Archive for the 'Theology' Category
Book Review – Church Planter by Darrin Patrick
As I’ve said previously, I’m in the beginning stages of planting a church in Nashville Tennessee. That being the case, I’ve been reading everything about the subject that I can get my hands on as I prayerfully formulate the vision for the church. Deep Church by Jim Belcher was helpful. Vintage Church by Mark Driscoll is a wonderful book. Francis Chan’s Forgotten God provided a needed reminder that I must (and frankly long to) operate out the of the power that only the Holy Spirit provides. And my latest read, Church Planter by Darrin Patrick, has been a much needed encouragement and reminder about what it is I’m supposed to be doing.
Patrick lays out the book in three sections: The Man, The Message, and The Mission. I immediately connected with the first section. Personally speaking, I needed to be reminded and encouraged about my call to ministry and my call to church planting. Patrick helped me to do this. Section two of the book, the Message, was a good reminder of what the gospel is and how it needs to be preached. I was less moved by this section of the book, but simply because most of its content is material that I’ve been swimming in for quite some time. Section three was my second favorite part of the book (after section one). I grew up hearing only a 50% gospel message. I mean, I grew up hearing how Jesus died and rose again and how that should transform me morally, but I heard very little about how that message is supposed to send us on mission into our cities and communities. The mission I mainly heard was, “tell people how to get saved.” But the culture-transforming, missional-lifestyle aspects of the gospel were rarely touched upon. And yet the Bible calls it the “gospel of the kingdom.” It’s a message about how to be saved yes, but the saved are sent on mission to not only preach salvation but transform cultures and communities and families. I don’t want to say that I never heard anything of this sort growing up, but it definitely wasn’t a key feature of the Christianity that I was accustomed to. Men like Driscoll and Keller and Patrick continue to add clarity to my thinking in this area.
This is a great book, and honestly it’s usefulness goes way beyond church planting. If church members read this book and embraced its words, Godly pastors would rejoice at the wave of momentum that would occur.
Related Posts:
No commentsDeep Church by Jim Belcher – Quick Thoughts
I’m in the midst of a God thing right now, whereby I think I’m being led – with the help of others – to plant a church near downtown Nashville. It’s all very preliminary, but I’m in the process of reading a lot about church planting and trying to cinch down some ideas. So you, the reader, should not be surprised to see a lot of references to books on ecclesiology on this blog in the near future. My most recent foray into church planting has been Deep Church by Jim Belcher.
Deep Church is Belcher’s attempt to plot a course for a “third way” of ecclesiology between the emerging church and the traditional church. He wants to take the best aspects of both camps: the orthodox beliefs of the traditionalists, and the cultural concerns of the emerging churches and combine them into a new movement.
I listened to this book via audio and now I want to get my hands on a physical copy so that I can go back and underline / rethink many of Belcher’s insights.
But here are a few quick thoughts
1. Belcher is truly kind to both traditionalists and emerging folks.
2. He truly understands the ideas and complaints of both sides.
3. Belcher is an evangelical and his suggestions for a deep church are extremely well stated.
4. Personally, I think he’s a little too soft on McLaren, Jones, and Pagitt. I wonder if his tone might be slightly sterner now that McLaren’s most recent book, A New Kind of Christianity, has been released, because frankly it is pure heresy.
5. Belcher helped me gain a key insight into postmodernity. Different people define the movement differently. I’ve been well aware for quite some time that some think postmodernity is good for Christianity and some think it is evil, but Belcher helped me to understand that often these two sides talk right past each other because they define the movement differently. Some see postmodernity as ultra-modernity, while others see postmodernity as contra-modernity. This is probably why there seems to be so much confusion about postmodernism and why it seems so elusive to define.
6. I think the church that I’m helping to plant may gain important insights from thinking through some of Belcher’s ideas.
7. In the end, I’m not sure that Belcher’s Deep Church is really a “third way.” For me, it’s more or less “the way” that I’ve been striving after for quite some time. And, I don’t think I’m alone. However, Belcher’s ideas have helped me to add clarity to many of my thoughts and for that I am grateful.
