Theology beacon dictionary of theology
Download 6.66 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- (nasb);
- A Theological Word Book of the Bible
- For Further
- For Further Reading: GMS, 152
- FOREORDINATION. See
- For Further Reading: Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament
- FORGIVENESS (cont.)
- JUSTIFICATION, MERCY, ATONEMENT, REPENTANCE, CONFESSION OF SINS, RESTITUTION.
- For Further Reading: Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, "Gospels and Acts"; Bultmann and Knudsin, Form Criticism; Martin
- The Relevance of the Prophets
- ADULTERY, PURITY AND MATURITY, INTEGRITY, IDOL (IDOLATRY), WORLD (WORLDLINESS), MARRIAGE. For Further Reading: ERE. LEROY E. LlNDSEY
FLOOD, THE. This refers to the biblical account of the destruction of the ancient world due to the prevailing wickedness of the day. This event, recorded in Genesis 6—9, takes place at a critical juncture in human history, for after describing the state of continual evil in the heart of man, the Bible states that "the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth" (6:6, nasb). The Flood is important in the history of revelation because it indicates how God deals with the problem of human sin—bringing judgment upon unrepentant evildoers and providing divine deliverance for righteous Noah. Herein then are two important theological emphases to be noted. First is the divine judgment for sin. The context of Genesis 6 graphically illustrates the moral condition of mankind which brought about the necessity of judgment. Elsewhere in Scripture reference is made to the time of Noah as symbolic of great wickedness and resulting judgment. In Isa. 54:9 God refers to the Babylonian captivity as being "like the days of Noah to Me" (nasb); and in the NT Jesus compares the moral climate of the time of His return to that of Noah's age (Matt. 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27). The second important theological emphasis in the story of the Flood is the gracious deliverance provided by God for righteous Noah. Amid the moral decadence of his day Noah is "a righteous man, blameless in his time; Noah walked with God" (Gen. 6:9, nasb). God's justness and mercy are manifested in that He gives clear direction to insure the deliverance of Noah and his family. In connection with Noah there is the occurrence of two important words for the first time in Scripture: (1) "Grace" or "favor" in Gen. 6:8, "But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord" (nasb); (2) "covenant" in verse 18, "But I will establish My covenant with you" (nasb). Both of these terms, so characteristic of biblical redemption, are initially expressed in the deliverance of Noah. See new covenant, judge (judgment), catastrophism, sin. For Further Reading: Richardson, ed„ A Theological Word Book of the Bible, 159; von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 1:154-57. alvin S. lawhead FOOL, FOOLISHNESS, FOLLY. These terms denote unwise conduct, careless judgment, wit-lessness, not necessarily implying lack of intellect. "A fool is not one who is deficient in the power of logical thought, but one who lacks the natural discernment and tact required for success in life" (HDB, 43). A man may be a fool who is careless, thoughtless, or just indifferent, but he may also be so because he ignores God and scoffs at religion and the instruction of others. It can imply a practical atheism as in Ps. 14:1 and 53:1. In the KJV one or the other of these words occurs some 60 times, almost all in the OT and two-thirds of these in the Wisdom Literature. The Hebrew word kesil is most commonly used (particularly in Proverbs) and refers to one lacking in judgment, a stupid person (e.g., Prov. 10:1, 18, 23; 13:19) but the stronger word holelot, found more often in Ecclesiastes, is translated "madness" (e.g., 1:17; 2:12; 7:25; 9:3; 10:13). The ethical implications are included in the word nebal or nebalah meaning "contemptible" or "shamelessly immoral," as in Gen. 34:7; Deut. 32:21; 2 Sam. 3:33; Job 2:10; Isa. 32:5-6. The common root word used in the NT for fool or foolishness is mows. Although it implies a moral content, it more generally means merely thoughtless or imprudent behavior such as that of the man who built his house on the sand (Matt. 7:26), the foolish virgins (25:2), etc. It is considered by some to be a transliteration of the Hebrew moreh, which is broad in meaning and at worst describes a perverse person or a rebel (Num. 20:10). The word aphron (commonly used for "fool" in LXX) has the moral overtones of impiety and unbelief, but the folly is of the heart, not the result of mental weakness.
