Stephen W. Hiemstra's Blog, page 11
June 15, 2025
Oración para Palabras
Por Stephen W. Hiemstra
Dios Todopoderoso, Autor de la Creación, Espíritu Santo,
Toda la alabanza y el honor, el poder y el dominio, la verdad y la justicia son tuyos, porque has usado palabras para crear el universo y nos las has enseñado.
Perdónanos cuando persistimos en la pasividad, prefiriendo la oscuridad a la luz y descuidando el aprendizaje de las palabras de nuestra salvación.
Gracias por el testimonio de los santos, el don de las Sagradas Escrituras y la promesa de un futuro brillante con tigo.
En el poder de tu Espíritu Santo,
¨Crea en mí, oh Dios, un corazón limpio, y renueva un espíritu recto dentro de mí. No me eches de tu presencia, y no quites de mí Tu Santo Espíritu. Restitúyeme el gozo de tu salvación, y sostenme con un espíritu de poder.¨ (Ps. 51:10-12)
En el precioso nombre de Jesús, Amén.
Oración para Palabras
Vea También:
Una Guía Cristiana a la Espiritualidad
Vida en Tensión
Otras Formas de Interactuar en Línea:
Sitio Web del Autor: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net
Sitio Web del Editor: http://www.T2Pneuma.com
Boletín Informativo en: https://bit.ly/Look_25, Signup
The post Oración para Palabras appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
June 13, 2025
Authors and Words
And God said, Let there be light,
and there was light.
(Gen 1:3)
By Stephen W. Hiemstra
If a crisis of authority—a replay of the reformation—is the core problem facing the church, then the Old Testament experience provides insight. Biblical faith starts with taking words seriously—God created the heavens and the earth with words—in a world where spin-doctors, advertisers, and half-truths undermine our confidence in what gets said.
Not incidentally, the root of the word authority is author—an originator or creator of something. The New Testament makes this point several times when it describes Jesus as the “author and finisher of our faith” (e.g. Heb 12:2, KJV). The Greek word in view—archenon (ἀρχηγὸν, BDAG 1154)—can mean: 1. one who has a preeminent position, leader, ruler, prince 2. one who begins something or 3. one who begins or originates. In a crisis of authority, one naturally defers to an authority.
Creation Language
Consider the third verse of Genesis cited above. The verse appears straightforward. That is, until you start to reflect on what is said.
The verse consists of three phrases: “And God said,” “Let there be light,” and “and there was light.” In English, the first phase is simply an attribution, as in a dialogue telling us who is talking. The second phase is an invitation. The third is a simple declaration. We are not told how the invitation morphs into a declaration.
The original Hebrew text is no help in understanding these three phases. Phases two and third state exactly the same thing: Be light and [there] be light (יְהִ֣י א֑וֹר וַֽיְהִי־אֽוֹר).
The grammatical description in my text (BDB 3570) describes the second phase as an apocopated jussive (abbreviated command), but that is likely an inference taken from the Greek translation in the Septuagint that utilizes an imperative form (γενηθήτω φῶς καὶ ἐγένετο φῶς). If it is a jussive, then why does not the text simply read: God commanded that light be created? It could easily but it does not.
The grammatical translation in English, as in Greek, expresses unusual politeness, as a parent might employ with a child and the subtext is ethical: What God says; God does. This point is underscored in verse four: “And God saw that the light was good.” (Gen 1:4). This form is repeated over and over in the creation accounts, which suggests emphasis and draws attention to the importance of words in the text.
Because we are created in the image of God and want to reflect his image, if God treats words as important, then we should too. This is context where we later witness the creation of Adam and Eve.
Words and Actions
What if we assume a promise, not an imperative, in translating the third verse in Genesis: Be light and [there will] be light? Grammatically, this is not a stretch but only an interpretation no different than that expressed in an imperative.
Jenson (1973, 2) writes: “A promise pose a future in a very particular way: as gift.” Creation is clearly a gift for Adam and Eve, And, by inference, for us. Jenson (1973, 8) interprets the Gospel as promise and views it as the grammatical anthesis of law.
“Because I will do such and such, you may await such and such. The pattern is ‘Because…, therefore…,’ the reverse of ‘If…,then…’ Here the future is opened independent of any prior condition…it grants a future free from the past.”