For a more in depth review, check out DeYoung
Also, after I get a physical copy of this book and rescan it, I may post some helpful insights here in the comments.
Related Posts:
No commentsLoving thinking-about-God more than God / Loving worshipping-God more than God
This is a good word from Piper about replacing God with aspects of religion. It seems like it’s right, but it’s really pride. I’m definitely prone to fall into this sin. Check it out!?
Related Posts:
No commentsBook Review: Whoredom: God’s Unfaithful Wife in Biblical Theology by Ray Ortlund Jr.
The book has now been retitled, and this is the new cover.
Borrowed Books
Reading a borrowed book is like a bad dream to me. If I can’t underline, then the endeavor is almost worthless. It’s at best frustrating. Not that I don’t immensely appreciate the sentiment that goes behind loaning a book to a friend, I do, but reading without a pen is death. I find this same frustration listening to audiobooks. I try my best to write down page numbers and quotes when I get the chance, but I still feel like I miss out on remembering some of the content that I would otherwise be able to recall If I could underline. Libraries are of limited use to me for the same reasons. I want to write in the book. So I buy a lot of books and help stimulate the economy.
Whoredom
Now that I’ve got that out of my system, I should explain that I just finished a borrowed copy of Whoredom: God’s Unfaithful Wife in Biblical Theology. And while I enjoyed the book, and found it helpful, I feel that I can’t remember all that I would like to because you can’t underline in a borrowed book. But, I’ll attempt to recall a bit for this review anyway. As a side note, I’m a little tempted to go buy a copy of the book and skim it with pen in hand. But whatever!
In Whoredom, Ortlund traces the idea of “spiritual adultery” through the Bible. The idea of God’s marriage to His people is first alluded to in the Law, developed rather extensively in the writings of the prophets, and then brought full circle in New Testament. The theme is extensive throughout the Bible and often pushes the biblical text into “R” rating territory. Think I’m lying? Go read Ezekiel 23:20 and make it your life verse. Then quote it when people ask “What’s your favorite verse in the Bible?” Watch the jaws drop. God’s point, I think, is that He treats our spiritual adultery, our idolatry, our un-love, pretty seriously. The drastic nature of the Bible’s language in this area brings us face to face with the ugliness of our sin, and points us to our need for a Savior.
This book is primarily consumed with examining the development of the “spiritual adultery” theme throughout the Old Testament. But Ortlund takes time in chapter six to show the relation between all of the Old Testament’s proclamations of spiritual adultery to the New Testament’s idea of Jesus as the Bridegroom. My favorite quote in the whole book might be:
“The gospel reveals that, as we look out into the universe, ultimate reality is not cold, dark, blank space; ultimate reality is romance. There is a God above with love in his eyes for us and infinite joy to offer us, and he has set himself upon winning our hearts for himself alone. The gospel tells the story of God’s pursuing, faithful, wounded, angry, overruling, transforming, triumphant love. And it calls us to answer him with a love which cleanses our lives of all spiritual whoredom” (173).
A Great Study Tool
I used this book mainly as a study tool and commentary on parts of the book of Hosea. Ortlund vividly portrays all the key passages that deal with the spiritual adultery theme in the Bible. These include passages in the Law, Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Ephesians, and Revelation among others. For being a book that I expected to be quite complex, Whoredom was rather straightforward and easy to read. I recommend it highly if you’re at all interested in studying this Biblical theme. It’s also a great read if you just want to understand the Bible better as a cohesive whole. The appendix, which deals with feminist interpretations of the Bible’s sexual language, is especially entertaining if you’d like to get a good look at absurd examples of Biblical interpretation.
Related Posts:
No commentsJohn Piper on Environmentalism
My favorite line from this is:
“Love for people, not love for mother earth. Who cares about mother earth, as a mother!”
Related Posts:
No commentsBook Review: Dispensationalism by Charles C. Ryrie
Why this book?
I don’t consider myself a dispensationalist. I’m not sure what I consider myself, but not a dispensationalist. For one thing, I think dispensational premillennialism is a little silly. It complicates the Bible’s teaching on the end times in an attempt to be clear. Certain interpretations of Old and New Testament texts seem farfetched. And I don’t think a “literal first” approach to hermeneutics is always the best way to interpret the Bible.
