Tag Archives: Christianity

Theology

Are We Really That Shallow? (A Few Ways God Encourages His Children to Remember Him and Keep Their Faith)

Leave a comment

Introduction

After recently moving to Tulsa, Oklahoma, I began visiting a small church nearby. During the congregational Bible class before worship services, the elders (for our context, elder refers to congregational leadership) and their wives were generally the only ones who spoke when questions and comments were invited. Since no one knew anything about me, and not wanting to be that guy, I kept silent one morning — whether or not that was the right decision at the time, I may never know. Honestly, I cannot remember the larger context of the class — the topic or passage being discussed now escapes me — but one specific moment has continued to poke and prod its way into being written down.

Before I get to that, I should first explain that this particular tradition within the larger body of Christ claims to “follow nothing other than the Bible” and denounces traditions of men not authorized by “command, example, or necessary inference” within the New Testament. There is a general belief that objects not specifically mentioned and used by first century Christians in the New Testament (e.g., musical instruments in worship) are not authorized for use by God and are thereby condemnable as strange fire (Leviticus 10:1–2). Regarding the use of crosses within this tradition, there is a spectrum; but generally speaking, ornamental use is accepted (more so in a home than in a church building), while using it as a focal point (e.g., prayer or worship) is not.

The Moment

Toward the end of the lesson, the wife of the aged elder teaching the class exclaimed with condescension, “Are people really that shallow? Do they need a cross around their neck to remind them of Jesus? Do they not have enough faith?” Her comments continued with affirmation from her husband, and it was difficult for me to remain silent. Thankfully, a middle-aged woman of the congregation, with much tact and understanding of her congregation’s social dynamic, briefly and carefully mentioned the use of college football paraphernalia commonly used by the congregants as symbols of something enjoyed and supported. Unfortunately, the theological astuteness of her subtle comment was missed and deflected.

It is my hope that my response below — what I fought to contain that morning — will encourage reconsideration for those who affirm the questions’ implications, as well as affirm those of us who need faithful reminders.

Addressing the Question

“Are people really that shallow? Do they need a cross around their neck to remind them of Jesus? Do they not have enough faith?”

So, “Are people really that shallow?” Yes. Yes, we are, and we should not feel shamed for needing external reminders. Faith is not merely an intellectual assent to a specific belief; faith is an all-encompassing allegiance that is often analogized to the relationship of citizens of a kingdom and their king. We may extend this analogy with the use of banners, crests, and other trinkets that demonstrate one’s allegiance and relationship to a king and status within a kingdom. God understands human tendencies and instructed us in ways to help us remember and remain faithful citizens of his kingdom. What follows are some of the reminders we use.

The Greatest Command

In response to a scribe’s inquiry about the greatest command (Matthew 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27), Jesus quotes from these words of Moses to Israel after his delivery of the ten commandments:

“Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God, the Lord alone. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. Keep these words that I am commanding you today in your heart. Recite them to your children and talk about them when you are at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you rise. Bind them as a sign on your hand, fix them as an emblem on your forehead, and write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.” (Deuteronomy 6:4–9, NRSV)

Notice the inclusion of physical reminders of their relationship to God and his commandments, placing them on hands, foreheads, doorposts, and gates. Those who adhere only to the New Testament may note that Jesus stops short of these externalities; they would, however, certainly accept the examples of the heart and teaching through spoken word that immediately precede these externalities but are still beyond the point at which Jesus ends his quote. Perhaps one might argue that evangelizing through spoken word is found elsewhere in the New Testament and therefore an authorized command, but they would be hard pressed to find in the New Testament the ritualistic means here included for teaching children followed by many parents who would still oppose the use of external reminders. I find this both hermeneutically and pragmatically inconsistent. Does Jesus not condone the greater context of the passage he quotes, including practical means of remembering, practicing, and presenting to others their faith in the one God? (For those who subscribe to the aforementioned hermeneutic, is this not worthy of necessary inference?)

Creation

Humans were given stewardship over creation (Genesis 1:28). Therefore, creation may serve as a continual reminder of our responsibilities — of who we are and to whom we belong. But if we’re looking for prooftexts, here are a few regarding the majesty of creation beckoning us to consider and glorify its creator:

The heavens are telling the glory of God;
    and the firmament proclaims his handiwork.
Day to day pours forth speech,
    and night to night declares knowledge.
There is no speech, nor are there words;
    their voice is not heard;
yet their voice goes out through all the earth,
    and their words to the end of the world.
(Psalm 19:1–4, NRSV)

Observing creation prompted the Psalmist to consider his relationship to both it and God (Psalm 8), the Psalmist calls for creation itself to praise God (Psalm 148), and Paul notes God’s use of creation to perpetual point back to himself, leaving nonbelievers without excuse (Romans 1:19–20). Experiencing and feeling closer to God through nature is not creation worship; it’s allowing creation to direct us to the creator, just as God intended.

Reminders Used in Worship Services

The Bible / Scripture / The Written Word of God

What is it that tells us of the object of our faith? We not only learn from scripture; we are reminded by it. Some people carry a Bible, while others carry something that embodies or reminds them of the words therein (e.g., crucifix or bracelet). Without revisiting the written word of God, I imagine the faith of many would dwindle.

