Tag Archives: faith

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, 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.

Art, Book Reviews

Book Review: Silence and Beauty: Hidden Faith Born of Suffering, by Makoto Fujimura

Leave a comment

Silence and BeautyWith a mix of exposition, critique, biography, and memoir, Makoto Fujimura’s Silence and Beauty: Hidden Faith Born of Suffering wrestles with Shusako Endo’s 1969 novel, Silence, providing empathetic insight into the past, present, and hopeful future of Japanese culture. Though many may disagree with and even criticize both Endo’s and Fujimura’s theological perspectives regarding Catholicism and authentic Christian faith in Japan both past and present, one need neither agree nor disagree in order to benefit from taking this journey with Fujimura. Yes, there may be times when one questions the validity of arguments and perspectives expressed in Silence and Beauty, but the reality of shumi-e culture still exists in varied forms, and Fujimura encourages us to see both tragedy and beauty in the brokenness. One may be left with more questions in the end, but they are questions worth asking and wrestling with.

For those who have not yet read Endo’s novel, Fujimura provides a synopsis at the end of the book (Appendix 3). There’s also a glossary of Japanese terms and definitions since they are not all defined in the text. I recommend reading all three appendices and the glossary before taking the journey. This will only take a few minutes and will serve you well.

Further resources may be found at silenceandbeauty.com.

 

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

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: Outlaw Christian: Finding Authentic Faith by Breaking the “Rules”, by Jacqueline A. Bussie

Leave a comment

Outlaw ChristianLutheran professor Jacqueline A. Bussie’s Outlaw Christian: Finding Authentic Faith by Breaking the “Rules” reads like an infomercial for the purported latest and greatest form of “just be you” faith and new club: Outlaw Christians. She writes:

Outlaw Christianity: (noun)

  1. a new, life-giving faith for those who ache for a more authentic relationship with God and other people by no longer having to hide their doubt, anger, grief, scars, or questions
  2. an honest, outside-the-law faith for those seeking a hope that really speaks to the world’s hurt (p.xi)

Bussie rightly pushes back against the notions many have of not being able to be really in honest in some Christian circles, having to hide anger, doubt, and scars in the midst of real pain and uncertainty; however, the path taken in this book is not one to recommend. In order to travel this path, one must, as Bussie has, redefine a number of terms to create this new faith club. Rather than revere the Almighty, Bussie encourages the reader to bring God down to a human level as she does, stating that God learns and grows with us, comparing her relationship with him to an angry married couple in which both sides are flawed people just trying to figure things out and get along.

I concur that we can learn from people not like us, even other religions; but if it is not ultimately God honoring and glorifying then it is of no use. However, Bussie seems to take this a bit further down an apparent path of universalism when she writes about our “brothers and sisters of other religions” (137) and redefines sin by stating, “To keep things simple as well as practical and concrete, I now define evil and sin as anything we say, do, or believe (or fail to say, do, or believe) that robs us of our humanity or the earth of its dignity” (129). The emphasis of this book is certainly on oneself and being honest about one’s humanity, reveling in doubt and sharing each other’s pain and suffering, for which Bussie claims there is no other meaning than that it is shared. She reminds her reader that something isn’t sin if it’s honest; so be honest because that’s authentic and authenticity attracts.

So, while being honest and attempting to attract others to this new club of “outlaws” that is said to include Job, Jesus, and God, Bussie demonstrates where she’s really at with God when she states that he “carries a dead child, and that child is Jesus, and all of us too” (157). No, Jesus is risen! Yes, there is suffering, but there’s so much more that can be helpful for potential readers than to bring God completely down to an utterly flawed human level and say something like “he’s just like us, so he understands.” He understands, and has conquered!

To be fair, there are also small sections in the book that praise God and his love, but I think Bussie’s experience with her mother’s suffering and passing is still eating away at her and is the lens through which she sees her life, her students, and the rest of the world. Yes, we are called to participate in changing the world (examples of which are included in the final chapter and may or may not be helpful for a Christ follower), but it is in Christ that we should have our identity, and it is through and for him that we are able.

Given the poor exegesis and evaluation of the book of Job in the second chapter, I would not have gone any further had I not agreed to review this book. However, having finished it in its entirety, I can say that my concerns about its direction were validated. In its sincere desire to help and encourage struggling Christians or those who have been pushed away by hypocrisy, it can be even more damaging than the things it attempts to correct.

