Book Review of “Beyond Opinion”

Zacharias, Ravi (editor). 2007. Beyond Opinion: Living the Faith We Defend. Thomas Nelson: Nashville, TN

I want to thank the fine folks at Thomas Nelson for providing this review copy. Ravi compiles a great group of folks to author the various chapters in this volume and they all represent their assigned topics quite well. While all of the contributors and chapters were great in content, I wish to briefly review 5 chapters that I found to be the most helpful personally.

Dr. Alister McGrath does a tremendous job in his chapter, “Challenges From Atheism”. McGrath has quite the reputation for his ability to dialogue with the new aggressive atheism that is represented by the likes of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and others.  This chapter provides a nice brief history of the debate, documenting the rise of atheism in the west with the likes of Karl Marx, Bertrand Russell and others. McGrath notes the irony of how atheism has historically bound people into oppression while it was peddled under the pretense of its liberating power from the opium of religion. The thought was that if you could get rid of God, then life would be much happier and rid of guilt and shame. Well, we all are made to worship, so the new idols in atheism usually became the leader of the state. The oppressive regimes of atheistic communism revealed the odious nature of a Godless culture. McGrath notes the falling of the Berlin wall as the people’s revolt against oppressive atheism.

McGrath theorizes that 9/11 was instrumental for the new atheism as many atheists made their case that religion “poisons everything”. There was a proliferation of books that followed 9/11, given rise to the new era of aggressive unapologetic atheism.

McGrath spends the rest of his chapter responding to what he labels as 4 of the “fundamental atheist challenges”. He cites them as follows: 1) Christianity, like all religions, leads to violence, 2)God is just an invention designed to console losers, 3) Christian faith is a leap in the dark without an reliable basis, and 4) The natural sciences have disproved God. McGrath’s response are brief, but yet effective. This chapter serves a great little primer for any who wishes to understand the history of atheism and its resurgence in the past decade.

Dr. John Lennox pens another wonderful chapter in this compilation, “Challenges from Science”. Lennox catalogues the main Christian doctrines that are under attack from the scientific community, namely creation and other associated doctrines like providence. Lennox dispels the myth that Christianity and the discipline of science are mutually exclusive enemies. Lennox lists a who’s who of the scientific community that were theists (most of them Christian). Lennox vindicates Galileo as a Christian, who was challenging the prevailing notions of the Aristotelian scientific paradigm more than seeking to defy the church. It just so happened that everyone held the same general scientific convictions at the time.

Lennox deals with a whole host of issues that the reader would find pertinent in light of what’s going on in modern Evangelicalism and science. He also is quite persuasive in noting the limitations of science. Many scientists don’t even claim the discipline of science to have a totalizing answer to all things. If the sum of all things is matter, then one would actually be consistent in claiming science as totalizing, however it usually ends up saying more about things than evidence warrants. Lennox is not advocating a dichotomy between science and philosophy as much as he is simply noting the limitations of one discipline without the other. In this sense, he views science and faith as allies and commends many wonderful scientists who conducted their work for the glory of God. Such a motive didn’t interfere with or disrupt their scientific enquiry, but actually made sense of it in a way that was liberating and awe-inspiring. Oh that we would have more scientists with such a frame of mind and heart.

Joe Boot explores “Broader Cultural and Philosophical Challenges” and essentially commends the role of faith in believing. You must want to believe in order to believe or all the evidence in the world will do nothing. Boot examines the spiritual nature of doubt in apologetics, as well as “the clear sight of faith”. He reminds us of the following (166):

The great problem facing a skeptic, then, is him- or herself, not a lack of evidence or adequacy of reasons to believe. We tend to find only what we want to find and to see only what we want to see. The fallen human desire to escape the reality of God is very strong.

Boot subsequently provides helpful information to keep in mind when dialoging with skeptics. He commends “stealth” apologetics, which requires a much more savvy approach than mere dictation of facts. One must acknowledge that a skeptic is dealing with deeply spiritual doubts and speak to that person with some level of empathy of seek to woo them to Christ, hopefully seeing faith arise with the desire to know the truth.

Ravi Zacharias pens what I found to be the most useful chapter, “Existential Challenges of Evil and Suffering”. It is simply one of the best treatments I have seen on the issue of evil and suffering in chapter form…I will leave it at that.

There was one other chapter that I found very helpful. Danielle DuRant’s chapter, “Idolatry, Denial, and Self-Deception: Hearts on Pilgrimage through the Valleys”, explored some common challenges for the believer throughout their journey. What we assent to as believers may at times be challenged, and certainly at other times we may feel dry in the heart in regards to the truths that ought to bring us joy and comfort.

All in all, I would commend this book. There are a total of 14 chapters beyond the 5 I especially enjoyed and all of them are educational, edifying, and useful for Christian witness. I suspect I will reference this book again and again throughout pastoral ministry.

Book Review of Jon Walker’s “Costly Grace: A Contemporary View of Bonhoeffer’s The Cost of Discipleship”

Book Review of Jon Walker’s “Costly Grace: A Contemporary View of Bonhoeffer’s The Cost of Discipleship”  

I am working on making my book reviews more concise and to the point. I have a way of writing books about books.

Lowdown: Jon Walker does a great job in examining the issue of discipleship and summoning the voice of Bonhoeffer in response to many of the contemporary struggles of the church, particularly the church in America.  

Summary: Walker devotes 25 of the 28 chapters specifically to “being like Jesus…” He touches on areas of prayer, vocation, and loving one’s enemies among many other pertinent concerns for discipleship. In many ways this book is similar to John Piper’s classic, “Desiring God”, in that the primary focus is on Spiritual formation within the more common categories of our life’s concerns.