Communion / The Lord’s Supper

While the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic traditions have unceasingly carried on this practice weekly at minimum, many Protestant denominations disagree and differ on the particulars surrounding the practice; however, virtually every Christian church participates in what Jesus instituted in the upper room on the night he was betrayed (Matthew 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:14–20; cf. 1 Corinthians 11:23–26). Though the means and frequency differ, it’s difficult to deny the importance of what we call “the Lord’s Supper” has had and continues to have on the church since its establishment. If nothing else, it’s a physical reminder of what Jesus has done — a reminder given by Jesus himself. So, whether once per year or weekly and then some, we all acknowledge the authorized use of external reminders (here the bread and the cup).

Songbooks & Presentation Media

Whether holding an old hymnal or lifting hands to a projection screen, these are more than mere mediums of written and visual communication; they often allow us to recall memories, events, and our place within our traditions. We could even here include bulletin boards used by some congregations for prayer, mission work, and membership. When distilled, they communicate something to us that we then communicate to one another and/or God.

Icons, Sculptures, Art, & Decorations

Rather than argue for or against iconoclasm, I only offer consideration for how images have been used through the millennia as storytellers and reminders. Some church buildings are covered in stained glass, paintings, and architecture of the highest quality, while some churches avoid religious images like the plague, although the latter do often use seasonal decorations and other images. Perhaps we should consider how things are used, such as the difference between worshiping an image (idolatry) and using the image as a reminder of the one being worshipped, before making any sweeping judgments against others.

Church Buildings & Architecture

Whether a gigantic cathedral built through decades of work or a thatched hut that took an afternoon, we often come to recognize our place of gathering for worship as a reminder — sacred even. Whether filled with lavish ornamentation or bare walls, we have our reasons, and those objects (or lack thereof) and reasons continue to serve as reminders of our faith, our beliefs, and our doctrines. The same can even be said for those of us who meet under a shade tree in the desert, on an ocean’s beach, or atop a windy mountain (see “Creation” above). Even tiny apartments accommodating persecuted churches in places where it’s illegal to worship God, these places serve as reminders.

Miscellaneous Reminders All Around Us

Pictures, Mementos, & Family Heirlooms

Not only do pictures capture moments in time, but so do other things to which we attach sentimental value. An old family Bible, usually on display and not read, can be a reminder of our past, our traditions, and our faith, perhaps triggering a particular recollection of a person, place, or event. The same can be said of other items passed down to us (or even acquired on our own): jewelry (e.g., wedding, engagement rings), furniture (e.g., hope chest, antique table), art (e.g., painting, cross-stitching, framed scripture reference), and clothing (e.g., wedding and baptismal garments) may all find their place in our homes.

Tech

Perhaps not as many people talk about their computer desktop images these days, but most of us carry a phone with a specifically chosen home screen, one we likely see dozens or even hundreds of times a day. Some people choose family photos, hobby interests, or something they simply find beautiful, among other things; some of us use that space to remind us of our relationship with God. (Those at all familiar with my web and social media presence have likely seen symbols and images I have created for myself to serve that purpose.) Many of us also use apps for Bible reading, prayer reminders, and a host of other things that aid us in maintaining our faith and walk with God.

Friends & Family

The people in our lives can trigger a number of physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual responses when we think of them or find ourselves in their presence. While we recognize no one is perfect, there are some people who, in some way, remind us of Jesus, make us want to better people, and invoke a response of glory to God. Some people trigger a negative response, and perhaps in that we are reminded to love — or perhaps recognize our own faults and even our own lack of love.

Reminders for God are Reminders for Us

Rainbow

It’s impossible for me to recall how many children’s Bible classes or Vacation Bible School sessions have been devoted to this lesson — this reminder. After the great flood, God set a bow in the clouds as a sign that he would never destroy the world by water again. But it’s more than that. Here is the passage:

Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him, “As for me, I am establishing my covenant with you and your descendants after you, and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the domestic animals, and every animal of the earth with you, as many as came out of the ark. I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of a flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.” God said, “This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations: I have set my bow in the clouds, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. When I bring the clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh. When the bow is in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.” God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant that I have established between me and all flesh that is on the earth.” (Genesis 9:8–17, emphasis added)

Notice God uses “I will remember” twice in reference to the sign that he established. Are we to conclude that God is forgetful or so shallow that he needs a physical reminder? I hope not! A reminder for God is a reminder for us — a reminder that He remembers. God is faithful, and we are neither forgotten nor betrayed; but we tend to be unfaithful, both forgetting and betraying, and often consequentially treat (or at least think of) God as if he is like us. God reminds us that he remembers in order to remind us that he keeps his promises and does not forget. God knows we need reminders.

Two Silver Trumpets

God instructed Moses to have two silver trumpets hammered out to be used for several purposes (Numbers 10:1–10). The latter half of verse 9 and that of 10 note the use of the trumpets being reminders for God on the behalf of his people.

Following God’s Lead

Joshua and the Stones

After Israel had crossed the Jordan River on their way to Jericho, God told Joshua to have twelve stones taken from the river and set up as a reminder for generations to come (Joshua 4). Here we can see that Joshua, of his own accord, took another twelve stones and placed them at the priest’s feet to mark where they stood with ark of the covenant as another reminder (Joshua 4:9). Was this wrong or abhorrent to God? There’s no indication that it is, so it appears Joshua was following God’s lead in marking a momentous place and time for others to remember.

