Click play. Go away for awhile so it loads fully. Come back when you have an hour to remember and revision what it means to be a Southern Baptist.
by Dr. Daniel L. Akin. You can download video and audio here.
Announcing the launch of a new website designed to help ministers, ministerial students, and Bible students everywhere. BestCommentaries.com polls the most referenced commentary lists (and throws my own list in for good measure) and provides rankings and reviews. If you know John Dyer, give him a virtual pat on the back for providing a truly useful site for those who love good commentaries. Thanks, John.
Bookmark BestCommentaries.com today.
If you’ve never heard S. M. Lockridge preach the “My King” (also known as the “Do You Know Him”) sermon, you owe it to yourself to visit this site where you can download or listen to an mp3. You can also watch a video slide show with the straight audio (w/o background music other sites add). Enjoy - and Praise God.
(Thanks, 4:14!)
The increasingly famous Tim Challies has added “commentaries” to his long list of book reviews and recommendations. I’ve often been impressed with what seems to be his desire to help his readers pursue spiritual formation (rather than simply pontificating). That said, he falls into the traps that most commentary list makers do not take the time to avoid. I offer the following critique for future aspiring commentary list creators.
1) What is the criteria for the list?
Challies give us two commentaries for each book of the NT. How did he decide? What makes a good commentary in his opinion? He does warn readers to choose commentaries “appropriate to your education and expertise.” What is the education and expertise of Mr. Challies? How can I know if my requirements for a commentary match his requirements for a commentary so that I can have any confidence that his recommendation will mean anything at all to me? Why does the NICNT “appear to be the best complete New Testament set”? What sets it apart?
Is this list anything more than “stuff I like”? Tell us why - the readers need to know how you are choosing volumes so that they can gauge how appropriate your selections are to their situation.
2) What makes any of these particular selections worthwhile?
This is related to (1), but what I am referring to here is the lack of any annotation for each recommendation. Whereas (1) is a critique of the lack of selection criteria, (2) is a critique of the lack of its application. Why is Fee better than Garland for 1 Corinthians? Is it because of Fee’s commitment to a charismatic interpretation? Does Challies like Fee’s proposed construction of the early Corinthian church? Why would a volume from 1987 be a better choice than the survey style BECNT from 2003?
3) Who would actually be helped by these recommendations?
Challies takes a few positive steps toward answering this question. He does warn readers to be aware that not all commentaries are equally useful for everybody. He also acknowledges that he is a non-scholar who enjoys studying God’s word.
However, the lack of any additional qualifications leads us to this basic understanding of these recommendations’ usability - “A list for people who like to study the Bible.” While admirable, this doesn’t really narrow the field down much. Will Bible study leaders or Sunday school teachers like this list more than non-teachers? Does it matter if you have a college background or not? Is this a list for people who just like to know a bunch of facts or do its members genuinely help readers in translating biblical principles to practical godly living? Tell us who the list was created to help: pastors, educated laypeople, the “everyman” - who? By not guiding his readers to understand the intended audience, Challies leaves his readers with little more than a few clues for better guesses - and I expect his intention was to help more than that.
4) What was the extent of the comparison?
Though usually my primary critique of a commentary list is (1), this “extent question” looms large over Challies list. He refers to his “attempt at thorough research” and his “extensive research,” but nowhere details what that research included beyond references to a few online commentary recommendation lists. Did he only look at commentaries reviewed by these sources? Or perhaps only those that appeared on two or more of the lists? If we do not really know anything about the extent of the “extensive research” then how can we have any confidence that these recommendations are actually the best recommendations for any particular biblical book?
Further, the striking admission that Challies was “relying almost entirely on secondary sources” suggests that he has no practical knowledge of the volumes he is recommending. Readers are left with the impression that all he did was uncritically compare a few relatively random lists and make guesses as to what books would probably be good purchases, maybe.
