SAET Blog

SAET Fellow Publications Posts

  • February 2, 2012 by Gerald Hiestand

    Sex, Dating, and Relationships: Wrap-Up

    Ambrose once said, “The condition of the mind is often seen in the attitude of the body….Thus the movement of the body is a sort of voice of the soul” (On the Duties of Clergy, I.18). Indeed it is. And nowhere does the voice of the soul speak louder than in our sexuality. Sex carries such significance in our lives because it was ordained by God to point toward that which is most significant—Christ’s relationship with the church. Thus the misuse of sex damages us in ways that other bodily sins do not. As the Apostle Paul states, “Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body (1 Corinthians 6:18).

    For too long pastors and Christian leaders have neglected to provide definitive instruction about the appropriate boundaries of premarital relationships. Telling singles that the Bible has nothing explicit to say about premarital sexual activity beyond its prohibition against intercourse is an unacceptable fulfillment of our pastoral responsibility. Sexual ethics are simply too important. We must say something. And as I have labored to show in these posts, the Scriptures have more to say about premarital ethics than many of us have been led to believe.

    While “thou shall not make out” is not as explicit as “thou shall not commit adultery,” the Bible does indeed offer us a clear sexual ethic: sexual activity is to be reserved for the marriage relationship. When we combine this sexual ethic with an intuitive understanding that sexual activity includes more than sexual intercourse, we can confidently conclude that all forms of sexual activity—even sexual forms of kissing—must be reserved for the marriage relationship.

    The reigning premarital sexual ethic of evangelicalism is muddled and unclear. The pressing need of the moment is for evangelical pastors and leaders to articulate a clearer, more pastorally responsible premarital ethic—one that is biblically authoritative, theologically robust, and sufficiently objective. And that is the very thing we’ve tried hard to do in our book.

    For all the posts in this series, see below:

    Categories: General | Gerald Hiestand | SAET Fellow Publications | sexuality

    0 Comments

  • February 2, 2012 by Gerald Hiestand

    Sex, Dating, and Relationships, Part 3: Thou Shall Not Make Out?

    Given the cultural dynamics of the ancient world, New Testament proof texts on premarital sexual ethics are in short supply. In a culture that prized female virginity, utilized arranged marriages, and often practiced cloistering, the authors of the New Testament had no need to be overly specific regarding chastity rules for premarital relationships. Simply put, the reigning ethic—even in the pagan culture—was, “keep your hands off my daughter.” Thus we cannot expect the Bible to offer us a detailed list about which activities (e.g., fondling, kissing, oral sex, etc.) are permissible in premarital relationships.

    Yet despite the lack of an explicit statement about “how far is too far” in premarital relationships, the New Testament does offer us a clear sexual ethic: sexual relations are to be reserved for the marriage relationship. Adultery (Romans 2:22), homosexuality (1 Corinthians 6:9), prostitution (1 Corinthians 6:12-20), fornication (1 Thessalonians 4:3-8), and polygamy (1 Timothy 3:2) are all explicitly condemned in the New Testament. Additionally, the New Testament uses the term πορνεία (sexual immorality) as a “catch all” term to forbid all extra-marital sexual activity. As has been shown by New Testament scholars, πορνεία is properly understood against the backdrop of the Torah, and thus adultery, fornication, bestiality, incest, homosexuality, and prostitution—all condemned by the Torah—fall within its semantic range.[1] We find a working example of this basic ethical framework, specifically as it relates to premarital sexual activity, in 1 Corinthians 7:1-9. Discussing celibacy and marriage, Paul writes,

    I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.  To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion (ESV).

