The WAGES of SYNTACTICAL ANALYSIS.

This is a follow-up article to an earlier post relating my experiences in "Youth With A Mission" (YWAM) in this mid 1980's. After my "Discipleship Training School" (DTS) in 1985 I had returned home to Yorkshire for a couple of years, but in 1987 (almost exactly twenty years ago) I went back to YWAM to do a year-long "School of Biblical Studies" (SBS) at The King's Lodge, near Nuneaton, in Warwickshire. At the time I still regarded myself as a Charismatic Christian but the glaring lesson from my DTS was just how disasterous it is to cut loose from the anchor of God's Word. The DTS implied (as did the wider charismatic movement) that Bible study was somehow dangerously 'cerebral' and therefore 'unspiritual': the stress they had laid on the experiential failed to grasp the obvious point that even "experiences" require some sort of interpretation: no end of authoritative pronouncements were made on the strength of leaders' supposed experiences and without the checks and balances of God's Word the leaders' own subjective "anointing" became an unimpeachable authority. I recall meeting one of the leading lights of the housechurch movement in the UK who, although he had been invited to speak about Jesus, actually spoke only about himself! But when you think about it - if you exalt the experiential at the expense of propositional teaching you have only your own self reverential ego to refer to. To faithfully teach Christ - a real person in space and time - you must preach because you can only convey who He is and what He did in world history by using words and propositions (you can no more communicate this wordlessly than you can convey anything meaningful about The Battle of The Somme without using words!) Nor can you model Christ adequately because what He did at The Cross was utterly unique!

Most (but not all) of the Charismatic leaders I had met over the years fostered a self referential arrogance I couldn't buy into and it made me want to learn more about the Bible..... not as an academic exercise, but because it was about the Lord Jesus - I loved Him and wanted to know all about Him! Of course even in this I couldn't claim to be without some mixed motives - I also supposed that I had some sort of "ministry" inside me waiting to be 'discovered' and 'recognised' (that was modelled to me). Maybe I even fancied myself as one of God's 'great ones' too - but that is probably a conceit common to young men like myself as I was at the time! So it was with these thoughts in mind that I signed up for the School of Biblical Studies.

The "SBS" was led by a quiet American called Charlie Bassett who exemplified the ideal Bible Study leader's attitude "pass the ball, don't strike at goal!" ie help others see for themselves what the Bible teaches. The 'big idea' of the SBS was called 'Inductive Bible Study' - students were encouraged to read the Bible for themselves without any preconceived ideas - it was wonderfully liberating. All questions and opinions were open for discussion unlike on the DTS two years earlier which was not as freeing as its advocates fondly thought. Quite how easily the SBS sat with the other YWAM courses I'm not entirely sure. During my time at The King's Lodge there was a DTS and a "Biblical Counselling Course" running and the members of the various groups might share thoughts over coffee about what we had all been learning and, I have to say, some of the ideas current on these other courses were a bit "iffy". Reading between the lines I think that some senior YWAM leaders had given the SBS their support because they realised that YWAM was acquiring a reputation for promoting unbiblical beliefs and some were keen to reassert basic Gospel teaching. Others in the leadership, I suspect, viewed the SBS as divisive (as if all these other teachings weren't!)

Until I did the SBS I had always read the Bible "in the flat", treating each verse as applicable to me; and I always used to put myself at the heart of the text. Maybe its a 'man thing' but I would identify myself with, for example, David fighting Goliath but what I now realised was that this is wrongly positioning myself within the text; if I was in that scenario at all it was among the quivering Israelite army who needed a champion to fight on their behalf! Another way of reading the Bible "in the flat" is to treat each verse as if it was a 'stand alone' aphorism. The SBS woke me up to the need to read those verses in context and to be sensitive to the genre of the particular literature I was reading. It was a 'revelation' to me, no pun intended! My experience of reading the Bible prior to this was like reading my way through a jumble of meaningless words and ideas occassionally stumbling upon a purple passage which I invariably felt I understood. After the SBS I realise just how important it all is and now I have a better idea of what those purple passages actually mean!

