Watch out for things that are getting legs around presbytery!

This is a note to my friend Good Sir Philip. I would have written it on Facebook, but for formatting’s sake it’s easier to write it here. Plus, the other 2.718 people who read this blog might find some of what I say useful, too. So, here goes.

Dear Good Sir Philip,

Hello! Here are some fun facts, observations, and even questions:

1. I’m about 100 pages into Infinite Jest. It’s really good. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
2. Had you read any DFW before writing that piece for The Inkslinger? Good job on that, by the way.
3. It’s okay if you don’t like The Hunger Games. ND Wilson doesn’t, and he’s someone whose opinion I really respect. I think I disagree with him, and I still think the series is good on the whole (look around here [sorry I'm not being more specific, but there are a lot of posts about the series] for a fairly good Christian engagement with the series; also, John Granger’s book about Harry Potter is really good), but his criticisms are well-taken. [It's not okay, however, to dislike Harry Potter. But, I know you love HP, so we're good.]
4. Seriously, ND Wilson is awesome. He has great ideas, and he conveys them in really good (even great at times) writing. I heartily recommend his nonfiction (Notes From the Tilt-a-Whirl is amazing; it’s hard to describe, but it’s the book I gave the MISTERPROFESSORCOACH at the roast; it’s really good) and his young-adult fiction (for example the 100 Cupboards trilogy [here, here, and here]).
5. Thank you again for making the song happen. I added my 2¢, but, really, it was nothing compared to the time and effort the two of you put into it. We’ll have to record it. Seriously. At least send me the words. But, let’s record it. For reals.
6. If you want to write fiction, I highly recommend getting to know Flannery O’Connor. If you haven’t read anything by her, start with some of her short stories (the ones I’ve read are “The Turkey,” “A Good Man Is Hard to Find,” “Good Country People,” “Everything That Rises Must Converge,” “Revelation,” “Greenleaf,” “The River,” and “The Artificial N——”), but then read Mystery and Manners. She has some amazing insights into the nature of fiction and fiction writing. Seriously good, although critical of a lot of fiction writers (which I don’t mind as much, since I’m not super interested in fiction writing). But, as a reader of fiction, I got a lot out of it, and I think you will, too.
7. I’ve enjoyed our rivalry, which, on my part, has been motivated by a strange combination of jealousy, competitiveness, and Good Clean Fun. All those fights on top of the bells were wearing me out. But, I’m glad we’ve reconciled. We really should have become friends a long time ago, and now you’re leaving. Alas.
8. Thank you for your taste in music. I’ve learned a lot from you, and I hope to keep learning. You were right, this was amazing:

Thank you again for everything.

Sincerely yours,

The Other Ridleyfan

This is my Torrey speech from last semester. I attempt to encourage Biola students concerning the topic of chapel.

Charity in Chapel:

An Evaluation and Defense of the Biola University Chapel Program

In the middle of last semester, I wandered into chapel on a Friday morning, exhausted from a long week of classes. I had no idea who the speaker was going to be, and, frankly, I didn’t really care. I hadn’t gotten much sleep the night before, and I still had a bunch of physics homework to finish before the afternoon. So, I distractedly mumbled through a few worship songs, feeling slightly guilty that I wasn’t giving worship my full attention, and then I settled in as the speaker was introduced. I perked up slightly when I heard that the speaker was Scott Derrickson, a Biola film graduate and writer and director of such films as The Exorcism of Emily Rose and The Day the Earth Stood Still. I had never seen those movies, so I still didn’t really know what to expect, but I figured that this guy seems to be somewhat of a real Hollywood filmmaker, so he might have something interesting to say, corny as it might be, about bringing Jesus to Hollywood. As he started talking, though, I got more and more excited. He shared about his own wrestling with the problem of evil, the arts, and sharing the gospel with Keanu Reeves. He presented a deeply emotional and yet intellectually stimulating account of how Christ’s own suffering on the cross was so much greater than the suffering that any mere human could ever experience, painting a picture which resolved for me some of the emotional impact of the problem of evil in a way I had never considered. I left chapel that Friday morning feeling both challenged to continue thinking and growing and encouraged that Biola is producing young Christian leaders like Scott Derrickson.