Viewing creation as a promise rather than an invitation is interesting thought experiment for two reasons. First, the hearer participates actively in the future event—a formative process—rather than remaining a passive observer of the past. Second, it permits us to observe the agent of formation, the Holy Spirit.
Unfortunately, treating the imperative as a promise is less helpful in discussing parallel verses in later creation events, suggesting that the current invitation translation is preferred. Nevertheless, we engage in thought experiments to tease out insights that deepen our understanding of the text, a kind of meditative exercise not unlike lectio divina (Peterson 2006, 91).
Other Promises
The biblical template for faith in an individual is a coming of age story that begins when Abraham acts on God’s promise (Gen 12:1-3). The biblical template for faith in a community begins with a promise to Moses: Deliverance, freedom, and land (Exod 3:7-10). Formation occurs in accepting and sticking with the journey under guidance of the Holy Spirit.
The Bible takes words seriously, yet the God of the Bible does not prefer any particular human language. The church could be defined as a community where people listen both to God and to one another.
References
Jenson, Robert W. 1973. Story and Promise: A Brief Theology of the Gospel About Jesus. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
Peterson, Eugene H. 2006. Eat This Book: A Conversation in the Art of Spiritual Reading. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Authors and Word
Also see:
The Face of God in the Parables
The Who Question
Preface to a Life in Tension
Other ways to engage online:
Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net
Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com
Newsletter at: https://bit.ly/Look_25 , Signup
The post Authors and Words appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
Autores y Palabras
Entonces dijo Dios:`Sea la luz.
Y hubo luz. (Gen 1:3)
Por Stephen W. Hiemstra
Si una crisis de autoridad—una repetición de la Reforma—es el problema central que enfrenta la iglesia hoy, entonces la experiencia del Antiguo Testamento proporciona una idea. Para comprender las Escrituras es necesario tomar en serio las palabras—Dios creó los cielos y la tierra con palabras. El gobierno de Dios sobre la creación se ve subrayado por su creación con palabras, ya que “los tratados antiguos [como el pacto de la creación] se caracterizaban como las ‘palabras’ del soberano [es decir, el rey de reyes]” (Niehaus 2014, 209). Esto nos parece extraño porque vivimos en un mundo en el que los asesores de imagen, los publicistas y las medias verdades minan nuestra confianza en la palabra hablada.
No es casualidad que la raíz de la palabra autoridad sea autor: Un originador o creador de algo. El Nuevo Testamento menciona este punto varias veces cuando describe a Jesús como “el autor y consumador de nuestra fe” (por ejemplo, Heb 12:2). La palabra griega en cuestión—archenon (BDAG 1154)—puede significar: “Alguien que tiene una posición preeminente, líder, gobernante, príncipe” o “alguien que comienza algo” o “alguien que comienza u origina.”
Una crisis de autoridad puede caracterizarse como un conflicto entre autoridades en competencia. En los círculos cristianos, esta crisis se discute estrechamente en el contexto de las disputas sobre la autoridad de las Escrituras, pero como las Escrituras definen nuestra imagen de Dios, la crisis es más profunda. La visión materialista del mundo, al definir a Dios, simplemente trata las Escrituras como un artefacto cultural, no como una autoridad, y trata al cristianismo como una preferencia privada sin ningún derecho sobre el cuerpo político.
Idioma de Creación
Consideremos el tercer versículo del Génesis citado anteriormente, donde se nos presenta una creación moral. El verso parece sencillo. Esto es, hasta que empiezas a reflexionar sobre lo que se dice.
El versículo consta de tres frases: ¨Entonces dijo Dios,¨ ¨sea la luz,” y ¨hubo luz.¨ (Gen 1:3) La primera fase es simplemente una atribución que nos dice quién está hablando. La segunda fase es una invitación. La tercera es una declaración sencilla. No se nos dice cómo la invitación se transforma en una declaración.
El texto hebreo original no ayuda a comprender estas tres fases. Las fases dos y tercera establecen exactamente lo mismo: Sea la luz y sea la luz.
La descripción gramatical en mi texto (BDB 3570) describe la segunda fase como un yusivo apocopado (mandato abreviado), pero es probable que sea una inferencia tomada de la traducción griega de la Septuaginta que utiliza una forma imperativa. Si es un yusivo, entonces ¿por qué el texto no dice simplemente: Dios ordenó que se creara la luz? Podría fácilmente pero no lo hace.
