I apologize to my fellow bloggers. I should have written much earlier to explain all that is happening at the Reynolds’ home. My life changed drastically in January, as my wife and I were blessed with the birth of Kelton on Dec. 29th. I am much busier, now that I have added the “father” hat to my closet. As far as obeying the great commandments of loving God and our neighbor, I believe my “neighbor” begins with my immediate family and thus my time for blogging was significantly diminished with the birth of Kelton.
Furthermore, on March 1 I accepted the pastorate of a church closer to the seminary. This church is a little larger than the one I pastored in Virginia and has added responsibilities.
I share this in order to say I do not have the time to blog as I used to and yet I ask your forgiveness for not sharing earlier with you (that was extremely insensitive on my part). I will begin blogging again on a part time basis (perhaps one post a week) but beg your patience as I may not be able to respond as quickly as possible to comments. I have missed the friendships and fellowship we share and look forward to building the Kingdom together.
With that in mind, I am changing gears a little on my blog. God was good to our convention this summer, and I fear that I fear when I ought not, moreover my desire since last fall was to begin moving this blog to a blog wherein we address issues, which student ministers can discuss. While we may address ministry issues in general, I would love for this to be a place for student ministry enhancement via mutual edification. Along those lines, I will begin a series on integrity in ministry soon. Integrity is especially vital to student ministers, for if we have learned anything from our youth, we have learned that they can spot a fake much quicker than many adults. Finally, let me take an opportunity to share about the new MDiv with student ministries that SEBTS is offering. Personally, I think this new degree will set the standard for student ministry training (but then again, perhaps I’m partial:)
BR
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
37 comments:
Welcome back! We've missed you. Congrats on the new member of your family and the new church.
Les
Brother Brad,
Congratulations on the birth of Kelton. Your life has changed forever.
I`m glad to see that you are back on the air, your new format looks interesting.
No apologies needed.....
God is good
Les and David
Thank you both. I've missed fellowshipping with you guys:)
Good to be back
BR
Brad
Good to hear from you. It was a joy to meet you in San Antonio and I look forward to your posts concerning integrity in the ministry.
God Bless
Brad: well, great! I'm so glad to see you up and running. Like the idea of the discussion for student ministers. selahV
p.s. no one else got strep did they?
Robin,
Thanks my brother, great meeting you also:)
Selah,
no one else caught strep, PTL.
Thanks for your prayers.
BR
brad,
great to see you back in business! congrats on the baby, too! also, it was great meeting you in san antonio. look forward to your posts.
david
Dr. Reynolds,
Do you realize how many times I clicked on your site thinking my feed-reader erroneously skipped your post?
Know many of us have missed your perspective not the least of which is me. Sometimes I've felt quite "lonely" if that makes sense :^).
I look forward to your future posts. Grace. With that, I am...
Peter
Peter
Thank you...While I have not participated in a while, please know I have been reading blogs:)
I always enjoy your posts: kind, educated, and almost always right on:)
David,
Great to meet you also. Praise God for your faithful service.
I just looked in on Kelton...I enjoy watching him sleep...anyway, thanks
BR
Brad,
You reminded me of that song: ‘Are you going away without saying goodbye?’ When you dropped off the face of the earth, I though you might have died. I’m with Peter on checking your blog.
Please don’t think you have to reply. That takes a lot of time, but if you do, I’ll ask a question: Do you think Wade Burleson is become more or less of in agreement with you, or maybe I should turn that around?
You say, “My desire since last fall was to begin moving this blog to a blog wherein we address issues, which student ministers can discuss.”
I’ve forgotten if you have covered this issue or not. It is the most helpful thing I’ve learned from blogging.
And that is, it was not a command from God but a curse between husband and wife (Genesis 3:16 Holman) “Your desire will be for your husband, yet he will dominate you.”
That “desire” is explained quite well in the New Living Translation. “…And you will desire to control your husband, but he will rule over you.”
In Criswell’s Study Bible, this verse is under the heading “The curse”, and it explains “desire” just as the NLT does, but Criswell explains the “rule over you” as a command.
I believe when husband and wife see the whole verse as a curse, they will resolve into a partnership, and not ‘Who’s the boss.”
I don’t mean to hijack your post, but that’s my two cents.
Glad your back. Happy fatherhood.
Rex Ray
Bonham, Texas
Rex
Thanks my friend.