The biggest shock to me as a Charismatic Christian, as I was then, was when we read the Book of Acts and the penny dropped about "The Baptism of the Holy Spirit". I had previously just lifted what happened in Acts and applied it to me without any regard to what the author of Acts was aiming to communicate. The reality is "The Baptism of the Spirit" occured as new people groups were included within the people of God: as the church expanded geographically following the structure of the book (see Acts 1 v8), each expansion was endorsed by the Holy Spirit. For us after Acts looking back on these events it seems the Baptism of the Spirit occurs when we become part of God's people when we are 'born again'. The Word had challenged my long held belief that there was a two stage message - a Gospel message for sinners and a 'second blessing' message for believers. Bible Study is always most exciting when it challenges our preconceived ideas. The irony is that it was a Charismatic group which caused me to adopt an Evangelical position on the 'Second Blessing'!

This realisation was actually very important because it also made me realise that the Gospel is not a portal through which a Christian then progresses onto some 'higher', 'deeper' or 'more abundant life' teaching - I realised something revolutionary; the Gospel is the Christian life! If you are at the North Pole you cannot go any further North; any so-called step "forward" will take you South! Most of my Christian life upto that point was obsessed with 'moving on' and now I realised it was because I had not yet even remotely begun to understand the implications of the Gospel itself! It is more than a mere entry point. 'Higher ', 'deeper' or 'more abundant life' teaching will inevitably and subtly take us into elitism, where we feel we are a cut above the common clay. The cosey triumphalism which passes for modern day Evangelicalism (which I had always found cloyingly sentimental and unreal) assumes that the Christian is above (or ought to be above) the common experiences of mankind. Yet as I read the Bible all the great issues in life are there, death, evil, failure, suffering, justice, hope, redemption and grace - "life, the universe & everything" are all laid bare.... with total honesty.

I could mention how our study of the Book of Revelation was staggering - I have rarely ever been so encouraged by a book: suffice to say that we let the structure of the book itself help inform how the text should be read.... a repeating cycle of seven, written in the apocalyptic genre. Those Evangelicals who take their theology from pulp paperback prophecy have completely lost the plot on this book, sorry but there really isn't a kind way to say it! (If you want to, check out my posts tagged Revelation - I won't repeat myself here). Besides Charlie Bassett we had some visiting speakers including a South African called Dr Bennie Wolvaardt who taught us how to really look at the Bible text with a series of talks on 'syntactical analysis'. I know this sounds terribly highbrow but basically it is about following the line of an argument, which is especially important in the epistles. Those 'stand alone' Bible verses will trip us up if we cannot set them in their rightful place in the flow of the author's thoughts.

After the SBS concluded in the Summer of 1988 a handful of us went on to the newly acquired YWAM base at Highfield Oval in Harpenden to learn about preaching and teaching for six weeks. Bennie organised and led this phase. After a year studying the Bible I had come to realise that I was not the man I supposed myself to be; the Word of God had held a mirror up to my face and revealed a face I don't show anyone - that's how I know it's true! - I was not one of God's 'great ones' after all. I returned home, did a course in paediatric nursing at St James' Hospital in Leeds and worked on a children's oncology ward there for a year. I had joined a charismatic church in the meantime but the harsh realities of a children's cancer ward don't sit easily with the sentimental triumphalism of charismatic christianity. The glib answers and unreality of this fellowship jarred on me and caused me to re-evaluate my beliefs. I realised that I was no longer a 'charismatic' and started describing myself as an 'evangelical'. I know that that word is fraught with misunderstanding and difficulties, and is often grotesquely caricatured and misrepresented (often by those who should know better), but it is the least worst option! The fact is a lot of what passes as contemporary evangelicalism is only loosely based on the Word of God - but I am loathe to disown these people because my own experience has taught me that God is a God of Grace. God did not disown the "crazies" in the church at Corinth but remonstrated with them using the Word of God. When I became a Christian it was on the basis of a feeble triumphalist Gospel message but it was the start of something. I had to unlearn a lot of what I will call "evangelical folklore". I suspect that there will be many people like myself sluicing around the church scene - coming to faith on the basis of an incomplete, faulty "gospel" message, poorly taught, confused and badly led; but in the Faith nonetheless.