La traducción gramatical, como en griego, expresa una cortesía inusual, como la que un padre podría emplear con un hijo, y el subtexto es ético: lo que Dios dice, Dios lo hace. Este punto se subraya en versículo cuarto: ¨Dios vio que la luz era buena.¨ (Gen 1:4) Esta forma se repite una y otra vez en los relatos de la creación, lo que sugiere énfasis y llama la atención sobre la importancia de las palabras en el texto.
Palabras y Acciones
¿Qué pasa si asumimos una promesa, no un imperativo, al traducir el tercer versículo del Génesis: Sé luz y habrá luz? Este experimento mental puede ayudarnos a extraer ideas que profundicen nuestra comprensión del texto, un ejercicio meditativo no muy diferente de la lectio divina (Peterson 2006, 91). Gramaticalmente, esto no es una exageración, sino sólo una interpretación que no se diferencia de la que se expresa en un imperativo.
Robert Jenson (1973, 2) escribe: “Una promesa plantea un futuro de una manera muy particular: como un regalo.” La creación es claramente un regalo para Adán y Eva y, por inferencia, para nosotros.
Jenson (1973, 8) interpreta el Evangelio como promesa y lo ve como la antítesis gramatical de la ley:
“Porque haré esto y aquello, podéis esperar esto y aquello. El patrón es “Porque…, por lo tanto…”, lo inverso de “Si…, entonces….” Aquí el futuro se abre independientemente de cualquier condición previa…otorga un futuro libre del pasado.”
Considerar la creación como una promesa más que como una invitación es un experimento mental interesante por dos razones. En primer lugar, el oyente participa activamente en el acontecimiento futuro—un proceso formativo—en lugar de permanecer como un observador pasivo del pasado. En segundo lugar, nos permite observar al agente de la formación, el Espíritu Santo.
Otras Promesas
El modelo bíblico para la fe en un individuo es una historia de llegada a la edad adulta que comienza cuando Abraham actúa según la promesa de Dios (Gén 12:1-3). El modelo bíblico para la fe en una comunidad comienza con una promesa a Moisés: Liberación, libertad, y tierra (Éxodo 3:7-10). La formación se produce al aceptar y perseverar en el camino bajo la guía del Espíritu Santo.
Entre paréntesis, buscar lugares en el Antiguo Testamento donde el Espíritu Santo estuvo activo difiere del enfoque habitual de anotar dónde el texto hace referencia al Espíritu Santo. Jeffrey Niehaus (2014, 70-73) observa que en el Antiguo Testamento normalmente se considera al Espíritu Santo como alguien que viene o llena a alguien para una tarea o por un tiempo, no que habita en una persona indefinidamente como en la comprensión del Nuevo Testamento. Pone el ejemplo: ¨Entonces Samuel tomó el cuerno de aceite y lo ungió en medio de sus hermanos. Y el Espíritu del SEÑOR vino poderosamente sobre David desde aquel día en adelante.¨ (1 Sam 16:13)
La Biblia toma las palabras en serio, pero el Dios de la Biblia no prefiere ningún lenguaje humano en particular. La iglesia podría definirse como una comunidad donde las personas escuchan tanto a Dios como a los demás.
Autores y Palabras
Vea También:
Una Guía Cristiana a la Espiritualidad
Vida en Tensión
Otras Formas de Interactuar en Línea:
Sitio Web del Autor: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net
Sitio Web del Editor: http://www.T2Pneuma.com
Boletín Informativo en: https://bit.ly/Look_25, Signup
The post Autores y Palabras appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
June 10, 2025
Kinnaman and Lyon Research Faithful Living, Part 1
David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons. 2016. Good Faith: Being A Christian When Society Thinks You’re Irrelevant and Extreme. Grand Rapids: BakerBooks. (Goto part 2; goto part 3)
Review by Stephen W. Hiemstra
During periods of philosophical transition, old verities no longer work and the new ones have yet to be discovered. In the early stage of a transition, the focus remains on the past. The middle stage begins once the obsession with the past subsides, but the future still remains murky. This middle stage holds the most uncertainty, but it also offers the most potential for innovation; that is, until the final stage comes into focus. Because the church currently finds itself in this middle stage, statistically-based research adds great value to the conversation.