My Thoughts (Good and Bad): I enjoyed reading the book and think that this may very well rank with one of the better modern books on Spiritual formation. Walker is redundant, but only so far as Scripture is redundant in saying the same thing over and over again so that we can be absolutely clear of what a disciple of Jesus looks like.

Walker sounds like an Ana-Baptist, very similar to Richard Foster, but offers the necessary qualifications on certain issues–like loving one’s enemies not requiring absolute restriction of self-defense when necessary. There are times, however, when Walker sounds anti-credal, anti-liturgical, and almost anti-ecclesiastical. My concerns are that one can walk away from this book thinking that discipleship is pretty much between Jesus and I, and therefore renders the church as a useless appendage in ones pursuit of being a true disciple.

I’m sure that Walker has no intentions of leading people away from the church, but I suspect that his ecclesiology leaves something to be desired. If anything, giving Walker the benefit of the doubt, I am thinking that he only intends to accentuate the fact that discipleship does in fact consist more in how we actually live our life moment by moment and less to do with an hour on Sunday. If that’s the case, I can yield an “Amen”. Even so, we must not make everything sacred to the point where we simply view the administration of the Word and Sacraments on the Lord’s day has having no more significance that personal prayer during the week.

Bottom Line: Overall, I would heartily commend Walker’s book, along with Piper’s “Desiring God”, and some other classics from the likes of Jerry Bridges. I prefer this book over Dallas Willard and Richard Foster’s writings. Paul anguished for the Galatians that Christ would be formed in them and Walker seeks the same in resurrecting some powerful insights from Bonhoeffer. I think that Bonhoeffer would be happy with Walker’s treatment. I certainly agree with Walker’s premise that grace is costly and not cheap. Too many churches are peddling cheap grace and thus not stimulating the body to true discipleship. This book will be a kick in the butt for most and hopefully cause you to pause at times for some introspection and prayer. To that end I pray that God will use this book.

For an interview with Walker about the book, I recommend: http://www.edstetzer.com/2010/11/book-interview-jon-walker-on-c.html

A Great Covenantal Credo-Baptist Response to Covenantal Paedo-Baptists

There is a great book that I read some time back, titled “Believer’s Baptism: The Sign of the New Covenant in Christ”. There is a chapter titled, “Baptism and the Relationship Between the Covenants” by Stephen Wellum, which is a response to some recent works such as Gregg Strawbridge’s, “The Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism”.

Wellum’s chapter summarizes well the whole idea of how baptism relates to the covenant and why covenantal paedo-baptists and credo-baptists disagree. You will want to read both Strawbridge and this book. They represent two of the better current books from both perspectives. Wellum’s chapter is available for free via pdf at this link: http://kingdomresources.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/wellum_baptindd.pdf

Book Review of Zondervan’s Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: Ephesians (Clinton Arnold)

I am so grateful to Zondervan for publishing this series and I commend them on their choices for commentators. All of the commentators represent a broad stream of solid Evangelical scholarship and exegesis. I chose to review the Ephesians commentary by Dr. Clinton Arnold (NT professor at Talbot seminary). I am familiar with Dr. Talbot’s previous work, especially his monograph, “Ephesians: Power and Magic”. He has done some great work on the topic of Spiritual warfare as well.

I can’t review this entire commentary or else my review would be hundreds of pages, so I will redact my feedback to that which I specifically like about the “Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament “ series itself.  As a point of reference, I own about 50 commentaries on Ephesians and will compare and contrast the Zondervan series with some of the others I own.

What’s to Like?

1.        The wide double-column format. I love this feature which you don’t find in many other series’. I personally read commentaries by keeping my thumb in a page and constantly looking back and forward to maintain a “Forest” view perspective on the text. With the double-column format, one has access to a total of 4 columns when viewing the open book with 2 pages open. I personally love this.
2.        Literary Context Section. T. David Gordon suggests, in his book, “Why Johnny Can’t Preach”, that many pastors simply don’t know how to read and engage in basic literary analysis. The very first subsection within each passage section is dedicated to literary context. Surveying the commentary, I was pleased to find this section deal with such things as genre, type of speech, repeated words and themes, among other things. This is invaluable for the person who really wants to understand the oral culture and how the written text would be heard to the listeners. Our culture is becoming increasingly illiterate, not that we don’t know how to pronounce words per se, but that we don’t know how to perceive certain literary features within the text.
3.        Main Idea. Many commentaries don’t distinguish the forest from the trees and leaves the reader thinking every single word is a really big deal, thus focusing on the trees and not seeing the forest, or flatlines the text in such a way that one only sees the forest and fails to acknowledge the beauty of particular trees.
4.        Translation and Graphical Layout. This is my most favorite feature. Some commentaries may include some sort of chiastic structure outline of the text, but this series actually provides a true outline based on syntax, noting particular clauses within the pericope. This alone is worth half the price of the book (with the additional features making the commentary a good investment).
5.        Structure. The structure section provides something of a chiastic structure of the text, noting parallelism, etc. At this point, you might think the commentary overkill on all the subsections dealing with the passage, but this just confirms how important it is to see the text on its own terms before you even get to Arnold’s exegesis. All good exegesis requires this preliminary work and Zondervan chose to enhance this often neglected preliminary work that is usually absent in many commentaries.
6.        Exegetical Outline. Yes, there’s even more before you even get to the commentary on the text. The exegetical outline provides a good skeletal outline that could very well serve as a homiletical outline for the preacher/teacher.  Such an outline is pretty common in most commentaries, but I appreciate how this outline comes after the previous labors which point to the summation.
7.        Theology in Application. This section is somewhat similar to what you would find in the NIV Application Commentary Series, however the NIV series emphasizes more of a hermeneutic “So What?” answer that is helpful in bridging the text to contemporary concerns, whereas this series engages in Biblical Theological and Systematic Theological applications. Compiling all of the “Theology in Application” could very well  serve as a Biblical Theology work on Ephesus as a standalone book that could well retail for $15 alone.

