Jesus + Nothing = Everything Review

A Man Enflamed

There is more to like about Tullian Tchividjian’s newest book than a sleek, simple, and smooth cover and design.

Most importantly, this is a man who bears all the stripes of someone who has rediscovered the all sufficiency of Jesus.

Tchividjian in Jesus + Nothing = Everything shares some of his personal experiences with rediscovering that all we need is Jesus. He does this primarily through expositing Colossians 1, taking a deeper look at the supremacy of Christ in all things. The book is easy to follow, he takes the equation in reverse and then forward again, in a chiastic pattern. He reveals how we all try to add to Jesus, but this is nothing more than setting up idols alongside Jesus.

He wants Jesus alone, nothing else. He wants this for you, for me, and he is learning it afresh through trying circumstances at his church.

Wanting More Story

But this brings me to something that I thought the book was lacking, more of his story.

In reality his story framed this book, but ninety-five percent of the book is exposition and explanation. I longed to hear specific examples of how this equation was crystallized as his car was getting keyed, as blogs were being birthed, spreading hateful words about him. I needed more practical examples, and the reason I needed more of his personal story is that there are so many good books that pretty much say the same thing (such as Elyse Fitzpatrick’s Because He Loves Me and Tim Keller’s Counterfeit Gods).

I was hoping this would be the personal story of him rediscovering it, not the sermons that came out of his rediscovery. Some of this could be explained by his desire not focus on his persecution, or the churches failings. However, by so doing, I sensed that some of the power was squeezed from the book. He experienced it, but he stops us from experiencing it with him.

Gospel Centered Reality Check

Finally, a word about the danger of this “gospel-centered” hit list.

Sometimes I feel as if it takes the teeth out of the imperatives in the Bible. Yes, I agree that the imperatives are fueled by the indicatives. Yes, I agree that if we give imperatives without grace they will never take root. Yes, I agree that we are saved not by what we do, but by Jesus alone.

However…there are roughly 550 imperatives in the Epistles, and therefore it is right and good for our pastors to give imperatives, and us not scream legalism. Tchividjian does put on his helmet, but it is more a protective helmet, in that he gives a nod of approval to the imperatives because he knows it is the right thing to do, but it is only a nod.

In addition, justification is only one of the the many images for our salvation, and as others have pointed out, when this doctrine gets elevated, sanctification gets the burnt edges.

But I do not want to end on a negative note, and there is still much to appreciate about this book. Like I said at the beginning, if you are looking for a man who is “red bulled” to re-awaken within you the all sufficiency of Christ, this your book.

What is the Mission of the Church Review

DeYoung, Kevin and Greg Gilbert, What is the Mission of the Church, (Wheaton: Crossway, 2011).

A firestorm of critique may await the publication of this book, due the increasing popularity of social justice in today’s churches. Some indeed might be stretching their fingers, getting ready to write a heated review of the book. But even if there is disagreement in some of the points, this is a topic that needs to be thought out more carefully and biblically. I think D&G have started that conversation.

Summary

In What is the Mission of the Church? Kevin DeYoung and Greg Gilbert (D&G) argue that the unique and main mission of the church is making disciples. Their concerns are that good behaviors are sometimes commended using the wrong categories, that churches sometimes put hard “oughts” on Christians, and that with the emphasis on social problems and renewing the city, the main mission of the church is being lost.

In Part 2 they cover five larger theological categories that are helpful to the discussion of the mission of the church are understanding 1) the overview of the Bible 2) the gospel 3) the Kingdom 4) social justice 5) shalom and the new heavens and the new earth.

What is the church supposed to do in light of all this? D&G acknowledge that we are all to be zealous for good works. This book has not been to discourage good works, but rather to put good works in the framework of the Christian life. They argue that it is not illegitimate for the church to do anything other than evangelism. The church can adopt a local school, revitalize a park, as long as it furthers the mission of bearing witness to Jesus and making disciples.

In other words, the church should run their programs through a decision making process that reveals whether are spending their time and resources that more directly, rather than less directly further its central mission. “Ultimately, if the church does not preach Christ and him crucified, if the church does not plant, nurture, and establish more churches, if the church does not teach the nations to obey Christ, no one else and nothing else will. And yet, many others will meet physical needs” (126).

Critique

Overall, the thesis of the book persuasively argued. Where disagreement might come up in the peculiarities of the arguments, not so much the main thrust. Such as is their definition of the gospel and mission wide enough etc…

Helpful Distinctions

I could spend this entire review on the exposition and proposals that DeYoung gives on the social justice texts. I could also mention the centrality of the gospel, the helpful discussion of the kingdom, and shalom. But more than these, there were a number of helpful distinctions that D&G made in the midst of the arguments that were the most formative in my thinking. They are the following.

The first distinction that they made was that there is an assumption that whatever God is doing in the world, this too is our task. But D&G assert that we are not called to partner with God in everything he undertakes. Our mission is not identical with God’s mission. We are not called to participate in the slaying of wicked. We are not to die for the sins of the world. We are not going to pronounce the final judgment on mankind. It is better to locate our responsibility in the specific tasks we have been given rather than in the work we see God accomplishing.

Second, I thought the DeYoung’s chapters on social justice and his application were probably the highlight of the book. Here he shows that poor in Scripture were usually the pious poor. They are the righteous poor, the people of God oppressed by their enemies yet still depending on him to come through on their behalf. He also notes that almost all the references to caring for the poor in the Bible are references to the poor within the covenant community (94). He helpfully proposes that the social justice discussion would be less controversial and more profitable if we stopped talking about social justice and started talking about love (102).

Third, the distinction between unimportant and ultimately important. Good works for the church falls somewhat in between, like in the really really important category but not of ultimate importance. It may sound like an elementary distinction, but I can already see how this distinction is valuable.

Fourth, the distinction between the corporate local church and the individual Christian. The church is not called to do everything the individual Christian is called to do.

Minor Disagreements

First, I think they underplayed in-breaking of the kingdom of God and its effects (73). In other words I think the parables do imply some sort of growth. They interpret the parables in Mark 4:26-34 as Jesus saying “the kingdom will start out with small beginnings but at the close of the age have cosmic significance.” I don’t disagree with the statement above, but the even that statement implies growth. The parables about the seeds not only inform about the kingdom, but inaugurate it and act. These stories were meant to invoke action, as most good stories do. Now of course these parables do not specify how it grows, but Jesus is telling this parable to both show that he is the one inaugurating this in-breaking and to send them out as ambassadors for this kingdom. But D&G, at times, seem to want to take our role completely out of the process. It seems to me to be the same type of logical mistake as taking the doctrine of grace, and then saying we can act however we want.

Second, a related to the above, I felt like they were a little pessimistic about what Christians can do in the world and how much we can and should cooperate as vice regents with our King. There was not much discussion of what it means to be salt and light in the world, and the paragraphs on the cultural mandate seemed to push too far into saying that we are merely here to preserve this fallen world, rather than fill the world with his faithful presence. Both Rodney Stark and Alvin J. Schmidt have interesting books on how Christianity has fueled great advances in society.

