Brief: 1 Timothy 3: 6

NBC

In regard to qualifications for an overseer:

1 Timothy 3: 6

New American Standard Bible

6 and not a new convert, so that he will not become conceited and fall into the condemnation [d]incurred by the devil.

English Standard Version

6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil.

King James Version

6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.

The new Christian believer is biblically disqualified from the office of overseer, due to the risk of pride. I reason the novice also lacks spiritual, biblical and theological experience; not the only relevant issues, but these are central. This standard does not measure up to the biblical standard of overseer.

Alan G. Nute:

'Recent converts are deemed unsuitable for the task; it has its perils for which they would be ill-equipped.' (1478).

NUTE, ALAN G. (1986) in '1 Timothy', The International Bible Commentary,  F.F. Bruce, General Editor, Grand Rapids, Zondervan/Marshall Pickering.

Jon Courson:

'Why was the devil-Lucifer-initially condemned? Because of pride (Isaiah 14: 12-15).'

(Verse 13 from Isaiah 13, my add):

New American Standard Version

“But you said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne above the stars of God, And I will sit on the mount of assembly
In the recesses of the north.

'Thus Paul warns Timothy not to place a novice in a position of leadership because novices tend to think that if anything good happens through them it is because they're a skilled speaker or a clever person. Only someone who has walked with the Lord awhile understands that if anything good happens through him it's not because of him, but rather in spite of him!' (1378).

COURSON, JON (2003) Jon Courson's Application Commentary, Nashville, Thomas Nelson.

It is biblically clear that a new convert, new believer and novice should not be an overseer.

However, I think Pastor Courson's use of the term 'leadership' is useful in developing an overall ministry principle.

A new Christian or Christian that is relatively inexperienced with spiritual matters, bible, theology and related, should not only be prohibited from the office as overseer; but this person should not have any leadership position in the universal 'catholic' Church, which would require experience and maturity in regard to spiritual matters, bible, theology and related.

By Church, I am not meeting, just or only formal professional Church work, but also parachurch ministry,  fellowships and studies.

The biblical principle remains the same.

Hope (PhD Edit)

Today

PhD, University of Wales Trinity Saint David, Lampeter, 2010: Theodicy and Practical Theology

PhD thesis excerpts on the theological concept of hope, from a Christian perspective:

There is hope!

David Lyon warns against the dangers of fundamentalism and hedonism/nihilism and states that the goodness and grace of the Christian God is the only hope for the world. Lyon (1998: 294). In a secularized Western culture the Christian Church needs to restructure where necessary certain practices without denying the Biblical revelation which provides hope for persons. Lyon (1998: 294).

Moltmann explains that it is believed that Christ will be God’s lieutenant in this godless world and bring about, through his crucifixion and resurrection, the promise of a better future, which includes hope. Moltmann (1993: 256). The Kingdom of God was present in Christ and this has been defined in history. Moltmann (1993: 263).

There is no hope!

Critically, D.Z. Phillips reasons that there is not actual hope for persons after death in another realm. Phillips (2005: 248). This would appear empirically true, but if the Biblical resurrection is true there is hope for those in Christ.

Clarence Darrow reasoned that there was no hope. He deduced that those within the New Testament era had little scientific knowledge, and therefore resurrection doctrine is a product of those with blind faith, wild dreams, hopeless hopes, and cowardly fears. Darrow (1928)(1973: 266-267). Darrow (1932)(1973) writes that the best one can do is hold on ‘to the same speck of dirt’ as we proceed ‘side by side to our common doom.’ Darrow (1932)(1973: 453).

There is some hope!

John Roth does have hope as he looks for a resurrection of the dead in the future, and in the present realm hopes that somehow ‘the waste’ as in unnecessary evil, will be placed in check. He views the traditional concept of God that Davis has as a God that is ‘hidden, absent, even non-existent.’ A trust and hope in any type of God is risky, but Roth reasons that the hope does not completely die.

I question whether an omnipotent God with less than perfect motives that would will so much evil, not for the greater good throughout history (Roth's view), would ever change his ways or be convinced by finite creatures to do so. There is certainly a degree of truth to the idea that the evil God allows often cannot be reasonably understood by persons. This could, however, be due as much, or even more, to finite human nature and reasoning as opposed to a moral deficiency or lack of omnipotence with God.

Religious history in Scripture

Without the biblical resurrection of Jesus Christ and imputed to believers (Revelation 20-22, I Corinthians 15), death would end all hopes of ultimate reunion between those who remain and those who have died. Speculation from those in philosophy of religion, such as John Roth and John Hick, does not suffice. The Hebrew Bible and the New Testament manuscript copies do serve as authentic religious history. The New Testament documenting God's resurrection plans for humanity in the work, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

DARROW, CLARENCE (1928)(1973) ‘The Myth of the Soul’, in The Forum, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

DARROW, CLARENCE (1932)(1973) ‘The Delusion of Design and Purpose’, in The Story of My Life,  October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

HICK, JOHN (1970) Evil and The God of Love, London, The Fontana Library.