 

Bottom Line:

I admit that the $36.99 retail price may seem steep; however this is less than the comparable Pillar series ($44) and Baker exegetical series ($44.99). Note that this volume is over 500 pages and double columned in the commentary portion of the text, whereas the Baker series is the same in pages but single columned in the commentary section, making this essentially larger in raw word count.

I highly recommend this volume for all pastors and would commend it to a general lay audience as well. I will be purchasing this series as I preach through NT books in the future.

Book Review of Bill Farley’s “Gospel-Powered Parenting”

A Book Review of William P. Farley’s, “Gospel-Powered Parenting: How the Gospel Shapes and Transforms Parenting”

William P. Farley is pastor of Grace Christian Fellowship in Spokane, WA, which belongs to the Sovereign Grace Ministries network of churches.

Farley strikes the balance beautifully between the absolute freedom of God in His sovereignty to regenerate the heart of the elect along with God’s sovereignly prescribed means for parents in raising their kids. This balance protects parents from being negligent and passive in the name of God’s sovereignty (“My kids salvation rests completely in God and has little or nothing to do with me”) or presumption that the prescribed means operate as an assembly line where we simply create Christians by pushing the right buttons (“If I parent exactly how God wants me to, then my kids will absolutely be Christians”).

We, therefore, don’t parent as if it completely depends on God, nor as if it completely depends on us. These complexities of means and God’s overarching Sovereign purposes have long confounded God’s people. Godly parents may see their children rebel, whereas Godless parents may see their children radically regenerated by God’s Spirit. Having said that, Farley acknowledges that God generally works through means and that negligent parents will generally see the consequences in their children, whereas Godly parents will generally see greater evidences of grace operating in their children.

If anything, Farley advocates parenting that is completely dependent upon God’s grace in the discharge of the prescribed means He calls us to.

The most striking and insightful aspects of the book for me personally can be summarized in the following points:

-          We must parent with one eye on eternity. Farley states, “…the Christian does not parent for this life only”.  We have 18 short years to not only influence their short time in this life, but also for all eternity.

-          Our aim is not to create “moral” kids. We ought not solely seek behavioral modification in our children. This alone will create nice little hypocrites who are further away from the Gospel of grace. While we must discipline and certainly condemn certain behaviors, we must always be pointing our kids to the cross and the Gospel.

-          Theology is enormously practical in how we parent because we should seek to emulate the “communicable” attributes of God towards our children. If we don’t know God, then we will paint a distorted picture of His nature to our children.

-          Regardless of schooling convictions (Christian school, public school, home school), the one factor that most influences our children’s Spiritual wellbeing is the faithful and consistent attention of parents. Farley concedes that public school might be too harmful for some and that all parents must use discretion. Having said that, a particular “method”  won’t work apart from parents who honor God above all.

-          Marriages preach the Gospel.

-          Dads matter more than any other factor in the perseverance of children’s interest in Spiritual things and church attendance into adulthood.

-          Lastly, Farley said, “Love God more than your children”. He cites many examples from pastoral ministry where families placed their kids above God and have gone on to pay a dear price with the apostasy of their children. If the parents weren’t valuing God more than the weekend soccer games, etc., why should we expect our kids to honor God more than __________ (fill in the blank).

Bottom Line:

I commend this book for parents. There is no shortage of books on parenting, but I think Farley brings out many good points and pastoral life illustrations that will be helpful and hopeful for most parents.

Living in God’s Two Kingdoms

Living in God’s Two Kingdoms: A Biblical Vision for Christianity and Culture by David VanDrunen was released recently by Crossway Books and presents a readable, comprehensive view of two-kingdom theology. I’m just a youngster in terms of theology, especially that of a reformed flavor, so I was excited to dive in with VanDrunen and stretch my brain.

The main premise is a counter to the “transformationalist” view of culture that seems to be pervasive with emergent theologians, those who ascribe to the New Perspective on Paul and neo-Calvinists (depending on your definition of neo-Calvinists). In transformational theologies, the church and Christians are about the work of restoration, as we march across creation and culture putting things back how they were meant to be before all this sin and death entered the world.

Whilst that can sound all well and good, the ramifications of that worldview are twofold:

1) When Scripture asserts that this world will be put away and a new heaven and a new earth will come, we have to reject any of the cataclysmic language that accompanies such claims. Instead, the new heaven and earth will come by a restoration to utopia.

2) VanDrunen states that when we embrace a transformationist view of culture, we cling to the work of Adam in the common kingdom rather than living in the grace of the redemptive kingdom which Christ has already won for us by living the life Adam, and each of us, should have lived.

Book Review of “Entrusted with the Gospel”

Entrusted with the Gospel, edited by D.A. Carson 
Copyright © 2010 by The Gospel Coalition 
Published by Crossway

 This book a series of expositions that were given at the 2009 Gospel Coalition National Conference. If you don’t know much about The Gospel Coalition, please check them out. It is a great network that our church is a part of. It represents a broad sector of Evangelicalism that is committed to Gospel-centeredness, Biblical exposition, and faithful pastoral ministry.