IntroductionDavid Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons’ new book, Good Faith, starts by posing this question:
“What does the future hold for people of faith when people perceive Christians as irrelevant and extreme?” (12)
The purpose of their book is “to make a case for good faith” (15) which they described as having “three essential ingredients”, which are: “how well you love, what you believe, and how you live” (72). Kinnaman and Lyons explain these three ingredients in terms of loving God and loving others, remaining biblically orthodox, and living a lifestyle consistent with the two (72-74).
Irrelevant and ExtremeSo why do people perceive faith to be irrelevant and extreme?
Irrelevant.Kinnaman and Lyons see the perception of irrelevance as a combination of apathy and ignorance (21-22).
Apathy jumps out of some basic statistics. Three out of four Americans have some Christian background, but only two in five Christians actively practice their faith (27). The good news is that the share of Christians who practice their faith has remained relatively stable over the generations (224).The decline in the share of nominal Christians, however, normally dominates the headlines.
Role of the Church in CharityWith little or no social pressure to maintain ties to the church, many American remain ignorant of the role of the church in our culture. For example, many people do not realize that religious groups “make up the largest single share of national charitable giving” (30). When the Obama administration wanted to make progress on prison reform, hunger relief, combating sex-trafficking, and fighting poverty, they called on Christian-led organizations who did the most work in these areas (21). The Christian influence is not understood, in part, because people do not know that many American institutions, including school and universities, hospitals, labor unions, public libraries, voting rights for women and minorities, and endowments for the arts and sciences, began as Christian initiatives (33).
Halo EffectIf you still believe that faith does not matter, consider a secular study done by economists at the University of Pennsylvania which looked at the economic benefit (or “halo effect”) of a dozen houses of worship (ten Protestant churches, one Catholic, and one Jewish) in Philadelphia. The study estimated the economic benefit to be $50 million per year (238). Another study, sponsored by World Vision in 2014, found that people generally believed churches should be involved in public issues like child protection and human rights, but were less tolerant of church involvement in their own spiritual lives (239).
Extreme.Christian faith appears extreme, not because it is dangerous, but because it is different (22). Pluralistic culture presumably preaches love and individualism, but endless corporate advertising homogenizes perceptions around consumerism and conformity, debasing real love and making a mockery of individual gifts, differences, and preferences.
Kinnaman and Lyons ask a pointed question: “Is it extremism when people live according to what they believe to be true about the world?” (40) Many Americans apparently would answer yes. Kinnaman and Lyons observe:
“While not majority opinions, millions of adults contend that behaviors such as donating money to religious causes, reading the Bible silently in public, and even attending church or volunteering are examples of religious extremism.” (41)
Conversation DifficultBecause many Americans believe that Christian faith is extremist, conversation across the faith divide has become more difficult. A majority of Americans, for example, find it is more difficult to speak with an evangelical (55%) than someone in the LGBT community (52%) (45).
In part 1 of this review, I have provided an overview of the author’s problem statement. In parts 2 and 3 I will look at their suggestions for how to deal with the problem.
AssessmentIn their new book, Good Faith, David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons explore the perceptions that Christian faith is both irrelevant and extreme, employing empirical studies and data to make their case. Their analysis bears examination and discussion by practicing Christians, seminary students, pastors, and researchers.
https://www.barna.com, @BarnaGroup, www.GoodFaithBook.org, @DavidKinnaman, http://QIdeas.org, @GabeLyons
Kinnaman and Lyon Research Faithful Living, Part 1Also see:Books, Films, and MinistryOther ways to engage online:Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com Newsletter at: https://bit.ly/Look_25 , SignupThe post Kinnaman and Lyon Research Faithful Living, Part 1 appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
June 9, 2025
Challenge: Monday Monologues (podcast), June 9, 2025
By Stephen W. Hiemstra
This morning I will share a prayer and reflect on the Core Challenge. After listening, please click here to take a brief listener survey (10 questions).
To listen, click on this link.
Hear the words; Walk the steps; Experience the joy!
Challenge: Monday Monologues (podcast), June 9, 2025
Also see:
The Face of God in the Parables
The Who Question
Preface to a Life in Tension
Other ways to engage online:
Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net
Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com
Newsletter at: https://bit.ly/Look_25 , Signup
The post Challenge: Monday Monologues (podcast), June 9, 2025 appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
June 8, 2025
Challenge Prayer
By Stephen W. Hiemstra
Almighty and Loving God,
All praise and honor, power and dominion, truth and justice are yours because you sent Christ to die for our sins and raised him from the dead.