Finally, they kept assuring us they were not being negative and preaching against social justice, but in the end it was really a book challenging modern notions of social justice and the way the church relates to this topic.

Conclusion

The authors were careful and nuanced in their argument, the advice is balanced, and most importantly they want to do the church good. Although I may have some minor disagreements with some of their points, overall they are on target even though it might not be popular.

As I told my wife after I read the book, “Everyone who is in church leadership should read this book.”

The Bible Made Impossible

Kevin DeYoung has a good review of Christian Smith’s (professor at University of Notre Dame, recently converted Catholic) book The Bible Made Impossible. DeYoung says:

By his estimation, American evangelicalism is beholden to a biblicist hermeneutic. By “biblicist” he means “a theory about the Bible that emphasizes together its exclusive authority, infallibility, perspicuity, self-sufficiency, internal consistency, self-evident meaning, and universal applicability” (viii). More thoroughly, Smith asserts that biblicism is the constellation of ten different assumptions or beliefs:

1. The words of the Bible are identical with God’s words written inerrantly in human language.
2. The Bible represents the totality of God’s will for humanity.
3. The divine will for all issues relevant to Christian life are contained in the Bible.
4. Any reasonable person can correctly understand the plain meaning of the text.
5. The way to understand the Bible is to look at the obvious, literal sense.
6. The Bible can be understood without reliance on creeds, confessions, or historic church traditions.
7. The Bible possesses internal harmony and consistency.
8. The Bible is universally applicable for all Christians.
9. All matters of Christian belief and practice can be learned through inductive Bible study.
10. The Bible is a kind of handbook or textbook for Christian faith and practice.

And he critiques him:

For starters, the book is littered with straw men. Smith frequently attacks ideas that none of the mainstream institutions, documents, or persons he criticizes holds. He opposes mechanical dictation theory, admitting that “most” thoughtful evangelicals do not hold to it (81). I can’t help but wonder which thoughtful evangelicals do? He chides biblicists for things I’ve never seen anyone do, like worshiping the Bible (124) and thinking that fellowship with God comes through paper and ink (119; see the quote from John Frame later in the review for a more sophisticated response). Likewise, he mocks the logic of biblicism for being equally certain about the divinity of Jesus as it is about the ethics of biblical dating (137). But who actually espouses any of this? These are simply cheap shots.

At other times it seems that Smith is ignorant of mainstream evangelical theology. He frequently attacks the notion that the Bible is completely clear, but then in the end he says the Bible is perfectly clear when it comes to the important stuff of the gospel (132). This is not very different from classic notions of perspicuity, which always pointed out that the Bible is not equally clear in every matter. Smith accuses evangelicals of buying into foundationalism whole hog (150), seemingly unaware that very few evangelical scholars today (including those he critiques as biblicists) defend full blown foundationalism in the way he understands it (for a careful, if now somewhat dated, interaction with postmodern thought and what to do with foundationalism see Reclaiming the Center: Confronting Evangelical Accommodation in Postmodern Times). Smith frequently gives the impression that no one has ever considered the problems he sees, as if no one has ever thoughtfully dealt with problems of harmonization, genre, or questions of culture and context.  He goes on about how words have a semantic range and how certain passages have layered meanings. This is basic stuff taught in almost every “biblicist” seminary. In another place Smith launches a tirade against the word “inerrancy,” saying it “is far too limited, narrow, restricted, flat, and weak a term to represent the many virtues of the Bible that are necessary to recognize, affirm, and commend the variety of speech acts performed in scripture” (160). Again I ask, where are the evangelicals writing books saying inerrancy is the only word we can use in talking about the Bible? I wonder whom is Smith arguing against when he says the Bible is much more than a collection of “error-free propositions with which to construct indubitably true systematic theologies” with “helpful tidbits” for how to dress, garden, cook, budget, parent, and run a business, but is instead a book that promises, confronts, commands, comforts, and commands.

Some of Smith’s most important arguments rest on false dichotomies. Consider this paragraph.

The Bible is not about offering things like a biblical view of dating—but rather about how God the Father offered his Son, Jesus Christ, to death to redeem a rebellious world from the slavery and damnation of sin. The Bible is not about conveying divine principles and managing a Christian business—but is instead about Christ on the cross triumphing over all principalities and powers and so radically transforming everything we consider to be our business. Scripture, this view helps to see, is not about guiding Christian emotions management and conquering our anger problems—but is rather about Jesus Christ being guided by his unity with the Father to absorb the wrath of God against sin in his death and conquering the power of sin in his resurrection. Scripture then ceases to be about teaching about biblical manhood and womanhood or biblical motherhood and fatherhood—and becomes instead the story of how a covenant-making and promise-keeping God took on full human personhood in Jesus Christ in order to reconcile this alienated and wrecked world to the eternally gracious Father. (111)

Amen to all that, but why all the “not this, but that” language? Of course the Bible is not about biblical manhood and womanhood if “about” means “this is the main point.” But doesn’t the Bible have something to say about being a mom, or running a business, or going on a date? Or do only biblicists try to apply the Bible to all of life?

Strangely enough, Smith begins the next paragraph by admitting, “That is not to say that evangelical Christians will never have theologically informed moral and practical views of dating and romance, business dealings, emotions, gender identities and relations, and parenting” (111). So maybe the Bible is kinda sorta about handling our emotions after all, even if no one would say that’s the main point.

Several times, Smith backtracks from his most provocative assertions. He bashes biblicism, only to come back to a proposal that sounds very much like what he calls biblicism. For example, he criticizes evangelicals for insisting on the Bible’s internal consistency, but later says “we must believe in some kind of internal biblical coherence or unity” (102). At times he speaks of the Bible’s contradictions and how its parts cannot be put together like a puzzle, but elsewhere he says the Bible is “apparently self-contradictory” (132, emphasis mine). Usually, for Smith, harmonization is what rationalist systematic theologians do, but he also acknowledges, “In some cases, to be sure, harmonizations of biblical accounts may actually be right.” The problem is when they are forced or implausible (134). No “biblicist” scholar I know would disagree.

Likewise, early in the book, Smith rejects the slogan “in essentials unity; in non-essentials liberty; and in all things charity.” He says it doesn’t work because no one can agree on the essential doctrines or even on which doctrines are essential. But later (acknowledging apparent inconsistency on his part) he introduces the categories of dogma, doctrine, and opinion to help sort through which issues in the Bible are most important (134-38). Smith claims that biblicists have no way to interpret problem texts like those that deal with slavery. But then he handles the slavery question with the same approach I’ve seen from dozens of “biblicists” (167). Smith is critical of those who make the Bible into a how-to book with instructions for managing our Christian lives, but then he says we obviously should focus on loving God and our neighbor (143).