So why did I read this book? One might assume that it was just to gain a better understanding of dispensationalism in order to further discredit it as a theological system. But in truth, this was not the main reason I chose to read Dispensationalism by Charles C. Ryrie. The largest factor contributing to my desire to read this book was the quote on the front cover. It says, “No one, whether friend or foe of dispensationalism, can avoid consideration of this important work.” And with that little bit of marketing, I thought I’d check out the theological system known as dispensationalism from one of its prime proponents, Mr. Ryrie.
It’s a Good Book.
I have to say that this is a pretty good book. Ryrie’s explanation of dispensationalism clears up several misconceptions that I had been taught about the beliefs of dispensationalists over the years. Ryrie does a good job of creating a level playing field upon which everyone can interact with dispensational teachings, whether for or against. And that’s good because this is a family fight so to speak. I don’t doubt for a second that normative dispensationalists are evangelicals and Christians. And even if I disagree with them, they’re brothers. So a level playing field is a good thing.
Central Teachings of Dispensationalism
To quote Ryrie, the three central teachings of dispensationalism are:
1. We believe in the clear and consistent distinction between Israel and the church.
2. We affirm that normal, or plain, interpretation of the Bible should be applied consistently to all its parts.
3. We avow that the unifying principle of the Bible is the glory of God and that this is worked out several ways – the program of redemption, the program for Israel, the punishment of the wicked, the plan for the angels, and the glory of God revealed through nature (247).
I disagree with Ryrie on all these points.
1. Truthfully I do see a distinction between Israel and the church, but not to the extent that dispensationalists do. I think both groups will share the same future, not separate futures. “The summing up of all things in Christ” seems in my mind to do more justice to the Old Testament’s prophecies and promises than does a future, earthly, millennial kingdom.
2. I don’t think that literal interpretation is always the method of interpretation that the text demands. Sometimes an overly literal approach creates more confusion than clarity. And it wasn’t the hermeneutical method always employed by the apostles. I am by no means claiming to be an apostle, but I do think it’s suspect to say that they can interpret the Old Testament one way, but we must interpret it another way.
3. I think that the unifying principle in the Bible is the glory of God through Christ, not the glory of God through multiple means in the various dispensations. I do see evidence for different dispensations, or periods of time, or economies within the Bible, but I think they all led up to, and were summed up in Christ.
I agree with Ryrie on Some Things
I agree with Ryrie that the extent to which the Old Testament saints understood that their salvation was through Christ was hazy at best. However, my understanding of salvation in the “other dispensations” is still different from Ryrie’s. He says that “Jesus Christ was not the conscious object of their faith, though they were saved by faith in God as He had revealed Himself principally through the sacrifices that He instituted as a part of the Mosaic Law” (139). Conversely, I believe that OT saints understood that their salvation was a result of God’s ability to pardon sin based upon an individual’s faith. Salvation was a result of faith in God’s ability to pardon, which was later shown to be through Christ (Rom 3:23-26). Progressively OT saints did understood that this would be through the Messiah, but obviously they didn’t understand the part that the Messiah would fully play in this pardoning with equal clarity in all ages. So I agree with Ryrie that the OT understanding of salvation through Christ was hazy, but I still conceive of it differently than he does.
I also agree with Ryrle that the validity of dispensationalism and covenantalism should be judged true or false based only upon the Bible, and not upon other factors. Oftentimes both sides are disparaged due to false accusations and the use of straw-man apologetics.
Middle Ground
In the end, I think dispensationalism is short-sided. It has a lot to teach us, but it is short-sided. And by the way, so is really dogmatic covenantalism. Both sides have things to teach us, but ultimately they both need to give a little bit and come towards the middle. The “middle” is not sacred because it is the middle, but in this case the “middle” seems to be more Biblical, and thus better.