Take Up Your Cross

When Jesus talked about people taking up their cross and following him (Matthew 10:38; Matthew 16:24; Mark 8:34; Luke 9:23), he was speaking figuratively; but for some, it was quite literal. Jesus was not the only one crucified on a cross; others were killed in the same way due to their faith in him. Following God’s lead as Joshua did, is it unthinkable to carry an actual cross, however small, as a reminder of Christ’s sacrifice and our commitment to him? Let’s pray we never need endure such pain and suffering, but a small reminder of our willingness to do so could probably benefit us all.

Use Wisdom and Take Care

Can reminders like these become idolatrous or cause us to treat particular people and places as better than others? Of course, and I’m sure God knew that when he told Joshua what to do. It’s up to us to understand and protect ourselves from these dangers, but not by excluding these practices and reminders altogether. We can prayerfully discern what to include or exclude from our lives — whether or not a particular item has moved past a symbolic reminder and into a hindering crutch or much worse.

Slippery Slope?

When unsure or unable to argue against what I’ve presented above, among other things, I have often heard warnings against the proverbial “slippery slope.” I have pondered that phrase, the definition of which many find elusive when pressed, and I wonder whether or not we can recognize the degree of said slope: is it sloping down, a warning to the addressed about slipping and falling to one’s peril, or perhaps it is an upward slope, a warning for the addresser who continues falling backward into a blind comfort (or peril?) rather than engaging in the difficult terrain of growing and climbing toward a majestic peak from which we can see our surroundings ever clearer? Perhaps our eyes (or traditions, doctrines, denominations, etc.) are sometimes unable to distinguish between the milk and meat (Hebrews 5:11–14), or even the broad and narrow gates (Matthew 7:13–14).

Conclusion

While some see a thin line between idolatry and the use of external reminders of our faith, I see God-given commands and freedom enabling us to focus on and remember the one true God. Am I really so shallow that I need reminders of and for my faith? Yes, and thank God he tells me so; otherwise, I may find myself sticking to my own foolish wisdom and failing will power.

Let us continue in prayer for God’s wisdom, the Spirit’s encouragement and leading, and for grace and mercy in our failings, offering the same to one another. Perhaps there is more difference between us than there is right and wrong.

May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of the Father, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with us all.

Book Reviews, Politics & Economics

Book Review: The Economics of Neighborly Love: Investing in Your Community’s Compassion and Capacity, by Tom Nelson

Leave a comment

The Economics of Neighborly LoveI expected there to be some overlap between Tom Nelson’s The Economics of Neighborly Love: Investing in Your Community’s Compassion and Capacity and the arguments and jargon used by the Institute for Faith, Works, and Economics. What I did not expect was to read a book full of claims, anecdotes, and quotes with very little support for the thesis. Nelson wrote this book to encourage people to use free-market capitalism to love their neighbors with Jesus; it is written, however, in a manner that requires the reader to already understand what he’s talking about and to already agree with it. Written to encourage “human flourishing,” Nelson does not articulate what “human flourishing” means. Rather than use evidence and hard data to support claims made in the book (he does use some Bible passages in and out of context to support a few things), Nelson uses quotes from others to say the same thing, but does not quote the data and reason for what other authors have written.

I certainly do not mean to imply that there is nothing good in this book—there is; but I would not recommend anyone spend money on this. While one may certainly argue that we continue to speak, write, and do things despite there being “nothing new under the sun,” I found no reason to read this book over the better reasoned, supported, more concise, readily available, and accessible material that already exists. Instead of writing the book, a blog post of overarching claims and a short bibliography would have been more helpful so that people may actually discover for themselves what it is Nelson desires them to understand. To that end, I would simply suggest perusing the IFWE website and reading the oft quoted When Helping Hurts: How to Alleviate Poverty without Hurting the Poor…and Yourself by Steve Corbett and Brian Fikkert, which will certainly serve any reader well.

 

*I received a temporary digital copy for review from InterVarsity Press via NetGalley.

Book Reviews

Book Review: Blessed Are the Misfits: Great News for Believers who are Introverts, Spiritual Strugglers, or Just Feel Like They’re Missing Something, by Brant Hansen

Leave a comment

Blessed Are the MisfitsWe’ve never met, but Brant Hansen and I are great friends. We’ve never hung out, never spoken with one another, and don’t really have a clue who the other is, but we’re super tight. Okay, we exchanged a couple tweets back when I reviewed Unoffendable, copies of which I subsequently purchased for others and continue to promote every time someone looks at my library, takes one of my courses, or mentions US politics (so, like, every day). (Yes, I just unashamedly dropped a serious book plug in a review for another book. It happens.) But really, we’re brothers, and really get one another. Of course, since we’ve never had a real conversation you may be skeptical of my claims. I understand. But I just read Blessed Are the Misfits: Great News for Believers who are Introverts, Spiritual Strugglers, or Just Feel Like They’re Missing Something, and I’m pretty sure he’s been spying on me for a few decades and has used some sort of alien technology to tap into my brain and emotions (or lack thereof). Whatever the means, he knows me, and I know him.

If you want to know us—if you want to get us—read this book. If you want to relate, commiserate, and/or illuminate, read this book. If you’re not sure, read this book. Basically, read this book.

Introverts, logicians, autistics, head-cases, odd-balls, the lonely, normal people who know everyone else is weird: This book is for us. God loves us. Prepare to get got, and maybe even learn something about yourself along the way.

Extroverts, emotional nutcases, emoji lovers, the always smiling, hands-in-the-air-jumping-up-and-down-mega-church-praise-teams, people who know why “the CW” still produces shows and why people watch them: This book is for you. God loves you, and he wants you to know he loves us, too. Prepare to get us (or not…that’s cool, too), and love your fellow brother/sister with deeper understanding (or just love us…that’s cool, too).