HICK, JOHN (1978) ‘Present and Future Life’, Harvard Theological Review, Volume 71, Number 1-2, January-April, Harvard University.

HICK, JOHN (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1993) ‘Afterword’ in GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.

HICK, JOHN (1993) The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Louisville, Kentucky, John Know Press. 

HICK, JOHN (1994) Death and Eternal Life, Louisville, Kentucky, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1999) ‘Life after Death’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press.

LYON, DAVID (1998) ‘Memory and the Millennium: Time and Social Change at the Fin de Siecle’, Timothy Bradshaw (ed.), in Grace and Truth in the Secular Age, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans. 

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1993) The Crucified God, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1999) ‘Perseverance’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

PHILLIPS, D.Z. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press. 

PHILLIPS, D.Z. (2005) The Problem of Evil and the Problem of God, Fortress Press, Minneapolis. 

ROTH, JOHN K. ‘Introduction’ (1892-1907)(1969) in The Moral Philosophy of William James, John K. Roth (ed.), Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York.

ROTH, JOHN K. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.

Not Blind Faith (MPhil & PhD)

Today

Preface

My academic approach to theology, religious studies and philosophy of religion, has been as an academic, to avoid the use of fideism.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Fideism

'The term itself derives from fides, the Latin word for faith, and can be rendered literally as faith-ism.' 'Fideism” is the name given to that school of thought—to which Tertullian himself is frequently said to have subscribed—which answers that faith is in some sense independent of—if not outright adversarial toward—reason.

In contrast to the more rationalistic tradition of natural theology, with its arguments for the existence of God, fideism holds that reason is unnecessary and inappropriate for the exercise and justification of religious belief.'
---

In this article I present some relevant 'faith' related excerpts from my British thesis work (2003) and (2010). This is non-exhaustive.

From MPhil, Bangor University, 2003: The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives

Christianity is, of course, a faith and I would argue, since as human beings we only possess finite knowledge, that faith, knowledge and reason always work hand in hand in all philosophy. Christians do not want to possess a blind faith, but one that can withstand the best criticism because it is philosophically sound.

Christianity is also a historical faith and it states through Scripture that God supernaturally interacted with human beings through his prophets, apostles, and Jesus Christ himself. So, the examination of Scripture is very important in any study of the problem of evil. Critics may suggest it is very convenient that the supposed supernatural occurrences in Scripture which support the Christian faith, and its remedy to the problem of evil through Christ’s work, took place thousands of years ago, before our scientific age. These supernatural events, it could be stated, are now rather hard to either prove or disprove. If they cannot be proven, why should the Christian answer to the problem of evil be taken seriously?

I admit this is an important criticism, but the Bible is consistent in its message, written within historical periods by historical people. The accounts of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus are in unity, and his resurrection, although disputed by some critics, does have the backing of New Testament authors, who claim to have witnessed the resurrected Christ, or to have personally known those who have.

From PhD, University of Wales Trinity Saint David, Lampeter, 2010: Theodicy and Practical Theology

From traditional and Reformed Christian perspectives, the Bible serves as the key Scripture and reference in regard to matters of faith. Cambridge theologian, J.S. Whale (1958) explains that within Protestant thought the Bible represents the whole counsel of God and nothing can be added whether by new revelation or tradition. Whale (1958: 15).

The Bible records these revealed events and they are perceived through faith for significance. Lindsell would support a traditional understanding of Biblical revelation where he states that through special supernatural revelation in Scripture, Jesus Christ is revealed to selected persons. Lindsell (1976: 17).

Clarence Darrow deduces that those within the New Testament era had little scientific knowledge, and therefore resurrection doctrine is a product of those with blind faith, wild dreams, hopeless hopes, and cowardly fears. Darrow (1928)(1973: 266-267). Darrow’s assumption would more likely be correct if the Hebrew Bible and New Testament were written by persons that were clearly writing mythological literature with the primary use of metaphorical language. However,  there are those within both conservative and liberal Christian traditions that would reason the historical writers of Scripture wrote what they saw and experienced, and therefore many of these modern scholars accept a doctrine of physical resurrection.

Moltmann writes that after the resurrection the risen Christ appeared to his followers in order to guarantee that the glory of God and his creation would occur in the not too distance future. Moltmann (1993: 178). There should be a faith in place that can trust in a God that has intervened in history through his prophets, apostles and, of course, the atoning and resurrection work of Christ.