As for the Leeds fellowship I gather that others felt ill at ease too by the same things as me but they moved toward, what would in later years be known as, the "Emerging Church" movement because they had lost confidence altogether in evangelicalism. I shared some of their reservations but what I had witnessed during the SBS had confirmed my confidence in the Bible as the Word of God and I wasn't prepared to give up on it so easily. Nor did I feel compelled to ditch key classical protestant doctrine as some of my contemporaries did. For a variety of reasons I decided (sadly) to leave Yorkshire and it was in 1991 that I moved to London to work on a children's intensive care unit. By sheer coincidence I found that I had moved to within walking distance of St Helen's Bishopsgate which has proved to be my spiritual home ever since. At the time one of my old Leeds contacts warned me off of St Helen's because it had a reputation for being a "teaching church" - the same phoney old argument that teaching the Bible kills spiritual life!

If anything I am more convinced than ever that when the Bible is faithfully taught God's voice is heard. You cannot separate the Spirit from the Word.The fact is God is a God of Grace, whose Word illuminates our darkened minds and whose Spirit softens our hardened hearts!

CHILD POVERTY!

Dominic Lawson commenting in the UK newspaper, "The Independent", a few months ago stated that the most significant determinant of a child's progress in life is not his or her schooling but their parenting. Lawson relates an encounter between Frank Field, MP for Birkenhead, and the headmaster of a school he recently visited:
"There's one thing you should understand," said the principal, "about 40% of the pupils in front of you will never have had the experience of adults at home who think of putting their children's needs ahead of their own desires."
It's not "Education, education, education" that should be our new PM's slogan. It's "Family, family, family", said Lawson.
But from a Christian perspective the heart of the matter is the matter of the heart. No government can change human hearts.

The rise of the
"UBER-CONSUMER"
and the decline of
PROPOSITIONAL TRUTH!

In our post-evangelical, post-modernist, post-consumerist age there is some talk about how propostional truth is passe. This is the kind of drawing room talk which only cuts much ice among the chattering classes at their dinner parties as they crack open another bottle of Chablis. "Mere words cannot convey meaning still less 'truth' - whatever that is. All truth claims are culturally bound. Yes, they say, the important thing is the debate - the dialogue is all - conclusions are so declasse!" The reality is this is a "debate" which can only truly exist (not in a post consumer age meaning they have 'moved on' from consumerism) but in an uber-consumer age when we arrogantly assume we can smorgasbord the philosophy table and select the "reality" which suits our taste. It is even possible to snack at the "Jesus" table and select the Jesus which suits us - the "another Jesus" of 2 Corinthians 11 v4! ("Uber" is a German prefix meaning "super" or "ultra", when this prefix is adopted in English it indicates quizzical disbelief. Please feel free to substitute the word Ultra if you prefer - ultra-consumer fits my meaning just as well). Reality is a human construct in this propositionless, ultra-consumer world; why not select one that is congenial? For them the "dialogue" is all and any attempt to draw universal conclusions is arrogant and mere "power politics"; any 'truth' claim is an exercise in oppression and control. Truth cannot be contained within a proposition they insist!

Of course I firmly believe this is all utter nonsense and fantasy-land thinking. If you want to dispute the point with me come and join me on the ward round on the children's intensive care unit here in London on Planet Earth. When we stand at the foot of the bed of a critically ill patient and their course of treatment is being debated why don't you chime in with your wisdom about the "meaninglessness of words" and how the "discussion is all", that conclusions are "oppressive" and how we represent an outmoded modernistic paradigm. (Don't misunderstand me; I do not believe that a reductionist scientific model describes the whole of reality - I wouldn't be a Christian if I did! - but as far as it goes it represents a model of physical reality. It is the truth and nothing but the truth, even if it is not the whole truth, because it completely misses out the spiritual dimension to reality).