That’s all you need to know. The rest is in the book. So…I guess wait until it’s published on November 28, 2017 (sorry, duplicating mine would get me into some serious trouble), or preorder it to make those numbers spike on release day (that’s a good thing for authors and publishers), or just go buy it now (if you’re reading this after 11/28/17, obviously).

Thanks again, Brant, for another gift from your God-given gift. I’m glad you listened to your friends and endured the self-effacing writing process to bless us with one more.

God bless all us misfits who only fit because Jesus perfectly shapes us. (Newsflash: We’re all misfits.)

 

*I received a temporary, unpublished digital copy for review from W Publishing Group via NetGalley.

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: God-Soaked Life: Discovering a Kingdom Spirituality, by Chris Webb

Leave a comment

God-Soaked LifeChris Webb’s God-Soaked Life: Discovering a Kingdom Spirituality is a beautiful and encouraging reminder to live with eyes to see and ears to hear the reality of the kingdom of God right now. Disciples of Jesus are not called to wait until they “fly away” somewhere; they are called to live in the kingdom now until we are fully united with God in the new heavens and new earth. What does that mean? Living and acting now in such a way that embodies the future kingdom that is “already among [us]” (Luke 17:21) and “not from this world” (John 18:36)—a kingdom and worldview that originated in God, not a human mind or institution. This way of love is not merely a suggestion; it’s a command. But if all we’re being are rule followers, then we’ve missed the entire point of loving God and neighbor—the kingdom.

Webb presents perspective on and life in the kingdom of God in practical and accessible ways. The book is divided into seven sections (The Invitation, Heart Renewal, Fearless Honesty, Close to the Father’s Heart, God in Everyday Life, Creating Community, and The Politics of Love), each containing three substantial chapters followed by a concluding fourth, which includes seven helpful and introspective questions based on particular readings of scripture. These questions may be pondered and answered all at once or, as suggested, taken a day at a time for a week’s worth of introspection and devotional time.

I will be recommending this book to my students, as well as many others (including you!). If it were scheduled to be published a month earlier, I would have had it on a reading list. Alas, it will be released too late, but never too late to recommend!

Grace and Peace to you all, and may you have eyes to see and ears to hear the kingdom of God in which we already live!

 

*I received a temporary, unpublished digital copy (hence no page numbers for included quotations) for review from InterVarsity Press via NetGalley.

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: A Bigger Table: Building Messy, Authentic, and Hopeful Spiritual Community, by John Pavlovitz

1 Comment

A Bigger TableIn the introduction to A Bigger Table: Building Messy, Authentic, and Hopeful Spiritual Community, John Pavlovitz writes, “This book is about humanity, about the one flawed family that we belong to and the singular, odd, staggeringly beautiful story we all share. It’s about trying to excavate those priceless truths from beneath the layers of far less important things that we’ve pile on top of them since we’ve been here. It’s about jettisoning everything in and around us that would shrink our tables.” (xiii) What it’s really about is tolerance and inclusion of LGBTQ in Christ’s church with no reservation. While I concur with Pavlovitz that we need to love people and be willing to sit at the same table, his use of Scripture and Jesus’ example leads the reader to believe that exclusivity is the only sin, that we are only unwilling to allow people into the Christ’s church because of our prejudices and biased upbringings, and that Jesus was a happy hippy who had no agenda and didn’t try to change people (except to make them tolerant of all other people). Much of this stems from some personal and unpleasant experiences with the church, with which many of us can certainly relate and understand. He rightly pushes back against business- and attraction-model churches, but argues for something that may appear virtually and functionally the same to those on the outside (108–110). Much of what Pavlovitz believes and writes is based on emotion what has felt good to him (even if they be difficult to deal with) rather than from a good wrestling with the whole of the Bible.

While likely intended to be a book about mercy and grace, it is really about loving people as they are and leaving them that way “because we are full image bearers of God and beloved as we are, without alteration.” (164) After reading Pavlovitz’s own words about his upbringing and current faith, I am not convinced he believes he has ever sinned (164–165) or that there is such a thing as sin (he encourages the reader to see suffering instead of sin [124], but this ought to be both-and, not either-or). Heaven on earth for him is simply diversity for the sake of diversity with open conversations where there is absolutely no pushback or accountability—where churches people can curse and say anything from pulpits like they do at his because that’s “real.” (81–82) While I’m certain there are many who will find this and the embedded universalism appealing, it’s not the image of ultimate redemption I find in Scripture.

 

*I received a temporary digital copy for review from Westminster John Knox Press via NetGalley.

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: Old Earth or Evolutionary Creation?: Discussing Origins with Reasons to Believe and BioLogos, edited by Kenneth Keathley, J. B. Stump, and Joe Aguirre

Leave a comment

Old Earth or Evolutionary Creation?Edited by Kenneth Keathley, J. B. Stump, and Joe Aguirre, Old Earth or Evolutionary Creation?: Discussing Origins with Reasons to Believe and BioLogos is a moderated (Southern Baptist Convention), two-view presentation and discussion between two “Christian” organizations (BioLogos and Reasons to Believe) in agreement with evolutionary theory in general and an understanding of the earth as being billions of years old, but they are in disagreement over what all that necessarily means and how we (humans) became we are in particular, especially regarding what it means to be “made in the image of God.” BioLogos members believe all life, including humans, have a common ancestor; Reasons to Believe (RTB) members believe humans were created as special beings separate and apart from an evolutionary process.