We confess that by ourselves, we are lost and broken, unable to contend with the spirits of our day. Cast out the spirits that afflict us, cleanse our hearts, and redeem us for you alone.
We give thanks for the newness of the morning sun, the work that you have given us, and the comfort of family and church. Cast out the spirits that afflict us, cleanse our hearts, and redeem us for you alone.
In the power of your Holy Spirit, draw us to yourself. Open our hearts, illumine our thoughts, and strengthen us in your service.
In Jesus’ precious name, Amen.
Challenge Prayer
Also see:
The Face of God in the Parables
The Who Question
Preface to a Life in Tension
Other ways to engage online:
Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net
Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com
Newsletter at: https://bit.ly/Look_25 , Signup
The post Challenge Prayer appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
Oración de Desafío
Por Stephen W. Hiemstra
Dios Todopoderoso y Amoroso,
Toda la alabanza y el honor, el poder y el dominio, la verdad y la justicia son tuyos porque enviaste a Cristo a morir por nuestros pecados y lo resucitaste de entre los muertos.
Confesamos que por nosotros mismos estamos perdidos y quebrantados, incapaces de contender con los espíritus de nuestro día. Echa fuera los espíritus que nos afligen, limpia nuestros corazones y redímenos sólo para ti.
Damos gracias por la novedad del sol de la mañana, el trabajo que nos has dado y el consuelo de la familia y la iglesia. Echa fuera los espíritus que nos afligen, limpia nuestros corazones y redímenos sólo para ti.
Con el poder de tu Espíritu Santo, atráenos hacia ti. Abre nuestros corazones, ilumina nuestros pensamientos y fortalécenos en tu servicio.
En el precioso nombre de Jesús, Amén.
Oración de Desafío
Vea También:
Una Guía Cristiana a la Espiritualidad
Vida en Tensión
Otras Formas de Interactuar en Línea:
Sitio Web del Autor: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net
Sitio Web del Editor: http://www.T2Pneuma.com
Boletín Informativo en: https://bit.ly/Look_25, Signup
The post Oración de Desafío appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
June 6, 2025
The Core Challenge
Jesus said to him, I am the way, and the truth, and the life.
No one comes to the Father except through me.
(John 14:6)
By Stephen W. Hiemstra
If the slander of Marx, Freud, and Nietzsche, posed no philosophical threat to the church, more recent challenges have been more fundamentally challenging to both biblical authority and the church’s witness to it.
The cultural-historical argument put forward by Jack Rogers (2009, 33), a Presbyterian theologian at San Francisco Theological Seminary, and published by the Westminster John Knox Press was evocative: The church got it wrong about slavery, women, and divorce, now it has gotten wrong about homosexuality. Roger’s book was used to launch a successful nationwide campaign within the Presbyterian Church (USA) to ordain homosexuals and to support gay marriage.
Roger’s book goes on to challenge orthodox biblical hermeneutics. Where an orthodox approach to biblical interpretation would consider the author’s intent, other statements in scripture, and the reader interpretation (Vanhoozer 1998, 25) in the original languages, Rogers (2009, 61) advises to focus on the double-love command. What would a loving God want us to say or do? While the role of love in Christian witness is undeniable, God’s self-revelation to Moses is more complete: “The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness.” (Exod 34:6) God is love, but he is not only love.
While one might criticize Rogers as unrepresentative, unbiblical, and unorthodox, his critique split the Presbyterian Church (USA) and other denominations since then. The problem is that his core challenge is at least partially true and Roger’s argument is intuitive to any rebellious teenager. In our anti-intellectual milieu, who has the patience to hear out a complex, theological rebuttal?
The crisis of authority that led to the reformation began with the infusion of humanism into the church. Roger’s anthropological argument reiterates this same humanistic critique. Its the Bible and tradition once again, but this time the tradition taken is from culture, not church practice. The reformers broke away from the Catholic Church to emphasize the authority of scripture much like the breakaway denominations today.
The Role of Materialism
At the time of the reformation (after 1517), few people doubted the metaphysical reality of God and most people could not read a Latin Bible. When Luther and others translated the Bible into the languages commonly understood, this was something new and intriguing for most people who could not read even their own native languages. When Calvin introduced public education in Geneva, it was expressly so that they could read their own Bibles.