Personally, I feel the husband is to oversee (rule over) the marriage.
The primary responsibility to be sure the marriage is as God planned it lies with the husband. The wife is a helpmate in the responsibilities God gave man.
So I would certainly say they are a team, even more, they are to be one!
Further, I think Scripture is clear that the husband is to consider his wife above himself by loving her and giving up his life for her and the wife is to consider her husband above herself by submitting to him and giving up her life in that way.
I tend to be harder on men, because I think Scripture is. On an observational level I have rarely found Christian ladies who want to be unsubmissive, most desire to obey Scripture here, but they have been hurt the times they did submit to their husband's leadership (in other words, they submitted but their husband's were not loving them as Christ loved the church but were being selfish). I have found it is much easier for Christian wives to submit to their husband's when they KNOW that their husband's love them more than anything in the world.
A good rabbit to chase:)
BR
brad,
amen, and thank God for prof.'s like you. keep teaching good, sound doctrine, bro.
david
Brad,
Ah, to chase rabbits was a lot of fun growing up. I never knew we were poor and every rabbit cut down on the grocery bill.
You said true words when you said husband and wife are to be one.
That reminds me of Paul concluding that none of our body parts were more important than the others. And neither is the husband or wife more important than the other.
But we both are bringing up other Scriptures to make our different view point, when I’d like to discuss the Scripture I mentioned first: “Your desire will be to control your husband, but he will rule over you.”
We agree this verse is a curse. That is; before the fall, Eve did not try to control Adam, and Adam did not rule over Eve. Do we agree on this?
Now then, Eve was “fooled” into sinning, while Adam was not fooled but sinned knowing full well he was disobeying God. Do we agree that knowing we are sinning is worse than sinning but not knowing it?
Therefore, should the ‘bigger sinner’ rule over the ‘small sinner’? In other words, should the fox guard the henhouse?
Brad, realize I’m not dead serious on what I’m saying, but I am serious that Jesus took this curse to Calvary and paid the price in hell, and Christians are no longer under this curse and once again husband and wife are to be partners like Adam and Eve before the fall.
Rex
P.S. Hello 007
Brad,
Welcome back to Blogsville. A Blessed Addition can turn us upside down with lost of sleep etc, but only for a short time. Your looking at your son while he sleeps brings back many memories for me.
I loved you nterpretation of Husband and Wife relationship.
In His Name
Wayne Smith
Wayne
Thanks my brother
BR
Rex
I will grant that before the curse Eve did not try and rule over Adam, however, I am not convinced that man's spiritual leadership "over" the wife was not in existence before the fall. In fact I think it was for a few reasons:
1. Woman was made for man according to Gen 2, not vice-versa.
2. Adam named the woman, I feel this implies a certain oversight of her.
3. Finally, when Paul was speaking of authority within the local church, he argued for not allowing a woman to teach a man because "Adam was formed first!"
In other words I am saying part of the curse of sin is woman's desire to control their husbands, but I do not believe that man's oversight of the marriage (rule) was part of the curse, rather I think it was God telling Eve that although she would desire to control her husband, she would not eliminate man's headship over her.
Moreover, while I am convinced that Jesus took the curse of sin to hell, I am not convinced that we do not still live with the results of sin. Hence, we still see women who desire to control their husbands and we still see men who are not being the spiritual leaders they should be.
Hope this is helpful
BR
Brad,
Thanks for the reply, and I see that you and Paul see eye to eye, in saying “God made man first” as a reason women should not be permitted to teach men.
I’m sure Paul read the same Scripture (he will rule over you) to form HIS opinion. (“I do not permit…”) One side sees “I” as Paul, and the other side sees “I” as God.
In the first place, God never used seniority to choose who should rule, be king, etc., so being made first is only human reasoning.
Paul’s second reason was Eve was fooled and not Adam and sin was the result. That human reasoning puts all the blame on Eve which is what Adam told God.
Since God rejected Adam’s reasoning, why would he accept the same reasoning from Paul?