Assuming Biola chapels are roughly one hour long, we will each devote two hundred forty hours to chapel over the course of four years here at Biola. Chapel is an experience which affects us all, and chapel policies are one of Biola students’ favorite topics for complaint. What is chapel good for? Why does it even exist? How should we as students approach chapel? Why does Biola think chapel is important enough to require all students to attend? Is mandatory chapel a good idea, and, if so, how should it be enforced? To explore some of these questions, I am going to address some shortcomings I see in Biola’s chapel system, lay out some things I think chapel clearly is not, and then work towards a vision for the role chapel should fill and evaluate how well I think Biola chapels fill that role. I hope above all that you will be encouraged by what I say, challenged to grow in the love and knowledge of our God.

While I do largely approve of Biola’s chapel program, I am not oblivious to its shortcomings. There are aspects of Biola chapels with which I disagree and aspects which I think should be improved. My own experience with chapel has had its ups and downs. First of all, many speakers have fairly unsophisticated ideas. While Scott Derrickson may have given an intellectually stimulating account of the problem of evil, I have attended quite a few chapels where it seems like the main message is that we should all close our eyes and imagine that Jesus is hugging us, and all of our problems will go away. This is Biola University, not Biola Kids Camp. Secondly, since I’m a bit of a theology nerd, I have a few theological idiosyncrasies which differ from Biola’s: I am Orthodox Presbyterian where Biola is nondenominational, I am an optimistic amillennial covenant theologian where Biola is premillennial dispensationalist, I am fairly cessationist where Biola chapels tend to be at least soft charismatic, I am presuppositional where Biola is evidential, and I subscribe to the regulative principle of worship where Biola…doesn’t. Even generally speaking, I have a fairly intellectual and theologically-oriented temperament which doesn’t always resonate with Biola chapels. The third and foremost reason I dislike some of what goes on in chapel is the tendency to blur the distinction between chapel and church. While I have heard multiple Talbot professors emphasize this clear distinction, my conversation with chapel staff left me not completely satisfied. My understanding is that they would of course encourage Biola students to become involved with a local church, but they realize there are many factors which might prevent students from doing so, at least at a significant and meaningful level.  To use an illustration, while I would view church as the main course of our spiritual meal, with chapel as a nice side dish, I understand chapel staff to view chapel basically as a triple-extra-gourmet helping of church. I think their view is the result of both a fairly low and somewhat cynical view of church as well as an overestimation of Biola’s chapels, and, at the core, we might disagree theologically about what the concept of church means. In addition, I do not believe that a chapel program should administer the sacraments, and Biola offers the Lord’s Supper in chapel at least once a semester. I’ll expand on this more in a minute, but all of this is just to say, I have as much reason as just about anyone to disagree with and possibly even dislike much of what happens in Biola chapels. Yet, even still I do not resent having to attend chapel; I choose to view it as a privilege, not a burden.

Our attitude towards chapel has a big effect on how we experience chapel. Even under the best of circumstances, no one chapel will ever be perfect for every single person in attendance, especially at a place like Biola which includes people in many different stages of spiritual and intellectual development, as well as members of many different denominations and traditions. After all, interacting charitably with other perspectives is exactly what we have been learning to do in Torrey these past three and a half years. If we can read Darwin, Nietzsche, and Freud charitably, we can surely tolerate a few chapels led by Christian men and women who profess love for Christ. It seems to me that every Christian should be able to learn from pretty much any other Christian, regardless of how different their doctrinal systems and experiences be. As long as we are all Christians, we are all pilgrims on the Way, and listening with a charitable attitude to another perspective seems an acceptable and even desirable practice.

Before moving on to say what chapel is, I think we should first draw some boundaries around what chapel is not. In my opinion, there should be a clear distinction between chapel and church, and I think maintaining that distinction will keep our chapel program healthy. We might be tempted to equate chapel services with church services, since there are many similarities. Like church, chapel brings believers together in community, creating a shared experience of spiritual growth under the preaching of the word. However, there are differences between chapel and church. Protestants have historically understood there to be three marks of the church, three things which distinguish a group as a true church. The classic statement of this concept is found in the Belgic Confession, a confession of faith written in the 1560s. Article Twenty-Nine of the Belgic Confession says that the “marks by which the true Church is known are these: If the pure doctrine of the gospel is preached therein; if it maintains the pure administration of the sacraments as instituted by Christ; if church discipline is exercised in chastening of sin.”^[1]