WHO ARE THEY?
BioLogos is quite a diverse group with no central board of scholars dictating their beliefs and findings to others. Their “core commitments” are relatively broad:

  • We embrace the historical Christian faith, upholding the authority and inspiration of the Bible.
  • We affirm evolutionary creation, recognizing God as Creator of all life over biollions of years.
  • We seek truth, ever learning as we study the natural world and the Bible.
  • We strive for humility and gracious dialogue with those who hold other views.
  • We aim for excellence in all areas, from science to education to business practices.

When an author writes from the perspective of BioLogos, he or she often includes a caveat that not all within the organization may agree on the specifics (or even in general, as the case may be). The organization’s focus is primarily on educating Christians in the “both-and” of science and Scripture in hopes of ending or smoothing controversies surrounding both and the fear and/or disdain many have for evolutionary theory.

Reasons to Believe is rather exclusive with only a small team of four scientists (Fazale Rana, Anjeanette Roberts, Hugh Ross, Jeff Zweerink) and one theologian (Kenneth Samples) leading the pack. Requirements for participation include signing a four-page doctrinal statement (“explicitly Protestant and evangelical, patterned after Reformation creeds, but allows for diversity of views on eschatology, spiritual gifts, and the paradox of human free will and divine predestination”) with a view of biblical inerrancy as articulated by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy, a Christian behavior contract, and RTB’s mission statement. When an author writes from the perspective of RTB, it is assumed all are in agreement. The organization’s focus is evangelizing non-Christians into a saving relationship with Jesus.

CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS
Southern Baptist Convention: Ted Cabal, James Dew, Ken Keathley, John Laing, Steve Lemke, Robert Stewart
BioLogos: Darrel Falk, Deborah Haarsma, Loren Haarsma, Jeff Schloss, Ralph Stearley, J. B. Stump, John Walton
Reasons to Believe: Fazale “Fuz” Rana, Hugh Ross, Kenneth Samples, Jeff Zweerink

ABOUT THE BOOK
Though not likely to convince and swing young-earth and “literal six-day” creationists to an old-earth perspective, it proves helpful in better understanding the two provided views in general and in pointing to much needed further detailed and precise information (see footnotes and bibliography for sources). The format of each chapter includes an SBC moderator introduction with questions, a response from a BioLogos author followed by the RTB response, a redirect with clarifications and questions from SBC, a response from BioLogos and RTB in the same order, and a conclusion from SBC. While authors BioLogos appear to be much more specific, detailed, and thorough than those from RTB, there simply isn’t enough time or space for fully articulated arguments and responses, and I wonder if the discussion would have been any different if the order had alternated between BioLogos and RTB responses. It would also have been helpful had the authors been able to edit their responses to better suit the moderator’s questions as intended rather than some moderator conclusions ending with something akin to “I must have been misunderstood” or “my questions weren’t really answered.” It definitely reads as an ongoing conversation, which it is, than a thoroughly prepared articulation of two views, which it isn’t.

STARTING WITH THE END
Some people read the end/conclusion of a book before reading the first page, which I find intriguing, especially in regards to fiction in general and mystery in particular. While I am not one who practices this, I perceive a few things mentioned in this book’s final chapter to be helpful on both bookends. So, for the reader’s benefit, here are three quotes from the end that should prove beneficial before starting on page one:

“After participating in all of our conversations with Reasons to Believe and BioLogos and now after working through this book, which is the product of those conversations, I am struck by a number of things. To state the obvious, this issue is huge. The creation/evolution conversation is big in the sense of how broad and interdisciplinary the topics are.” – SBC moderator Kenneth Keathley

“We probably all felt frustrated at times, wondering, Why can’t you see the strength of my argument? or Why can’t you see the danger in your position? If the group had not established strong personal relationships and been committed to humility and Christian unity, we would not have been able to sustain true engagement and would have descended to talking past each other or rancorous debate. … In today’s public square and—sadly—in our churches, people are assign guilt by association, so that even talking with someone of a different view can be seen as an endorsement or agreement with that view. I admire the courage of everyone involved to continue our conversations despite the risks.” – BioLogos author Deborah Haarsma

“The issues addressed in this book are very big and controversial and, even for people with doctoral degrees in science or theology, can be confusing. Our goal in this book was twofold: to help remove some of the confusion and to demonstrate that important controversial disagreement can be addressed in a spirit of gentleness, respect, and love. … This book…is a two-views book but not a debate book. We purposely avoided long rebuttals and responses, recognizing that there is not enough room within a single volume to engage in sufficient depth to map out pathways for resolution of our differences. Our goal is to do that in future books.” – Reasons to Believe author Hugh Ross

RECOMMENDED?
While I remain unconvinced on many of the particulars, I did find the book helpful in better understanding some of my brothers and sisters in Christ and applaud the way in which all participants demonstrated the love of Christ. I look forward to delving into some of the more specialized and detailed sources cited.

 

*I received a temporary, unpublished digital copy (hence no page numbers for included quotations) for review from IVP Academic via NetGalley.