I hope this is confusing. Ha
Rex
rex,
reading 1 cor. 11:1-16 might also be enlightening about God's design for a man and a woman and the different roles they play in life and why it's so.
david
Brad: so glad you said that about the curse and the cross. I was thinking the same thing. We will always live on this earth with the nature of sin and flesh, won't we? After all, why else would we be told the greatest commandment is to love the Lord with all our heart, soul, mind and body and our neighbor as ourself? Doing such demands a surrender of our own will to God's will. It doesn't happen by osmosis, we must empty ourselves and be filled with the Spirit. That takes a conscious effort on our parts, I'd say, since Paul told us to die daily, doesn't it? Before my husband and I became Christians, I fought to wear the pants but afterwards I fought to take them off and prayed for him to wear them. (Tired metaphor but so clear.) I have the joy of ironing them.
Doesn't husband mean banded around the house or something like that? In that the husband is to protect, nurture, guide, encourage and take the heat of life for his mate and family?
great having you back! selahV
Rex
I think we may disagree on God's inspiration of Paul's words which we call Scripture:)
David
Great reference!
Selah
As always...wise
BR
Brad,
Ah! I believe the ‘rabbit’ is picking up speed. I see you used logic until you started losing, so you pulled out the old ace-in-the-hole: INSPIRATION or more in detail, INERRANCY. Then there’s the ‘slippery-slope concept—believe one word not to be of God, then believe two and so on until you slide right into hell.
Understand, besides Jesus, Paul is my biggest hero in the Bible, but he was NOT God. He was not as wise as Solomon who sinned so much he became as a fool in allowing his wives to worship false gods.
Would you agree if Paul could write one word not from God, he could write two, and so on? OH, BUT IF WE BELIEVE THAT, HOW DO WE KNOW WHICH IS WHICH? The answer is the Holy Spirit who Jesus said would teach us.
Is Paul called a liar when he wrote: “But to the rest I, not the Lord, say…”? (1 Corinthians 7:12)
Did the Lord forget who Paul baptized when he wrote: “…I didn’t baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius.”? (1 Corinthians 1:14 vs. 1:16)
Did the Lord forget or was it Paul that forgot when he appealed to Caesar? (Acts 25:11 vs. a year later Acts 28:18-19) The answer is revealed when King Agrippa said, “He could be set free if he hadn’t appealed to Caesar!” (Acts 26:32)
Did Paul tell the truth when he said, “I’m being tried because I believe in the resurrection of the dead.”? (Acts 23:6)
The answer is, “…I should not have said that I’m being tried because I believe in the resurrection of the dead…” (Acts 24:20-21)
Paul knew he was being tried because he believed in Jesus, and to put the blame elsewhere was denying his Lord as Peter had done.
The high priest allowed both Jesus and Paul to be struck while giving their testimony.
They both ‘fought back’, but where Paul gave in, Jesus stood his ground. (Acts 23:5 and John 18:23)
Have you heard, ‘The Lord would not allow any error or discrepancy to be recorded in the Bible’?
What about the Lord allowing his Son to say one thing, and then later say the opposite?
(His Father would not forsake him at Calvary, and then My God, why have you forsaken me?) (John 16:32 and Matthew 27:46)
Well Brad, I think the rabbit has made full circle, and I’ll conclude with Paul saying, “I do not permit…” might fit in with “But to the rest I, not the Lord, …”
Rex Ray,
Bonham, Texas
Rex
I apologize if my logic was confusing. Allow me to say it more clearly my brother: I think Paul was inspired by God to write what he wrote!!!
And I don't believe the Holy Spirit inspires me to spots the spots of inspiration. I believe it was ALL inspired.
I think we shall agree to disagree here my friend. But I know there are no hard-feelings on this end and I feel certain there are none on your end.
BR
Brad,
I’m sorry you don’t want to discuss the issues, but I like the way you hint at goodbye in saying we can agree to disagree.
The only trouble is your rabbit has a nice accepted nest while mine has no place to lay its head in the present SBC.
Rex
Rex
I never intended to imply I didn't want to discuss. I failed to express that I felt you and I disagreed on God's inspiration of some Paul's words which we call Holy Scripture.
I am certain that you will not change my mind on whether God inspired Paul to write those words...and I highly doubt I will change your mind. So we can talk about it till Jesus returns but I fear I will be wasting your time for I will always be convinced that "all Scripture is God-breathed (inspired)."
And at the risk sounding unkind, although it is certainly not my desire, let me further state I am grateful that SB have decided we believe all Scripture is God-breathed and the original manuscripts are inerrant. There are plenty of other denominations (nearly all other mainline denominations, in fact) who disagree. That's why I'm glad to be a SB.
