jordanpfowler

One of the spiritual disciplines I practice is modernizing classical text. Why do I do it?

1. It forces me to slow read classical texts that are rich in content but difficult in their language.
2. It provides an means to generate language to restate the thoughts which then ingrains their ideas in my brain and heart.
3. While the modernizations will never replace the original in richness, they do offer a reader who would, at first sight, not engage the difficulty of the original. Perhaps they can catch its concepts or, better, be compelled to wrestle with the original.
4. I don’t want some of the classic writings, particularly the lesser known puritans, to disappear from the modern believer’s view.

In all my modernizations, I leave the original in the left column and in the right column offer my modernized interpretation. If others desire to read the modernizations then can easily look at the original to check my meaning. In certain works, I modernize phrase by phrase. In others, sentence by sentence. Each writer’s style dictates my method.

If you desire to pass on any modernization, you have my permission to do that. Please provide  full credit, including the reference to this site,  and insure that no edits are made. Theses are primarily for my own spiritual growth and I pass them on to be used for the sake of the Kingdom.

Tartar hides deep under our gums. Even after brushing it has to be dug out. When I know I have to go to the dentist I brush with extra diligence in the days approaching the appointment. And yet all this junk still comes out from under my gumline when the hygienist cleans with her instruments. Arrrgggghhhh! I thought I got that out.

I am learning that it is the same with confession and repentance. Sometimes I have to be really still for a long period and reflect to allow the Holy Spirit to scrape the recesses of my hearts. A cursory brushing won’t do.

We all* limit the atonement.  Some its effectiveness and its efficacy (Arminians), others its extent (Calvinists).

A Calvinist says the death of Christ on the cross actually did something in that moment to free all those from sin and death who had been elected by God (insert one zillion verses here). It didn’t simply create the potential for men and women to be saved, but actually saved them in that instant. In their time, God granted them gift of faith. In this view, God gives a totally dead person mouth to mouth and resuscitates us from a state of death.

An Arminian would say that Christ died for all (insert hundred verses here), thus not limiting the atonement’s extent but rather its efficacy. It gave us the potential to be saved as we come in by our freewill selection choosing to participate in Christ by faith, but did not as a proper act actually secure our salvation when He said, “It is finished.” He gave a severely injured person a wake up slap about the head to awaken them from near unconsciousness and said, “Medical help is here, do you give us permission to administer it?”

Each limit the atonement in some way.

*“all” meaning those who hold to a view of the atonement that Jesus was our substitute. I am aware there are models which say that Jesus was simply a good moral example on the cross, etc. Not smoking those pipes. That post coming soon enough.

Thoughts? Questions?