221
See sin, atheism, wisdom, accountability, values. For Further Reading: hdcg, 1:604-5; hdb, 2:43-44; zpeb, 2:581. J. fred parker FOOT WASHING. See feet washing. FOREKNOWLEDGE. Foreknowledge has as its frame of reference God's omniscience. It is the precipitate awareness of an all-knowing Mind. God knows because He is everywhere, but He does not act necessarily because He knows, else we face sheer determinism and its end, natural mechanism. Knowledge may activate, but not because of the necessity of its nature. The knower may act, that is freedom; that the knower must act countermands freedom for purposeless fixation. God is both omniscient and free. "Foreknowledge is one aspect of omniscience; it is implied in God's warnings, promises and predictions. . . . God's foreknowledge involves His elective grace, but this does not preclude human will" (Vine, ED, 2:189). Foreknowledge and predestination are not synonymous terms; knowledge, "fore" or otherwise, does not require a willed act to be, but predestination cannot obtain apart from an act of will. Since, according to the Arminian interpretation of Scripture, predestination is based on foreknowledge, the two terms obviously relate; yet they are discrete. The temporal forms of past, present, and future in respect to foreknowledge are not essential modes of reality or aspects of omniscience, but they are conveniences for rational human thought. "God cannot be grasped in the categories which we use in our knowledge of secular realities," says Thielicke (The Evangelical Faith, 366). How God knows antecedently cannot be gauged by human comprehension; God is not a big man, nor in fact is He a big God, either: He is God! That God knows the past and present fully is a judgment at least tolerated by most theists; His knowledge of the future, however, is questioned by many. Yet a God thus limited is something less than God, prompting the complaint, "Your god is too small." Foreknowledge refers to God's antecedent knowledge of persons, how they respond to His provision for salvation. He predestines those whom He foreknows "to be conformed to the image of His Son" (Elect in the Son, 206). The strongest evidence for and demonstration of God's foreknowledge is fulfilled prophecy. To be able to predict events not possibly within the range of human foresight is explainable only on the ground of a divine knowing incomprehensible to man. The most difficult theological problem in the doctrine of foreknowledge is in knowing how to relate God's foreknowledge to contingency. See attributes (divine), contingent, prophet (prophecy), determinism, predestination, elect (election).
See john the baptist, elijah. For Further Reading: Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 34-44; Robinson, Twelve New Testament Stud- ies, 28-52. Hal A. Cauthron FORGIVENESS. In their awesome picture of the holiness of God set over against the sinfulness of His fallen human creatures, the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures steadfastly refuse to make God the author of evil. He is the Creator only of what is good, including the freedom of human beings to choose holiness (out of thankfulness for His divine goodness) or, alternatively, to choose sin and death. Amidst this somber setting springs up, in biblical testimony, the fountain of God's forgiveness. It began at Eden, in the Father's confrontation with the willful determination of our first parents to know both good and evil. Amidst the curses pronounced in that moment shined a promise: The Seed of the woman would bruise the serpent's head. Thereafter, God's mercy offered forgiveness to sinful Noah, frightened 222 FORGIVENESS (cont.) Abraham, thieving Jacob, Joseph's spiteful brothers, and to Moses, adopted son of Pharaoh and the first Jewish terrorist. Little wonder that when Moses found the children of Israel making a golden calf to worship while he was receiving the covenant of law at Sinai, he understood at once that a direct appeal to Yahweh, to "forgive their sin," and if not, to blot him out of the book of life, would be successful (Exod. 32:32). The vision Moses had of a forgiving God has been central in Hebrew and Christian faith ever since. Yahweh himself confirmed it. He passed before Moses, whom He had hidden in the cleft of the rock, proclaiming, "The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin," even though He visited "the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation" (Exod. 34:6-7). Always thereafter, when Jews came face-to-face with God, whether in their ancient feasts, in their sacrifices at the Temple in Jerusalem, or in the meetings of their congregations in the lands of their exile, the confession of their sins and the assurance of God's readiness to forgive them was central in their worship. "Their heart was not right with him," they sang in the psalm we call the 78th; "but he, being full of compassion, forgave their iniquity" (vv. 37, 38). In another they asked the question, "If thou, Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?" And