    Here Paul is responding to a series of questions posed to him by the Corinthians. Many at Corinth viewed celibacy as the ideal Christian state. Even married individuals, it seems, were attempting to live a celibate life.[2] Paul notes his own commitment to celibacy and agrees that celibacy is indeed ideal for increasing one’s capacity to serve in Christ’s kingdom. Yet Paul rec­ognizes that the ability to live a chaste and celibate life is a unique gift from God—one that God has not given to everyone. Given the ever-present temptation toward sexual immorality, Paul instructs those who have a strong desire for sexual intimacy (i.e., “burn with pas­sion”) to fulfill that desire within the context of a marriage relationship. The implications here are clear: the marriage relationship is the only legitimate context for sexual activity. Given the clear teaching of the New Testament, the church—broadly construed—has historically viewed sexual relations as appropriate only within the context of a monogamous, permanent, heterosexual marriage.[3]

    Thus far we have broken no new ground. Nearly all evangelical pastors and ministry leaders agree that sexual activity should be reserved for the marriage relationship. [4] But it is here that evangelical sexual ethics begin to flounder. Our problem is not that we have failed to recognize the New Testament’s prohibition against premarital sexual activity; rather we have failed to fully reckon with the reality that there is more to sexual activity than intercourse. Oral sex, fondling, and mutual masturbation, for example, are all sexual activities. It is inconceivable that the New Testament’s ethic—in as much as it is an extension of the Torah—intends to leave room for such activities outside of marriage. Once we embrace the biblical ideal that sexual activity must be reserved for the marriage relationship, the question, “How far is too far?”—a perennially vexing question for singles—is easily answered. If an activity is sexual, it is to be reserved for the marriage relationship.

    Yet for the sake of clarity we must press this farther. Beyond the seemingly obvious activities above, there is real confusion among evangelicals about what constitutes sexual activity. There are a wide array of physical activities that are inherently non-sexual; holding hands, a kiss on the cheek, a peck on the lips, hugging, walking arm in arm, etc., are all non-sexual activities. While sexual arousal may indeed accompany such activities, the activities themselves are not inherently sexual. But there are other physical activities that are exclusively sexual. It is these activities (at least) that must be reserved for the marriage relationship. But how are we to tell which is which?

    Perhaps the most objective way to determine the sexual nature of an activity is to consider it against the backdrop of the family relationship. Within the context of family relations, there are certain physical forms of affection that are inappropriate (fondling, oral sex, etc.). And the reason they are inappropriate is precisely because such activities are sexual. Thus we can quickly intuit which activities are sexual by considering an activity within the context of the family relationship. If an activity would be sexually inappropriate to do with a biological relative, then that action is clearly of a sexual nature. Or again, the activities that we intuitively exclude from family relationships because those activities are sexual, are, in fact, sexual activities. To clarify, note here that this way of identifying sexual activity is not primarily concerned about what I would (or would not) do with my mother, but rather about what is deemed to be generally appropriate between biological relatives. While a particular man might never hold hands with his mother (given the interpersonal dynamics of their relationship), that same man would not view it as sexually inappropriate for a mother and son to hold hands. If Genesis 26:28 is any indication, even ancient pagan cultures have distinguished between sexual and non-sexual activity via the context of the family relationship.

    This criterion becomes enormously helpful when considering appropriate premarital boundaries, particularly as it relates to one of the most common activities in contemporary dating relationships: passionate kissing. Many (perhaps most) Christian dating couples regularly engage in passionate kissing. And for the most part, evangelical pastors and leaders have not provided definitive, biblical counsel here. Clearly some forms of kissing are non-sexual. Fathers kiss their children, and sons their mothers. But there are other forms of kissing that men reserve exclusively for their lovers. And the reason they do so is because such forms of kissing are sexual. When we consider passionate kissing against the backdrop of the family relationship it quickly becomes clear that passionate kissing is not merely affectionate, but sexual. Under no circumstances would it ever be appropriate for a brother and sister to engage in passionate kissing. Thus we may properly conclude the following:

    1) All sexual activity must be reserved for the marriage relationship.

    2) Some forms of kissing are sexual. Therefore,

    3) Sexual forms of kissing must be reserved for the marriage relationship.

    The logic of the above is, I believe, inescapable. In order to legitimize sexual forms of kissing in a premarital relationship, one would need to, 1) provide a cogent rationale for why passionate kissing is not sexual; or alternately, 2) legitimize at least some sexual activity outside of the marriage relationship. The first is counter-intuitive to the way human sexuality actually functions. The second runs counter to the ethic of the New Testament.

