Sovereign Grace

Pay No Attention to the Doctrine Behind the Curtain

 By John Immel

(For those of you who don’t care about the specifics of the SGM phenomena, give me a minute. This is going somewhere.)

 Ding Dong! The Witch Is Dead.

Which old Witch? The Wicked Witch!

Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.

Wake up – sleepy head

Rub your eyes, get out of bed.

Wake up, the Wicked Witch is dead.

She’s gone where the goblins go,

Below – below – below. Yo-ho,

let’s open up and sing and ring the bells out.

Ding Dong’ the merry-oh,

sing it high,

sing it low.

Let them know

The Wicked Witch is dead! 

So some time has passed since Vicar Charles Joseph headed off to sit in the bad preacher doghouse. Rumor has it that the doghouse has traveled to other states and other countries south of the border where he is speaking in behalf of the very church he said he should not be leading. Or maybe that was just the local church he had committed grave sins against, and the universal church is fair game for his metaphysical mayhem.  

Anyway, for a few days the blogging world tried to hum a few bars of the song in the Wizard of Oz: “Ding Dong, the Witch Is Dead.” People seemed to breathe a collective sigh of relief: “See, we really aren’t crazy!  It really is bad in Sovereign Grace Ministries.  It really is!”  

Joshua Harris, beta big dog for the SGM Vatican in Gaithersburg, Maryland, took to the plexiglass podium and admitted that yes, there were grave sins in the church. It really was as bad as it seemed. We don’t answer fools, but God was disciplining US because He loved US.  

SGM admitting they are wrong?  Why, how could it be?  

People broke out in group hugs, speaking of grace and love and mercy and nodding sagely as people thought this was God finally showing up. Why, if the CJ Mini Me was willing to say it was bad, very bad, then surely this was a sign that the bucket of WikiLeaks in the face had really worked:  

“Ding Dong the Witch is dead. Which old Witch? The Wicked Witch!”  

Armed with ruby slippers, a flood of outrage-filled articles poured forth taking El Primo Doctrinal Mover and Shaker to task. If it wasn’t for his faulty Bible interpretation, his Bible proof-texting, a host of church polity mishaps, and his temerity for seeking to place himself in the same category as John Calvin, all these thing would not have happened. 

“Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.” 

SGM WikiLeaks seemed to embolden a few more victims to take their story public: yet another story of molestation swept under the pervasive depravity rug and another parent villainized for a lack of love and grace and forgiveness showed up on www.sgmsurvivors.com. Rumor has it that this story hit very, very close to SGM Vatican home. The CLC faithful were summoned to a members’ only meeting. The women are in an uproar; the men are scratching their heads trying to figure out how to proof-text their masculinity to get their theologically deficient wives back in line. The pastors are doing their gossip and slander two-step all the while woeing and tumulting about the great sinfulness of man and the great evils of human ego. 

“Wake up – sleepy head, rub your eyes, get out of bed.” 

With only a few exceptions—from those on the “anti-SGM” side of the blogging world—Brent Detwiler was heralded as a hero with the pooper-scooper for the SGM dirt and applauded for his courage to face down the green-faced villain of Gaithersburg, Maryland.  

“Don’t you talk mean about Brent! Don’t you dare remember he was one of them for decades! Brent, please come in. Yes, make yourself at home. You are one of US now.  Besides, we need you to tell us we are OK. We can’t know anything unless a pastor makes it clear for us. We can’t understand what is really happening unless a leader tells us. We are so confused. Can we get you some hot cocoa?  Yes, tell us how hurt you are. We are very hurt. So you must be hurt. Brent, tell us where you hurt. Is it in your heart? Is it in your soul?  We are hugging you.  Brent?  Brent?  Brent, aren’t you going to tell us?” 

Denigration of those dastardly bloggers in their underwear daring to speak ill of SGM leaders all but forgotten, Brent slid into the kiddie end of the cyber pool ready to take his side of the story public. Floaties firmly around his arms, like God before Balaam, the very blogs he denounced for a failure of attitude, and gossip and slander became his voice to the world.  See! I’m not apostate! I’m not evil!  I did it right! But CJ, this is all his doing!  It’s him! 

“Ding Dong’ the merry-oh, sing it high, sing it low.” 

When a house didn’t drop on his head for the rational larceny of joining the blogging world, Brent was encouraged to take his kiddy pool backstroke into the lap lanes. With the debut of brentdetwiler.com, he came out splashing; the mist was felt all over the blogosphere. Tim Challies took his blogging towel to Rat Fink Brent D concerning his documents; yet another Neo-Reformed shill weighing in on the general impropriety of reading the leaky PDFs. Rat Fink Brent D defended himself by pointing out that “two anti-SGM blogs” had been in existence for years before the documents, so he really didn’t have a personal vendetta.  

Read More
Uncategorized

Like Tai Chi, Kung Fu, and Karate

By John Immel

On occasion you will hear me (and hopefully others) talk about Exegetics and Hermeneutics when discussing bible ideas related to the post.

It occurred to me that some may not know what Exegetics might be.

There is no quick way to do this particular subject justice, but it is essential that this body of ideas enter the minds of as many people as possible. What follows is a bit of self-plagiarism from a book that will be published one day to achieve some part of my plan to take over the world. The following article is a very basic effort to explain Higher Critical Methodology as the broad category that Exegetics and Hermeneutics fall under.

****

Like Tai Chi, Kung Fu, and Karate

Trust me this is going somewhere. I like metaphors and we are already talking about the Arena of Ideas where fighting goes on. The following is a break down of the avenues of Theological combat, oops, I mean, studies; see it’s a cool metaphor…or maybe it’s a simile…who can tell?