I don’t think that church discipline, excommunication, in the most extreme case, should be exercised by a chapel program. That level of discipline requires the kind of intimate knowledge and relationship found between an individual and his spiritual authorities, the leaders of the local church with which he has associated himself. A chapel program is not designed to develop those kinds of relationships, nor is it designed to have that kind of spiritual authority. By extension, then, I would also argue that a chapel program should not administer the sacraments; the terminal form of church discipline is called excommunication because the church is supposed to administer the sacraments to communicant members only; when one is excommunicated, one can no longer partake of the sacraments. If a chapel program should not exercise church discipline, then it should not administer the sacraments. Of course, a Christian chapel program should be expected to preach the gospel, but the doctrinal claims made in chapel should not carry the same weight as those coming from the pulpit of a local church, from those leaders in ordained positions found in the Bible. Chapel messages, rather, are instances of one believer helping other believers in their mutual journey on the Way, offering insight, wisdom, and experiences in the hope that others will be inspired by them to a greater love of God and life of holiness.

Moreover, looking at the church/chapel distinction in a broader and more directly biblical context than a Sixteenth Century confession of faith, there are aspects of a Christian community which are found in a church which a Christian university simply cannot provide. A few months ago on The Good Book Blog, Biola’s own Dr. Kenneth Berding posted an article entitled “Should students at Christian colleges go to church?”^[2] In this article, Dr. Berding cites ten aspects of Christian community which he takes from 1 & 2 Corinthians, and he notes that some items on the list, such as interacting with the whole body of Christ, which includes people in all stages of life, from childhood to old age, are scripturally mandated for the church but are nearly impossible to live out in a place like Biola. Chapel does indeed have its proper place and function, but it should not be understood as the equivalent of or a replacement for church.

Now that we’ve looked at what chapel isn’t, let’s move on to what chapel actually is. The way I see it, the overarching category into which chapel fits is what is popularly called a spiritual discipline. In Romans 12, the apostle Paul exhorts us “by the mercies of God, to present [our] bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is [our] spiritual worship”; we are told to “not be conformed to this world,” but to “be transformed by the renewal of [our] mind[s], that by testing [we] may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.”^[3] Chapel is one way in which we can carry out this command. In the first place, the act of physically showing up to chapel on a regular basis is a way in which we fulfill the first part of the command; we can literally present our bodies to God at chapel, setting aside time during the school week to worship, carving space into our busy schedules to signify where our priorities lie. We may not always be happy about waking up early, and we will not always be in the mood for chapel; we’ve all had days when going to chapel feels like the last thing we want to do. Nevertheless, as I said earlier, choosing to approach chapel with an attitude of humility and going to chapel anyway, regardless of how we happen to be feeling on any particular day, is an opportunity to practice an important aspect of presenting ourselves to God; indeed, we sacrifice our feelings to him. This does not mean we should pretend to be happy and go through the motions of chapel, resenting it the whole time. Rather, we should be honest with ourselves and God and take those opportunities to pray, examine our hearts, and grow. If we never did anything we did not want to do, we would not be growing spiritually; it is not a sacrifice to present our bodies if we do not have to give something up. Going to chapel even when we do not feel like going to chapel is an example of presenting ourselves as a sacrifice to God.

In addition, chapel provides us an opportunity to fulfill the second part of the Romans 12 command; we are transformed by the renewing of our minds when the Scriptures are set before us and we are encouraged by our brothers and sisters in Christ. In Colossians 3, we are told by the apostle Paul to “let the peace of Christ rule in [our] hearts, to which indeed [we] were called in one body. And be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in [us] richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in [our] hearts to God.”^[4] While these commands were given to a church, their scope is not restricted to a formal Sunday meeting. Chapel is a perfect example of how we as believers, members of the church universal, can build each other up in love and knowledge as we are renewed after the image of our creator, supplementing our academic study of the Scriptures with an opportunity to live out a part of our Christian faith.