    The objective definition provided by the family test is not the last word on sexual purity. There is, of course, more to purity than how one behaves with the body (Matthew 5:27). And every “objective” boundary can be worked around by sin-inspired creativity. But in spite of its limitations, it does provide a solid framework for clearly identifying which bodily activities are inherently sexual. Humans are embodied beings; as such, we need an embodied ethic. While it may be a sexual act for a particular man to look at (talk to, etc.) a particular woman, it is always a sexual act when he does something with her that would be sexually inappropriate between blood relatives. To be sure, there may be good reasons to refrain also from non-sexual acts of intimacy outside of the marriage relationship.[5] If Jesus condemns even the look that leads to inappropriate sexual desire, how much more the touch (sexual or not) that leads to inappropriate sexual desire. But while wisdom may often call for a more restrictive posture than what is required by the family ethic, it never calls for less.

    Pastors and ministry leaders have been sending a mixed message about premarital sexual activity. On the one hand, in keeping with the sexual ethic of the New Testament, we’ve clearly articulated that sexual activity should be reserved for the marriage relationship. But on the other hand we’ve largely ignored—or actually legitimatized—sexual forms of kissing. We are in effect saying that while sexual activity is not permissible in premarital relationships, sexual activity is permissible in premarital relationships. If the preceding sentence doesn’t make sense to the readers of this post, it’s not making sense to singles either.

    At its heart, the New Testament ethic calls for premarital relationships to be completely non-sexual. Sexual forms of kissing fall afoul of this ethic, likewise any activity that is sexually inappropriate between blood relatives. Simply put, if an activity is inherently sexual, it is to be reserved for the marriage relationship.

    [1] Etymologically, πορνεία referred to prostitution or fornication, but was frequently used more broadly to denote any and all forms of sexual misconduct. For an analysis of the use of πορνεία in the New Testament, see Raymond Collins, Ethics and the New Testament: Behavior and Belief (New York: Cross Road Publishing Company, 2000), 80-83; William Loader, Sexuality in the New Testament: Understanding the Key Texts (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 2010) 71-76. William Countryman, Dirt, Greed and Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and Their Implications for Today (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 2007), 73. The terms ἀσέλγεια (sexual immorality, impurity) and κοίτη (sexual immorality, lasciviousness), also function as general terms denoting sexual misconduct, but are used in the New Testament with less frequency. For the full range of terms denoting sexual misconduct, see the entry in Louw-Nida on sexual misbehavior (88.271-88.282).

    [2] My brief reconstruction here follows the standard interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7, i.e., that Paul is addressing a form of asceticism. For interpretations along these lines, see Tom Wright, Paul for Everyone: 1 Corinthians (Louiseville, KY: Westminster, 2004), 77, and Raymond F. Collins, First Corinthians, ed. Daniel J. Harrington, S. J., SP (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1999), 253. Contra this reading, see Barry Danylak, Redeeming Singleness: How the Storyline of Scripture Affirms the Single Life (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2010). In either case, my central point above remains valid regardless the extent to which the ascetic question is resolved.

    [3] Only in relatively recent times has this sexual ethic been questioned. The contemporary rise of homosexuality, combined with a post-modern way of reading texts, has raised questions about the church’s traditional sexual ethic. For a detailed analysis of the New Testament’s sexual ethic, see Collins, Ethics and the New Testament; Loader, Sexuality in the New Testament; Countryman, Dirt, Greed, and Sex.

    [4] The Colorado Statement on Biblical Sexual Morality offers us a standard evangelical articulation: “Sex outside of marriage is never moral. This includes all forms of intimate sexual stimulation that stir up sexual passion between unmarried partners.”  Quoted in Heimbach, True Sexual Morality, 370.

    [5] Even non-sexual touch can arouse sexual desire. Further, physical affection (whether sexual or not), makes a statement about one’s intentions, and often creates misplaced expectations. For a discussion about the mixed messages men and women send to each other via non-sexual interaction, see my Raising Purity, 53-100.