Biblical Theology is similar to Systematic Theology (to be discussed in a moment) in as much as it compiles Scriptural references to gain a whole picture of God’s ongoing revelation. The difference is that Biblical Theology starts its inquiry with the scriptural roots, the cultural belief structure, behind the text.  With this starting place, Biblical Theology extracts pervasive themes and concepts. Interpretation is done by using these themes to filter what God is trying to say to man. For instance, the theme of covenant was suggested by some big Theology muckity-muck named Gerhard Von Rad. [1] Then he read every passage, every recorded action, to filter Bible literature. Some doubt the adequacy of this approach because it often seems to set aside portions of text. But that is another discussion. Some contemporary movements are based in Biblical Theology. For example, there are a whole host of Pentecostal churches that read every recorded passage through the day of Pentecost and the coming of the Holy Spirit. Word of Faith churches interpret the Bible placing their emphasis on God’s Word being alive and apprehended by Faith. 

Historical Theology is the study of Christian thought through the succeeding centuries of Church history. One can study the entire body of thought of say, the second century.  Or one can study the Theology of a given thinker or schools of thought, like Augustine and his intellectual children Luther and Calvin.

Practical Theology or Task Theology is really just a fancy name for “How the heck do we apply all these big words and big ideas to people living their life and paying their bills and raising their kids.” (The Scholar types reading this are going to luuuvvvv me.)

Systematic Theology seeks to give an ordered account of major themes in Scripture, taking each reference and compiling it with all others to form a rational picture of bible commentary. The major themes are designated by some big Greek words that are easy to get once you understand the root words. Logos means teaching, or words, or doctrine.  The prefixes tell us what the words or teachings are about. Theology then, would be easily translated: Doctrines of God. The remaining six themes are:

Anthropology: doctrines of Man

Christology:  doctrines of Christ

Soteriology: doctrines of Salvation

Pneumatology: doctrines of the Spirit

Ecclesiology:  doctrines of the Church

Eschatology:  doctrines of End Things

All right, we’re studying and studying and studying; we’re trying to compile our stack of scriptures to Systematically make our 20th century doctrinal point. Suddenly, lo and behold, (a little biblical language for you) some bright boy raises his hand and says, “But what did those Israelites think about God? I mean, they were closer to the source. Wouldn’t that make their understanding better?” So we say, “Oh, darn. Now we have to figure out what their culture and politics and so forth were to understand what they believed.” We have to draw out the meaning from their culture. This is called Exegetics.

Once we figure out what they thought and believed and practiced, we have to figure out how to apply it to our 20th century brains and make our own practice. This is called Hermeneutics.

Exegetics is the art/science of extracting biblical information. Hermeneutics is the art/science of interpretation.

Exegetics in Brief

Thomas Aquinas brought modern intellectual inquiry to the study of the bible, and from him Higher Critical Methodology has evolved with different influences.

What does Critical mean? It means that the Bible needs to be sifted through to establish its veracity, and to determine what parts are dependable for what resources. For about 1200 years men have employed an increasingly complex, science/art to draw out authoritative truth. Historical Criticism, Redaction Criticism, Textual Criticism, Literary-Source Criticism, and Form Criticism, are a few of the sciences.

Hermeneutics in Brief

Taking what you have drawn out of scripture and finding a way to apply it to your own life is the essence of Hermeneutics. Interpretation is an iterative process done by everyone.  Most people interpret by saying to themselves, “Well, this means to me.” The “This means to me,” approach to interpretation is of the flip open the bible and point variety. It is self-actualization at its highest expression; Henry David Thoreau would be proud. For most, this is not a terribly disastrous methodology. But trust me, it is very limiting.

(Oh, hey. I’ve got a really funny church trick. Walk up to a hard core Reformed Theologian and say, “I was reading the bible the other day and this passage means to me . . .” and watch the smoke roll out his ears.)

How people have interpreted has changed drastically over the centuries. The traditional method was allegory: a teaching device where each character, object, and event symbolically represented a moral or religious principle. Mostly these elaborate allegories were created for the ignorant masses, so that they could grasp complex spiritual truths.

As the masses became more educated, the learned bible teachers moved into the varied forms of Higher Critical Methodology.

When I use the words Higher Critical Methodology, think of a belt full of weapons. Having the right weapon for the fight decides whether you live or die. Or maybe those timid souls amongst the readership would like a more pacifistic metaphor or simile…who can tell?  Think of a belt full of tools. Having the right tools means you can build the right house.

The action of reading the Bible requires the action of interpretation. I don’t care at what level you are reading. From a child’s beginning effort to grasp John 3:16, to a Seminary graduate wrestling with Theodyssey (the problem of evil) you are engaged in some form of interpretation. And therefore, by default, you are applying some level of critical thinking to what you read so that you might understand.

Now back to Exegetics and Hermeneutics. The art/science behind the two words are the questions that a person learns to ask. The better one gets at asking the right questions, the better one becomes at getting the right answers from the Bible.

Are there basic questions that that average Joe Six Pack can ask without having to learn about all that . . . that  . . . that four-letter word stuff?

And by the way, I am assuming that your Joe Six Pack is drinking Coke or something.  Certainly, there is a Christian version of Mr. Six Pack. We’ve got a Christian version of everything else.

Anyway, back to this Theology stuff.

What are the most basic questions of Higher Critical Methodology? Take notes, there is a quiz later.

Here they are:

Who is talking/writing?

Who is listening? OR who is the Audience.

What is the occasion?

Say them out loud. Learn these questions. Live these questions. Love these questions.

[1] G. Von Rad.  OT Theology, 1957.

Read More