After the last post, I was pleased to find David Jackman’s wisdom on this.
Having grown up amongst paintings and drawings and their artists, I am particularly fond of art workrooms strewn with unfinished work, a paint-splattered floor, inspiration boards in a mess, smelling strongly of acrylic or watercolour paint. So was delighted for a free hour or two to mosey about the open studios at ArtWalk@Wessex (facebook) and chat with some of the residents.
Other than the happiness of being in a workspace and discovering new art, I had two aims: (i) to subtly help artists sell their work; (ii) to see what sort of artists occupied the Wessex Work Lofts.
- some are in it for the alleged (mostly elusive) easy money. Lots of schmoozing ensues;
- some want a lifestyle that is non-office droney (or, depending on your perspective, undisciplined) and gives them hipster and authenticity points with their friends and society. Lots of “hey look how cool and alternative and smart I am” ensues;
- others just want to make art but obviously need to feed themselves so have put on their scratchy best shirt and try their hardest to be friendly to visitors. But they’d rather be in front of an unfinished canvas.
With the last, a few well-placed questions, especially when it was obvious that potential customers in the studio were not quite appreciating the art for lack of commentary, was just the push they needed to them them going. Many collectors like to know the story behind a piece of art, the vision of a work, and several stopped to look more closely after sullen artists started getting more animated and chatty. Hopefully some went from “I’m not sure this goes with our decor” to “actually, I think we can repaint the wall”.
To achieve the second aim, I’ve learned from years of attempting to extricate myself from the over-friendly hard-sell of schmoozers to dress down as much as possible: slippers, shorts, a t-shirt that has seen better days. Artists who prioritise sales more than educating people about their art would ignore someone like that, and a handful did. It was their freedom to do so, and it was great because it helped me concentrate on those who were less commercial-minded and who just wanted to chat about their projects and were curious about the lives of visitors as well.
Frances Alleblas (2 Woking Road, #02-03)
Max Kong Studio (3 Westbourne Road, #01-01) – sun and moon – he demonstrated how the pieces would look different in daylight and at night without artificial lighting.
Saya Yamaguchi (also 3 Westbourne Road, #01-01) Tsujii Junko (3 Westbourne Road, #03-05) CdeM Atelier & Art School (5 Westbourne Road, #01-02. facebook) by Patricia Cabaleiro. Milica Bravacic (5 Westbourne Road, #01-01) – inspiration from Peranakan tiles.
d’Art Studio (5 Westbourne Road, #02-03). Dick Lim who signs his work as “Chye”. Amazingly versatile artist. Particularly liked the black-and-white canvases with a little thing of red.
Beng (8 Woking Road, #02-03. facebook), who isn’t the Hokkien vulgarity-spewing long-fingernailed man you thought he would be.
JoyClay Studio & Gallery (10 Woking Road, #01-01).
Authenticity in art, in terms not of provenance but artistic motivation, is a big criteria for me. It sounds a bit esoteric but owning a piece of art is like purchasing a sliver of the artist’s soul – and I would like one that is kind and generous and passionate and well-thought-through (about a cause or a message, not Mammon or ego).
Perhaps this comes from being used to people holding out the Christian gospel to others: they do so for the glory of God whom they think should, rightly, be worshipped, and they do so for the good of the people to whom they are speaking – for their salvation. While missionaries, evangelists, pastors, Bible teachers may be paid for their work (just as an ox is fed for treading out the grain), to preach the good news merely for monetary or other personal gain would be anathema!
Stockholm was an easy and comfortable 5-hour train ride on the SJ X2000 (with in-train wifi) from Copenhagen.
The interior architecture of Stockholm C (Stockholm Central Station) was a good indicator of how the rest of the city would be: not ostentatiously design-conscious, but sort of like that conservative relative who has kept their understated 1970s stuff so well that it is ready for the return of the trend.
Chatted with S over very good fried herring (no excess oil or batter; fresh fish) at Nystekt Strömming (just outside Slussen station, Södermalm), about life as a Swede. Was very glad to hear about how instrumental the Nordic Chinese Christian Church summer camps had been in her coming to faith. Still, it’s not just starting the race that is important, but persevering and ending well. This comes not by clinging on to some historical commitment doggedly, but in learning more and more about this Jesus in whom we have put our trust. And his trustworthiness shines through very clearly in the Bible, but poor preaching and teaching unfortunately often obscures this!
An inspirational verse for the day here and a verse-hop through Scripture there to find back-up for my latest crackpot-or-not theory makes use of the Bible for our own ends rather than letting it show us the character of God and Jesus. Which is why expositional preaching and teaching (that is, working systematically through a book of the Bible) and a good grasp of biblical theology is important.