Over and over, Smith settles back on “biblicist” ways of reading the Bible. When it suits his rhetorical aim, Smith makes a big deal about the multiplicity of interpretations among evangelicals. But when he wants to make a point important to him, suddenly the Bible speaks clearly. For example, Ron Sider’s book Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger makes “a clear biblical case about poverty and hunger” (32). Similarly, the commandments that instruct Christians to give away their money generously are “pervasive, clear, straightforward, obvious, and simple” (144). He’s radically uncertain of a lot of things, but he can conclude that Genesis 1-2 was written to banish rival pagan accounts of the world’s origins (161). Even though PIP exists when it comes to issues of poverty and generosity, just like it does with baptism or the Lord’s Supper, in cases like these Smith is eager to find a “proper interpretation” (95).

This gets to the Achilles heel of Smith’s argument. His reliance on “pervasive interpretative pluralism” is not pervasive. The theory comes and goes. Smith argues that Jesus Christ is the center that holds the Bible together, that everything in the Bible should be read through the lens of the gospel, that we should all agree on Nicene orthodoxy. But surely Smith realizes there is no uniform agreement on these matters either. You can find professing Christians—sincere, intelligent persons—who disagree on the divinity of Christ, the reality of the Trinity, and the resurrection. So can we still hold to these doctrines even when so many people disagree? Or is that biblicism?

Smith seems to think everyone can, will and should agree on the matters he thinks are most essential. But as for the rest, PIP makes those relatively unimportant. To cite but one example, Smith says penal substitution should not be placed at the level of church dogma (135) and that with his approach to Scripture we don’t have to lose anything of the gospel (176). But what about those who think penal substitution is at the heart of the gospel? Aren’t they in danger of losing everything? Smith argues that we must have a canon within a canon if we are to interpret Scripture correctly (116). But what if Christians can’t agree on that inner canon? It’s hard not to conclude that in most cases PIP proves that we are asking the Bible questions it never meant to answer, but when it comes to doctrines or methods Smith thinks are central, then PIP is not insurmountable. There really are right interpretations that everyone should recognize, whether everyone does or not.

Look at these two quotes.

If scripture is as authoritative and clear on essentials as biblicists say it is, then why can’t the Christian church—or even only biblicist churches—get it together and stay together, theologically and ecclessiologically? (175)

It should be possible for all sorts of Christians, if they really grasp the difference and importance of these three distinctions [dogma, doctrine, opinion], to agree on a short list of beliefs that genuinely belong at the level of dogma. (136)

On the one hand, biblicists naively think the Bible is clear and authoritative on essentials. On the other hand, all sorts of Christians should be able to agree on essential beliefs. So is it right or wrong to insist that the Bible speaks clearly and authoritatively on doctrinal essentials? Or perhaps the unstated assumption is that official Church Tradition can define our essential beliefs. But given the divisions and serious disagreements within the Catholic Church (despite external organizational unity), why shouldn’t the problem of PIP also blow up a biblicist approach to Church Tradition?

 

Love Wins by Rob Bell: Reviewed by Challies

Who is tired of the name Rob Bell? Finally after all this conjecture we have a book review, and a good one from Tim Challies on Bell’s important book Love Wins. He says:

If Love Wins accurately represents Bell’s views on heaven and hell (at least if our understanding of the book accurately represents his views on heaven and hell), it reveals him as a proponent of a kind of Christian Universalism. He would deny the label as he tends to deny any label. But if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, well, you know how it goes.

Neill’s and Wright’s Interpretation of the NT

I am just finishing The Interpretation of the NT (1861-1986) 2nd ed., by Stephen Neill and Tom Wright.

I have enjoyed my first overview to NT interpretation because of Neill’s lucid writing. His nack for personal details makes it come alive. The personal details saves these men from merely being men with new ideas. It is evident Neill is chomping to tell us more. He is overly kind to some interpreters, when a good punch to the gut would have done. But he was probably trying to be charitable, and by so doing, show how they have influenced scholarship and the questions we are still dealing with today.

Andy Naselli put up a review of the book (which was not so favorable), but most of the 30 plus bibliography that he attached seemed to think otherwise.

How to Write a Sentence: Reviewed

Louis Markos has an excellent review of How to Write a Sentence at TGC.

HT: Justin Taylor

1 Corinthians: Rosner and Ciampa

I am trying to keep up with my Greek this semester by reading 1 Corinthians and supplementing it with Rosner’s and Ciampa’s commentary.  Michael Bird has a good summary of the commentary.  This is my first commentary on 1 Corinthians that I have read and the first thing I noticed is that they claim that he central theme of 1 Corinthians is not unity, but purity. Here is Bird’s summary of the framework they use.

There are so many good 1 Corinthians commentaries. Fee and Thiselton are the must-reads, but one can hardly neglect Garland, Hays, and Witherington either (then there’s Blomberg and Morris which ain’t bad either). And Richard Horsley’s and Jerome Murphy O’Connor’s studies on 1 Corinthians are worth checking into too. But I have to say that Ciampa and Rosner have added another excellent book to the list of top Corinthian reads by producing a solid commentary that contains several unique approaches.

Ciampa and Rosner (henceforth CR) see the problems in Corinth emerging from the inability of the Corinthians to let the gospel message shape their gentile and Graeco-Roman lives and consequently misunderstand the message and misbehave. So the problems are fundamentally about relating to cultural values rather than, say, theological like Gnosticism or over-realized eschatology. The main subjects of 1 Corinthians according to CR are wisdom, sexuality, worship, and resurrection/consummation. The OT is key in Paul’s exhortation in 1 Corinthians, esp. Deuteronomy and Isaiah. CR do not apply the categories of ancient rhetoric to 1 Corinthians since such rhetoric was rarely applied in letters (though see my Expository Times essay for a qualified approval of using rhetorical categories to letters). Another feature is that the authors apply the categories of verbal aspect to the Greek text though they seem to cautiously accept that Greek verbs do have tense unless contextually cancelled. CR believe that 1 Corinthians provides some good resources to enable Christians to meet the challenges of postmodernism. They summarize the argument of 1 Corinthians as follows:

Paul’s attempt to tell the church of God in Corinth that they are part of the fulfillment of the Old Testament expectation of worldwide worship of the God of Israel, and as God’s eschatological temple they must act in a manner appropriate to their pure and holy status by becoming unified, shunning pagan vices, and glorifying God in an obedience to the lordship of Jesus Christ (52).

Defending Constantine: Reviews

Two good reviews of Peter Leithart’s Defending Constantine are out.

• First Craig Carter’s review:  Here is his intro and conclusion:

The title “Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom” should have been “Defending Constantine from John Howard Yoder.” This is not meant, I hasten to add, as a put-down. This is a splendid book and by far the most substantial response to Yoder’s The Politics of Jesus to date.

