Need to Own…
So maybe someone will get this for me for Christmas. I love Grudem and this is very intriguing. For a synopsis on Grudem’s position, check out Justin Taylor’s blog post.
Related Posts:
No commentsA Call to Ministry
I just started reading Church Planter: The Man, The Message, The Mission by Darrin Patrick. It’s really good so far. I love this statement about a call to ministry:
All three of these confirmations – heart, head, and skill – must be present in a genuine call. The Pentacostal/charismatic camp tends to focus on heart and the supernatural calling from God. The Reformed/evangelical camp tends to focus on the head. The mainline churches often focus on skills. But in a genuine call all three are present (40).
Thoughts?
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 commentsBook Review: The Prodigal God by Tim Keller
Three Down
The Prodigal God marks the third Tim Keller book that I’ve read this year. All three books (The Reason for God, Counterfeit Gods, and now The Prodigal God) were gifts from my brother Andy and his family. They’re all worth your time.
A Revealing Twist on a Old Favorite
Tim Keller has an uncanny ability to take Bible stories that you’ve heard many, many times before and reveal their relevance in previously unthought of ways. The Prodigal God is a striking example. The entire book explores the parable of “the prodigal son,” or as Keller likes to call it, “the parable of the two lost sons.” As Keller’s renaming of the parable might suggest, he finds as much meaning and significance in the story about the older brother as he does in the story about the younger brother.
The title, “The Prodigal God” is also a bit of a twist on the normal understanding of this parable. The word “prodigal,” according to Keller, means “recklessly extravagant,” or “having spent everything” (1). And he aptly applies this title to God, who recklessly loves His people and who spent the life of His son for our redemption. Keller claims that he has “seen more people encouraged, enlightened, and helped by this passage, when he explained the true meaning of it, than by any other text” (XIII).
I don’t think Keller is stretching the meaning of this story. I think He’s right, and it’s amazing to see all the applications that this story entails.
Personally Speaking
For me personally, I can identify with “the older brother” in this parable. I know my standing before God is one based on Jesus’ performance and not my own performance. But sometimes, in the midst of life, I find myself believing that my performance is the ground upon which God is either proud or disappointed. Sometimes in these moments, especially when I think I am excelling in my pursuit of God, I am the most judgmental person you’d ever want to meet. I start expecting people to live up to my standards. This is pride, and it’s older brother syndrome. The Prodigal God, and about ten other things in my life right now, have helped remind me that I have plenty of faults, and I need to be humble. After all, when I am humble, I am most useful to God.
This is a good book. Easy to read. Life-changing. I wish it weren’t twenty bucks, because I’d buy about fifty copies and give them away.
Related Posts:
No commentsBrief Book Review/Rant: The Revolution by Ron Paul
Between Now and Eternity
Let me start out by saying that the ultimate hope for any government is only Jesus. On this side of eternity, every political theory is lacking. The only perfect government will be the future one, where Jesus is king and the heart of every individual has been made perfect. Until that glorious kingdom is fully made known, every government will be less-than-perfect. Political party affiliation, political candidates, and political ideas will all be found lacking. So I don’t put an exorbitant amount of hope or time into politics. However, I do think we are called as Christians to live out the implications of the gospel to the various cultures that we find ourselves in, and this includes the political culture within America. Between now and eternity, I want to recommend the ideas of Ron Paul as a good solution to a lot of America’s problems.
A.S.A.P.
To be perfectly honest with you, to fully review this book would be a waste of your time and mine. To fully say all that I wish to say about the book, would be to quote the whole book. Rather than writing a lengthy review, I would rather you just read The Revolution. In fact, if you want to stop reading this review right now (which honestly is not much of a review anyway), and instead go read Ron Paul, I would applaud you. There is no portion of The Revolution that I wish to synopsize. I like every word. There is no part I disagree with. It’s all good.
The two political parties, as they currently exist, both promote a future for America that is heading towards total and complete futility. Ron Paul offers an alternative path. Bush was an awful president. Obama seems no better. Does either one intend to lead America into futility? No. But the politics they promote are like a heavy weight tied around the ankle of this country. The nation is drowning. These days America is not the America that we wish it to be. It is not the America that the founding fathers wished it to be. And personally speaking, I like the America that they envisioned better than they one we currently have. So I’m recommending this book.
Simply put, and I know this sounds awfully dogmatic, I dare you to read this book and consider its ideas honestly. Maybe you’ll disagree with some of them, but I think you’ll agree with a lot of them. And that at least will be a step in the right direction.
P.S.
This is an awfully good audiobook (concise, about 5.5 hrs), that’s how I read it. But, I’m thinking of buying a physical copy so I can go back and underline some stuff (see previous post).
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 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 commentsBrief Book Review: Digital Fortress by Dan Brown
Dan Brown’s Writing
I like Dan Brown. He writes entertaining, conspiracy-theory laden novels about religion, history, government, science, and technology. Digital Fortress is his earliest novel, published in 1998. It’s a good book, but as might be suspected, it’s not as good as some of his later work. In my mind both Digital Fortress and Deception Point (Brown’s third novel) pale a bit in comparison to his more popular novels: Angels & Demons (his second novel) and The Da Vinci Code (his fourth novel). This may be because his writing has gotten better, or it may be because the subject matter is more intriguing in Angels & Demons and Da Vinci.
Uber-Brief Synopsis
Digital Fortress is a book that follows the inner-workings of the NSA (National Security Administration) and code breaker Susan Fletcher. David Becker, Susan’s fiance, plays an equally large role within the book, and finds himself in Seville Spain trying to track down an item that he has been told is vital to national security. The larger issue in the novel is about balancing national safety with the right of each individual’s personal privacy. In other words, “How much about our personal lives does the government need to know to truly keep us safe?” This topic seems like old hat in a post-911, post-George W. Bush presidency era, but Brown wrote Digital Fortress before these events had taken place, so kudos to him for having insight into an important debate ahead of time.
The Good & the Bad
I liked this book, but some of the terms and technology referred to are a bit dated now. I also think that Brown’s writing becomes somewhat predictable as the story builds. To be honest, I’m not a person who usually tries to figure out how a novel or a movie is going to end. I’m more interested in experiencing the emotion that the story brings to life in the moment (novels in this sense are an escape for me because so many other types of books that I read require constant mental awareness), but even as someone uninterested in figuring the story out, I could foresee how some of the situations in Digital Fortress were going to end. I think some of this predictability is also present in Deception Point, but happily not in Angels & Demons and The Da Vinci Code.
One more thing to Brown’s credit: some of the characters in this book are spot on. The NSA’s lead sys-sec, Jabba, is perfectly believably and at times annoyingly so. Midge, an internal security analyst, is a perfect rendition of that snarky, intelligent, domineering woman whom you love to hate, but truthfully need. There were times within the book where these two characters, especially Jabba, were so believable, that I was getting irritated just listening to them speak.
Verdict
If you like Dan Brown’s writing, Digital Fortress is worth the read. But, read Angels & Demons, The Da Vinci Code, and The Lost Symbol (his newest book, which follows The Da Vinci Code, and which I assume is great) first.