The first chapter features John Piper, with the message “Feed the Flame of God’s Gift: Unashamed Courage in the Gospel” (2 Tim. 1:1-12). In Piper-esque fashion, the exposition is passionate and offers much exhortation. Just as Paul called upon Timothy to “fan the flame” in the discharge of his ministry, so also must contemporary Gospel ministers tend to their calling. Piper says,

Timothy, keep feeding the white-hot flame of God’s gift—of unashamed courage to speak openly of Christ and to suffer for the gospel. Feed it, Timothy. Do that. Fan that flame. Feed that fire. And every time you preach the Word of grace to yourself and strengthen your heart with blood-bought promises of life and help, look deep into eternity to see why you are doing this.

Piper also reminds us of the incredible suffering that Paul encountered and reminds us that we must fan the flame in the face of suffering…in fact, it’s the only way to survive through suffering.

The second chapter, “The Pattern of Sound Words (1 Tim. 1:13-2:13)”, was my favorite. Phillip Ryken draws attention to the trait of faithfulness, which is necessary to persevere in ministry,

Ministry takes courage—sometimes unusual courage. It takes courage to expose idolatry or to cross ethnic and social lines with the gospel. It takes courage to stand up and say that Jesus is the only way, not just for Christians, but also for Muslims and atheists. It takes courage to go to the hard places in the world and share the gospel. But this is what faithfulness requires.

Ryken also contemplates the mentoring ministry of Paul to Timothy and how Timothy is called to train other faithful men as well. We have an example of apostolic succession, not through the ordaining of infallible mouthpieces, but rather through the deposit of the Gospel. We also must contemplate how our ministry is fruitful in raising up faithful men who subsequently train others as well. He proceeds to draw upon the faithful illustrations given by Paul: Soldier, Athlete, and Farmer. These illustrations are not coincidental, but share a unifying theme of focus and discipline. This is what ministers are called to. Summarizing his treatment of these illustrations, Ryken shares the following,

All three of the occupations that Paul mentions require faithful hard work and dedicated, undistracted labor. All of them entail hardship and suffering. But they also hold the promise of a reward. “Beyond warfare is victory, beyond the athlete’s effort is the prize, and beyond agricultural labor is the crop.” So work faithfully for the gospel reward, which God will bring in his own good time.

 God’s reward for faithful ministry is beautifully illustrated by the story of Luke Short, converted at the tender age of 103. Mr. Short was sitting under a hedge in Virginia when he happened to remember a sermon he had once heard preached by the famous Puritan John Flavel. As he recalled the sermon, he asked God to forgive his sins right then and there, through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Short lived for three more years, and when he died, the following words were inscribed on his tombstone, “Here lies a babe in grace, aged three years, who died according to nature, aged 106.”

Here is the truly remarkable part of the story. The sermon that old Mr. Short remembered had been preached eighty-five years earlier back in England! Nearly a century passed between Flavel’s sermon and Short’s conversion, between the sowing and the reaping. Sooner or later, by the grace of God, faithful work always has its reward.

Lastly, Ryken draws our attention to the faithfulness of our Savior and Father. It is because of His faithfulness that we show any semblance of faithfulness in our ministry. It is His faithfulness that upholds His own name in spite of our unfaithfulness,

It is not just our persons that are accepted by God because of the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, but also our services, that is, all the things we do for God in ministry. We are called to be faithful in the sacred trust of gospel ministry. But the acceptance of our ministry does not depend on our faithfulness to God, but on his faithfulness to his Word. Admittedly, our ministry isn’t what it could be. At times we may wonder whether anything we have ever done for Jesus is worth anything at all. Or perhaps, after failing, we doubt whether God can still use us. It is at such times, most of all, that we need to remember Jesus Christ and know that we are loved and accepted by God. Even our own ministry is accepted on the basis of his perfect life, atoning death, and glorious resurrection.

Even if we are not really sure if we could ever be any kind of success in ministry, we should still try for Jesus, and when we fail for Jesus, we should believe this promise, “If we are faithless, he remains faithful—for he cannot deny himself.”

The third chapter, “The Marks of Positive Ministry (2 Tim. 2:14-26)”, offers surprisingly mature insights from the relatively young Mark Driscoll. Driscoll defines three basic categories for people: positives, negatives, and neutrals. Essentially people fall in one of these groups. Just as Timothy calls Paul to deal with the “negatives”, so also must pastors deal with this laborious task of calling out the negatives in one’s fellowship.  Driscoll offers this fairly comprehensive list of what these negatives are:

Book Review of David VanDrunen’s “Living in God’s Two Kingdoms: A Biblical Vision for Christianity and Culture”

Living in God’s Two Kingdoms: A Biblical Vision for Christianity and Culture

Copyright © 2010 by David VanDrunen

Published by Crossway Books

PRELIMS: This book was provided by Crossway for my personal review.

First off, Dr. VanDrunen is a credible author on the points in which he engages. He is a studied scholar in the realm of divinity and law. Such background is necessary for the topic in which he engages. Secondly, this book is much needed in the “Evangelical” world today as the church struggles and flounders through the murky issues of Christian engagement of culture, politics, etc. Lastly, VanDrunen approaches this work from the rich heritage of the “Two-Kingdom” theory you will find in Augustine, Luther, Calvin (although open to debate), and many contemporary Reformed thinkers.

THE GOOD:

VanDrunen establishes a historical understanding of the issues of how God rules in the world generally and in the Church specifically. He is well aware of Niebuhr’s work on “Christ and Culture” and establishes the framework of the debate judiciously. Before making an inductive thesis in support of the “Two-Kingdom” perspective, he engages critically in modern distortions of the Christians obligation to the world: N.T. Wright and the Emergent Church. His criticisms are insightful and helpful. Read the book for the nitty gritty.