Today in our materialistic culture, most Western people are functionally literate. What is different is that the metaphysical reality of God is openly ridiculed in public schools, in the media, and among intellectuals. Furthermore, the deconstructionism promoted by cultural Marxists, which questions all forms of authority (e.g. Marcuse 1974, 36), leaves people suspicious of all leaders and radically alone (Nouwen 2010, 12). A replay of the crisis of authority from the reformation accordingly plays differently in this new cultural context.
Loss of the Christendom and Church-State Separation
Returning to this problem of the loss of Christendom and church-state separation, the new cultural context provides no shelter from secular intrusion to our kids. Even as the formational concern becomes more critical for adults, our kids are growing up without the benefit of having seen things work differently than the view given them on television, in public schools, and everywhere else they turn. Every flavor of perversion is immediately available and poses a claim on a kid’s devotion even as parents fight daily to maintain standards of living and decency.
In this context, cultural Christianity offers no bulwark against the evil and slander of our time. The good news is that Christ died for our sins so that we don’t have to.
References
Marcuse, Herbert. 1974. Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud (Orig Pub 1955). Boston: Beacon Press. Nouwen, Henri J. M. 2010. Wounded Healer: Ministry in Contemporary Society (Orig 1972). New York: Image Doubleday. Rogers, Jack. 2009. Jesus, The Bible, and Homosexuality: Explode the Myths, Heal the Church. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press. Vanhoozer, Kevin J. 1998. Is There a Meaning in This Text: The Bible, The Reader, and the Morality of Literary Knowledge. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
The Core Challenge
Also see:
The Face of God in the Parables
The Who Question
Preface to a Life in Tension
Other ways to engage online:
Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net
Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com
Newsletter at: https://bit.ly/Look_25 , Signup
The post The Core Challenge appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
El Desafío Posmoderno
Yo soy el camino, la verdad y la vida;
nadie viene al Padre sino por mí.
(Juan 14:6)
Por Stephen W. Hiemstra
Si las calumnias de Marx, Freud y Nietzsche no representaban una amenaza filosófica para la iglesia, desafíos más recientes han cuestionado tanto la autoridad bíblica como el testimonio que la iglesia da al respecto.
El argumento histórico-cultural presentado por Jack Rogers (2009, 33), un teólogo presbiteriano del Seminario Teológico de San Francisco y publicado por Westminster John Knox Press, fue evocador: La Iglesia se equivocó acerca de la esclavitud, las mujeres y el divorcio. Ahora se han equivocado respecto a la homosexualidad.
El libro de Roger se utilizó para lanzar una exitosa campaña a nivel nacional dentro de la Iglesia Presbiteriana (EE. UU.) para ordenar a los homosexuales y apoyar el matrimonio homosexual.
El libro de Roger continúa desafiando la hermenéutica bíblica ortodoxa. Mientras que un enfoque ortodoxo de la interpretación bíblica consideraría la intención del autor, otras declaraciones en las Escrituras y la interpretación del lector (Vanhoozer 1998, 25) en los idiomas originales, Rogers (2009, 61) aconseja centrarse en el mandamiento del doble amor. ¿Qué querría un Dios amoroso que dijéramos o hiciéramos?
Si bien el papel del amor en el testimonio cristiano es innegable, la autorrevelación de Dios a Moisés es más completa: “El SEÑOR, el SEÑOR, Dios compasivo y clemente, lento para la ira y abundante en misericordia y verdad (fidelidad).” (Exod 34:6) Dios es amor, pero no es sólo amor.
Aunque uno podría criticar a Rogers por no ser representativo, no bíblico y poco ortodoxo, su crítica ha dividido a la Iglesia Presbiteriana (EE. UU.) y otras denominaciones desde entonces. El problema es que su crítica es al menos parcialmente cierta y el argumento de Roger es intuitivo para cualquier adolescente rebelde. En nuestro ambiente antiintelectual, ¿quién tiene paciencia para escuchar una refutación teológica compleja?
La crisis de autoridad que condujo a la Reforma comenzó con la infusión del humanismo en la iglesia. El argumento antropológico de Roger reitera una crítica humanista similar. Se trata de la Biblia y la tradición una vez más, pero esta vez la tradición tomada de la cultura, no de la práctica de la iglesia.