Does this book constitute a comprehensive and final answer to Yoder’s call for the Church to embrace pacifism as its essential posture in this world? My reading of Augustine over the past five years has convinced me that it is time to move on from Yoder’s version of the politics of Jesus and be much less hasty in dismissing Christendom as I, like many others, have been. In truth, the only reason Leithart’s book did not convince me of the absoluteness of pacifism as the essence of the Church’s witness is that I had already been convinced by Augustine. But I predict that Leithart’s book will lead many to re-consider their “Yoderian” position and ponder the possibility of a politics of Jesus that moves beyond doctrinaire pacifism.

• Second, Stanley Hauerwas.

But I think Leithart has written an important book that does more than help us to better understand the complex human being who bore the name Constantine. More significantly, Leithart’s criticisms of Yoder’s account of Constantinianism is one that Yoder would have appreciated and taken seriously. For unlike many who criticize Yoder, Leithart has actually read him appreciatively. He understands that even if Yoder does not get the “historical Constantine” right, that does not mean Yoder’s case against Constantinianism is mistaken. The history matters, Leithart makes clear, but how it matters is finally a theological question.

The Kindle 3: A Personal Review

I have now had my Kindle Wifi for 5 months. To start it is important to note that this was never meant to, and will never replace my hard-copy books. It is an addition to them. There are just some books that you need to have in print, like reference books (see Mohler’s discussion on this). Here are the strengths and weaknesses of the Kindle.

Strengths:

• Reading Ability:  It has a 6 inch page and is ultra thin, like reading a small paperback. Also, the screen is really easy on the eyes. You can change the font size to what you want. Unlike the iPad it is not back lit and therefore does not hurt your eyes after long periods of staring at it. When you buy this you are buying a reading device. Don’t expect anything else, that is what it is meant to be and that is what it excels at.
• Battery Life:  The Kindle battery lasts a very long time. My Kindle died for the first time this past week after I had not charged it for over 1.5 months and left it on standby the entire time. Let’s put it this way. If you go on a week trip you don’t have to bring your charger.
• Available Books:  There are tons of FREE books, and the availability of books continues to grow.
• Price:  Amazing that this thing is $139 Wifi or $189 with 3G. In addition e-books are cheaper than hard-copy.
• Memory Space:  Kindle supports 3500 books (also can support PDF’s)
• Bonus Features:  The bonus features like listening to music, browsing the web, it reading aloud to you all need work, however it nice to have the option to use them.
• Syncing Ability:  It syncs to your Kindle App on your computer, iPhone, or iPad.  In other words, you can put down your Kindle and pick up your computer and continue to read where you left off.
• Kindle Clippings:  It is easy to highlight and then very easy to plug it into your computer, and put these clippings in word documents.  I love this feature, because it is like marking up a hard-copy book but it is all put into a word document for you.

Weaknesses

• Page Turning:  Although you get used to the page turn, and it has been sped up from the last version, I still think there could be improvements made.
• Greek and Hebrew Bibles:  I still have not found a Hebrew Bible to buy for it and the only Greek Bible is the Byzantine text.
• Bible Surfing:  It is great to have your Bible on there, but trying to get to different places in the Bible takes some.  You have to always go back to table of contents, then scroll through books, then scroll to chapter. It makes it difficult to get to things quickly.
• Extras:  Like I said above, I love that I can listen to music on it and check my email but it is also difficult. It is like having an iPod shuffle with the music. You put it on there but cannot see what you are listening to and have to simply go from one song to the other. In addition, in regards to the Internet, it is slow and difficult to maneuver. In other words, it is nice if you have time, but you would never want to always check your email on it.
• Theological Works:  The amount of deep theological works are lacking (although growing).  But actually that has not bothered me.  I buy more books on the Kindle that I want to read quickly.
• No Support of Library eBooks:  I have heard that you can go to the Library with the nook and rent ebooks from the library and then they will disappear when the rental is due. That would be a nice feature that they could add to the Kindle

Overall

Overall I love my Kindle. If you don’t buy books that you want to read, you won’t use it. If you don’t travel much, you also might not use it that much. The extras (music, internet) need a lot of work. So if you want to spend $300 extra, watch movies, and surf the internet, then get the iPad. But if you want a reading device, buy the Kindle.

Also see the following:

• Tim Challies reviews one of the older generation Kindles.
• Tim Challies also gives 5 good reasons to own a Kindle.
• The E Book Reader Reviews the Kindle 3.
• CNet Reviews the Kindle 3.
• Engadget reviews the Kindle.

Recalling the Hope of Glory: Book Review

Recalling the Hope of Glory: by Allen Ross

Long Summary

Allen Ross, professor of divinity at Beeson Divinity School, writes Recalling the Hope of Glory in order to show how the patterns of worship have developed along the plan of God’s redemption (39).  Ross begins asserting that worship is a response to the revelation of God.  A response that includes fear, adoration, confession, commitment, ritual acts, religious observance, and celebration.

Part 2 covers Genesis 1-3.  Specifically it speaks of the garden as a sanctuary, the features of the Garden, and how paradise was lost.  The garden was sanctuary where Adam and Eve could be in the rest of God.  This sanctuary included rivers, precious stones, trees, all of which the temple was patterned after.  But Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden and now only through mediation could they draw near divine presence again.

Part 3 continues along the biblical story line capturing the worship of Abraham and his descendants.  Ross surveys worship in the ancient world showing the parallels and differences between the worship of pagan gods and the worship of Yahweh.  He focuses on Abraham’s faith as the essential act of worship.  This faith expressed itself in sacrifice, proclamation, oaths, tithes etc…Issac demonstrated his worship through similar faith with prayer, oaths, and oracles of blessing.

Part 4 begins with the worship at Sinai and proceeds to explain the worship commanded by the law.  This includes the instructions for the tabernacle, the sacrifice rituals, and the worship leaders.   At Sinai it was made clear that God is holy, but with the formation of the sanctuary God was able to dwell with is people as in Eden.  However to approach him, they would have to offers sacrifices and these sacrifices were highly regulated by the worship leaders.

Ross then looks as worship as praise, focusing on seasonal celebrations and the Psalms.  He says, “the worship of God was intended to be a joyful celebration of communion with the sovereign and holy Lord God” (290).  The Israelites were to acknowledge that every season belonged to him and at the heart of worship was the cycle of prayer and praise, which is reflected in the Psalms.

Part 6 covers what we can learn about true worship from the prophetic rebukes in the OT.  Here we learn the qualifications for true worshipers are faith and obedience.  The prophets denounced corrupt idolatrous worship but unfortunately Israel continued to rebel.  Hosea condemned them for their unfaithfulness, Isaiah for the lack of care for the needy, Amos for injustice and immorality, and Ezekiel for self-indulgence and perversion.

The transformation of worship is the subject of Part 7.  With the coming of Jesus, worship was changed forever.  Before entering the NT Ross takes a peek at the need for transformation by giving an overview of the exile and then the eventual rebuilding of the temple.  The Israelites thought that all the promises were coming true when the temple was rebuilt but still they needed new hearts.  The synagogues provided a place for a focus on the Word of God before Jesus came.  When Jesus came, he came as the Incarnate Word.  He was and still is the revelation of God.  Jesus rebuked the legalistic worship of Jewish people and encouraged true worship, which was through him alone.  At the last Supper he showed that he was the one to inaugurate the new covenant promised in the prophets.