    Categories: General | Gerald Hiestand | SAET Fellow Publications | sexuality

    0 Comments

  • January 27, 2012 by Gerald Hiestand

    Sex, Dating, and Relationships, Part 1: An Introduction to the Problem

    One of the more vexing issues facing pastors today is the question of premarital sexual ethics. Simply put, we pastors are not quite certain how to counsel singles and teens regarding appropriate sexual boundaries. Of course, we clearly teach that sexual intercourse should be reserved for marriage. But beyond this, there is no consensus among evangelical clergy about where the boundaries should be drawn. Instead we tend to push the burden of this question back onto singles. One pastor typifies the counsel regularly given by evangelical clergy:

    “You may want me to tell you, in much more detail, exactly what’s right for you when it comes to secular boundaries [in dating relationships]. But in the end, you have to stand before God. That’s why you must set your own boundaries according to His direction for your life. . . . I want you to build your own list of sexual standards” ( Clark, I Gave Dating a Chance, 108-09).

    But do we really mean to say that Christian singles should “build their own list of sexual standards?” Certainly this can’t be right. Is oral sex permissible? Fondling? Mutual masturbation? Passionate kissing? No one seems to really know. Certainly Christian singles don’t know. And the confusion here is no small matter. There is every reason to suspect that our lack of clear direction regarding premarital boundaries is putting singles in a precarious position. The September/October 2011 edition of Relevant Magazine includes a remarkable update regarding evangelical sexual ethics. In the article, “(Almost) Everyone’s Doing It” author Tyler Charles, drawing upon data gathered by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unwanted Pregnancy, informs us that forty-two percent of evangelicals between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine are currently in a sexual relationship, twenty-two percent have had sex in the past year, and an additional ten percent have had sex at least once. Assuming the accuracy of Charles’ data, this means only twenty-percent of young evangelicals have remained abstinent.

    Even if the survey’s data were wrong by half (see DeYoung’s comments), the numbers would still be concerning. And as a pastor, I am indeed concerned. In my own experience, I see a significant amount of confusion and compromise among Christian teens and singles, particularly as it relates to premarital sexual ethics. Sometimes Christians flounder because the Church fails to address crucial issues; sometimes they flounder because the leaders of the church address crucial issues wrongly. Both the former and the latter, I believe, are at work here. On the one hand, evangelical scholars and theologians have devoted a paucity of attention (if any) to the issue of premarital sexual ethics; we’ve left it to popular-level books to plumb the Scriptures teaching on this matter. And when pastors do speak explicitly to this issue, we send a confusing and mixed message. We’ve told Christian singles that it’s fine (or at least might be fine, or at least we can’t say it’s not fine) to prepare the meal, set the table, put the food in their mouth, and chew—just as long as they don’t swallow. We’ve left the door open to sexual foreplay, while insisting that singles refrain from consummating that foreplay. In essence, we’re telling Christians singles that it is (or might be) permissible to start having sex, just as long as they don’t finish. It is little wonder then, that many Christian singles—while largely agreeing that intercourse should be reserved for marriage —find themselves unable to live out their own ideal.

    Does the Bible really have nothing definitive to say about premarital sexual ethics, beyond a narrow prohibition against sexual intercourse? Can we construct a theology of sexual relations that informs the question of premarital sexual boundaries?  What implications would a more objective view of premarital sexual ethics have for contemporary dating relationships?

    Answering the above questions is the aim of my new book, written along with my friend Jay Thomas, Sex, Dating, and Relationships: A Fresh Approach (Crossway, 2012). The book comes out at the end of February and is written at a popular level, targeting Christian singles between the ages of 18-35. (I thought about doing a provocative book trailer, but decided against it. I can see it now… Did Ghandi believe in dating? Really?). Anyway, while the book won’t be as controversial as Bell’s book on Hell, it will, I’m certain, generate some discussion among those who read it. Jay and I worked hard to offer a biblical, objective premarital sexual ethic that is consistent with a larger theological understanding of sexuality. The conclusion we reach is pretty counter-cultural even within our evangelical sub-culture. By way of teaser, let me give the punchline: making out between unmarried men and women is a sin, and represents the first stages of sexual immorality.

    I’ll be using the next few posts to lay out the basic argument of the book, in anticipation of the book’s release. Stay tuned.