Los reformadores se separaron de la Iglesia Católica para enfatizar la autoridad de las Escrituras, de forma muy similar a lo que hacen las denominaciones separatistas de la actualidad.
El Papel del Materialismo
En la época de la Reforma (después de 1517), pocas personas dudaban de la realidad metafísica de Dios y la mayoría de la gente no sabía leer una Biblia en latín. Cuando Lutero y otros tradujeron la Biblia a los idiomas comúnmente entendidos, esto fue algo nuevo e intrigante porque la mayoría de la gente no podía leer ni siquiera sus propios idiomas nativos. Cuando Calvino introdujo la educación pública en Ginebra, lo hizo expresamente para que pudieran leer sus propias Biblias.
Hoy en día, en nuestra cultura materialista, la mayoría de los occidentales son funcionalmente alfabetizados. Lo diferente es que la realidad metafísica de Dios es ridiculizada abiertamente en las escuelas públicas, en los medios de comunicación y entre los intelectuales. Además, el deconstruccionismo promovido por los marxistas culturales cuestiona todas las formas de autoridad (por ejemplo, Marcuse 1974, 36) y deja a la gente desconfiada de todos los líderes y radicalmente aislada (Nouwen 2010, 12). Por lo tanto, la repetición de la crisis de autoridad de la Reforma se presenta de manera diferente en este nuevo contexto cultural, porque por definición el materialismo excluye la existencia de Dios.
Pérdida de la Cristiandad y Separación Iglesia-Estado
Volviendo a este problema de la pérdida de la cristiandad y de la separación Iglesia-Estado, el nuevo contexto cultural no ofrece ningún refugio contra la intrusión secular para nuestros hijos. Si bien la preocupación formativa se vuelve más crítica para los adultos, nuestros hijos están creciendo sin el beneficio de haber visto que las cosas funcionan de manera diferente a la que se les muestra en la televisión, en las escuelas públicas y en todos los lugares a los que van. Todo tipo de perversión está inmediatamente disponible y exige la devoción de un niño, incluso cuando los padres luchan diariamente por mantener su nivel de vida y la decencia.
En este contexto, el cristianismo cultural no ofrece ningún baluarte contra el mal y la calumnia de nuestro tiempo. La buena noticia es que Cristo murió por nuestros pecados para que no tengamos que hacerlo.
El Desafío Posmoderno
Vea También:
Una Guía Cristiana a la Espiritualidad
Vida en Tensión
Otras Formas de Interactuar en Línea:
Sitio Web del Autor: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net
Sitio Web del Editor: http://www.T2Pneuma.com
Boletín Informativo en: https://bit.ly/Look_25, Signup
The post El Desafío Posmoderno appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
June 3, 2025
Kress Writes Fiction with Logic and Flair
Nancy Kress. 2005. Characters, Emotion, and Viewpoint. Cincinnati: Writer’s Digest Books.
Review by Stephen W. Hiemstra
One of the dividing lines between fiction and nonfiction writing shows itself in the indirect way that fiction writers express themselves, “showing” rather than “telling” the reader. Showing a characteristic or emotion subtly transforms the reader from an observer into a participant in the story. Depending on whose head the reader occupies, we arrive at the “point of view” (POV) that the author wants to use, something that nonfiction writers may treat casually or simply ignore. In her book, Characters, Emotion, and Viewpoint, Nancy Kress offers us a guide to this subtly in three parts—character, emotion, and point of view.
CharacterKress sees character defining fiction because character differences shape plots, settings, and writing styles, even if the influence cuts both ways (2-3). These subtle influences require that the writer adopt different perspectives, that of the writer, the character, the reader, and the critic, but at different times (3-4, 221). She sees four sources for interesting characters: “yourself, real people you know, real people you hear about, and pure imagination.” (5)
An important aspect of character is whether they are “stayers” or “changers”. Kress writes: “Changers are characters who alter in significant ways as a result of the events of your story.” By contrast, stayers may be heroes, like James Bond, who remain remarkably unflappable over time and always get the villain or may be tragically flawed and “come to grief because of their blindness.” (10) Likewise, motivations that characters exhibit may either be unchanging or change over the course of the story. Thus, four basic character/plot patterns emerge from the interaction of personality and motivation:
Personality stable, motivation stable;Personality stable, motivation changes;Personality changes, motivation stable; andPersonality changes, motivation changes (67).The key to any change in personality or motivation is to make it believable.