Considering the role of chapel, and despite all the things I dislike about Biola chapels, I think Biola does a pretty good job. According to Biola’s chapel website, the goal of Biola’s chapel program is to “bring the Biola community together regularly for worship, spiritual nurture, and education.”^[5] All of these goals are good, biblical ideas, things which we as Christians should value and desire. Moreover, these goals lie within the bounds of the role of a chapel program; they do not assume the role and responsibility of the church.

I spoke with Dr. Todd Pickett about Biola’s chapel program. He told me that there are seven main concepts which the Department of Spiritual Life tries to work into the standard Monday, Wednesday, Friday chapels on a regular basis; these are biblical exegesis, Christian living, spiritual development and formation, social justice, reconciliation, missions, and arts and culture. These are important topics with roots in Scripture, and they include and address things which are frequently neglected in a church context. It is good, for example, for believers to hear a Christian account of the arts, and it is even better for them to hear that account from a Christian who is actually an artist. I remember hearing artists like David Taylor and Jon Anderson give their perspectives on what it means to see God’s beauty in the unexpected nooks and crannies of the world, and the way I have looked at a sunset has been changed ever since.

Furthermore, Biola’s chapel program overcomes some of the limitations inherent in a situation which includes people in many different stages of spiritual development, as well as members of many different denominations and traditions, by offering many alternatives to the standard, thrice-a-week chapels. Not only are the speakers at chapel well-advertised, so that students can choose to hear people speak about topics in which they are especially interested, but spiritual development credit is also offered for events and activities like Singspiration, Fives, Sabbathing, and spiritual direction. Biola’s chapel program is designed to provide many different and varied opportunities for a diverse body of students to be able to grow spiritually, enabling us to fulfill God’s commands and will for our lives.

Biola has no right to force us to go to chapel against our will, but, in my opinion, they’re not forcing us to go to chapel against our will, since we signed up for chapel when we signed up for Biola. As I see it, Biola has just as much right to set a required number of chapels as it does to require us to obey any of the other community standards or to meet academic requirements. We might think that chapel falls into a different category because it deals with spiritual development, something which can be radically personal and private. However, chapel is not church; chapel is an opportunity for growth, and no one is forcing us to sing, do what the speaker tells us to do, or even pay attention at all. But, we have signed up to be there and present ourselves; Biola is offering a service, a package deal, and, if we don’t like it, we don’t have to buy it. As far as the new three hundred seventy-five dollar fine is concerned, I am largely indifferent to it. One might argue that, in the grand scheme of things, it might not be the best idea to set up a system in which spiritual development can be so easily monetized, and perhaps the old chapel probation system was better in some ways. There is probably some value in these counterarguments, but, on the whole, it shouldn’t matter what the penalty for failing to meet the chapel requirement is. We have signed up to do it, and, in all seriousness, it is not very hard to do. I am a very busy student, and I have never been even remotely close to not meeting the chapel requirements. Biola’s policies in particular are quite lenient compared to other schools, some of which require attendance at three chapels every week, and others of which assign grade points to numbers of chapels attended. Biola offers abundant makeups, in addition to the possibility of chapel reductions. Meeting the requirement is not difficult.

I think that chapel is fundamentally a good thing, an opportunity for us to grow in the love and knowledge of our God. Even while we realize that Biola’s chapel program is not perfect, we should have a spirit of charity and present ourselves as a living sacrifice. If we can come to see chapel as good and we have a desire to attend, the idea of a chapel requirement takes on a new light. In setting a number of chapels that its students must attend, Biola is saying that it values the spiritual development of its students and it wants to provide them with a plethora of opportunities for growth. We students should approach agreeing to the chapel policy, which we do every time we come back for a new semester at Biola, not as accepting a burden and paying an extra price to attend Biola but as, in Dr. Pickett’s words, submitting ourselves to a training, providing ourselves with accountability and extrinsic motivation for when we feel like quitting. In 1 Timothy, the apostle Paul exhorts Timothy to “train [himself] for godliness; for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come.”^[6] Just as an athlete temporarily subscribes to a rigorous training regimen in preparation for a big event, we agree to devote thirty hours per semester to the spiritual discipline of chapel; just as an athlete must stick to his regimen even when he doesn’t feel like it or risk the discipline of his coach, we go to chapel even when we don’t feel like going.