Related Posts:
No commentsBook Review: Vintage Church by Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears
Slowly
Our church staff has been slowing, and I mean slowly, working its way through Vintage Church by Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears. Time elapsed so far is probably nearing a year. Initially we were reading at a reasonable pace, but then everything got busier in “the ol’ church world” as they say, and we’ve all but postponed finishing the book for the time being. But, we will finish. In the mean time, and since I was nearly finished with the book anyway, I thought I’d read the last few chapters.
It’s good. I mean really good. It’s been good all the way through, but it got really good at the end. Driscoll and Breshears start out simple, and move to more complex subject matter. Perhaps complex is actually a bad way to say it, let’s say they move on to more timely subject matter towards the end of the book. All of it’s good reading though. Even the opening chapters, the ones I’ve now labeled as “simple,” are relevant and essential reading. One of the most under-taught areas of theology is probably ecclesiology (i.e. the theology of the church). And because church should not just be this service that we attend in a building once a week, we need to understand what a church is, and why it does the things it does, and even if it should be doing them at all. Vintage Church forces readers to interact with these questions.
My favorite chapters are definitely the last several. They include chapters such as:
Chapter 9) What is a missional church?
Chapter 10) What is a multi-campus church?
Chapter 11) How can a church utilize technology?
Chapter 12) How could the church help transform the world?
The chapters on preaching (chapter 4) and church discipline (chapter 7) also stand out in my mind as highly helpful and extremely insightful.
#12
The most important chapter may be chapter twelve, which as stated above, deals with the question, “How could the church help transform the world?” In this chapter Driscoll and Breshears interact with the collision of church and culture. How should the church influence, transform, and help create and cultivate the larger culture that is around it? I’ve heard Driscoll teach about this subject matter before, but I feel the treatment in Vintage Jesus is the most fully-orbed that I’ve heard so far. So, I want to touch on this specific subject matter for the rest of this review.
Driscoll starts out by defining four commonly held visions for how to transform culture, and then decries each of them as short sided. These visions are:
1) The Evangelistic Vision – if everyone gets saved, the world will change
2) The Political Vision – if we elect the right leaders, the world will change
3) The Fundamentalist Vision – we should flee the sinful, secular culture, which will be destroyed by God soon anyway
4) The Liberal Vision – if we just love people, even if we don’t share the gospel, everything will be ok
Driscoll then proposes a new, 5th vision for how to transform culture, one that has been largely developed by James Davison Hunter, a Christian and professor of sociology at the university of Virginia. Hunter concludes that Christians must abandon the short-sidedness of the previous visions for how to transform culture. They are all based on the false premises that culture will change because of great ideas, or a great man, or the purity of the hearts of individuals. Conversely, Hunter asserts that culture changes because of connectedness to a powerful network of cultural shaping individuals and institutions. He offers the following five ideas:
1) Culture is a resource and, as such, a form of power.
2) Culture is produced.
3) Culture production is stratified (i.e. arranged and sent out) from center to periphery.
4) Culture changes from the top down and rarely from the bottom up.
5) The impetus, energy, and direction for changing the world are most intense where cultural, economic, and even political resources overlap.
Driscoll seems to agree with these ideas and offers the following plan. Churches should be planted primarily in urban areas where they can interact with the culture-makers and become the culture-makers in society. In these large urban areas, the church should exist as a city within a city. It should demonstrate how life should be lived within its own small city (the church), and send its people out to interact with larger city where it is planted. The people of the church are transformed and trained to interact with the culture at large in loving and truth-filled ways. This God-centered culture will then flow downstream to smaller cities and more rural areas and effect them as well. This is a strategic method to reach the largest amount of people and effect the largest swath of culture.
I think the most eye-opening part of this chapter for me was that “the evangelistic vision,” and the “city within a city vision,” are not the same vision. Personally, I had been propagating both and assuming they were the same. But they are not. As Christians we must preach the gospel, and people must be saved. But, we also must create and effect the cultural systems at large by constantly interacting with the culture-shapers in our city. It’s not enough to simply teach our people to witness, they must witness yes, but they must also create and effect the culture in every area of their lives. This is being true to the entire message of the gospel, which is more than “pray this prayer and ask Jesus into your heart, and then be moral.”