Conclusion
I applaud anyone’s desire to help others not waste money on books, especially commentaries. There are lots of intelligent, informed, discerning people on the web making recommendations (Challies may very well be one) - but if they do not give us any basis for their advice, then they are simply adding their voice to the “because I said so” cloud of the internet. Such is useful as far as it goes, but most people who desire to make wise commentary purchases would be so much better served by list creators simply answering for their readers the questions detailed above.
For my money, the most useful all around commentary reference guide is John Glynn’s Commentary and Reference Survey (newly updated in 2007). It is thorough, instructive, and will save you money. If you cannot afford that one quite yet, you are welcome to download my own Basic Reference Commentary Set (first commentary recommendations) for free.
(Also, watch for a “Best Commentaries” comparative website to launch around mid-August. I’ll post a link when “they” get it up and running.)
Berean Bible Study is a great, bare bones electronic bible program. It comes loaded with the ESV. The software is simple, intuitive, and small enough to load directly onto a usb flash drive (my key chain). This is a great single minded tool that allows a good reading platform and searchable ESV where ever you are, regardless of internet availability.
I am not impressed by the amount LifeWay “gives back” to the Cooperative Program. My church budget is dwindling through increasingly higher priced materials that are increasingly not applicable to my small church situation. Don’t get me started on the insane shipping and handling fee structure. LifeWay privileges large churches with multiple specialized ministries that can be planned far in advance. I am starting to understand the voices at the last few convention meetings calling for an increased focus and applicability for the small churches.
Rather than LifeWay the For-Profit Megalith donating a few extra dollars to the missions fund, I’d like to see LifeWay the SBC Agency Denominational Publishing House serve the churches of the Southern Baptist Convention by helping churches like mine perform local missions with high-value low-cost outreach and education materials.
It is getting to the point from a cost/benefits perspective where it no longer makes sense to support LifeWay. It is now worth my time to shop around for the best curriculum and best materials for the best price. Problem is, I have generations of people trained to privilege LifeWay out of denominational loyalty. Now, if I want to make changes, I’ve got to train and educate my congregation on why LifeWay no longer delivers value for our stewardship dollars. This puts me into the position of encouraging Cooperative Program style denominational commitment while denigrating an associated agency. I do not have a full complement of lifetime Southern Baptists - our folks come from all over - and this mixed message creates confusion and lowers overall enthusiasm.
I thought there was supposed to be this big LifeWay revolution under Rainer. But the website is still hard to search and navigate, the prices are still high, the kitch is still strong, and the curriculum still draws complaints of biblical insufficiency and non-applicability from my teachers.  Perhaps it takes longer than I think to resolve some of this.  If so, it would be nice to see some Baptist Press about what is actually going on in Nashville that might give some of us out on the frontier some hope. When the president “co-writes” a book called Simple Church, you might expect his organization to be slightly less byzantine and quite a bit more responsive to the many small congregations whose money it takes and whose denominational name it carries.
Sunday’s sermon was actually pretty good. The primary illustrations were from church history and the Scriptures themselves. The preaching was expository and emotionally applicable. The introduction and conclusion were a wrap around that felt very natural given the subject matter. And, the whole thing was done in a reasonable amount of time. I had a very firm time goal and I found that forcing myself to keep it made my sermon much more lively and sharp.
Though I do not usually commend my own sermons online, I think this one might be worth a listen, especially if you are someone who is struggling - either with life or to maintain your sense of closeness to God in the midst of life, or if you want to hear a sermon that assumes the book of James is more integrated than scholars give it credit for.
Listen here: James 1b: “The Perfect Result”
A few night’s ago, at a Michigan campaign stop, Mike Huckabee said the following:
“I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution. But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God. And that’s what we need to do is amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than trying to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family.”
Perhaps I am late to the party, or perhaps the MSM just hasn’t picked it up yet, but several liberal types on the internet seem to be making a big deal about this statement - recognizing in it a plea for a “theocracy.” This seems to be a ridiculous and un-thought-out assertion, betraying an ignorance of mainstream conservative evangelical thought.