Back on the ward round as we sift the results of investigations undertaken and discuss options and courses of treatment we may well not have a complete picture of the patient's condition (we rarely deal in "certainty") but we must draw some conclusions from what evidence we do have and work out an action plan - indeed it would be outrageous and morally indefensible to pass by without formulating some treatment plan even if it is only a provisional one. It may well be that over the following hours and days we will revise and refine our plans as we get a clearer picture of the disease process. Isn't this the "hermeneutical spiral" principle, constantly homing in on the truth? So do not confuse the cowardice of indecision with the virtue of humility. Do not confuse humility with merely having ceased to care! What the uber-consumer calls toleration is more likely to be indifference..... or, just possibly, despair.

But as that ward round unfolds why not discuss your insights into oppressive 'truth claims' with the parents of one of our patients? I'm sure that they would be only too interested to hear from you.... but I won't answer for how they might respond! You see we live in an uber consumer society cut off from reality but once in a while reality impinges on our illusory world that once seemed so secure; when nasty things happen then we don't want a "dialogue" with the chattering classes. When push comes to shove we recognise our need for conclusions and a course of action by experts in their field not a philosophical debate about the meaninglessness of propositions or how 'truth' is culturally determined and a
function of oppression! (Disease and misfortune are not culture bound and in fact they are a compelling international language). This whole outlook is one which can only ever arise in a complacent consumer mindset which has never had to deal with difficulty or danger as previous generations have; the uber-consumer merely wants to be left to luxuriate in a world where there are no difficult choices to make and no challenges to unsettle us. We tolerate everything not because we are caring people, we tolerate everything precisely because we have ceased to care!

Do you ever wonder why people get angry and even violent with health care workers? I've seen it happen within my own intensive care unit. It's because the health care worker tells them the truth about reality when they've always thought that they could choose their own... they are uber-consumers who bought into the post modern lie. Someone given the task of breaking bad news becomes the official representative of the society who has denied them their right to the reality of their choice! Afterall the uber-consumer's catch phrase is "I know my rights!"

It would be a shame if evangelicals buy into this sort of mentality too. The danger, as I see it, is that in an attempt to be culturally 'relevant' to the uber-consumer we tailor the Gospel message to flatter our target group - but when we do that we also cease to have anything meaningful to say, we can only reflect back the conceits of the uber-consumer and we can never challenge them. The uber-consumer does not want to be unsettled in fact they will demand (with menaces) the craven approval of the church..... for all their talk about "toleration" they will never tolerate any group not geared to flatter them.

We Evangelicals only have something distinctive to say when we are authentically counter-cultural, and we have not always been faithful in this regard, but that is something the Lord Jesus requires us to be if we are to be worthy of the name Evangelical, that is "Evangel people", literally Gospel people!

FLOODS - An "ACT OF GOD" or a Luke thirteen?

In the UK recently we have had some rather exceptional weather resulting in flooding which some Christians have interpreted as God's judgement on us as a nation. Some areas of Europe are experiencing a drought as are some other areas of the world and no doubt there too some people who fancy themselves as modern day Elijahs will draw similar conclusions as if we are still inhabiting an earlier act of the Bible timeline.

Were these floods an "Act of God"? The following comments are addressed to the British nation; if others can play Elijah why can't I?!

Some, no doubt well meaning people, have attributed certain recent weather events to God's wrath, presumably therefore the fine weather we enjoyed last Easter was a sign of God's favour - so what went wrong withYOU people out there during those few weeks!? Some of you dropped a clanger didn't you! Well I hope you feel proud of yourselves - spoiling everyone's Summer!

I take note of the fact that the weather has since perked up so all I can say is whatever it is that you are doing now keep it up!