Part 8 gives the patterns of worship in the early church.  Christians meet in synagogues, in homes, and really anywhere they could find on the first day of the week.  They met in faith practicing baptism through Christ, the public reading of Scripture, teaching and exhortation from the Word, the giving of offerings, the saying of creeds, prayers, and the practice of the Lord’s Supper.

In Revelation the glimpses of worship in heaven are meant to inspire worship in this earth.  What is central to worship in Revelation is that the vision of the risen Christ in glory creates and inspires worship.

The final part of Ross’ book brings together all that Ross has noted about worship in the Bible.  He lists the basic principles of more glorious worship which are:

The revelation of the exalted Lord God in glory inspires glorious worship and fills us with the hope of glory.  2) The evidence of the Lord’s presence makes worship a holy convocation in a holy place that calls for holiness.  3) Sacrifice is at the center of worship as the basis and expression of it.  4) Sound biblical proclamation informs all worshipful acts.  5) The ministry of the Word, an act of worship itself, is the key to coherent, corporate worship.  6) Individual public praise and thanksgiving is the evidence of the spiritual life that is alive in the church.  7) Singing, chanting, playing musical instruments, and dancing done to the glory of God are a part of the praise of the people of God.  8 ) Worship is the response of people to the divine revelation.  9) Worship prompts moral and ethical acts.  10) Great festivals preserve the heritage of faith, unite believers, and gather resources for greater worship and service.  11) The household of faith preserves the purity and integrity of worship.  12) Worship possesses a balance of form and spirit.  13) Worship possesses a balance of form and spirit.  13) Worship is eschatological.  14) Prayer enables all the acts of worship to achieve what God intended.  15) Worship transcends time and space.

Critical Interaction

Ross provides a valuable biblical theology of worship for all Christians.  Specifically, Ross is skilled at intertextuality.  One of the highlights of the book is his chapters on Genesis and on the garden imagery appearing in the tabernacle, temple, and also appearing at the end of Revelation.  Ross convincingly shows that the garden was meant to be a sanctuary where Adam and Eve were in the presence of God worshiping him there.

Ross not only does this well for Genesis 1-3 but at least touches on every genre in the Scriptures.  He deals with the narrative texts of the Israelite history, the wisdom and poetic language of the Psalms, the prophetic literature, the gospels, and the epistles, and apocalyptic literature.  This truly is a biblical theology of worship, which takes into account the various types of literature and how they present worship.

Ross also gives helpful historical sections that describe how the synagogues started, what exactly happened when people took part in the Lord’s Supper, a brief look at the history of Baptism, a description of the practices of the Jewish festivals and sacrifices.  He also steps back and walks one through what one would encounter if they entered the tabernacle/temple.  By doing this he places the reader in the life of a common Jew.

Finally Ross also gives practical advice for worship in each chapter.  By doing this he shows readers how practical a study of worship throughout the Bible is.

The only critique of Ross is how he seems to focus more on the continuity between worship in the OT and NT, than on discontinuity.  David Peterson’s book does a better job of giving the shocking, earth-shaking, reality of Christ’s incarnation and death.  When Christ came everything was turned upside down, and this is evident by the reaction of the Jewish leaders.  In no way does Ross dismiss the change of worship with Christ’s coming, but he seems more excited to show how the Testaments are similar than different.  Although this is not a bad thing in itself it lead to some practical advice that I do not see in see in the NT.  Specifically he pointed to the symbolism in the temple and argued that our buildings should imitate this symbolism.  But I see very little emphasis upon the place or aesthetics of worship in the NT.

Conclusion

Ross has provided the church with a valuable resource.  His extensive research and familiarity with the Biblical text, and the history of the OT are admirable.  He structures the book well, and it is a pleasant read.  Most importantly, he inspires true worship, through Jesus Christ our Lord.

P.S. I think this book fills in some of the holes left by Peterson’s Biblical theology of worship.  For example Ross focuses on Genesis 1-3 while Peterson does not mention it.  Ross focuses on continuity, Peterson on discontinuity.  In other words, these two books compliment one another.

Washed and Waiting Review

Matthew Lee Anderson’s conclusion to his review of Washed and Waiting by Wesley Hill.

Reservations aside, Hill’s book is a remarkably sensitive treatment of the complexities of human sexuality that manages to fuse graciousness with a firm resolve in the authority of Scripture’s teachings. Hill insists that though our transformation—sexual or otherwise—might take longer than we desire, we have been washed by the blood of Christ and now wait in hope for the redemption of our bodies. Hill’s bracingly honest depiction of the shape that waiting takes is a gift to a movement that has sometimes struggled to understand, interpret, and respond in grace and charity to the tragic brokenness of a fallen world.

Engaging with God: Book Review

Engaging with God: A Biblical Theology of Worship, by David Peterson

Introduction

“We not only use words, but words use us.”  There is a danger of using words in the wrong way.  What may begin as an oversimplified expression begins to be the way people define the word.  The term worship is in this very danger.

David Peterson in Engaging with God: A Biblical Theology of Worship seeks to reclaim the biblical sense of the word worship.

Long Summary (b/c for a class)

Too many times the term worship has been regulated to the public singing of the church and numerous books have been written addressing stylistic issues.  But Peterson notes that not many books survey a biblical theology of worship.  Peterson seeks to trace the theme of worship throughout the Scriptures chronologically, acknowledging the progressive nature of Scripture, and interpret key passages in their immediate context.  As Peterson later says, one of the aims of the book is to expose the discontinuity between the Testaments on the subject (24).  Worship in the Bible is a comprehensive category describing the Christian’s total existence.  Peterson’s defines worship as an engagement with God on the terms he proposes and in the way he alone makes possible (20).

Chapter one gives a summary of worship in the OT.  In the OT God took initiative in making himself known.  He revealed himself, and then rescued his people so they might worship/serve/engage with God alone.  His presence was made known to them through the ark and the tabernacle.  Later the temple built in Jerusalem replaced the tabernacle.  But the people could only come near to him through sacrifice.  God had made it possible for sinful people to draw near to him but the people failed to engage with him in the way that he required.  This led to the exile.  Yet the prophets foretold of a day when worship would be restored in a new temple and all nations would come and bow before the LORD.

In chapter two Peterson gives an overview and definitions of certain key words and explore more fully what it meant for people in the OT to engage with God (55).  Worship can be described as adoration to God as a great king, or service rendered to God, or reverence and fear of the LORD.  These are not three separate categories but all enfold one another.  What finally matters is the attitude of the heart, in all of life.

In chapter three Peterson jumps testaments.  What is evident from the NT is that the coming of Jesus had stimulated a whole new way of thinking about worship.  Peterson especially focuses in on the gospels of Matthew and John to show that Jesus is the fulfillment of everything the temple stood for.  They stress that God’s presence and God’s glory are now here with us in and through Jesus Christ.  No longer are sacrifices needed, but God still stipulates how people come to him, and that is through his Son.