I commend VanDrunen’s covenantal redemptive-historical framework throughout the book. He deals specifically with the covenant with Adam and how it consisted of his tending the garden (priestly duties), as well as governing the land (kingly duties). If Adam and his righteous progeny had succeeded, eternal bliss and rest would have followed, meaning that the “Creation Mandate” had a goal in view. Adam and Eve weren’t to perpetually bear children and work the land forever and ever as the last climatic act in their God-given charge. The priestly duties would have brought about consummated holiness in destroying the serpent and partaking of the tree of life, while the kingly duties would have brought earth under perfect subjection and thus a perfect consummate rest from labor. VanDrunen dedicates an entire chapter in elaborating upon these themes because the rest of the book makes no sense apart from this framework.  VanDruned then dedicates an entire chapter to exactly how Jesus has and will fulfill these charges given to Adam. VanDrunen states the following:

Before the second Adam no one accomplished the task of the first Adam, and after the second Adam no one needs to accomplish it. The last Adam has completed it once and for all. Christians will attain the original destiny of life in the world-to-come, but we do so not by picking up the task where Adam left off but by resting entirely on the work of Jesus Christ, the last Adam who accomplished the task perfectly.

 How did Christ accomplish Adam’s original task perfectly? Jesus did not personally fill the earth with his descendants or exercise dominion over all creatures in his human nature during his earthly ministry. But as considered in chapter 2, Adam was to have his entire obedience in the entire world determined through a particular test in a particular location. So it was for the last Adam. Like the first Adam, the Lord Jesus was confronted by the devil who tried to entice Christ to obey him, and King Jesus resisted the devil and conquered him (Matt. 4:1–11; Col. 2:15; Heb. 2:14). Like the first Adam, the Lord Jesus was called to priestly service, and Christ the Great High Priest purified God’s holy dwelling and opened the way for human beings back into his presence (Heb. 9:11–28; 10:19–22). Like the first Adam, the Lord Jesus was to enter God’s royal rest in the world-to- come upon finishing his work perfectly, and this is precisely what Christ did, entering into heaven itself, taking his seat at God’s right hand, ministering in the heavenly tabernacle, and securing our place in the world-to-come (Heb. 1:3; 4:14–16; 7:23–28).

This is absolutely essential for issues of Christianity and culture! If Christ is the last Adam, then we are not new Adams. To under- stand our own cultural work as picking up and finishing Adam’s original task is, however unwittingly, to compromise the sufficiency of Christ’s work. Christ perfectly atoned for all our sins, and hence we have no sins left to atone personally. Likewise, Christ perfectly sustained a time of testing similar to Adam’s: he achieved the new creation through his flawless obedience in this world. He has left nothing yet to be accomplished. God indeed calls Christians to suf fer and to pursue cultural tasks obediently through our lives. But to think that our sufferings contribute to atoning for sin or that our cultural obedience contributes to building the new creation is to compromise the all-sufficient work of Christ.

VanDrunen even pulls out the exclamation mark in reference to how important understanding the work of Christ is for determining our own obligations as a Christian.  We are now heavenly citizens who taste the world to come, but do not in any way bring it about. He states:

The Bible Story Handbook by John and Kim Walton

The Bible Story Handbook by John and Kim Walton
Crossway Books, 2010

The Bible Story Handbook is a new resource for parents and Sunday School teachers wanting to clearly and correctly communicate the truth of the Bible to children. Unlike many such resources, this is not a curriculum or lesson plan, but is a rather unique tool that will assist and enrich all those who seek to communicate God’s timeless truth to young hearts and minds.

Beginning the collection off is an essay on the need for this book and the dangers of “dumbing down” Biblical stories. It is the danger of hermeneutics trumping exegesis, to use the language of Stuart and Fee’s “How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth.” Though the gray area theological points of the authors shines through a little too strongly at times (in particular their views on creation and the continuation of charismata), the introduction should be essential reading for all who minister to children and have the sacred duty of teaching them about God from the Scriptures. This includes ALL parents! To sum up the concept of the book, here’s a quote:

“Though we might be able to learn innumerable things from a passage, the passage is not teaching everything that anybody sees in it.” (p.22)

The books aims to help teachers understand both what the main point of a Bible story is, and what it specifically is not. This is a really useful thing to have, especially for people less well versed in the Scriptures who may not so quickly recall other areas of the Bible that help identify the meaning of the text being studied. John and Kim Walton have provided a quick reference guide to check context, and so it is a book that can be used whether following a curriculum, or creating your own lessons from scratch.
After the introduction, the book is broken into Old Testament and New Testament, covering a lot of the narrative of the Old Testament, and then providing lesson coverage for the Gospels, Acts and Revelation. The epistles are not covered since they do not meet the requirements of narrative story. Each lesson contains the following sections:

- Lesson Focus
- Lesson Application
- Biblical Context
- Interpretational Issues in the Story
- Background Information
- Mistakes to Avoid

The lessons take up around a couple of pages each, so the material is not particularly lengthy, but is written for adults to consult and consider prior to teaching. I daresay that there will be disagreements along the way. For instance, comparing the Walton’s take on the story of Jonah with Tullian Tchividjian’s brilliant Surprised By Grace, it is clear that they hold strong opinions about the use and abuse of the text that may differ with other writers and theologians. I do appreciate their strength of conviction, but it will have to be weighed against other sources too – no carte blanche for anyone but God, I’m afraid!

I do not foresee this being a book that is allowed to gather dust – with two young sons of my own, and regular ministry to children in our home church, I will be routinely consulting this volume for a quick checkup to see if the lesson is on point, and will likely employ it in personal study and sermon preparation too! This is a unique resource to add to your collection.

A review copy was provided to me at no charge by the publisher. No attempt was made to gain a favorable review, and all opinions and recommendations expressed are the author’s own.