    Categories: Book Reviews | General | Gerald Hiestand | SAET Fellow Publications | sexuality

    2 Comments

  • October 13, 2011 by Jason Hood

    Reviewing Wisdom (part 1): O’Dowd on O’Donnell on wisdom

    Douglas Sean O’Donnell, The Beginning and End of Wisdom: Preaching Christ from the First and Last Chapters of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Job (Crossway, 2011). Reviewed by Ryan Patrick O’Dowd.

    [[See the series introduction here.]]

    In his introduction to this book, Sidney Greidanus admonishes the church for its failure to read and preach Old Testament wisdom literature.  Greidanus shows that when the biblical sources churches use to equip God’s saints are inadequate, the health of the church suffers.  Douglas O’Donnell’s book is a creative and engaging introduction to these lost texts and a much needed book for a church long deprived of biblical wisdom.

    After a short introduction, O’Donnell provides six sermons on the first and last chapters of each wisdom book. These sermons are followed by a chapter on hermeneutics and homiletics and two appendices that help preachers to preach wisdom and poetry.  O’Donnell’s aim is twofold: one, to inspire love for the wisdom literature, and two, to motivate and guide preachers towards preaching good sermons from these books.  I have written two reviews in order to comment on both goals.  In the next review I will point to elements in O’Donnell’s methodology which demonstrate that the church’s struggle to preach wisdom literature today goes beyond the genre or our theological method.  This first review examines the content of O’Donnell’s sermons.

    O’Donnell’s sermons on Proverbs emphasize moral application.  He shows that wisdom is interested in giving us a particular guide for day-to-day life in the world, inspiring us to be grateful for the gift of wisdom.  O’Donnell explains that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, meaning that true wisdom can only be had if we start in the right place and aim in the right direction – an obedient faith in the covenant God who is the source of all wisdom.

    The argument is clear and persuasive in this chapter, though I would have taken the discussion a bit further.  Because O’Donnell views wisdom almost entirely within the categories of salvation and morality, he does not address the way wisdom speaks to vocational and cultural issues like aesthetics, architecture, education and politics.  Note, for example, the wisdom Bezalel had in building the tabernacle (Exod 31) – wisdom of skill that knows the material properties of God’s world.  Joseph and Daniel are given wisdom to govern and to interpret dreams and Solomon’s wisdom applies to a range of tasks from administering justice to building the Temple.

    When O’Donnell comes to his next sermon on the valiant woman in Proverbs 31, he again focuses on her moral and spiritual character.  But Proverbs 31 also provides lengthy illustrations of her accomplishments in agriculture, commerce, parenting, textiles, and social justice.  O’Donnell generically calls these her “industrious work,” referring briefly to Ruth and Boaz as people of character like the Valiant Woman and Woman Wisdom in Proverbs 8.  But he doesn’t explore these connections.  Had he done so, he might have opened up the way back to Woman Wisdom in Proverbs 8, who saw all the events of creation. Wisdom affirms the goodness of all the human vocations in this world, not just being a good wife.

    O’Donnell preaches with an explicit indebtedness to the tradition of Reformed theology and so I was surprised that he did not make use of the excellent Proverbs scholarship by Raymond Van Leeuwen and Al Wolters.  Not only do they share his Reformed heritage, but both show how Reformers like Luther, Calvin, Brenz and Melanchthon all saw the wisdom literature celebrating God’s whole creation, and with it, every dimension of human activity in the world.

    O’Donnell’s two chapters on Ecclesiastes describe what he calls “the futility of our work in this world,” warning us that our work adds nothing new to this world unless it is “in the Lord.”  In other words, work is futile but can be redeemed in Jesus the Messiah.

    This raises important questions: how do Christians in a fallen world balance the message of the futility of work with the goodness of work imagined in Proverbs 31?  And what does it mean for Jesus to redeem work?  The sermons don’t tackle these questions and I suspect that all pastors struggle to connect the physical resurrection of Jesus’ body with its specific application to our life in this world today.  In Colossians Paul tells us that Jesus’ resurrection begins the process of reconciling everything in the heavens and the earth.  He then prays for God to give his church wisdom so that we can bring the power of his resurrection to the world (compare Phil 3).  Simply put, wisdom is our guide to embody his renewing grace, peace, forgiveness and healing in all the broken places of the world: offices, schools, banks, hospitals, studios, and homes.  But we must first link wisdom to creation for this wisdom message in Colossians to make sense.