they answered it with a testimony straight out of Moses: "But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared" (130:3-4). The young Daniel, in exile, grasped by the spirit of prophecy, put it simply: "To the Lord our God belong mercies and forgivenesses, though we have rebelled against him" (Dan. 9:9). What made Jesus of Nazareth recognizable to faithful Jews as the promised Messiah was His consummate embodiment of this image of a forgiving Yahweh. "Behold the Lamb of God," John the Baptist cried the day after Jesus' baptism, "which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). When at the Last Supper Jesus passed the cup, saying, "This is my blood of the new [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission [that is, the taking away] of sins" (Matt. 26:28); when He prayed at the Cross, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34); and when He opened the understanding of His disciples to what was "written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms," concerning Him, namely, "that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations" (24:44-47), first-century Jews recognized Him, as we do, to be the godlike Christ. The love incarnate in Him was meant also to remind both Jews and Gentiles that Yahweh was a Christlike God. Totally absent in every case of divine forgiveness recorded in Hebrew and Christian Scriptures is the custom, nearly universal in other world religions, of bargaining for divine favor. Making a deal, setting a price on reconciliation between man and God, has no place in biblical faith. God himself provided the basis of forgiveness in the vicarious death of His Son. Although keeping covenant with God or renewing broken covenants brought economic and psychic advantages, the preoccupation of Hebrew priests and prophets was with the moral and ethical relationship of the people with the One who had called them to righteousness. In the face of their manifold sins, the only hope for reconciliation the patriarchs ever saw, from Abel to Abraham, rested on divine goodness, God's grace. The biblical picture, therefore, is first of a God who makes and keeps His promises to be faithful, even when those in covenant with Him have broken theirs. Though He stands in judgment of all sin, His love is longsuffering and kind. Hosea declared this in his beautiful image of God the Father, remembering in His wrath that he had taught faithless Ephraim his first steps and held him as a babe against His cheek. Out of that faithfulness, Hosea, Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel saw, God was forging a new covenant of forgiveness, in which His law would be written in our hearts and we would be able to keep His statutes. From goodness and grace comes also, in biblical faith, a second characteristic of divine forgiveness, power. Very early in Jesus' ministry, the Gospel of Mark tells us, four people carried a man ill of the palsy into the presence of the Lord and heard the Master say, "Son, thy sins be forgiven thee." When some of those present questioned this as near blasphemy, Jesus told the sick man to take up his bed and walk, which he promptly did. The Lord then explained that He wanted His hearers to "know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins" (Mark 2:3-10). Both the words and the event point to the root meaning of the word "forgive": "to take away." That meaning survives in medical as well as theological usage in the connotation of the English word "remission." Jesus sent His followers to proclaim good news: that the divine forgiveness, executed in the life-giving power and presence of the Holy Spirit, constituted in fact
FORM CRITICISM 223
deliverance—freedom from both the psychic burden of guilt and the moral burden of bondage to the habits of evil that imprison and corrupt human life. John and Charles Wesley and the young George Whitefield were precisely correct in their understanding of Scripture on this point: The grace which by faith brought justification, that is, forgiveness, brought in that same moment a rich measure of sanctification, breaking the power as well as cleansing away the guilt of sin. Here lies the biblical basis of the theology of liberation. Jesus himself had announced to the synagogue at Nazareth that the Spirit of the Lord was upon Him, to preach release to the captives, and to proclaim the year of jubilee (Luke 4:18). Little wonder that Peter should have declared to the multitude at Pentecost the good news that they could every one "repent, and be baptized ... in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" and "receive the gift of the Holy [Spirit]" (Acts 2:38), or that the apostle Paul should have written to the Ephesians of the abounding riches of the grace that comes through faith in Christ, and the "exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe" (1:19). They had received the forgiveness of their sins and become "his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works" (2:10). At no point in either Old or New Testament