Book Review of Daniel Hyde’s “Welcome to a Reformed Church”

Hyde, Daniel R.. Welcome to a Reformed Church: A Guide for Pilgrims. Orlando, Fla.: Reformation Trust Pub., 2010. Print.

Reformation Trust provided this copy for a honest review on my part, so here it is:

Rev. Hyde offers readers a primer on the history and doctrine of the Reformed Church, focusing mainly on the 3 Forms of Unity (Belgic Confession, Heidelberg Catechism, and Canons of Dordt).

The Good:

Although an Evangelical Baptist, I am indebted to the 3 forms more than any other confession, catechism, or doctrinal formulation. I welcome with joy this brief book which introduces many to a heritage that is little-known in the broader American Evangelical Church.

Rev. Hyde takes great care to represent Reformed theology as a religion of the heart and mind. Hyde states,

“God has established an inseparable connection between truth and godliness. If truth remains in our heads but does not proceed to dwell in our hearts and find expression in our conduct, then we are no different, James says, than the devils (James 2:18-19).”

 Many have criticized Reformed theology as being arrogant and cerebral. While there are some who may unfortunately represent the Reformed heritage in such a way, this certainly is unrepresentative of the whole. Hyde commends Scottish Presbyterian John “Rabbi” Duncan’s quote, “I’m first a Christian, next a Catholic, then a Calvinist, fourth a Paedobaptist and finally a Presbyterian. I cannot reverse the order.” Hyde reminds us that we are first Christians, and secondly catholics. Catholic in the sense that we affirm solidarity with the church behind us, the church around us, and the church ahead of us.

Hyde also reminds us that Reformed theology highlights the importance of Sanctification. While many may first think of God’s sovereignty and Justification as key Reformed doctrines, the Reformers cared just as much about holy living. Hyde notes:

“Our Reformed fathers focused heavily on holy living. The volume of teachings they devoted to sanctification in their confessions and catechisms is striking. The Heidelberg Catechism devotes forty-four of its 129 questions and answers, more than one-third of its material, to sanctification, while the Westminster Larger Catechism devotes an impressive eighty-two of 196 questions and answers (42 percent) to this subject. By this emphasis, the Reformed churches declared that Calvinism is no mere religion of “head knowledge,” and we cannot live as if it makes us the “frozen chosen,” as we are sometimes derisively known. It is a religion of head and heart.”

The last emphasis that I found helpful was Hyde’s treatment of the Church and the centrality of the means of grace through Word and Sacraments. He reminds us that,

“It is the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ, then, that creates the people of God. The gospel not only saves us from our sins and the wrath of God, it places us in vital union with Jesus Christ and other Christians. Thus, the church is the fruit of the gospel; it is not our own creation, but a creation of the triune God of grace.”

The Bad:

Music Review of Abel’s “Lesser Men”

Abel are the latest band to hit the Come&Live! roster and with “Lesser Men” they are about to make their presence known. The release fits sonically somewhere between Thrice and New York state neighbors Brand New. It’s a cohesive experience to listen through the album, and one that features a lot of water. There are boats out on the waves, oceans on feet, and the watery peril of ‘Titanic’ (which might be one of the best songs I’ve heard this year). But aquatic metaphors aside, the album’s heart is forgiveness and our need to understand the vastness of God’s forgiveness and love.

Sinking into the ebb and flow of “Lesser Men”, the opening track gently draws you forward with it’s instrumental beauty and emotive/intimate vocals, only to snap you out of your reverie with the spasmodic ‘Saints’. It’s an album of contrasts, but apart from this initial punch the rest flows with an organic nature that keeps you on the journey for the full 35 minutes.

The band is able to write memorable hooks and melodies that will haunt your waking hours, and sing you to sleep at night.

I’ve struggled to find words for this review so I’m just going to tell you to download this now from www.ComeAndLive.com and experience it for yourself. Drop back in with your own thoughts and experiences, and be praying for Abel as they step into the live arena!

Musical parallels: Thrice, Brand New, Biffy Clyro

Book Review of John Piper’s “Think!”

For so long it felt like there were two camps at war. The MindPeople and the HeartPeople both considered their way superior, and would critique each other at any given opportunity. I always had the inkling that something was not quite right with this division, and over the last few years have found allies in the works of Francis Schaeffer, Nancy Pearcey, D.A. Carson, John Calvin, Martin Luther and other great minds whose intellect is not divided from the work of their hands, their compassion towards people and, most importantly, the work of the gospel. Rather than divided, it is the operation of a redeemed intellect that will not stop at words and thoughts but is driven thereby to action.

Now, with more clarity of thought and ease of access than ever before, John Piper has delivered Think! by Crossway Books and it is the literary equivalent of love at first sight. Here is a theology of the mind and thought that drives hard, fast and passionately towards the glory of God. The basic premise is that thinking is the wood that fuels the fire of worship of God. By thinking well, we engage more deeply with the person of God as we consider His word, and the work and person of Jesus; thus we know and love God with more passion, and likewise love our fellow man more completely than before.

Piper does a wonderful job of showing the correlation between real thinking and Holy Spirit dependence. We cannot truly know and understand the Scriptures unless He first illuminates them to us, but we are also called to think – it is not a mystical experience in the sense of overwhelming revelation that is imparted to the mind without the mind being involved. We think because God has made us to think, and in our thinking we ask the Holy Spirit to help us understand and so our thinking becomes a work of devotion and adoration – theology turns to doxology, as Piper puts it several times.

Equally compelling to the whole-person theology that Piper proposes is his great handling of texts that have been abused by anti-intellectuals across the ages. Most notably, there is correction to a misunderstanding of what is meant by being as a “little child” in order to know God. I don’t want to give it all way, because I really must compel you to read this book! For me, it is a tall, cool glass of water in the midst of a desert of oft well-meaning but ill-consequenced ideas that abandon either the mind or the heart in the pursuit of God. Let us have both, for He has made us such creatures that enjoy the benefit of both intellect and emotion!