This Keeps Making More and More Sense
I still have a lot to learn about what all this entails, and the following synopsis is incomplete, but I think I agree. Personally, I have no intentions of diminishing the priority of evangelism. But I think evangelism is just part of the solution, and actually becomes a more effective tool in the hands of a Christian who is constantly cultivating the culture around him as he shares the good news.
Related Posts:
No commentsBook Review: Religion Saves + Nine Other Misconceptions by Mark Driscoll
The Book
My beautiful wife gave me this book for Christmas, and ever since I’ve been slowly picking my way through it’s pages. It’s that type of book. You can read a chapter one night, put the book down, pick it up again a month later, and read another chapter. The chapters stand on their own.
Religion Saves was a sermon series at Mars Hill Church before it became a book. Driscoll gave his church members (and really anyone who visited the church website) the chance to vote on his sermon topics. The nine most popular questions, as determined by the online voting, were developed into the Religion Saves sermon series. The book came about after the fact.
The questions preached / written upon were:
9. Birth Control: There’s no doubt the Bible says children are a blessing, but the Bible doesn’t seem to address the specific topic of birth control. Is this a black-and-white topic, or does if all under liberties?
8. Humor: Why do you make jokes in sermons about Mormon missionaries, homosexuals, trench coat wearers, single men, vegans, and emo kids, and then expect these groups to come to know God through those sermons?
7. Predestination: Why does an all-loving, all-knowing, and all-sovereign God will into creation people he foreknows will suffer eternal condemnation – and the Romans 9:20 answer seems like a cop-out!
6. Grace: Of all the things you teach, what parts of Christianity do you still wrestle with? What’s hardest for you to believe?
5. Sexual Sin: How should Christian men and women go about breaking free form the bondage of sexual sin?
4. Faith and Works: If salvation is by faith alone, then why are so many verses that say or imply the opposite – that salvation is by works?
3. Dating: How does a Christian date righteously, and what are the physical, emotional, and mentally connecting boundaries a Christian must set while developing an intimate relationship prior to marriage?
2. The Emerging Church: What can traditional or established churches learn from “emerging” churches?
1. The Regulative Principle: Do you believe that the Scripture not only regulates our theology but also our methodology? In other words, do you believe in the regulative principle? If so, to what degree? If not, why not?
My Opinion
As you can see, some of this is pretty heady and some of it is pretty practical, but most all of it is interesting. One of my favorite things about Driscoll’s writing style is how well-stated and organized his books are. He manages again and again to state an unbelievable amount of information in a concise, understandable, well-organized, digestable-for-nearly-anyone format. Even if you are a pastor, and think you already know your answer / opinion on all of these questions, this is a useful resource. Because let’s face it, unless you’re D.A. Carson or John Piper, Driscoll probably answers these questions better than you would.
My favorite chapters are: Birth Control, Predestination, Sexual Sin, Dating, and The Emerging Church. I would argue that each of these chapters warrant the purchase of the book alone.
Really good read!
p.s. – you can watch all the sermons online rather than read here:
http://www.marshillchurch.org/media/religionsaves?direction=asc&order_by=date
Related Posts:
No commentsHave you read 9mark’s review of the Nooma Video Series?
http://www.9marks.org/books/scoopa-nooma-part-1
Here’s an excerpt:
“The gospel as Bell communicates it in NOOMA runs something like this: All of us are broken, sinful, selfish, and prideful people. We carry around the baggage of our hurts, our resentments, and our jealousies. As a result we are just a shell of the kind of people God intends us to be. But our God is a loving God who accepts us and loves us just as we are. He can comfort us, heal us, and make us whole, real, authentic, living, laughing people. Not only that, but Jesus came to show us how to live revolutionary lives of love, compassion, and acceptance. By learning from his teachings and following him, we can live the full and complete lives that God intended.
And that’s about it. That’s not just the introduction that leads to an explanation of the cross, atonement, the resurrection and salvation, either. So far, at least, that’s what NOOMA holds out as “The Gospel.” Full stop”
My Opinion
I admire Bell’s creativity , his desire to help people, and his desire to point them towards God, it just doesn’t seem like he’s pointing people towards the God of the Bible.