After lunch, we paid a visit to Drop Coffee Roasters a few streets away. It was crowded and hot, but both the flat whites and almond pastries were excellent. And I guess tasting that the Lord is good and trustworthy and glorious is just as plain from reading any bit of the Bible.
So, take the second bit of chapter 1 of John’s Gospel:
19 And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” 20 He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.” 21 And they asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.” 22 So they said to him, “Who are you? We need to give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?” 23 He said, “I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord’, as the prophet Isaiah said.”
24 (Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) 25 They asked him, “Then why are you baptizing, if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?” 26 John answered them, “I baptize with water, but among you stands one you do not know, 27 even he who comes after me, the strap of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie.” 28 These things took place in Bethany across the Jordan, where John was baptizing.
29 The next day he saw Jesus coming towards him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.’ 31 I myself did not know him, but for this purpose I came baptizing with water, that he might be revealed to Israel.” 32 And John bore witness: “I saw the Spirit descend from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. 33 I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.”
35 The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples, 36 and he looked at Jesus as he walked by and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” 37 The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus. 38 Jesus turned and saw them following and said to them, “What are you seeking?” And they said to him, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 He said to them, “Come and you will see.” So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour. 40 One of the two who heard John speak and followed Jesus was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41 He first found his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which means Christ). 42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “So you are Simon the son of John? You shall be called Cephas” (which means Peter).
43 The next day Jesus decided to go to Galilee. He found Philip and said to him, “Follow me.” 44 Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. 45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” 46 Nathanael said to him, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” Philip said to him, “Come and see.” 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming towards him and said of him, “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit!” 48 Nathanael said to him, “How do you know me?” Jesus answered him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.” 49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!” 50 Jesus answered him, “Because I said to you, ‘I saw you under the fig tree’, do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” 51 And he said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”
It amazes me how big the Bible is on giving more than sufficient evidence to enable us to trust that what Jesus claims of himself is true. After all that mindblowing stuff in the first part of John 1, you’d be waiting for John to back-up that bluster. Here, he names three incredible witnesses:
- John the Baptist (a big historical figure, mind. Josephus wrote about him in Antiquities of the Jews) – Herod might have perceived him as a threat, but missed the bigger threat to whom John the Baptist was pointing: Jesus. The whole aim of John’s ministry was to prepare people for the arrival of the king, “the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord” (as prophesied by Isaiah, oh, maybe 700 years before. See Isaiah 40:3 and Malachi 4:5.).
- God the Father himself – now part of John the B’s witness was to observe and proclaim that God the Father himself had borne witness that Jesus was the Son of God, by the visible descent of the Spirit on him (this again had been prophesied by Isaiah. See Isaiah 42:1.)
- the Old Testament – not only did were these events prophesied by Isaiah. It was clear that the Jews had already been waiting for the fulfilment of other prophesies in the Old Testament (Moses and the prophets): the coming of the Lamb of God, the Prophet (Deuteronomy 18:15), the anointed one (the Messiah, Christ), the Son of Man (Daniel 7).
As we end this passage in John, Jesus says rather tantalisingly to Nathanael,”…you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”, a reference to Jacob’s dream in Genesis 28:10-12 where he saw angels going up and down from heaven on a ladder. So Jesus is promising to be the one who links earth to heaven, who is the path to God, who enables the fulfilment of God’s covenants.
But we’ll need to read on in the Gospel of John to see how all this panned out! Exciting stuff.
“Je manger du fromage avec du pain” (“I eat cheese with bread”) was the first French phrase I learned, even before the usual “je m’appelle” (“I am called”), reflecting the central importance of those foods in my life and even, identity.
The brie de meaux is a lovely and melty (in Singapore weather) cheese with a sweet, creamy, slightly truffley, complex taste that totally cuddles up to your tastebuds. The morbier I am less effusive about – it is stronger tasting (good) but the saltiness trumps any nuance in flavour. There is a bitter aftertaste (interesting), and an almost agar-agar texture (not keen).
Accompanying the cheese, baguette au levain (sourdough baguette) from The Bread Table was a decent loaf. Its lack of an assertive depth of flavour (cf, say, Poilâne) commended it as a good base for any cheese.
There was no reason why a finicky child born and bred in Singapore, where lactose-intolerance prevailed on a sizeable chunk of the population, would take to bread and cheese so readily. It was too specific a liking and too early a proclivity to be any sort of pretension.