DARROW, CLARENCE (1928)(1973) ‘The Myth of the Soul’, in The Forum, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

DARROW, CLARENCE (1932)(1973) ‘The Delusion of Design and Purpose’, in The Story of My Life, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

LINDSELL, HAROLD (1976) The Battle for the Bible, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1993) The Crucified God, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1999) ‘Perseverance’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books.

Love (PhD Edit)

Google+

This article presents selected excerpts from my PhD, The University of Wales, Trinity Saint David (2010) in regard to the love of God.

Objections

John Hick (1970) writes that evil is the most serious objection against the Christian belief in a God of love, and is probably the most difficult objection to write about. It can be disastrous to say too little or too much. Hick (1970: xi).

R.Wickham (1964) explains that within the discussion of the problem of evil and theodicy, it is asked how human suffering can be reconciled with the goodness of God. How can evil occur if God loves humanity? Wickham (1964: vii).

Incompatibilism versus Compatibilism

Tim Mawson (1999) indicates free will theodicy assumes moral evil that accompanies free will is necessary as a universe with free will is better than one without free will. Mawson (1999: 323).

The idea being that within free will theodicy significant, unfettered, human freedom, is vital for meaningful existence. Feinberg (1994: 65).

A greater good could not be realized unless God allowed his human creatures to freely reject him, since this was the only means by which they could also ultimately love, trust, and obey God. Schoenig (1997: 458).

This is incompatibilism.

Feinberg as a compatibilist states that within an incompatibilistic approach: God is therefore justified in having evil exist in his creation because the amount of overall good produced with significant human free will would far outweigh the negatives within the problem of evil, even though many persons reject God. Feinberg (1994: 65).

Compatibilism in contrast, states that human freedom can be significantly influenced by other secondary causes and most importantly, a primary cause. The primary cause is God, within a theistic model.

Robert H. Mounce (1995) explains that God directs the affairs in life, for those who love him, for the greater good. Mounce (1995: 187).

G.R. Lewis (1996) explains God does, at times, choose to work through angelic and human intermediates. Lewis (1996: 458). This would be a means by which God uses evil for his good purposes.

The idea that God is love is demonstrated through Christ’s work on the cross. Moltmann (1993: 227).

God is showing love within this system by allowing significant human freedom and not using compulsion to counter it (Calvin (1543)(1996: 68). It is also showing love through the work of Christ. This love of God needs to be presented within a Calvinistic sovereignty theodicy. God’s love may often be an overlooked idea within some Reformed, and Calvinist writings, and this may be because Calvinism is a largely philosophical system of theology. Green (1971: 2).

Millard J. Erickson explains that God demonstrates his love through benevolence, grace, mercy, and persistence. Erickson (1994: 292). The love of God and Christ needs to be demonstrated within a Calvinistic sovereignty theodicy in order to serve as an effective form of practical theology for those suffering. I favour compatibilism, to hard determinism or incompatibilism.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College.

CALVIN, JOHN (1540)(1973) Romans and Thessalonians, Translated by Ross Mackenzie, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

CALVIN, JOHN (1550)(1978) Concerning Scandals, Translated by John W. Fraser, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

CALVIN, JOHN (1552)(1995) Acts, Translated by Watermark, Nottingham, Crossway Books. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1553)(1952) Job, Translated by Leroy Nixon, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1554)(1965) Genesis, Translated by John King, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It?, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, in David Basinger and Randall Basinger (eds.), Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books.

GREEN, JAY (1971) Five Points of Calvinism, ‘Forward’, Grand Rapids, Sovereign Grace Publishers. HICK, JOHN (1970) Evil and The God of Love, London, The Fontana Library.

HICK, JOHN (1978) ‘Present and Future Life’, Harvard Theological Review, Volume 71, Number 1-2, January-April, Harvard University.

HICK, JOHN (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1993) ‘Afterword’ in GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.

HICK, JOHN (1993) The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Louisville, Kentucky, John Know Press. 

HICK, JOHN (1994) Death and Eternal Life, Louisville, Kentucky, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1999) ‘Life after Death’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press.

LEWIS, G.R. (1996) ‘God, Attributes Of’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

MAWSON, TIM (1999) ‘The Problem of Evil and Moral Indifference’, in Religious Studies, Volume 35, pp. 323-345. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1993) The Crucified God, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1999) ‘Perseverance’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman
& Holman Publishers.

SCHOENIG, RICHARD (1997) ‘The Free Will Theodicy’, in Religious Studies, Volume 34, pp. 457-470. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

WICKHAM, EDWARD R. ‘Forward’, in O.Fielding.Clarke (1964) God and Suffering: An Essay in Theodicy, Derby, Peter Smith (Publishers) Limited.