A review copy was provided to me at no charge by the publisher. No attempt was made to gain a favorable review, and all opinions and recommendations expressed are the author’s own.

Book review: “Eccentric Culture,” by Rémi Brague

Eccentric Culture is a brief book (less than 200 pages), but dense and challenging.  It also has a fairly simple thesis: European culture is essentially Roman.  Rather than a combination of Jewish and Greek culture alone, with the Romans merely passing these elements on (I posted about Brague’s critique of that attitude here), European culture displays the Roman attitude of “secondarity.”  Secondarity is the Roman recognition that the best culture came from outside themselves, from the Greeks.  Thus, the Romans knew that there was an ideal to strive for (Greek culture) and a danger into which they could fall (barbarism).  In a similar way, he believes, Christians recognized their secondarity to the Jews.

He doesn’t give a lot of examples of the Roman appropriation of Greek culture, probably because it’s well-established that the Romans saw the Greeks as having a superior literary culture.  I wish that he had included more to establish his particular interpretation of it, but I imagine that if I were better versed in classical studies I wouldn’t need the examples.  He goes into more depth on what he calls “religious Romanity,” the parallel between Romans’ and Christians’ relations to the Greeks and Jews.  Here is one passage that explains the Romanity of Christianity, which touches on many of the important themes of the book:

In this way, it was religious secondarity that prevented all culture inherited from Christianity, as is the case with Europe, from considering itself as its own source.  The refusal of Marcionism is thus, perhaps, the founding event of the history of Europe as a civilization, in that it furnished the matrix of the European relationship to the past and anchored it at the highest possible level.  It may be then Saint Irenaeus, from his polemics against Marcionism [named for the heretic Marcion who sought to eliminate the Old Testament and edit the New in the second century] and his affirmation of the identity of the God of the Old Testament with that of the New, is not only one of the Fathers of the Church, but also one of the Fathers of Europe.  Conversely, the withdrawal of Europe into its own culture, understood as being only one culture among others, would be something like cultural Marcionism.

In the religious domain as in the cultural domain, Europe had the same relation to what preceded it: it did not tear itself from the past, nor did it reject it.  Europe did not pretend, as to profane culture, to have absorbed in itself everything that Hellenism contained or, in religion, everything that the Old Testament contained –  in such a way that one could throw away the empty shell.  At the most, what Christianity claims to possess (the term is not even right) is the key permitting the interpretation of that to which the Old Covenant tended.  It claims that the recapitulation of past history is given in the event of the Christ, the plenitude of the divinity (Colossians 2:9).  But the exploration of the riches that are contained there, and their refractions in the sainthood of the Church, is an infinite task, which requires nothing less than all of history to come. (111)

This passage gives you a good idea of Brague’s concept of secondarity.  He contrasts it with Byzantine and Islamic approaches to Greek culture.  The Byzantines believed that Greek culture was theirs and Muslims often translated and then discarded the original texts (thus, his reference to “throw[ing] away the empty shell” in the above passage).  Neither of these cultures, Brague believes, could have the dynamism of European culture, which constantly found renewal through the method of looking to a past that it saw as outside itself.  This allowed for many European renaissances, renewed interests in the past (if you’re familiar with the early modern Italian Renaissance, Brague’s paradigm fits with the humanists’ attitude of reawakening ancient values in an barbaric age).  Brague also notes the importance of the classical educational tradition, in that educated people needed to learn Greek and Latin to encounter the classics.  Thus, European culture avoided resting on its laurels.  This is where the term “eccentric culture” comes in: European culture has an “eccentric identity,” finding its center outside itself.  Thus, European culture does not have a defined “content” that can be listed; rather “the content of Europe” is an attitude: “to be a container, open to the universal.” (146)  Thus he even disputes the term “Eurocentric,” saying that Europe is not centered on itself, but outside itself.

In the last chapter, Brague asks if Europe still displays this “Romanity.”  He believes that modern European culture runs the risk of “cultural Marcionism,” a cutting off and denial of the outside.  Writing in the early 1990s, Brague believed that Europe was retreating into itself, content to say that European culture was only for Europeans rather than relevant for the world and rather than inviting non-Europeans to adopt the European attitude that finds the center outside one’s own culture.

American Slavery, Northern Complicity, and “Natural” Law

I continue my review of Andrew Napolitano’s, “Dred Scott’s Revenge: A Legal History of Race and Freedom in America” with this second installment on his 2nd chapter, “American Slavery”.

Napolitano shares what the typical life of the slave was like, involving being broken in, strict codes of discipline, teaching that livelihood was dependent on the good of the owner (thus creating sense of inferiority and dependency), and Bible Studies from selective Scripture to reinforce that slavery was their lot in life and needed to be accepted as from the hand of God.

A sad but revealing quote, “In general, even the most humane slaveholder, as paradoxical as the phrase is, could not afford to be too nice if he hoped to perpetuate his enterprise” (p. 16). This pretty much sums up the relationship of master and slave.

The Domestic slave trade was prompted by the outlawing of the African slave trade in 1808. The powers that be realized that a constant influx of slaves would perhaps lead to future revolt. Now that slaves weren’t being imported, the domestic slave trade got uglier. Masters were trying to breed more slaves to perpetuate their estate. Marriages were dissolved if there was infertility and it was plain ugly. The Northeners tried to abolish the slave trade, but they weren’t as lily white as some might think. Mills in the North processed Southern cotton, exported cotton overseas, and manufactured goods for the Southern market. Slavery was alive and well in the North prior to the Revolution and many slaves gained their freedom during the Revolution, only because it was offered in exchange for their fighting in the war. One can hardly call that emancipation based on conviction, but rather a leveraging of power over the slave to exploit their dependence on the State.