 

 

*Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher through the BookLook Bloggers book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: The God I Don’t Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of Faith, by Christopher J. H. Wright

Leave a comment

The God I Don't UnderstandWhile working through the unread books in my library, I realized I still had one more by Christopher J. H. Wright that I had forgotten about: The God I Don’t Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of Faith. Wright here works through four of the big questions people often have when struggling with God and the Bible: evil & suffering, destruction of the Canaanites, the cross, and thoughts on the end of the world. He addresses each of these issues through faith, scholarship, and trust, honestly and humbly admitting his own struggles along the way. The book is easy to read and understand, despite the subject difficulty. (This isn’t necessarily intended for those looking for the kind of thorough academic arguments as found in other works of Wright, but still both a useful and helpful starting point.)

If I ever get the chance to meet Chris, I’m going to thank him and give him a giant, awkwardly lasting man hug. His The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative (review) is still my top recommendation (a bit too academic for some, but I encourage taking the journey anyway), with The Mission of God’s People: A Biblical Theology of the Church’s Mission (review) in an easy second (more of an expansion on a particular aspect of the former, and much easier to read). The God I Don’t Understand is a helpful addition!

Book Reviews

Book Review: Bringing Heaven to Earth: You Don’t Have to Wait for Eternity to Live the Good News, by Josh Ross and Jonathan Storment

Leave a comment

Bringing Heaven to EarthMany of us have grown up in the “I’ll Fly Away” crowd, getting much of our eschatology (what we believe about end times) from our hymns rather than the Bible, which in turn influences what we believe about how we are to live here and now. If this place is going to blow up and we’re going to fly away, then nothing here really matters, right? Unfortunately, this way of thinking is still pervasive in many churches and schools. Josh Ross and Jonathan Storment grew up in this same vein, have since been convinced of a greater reality of living in the kingdom now, and have provided an easy to read book on why and how that can and should happen. This is Bringing Heaven to Earth: You Don’t Have to Wait for Eternity to Live the Good News.

“Part 1: A Reintroduction to Heaven” begins emphatic, but lighthearted, sports jokes and jabs not spared (just look past them!). Ross and Storment make a simple case for the real connection between heaven and earth and God mission of resurrection and redemption, not rapture. “Part 2: When Heaven Celebrates” gets a little heavier—if that can happen when talking about partying!—but only insomuch as the authors continue drawing the reader into the importance of the topic at hand. Once in “Part 3: Life in the Light of Heaven” the reader should have a broader grasp of what it means to live for God’s glory and the sake of others right now and give up on any ideas that may keep us waiting until we’re in “heaven” to be joyful in this life.

This can be a great primer for anyone struggling with what to do with the good news of the kingdom of God and how heaven, hell, and earth may fit therein. It may be especially helpful for those who are steeped in dispensationalism, a particular theological stream espoused by much company I’ve kept in recent years. If you’re looking for a quick and easy read to whet your appetite to go even further in living as a kingdom citizen now, this can help. Be strong and courageous; do not be afraid!

 

*Disclaimer: I was contacted by the WaterBrook Multnomah Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House, and received this book for free in exchange for an honest review. I was not paid, nor was I asked to write anything specific, whether positive or negative.

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: Jesus, Bread, and Chocolate: Crafting a Handmade Faith in a Mass-Market World, by John J. Thompson

Leave a comment

Jesus, Bread, and ChocolateIn Jesus, Bread, and Chocolate: Crafting a Handmade Faith in a Mass-Market World, John J. Thompson takes the reader on his journey into artisanship through bread, chocolate, coffee, beer, gardening, and music-making. Throughout, he uses handmade vs. mass-produced as a metaphor for how we are (or are not, as the case may be) being Jesus’ disciples. A resident of East Nashville (or East Nasty [shout out to my old peeps!]) and world traveller, Thompson has had the privilege of experiencing (and being spoiled by) some of the best the handmade world has to offer. I admit, though I already make my own bread, it made me want to stop eating white bread. Will I? Probably not. It also made me want to stop using sugar and cream in my coffee. Will I? Probably not. And though I don’t drink alcoholic beverages, it even made me think about what it’d be like to try a microbrew (certainly not any of the mass-produced stuff I think smells like horse pee). The point being, it’s a good read, and I learned a lot about what it takes to make and appreciate some really beautiful things. But that’s not all: it also made me consider how I relate to my creator and others in service to the King. Of course, one may always have questions and push back against the author (he admits that there is good in the mass-produced), but if one refrains from being pulled in the direction of criticism (like that the book is mass-produced by Zondervan and not by a small publishing team that had it printed or handwritten on handmade paper or parchment!) and engages with him in the point he’s trying to make, I think it can be quite helpful. (All analogies break down at some point, but I do think potential rebuts against his handmade vs. mass-produced points often fail when attempted to be made in relation to our discipleship.)