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: Heaven on Earth: God’s Call to Community in the Book of Revelation, by Michael Battle

Leave a comment

Heaven on EarthIn Heaven on Earth: God’s Call to Community in the Book of Revelation, Michael Battle unconvincingly attempts to harmonize the messages of Origen, Desmond Tutu, and Martin Luther King, Jr., among others, with what he refers to as John’s “speculative” (105) vision of heaven and earth in the book of Revelation. Ultimately, this is a book about universalism and a realized eschatology (60, 82) living in community in an utterly selfless way to create heaven on earth. Battle argues that heaven is not some distant place in regards to space and/or time, but is in his words “an uninhibited God” (7), “where God is present” (19), and “the joy derived from interdependent persons who adore someone greater than themselves—God” (21); however, demonstrating the inconsistency found in his work, he also says it is a place we “go to” (171) that will be “everyone’s final destination and reward” (31). While he often redefines heaven in such a way that fits his argument on any given page with no regard to inconsistencies, taken in its totality, it appears that Tutu’s Ubuntu theology, “A person is a person through other persons” (135), is really Battle’s epitome of heaven on earth. (So enamored with Tutu, Battle writes as if South Africa’s example is going to save the world, all while ignoring rampant racism therein with a flip-flop of its past racial hierarchy.)

 

ORIGEN AND UNIVERSALISM:

Heavily influenced by and in agreement with Origen’s speculation about heaven and the origin of creation found in Origen’s De principiis, Battle believes everyone always existed with God before creation and that “God has given us earth to practice heaven again” (88) after having fallen from heaven due to selfish desires—earth, according to Orgien, was basically created because there needed to be a place to land from the fall. Battle continues, “On earth we are given a soul which is the ‘sliding middle’ in which choices are made. If we wish to attain transformation back into spirit, the soul must choose communal existence as opposed to individualism” (88). Yes, we must choose community, but not for the reasons found in Origen’s speculations. Whereas Battle thinks, “[Origen’s] genius is to show us that heaven can only be found in community” (90), I think it’s more appropriate to say that heaven exists as community—it certainly may not be found in just any community.

A further point of inconsistency: If this were true—if earth was created as temporary place to practicing being better in order to get back to a state of unity with God in heaven, thereafter eliminating the need and place of earth—I’m not sure why Battle found it necessary to include the following akin to ying yang philosophy: “heaven is unintelligible apart from earth; and earth is unintelligible apart from heaven. In other words, we need both of them to know each of them” (111–112). Perhaps he finds this to be a temporary necessity?

In an endnote from chapter eleven, Battle writes, “Origen uses an illustration of a student of geometry for hierarchy of souls (Princ. 1.4.1). Death does not finally decide the fate of the soul, which may turn into a demon or an angel. This ascent and descent goes on uninterruptedly until the final apokatastasis when all creatures, even the devil, will be saved” (187, n.7). Yes, the devil/Satan being saved is the only way Origen’s speculation could possibly come to fruition, and it appears Battle believes the devil will be saved. This is, however, an enormous monkey wrench even for Origen. While De principiis certainly implies the possibility, Origen never explicitly states that Satan will be saved. When pressed, Origen only goes so far as to concede its possibility while also stating, “Even one who has lost his mind cannot say this” (see Jennifer L. Heckart, “Sympathy for the Devil? Origen and the End,” Union Seminary Quarterly Review 60, no. 3–4. 2007: 57). Pressing further, Lisa R. Holliday writes, “By considering the devil within Origen’s stance on volition and the nature of the soul, it is clear that while the devil technically retained the possibility of salvation, he did not wish to attain it, due to the degree to which he pursued his own desires” (Holliday, “Will Satan Be Saved?: Reconsidering Origen’s Theory of Volition in Peri Archon,” Vigiliae Christianae 63, no. 1. 2009:1). The fact that even the Catholic Church deemed Origen a heretic for centuries is not mentioned in Battle’s argument, nor are the weightier points of De principiis that would likely cause many readers to stop reading Battle’s work altogether. While later absolved, Origen’s teachings on this subject were not.

It is my opinion that Origen did not really believe that Satan would be saved, and found himself in quite a quandary: to fully admit Satan could be saved would contradict Scripture and would have Origin deemed a heretic, which, as already noted, eventually happened posthumously simply based on his implications; but to flatly deny the possibility of Satan’s restoration would nullify his entire argument in De principiis. (Scholars often find themselves with this sort of conflict when confronted with compelling evidence contrary to their work, as if being academically honest and changing one’s position thereby negates one’s position and ability in scholarship. To be closed to correction and change is not very academic or scholarly at all, but the academy is strange and defensive thing.)

I hope Battle would be open to criticism and evidentiary change, but the following example of how Battle simply dismisses pushback with, “In any event,” leaves me doubtful:

Realized eschatology has gained some currency among biblical scholars in the United States. These tend to base their arguments, again, on the reordering of the Gospel material which then can be made to show that Jesus was a sort of Cynic teacher of social reform. My view, however, is based more on the notion that I attribute to Care Waynick, the Episcopal bishop of Indianapolis. Bishop Waynick heard that I was writing this book and offered me this insight: “[Jesus] said repeatedly that ‘the kingdom is among you.’” A critic could easily say that neither the bishop nor I seem to be aware that the passage we are referring to is unique in the Synoptic Gospels, occurring only in Luke 17:20–21: “The kingdom of God is not coming with things that can be observed; nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There it is!’ For, in fact, the kingdom is among you [within you; entos hymon].” This passage has been much controverted, especially in the context of saying that Luke constructed his own version of realized eschatology. The sharp criticism comes: If one were to assume that Jesus made the statement in the passage and meant by it that there was no future coming of the kingdom, then how is the material that follows (Luke 17:22–37) to be read? Did Jesus also make the other, numerous, futuristic statements in the Gospels?