    In his sermons on Job, O’Donnell avoids the common error of moralizing Job’s story and concluding that Job suffers because he has sinned.  Such a move is shortsighted, as O’Donnell notes, because the narrator and God both strain to reaffirm Job as an upright and righteous man.  No, this book is about the mystery of a just God who introduces punishments into the life of a holy man.

    I was a little surprised that O’Donnell did not place this mystery in the context of the created order, as Job does in his first complaint about his suffering (3:1-10).  Here Job specifically reverses all the terms of light, life and goodness in the six day account of Genesis 1.  Job’s friends immediately defend God and accuse Job of sin; but they are misguided.  God’s response confirms that Job was on target from the beginning, answering Job’s complaint with a long series of questions that demonstrate the mysteries in the created world (chapters 38-42).   The point is that justice and suffering in Job are not just abstract ideas detached from life on earth.  They are visceral realities of the order of the universe that extend from human affairs to the sun, moon, clouds, rain, and soil.

    Though O’Donnell’s approach does not place suffering in a theology of creation, his excellent sermon on Job 42 nevertheless fits with this interpretation.  He argues that if Job is righteous, then there must be much about our human path in this world that remains a mystery to us: life exceeds our understanding and wisdom must know its limits! God does not give Job a rational explanation after all; instead he points to his power in the physical world as a reminder that his thoughts are not our thoughts.  The story ends with Job repentant, but the mystery left open.  O’Donnell shows that this mystery is only resolved in Jesus’ suffering and resurrection.  Indeed, the death of the righteous One and his rising again save us from our judgment and restore the whole world with a power that is beyond our imagining.  But that does not always lessen the anguish of suffering in our long wait for his kingdom to come at last.  Job is a long story that encourages a long wait.

    O’Donnell’s book is easy and useful reading, despite what I think is sometimes too narrow a focus that does not address the connections between creation and wisdom.  I am increasingly convinced that if wisdom sermons are going to have significant staying power, they will do best to delve into the roots of wisdom in the tangible, created world.

    Categories: Book Review | Book Reviews | General | Jason Hood | SAET Fellow Publications | Second Fellowship | wisdom

    0 Comments

  • October 12, 2011 by Gerald Hiestand

    New Book from Matthew Kim

    Dr. Matthew Kim (SAET First Fellowship) has recently released a  book for new pastors. The publisher’s description is below:

    In 7 Lessons for New Pastors, author Matthew Kim discusses various experiences he had during his first year as a senior pastor. He offers seven lessons that he learned and continues to learn as a young minister in hopes of assisting others as they navigate through their first year in ministry– and beyond. Learn how to create balance in your new life as a minister, get a “behind-the-scenes” look at what pastoral life is really like, and read advice on how to find the right church. Questions for individual or group reflection are included at the end of each chapter.

    Categories: General | Gerald Hiestand | SAET Fellow Publications

    0 Comments

  • August 17, 2011 by Gerald Hiestand

    The Beginning and End of Wisdom, By Doug O’Donnell

    Crossway has just published, The Beginning and End of Wisdom: Preaching Christ from the First and Last Chapters of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Job, by Doug O’Donnell (Second Fellowship). The publisher’s blurb is below, along with a few of the endorsements:

    Pastor Douglas O’Donnell writes, “Just as every book of the Old Testament adds light to our understanding of Jesus, so the revelation of God in the person of Christ enlightens our understanding of the Old Testament.” Not only do the wisdom books teach us about Jesus Christ, but we understand the books better in light of the revelation of God’s Son.

    O’Donnell opens up the genre of wisdom literature through six chapters that look at how the gospel shines through Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Job. He specifically centers on the first and last chapters of each book, noting how the texts illustrate “the wisdom of God in the sufferings of our Savior.” Pastors, church leaders, and students of Scripture will find this thoughtful volume demonstrative of seeing the gospel in the Wisdom Literature.