teaching, however, is the promise of forgiveness offered apart from the recognition by both the divine and human partners in the covenant of grace of the "exceeding sinfulness" of our sin. The modern impulse, recently reinforced by counseling psychology, to shun the awakening of feelings of guilt, has no standing in biblical religion. There, publicans who beat their breasts go down to their houses justified. Godly sorrow becomes a healing gift of grace. And if the seekers are reticent to confess the evil, the word of the Lord, speaking through priests and prophets, apostles and pastors, prods them on. The bleak judgments of the prophet Hosea that "there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land" (4:1) lie back of the Father's plaintive cry in 11:8: "How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? how shall 1 deliver thee, Israel?" Here lies the difference between modern sentimentality and biblical mercy. The former, masquerading as forgiveness, passes off deep wrongs as matters of no consequence. "Oh, forget it," we say jauntily, "it was nothing." Biblical forgiveness in fact is demeaned by such denials of the consequences of our rebellion against God or violations of the principle of ethical love in our relations with one another. Christians can afford to face guilt directly, and they encourage others to do so, in the confidence that the healing forgiveness of the eternal God, attested at Calvary, offers a judgment that is "true and righteous [right making] altogether" (Ps. 19:9). "Godly sorrow" (2 Cor. 7:10), which the NT defines as the basis of true repentance, flows from that recognition of both the depth of our guilt and the power of saving grace. All this points up one further characteristic of the Christian doctrine of forgiveness, namely, that it takes place amidst the making of a covenant of mutual commitment between God and His children. The story of Zaccheus in the Gospel of Luke illustrates the point clearly. A tax collector whose obvious success made other Jews despise him, Zaccheus sought to see Jesus and welcomed Him as a guest. Then, inspired by Christ's acceptance, he gave half his goods to the poor and pledged to restore fourfold all the taxes he had wrongly collected. Jesus responded, "This day is salvation come to this house . . . For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost" (Luke 19:9-10). The doctrine of God's gracious forgiveness, like all the other doctrines of grace, is grounded not only in the divine initiative, but in God's expectation of our active and persisting response to His love. See JUSTIFICATION, MERCY, ATONEMENT, REPENTANCE, CONFESSION OF SINS, RESTITUTION. For Further Reading: GMS, 380-405, 441-43, 454-57.
The forms of oral tradition are found within the written Gospels and may be classified as stories about Jesus, sayings of Jesus, parables, and miracle stories. Bultmann claims that these arose in the contexts of Jewish apocalypticism and Hellenistic Gnosticism, both of which employed the unscientific concepts of a three-storied universe 224 FORMALISM—FORNICATION —heaven, earth, and hell—and the ability of celestial spirits to associate with humans. The Gospel writers were editors more than historians and therefore unreliable in terms of the original forms of the material. What they set down represents the life setting of the Church rather than that of Jesus and the disciples. This is supported by the "alterations" made to Mark's Gospel by Matthew and Luke. There are several serious criticisms of this method. First, it minimizes the value of any eyewitness accounts by those who followed Christ. It also ignores the uniqueness of Christ and His claim to be the Savior of the world. It also disregards the special character of the NT Church. The claim of both Jesus and the Gospel writers that the Holy Spirit was their great moving Force is denied as unhistorical, which means that it cannot be proven scientifically. The Virgin Birth and the Resurrection are also said to be unhistorical. As a consequence it is impossible to write an accurate life of Christ. Form criticism has had value in opening up some doors into the 20 or 30 years between the death of Christ and the writing of the first Gospel. But it has been too ambitious, judging historical data by modern standards of philosophy to the point of cancelling its value. This is professedly done in the interest of discovering the unadulterated kerygma or message. Actually, the attempt to modernize the gospel message has been a liability. There is peril in trying to modernize Jesus, even though our aim may be to make Him meaningful to the present age. Not the discipline per se but the excesses of its philosophical presuppositions and professed expertise should be labeled objectionable. See exegesis, inspiration of the bible, biblical inerrancy, biblical realism, criticism (ot, nt), historical jesus (the). For Further Reading: Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, "Gospels and Acts"; Bultmann and Knudsin, Form Criticism; Martin, New Testament