Also helpful on this topic is Mark Driscoll’s chapter on the Emerging Church in his book Religion Saves (Religion Saves is also a sermon series by Driscoll that mirrors the book, see the link to the video below).
http://www.marshillchurch.org/media/religionsaves/emerging-church
Related Posts:
2 commentsBook Review: The Magician’s Nephew – Book 1 of The Chronicles of Narnia
As a Boy
I was given a set of The Chronicles of Narnia as a kid, but failed to really enjoy them. I began the series with The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe and read a few of the books that followed it, but never finished. I think my stopping point was about halfway through The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. Honestly, I don’t remember enjoying the books that much, and that’s probably why I didn’t finish them.
Now, about 20 years later, a few things have changed. For one, I’ve become more appreciative of the writings of C.S. Lewis as a whole. Secondly, I’ve developed more of a taste for all-things-geek (e.g. fantasy stories such as The Lord of the Rings, The Chronicles of Narnia, comic books, etc.). And thirdly, I’m now very interested in the theological ramifications of Lewis’ writings. I think Lewis was a genius, but I also know that his theology is seriously flawed in certain areas, and I guess you could say that I’m investigating. So, I’ve begun reading and re-reading these books, mainly for entertainment, but also with a careful eye towards the content.
First Things First, or perhaps the reason I didn’t Like These Books As a Child
As beloved as The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe is, it really should not be read as the first book in the series (as it often is). Lewis intended for The Magician’s Nephew to be read first, and having now read both books, I agree that The Magician’s Nephew better sets up The Chronicles of Narnia as a whole. I think it’s disappointing to begin The Chronicles of Narnia series with The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe because The Horse and His Boy, the book that follows, has such a drastic change in characters. This change really puts a bad taste in the reader’s mouth, a reader who has developed somewhat of an attachment to the characters in The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. As a boy, I longed for more connection between the characters in the two books, and because of a perceived lack of cohesiveness, I think I lost interest in the series as a whole. I would argue that reading The Magician’s Nephew as the first book in the series (as Lewis intended), prepares the reader for the drastic character changes that occur throughout the series, and in this way it leaves the reader anticipating rather than disappointed.
A Few Highlights
I’m preparing to write a review the entire Chronicles of Narnia series once I’ve completed all the books, so I’m not going to jump into too much detail here, but I do want to touch on one or two highlights in the book:
1) Lewis’ description of the creation of Narnia (and its obvious parallels to the Biblical account) is really quite breath-taking. This is probably my favorite part of the book because it so brings to life the power and beauty of God. Aslan (the Jesus figure in the series) walks too and fro over a darkened, formless earth, and sings the creation to life. His song creates life and bursts forth with wonder and beauty. This conception of the creation account really aids me in praising God and is probably closer to the actual truth than the sometimes sterile picture I create in my mind if I’m not careful.
2) Lewis’ perfectly captures the truth about spiritual blindness in this book. The protagonist in The Magician’s Nephew is Digory, a young boy who visits other worlds through the magical powers of a set of rings. Digory and his Uncle Andrew (along with a few others) witness the founding and creation of Narnia. To Digory this is a wonderful experience, but to Digory’s uncle, it is a dreadful experience. And Lewis, as narrator in the book, comments that “What you see and hear depends a good deal on where you are standing: it also depends on what sort of person you are” (148). This quote perfectly captures the truth of spiritual sight and spiritual blindness that we see in the Bible. Those who have their eyes opened to the truth of God see evidences of His existence, and beauty, and goodness wherever they look; but those who don’t know God often see the exact opposite. They see no evidence that He exists, or at best see evidence that He is in fact mean, selfish, and puny at best. The difference between these two types of people is spiritual blindness. Lewis perfectly captures this truth in The Magician’s Nephew as he compares Digory to Uncle Andrew.
One more quote
“They were terribly afraid it (Aslan) would turn and look at them, yet in some queer way they wished it would” (128).
More Chronicles of Narnia to come…