If the temple has been replaced, then the implication is that a new covenant is in place, and this is the topic of chapter four.  Jesus came to both fulfill and abrogate the Mosaic law.  He lived as a pious Jew, following the commandments.  However, he also gave a prophetic interpretation of the law.  The coming of the new covenant is most clearly spelled out in the gospel portrayals of the Lord’s Supper.  Here Jesus redefines the people of God.  (critique: very little about how this furthers his thesis or how it relates to worship.)

In chapter five Peterson looks at worship in book of Luke-Acts.  While the word worship is used only a small number of times the temple is the geographic center.  In Acts Jerusalem is the place of revelation and then gives way to the new salvation which is not confined to any geographic location.  Rather confessing Jesus as Savior and Lord and living in continual dependence on him seems to characterize how the early church viewed what it meant to be a Christian.  Only once in the book is worship used to describe what Christians do when they meet together (Acts 13:2).  Luke presents the community life as one devoted to teaching, praying, fellowships, and the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42).

Chapter sixes aim is to uncover the substructure of worship theology in Paul’s writings (166).  What Peterson discovers is that “expressions of faith in the saving work of Jesus Christ and ministries that encourage such are specifically the worship acceptable to and please to God” (187).  The cultic activities have now been replaced, and Christians are called to give their entire lives/bodies as sacrifices (Rom 12:1-2).  This includes obedience, evangelism, and the strengthening of other believers as priorities.  But fundamentally an engagement with God through Christ is the only way to offer the worship that is due to him.

Chapter seven continues Paul’s description of worship, specifically in the assembly of his people.  Peterson acknowledges from 1 Corinthians that when the church assembles they are there to meet with God and to edify one another.  However, these two ideas are not mutually exclusive, we meet with God when we meet and edify one another.  This is because God no longer dwells in the temple but inside believers.

Chapter eight is about worship in Hebrews.  The only acceptable worship in Hebrews is through the “ministry of Christ—past, present, and future—as the basis on which we can relate to God” (228).  Jesus replaces the OT cultic rituals by becoming the great high priest who offers himself as the once and for all sacrifice.  Through Christ we are all called to draw near to God. But Christians are called to draw near to God together.  As in Paul, there is an emphasis on the gathering for the benefit of the believing community (3:12-15; 10:24-25).  As Peterson says “The Christian gathering ought to focus on the finished work of Christ and the needs of his people as they seek to serve him in the present” (254).

In chapter nine Peterson turns to the last book in the canon, Revelation.  In Revelation the focus is on the heavenly realm and upon him who is seated upon throne.  These heavenly visions are given to encourage Christians to remain faithful to Jesus and not miss out on the joy of serving God in Christ.  More than any other book in the NT the stress is on praise and acclamation as a form of worship.  This worship is in contrast to the pagan worship of the day.

In the final chapter Peterson restates his thesis: that worship is engaging with God on the terms he proposes and the manner he makes possible.  Worship is faith expressing itself in obedience and adoration in all of life.  In the OT God made himself known and worship with the Israelites revolved around the cult.  But in the NT Jesus Christ is central to thinking about worship.  Therefore, worship in the NT means believing the gospel and responding with one’s whole life to the work of Jesus (286).  This gospel is spread to others primarily through missionary preaching and church planting which are particular expressions of worship in the NT.  In these churches the purpose of gathering is the edification of believers.  These meetings are meant to be an anticipation of the assembly of God’s people in heaven.

Critical Interaction

Peterson does many things well.  His emphasis on the discontinuity between the testaments is commendable.  He rightfully shows that in the OT worship was through the cult, but the NT shows that Christ has come and fulfilled all the cultic duties.  Worship is now centered on and mediated through Jesus Christ.

Peterson also traces his thesis throughout Scripture: that worship is an engagement with God on the terms he proposes and in the way he alone makes possible.  In the OT God dictated the rules and regulations for worship being acceptable to him.  In the NT the same is true, acceptable worship is only through God’s beloved Son Jesus Christ.

Peterson rightly notes that worship in both the Old and New Testaments was more than a once a week activity but included one’s whole life.  The prophets in the OT rebuked the people for offering sacrifices without heart devotion.  In the same vein, worship in the NT is described as offering one’s body as a living sacrifice.

Overall Peterson’s emphasis upon worship being an entire life devoted to God through Jesus Christ correctly captures Scripture’s teaching on worship.  Peterson focuses on the major themes of Scripture, and interprets texts with an eye to their immediate context and salvation historical placement.

The critiques are minor.  First, I am skeptical of trying to formulate a definition of worship.  With so many definitions, who is right?  If there are elements of truth in all of them can we really say it is a good definition?  Many times the definitions are either too long and not helpful, or too brief and reductionistic.  I tend to agree with Robert Sharper who asserts that worship, like love, is characterized by intuitive simplicity.  Therefore a definition obscures rather than reveals.  For example Peterson’s definition has much to commend it, however, Peterson’s definition misses that not only humans worship.  In Psalm 148 the sun worships, the moon, the stars, the heavens, the sea creatures, etc…In Revelation 4 the seraphim worship.  Simply put, the Bible presents a more extensive view of worship than Peterson presents.

Second, Peterson insists that a distinctive element of corporate meetings is not worship but edification (214, 219, 287).  But this seems to be an overemphasis.  The church also meets to approach God (Heb 10:19-25).    Calvin believed that the goal of gathered worship was to bring people face to face with God.

Finally, I was surprised a biblical theology of worship passed over Genesis 1-3, arguably the most important chapters in the Bible.  Without these chapters introducing the storyline of the Bible, there is no coherence and there is much to learn about worship from the first three chapters.

Conclusion:

Peterson depth of research, yet accessibility to a biblical theology of worship is significant.  His examination of the “cultic” vocabulary in the New Testament is convincing.  He does not try to be innovative, but sticks closely to the text and focuses in on the center of the Bible, Jesus Christ.  Peterson cannot be far off when the says that worship in the New Testament means believing the gospel and responding with one’s whole life and being to the person and work of God’s Son, in the power of the Holy Spirit (286).

Unbroken

Earlier I noted that Laura Hillenbrand (author of Seabiscuit) came out with a new book called Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption.

Tim Challies reviewed the book and highly recommends it.

Between Two Worlds: A Book Review

Between Two Worlds:  The Challenge of Preaching Today, by John Stott

Stott’s thesis is that preaching is the “indispensable for both evangelism and for the healthy growth of the Church” (9).  To accomplish his goal, Stott gives a historical sketch of preaching, responds to contemporary objections, provides theological foundations for preaching, speaks of preaching as bridge-building, tells preachers how to study, prepare, and encourages sincerity, earnestness, courage, and humility in the pulpit.