Here’s a taste:

Christians, especially evangelicals like me, often like to pulverize the gospel into small, fine, easy-to-digest particles. But if our creed can fit on a bumper sticker, we’re doing it wrong. I believe this is a by-product of our well-intentioned and laudable desire to be understandable and relevant to our peers. In the process, however, we risk turning the Bread of Life into a Twinkie. At some point, the essence of the thing we are trying to sweeten is compromised beyond usability. This processed, refined gospel feels good going down, but when the energy buzz wears off, we are left with nothing but a headache. No white-bread gospel can satisfy the deep hunger of the human heart. (68)

Boom!

Enjoy.

 

*Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher through the BookLook Bloggers book review bloggers program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: The Grand Paradox, by Ken Wytsma

Leave a comment

The Grand Paradox: The Messiness of Life, the Mystery of God and the Necessity of FaithKen Wytsma’s latest, The Grand Paradox: The Messiness of Life, the Mystery of God and the Necessity of Faith, is not another “here’s the real answer” amid the myriad of “conspiracy” titled books about Christianity and/or the Christian faith that have been released in recent years; it’s a “both-and,” “wrestle with the tension,” “it’s okay to have honest doubt” book that is sure to help and encourage both those who currently struggle with their faith and those who could use (need?) that every-so-often, honest look at their current state of being with our creator. Ken has written in an easily accessible manner by which anyone should be able to understand the book’s message without being further confused by his or her own paradoxical state. For some, it may answer, rework, and/or redirect questions, perhaps even give from another’s perspective the permission needed to simply have questions; what it won’t do is encourage the kind unhealthy doubt and skepticism that comes from a position of insincere and dishonest inquiry. This one comes highly recommended by the six pages of endorsements at the beginning of the book (maybe not as over-the-top as I initially thought) and myself. Read, enjoy, and be uplifted.

In a more personal note, I received a copy of the book from Ken over two weeks ago to review and take part in the book launch. Due to other obligations and reading that didn’t get done as soon as I’d planned, I didn’t get to it until today—the day of the launch! So, first things first, I hit my usual spot in the café on the campus of a local Christian college where I like to spend time interacting with students, many of whom use the space for dialogue and inquiry not so much encouraged elsewhere on campus. I begin reading and about a third of the way through I immediately begin thinking of a student who quit and left the school at the end of last semester due to many questions that could not and would not be answered in her previous environment, only to quit going to any church altogether as she wrestles with her faith. I highlight the passage, get one more page into the book, and who should walk into the café but the long absent student back to visit friends! I hop up, exclaim the providential nature of our meeting, have her read the section, and immediately receive affirmation of her relation to the text. I get her mailing address and immediately after finishing the book order a copy for her, marking the first time I’ve done such a thing, and on it’s launch date no less! Take this as you will, and let it stand as a further stamp of my humble approval.

Book Reviews, Theology

Book Review: Muscle and a Shovel, by Michael Shank

3 Comments

Muscle and a ShovelI first want to address the form of the book Muscle and a Shovel by Michael Shank that I purchased. It is an e-book (Kindle) and the 5th edition. I purchased it for $9.99. It was strewn with typographical errors and poor grammar, had no table of contents or means by which to jump to chapters (there are 40, plus the following sections: introduction, epilogue, end notes, bibliography, and Bible verses used in each chapter), no links to end notes from where noted within the chapters, and missing end notes! I repeat: this is the 5th edition since its initial publication in 2011. Five editions in three years, and it’s still in this condition. Without having yet mentioned anything about the actual content, this is enough to see little care has been taken in editing and likely speaks to the quality of the work itself. It does.

My reason for purchasing the book is simple: I was asked to read it in its entirety no matter how I felt along the way, to take notes, and to then offer my thoughts concerning its potential use in someone’s “outreach ministry.” I was asked to not read anything about the book (no abstracts, reviews, etc.) beforehand in order that I might approach it without any preconceived notions or bias, at least as little as can be expected. So, that’s what I did (or didn’t, as the case may be). This is, however, a book review and not the place for me to express all my thoughts concerning the task I was given, though I will make a few notes to caution those who would consider reading it.