BR
Brad,
I thought I was saying goodbye to the present subject, but I find it interesting your statement: “I am grateful that SB have decided we believe all Scripture is God-breathed and the ORIGINAL manuscripts are inerrant.”
By saying “the original manuscripts are inerrant” (none can be found) implies our present manuscripts are NOT inerrant.
I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but is this what you mean? (Present manuscripts are not inerrant.)
If so, that means you are saying the Bible we have in our hands contain errors and discrepancies.
When I asked Patterson if the Criswell Study Bible explained ALL errors and discrepancies or only SOME of them, he said, “WE GOT ALL OF THEM” loud enough all could hear.
But when I said, “What about the ruler’s daughter being dead in Matthew, and alive in Mark and Luke?” he whispered in my ear, “We got all we could.”
I find it interesting the Holman changed the girl to being alive in Matthew.
I believe the Bible in our hands has ALL Scripture inerrant, but all the words in the Bible (lies of the devil and man, lack of knowledge, ignorance, and stupidity) are NOT Scripture.
My belief is in keeping with the BFM that states, “We believe the Bible has…truth, without any MIXTURE OF ERROR for its matter.”
Michel Whitehead, presiding lawyer for the SBC said, “Mixture of error means the truth of the Bible is true and the untruth of the Bible is untrue. That is why WE added, ‘and that all SCRIPTURE is totally true and trustworthy.’”
I agree with what he said 100%.
Rex
Dr. B,
Good to hear from you. I didn't realize it until this post, but your son was born exactly Two years after my daughter. Later in life if they are both walking with God and seeking to serve him and your son likes older women...lets talk! I'm in to the whole arranged marriage thing! (I have 3 daughters!)
I look forward to the youth ministry discussions. I'm back in Youth again starting today after a brief stint in my church as interim. My pastor left for NC and we just installed a new man that I believe will be a good fit for us.
Joy,
Cliff
Brother Rex,
Thank you for sharing your perspective on the marriage issue (and more largely on scripture in general). It helped me to understand where you are coming from there. I do respect your position even though I do not hold it myself. If we are honest about where we are coming from, it may be easier for us to be friends and show respect even when we disagree completely. This discussion demonstrates the reason why we come to such different finishing lines so often; we began at different places. I wish I could convince you the nature of scripture was different. You wish you could convince me. Instead, we will have to agree to disagree and love each other anyway.
For me, knowing that the Apostle Peter himself considered Paul's writings to be scripture is terribly convincing. I leave you with his thoughts...
2 Peter 3: 15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Joy,
Cliff
Brother Brad,
Please do not wait another 6 months before you post again. :>)
Blessings,
Tim
Well......Let's dance. Bring your best stuff. I have had few that like to "mix it up" like you since you left for the PaPa life.
First question. What do you think of Ron Paul for President of the United States? Of course you may be a closet Hillary man or possibly a John Edwards supporter. Surely Obama is not getting your vote. On second thought, maybe. :-)
Welcome back, Minor Leaguer.
cb
Sorry again for the delay:)
School started back and been busy but should be able to post again Monday. I don't know how some of you do it.
April and I are expecting AGAIN:)
Wow
Rex, I think we have had this conversation, I know their are scribal mistakes but that does not deny the inerrancy of the originals or God's preservation of his word. To borrow words from one of my mentor's "we have 102% of God's Word."
Cliff
Good to hear from you. In about 18 years, let's talk:)
Tim
Will do:)
CB
I was hoping Al Gore might run again - You know he won in 2000:)
To my friend who asked me not to post their comment, please write me at my e-mail address - Good to hear from you and am praying for you
BR
Brad and Cliff,
I know it sounds ‘heroic’ to say ‘all words in the Bible are inspired’, and that’s what we teach children, but ALL words include the devil’s lies. Do you believe God inspired the words of the devil? To answer that calls on the Chicago definition of inerrancy where you end up believing the Bible has ‘illusions’ and will be clear someday in the future.
It does not bother me for Christians to believe the Bible in a different way. It does bother me when the majority persecutes us by not letting us be missionaries or hold an office in the SBC or SBC controlled seminaries. There is no ‘loving your brother’ in ‘our way or the highway.’
BTW Brad, where does the BFM have the word ‘inerrant’, since you indicated the SBC has accepted it?
