Culture,Ecclesiology,Eschatology,Faith,Review,Theology
30 November 2010 | 0 Comments
Initially promising, but ultimately unsatisfying. That’s how I would describe Dual Citizens: Worship and Life between the Already and the Not Yet by Jason Stellman. Now I want to be clear that I’m not on a witch hunt for Jason Stellman’s head. I’ve never met him, but clearly he’s a brother in Christ, and I would say that he seems like a pretty cool guy. I randomly discovered his book while browsing Nashville’s local reformed bookstore (logos), was highly intrigued by the subject matter, and purchased it with an extreme excitement and eagerness to begin reading. And, I’ll happily admit that the introduction to this book rocked my world – helping to construct some much needed theological framework. But, by the end of the book I feel like Stellman kind of lost steam.
The basic concept of Dual Citizens is that there is a necessary division between the sacred and secular in the lives of Christians. Contrary to the opinion of many – including John Frame (whom Stellman quotes and disagrees with in the intro – ballsy!) – there should be a distinction between how Christians operate when gathered for worship as a church and when scattered throughout the week as citizens of earth. I should make clear that Stellman is not arguing for any sort of antinomianism position that allows Christians to act like “hell” during the week and act like “angels” during church service. But, he is arguing that the main way in which Christians are countercultural is through their gathering on the sabbath to participate in the preaching of Word and the taking of sacrament (Lord’s Supper and Baptism). He decries any sort of seeker-sensitive, “let’s be relevant” approach to church. Church is not supposed to be relevant to culture, but obedient to the Bible. And Stellman argues that the Biblical pattern for our gatherings are: Word and sacrament, period.
The book is divided into two main sections. The first seven chapters describe Christian worship, and the last seven chapters describe Christian life. In my opinion, the first half (Christian worship) forms a more cohesive whole than the second half of the book. I don’t agree with all of Stellman’s conclusions in this first section, but he does a better job writing this section than he does in the second section. One of my main critiques is that, Stellman over-argues his point about the church gathering being free from cultural influences. I’m not sure that’s a good thing or even possible. He argues that “culture, then, is never to be the determining factor in a church’s worship” (8). But I would argue that all churches necessarily take on cultural forms both because they are composed of people from specific cultures and because they attempt to clarify the gospel to these specific cultures. Certainly the attempt to be “relevant” can go too far and water down the gospel, but so can the attempt to avoid this pitfall. The opposite of the “relevant” pitfall is to be so culturally insensitive that the gospel fails to even be understood. You can argue all day long that the church is not composed of seekers but of saints; however, any church that loves people will be filled with both saints and the seekers. Cultural sensitivity and even acclimation will always be necessary to make the gospel clear. Without clear cultural understanding the gospel may be mistranslated altogether. Having argued this point, I still think that Stellman does a fair job of deconstructing a lot of seeker-sensitive nonsense that Christianity seems to be so captivated by, but I think he could have made his point in a more even-handed way.
My other critique of this book is that while the first seven chapters were captivating (if overstated), the last seven were kind of boring. Having read Stellman’s arguments for “worship,” I had a lot of questions about his conception of “life,” but he didn’t really answer many of my questions. This is why I say that the book kind of lost steam. The last seven chapters were more of a shotgun approach with bits and pieces of the puzzle being put together, but clearly with some frustrating gaps in clarity. Two of the chapters: 9) Egypt’s Unworthiness: Joseph, Moses, and Vanity of Time and 11) Worldliness: Puritans, Pagans, and the Proper Place of Pleasure were on point, but the other chapters seemed to deal with secondary or even tertiary issues rather than the main subject matter at hand. Maybe Stellman is just lacking a conclusion or an introduction to the second half of the book, but I can’t shake the taste of confusion that the book left on my tongue. I would have appreciated more information about how Christians should participate in the culture. How should they work, enjoy and create art, raise families, and participate in politics? I’m not looking for answers from the Religious Right, I’m looking for answers from the Bible, but Stellman doesn’t really help me any in this endeavor. He does briefly touch on some of these issues, but never for long, and never in a complete way. Personally, I could have done without a few of the chapters that he did write (even though they were fine in and of themselves) and done with a few of the chapters he didn’t write on cultural engagement. And to reiterate again, I think Stellman would benefit from a conclusion to pull all the pieces together.