On the subject of non-pretentiousness, we were discussing theology and the ordinary Christian, and how all Christians engage in theology, not just pouncy academics. Of course, the term could be used to mean generic academic study (in the U.K.) and systematic theology (in the U.S.), but at its heart, all these merely amount to serious discourse, reflection about God, based on the Bible.
Some points from D.A. Carson’s Introduction to Biblical Theology at The Gospel Coalition’s 2014 National Women’s Conference:
Biblical theology is interested in the temporal development themes across redemptive history. It is normally concerned with the following:
- What is the particularly set of theological emphases in particular book or corpus? What is contribution of Gospel of John? What is role of Moses in redemptive history? So as we study Nehemiah, we want to outline the biblical theology of Nehemiah – thinking through themes, argument, priority of Nehemiah.
- The examination of certain themes that run through the entire canon, where you’re keeping an eye on temporal development. What does the bible say about the temple – where is the temple first introduced? storyline? Some themes that run through the whole Bible: temple. covenant, priesthood, sacrifice, exile, creation-new creation etc.
- A combination of the first two: theology of a particular book, but looks backward to see what biblical themes it is taking up and looks forward to see how later books use this particular book. Carson recommended James M. Hamilton Jr’s With the Clouds of Heaven: The Book of Daniel in Biblical Theology as a good example of this.
What are the ways that a good grasp of biblical theology help us to understand the Bible better, lead better Bible studies, and preach better?
- biblical theology directly addresses the massive biblical illiteracy prevalent in our age. If you have preaching and teaching that thinks only in terms of systematic theology, you just pull in all sort of biblical texts that seem to apply to your theme. It does not help you understand the Bible. You need to examine the flow, immediate context – what comes before and later. For example, the “fear of the Lord” is a theme in Nehemiah, but how does it work out in Nehemiah, how does it contribute in understanding Nehemiah? Look at the flowline, textline.This is also one of the aims of expository preaching. The truthfulness of what is being taught in systematic preaching is based largely on proof-texts. Rather, with expository preaching we take readers to the text and say “follow with me”. What we want to hear after the sermon is not “boy, i could not have seen it in the text” but “it is so obvious, it’s in the text”.Look at the Bible storyline – how the story of redemption is unpacked. It works with biblical categories: fear of lord, tabernacle, faith, kingship that are there in the Bible. Pointing out biblical categories is desperately important because these usual themes are incoherent to current biblically-illiterate generation. Systematic theology generally uses synthetic categories – categories that are not found in Bible, eg. trinity or cessationist. These might reflect truths but they don’t help readers understand the Bible, because when they turn to their Bibles, they don’t find these words there.
biblical theology draws attention to the turning points in biblical history. If we only use bible as source book for pious thought for the day, it may be of some help, but reading like that won’t tell you how all the bits fit together.
Turning points: creation – fall – choice of abe – beginning of covenant people of God – story of Abraham and patriarchs – Jacob and sons to Egypt – slavery – exodus – law at Sinai – tabernacle and priestly system – entrance to land – judges – united monarchy – David and davidic dynasty – splitting of kingdom – northern tribes go to captivity – southern tribes go to captivity – return and rebuilding – silence – coming of Jesus (sacrifice, temple, high priest, covenant – all categories in the new testament) – descent of Spirit in Pentecost – new heaven and new earth.
If you know the Bible storyline well, you know how the different books fit in it. The Bible is not primarily organised on chronological grounds. For example, in the New Testament, the letters to churches come before letters to individuals. And long letters come before short ones.
biblical theology enriches systematic bible reading and vice versa. This prepares the way for mature preaching. A biblically-informed parishoner is the best hearer.
- biblical theology encourages various kinds of integration and diversity in preaching. We can see that biblical books are of many sorts: letters, poetry, songs, narrative, discourse, curses, maledictions, oracles, apocalyptic, wisdom. Every genre of literature has its own way of making an appeal. What would be lost from the book of Genesis if i lost this chapter? What is this chapter doing in this book?
- biblical theology fosters inductive rigour. If we what bring to bear on the Bible first from systematic theology, then comes out of our pre-existing framework. This blinds you to what can be inductively perceived from Bible. BT therefore makes you a better interpreter of Bible.
- biblical theology helps you to avoid anachronism in preaching and teaching. It enables biblically-warranted connections and avoids imposing something from the big picture on the local text – this may be doctrinally right in general but anachronistically wrong in chapter.
- biblical theology is also fundamental for detecting one of many penetrating biblical arguments for connecting Old Testament and New Testament, and the use of the Old Testament in the New Testament. See Edmund P. Clowney’s The Unfolding Mystery.