    “Douglas O’Donnell writes with infectious enthusiasm about the Wisdom Literature of the Bible. At a time when many Christians wonder how these books ‘fit in’ to the rest of Scripture, O’Donnell’s call to pay close attention to these books and his gripping introduction to them should be widely read.”
    —Peter J. Williams, Warden, Tyndale House, Cambridge, England

    “Doug O’Donnell’s sermons in this volume are all that a preaching commentary should be—analytic of the biblical text, wide-ranging in biblical scholarship, containing a wealth of ‘bridge building’ to everyday life, and stylistically excellent.”
    —Leland Ryken, professor of English, Wheaton College; author, The ESV and the English Bible Legacy

    “In an age of endless self-help courses, books, and psychobabble there are few parts of the Bible more needed than the Wisdom Literature. Christians need to learn from our creator how to live wisely in his world and, in learning this, discover how this literature leads to the gospel and points to Christ. Doug O’Donnell’s book seeks to show how we may know and enjoy the Wisdom Literature and preach Christ from it. Such an enterprise is timely and helpful for those who wish to live God’s way in his world.”
    —Phillip D. Jensen, Dean, St. Andrew’s Cathedral; co-author, Preach the Word: Essays on Expository Preaching: In Honor of R. Kent Hughes

    Categories: General | Gerald Hiestand | SAET Fellow Publications

    0 Comments

  • July 8, 2011 by Gerald Hiestand

    Sex, Dating and Relationships: A Fresh Approach

    Jay Thomas (SAET First Fellowship) and I are in the editing stage of a new book, Sex, Dating, and Relationships: A Fresh Approach (Crossway, forthcoming). The book is a follow-up to my first book, Raising Purity: Helping Parents Understand the Bible’s Perspective Sex, Dating, and Relationships (Iustificare Press, 2009), and is targeted toward singles between the ages 18-35. I’m sure I’ll have more to say about it in the days to come, but for now, here’s the publisher’s description:

    Answering prevalent questions like “How far is too far?” the authors articulate a biblical theology of sexuality and marriage aimed at persuading a new generation of Christians to get serious about honoring Christ with their sexuality.

    Considering the pervasive immorality and high divorce rate of our contemporary Christian culture, we evidently need a biblically based, theologically compelling, practical understanding of sex, dating, and relationships. Pastors Gerald Hiestand and Jay Thomas counteract this problem with their paradigm-shifting view of purity and relationships—a view that challenges even the basic assumptions of evangelical subculture.

    Unlike most books on dating, this one cuts straight to the heart of dating relationships, asserting with confidence that the line must be drawn at “no sexual activity” whatever. Few have dared to define and apply the Bible’s understanding of purity in premarital relationships to this degree, but Hiestand and Thomas have done it. Furthermore, both authors are vocational pastors who communicate regularly with the target audience and have a proven ability to express biblical truth in a winsome and compelling manner. Sex, Dating, and Relationships adds a new, almost provocative voice to the conversation that, with straightforward theological insight, pleads with Christians to get serious about honoring Christ with their sexuality.

    Categories: General | Gerald Hiestand | Jay Thomas | SAET Fellow Publications

    0 Comments

  • June 17, 2011 by Gerald Hiestand

    Erasing Hell — New Book by Preston Sprinkle and Francis Chan

    Preston Sprinkle (SAET First Fellowship) and Francis Chan have just released a new book on Hell. The book is a response to sort of theology being espoused by Rob Bell. Here’s the publisher’s blurb:

    Erasing Hell: What God Said About Eternity And The Things We Made Up (David C. Cook Publishing) – In this groundbreaking new book, Francis Chan and Preston Sprinkle take on the topic of hell and our eternal destiny, with a sense of humility and a deep respect for the inspired Word of God. They will address questions such as “Will everyone be saved?” and “Does God Get What He Wants in the End?” as well as reviewing in depth, everything Jesus said about Hell. Chan and Sprinkle lay all the evidence on the table and present all the facts from Scripture, so that people can decide what to believe for themselves.

    You ca pre-order your copy of Erasing Hell now through Amazon. Additionally, check out these videos interviews with Preston, where he talks about the book.

    Categories: General | Gerald Hiestand | Hell | Preston Sprinkle | SAET Fellow Publications

    0 Comments

  • June 10, 2011 by Jason Hood

    Vanhoozer Does SAET (part 2)

    (For part one click here.)

