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 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: 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 commentsMark Driscoll on Repentance and why Celebrity Pagan Neo-Catholicism doesn’t cut it
I love how Mark Driscoll is able to articulate the truth of Scripture in such a culturally-aware manner. He is probably better at this theological/cultural mixture than anyone else that I know of.
Related Posts:
1 commentMaybe the best sermon I’ve ever heard…
Maybe. I’m not entirely sure, but maybe, John Piper’s sermon at the Together For the Gospel Conference 2010, is my favorite sermon ever. I love the ministry of John Piper. I’m not worshipping the man, but I thoroughly appreciate how God uses John Piper to bless my life and point me towards Jesus. This sermon from T4G2010 is simply amazing. In this sermon, Piper asks the question, “Did Jesus preach the message of imputation that Paul clearly preached?” In other words, “Did Paul alter the message of Jesus?” or “Are Jesus’ and Paul’s theology the same?” Piper’s answer is a resounding yes. Jesus and the Apostle Paul are in complete agreement, and his exegesis to prove this point is remarkable. This sermon is eye-opening and highly applicable to many of the errant teachings of emergent teachers (although Piper never makes that direct application himself in the sermon). I highly commend it for your consideration.
Manuscript http://www.desiringgod.org/Blog/2352_did_jesus_preach_pauls_gospel/
Audio http://www.t4g.org/resources/
Related Posts:
1 commentDoctrine: What Christians Should Believe & TGC Reviews
Hey everyone, I’m here at the Together For the Gospel Conference in Louisville, KY – and typing on a Dell, ugh Windows – but anyway, I ran across something I wanted to share. I was already aware of Mark Driscoll’s and Gerry Breshears new book, Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe, and I plan on reading it soon. However, I ran across an audio interview of Mark Driscoll talking about the book. I think the interview is interesting, so I’m posting a link here. http://tgcreviews.com/interviews/doctrine-what-christians-should-believe/ Also, the interview is listed on The Gospel Coalition’s new Book Review Site http://tgcreviews.com, which seems like a great tool to discover good books.
Check out these links. Hope you enjoy!
Related Posts:
No commentsBook Review: Finally Alive by John Piper
I received a free copy of Finally Alive last month at the Death to Performance Conference in Nashville. Finally Alive is a new book (published in 2009) by John Piper that is all about regeneration. Regeneration is the technical (but still Biblical) term used to describe what the Bible calls “being born again.”
Piper’s aim is to return to a true, biblical understanding about the new birth. In the first chapter he offers a scathing rebuke to those who misuse the term “born again,” as well as an example of true regeneration by examining the conversions of C. S. Lewis and Augustine. Building upon the argument that Christians must truly understand regeneration, Piper then spends the next fifteen chapters unpacking the biblical teaching about the new birth. In typical Piper fashion, the exposition of Scripture is precise, the writing is technical, and the truths are glorious. Piper ends the book by spending two chapters urging believers to spread the message of the gospel. Christians must proclaim the message of Jesus. As he says, “God’s role in bringing about the new birth is decisive, and our role in bringing about the new birth is essential” (166). Piper is a Calvinist, but a biblical Calvinist who realizes that humans are the agency that God has appointed to proclaim the gospel to the world.
I found this book really encouraging. Piper’s balance in explaining the doctrine of regeneration is spot-on. He studies the work of regeneration from both God’s perspective and man’s perspective. The new birth is unashamedly God’s work, but it is always accompanied immediately by faith in the life of a believer. As Piper says on page 33, “When answering the question What happens in the new birth? never separate these two sayings of Jesus in John 3: ‘Unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God’ (v. 3), and, ‘Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life’ (v. 36).” Equally important in Finally Alive is Piper’s explanation of grace and work in the life of a believer. The new birth occurs by grace alone, but by grace Christians become irreversibly linked with Christ and his life. This union with Jesus always results in love and good deeds, and the good deeds are evidence of true saving faith in the life of a believer. The most compelling part of the book for me was definitely the last two chapters. In chapters fourteen and fifteen, Piper encourages believers to return to good old-fashioned evangelism. As he says, “We’re ending with personal evangelism – an old-fashioned commitment in new contexts for the sake of the new birth in thousands of spiritually dead people for the glory of Jesus Christ” (177). He urges believers to “Tell people the good news of Christ from a heart of love and life of service” (166).
Having read this book, I’m more compelled than ever to embrace God’s absolute sovereignty in salvation, and my absolute need to share Jesus to those around me. Christians must never bow to a fatalistic mindset that ignores the necessity of sharing the gospel. While I know this to be true, I still struggle to be bold with my faith. But as Paul said, “the gospel…is the power of salvation to everyone who believes” (Romans 1:16).
