even though it’s just a verse in the Bible.

I saw it today while at Neot Kedumim, a biblical landscape reserve. Great place!

Lest you thought that the Muslim world had finally acknowledged Israel’s right to exist and that the real sticking point was the Jews’ refusal to return land taken in the 1967 war, the current conference in Iran should dispel any such false delusions. “The World Without Zionism” is euphemistic for “The World Without Jews” and should remind all who hear of it of a fellow named Adolf Hitler. The conference isn’t being held by a minority group either; the president of Iran spoke at it, calling for the annihilation of Israel. How should the world respond? By talking with such people and signing agreements? By allowing them to pursue, one way or another, nuclear technology? To ask it another way, what would the world be like if Hitler’s ambitions had been stopped in 1939 or 1941 or even 1943? Appeasement was foolish then and it is foolish now.

Update: All 15 members of the UN Security Council condemned Iran’s statements. This Jerusalem Post article says that the conference was being held for students who are majoring in “world without Zionism” studies. I wonder how the world would reply if a US or Israeli university started a major in the “world without Iran.”

If you’ve only been to Israel in the last five years, then you never had a chance to visit inside the Muslim buildings on the Temple Mount. In fact, chances are good you weren’t even allowed on the Temple Mount at all. If you visited before the outbreak of violence in 2000, you likely visited these but probably were not able to enter “Solomon’s Stables” below Al Aqsa Mosque. Now there’s a recent video showing all of that.

When I first saw the link, I ignored it because it didn’t seem that it would have anything of interest to me. Certainly no one has been able to take a videocamera through all of the off-limits areas in recent times. I was wrong. And the 4-minute video is worth watching if you have any interest in seeing the interior of the Dome of the Rock, the Al Aqsa Mosque and Solomon’s Stables. The clip could benefit with an audio commentary explaining what you’re seeing (including some remains of Herodian architecture!), but most of it is easy to understand.

Watch it at ynetnews.com.

In my last post, I suggested that you study a large section or book of the Bible as a whole. Read the entirety in one sitting, and do that every day for a month. As you do, try to trace the main goal(s) of the writer. Then boil it all down into one paragraph. Certainly important things will be left out, but that’s ok. If you get the big pieces of the puzzle in order, the smaller pieces tend to fall into place (in your mind) much more easily. I have done this with Galatians. Read it and see if it makes sense to you. See if you catch the “message” of Paul; this is too often lost in the details as we read extended portions. You also will note that there is some interpretation involved (inevitable as you condense); see if I was faithful to the original. Whether you agree or disagree, do it yourself.

Paul writes to the Galatians because they appear to be following a different gospel than the one Paul preached to them. Paul received the gospel directly from Jesus and not from men, but its truth was confirmed by the Jerusalem apostles. The gospel is that man is justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law. If justification could be gained through observing the law, Christ died for nothing. Since you were saved by faith and not by works, you must continue to live by faith and not by works. Gentiles become children of Abraham and receive the Spirit by believing in Christ crucified. The promise was given first to Abraham and the law was added later to lead us to Christ so that we might be justified by faith. When Christ came, we were made sons of God by faith and the law was no longer needed as our guardian. Thus it is foolish to revert to the law, which is slavery. Just as the child of the slave woman, Ishmael, persecuted the child of the free woman, Isaac, so those under the slavery of the law are persecuting the children of freedom. Remove from your midst those serving the law, for they will not inherit the promises made to Abraham. Those who try to be justified by the law have fallen away from grace.

Do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature, but rather to serve one another in love. Live by the Spirit and do not practice the works of the flesh. The sinful nature is subdued not by the law but by keeping in step with the Spirit. Be careful how you live, knowing that a man will reap what he sows. Again, I urge you not to be circumcised, for that only produces boasting about your flesh, and there should be no boasting except in the cross of Christ. This is true not only for Gentiles but for Jews as well.

In one sentence: You were justified by faith in Christ crucified and to submit to observance of the law is to fall away from grace and return to slavery.

Key verses: 2:16; 3:3, 5:4

It seems to me that one of the problems that believers have is that they learn the Bible in bits. The preacher focuses on a paragraph (or even a single verse). The daily reading plan has you reading portions of 4 books (OT, NT, Psalms, Proverbs) every day. Bible “study” automatically means a detailed look at a small portion of Scripture, with a focus on individual words. The result is that no one knows the Bible. They know bits of the Bible, but they can’t see the big picture. They can tell you what the parable of the sower means, but not how it fits into the larger context of Jesus’ ministry (why he told it at this time, who it was directed towards, etc.). They know the story of David and Goliath but they don’t have a clue what it is really about (hint: it’s not about David and Goliath).

So my suggestion, especially to any former students no longer encumbered with required coursework, is to plan to do a “forest” study. Put the lexicon away, and instead see the sweep of the narrative or discourse. Read the whole thing again and again. Identify the key points, and observe the flow of the logic.