Well, I’m through on this subject, but on the subject of Bibles, what do you think about the ‘oldest Bible in the world as reported by the Dallas Morning News Friday, March 11, 2005—the Codex Sinaiticus?
Part of the Newspaper report is below:
The ancient Greek Bible, written between the first and fourth centuries, has been divided since the mid-1800s after visitors from Russia and Western Europe removed sections of it from a desert monastery in Egypt.
But on Thursday, experts from Britain, Germany, Russia, Egypt and the United States launched a four-year project to digitally reunite the fragile texts and make them available to anyone with the click of a mouse.
“The codex is so special as a foundation document and a unique icon to Christianity,” said John Tuck, head of British Collections at the British Library in London. Unification of the manuscript, even digitally, “is a blockbuster in scholarship.”
Only a privileged few have ever been allowed to handle the original manuscripts. Scholars need access to determine, among other things, how far the modern Bible has veered in interpretation from the codex. Parts of the project announced Thursday will include Christian texts written as few as 45 years after the death of Jesus Christ.
The manuscripts are so delicate that only four scholars have been granted access in the last 19 years to sections of the text housed in London, said Scot McKendrick, head of medieval and earlier manuscripts at the British Library in London.
But researchers and the general public will be able to examine the digitized texts in minute detail. Historical and explanatory notations will accompany the digitized texts so that viewers can trace how changes were made and, more important, why.
“Obviously, the way the editing works…is exceedingly interesting. What is process leading to this or that correction? Whether it was merely editorial, or if they were following a theological led” in altering the message, Mr. McKendrick said.
Researchers and plunderers have particularly coveted the codex because the texts were written so soon after the life of Jesus, and they are the largest and longest-surviving biblical manuscript in existence, including both the Old and New Testaments. In addition, the codex contains two Christian texts written around A.D. 65, the Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas.
Until the mid-1800s, the complete codex was housed inside St. Catherine’s Monastery in Sinai, Egypt. But the texts were broken up when visitors bribed, cajoled or deceived monks into letting certain sections be removed for further examination in Russia, Britain, and Germany.
“They were never returned,” said Greek Orthodox Archbishop Damianos of Sinai. “The monastery felt a great injustice was done.”
He said the disappearance of the texts led to upheaval in the monastery, and because of lingering resentment, the monks at St. Catherine’s had been “a bit reluctant to respond positively” when asked to participate in the current project.
Mr. Mckendrick said the codex was originally produced on high-grade papyrus with the state-of-the-art ink and pens---the best available at the time.
Similarly, the new digitization project will use some of today’s most advanced technology, he added. “So in a sense, we’ll be matching fourth century cutting-edge technology with cutting-edge 21st century technology.”
The newspaper didn’t say what language the translation would be in, but I hope it would be English.
Wonder how much ‘arguing’ will be between the translators? Wonder how much ‘acceptance’ will be among Christians?
Rex my friend
We still seem to chase this rabbit and honestly it appears we are chasing different ones.
To say that God inspired the authors to accurately record Satan's lies does not mean God inspired Satan's lies.
Further, the SBC conservative resurgence was very much related to inerrancy of Scripture. So I do not think it unfair to say that in certain respects the words "without any mixture of error" and "inerrant" are synonymous.
Not sure, we will get any further, but God bless you
BR
Hey Dr. Reynolds,
I'm looking forward to the coming Student Minsitry focus of the blog. I think it will be great for those of us who are learning as we go.
- Aaron Swain
Brad,
Welcome back my brother. Congratulations on the new member of your family and the new ministry.
I wondered often about you after your disappearance. In fact, at this point, I feel as if I should refer to you as "Brad the White."
Let us hope that you no longer speak in riddles.
God Bless,
Jeffro
(Jeff Holder)
Brother Brad,
Since its October, maybe we need another apology.
Just kidding....
How are you, what new ?
Hello......
Come in, earth to Brad, come in over.........
I'm sorely disappointed. I so longed for thoughts to sharpen mine. I know you are about your Father's business. But I've been missing you.
Praying all is well with Kelton, April and the darling to come. selahV
p.s. and you too, of course.
Congratulations to you and the misses! I'm surprised that you didn't name Kelton after a town in Texas. Hmm? Unless there is a town named Kelton in Texas. LOL.
God Bless "daddy" Brad!
Post a Comment