As a book, it appears to be a strange and disjointed, autobiographical narrative that preaches at the reader in an attempt to convince them to read the Bible in a way rather specific to a particular end of the spectrum within the Church of Christ denomination. (It is “about” Michael Shank’s conversion from the Baptist to Church of Christ denomination.) I found much of storytelling of daily life events to be mundane and distracting from the larger context of the book. Not only were they simply not written well, they often did not make much sense wherein they were placed. The text is unnecessarily long, and cutting much of this “storytelling” would make it much more tolerable.

However, there is still the issue of the way in which the reader is being preached to. There is constant repetition of the same Bible verses, and they are always typed out in their entirety every time. I understand the desire to print full Scripture references in a book that is intended to “teach,” but not every time, least of all the same ones. This could be trimmed and save a lot of room, again making the book a bit more tolerable. Using the King James Version of the Bible for everything is also not very helpful. Of course, it is still used by many churches who consider it to be “the authorized version,” which simply shows a lack of understanding the history behind that phrase and the number of errors found within the text. (Someone reading the book along with me needed, on numerous occasions, to go to another translation simply to understand what was being said.) There is great history and tradition behind the KJV, but it is horribly outdated and ought not be used by most for Bible study today, especially if they are new to Scripture.

The author belittles people he’s trying to reach and uses examples and exaggerations that make it appear as if all people within a particular denomination are exactly the same as that which is poorly described. Do they exist? Yes, just as they do within the author’s own denomination. However, saying someone is an idiot or needs psychiatric help, for example, simply because they do not read a verse the same way (usually because they disagree on how it is to be read based on preconceived notions of biblical interpretation handed down to them, just as with those in the Church of Christ) is self-defeating, especially when trying to convert the very people being insulted. Though the book attempts to refute that assertion, the point is made therein: “We (the Church of Christ denomination) are the only ones who read the Bible correctly, we are the only ones who know the truth of Scripture, and everyone else is going to hell, even though we state we do not make that judgment call because God is the final judge (but if you read and present the Bible like we do, it is the obvious conclusion).”

For these reasons, and so much more, I would not recommend Muscle and a Shovel to anyone as a “good read.” In fact, it’s quite poor.

 

 

 

Now, since I’ve likely offended many in my Church of Christ tradition by saying these things, especially by calling it a denomination, I feel I must mention a few things I normally would not include in a book review.

The author notes how a few denominations came to be and why they are wrong but fails to properly address his own history. The Church of Christ (yes, big “C”) is not the only church of Christ (little “c”) as many purport. It is a branch within the history of Christianity and stems from men just as every other denomination comes from those who have influenced a particular direction or way of reading Scripture. In my opinion, there are two major blinding factors to those within the Church of Christ not understanding themselves as a denomination: 1) they simply redefine the word “denomination” in such a way that they intentionally exclude themselves, and 2) they are woefully unaware of their own history.

(Note: There are many who do not fall within the ignorance described here and remain within this particular tradition for numerous reasons, which I admire. In my own experience, I have been pushed away and described as an apostate and heretic for disagreeing with my tradition in its general narrowness of scriptural interpretation and exclusivity, and currently find myself living in an area that needs much more than the tiny [~20 people], local [20 minutes away by car] Church of Christ is teaching and offering—nothing—and have partnered with other Christian leaders in the area and lead a congregation in my home. I still don’t agree with denominationalism, which is why I do not fully associate myself with one (the Church of Christ), but I work with those therein and am still thankful for the good that has come from my Church of Christ heritage. In fact, when I’m visiting family and traveling, I still take my family to a Church of Christ.)

First, a denomination does not necessitate a central organization or governing body, but the Church of Christ has enough of a connection through hermeneutics, language, teachings, preachers, schools, and publications to be understood as having an unspoken (though loudly spoken) central governance that stipulates who is and isn’t “in” to fall within their own definition of “denomination.” They also have churches that fall within a wide spectrum, wherein not all believe the others are “in” (usually the more conservative, the more exclusive), just as is the case with many other denominations. Though they often claim that “church of Christ” is merely a descriptor and have concocted a theological doctrine by which it is a necessary descriptor, they certainly function as the “Church of Christ,” a denomination with a specific label.

(Note: The Church of Christ is not a cult, as some still purport, though it is generally so narrow in its approach to Scripture and other people that they alienate others who consider themselves to be [and are!] in the church of Christ, or any of the other names used for the people of God in Scripture that are more numerous than this single reference in Romans 16:16. Many are simply offended by the hijacking of this particular label by one denomination to the exclusion of all others from being associated therewith.)