Summary:

Stott begins by giving a historical sketch of the centrality of preaching, and by so doing he demonstrates the long and broad Christian tradition of the centrality of preaching.  It was central to Jesus’ ministry (Matt. 4:17; Mark 1:14), to the apostles (Acts 6:4), and the fathers.  It was also primary to the Friars who laid great stress on preaching everywhere they went.  The Reformers saw preaching as the most important function of the priest (23).  The Puritans and Evangelicals followed in the footsteps of the Reformers, and when the Nineteenth century came around you get people like Whitefield and Wesley.

In chapter two Stott responds to the contemporary objections to preaching including the anti-authority mood, the addiction to television, and the contemporary atmosphere of doubt.

He then gives five theological foundations for preaching: a conviction about God, Scripture, the Church, the Pastorate, and Preaching.  Chapter four is about having one foot in the text and one foot in the world.  Stott calls it bridge-building.  The chasm that preachers have to cross is “the deep rift between the biblical world and the modern world” (138).  Preaching that builds bridges is authoritative and adheres to biblical principles, but tentative in applying them to complex issues of the day.

Chapter five is a call to study.  As Calvin said, “None will ever be a good minister of the Word of God unless he is first of all a scholar.”  A pastor is first called to study the Bible.  But in addition the pastor is called to know and study the modern world.  As Stott says we need to study both sides of the divide (191).  Stott ends the chapter by giving some practical advice on how increase our understanding of the modern world, in which he recommends reading groups.  He also encourages developing habits of study and warns of hindrances to study.

After Stott has laid his groundwork, he moves onto the practical nature of preparing sermons.  He details six steps:  Preachers much 1) choose their text, 2) meditate upon it, 3) isolate the dominant thought, 4) arrange their material to serve the dominant thought, 5) add the Introduction and Conclusion, and 6) write down and pray over their message.

Stott concludes the book speaking of how pastors must have a combination of sincerity, earnestness, courage, and humility.  Nothing takes away from the power of a message like hypocrisy, and to be earnest means to actually feel what you say.  It also takes courage to speak God’s truth to people who will not always like it, but the pastor must do so in all humility.  The pastor is God’s ambassador, and he must preach the message given to him and get out of the way and let God work.

Critical Evaluation:

Stott succeeds in developing his thesis.  He makes clear that preaching is indispensable by looking at the Scriptures, history, and responding to contemporary objections.  The rest of the book is more practical.  The practical nature of Stott’s advice is unparalleled.  Many books on preaching give the impression that there is one way to do this thing we call preaching.  Stott acknowledges that a different personality enters into the pulpit than his own.  Therefore there are guidelines he gives, but he is not overly specific.  For example Stott asks, “How long should sermon be?”  Wisely he responds,

It is an impossible question to answer because there are so many imponderables.  It depends on the occasion and the topic, on the preacher’s gift and the congregations maturity…But I think that every sermon should last just as long as the preacher needs in which to deliver his soul.  (292)

Or when he speaks of preparing sermons he says:

This is a very subjective matter.  There is no one way to prepare sermons.  Every preacher has to work out his own method, which suits his temperament and situation; it is a mistake to copy other uncritically.  Nevertheless, we can learn from one another. (213)

This is the type of advice you only get from a man who has years of wisdom to share.

Stott also rightly spends a good deal of time making sure that preachers understand both their contemporary culture as well as the Bible.  Preachers who cannot relate the truth of Scripture to their hearers are ineffective and soon their listeners will be bored stiff.

What was most impressive about Stott’s book is his wide reading, clarity of writing, and reputable sources.  He interwove timeless quotes while at the same time making the book flow like a story.  Stott combined well a definite goal in mind, and getting there in an enjoyable way.  This reader left the book with the weight of preaching resting heavy upon his soul.

There are very few negative things to say about Stott’s book.  The contemporary objections to preaching were a little out-dated and could be updated with more relevant ones such as: 1) responses to preaching as dialogue/conversation 2) thoughts on the over stimulated nature of our culture 3) the nature of truth in a postmodern world 4) the authority and nature of Scripture and many others.

The structure of the book could have also been tweaked by putting the theological framework before the historical framework.  In this way he would be establishing first what Scripture said before establishing the strong tradition of preaching in Christianity.

Conclusion:

Stott’s book on preaching is a must read, if not only for the numerous invaluable quotes to which he refers.  This book has stood the test of time, and will continue to live on, because Stott’s priceless advice.  Stott has years of wisdom behind this book and it as if the reader is sitting at the foot of a wise old preacher who is pouring his knowledge into our glasses, which are barely damp.

Christ-Centered Preaching: A Book Review

Christ-Centered Preaching:  Redeeming the Expository Sermon, by Bryan Chapell

Chapell’s thesis is that “preaching that is faithful to the whole of Scriptures not only establishes God’s requirements but also highlights the redemptive truths that make holiness possible” (p. 19).  In other words, his aim is that Christ redeeming work should be central in sermons.  Rather than preaching that pushes people towards moralism, Chapell desires that sermons be centered around the redeeming work of Christ upon the cross.

Summary

Chapell develops this thesis by beginning with the Principles for Expository Preaching.  He establishes that the power of preaching comes from the Word.  The Holy Spirit uses scriptural truth to convert souls (p. 27).  And this Word is a witness to Christ.  Already is evident Chapell’s logic for this thesis.  If the word of God changes people and Christ is central to God’s Word, then Christ should be central to preaching.   The obligations for an expository sermon are unity.  A sermon should have one point.  And this point is revealed by a Fallen Condition Focus (FCF).  Next Chapell gives his guidelines for selecting and interpreting the text.  The backbone of this section is that the text should be the driving force of the sermon.  Interpreting the text includes the use of the grammatical-historical method, observing the historical, cultural, and literary context, and determining the redemptive context.  Then Chapell gives the components of exposition which include the historical, homiletical, and attitudinal components.

Chapell began with giving some principles to expository preaching and pushes his thesis further with a “how to” section entitled Preparation of Expository Sermons.  This includes the process of explanation where one learns how to shed light on the text.  Four necessary steps of explanation in the study include 1) observe 2) interrogate 3) relate 4) organize.  Following on the heels and supporting explanation is outlining and structuring a sermon.  A good outline will be brief, have unity, harmony, progression and culmination.  Chapter seven then moves onto illustrating sermons.  Illustrations anchor the abstract in minds of the hearers.  Application is also a vital component to the preparation.  Application is to present the personal consequence of scriptural truth and not to be left to only the end of the sermon, it should be the driving force in a sermon (p. 210).  Finally Chapell gives principles for constructing effective, introductions, conclusions and transitions.  Introductions arouse interest in the message, conclusions are the climax of the message, and transitions bring all these components together.