    KV spoke of the importance of direct and indirect communication (Kierkegaard’s distinction): story, parable, proverb, and action are vital (and sometimes overlooked) tools for getting a message across. This prompts KV to ask if forms or genres of Scripture have authority, and if so, how? If they are not authoritative, we could simply download true facts abstracted from the Bible and be done with the tricky forms! (I also have in my notes the question, “Is Paul’s life canonical?” i.e., 1 Cor 4:8-17, but I cannot remember if that’s KV’s idea or my own reflection.)

    The goal of theology is to form people of wisdom, not least so that theology and the life lived are not divorced. He gave the example of Philemon, where Paul foregoes command in order to facilitate a “fitting act that refreshes the heart,” as Vanhoozer interpreted it; or “prepared spontaneity,” in Paul Tripp’s wonderful phrase, brought out by Matthew Mason in his response paper. First Theology is about the gospel, but in a broad sense, larger than sin-defined needs–that’s milk, the beginning, but not the end.

    Kevin’s recommendations included Fred Sanders, The Deep Things of God; he urged us to pursue a trinitarian gospel-centeredness, so that our gospel accounts for and celebrates “Not just God for us, but God with us and in us.” This is just one example of KV’s consistent effort to overcome theory-praxis distinction, a theme that arose repeatedly inDrama and in our discussion. KV asks what it means to be biblical, and he very forcefully insists that it is not enough to have the right propositions in hand…we must follow those facts, “walk in the way,” exercising (and acting in) judgment: we are actors, not just spectators.

    The theologian also has the task of cultivating not just the intellect, but intellectual virtues, and habits of the mind linked to those virtues. Humility, not hubris; honesty, justice, patience; an intellectual pursuit that is “less about me.” A high view of our own thoughts over time makes us closed-minded and pastorally disastrous. (JH note: How do we balance this with the pastor-theologian as “public intellectual” and “Big Picture Specialist”?!? I’d recommend John Dickson’s new book, Humilitas.)

    Categories: Ecclesial Theologian | Ecclesial Theology | General | Jason Hood | Kevin Vanhoozer | SAET Fellow Publications | SAET Fellowship | The SAET

    1 Comment

  • April 22, 2011 by Gerald Hiestand

    New Book by Michael LeFebvre

    Michael LeFebvre (Second Fellowship) has a new book out this week, co-authored with Philip Ryken. Below, please find the publisher’s description of the book, along with a few endorsements.

    About Our Triune God
    How are we to relate to a three-personed God? The idea of the Trinity may initially seem too abstract to understand, but the truth is that a deeper knowledge of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit has daily importance. Convinced that many Christians “have some level of awareness that God is triune…[but] are virtually Unitarian,” the authors have written a practical and theologically robust resource to help readers grow closer to the Triune God.

    Philip Ryken and Michael LeFebvre examine the doctrine of the Trinity in four parts. They explain the roles of the Father, Son, and Spirit in salvation; answer difficult questions about the Trinity; explore the believer’s relationship to each person of the Trinity; and provide an exposition of the various Gospel narratives depicting how the three persons of the Trinity work together to accomplish the redemptive purposes of God. Their careful treatment of these central truths captures important implications for the Christian life.

    Our Triune God is a helpful guide for Christians wanting to deepen their faith and for pastors as they shepherd their congregations toward a richer love of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

    Endorsements
    “Philip Ryken and Michael LeFebvre have written a delightful book that will help us to better understand the great truth of the Trinity; one God in three Persons. Better yet, it should cause us to grow in our appreciation of the distinct works of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in our salvation and sanctification. I heartily commend this book.”
    -Jerry Bridges, author, The Pursuit of Holiness

    “The Westminster Shorter Catechism tells us that ‘man’s chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever.’ In this book, the authors bring that affirmation to life by showing us that the Trinity is not just a doctrine to be believed but a relationship to be experienced and enjoyed. Pastors, teachers, and believers everywhere will be refreshed and challenged by this stirring call to a deeper participation in the love of the triune God.”
    -Gerald Bray, Research Professor of Divinity, Beeson Divinity School

    Categories: Michael LeFebvre | SAET Fellow Publications

    0 Comments
« Previous Entries