Second, the Church of Christ came about as the result of Stone, the Campbells, and others desiring to get away from denominationalism and focus on unity in Christ and an emphasis on the written Word of God (the Bible). As with most denominations, the men by whom they were founded (or not!) did not intend them to be so, and they often spoke against it. However, just as with the Church of Christ, the further people were separated in time from these men the more they wanted to set up a particular system based upon their teachings (or twisted versions thereof).

The beginnings of the American Restoration Movement, of which the Church of Christ was a part, were by men who disagreed on much but agreed on Jesus, the Son of God, and a desire to get back to a New Testament example of living as the body of Christ. They disagreed on what the Church of Christ now considers to be salvation issues (names, labels, baptism, and the entity and function of the Holy Spirit, just to name a few), but they believed in unity in Christ and worked together to further the Kingdom of God, even in using different names and descriptors of the church but considering one another brothers and sisters (or sister congregations, as they are commonly known). This is the kind of unity for which many of us still strive, and it saddens me that many within the Church of Christ are not even aware of this part of their heritage and are actually opposed to it. However, this is what the author of Muscle and a Shovel speaks against. As a major debate in the history of the splitting of the Churches of Christ concluded on one end, it’s all right (good, of God) or it’s all wrong (evil, of Satan). This has been the trajectory for the Churches of Christ for some time, but many have begun to break away from this lie and are much more willing to listen to and journey with other believers in order that we may all become better disciples of Christ (another descriptor that turned into a denominational name “Disciples of Christ” within the American Restoration Movement and the other label used in its founding by Stone and Campbell).

Michael Shank uses the often expressed hermeneutic of “speaking where the Bible speaks, and staying silent where the Bible is silent” by way of looking at the New Testament through “commands, examples, and necessary inferences,” but fails, as many do, to show in the Bible (!) where these hermeneutics may be found about how to interpret itself! Why? This is what has been handed down through tradition but is understood to be “the way” (the most logical and right?) in which Scripture must be interpreted. This hermeneutic defies itself, but it is unquestioned. Therefore, though I may fully agree with some of what is expressed in his book, I cannot (must not!) agree with the way in which much of it concluded, especially when several issues addressed (the use of instruments, the plausibility of miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit, et al.) are approached in ways I find to be out of context (a phrase often used in the book) and the side on which someone lands on these “issues” (issues to many within the Church of Christ) is used to condemn someone.

As an example of consistency, I present the often used passage of Ephesians 5:19 that is used to say using an instrument in worship to God is evil. Those within the Church of Christ who hold to these narrow hermeneutics and expressions thereof must, out of necessity and fear of condemnation, sing with their heart (not vocal chords!) because that’s what Paul says, and it must be done in unison (melody!) without harmony! The Eastern Orthodox tradition continues to sing in unison for many reasons, but the basic ancient tradition thereof and its means of maintaining unity are two big ones. If the Church of Christ is going to call upon history to express a split in the church over the use of instruments, it must also contend with an even earlier split by way of the introduction of a single voice of harmony. The four-part (or more) harmony the Church of Christ so adores and finds so beautiful (how is that any less emotional and entertaining than the way others describe the use of instruments?) is evidence of an expression of division in history that it claims as evidence for not causing division and being “right” with Scripture. It is utterly inconsistent, and that is an issue that must be addressed. I absolutely love a cappella singing (that’s still “music,” by the way, brother Michael), and it’s how we often sing in my church; however, I cannot make it an issue that it is not because the “issue” comes by way of faulty logic and hermeneutics (Muscle and a Shovel uses a lot of basic “logic” jargon).

There are a plethora of things I feel must be addressed within Muscle and a Shovel by anyone reading it or desiring to use it for outreach, but I hope what I have written here has demonstrated my reasons for dissuading others from reading and using it. There are plenty of other resources out there for the good found within Muscle and a Shovel that I would recommend rather than have someone read this unnecessarily lengthy and frustrating book that would require a lot of hand holding, explaining, and correcting along the way. I actually find the book to be dangerous to the spiritual growth of others in their relationship with other believers. In the language of the KJV, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (Matthew 22:39). Though I do believe it was the author’s intent, I do not find this book to demonstrate love.

 

Thanks be to God for his grace and mercy as we continue to search out His truth and live unified in His Kingdom. Forgive us of our ignorance and infighting as we strive to love you and one another more. God bless us, every one.