You can do this in the Old Testament (e.g., 1 Samuel) or in the New Testament (e.g., Colossians). Try to figure out what the author was trying to say to his audience (and forget about how to apply it today). Do this without any outside sources; just you and your Bible and your pencil. At some point, re-write the book in condensed form, tracing the essence of the “argument.” If this is longer than a paragraph, re-write it so that it’s not longer than a paragraph. Then try to sum it up in a single sentence.

I’m not claiming that this is the only type of Bible study to do, but I am suggesting that it be one of the types of Bible study you do. And I have found it immensely satisfying. How enjoyable it is to know the main point of Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, and to have figured it out for yourself (instead of just reciting some formula you once learned in a class). Admittedly, some books will be easier than others; the logic of Paul’s argument in Galatians is much simpler than the oracles of Isaiah. So start with the easy ones. Later this week, I’ll give you an example of what I mean.

I’m back from the Negev and thought I might post a bit about it since I mentioned a few things briefly before departing. First, I was basically healthy from the start of the trip, for which I am thankful. But the illness continued throughout the family while I was away and now Kelli is sick.

As for the mixed up schedule, this was a Negev trip different from any before or likely any in the future. It started when I got a call on Wednesday from the youth hostel at Mizpe Ramon asking what time that evening we were arriving. With that I realized that our reservations were one day off. Attempts to rebook the nights were unsuccessful because it was the week of Sukkot (like the 4th of July in terms of vacationing). So we “skipped” the normal “Day 1” and did the trip starting with Avdat, Nahal Zin, Machtesh Ramon and the wilderness. The major stops of “Day 1” were moved to the last day (Day 4). The big downside to this approach is that Day 1 is academically more intense and dusty (yes, tells). I prefer to start hard and end with fun things like floating in the Dead Sea. That was not to be, but it worked out quite well on a number of fronts. As a result of the mixup and related reshuffling, I ended up with an extra free afternoon today and so I took the group to Nahal Besor, Tell el Farah South (Sharuhen?), and Gerar. Those would all qualify as good biblical sites off the path of even the most academic of programs.

One photographic highlight of the trip for me: at Avdat, the National Park rangers brought out a truckload of grapes and we got to tread them in the Nabatean winepress.

Because I was sick when I packed, I knew I wouldn’t need my swimsuit and so I didn’t bother packing it. I never swim anyway when I am leading. But the students got the impression that I “accidentally forgot” it and so bought me a new one. Not wanting to disappoint, I sported the hottest swimsuit this side of Hades for a swim in the Dead Sea yesterday. That was the first time I’ve been in those salty waters in I can’t remember how long. What fun!

If you missed the introduction to this series, read that first. Some of these are not real clear similarities as much as interesting perspectives on Albright and his teaching.

20. “Dr. Albright was an effective lecturer. He once explained that because he could not see well enough to read a lecture or paper acceptably in public, he simply talked to his audiences” (136). [I refuse to read to an audience, but not because I can’t see.]

21. “He was a considerate and inspiring teacher, though his students were often terrified by his immense erudition. He demanded their best, but was always more than willing to help them individually as long as they were willing to work seriously” (172). [So I would like…]

22. Frederick L. Moriarty, S.J.: “I guess you could sum it up in one word—inspiration. He gave us momentum, drive, a basic interest in the field, and this has sustained me over the many years since those days at Hopkins” (217).

23. John Bright: “It must be said that as a pedagogue he was not at his best. Of educational method he knew nothing and, I suspect, cared less. His lectures were a catena of brilliant divagations upon which it was impossible to take coherent notes” (199). [Here we may differ more; I consciously try to be a good teacher, and have no claim to being a scholar or making any original contributions. I don’t think Albright’s focus was on the classroom.]

24. F. M. Cross: “Perhaps Albright was never in worse form than when he consciously undertook to be a pedagogue. At the same time he was the greatest teacher I have ever known” (403).

25. “Albright’s de-emphasis on grades and courses taken (one automatically got a ‘P ‘ for ‘passed for any course one enrolled in), together with his high expectations in the grueling prelims and dissertations, made it easy for all but the most self-disciplined and inwardly motivated students to ‘goof off, ‘ with the end result that the weak student never had the requisite knowledge to pass the prelims, let alone attempt a dissertation. Only the self-disciplined and inwardly motivated would survive, and such qualities are a prerequisite for continuing research and writing long after the degree has been conferred” (218).

I think this is the end of this series. I’m off to the Negev in a few minutes, with 1) hopes that I’m feeling well; and 2) a mixed-up itinerary because of a youth hostel scheduling error.

I’ve known about this series for sometime because I originally had scheduled Gabriel Barkay for a trip for my class, but that had to be changed because of his LA engagement. In any case, full details of Excavating in Jerusalem and the Mountains Around Her: What the New Excavations Teach Us About the City, the Bible, the People and the Temple are now available from the University of Judaism. There are 7 lectures, with an entrance cost of $25 each. A few years ago I attended some of these lectures and I believe there was a student price at that time. The top three that I would attend if I could:

Gabriel Barkay: What Does Recent Excavation Reveal About the Temple Mount Past and Present?