EmotionKress sees emotion derived “from two other critical concepts: motivation and backstory” where “motivation means that someone wants something” (35-36) and backstory explains why. The backstory can be given in: brief detail, an inserted paragraph, a flashback or an expository dump (39). Motivation gets interesting when a character has conflicting or mixed motivations that help define character (52-54).
Expressing emotion is tricky because characters differ in ethnicity, family background, region, gender, education, and circumstances (106-108). In view of these differences, writing dialogue is tricky—we do not speak the same and we reveal emotions to just anyone. Because many people are uptight about expressing emotion, Kress cites several occasions that might allow emotional dialogue to proceed, like keeping a journal, writing a letter, talking to a pet, therapist, or priest (114-115). Another way to open up emotions is to infer them through the use of metaphors and symbols (120-121, 124).
In her inventory of emotions, Kress highlight frustration as important in plot development and authenticity in character development. Kress writes:
“Because frustration is such an important emotion in fiction, how well you portray it can make the difference between characters that seem real and those that seem cardboard.” (150)
Kress sees: “four modes of conveying emotion: action, dialogue, bodily sensations, and character’s thoughts” (46) which implies that frustration must too be displayed in various modes.
Point of ViewBecause we are only really privy to our own emotions, fiction fascinates us because we get to experience someone else’s (158) and writers get to choose both which character’s POV is highlighted and how much story time it gets. Kress suggests these criteria in choosing a POV character:
“Who will be hurt by the action? . . .Who can be present at the climax? . . .Who gets most of the good scenes? . . .What will provide an interesting outlook on the story? . . .Whose head are you most interested in inhabiting during this story?” (160-161)After choosing a POV character, the next step is to decide how the author will appear in the narration—“first person, third person, omniscient, or (rarely) the ‘novelty’ points of view: second, plural first, plural third, and epistolary.” (163)
While most of these POVs are well known, in the case of the third person, which is most common, Kress further delves into the question of distance—close third, medium-distance third, and distant third—which deals with the level of intimacy that the author presumes. (185) Close third allows the author to read the character’s thoughts, almost like first person, while distant third views the character as external and more formal. (188) Middle-distance third remains somewhere inbetween. The clincher is that the author can move between these three categories, although too much jumping around is confusing. (190) Kress suggests sticking with one perspective per scene. (194-195)
Nancy Kress is a writing instructor with several writing books and a novelist, specializing in science fiction and fantasy. Awards that her books have won include:
“six Nebulas (for ‘Out of All Them Bright Stars,’ ‘Beggars in Spain,’ ‘The Flowers of Aulit Prison,’ ‘Fountain of Age,’ ‘After the Fall, Before the Fall, and During the Fall,’ and ‘Yesterday’s Kin’), two Hugos (for ‘Beggars in Spain’ and ‘The Erdmann Nexus’), a Sturgeon (for ‘The Flowers of Aulit Prison’), and a John W. Campbell Memorial Award (for PROBABILITY SPACE).”
Her most recent degrees are from the State University of New York at Brockport, where she had earned an M.S. in education (1977) and an M.A. in English (1979).
Nancy Kress’ book, Characters, Emotion, and Viewpoint, is a how-to-book for fiction writers. Nonfiction writers, like myself, can also benefit both from becoming better informed about descriptive writing and from learning to write tighter stories, which appear in most nonfiction writing. Kress’ writing is accessible, a joy to read, and displays a wonderful knowledge of classical fiction writing.
ReferencesKress, Nancy. 2004. Dynamic Characters. Cincinnati: Writer’s Digest Books.
Kress, Nancy. 2011. Beginnings, Middles, and Ends. Cincinnati: Writer’s Digest Books.
Other than this book, she has written Dynamic Characters (2004) and Beginnings, Middles, and Ends (2011).
Kress Writes Fiction with Logic and FlairAlso see:Books, Films, and MinistryOther ways to engage online:Author site: http://www.StephenWHiemstra.net Publisher site: http://www.T2Pneuma.com Newsletter at: https://bit.ly/Look_25 , Signup
The post Kress Writes Fiction with Logic and Flair appeared first on T2Pneuma.net.