So…for a first book this is pretty decent (I mean I’ve never written a book!), but I think it could use some additional clarity in the second half, and a more nuanced approach overall. Also, I couldn’t help but feel that Stellman occasionally mischaracterized some of those whom he critiqued (which is why I would appreciate a more nuanced approach). (And hopefully it won’t be said that I lacked a nuanced approach while writing this review, which is brief at best, but I’ll gladly accept any dialogue about my comments if anyone disagrees.) At the end of the day, I think it would be a blast to sit down with Stellman at a coffee shop and talk theology, and maybe some day I’ll run into him and we’ll do just that. Probably not, but maybe. Anyway, I hope he writes another book because the nugget of understanding that he provided for me in the introduction about cult and culture was worth the whole book.
I’ll end by saying that if you are interested in the subject matter of dual citizenship, I don’t think you can go wrong with Living at the Crossroads by Bartholomew and Goheen. In my opinion it’s a clearer and more well-rounded approach to this same subject. At least read it first, and then read this book second.
Related Posts:
Tagged in already / not yet, book review, church, Craig Bartholomew, cult and culture, Dual Citizens, ecclesiology, Eschatology, John Frame, kingdom, kingdom of God, living at the crossroads, logos bookstore, Michael Goheen, relevance, Review, sacred / secular divide, seeker sensitive, Theology, word and sacrament, worship and life, worship and life between the already and the not yet
Culture,Review,Thoughts
25 November 2010 | 0 Comments
The Lost Symbol is the third novel by Dan Brown featuring his popular character, Robert Langdon. The first two novels about Langdon, Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code, have been wildly popular and successful books. In my opinion, The Lost Symbol is the weakest of the three books; however, that’s not so say it fails to be an extremely enjoyable read.
Whereas the Angels and Demons story revolved around the illuminati, and The Da Vinci Code story dealt with the search for the holy grail and conspiracy theories regarding the knights templar, The Lost Symbol is built on the mystery surrounding freemasonry and its influence upon America’s forefathers. If you enjoyed the first two books, you’ll enjoy this one, but honestly there were a few parts in The Lost Symbol that seriously “jumped the shark.”
The most interesting feature of The Lost Symbol, from my perspective, were the differing worldviews embodied within the book. Robert Langdon and Katherine Solomon (two central characters) display differing versions of a modernist worldview (i.e. – science and reason can explain everything and will eventually bring about a better world). Langdon’s character is a skeptic who views all religion from the viewpoint of an anthropological / cultural scientist. He clearly understands the beliefs of various faiths, and yet he remains a skeptic himself. Somewhat conversely, Katherine Solomon’s character embraces elements of a hinduism and new-age mysticism, but she does so from a sort of scientific / modernist base. In her view, the common hinduistic belief that “man is god” is equivalent to the evidences that science is producing. God is not real, and yet he is real because humanity itself is god. There is no “One Creator,” but there are humans who themselves create. It’s a bit hard to sum up this view in a few short sentences, but this is the worldview being propagated by Solomon’s character. It’s simultaneously modern and mystical. All of this is interesting to me because while postmodernism may be all the rage these days, modernism is still alive and well, and this book demonstrates the believability of a modernist worldview in 2010.
This book is good reading to better understand how some academics and mystics view the Bible. In their view the Bible is simply another religious text. It contains a mixture of both truth and error, and is equivalent in many ways to the texts that other faiths hold dear. I don’t hold this viewpoint at all, but The Lost Symbol helped me in some ways to understand the viewpoint from which others are operating. Now obviously this a fictional book, and I have no desire to go on any witchhunt against Dan Brown (as many did after The Da Vinci Code), but in my opinion it’s a useful tool for understanding non-Christian worldview. (Sidenote: It’s also a useful tool for learning how to misinterpret the Bible, so if you’re young in the Christian faith, ignore the interpretations of the Bible offered within, they’re garbage.)