In spite of the heroic efforts of the Underground Railroad, which was based on conviction and noble intent, running away was simply not an option as the Federal Government enforced strict laws to bring fugitives back to their owners and money rewards were also offered to those who would capture slaves. Ahhhhh, how the smell of money always works its way into most every story and conflict in human history. I actually just picked up the book, “From Midnight to Dawn” based on the Underground Railroad that I hope to review sometime in the future.

The good old dollar also shows up for yet another reason why slavery was eradicated in the North (sorry to crash the party). White labor was considered more valuable than blacks, so many emancipation laws were designed to bolster the economic conditions of the whites. I guess it was, “Here’s your freedom…over there on the curb with gutter water and crumbs”. Makes slavery under a humane owner not look so bad. Reminds me of the Prodigal son who realized that servanthood in his father’s house sure did beat poverty in the distant land that allowed him to party with money, but kicked him to the curb when he was out of money. Not trying to justify slavery, nor say the Prodigal Son parable justifies slavery, but only noting that being a servant under a good master is better than being “free”, but poor and desperate to do anything for money to buy food and shelter.

Napolitano wraps up the chapter with a very interesting discussion of Natural Law, quoting from the likes of St. Thomas Aquinas, Justice Clarence Thomas, Thomas Jefferson, and Martin Luther King Jr. Aquinas argued that the government did not have the right to enact unjust laws. This raises the question of epistemology and how we can know anything, let alone whether something is right or wrong. How much can be known by “Natural Law”? Must one quote Scripture when self-evident “Natural Law” is no longer self-evident (yeah, I caught the logical fallacy as well). I am tempted to turn this post into a discussion of Theonomy, Natural Law, and more, but will refrain.

Aquinas echoed what many folks in the Reformed branch of Christianity would assert, that a government is only legitimate when it is enacted some assumed aspects of morality based on the Decalogue (10 Commandments). You can read Romans 13, where it is assumed that the Civil magistrate is punishing evil behavior…behavior called to be evil like murder, stealing, and the like. So far as the government is operating within this minimal guidelines, can they be considered as remotely legitimate. Now what about a government that is not just on a lot of things, while being just on many other things? Therein lies the dilemma that all people live under. Aquinas suggested that only “just” laws were to be obeyed. This presumes that the citizen is defining justice by some standard in which the government itself is subject to. What is that standard you might ask? Is it the Bible? Part of the Bible? Natural Revelation? This is tough. Laying that debate aside, Judge Clarence Thomas said the following about his notions of a higher, binding natural law:

Without such a notion of natural law, the entire American political tradition from Washington to Lincoln, from Jefferson to Martin Luther King, would be unintelligible.

Napolitan adds:

He (Clarence Thomas) said that he subscribes to this principle because it guarantees equality, even if the words of the Constitution do not.

Back to Thomas:

Natural rights and higher law arguments are the best defense of liberty and of limited government.

Thomas Jefferson also appealed to a higher law that he understood the magistrate to be bound by, almost as if it were a trust that needed to be guarded and protected. Jefferson was hardly an  Evangelical by modern definition, but he was a Deist and rooted inalienable rights as something, “endowed by our Creator”. I have heard that some scientists and atheists are most tempted to Theism because of the Moral argument for the existence of God. One becomes a tyrannical dictator when they enforce laws that they must admit originate in their own minds. Even utilitarianism subjects a dissenting minority to the rule of the majority and doesn’t resolve whether something is true, beautiful, and good. If the majority wish to cleanse their land of a race of people, whose to tell them that they’re wrong, irregardless if 99% think the same say for that matter?

Martin Luther King Jr., in his famous letter from the Birmingham jail, said:

…an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law

So my question to those reading this: Is there such a thing as “Natural law”? Can it be know for certain? What is it? Was Aquinas, Justice Clarence Thomas, Thomas Jefferson, and MLK Jr. right in appealing to “natural” law?  What exact “natural” law were they appealing to?

Book Review, “Gracenomics” by Mike Foster

Mike Foster is a nice dude. Mike Foster is a humble dude too. I’ve been enjoying his writing since Deadly Viper first emerged, and watched as he and Jud Wilhite closed down that format of their ministry in response to concerns from some fellow Christians that their use of asian culture was misrepresentative and offensive.

At the time, I was angry that they had been “forced” to close it down, but over time I have seen the beauty of their actions. But having read Mike’s latest book, I’m going even further and seeing the point of view of those offended and am even more grateful for the example of grace that these two guys embodied. GRACENOMICS is about the economy of grace, and the great blessing it is when we live as “the Red Cross relief team for the disasters in people’s personal lives. We’re setting out to be the living, breathing PEZ dispensers of grace for our world.” (p.12)

GRACENOMICS is basically a primer on and call to arms for People of the Second Chance. And POTSC is all about extending radical grace to people in all of our lives. Radical grace is the kind of grace that caused Paul to write things like:

What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! (Romans 6:15 ESV)

Is the grace we offer to people ever so full that we get accused of being permissive of sin? Because if our grace has clear limits, it isn’t gracious enough. One of the interesting things about this book is that it lacks any explicit tie to Christian theology. It is aimed at all people, in all walks, and as such would be a great tool for discussion in the business world where ideas tied to one specific faith can be dismissed all too easily. But when you start dealing with grace and forgiveness, especially as a Christian, you will find so many opportunities to take it to the cross and talk about the ultimate reconciliation that our human efforts are merely pointing towards.