Beth Alpert Nakhai: An Archaeological View of Biblical Women and Their Families

Thomas Levy: King Solomon’s Mines Revisited: Archaeological Explorations in Edom and What They Mean for Understanding Biblical History

$25 is not cheap, esp. for students, but these are the scholars who have made (or are making) the discoveries. And LA is a shorter drive than Israel.

Various people have been influential in my life and thinking. The one whom has had the most impact but whom I have never seen in person (and is still alive) is John Piper. Like many well-known pastors, Piper does not give lots of personal details in his messages. So while I’ve long known that Piper was a professor at Bethel College before he became a pastor, I never knew why he left. The reason why this was so important to me was because I wondered if I would ever do the same.

Piper gives his reason in a sermon recently sent out by his list and the answer is quite helpful to me. I excerpt a longer portion for a reason:

I was on sabbatical from teaching at Bethel College. My one aim on this leave was to study Romans 9 and write a book on it that would settle, in my own mind, the meaning of these verses. After six years of teaching and finding many students in every class ready to discount my interpretation of this chapter for one reason or another, I decided I had to give eight months to it. The upshot of that sabbatical was the book, The Justification of God. I tried to answer every important exegetical objection to God’s absolute sovereignty in Romans 9.

But the result of that sabbatical was utterly unexpected—at least by me. My aim was to analyze God’s words so closely and construe them so carefully that I could write a book that would be compelling and stand the test of time. What I did not expect was that six months into this analysis of Romans 9 God himself would speak to me so powerfully that I resigned my job at Bethel and made myself available to the Minnesota Baptist Conference if there were a church who would have me as a pastor.

In essence it happened like this: I was 34 years old. I had two children and a third on the way. As I studied Romans 9 day after day, I began to see a God so majestic and so free and so absolutely sovereign that my analysis merged into worship and the Lord said, in effect, “I will not simply be analyzed, I will be adored. I will not simply be pondered, I will be proclaimed. My sovereignty is not simply to be scrutinized, it is to be heralded. It is not grist for the mill of controversy, it is gospel for sinners who know that their only hope is the sovereign triumph of God’s grace over their rebellious will.”

I turn 34 years old in a few months, but the reason why I don’t think that I will leave teaching is because in my situation I teach about a God who is adored. Yes, we analyze, but we also worship. Sometimes maybe I “cross the line” in preaching (vs. teaching), but the students don’t resist; they respond. If it were not so, I cannot see enjoying my job.

I don’t know what Bethel College was like in 1980 (when Piper left), but I know what it was like in 1990 when my girlfriend (now wife) attended and graduated from there. I would say this: there are Christian colleges and there are Christian colleges. Do not trust the glossy flyers they send you in the mail. Be very careful where you choose to go to school, where you choose to teach, or where you choose to send your kids. After a while of observing graduates, you start to see patterns. School X produces spiritually confused graduates; School Y produces students with more freedom than the pagans; School Z produces narrow-minded, angry fools.

The Master’s College isn’t perfect, but it’s right on the main thing: we exist to proclaim Christ as Lord and to live for him. And the students at TMC know that and they’re there because of that. If they want the beach, or the big-city life, or the intellectual snobbery, they go to other schools. So I never have to fight students who want to scrutinize to the exclusion of submission, or to deliberate without delight.

A bug hit me hard last night, making it a worse sleep than even mosquito night. An ibuprofen has got me out of bed. I wrote this before and simply make a few edits before posting.

I continue my list of curious similarities between Albright and me, looking at more of his travels in the 1920s and mine today. If you missed the first post introducing this series, read it first. Quotes are from his biography, with page numbers in parentheses. My comments are in brackets.

13. Albright went on lots of exploration trips while he lived in Palestine. He went to many of the same sites that I have traveled to on my own. The purpose of the trips was ‘archaeological, topographical, and folkloristic ‘ (88). [I don’t use the word “folkloristic,” but otherwise sounds good.]

14. Albright taught summer school and took the groups to places of interest in and around Jerusalem, as well as up to Syria (127). [I only wish I could go to Syria.]

15. The Albrights liked to spend a week by the Sea of Galilee (125). From here they would make day-trips to the various archaeological sites in the area (149). [That was me last week!]

16. At Ashkelon, they stopped for examination of a mound, lunch, and a swim in the wonderful surf on that beach, then continued to Mejdel and spent the night in a flea-invested khan (inn)” (75). [What is it about Ashkelon that keeps attracting Americans to its beach? There are many beaches in Israel, but Ashkelon’s pull seems irresistible.]

17. Albright concluded his report on a trip, “If we could always find as many new things as we did on this trip, we should be kept busy registering our discoveries” (121). [My discoveries are on a different order, but they make me feel good. And that’s what matters. :-)]

18. In Turkey, “he made a five-day trip driving almost 1400 kilometers visiting excavations” (269). [In April, I made a 8-day trip driving about 2900 kilometers (1800 miles) through Turkey. One difference: Albright never drove.]

Albright Institute in Jerusalem

19. “They averaged twenty-five miles in nine hours of walking each day” (89). [I don’t believe it. Well, I believe they walked 9 hours each day; I don’t believe they knew how to compute distances on a walking trip. That would be nearly 3 mph with no rests. 20 miles is a full day’s walk.]