In any event, I am one of those people like Bishop Waynick who believe that Jesus did more than say the kingdom is among us—he actually came among us. In addition, not only did he come among us, he is still here. Those like Bishop Waynick and myself practice this presence regularly through the Eucharist and caring for the least in society. (82)

 

KINGDOM LIVING (HEAVEN ON EARTH?):

Battle rightly encourages his reader to be what many of us simply refer to as active citizens of the kingdom of God. Though not yet in its fullness, we are called to be witnesses to a real kingdom right now, not to coop our Christian identity into nationalism or focus merely on our personal salvation as if it could be disconnected from love of neighbor, which is very much a part of being a disciple of Jesus and kingdom citizen. He points out some proper concerns, such as, “We seem more eager to argue over passages of Scripture pertaining to sexuality than passages such as Matthew 5:38–45” (62), but he does tend to focus on communal care and acceptance of all people as they are to the exclusion of anything else we may find entailing a God-honoring life. The only sins Battle appears to be concerned with are racism, violence, and concern for oneself (individualism) to the exclusion of others. He certainly misconstrues the reason Jesus hung out with “sinners”:

Do not seek your personal salvation—in doing that we end up like those religious hypocrites that irritated Jesus the most. In fact, Jesus doesn’t get angry at those who seem to be most worthy of our anger—those who embezzle money (the tax collectors) and those who commit sexual sin (prostitutes and adulterers). These were Jesus’ best friends; he required from them conversion and fidelity. He became angry at the religious folk who sought only their personal salvation. (151)

Jesus wasn’t in the business of finding people deep in sin, becoming best buds, and telling them it’s all okay; he was changed lives by pointing them back to the way God intended us to be because he loved them. Nor was Jesus angry with people who wanted to be “personally saved,” though he did chastise folks for ignoring and oppressing others for selfish gain. To not be concerned about one’s relationship with God is, in fact, not honoring God.

 

CONCLUSION:

All in all, this book does not have as much to do with community in the book of Revelation as it does with an overly repetitive, argumentative soapbox against white, Western, fundamental, individualistic, liberal and conservative straw men with no introspection or self-criticism to be found. Here Battle should have listened to his own words: “Labels of conservative and liberal theologies only obfuscate arguments” (36). While reading this work was quite tedious and not at all recommended, I hope what I have read is simply the result of much frustration over the lack of love for one’s neighbor Battle sees and experiences on earth as it is now.

 

*I received a temporary digital copy for review from Westminster John Knox Press via NetGalley.

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: The Minister as Moral Theologian: Ethical Dimensions of Pastoral Leadership, by Sondra Wheeler

Leave a comment

The Minister as Moral TheologianFor the aspiring, new, and even seasoned shepherd/pastor/preacher, I cannot recommend enough Sondra Wheeler’s The Minister as Moral Theologian: Ethical Dimensions of Pastoral Leadership. This is not a book on ethics, as some would academically approach the subject, although Wheeler does offer a brief primer on types and methods; it is an encouragement and guidebook on being ethical for those shepherding the church. Pastors are not merely prayers, preachers, and teachers; we are (ought to be!) shepherds who model the life of a disciple of Christ and guide others to do the same. This means we “walk the talk,” so to speak, and come alongside others—beginning where they are—and guide them in the same.

Life is messy and often encountered in the grey, which makes how we “do ethics” vitally important in our greater task. Regardless of how much some may want or force it to be, it’s usually not as easy as “yes or no” or “do this to fix that.” In such a small book, Wheeler helpfully discusses with much wisdom the “what, when, why, and how” of living, preaching, teaching, and counseling—or not, as the case may need be. While written in a way that often presumes a more traditional, western and liturgical church, particularly with clergy, its application is by no means strictly understood and confined therein. As a longtime pastor of smaller and home-based churches, as well as a mentor, teacher, and guide to those who come from other churches for pastoral care, I found Wheeler’s book to be an exceptionally helpful and encouraging reminder. I learned from her scholarship and wisdom, as I suspect will any reader open to Spirit of God.

Wheeler is already working on a follow-up, also to be published by Baker Academic: Sustaining Ministry: Foundations and Practices for Serving with Integrity. I look forward to reading that, too!

 

*I received a temporary, pre-published digital copy for review from Baker Academic via NetGalley.

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: A Little Book for New Bible Scholars: Why and How to Study the Bible, by E. Randolph Richards & Joseph R. Dodson

Leave a comment

A Little Book for New Bible ScholarsInspired by Helmut Thielicke’s popular publication from 1962, A Little Exercise for Young Theologians, IVP Academic (of InterVarsity Press) has been putting out lengthier books—still quick reads—in it’s A Little Book for New [X]: Why and How to Study [Y] series. Thielicke’s work is so well done in that it shouldn’t be surprising to find it being quoted in these new books. So, what’s the point in trying to replace? I’m not sure that’s necessarily the intent, though some schools and classes may decide to go that route with their book requirements and recommendations.