I would encourage all of us, myself included, to take advantage of the few opportunities we have left and go to chapel, approaching it with an attitude of charity, humility, and submission. Pretty soon, we will have graduated, and we will no longer have the option of going to chapel. While some of us might view the lifting of this requirement as a cause for much joy and jollification, none of us will have matured so far in our Christian lives that we will not be able to benefit from something similar to chapel. So, what will be the chapels in your life after you leave Biola? How will you continue growing? Quiet times? Small groups? Journaling? These are all good things, but what about engaging the culture? Reading great books? Seeking out Christ in unlikely places? Having good-natured theological fist fights with friends? Ruminating on how the eighth Harry Potter movie ruined all of the books’ Christological symbolism and turned the gospel in to a works-righteousness? But, I digress. I hope I have been heartening to you in what is, for most of us, our last year here at Biola. My prayer is that we will have grown tremendously in our time here, but, more than that, my prayer is that we would continue to grow in the church as we leave here, ready to impact the world for our Lord Jesus Christ.

While we’re on poetry, here’s one I love:

As kingfishers catch fire, dragonflies dráw fláme;

As tumbled over rim in roundy wells

Stones ring; like each tucked string tells, each hung bell’s

Bow swung finds tongue to fling out broad its name;

Each mortal thing does one thing and the same:

Deals out that being indoors each one dwells;

Selves—goes itself; myself it speaks and spells,

Crying Whát I do is me; for that I came.

Í say móre: the just man justices;

Kéeps gráce: thát keeps all his goings graces;

Acts in God’s eye what in God’s eye he is—

Christ—for Christ plays in ten thousand places,

Lovely in limbs, and lovely in eyes not his

To the Father through the features of men’s faces.

– Gerard Manley Hopkins

When I consider “Reading Narratives,” I tend to think in terms of “what should I, the reader, do when reading a story?” or “how ought I to read a story?” Though that is something I have thought about way too much (and I am not really the more informed for it!) I am willing to throw in my two cents.

So I am more concerned, at the present, with how we ought to read a story. More from the reader’s point of view, of course, as a very large can of worms is opened up when you introduce the role of the author of a narrative. So, wishing to not complicate matters, I think that a thesis statement is in order…

We ought to read stories as Christians in the world.

“We”

Not just the blogalectic peeps, but all Christians everywhere.

“ought to read stories”

Because the Bible is predominantly a Story, the Christian must not despise stories. A story serves many purposes (as I am sure later posts will affirm) but not a small purpose is to help us to see the Story that we all inhabit; both the big metanarrative (yeah, I went there…) and our little narratives. It is not ethically necessary to read stories (outside the Bible) but I contend that it is secondarily necessary because reading the little stories well will help us to understand God and His Story better. Since this is a “good” that we must seek if we are to be “good”, then we ought to seek all of the means by which we can become better in that life-long journey. Thus: we ought to read stories.

But the point is to read stories in a specific way…

“as Christians”

Before I get into “as Christians”, Vicki brought up a legitimate point about the presence of evil and sinful stuff in stories that are fundamentally dark and unbelieving. I would disagree about the whole “can’t use the Philippians test” idea because I think that the ethical realm is firmly seated (if the author is not considered!) in the reader, not in the text itself. I am not advocating an entirely subjective reading ethic, though, as I would say that we can still test a text by the Philippians standard within the context of the personal. The text has no ethical frame of reference without either the author or the reader. The words are not timeless Platonic forms of meaning, but rather are dependent on human (or greater) interaction to have their meaning. You have to just trust that i am not advocating subjectivism, as I know it sounds a whole lot like that (and I do wax postmodern at times!). It might have been sinful for the author to write something lusty and messed up because he was not considering the “excellent” or “praiseworthy” while writing it. And the reader that is having lust issues that reads such a text is made to stumble, and it is entirely the fault of him who chooses to read something (if false advertising is employed the question gets more difficult) that would cause him to stumble. Okay… this could go on forever, so I will stop. So I will conclude that by saying that the Philippians standard applies to the entire process and context of reading in terms of content, but to the text itself in terms of form. I know that is a large statement, but forgive me, I won’t defend it here… Comment or write your own post about the relation of form and content in relation to objective standards of the good, the true, and the beautiful!