It should come as no surprise that religious conservative and conservative voters are upset with gay “marriage” and abortion - or at least the judicial usurpation of these issues. It should further be recognized that one reason (a big reason) for some voter’s opposition to these practices is based on their interpretation of religious writings they receive as authoritative. It was just a matter of time before one of these people became a candidate and spoke the language of these voters.
Part of the democratic process is hearing the voices of the electorate and evaluating their claims. It is not a “theocracy” for conservative religious people to share their views on abortion any more than it is an imposition of theology for liberal religious speakers to preach against war or advocate an increase in welfare entitlements. Would Huckabee’s detractors deny him access to the public square to make his case before the populace? Such seems patently un-American.
You may not agree with Huckabee’s positions on gay “marriage” or abortion, but amending the Constitution with specific policy statements would make them constitutional laws, not religious laws. The candidate is not speaking of the establishment of a particular national church. The candidate is not advocating the alteration of the Constitution to privilege a certain faith. He is advocating public policy decisions to be considered by the American public. His own personal basis for recommending these changes may stem in part from religious motivations, but the policies and process themselves are entirely secular.
An amendment to the Constitution that privileges the dignity of human life would be a statement that a Constitutionally controlled people made the democratic decision to set a standard for how the country should operate. It would not create a theocracy any more than the 13th amendment, widely supported by religious abolitionists, created a theocracy.
The cries of “theocracy” and “theo-con” and etc. are nothing more than political spin attempts to discredit the policy positions with which the critics disagree. Where any fear actually exists, it is the result of paranoia. Of course, the true danger to a Constitutional way of life for our country is not from Huckabee’s statements or those who oppose them for political reasons, but from those who oppose his views specifically because they have some basis in religious thought. Rabid secularists would seek to squelch the protected speech of religious citizens, bar certain candidates of faith from public office, and silence the voice of certain of America’s citizens. This is anti-religious bigotry in its worst form and undermines the most cherished of American guarantees - a voice.
It is not immoral to be a moral person who cares about others and the welfare of our country. It is not un-American to participate in the great debate. It is both to promote falsehood and fear an effort to deny citizens their political and religious rights.
One thing I miss about being in school were the tremendous Ping-pong games we enjoyed. I would often play with Jake and the matches would look something like this.
Tony Kummer has added some new tools for the Said at Southern Network. The best new tool (imho) is the Network Search box. It is a Google custom search engine defined to only search Said at Southern linked blogs and resources. This way, you can search within a relatively narrow field for topics where you’d like some information from those with the mindset represented by faculty, alumni, and students of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
Yes, of course it is not your only search tool - by all means open yourself up to the wider web community. However, this search tool will be incredibly valuable searching for book reviews from like-minded reviewers, or in finding a good starting point to think about certain theological topics. If I want to meditate on the Lord’s Supper, I might want to start with the thoughts of those in my own faith tradition, etc.
Overall, it is a great value-added tool capitalizing on Tony’s other tremendous work pulling the Said at Southern blog aggregator together. You can access the search from the sidebar on this site’s homepage or at Said at Southern. Well done!
Baker Publishing is offering a free copy of Barna’s new study of 16-29 year olds, unChristian: What a New Generation Thinks About Christiantiy…and Why It Matters. There is only one free copy per church, so tell your pastor.
Here is the webform.
I don’t know how long the offer lasts.
The North American Mission Board continues to produce many unknown web initiatives. The main site is so disorganized and confusing that you can easily miss many of the interesting things available to us all.
ChurchPlantingVilliage.net is intended for those who are planting or planning to plant a new church. It is loaded with planning and growth tools in the form of .pdf files. A lot of their material would also be helpful to the small church pastor who is looking to revitalize his congregation or adapt to changing community demographics.
Start with the Church Planting Resource Library - lots of good stuff. The site also has several hidden nested libraries that you will discover by clicking on stuff that interests you. If anyone wants to make a motion at the next SBC to give NAMB a few more bucks to overhaul their websites so that we can all better find their information, then I’ll second it. Until then, let’s keep one another in the loop as we discover some of these great sites.