The third and final section which develops Chapell’s thesis is a theology of Christ-Centered messages.  Ultimately, this section explains why redemption should be central in every message.  Chapell asserts that every part of the Bible reveals an aspect of our fallen condition.  This allows a preacher to base their entire sermon around this FCF.  But the Bible does not only give the negative, “Scripture addresses features of our incompleteness only because such a focus concurrently signals the work of God that makes us whole” (p. 273).  Therefore the goal of expository preaching “is to decipher these redemptive signals so that listeners understand a text’s full meaning in the context of its God-glorifying, gospel intent” (p. 273).  Chapell moves on to point out that this will keep us from “be like” sermons.  In the final chapter Chapell gives instructions on how to construct expository sermons that reflect the redemptive context of every biblical text.  The three steps he gives are 1) Identify Fallen Condition Focus 2) Specify the Christ Focus 3) Discern the Redemptive Purpose.

The summary of the development of Chapell’s thesis above is brief, and does not do justice to all the work that Chapell put into this 400 page book on preaching.  However, Chapell’s thesis is clear:  preaching that is faithful to the biblical text involves redemption, specifically the redemption that is found in Christ.  The title and subtitle of the book says it all: Christ-Centered Preaching: Redeeming the Expository Sermon.

Critical Engagement

Positively, Chapell’s thesis is supported by strong biblical support.  In Luke 24:27 Jesus interprets all of Scripture in light of himself.  He is following Jesus in this interpretation of the Scriptures.  His model is exemplary to those seeking to put the entire Bible together, rather than give the congregation unconnected bits and pieces.  Everything from the time of Gen 3:15 is looking forward to the seed who will crush the serpents head.

Even more foundationally Chapell’s commitment to expository preaching rests on the conviction that the Word of God changes people.  God has chosen “to exercise his power through it and to be present in it” (p. 28).   God has chosen to work through is Word, therefore, when Chapell desires to follow the Bible’s hermeneutic, he is desiring to unleash the most power possible.

Chapell also gives good practical advice for preaching.  He simplifies a message to one big idea and tells pastors to look for the FCF and then the redemptive solution.  This will keep pastors from running all over the place and keeping their messages simple.

Negatively, Chapell’s development could have been tweaked.  The “how to” or preparation of expository sermons should have been left to the end, simply because a reason for the method needs to be established first.  This leaves either a theology for Christ-Centered messages or Principles for Expository Preaching first.   I am tempted to put the Theology section first but I think Chapell is right to put the principles first because here he establishes the authority of the Word.  Without the authority of the Word, the Theology will be a wreck.

The next two critiques would be an over-reaction to Chapell’s book which Chapell is not aiming at.  However, some might walk away and never give moral instruction again, although Chapell does qualify his “Be-like” section (p. 290).  But the NT does routinely call hearers to imitate the character in the story.  The book of James references four OT characters and prophets all of whom are used as example for the guidance of NT believers (Jas 2:14-26; 5:10-28).  The author of Hebrews repeatedly mentions believers as models of active faith in the face of difficulty.  Romans 15:107 applies Psalm 40 to Christ, but does so in order to hold out Jesus’ sacrificial suffering as an example for believers to imitate.  Therefore, in the Bible there is still a place for following examples.

Finally, some might take Chapell’s advice and feel like they have to give the storyline of the Bible in every sermon.  But this would weary a congregation, and maybe not be as faithful as they could to a particular text.

Conclusion

Overall, Chapell’s book is filled with helpful advice.  It is never bad advice to focus on the climax on the Bible: the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.  The entire OT is looking forward to it, the Gospels give the story, and the Epistles interpret its significance.  Some could take this book and over-react, but that is not Chapell’s intent.  His intent is that Christ is central in every pulpit across the world.

Washed and Waiting Reviewed

Tim Challies has a book review of the book I pointed out earlier by Wesley Hill’s called Washed and Waiting. Challies said:

Washed and Waiting: Reflections on Christian Faithfulness and Homosexuality is his attempt to answer some of the most difficult questions, and to answer them not in an abstract sense, but from the perpsective of someone who has labored over them and shed many tears along the way. What does it mean for gay Christians to be faithful to God while struggling with the challenge of their homosexuality? What is God’s will for believers who experience same-sex desires? How can gay Christians experience God’s favor and blessing in the midst of a struggle that for many brings a crippling sense of shame and guilt? These are the questions the church needs to be willing and equipped to answer. We have to be able to do better than “Homosexuality is wrong.” And that’s what this book is all about.’

HT:  Denny Burk

P.S.  I, and many others are still uncomfortable with the label “gay Christian” but that does not mean this book should be thrown aside.  

Update: Hamilton’s Review of Hays

Jim Hamlton does have a review of one of Richard B. Hays more recent books on interpretation which is a helpful summary and interaction.

What is Worship Music?

My review of What is Worship Music? by Paul S. Jones is up at The Gospel Coalition Reviews site.

The Great Commission Resurgence: Book Review

My review of The Great Commission Resurgence is up at The Gospel Coalition website.

Greg Giblert on Hunter’s To Change the World

Greg Gilbert has a good summary of James David Hunter’s To Change the World:

“Will engaging the world in the way discussed here change the world?  This, I believe, is the wrong question. . . .

The question is wrong because, for Christians, it makes the primary subservient to the secondary. By making a certain understanding of the good of society the objective, the source of the good—God himself and the intimacy he offers—becomes nothing more than a tool to be used to achieve that objective. When this happens, righteousness can quickly become cruelty and justice can rapidly turn into injustice. . . .

To be sure, Christianity is not, first and foremost, about establishing righteousness or creating good values or securing justice or making peace in the world. Don’t get me wrong: these are goods we should care about and pursue with great passion. But for Christians, these are all secondary to the primary good of God himself and the primary task of worshipping him and honoring him in all they do. . . .

Against the present realities of our historical moment, it is impossible to say what can actually be accomplished. There are intractable uncertainties that cannot be avoided. Certainly Christians, at their best, will neither create a perfect world nor one that is altogether new; but by enacting shalom and seeking it on behalf of all others through the practice of faithful presence, it is possible, just possible, that they will help to make the world a little bit better.”

There’s much about Hunter’s thought and articulation here that I find very helpful.  I appreciate, as I said, his theological sensitivity.  He understands that the establishment of the kingdom of God is a work that God and God alone performs, a biblical truth that prevents a boatload of error from creeping into our theology.  He also understands, rightly I think, that Christianity is not primarily about creating social well-being.  (He says it is primarily about glorifying God; I’d only add that that glorifying is to be done especially by witnessing to Jesus in the world, that is, by proclaiming the gospel and making disciples.)

What I appreciate most, however, is Hunter’s humility.  For a book titled something as in-your-face as To Change the World, one would really have expected a more in-your-face conclusion than, (I paraphrase) “Can we change the world?  Well, who knows?  Probably not.  But we can perhaps, just perhaps, make it a little better by living godly lives as aliens and strangers in it.”  (The word “Irony” in the title begins to stand out, doesn’t it!)  That’s a humility, I think, that is born of the very same theological care I mentioned before.  Hunter knows that the world is fallen, he knows that God—and God alone—will finally set it right one day, and in the meantime, he wants simply to live a life that will commend that God and his gospel until that final day comes.  There’s a humility there that we can all learn from.

HT:  Jim Hamilton