We should read a text “as Christians” because of obvious Biblical reasons, not the least of which is that all things should be done for the glory of God. Sometimes it seems that with that we have to say that you should only read devotional books, theology books and the Bible… But that is not the case because of…

“in the world.”

We don’t exist in a little Christian bubble (unless you attend Biola haha) and so we ought to read with the understanding that “the glory of God” is achieved when we grow in our knowledge of others made in His image. We can see brokenness and fundamentally dark books as glorifying God, because there was no light at the crucifixion, and God was most glorified at that moment. Of course that is only glorious because  of the Resurrection, but a resurrection need not be spelled out in every narrative. There were two thieves next to Jesus at the darkest moment of human history. It is helpful to know about both the one who ended up “with Him in Paradise” and the one who hurled taunts and abuses at the Lord of glory and died in dishonor, hopelessly clinging to his sin all the way to Hell. If we are gonna be like Jesus we have to live in the same world He entered and He loved and He saved. We have to learn every lesson we can about the scoffing thief that we never be like him.

This is simply a collection of most of the verses containing the root-word “fill” in Paul. Just for those of you interested in seeing how Paul does stuff like this.

Romans 1:29 – They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness…

Romans 8:4 – … in order that the righteous requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us…

Romans 11:12 – Now if [the Jews'] trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their [fullness] mean?

Romans 11:25 – Lest you be wise in your own sight, I want you to understand this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

Romans 13:8 – Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the Law.

Romans 13:10 – Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the Law.

Romans 15:14 – I myself am satisfied about you, my brothers, that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge and able to instruct one another.

Romans 15:19 – …from Jerusalem and all the way around to Illyricum I have fulfilled the ministry of the gospel of Christ…

Romans 15:29 – I know that when I come to you I will come in the fullness of the blessing of Christ.

2 Corinthians 7:4 – I am acting with great boldness toward you; I have great pride in you; I am filled with comfort. In all our affliction, I am overflowing with joy.

2 Corinthians 10:6 – …being ready to punish every disobedience, when your obedience is [fulfilled/filled].

Galatians 4:4 – But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth His Son…

Galatians 5:14 – For the whole of the Law is fulfilled in one word: “You should love your neighbor as yourself.”

Ephesians 1:10 – … as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in [Christ], things in heaven and things on earth.

Ephesians 1:23 – … which is [Christ's] body, the fullness of Him Who fills all in all.

Ephesians 3:19 – … and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.

Ephesians 4:10 – He who descended is the One Who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.

Ephesians 4:13 – … until we all attain to the unity of the Faith and of the knowledge of  the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ…

Ephesians 5:18 – And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit…

Philippians 1:11 – … filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.

Philippians 2:2 – [fulfill/fill] my joy by being of the same mind, have the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.

Colossians 1:9 – And so, from the day we heard, we have not ceased to pray for you, asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding…

Colossians 1:19 – For in [Christ] all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell…

Colossians 1:25 – … of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God that was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known…

Colossians 2:9 – For in [Christ] the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,

Colossians 2:10 – and you have been filled in [Christ], Who is the Head of all rule and authority.

Colossians 4:17 – And say to Archippus, “See that you fulfill the ministry that you have received in the Lord.”

A few initial thoughts. Paul’s use of the phrase “fullness of God” seems to indicate that what He means by that is “The Holy Spirit”. We are “filled with the fullness of God” seems to indicate to me that the Holy Spirit is that Fullness as it seems to mirror well with Spirit passages in Paul as well. The idea of love “fulfilling” the Law then seems to be also a referent to the Holy Spirit as the Romans 8 passage implies. We fulfill the Law when we walk in the Spirit, who fills us with the love of God in Christ. The structure seems to be that the Father loves the Son by giving Him the fullness of the Spirit, by Whom He accomplishes His word and ascends to the right hand of the Father in turn, pouring out into our hearts (analogous to the initial act of the Father to his Son, thus the logic of Ephesians 1). This makes me think that the fulfilling of the Law’s righteous demands is accomplished by a Spirit-filled Christ, Who then pours His Spirit out to make us similarly Spirit-filled that we might walk in love, which fulfills the Law. I say this not as an instrument of justification, necessarily, but as a “fruit” or “ministry” given to us which is another place where “filled” is used often.

Any thoughts?