The latest addition to the series, A Little Book for New Bible Scholars: Why and How to Study the Bible by E. Randolph Richards and Joseph R. Dodson, is certainly not a replacement to Thielicke’s, but it is a welcome and helpful addition. Its helpful and encouraging contributions are often through narratives likely much more palatable and an easier introductory pull into the field for millennials than perhaps Thielicke’s language may be. It is also, as the title suggests, more specific to biblical studies than theology, a distinction students will (should) eventually learn. My only major criticism is on the awkward and uncomfortably forced chapter on equality wherein the authors encourage “female, black, Hispanic, and non-Western scholars to step up and do the hard work of biblical studies” (79). To be fair, it is a sincere and grace-filled attempt at inclusivity. As stated by one of the authors, “Sometimes white male scholars like me can be a jerk. (I may even have stated some things in this chapter in insensitive ways—forgive me.)” (87) That said, I would still recommend the book anyone interested in or considering academic Bible study.

 

Note: I have not yet read Kelly M. Kapic’s A Little Book for New Theologians: Why and How to Study Theology (2012), thus I am unable to speak to how his approach may or may not be different from Thielicke’s and what may or may not be gained from reading it in conjunction with others in this series.

 

*I received a temporary, unpublished digital copy for review from IVP Academic via NetGalley.

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: Salvation by Allegiance Alone: Rethinking Faith, Works, and the Gospel of Jesus the King, by Matthew W. Bates

Leave a comment

Salvation by Allegiance AloneIt’s no secret in scholarship that the English language does not have words that carry the same meaning and connotation of the Greek word pistis and its various forms and conjugations; however, that doesn’t stop most from using “faith” in its place wherever found. The driving force of Matthew W Bates’ Salvation by Allegiance Alone: Rethinking Faith, Works, and the Gospel of Jesus the King is the reevaluation of pistis as “allegiance” rather than “faith” in its greater context. I do not doubt that many will find Bates convincing in this regard, especially those already aware of the political context of Scripture; however, there are several major points I find in need of revision in this thought-provoking work.

First, Bates argues that the oft used arguments for “salvation by faith alone” have not only been theologically wanting but also damaging to the way in which hearers may then perceive and read Scripture and live (or not) as citizens of the kingdom of God. Studying in both Presbyterian and Catholic contexts, Bates feels he is uniquely positioned to speak in a bridging manner for Protestants and Catholics, particularly regarding the place of “works” or “living out one’s faith,” as some describe it, in conjunction with faith—or, as he argues, one’s allegiance to Jesus as Lord. His arguments are sound and point out philosophical, theological, and practical flaws on both sides of the traditional arguments that overemphasize faith or works in such a way that diminishes the other. However, after so doing, he comes back to “allegiance alone” (hence the title), perceivably unable to escape his traditional Evangelical roots, even after arguing for a much deeper understanding of an holistic life actively aligned with the king in mind, heart, and action. Perhaps this new phrase is intended to imply this holistic life, but his arguments against “faith alone” can be used against the reevaluated pistis phrase since “allegiance” may be easily misinterpreted and misused in time, as he has demonstrated the case to be with “faith.” I would encourage an holistic understanding and teaching of pistis, as does Bates, but without the wholesale removal of “faith” terminology, arduous as the task may be.

Second, Bates attempts to define the “gospel message” in its entirety according to eight foundational statements found in the Apostles’ Creed:

“Jesus the King
1. preexisted with the Father,
2. took on human flesh, fulfilling God’s promises to David,
3. died for sins in accordance with the Scriptures,
4. was buried,
5. was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
6. appeared to many,
7. is seated at the right hand of God as Lord, and
8. will come again as judge.” (p# unavailable, emphasis original)

There’s no doubt that these statements are either explicitly or implicitly made by Jesus and/or the apostles; however, I find his argument utterly unconvincing, stemming more from creedal theology rather than an holistic approach to the New Testament’s use of euangelion and its varied forms—basileia (kingdom) isn’t even included in Bates’ gospel message, that which is most associated with “gospel” in the New Testament.

Third, Bates argues that we are “idols of God” solely based on characteristic similarities between “image” and “idol” and the nature of idols in ancient Egypt as articulated by John Walton. No linguistic evidence is provided—contrary to the positive evidence for the pistis/allegiance argument—for a shift from “image” to “idol” in his desire to “restore the idol of God” (humans who properly reflect God, Jesus noted as being the prime and only perfect example this side of the new heavens and earth), but that does not stop him from making the switch and henceforth referring to those aligned with Jesus as idols. Not only is it unconvincing, I find no positive or helpful reason for its inclusion in the book. It simply appears to be an attempt to cram into the book a second linguistic wrench of controversy for the academy and ends up detracting from the greater message.

Finally, pairing “allegiance” and his “gospel” creed, Bates encourages Christians to use and recite the current form of the Apostle’s Creed as the true and proper “Pledge of Allegiance” with ever-increasing frequency in order to proclaim, teach, and remind people of the gospel (as defined by Bates) and with whom they are aligned. Certainly reciting and affirming creeds is not my dispute. They may proclaim truth and serve a purpose, and it’s the purpose and degree of complete truth claimed by the authors and perpetuators that I question. Bates is not the first to put forth an alternative pledge that counters those nationalistic in nature (Shane Claiborne being one of the most recent), and it sounds like a good idea. Jesus is lord; Caesar is not. We (well, some of us) get that. My reservations for using at least this pledge in particular (or really anything as the pledge) should be apparent in my questioning of Bates’ presentation of the holistic gospel message above.

Given the aforementioned observations and reservations, I find the overarching thesis to be an important one in need of further discussion within the academy and local churches alike. A proper understanding of the political context within and with which Scripture is written can only help us more fully understand whose we are, for whom we live, and what a life lived with that perspective may and ought to look like.

*I received a temporary, pre-published digital copy for review from Baker Academic via NetGalley.