Foundations, vol. 1; Ladd, The New Testament and Criticism; Anderson, Jesus and Christian Origins. HARVEY J. S. BLANEY FORMALISM. In music and art, formalism is the preeminence of formal rules regulating form and style over content, especially over novelty. In ethics, formalism is the belief that conduct should be determined by formal principles (e.g., Kant's "categorical imperative") rather than by considerations of utility, pleasure, or consequence. In religion, formalism is an excessive emphasis on liturgy, which is permitted to become performance without feeling or moral validity. It thus tends to become form without life, outward appearance devoid of inward substance. Formalism in creed is barren orthodoxy. The "pattern of sound teaching" is preserved without faith and love (2 Tim. 1:13, Niv). Truth is proclaimed from the lips, but not believed in the heart or practiced in the life (Isa. 29:13; Jas. 2:18-19). Formalism in worship is empty ritual. Ceremony is valued for itself and divorced from the reality it symbolizes. Sacrament is viewed as magic. A "form of godliness" is displayed, but its power is denied (2 Tim. 3:5). Formalism becomes hypocrisy, the substitution of appearance for reality, and a cloak for sin. Against this evil the prophets thundered (Isa. 1:10-20; Jer. 6:19-21; Amos 5:18-27), as did our Lord (Matt. 15:1-14; 23:13-28). Formalism, as hypocrisy, becomes defensive and justifies the persecution of those who oppose and denounce it (Matt. 23:29-35; John 16:1-3). This has been the consistent history of Christendom. The greatest hindrance to the gospel is often not a blatant atheism but an apostate theism. Formalism is a constant temptation. Churches may have "a reputation of being alive" while they are actually dead. The only remedy is to awaken and repent (Rev. 3:1-3, Niv). See ethics, values. aesthetics, worship. For Further Reading: Scott, The Relevance of the Prophets, 180-203; Earle, "Matthew," WBC W. E. McCUMBER FORNICATION. In the Scripture, "fornication" describes three levels of sexual activity between persons of the opposite sex. It is used to denote sexual relationships between unmarried persons of the opposite sex in its narrowest and most general usage (1 Cor. 6:9). In a broader sense, it relates to cohabitation of a person of either sex with a married person of the opposite sex (Matt. 5:32). It thus becomes equivalent to adultery. In its broadest usage, "fornication" may refer to immoral conduct in general (1 Cor. 5:1). In a spiritual sense, "fornication" is used to describe unfaithfulness in one's relationship to God. The OT refers to Israel as the beloved of God; espoused to Him; married to Him. The unfaithful spiritual wife is in danger of being cast out just as the unfaithful marriage partner could, justifiably, be divorced. (See Hosea for an amplification of this position.) The use of "fornication" to describe a spiritual relationship marked by unfaithfulness is appropriate because of the tendency, or penchant, on
FOUNDATION—FREE GIFT 225 the part of the Hebrew people to adopt heathen idol worship and customs which were, frequently, fertility cults involving sexual promiscuity as a part of worship. The NT supports the OT in its claim for moral purity before marriage as well as under the marriage contract. The spiritual relationship to Christ is described as a marriage between Christ and His Church (Eph. 5:25-27). This relationship demands fidelity to Him as an essential part of the faith covenant. Modern-day humanism, with its emphasis upon freedom in all areas of life, is promoting the view that sexual intercourse prior to marriage is not only permissible but desirable. Consequently, the stigma of shame and sin is being removed from all such activity. However, the position of Scripture cannot be ignored. As in all areas of life, no one can sin without opening himself to the consequences of that sin. See ADULTERY, PURITY AND MATURITY, INTEGRITY, IDOL (IDOLATRY), WORLD (WORLDLINESS), MARRIAGE. For Further Reading: ERE. LEROY E. LlNDSEY Directory: sites -> default -> files -> publications publications -> Table of Content forward introduction publications -> Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center for Wireless Technologies Georgia Institute of Technology publications -> Housing Counseling Research in Chicago publications -> Communicating with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Audiences publications -> New Brunswick Info Sheet on First Nations Child Welfare publications -> Paap’s Electronic Newsletter 14 November 2008 Volume 11 Number 22 towards ‘smart’ subsidies in agriculture: lessons from recent experience in malawi publications -> Information support of pedagogical process for the children experiencing difficulties with acquisition of preschool educational programs publications -> Asus’ ZenFone ar has Google’s augmentted and virtual reality baked in — but not combined publications -> School Readiness and Early Grade Success Consultation Memo Atlanta, ga Download 6.66 Mb. Share with your friends:
|