Verdict: Fun to read, decently written, at times unbelievable, a good tool for understanding the modernist worldview (and a mystical hybrid of the modernist worldview), but should be read with caution and shunned as a reliable source for understanding the Bible.
Related Posts:
Tagged in American forefathers, Angels and Demons, Bible, book review, Christian worldview, Dan Brown, fiction, freemasonry, freemasons, hinduism, modernism, new age philosophy, novel, postmodernism, reason, Review, Robert Langdon, science, The Da Vinci Code, The Lost Symbol, worldview
Culture,Just Plain Crazy,Music
9 November 2010 | 0 Comments
His new posthumous single, “breaking news” is now up on michaeljackson.com. It’s about his up-and-down relationship with the media. Pretty cool I think. There’s apparently some controversy about whether or not he is really singing on the track, and I will say that his voice near the beginning doesn’t quite sound like pure Michael. It could be, but it could also be an impersonator. Who knows. What do you think of the song? Do you think it’s really Michael Jackson?
Related Posts:
Tagged in breaking news, Culture, is it really Michael Jackson singing?, michael jackson, michaeljackson.com, Music, new album, new single, posthumous
Faith,Review,Theology
8 November 2010 | 0 Comments
I’ve been slowly reading through God of Promise: Introducing Covenant Theology by Michael Horton for several months now, and I finally completed it this weekend. Earlier this year I read Charles Ryrie’s book Dispensationalism, which is basically the opposite end of spectrum theologically from this book by Horton. Dispensationalism and covenant theology are two competing systems that try to explain the way in which we should understand the overarching theme and history of the Bible. Dispensationalism argues that all of history can be divided into different dispensations (economies of time) and that in each dispensation the way in which man relates to God varies. Conversely, covenant theology argues that all of the Bible, and history, can be understood through examining the different covenants that God has made between Himself and others. (These are both extremely simplistic definitions, and could easily be expanded and explained better, but that’s the gist of it.) The truth about the whole dispensationalist versus covenant thing is that both sides have simultaneously made some good points and probably oversimplified some points as well. If I had to claim a specific leaning, then I am definitely more on the covenant side of things, and I question a lot of the interpretative decisions that classic dispensationalists make.
Ok back to the book…where as Ryrie’s book was a defense of his position over and against other positions, Horton’s is not. He’s simply trying to teach readers how to properly understand the covenants that we find in Scripture. This entire book is helpful in that regard, and honestly I feel as if my understanding of the Old Testament is better after having read this book. I would go so far as to say that my entire framework for understanding the Old Testament Law has been transformed. Horton explains that within the ancient world several types of covenant arrangements were commonly used, and God intentionally paralleled many features of these secular covenants as He entered into covenants with his people. He did this so that they would more fully understand both His grace and His holiness. Against this background, the Old Testament Law and the new covenant that Jesus instituted by his life, death, and resurrection come alive. In some ways It’s as if I never truly understood the Old and New Testaments until I read this book. There are also several ideas about baptism & communion that I’m chewing on as a result of Horton’s writing.
I wholeheartedly recommend God of Promise: An Introduction to Covenant Theology. If you have a desire to better understand covenant theology and the Old Testament in general, then this is a good read. If I have any one complaint, I’ll say that the book gets a little long in the middle if you’re not careful. it’s better to read a whole chapter in this book at one time rather than stop in the middle of a chapter and pick it back up later. If you do so, you may find it hard to plug back in to Horton’s thoughts. But otherwise, this is an amazing read.
Related Posts:
Tagged in biblical history, book review, Charles Ryrie, covenant, covenant theology, dispensationalism, God of Promise, God of Promise: Introducing Covenant Theology, Jesus, Michael Horton, new covenant, Old Testament, Review, theological framework
Recent Comments