from being divorced. Jesus was at least in part defending an innocent party from being wronged: the husband who divorces his wife and remarries commits adultery “against her”—against his wife (Mk 10:11). This was a sin not only against God, but also against another person innocent of the divorce (cf. also Mal 2:14).

Second we should examine what this saying literally claims. “Adultery” in the literal sense is being unfaithful to one’s marriage partner; for remarriage to be adultery against a former spouse means that, in God’s sight, one is still married to one’s former spouse. If we take this literally, this means that marriage cannot be dissolved, and that Christians should break up all second and third marriages. (Interestingly, despite the scandal this would have caused in ancient society, we have no record of anyone breaking up later marriages in the New Testament.) But is this a literal statement, or one of Jesus’ deliberate overstatements meant to grab people’s attention—like plucking out the eye, a camel passing through a needle’s eye, or a mustard seed of faith? We can easily answer this question by examining Jesus’ other sayings on the same subject.

In the same context as Mark 10:11, Jesus also says, “What God joined together, let no one separate” (Mk 10:9). In 10:11, marriage cannot be broken; in 10:9, it should not be and must not be, but it is breakable. The difference in meaning here is this: one says that one is always married to one’s first spouse; the other says that one should remain married to one’s first spouse. The one is a statement; the other is a demand. Yet marriage cannot be both unbreakable and breakable; so it is possible that 10:11 is a deliberate overstatement (hyperbole) whereas 10:9 communicates its real intention: to keep us from divorcing, not to break up new marriages.