Book Review: Beautiful Attitudes

The Sermon on the Mount must be one of the most-preached and most-written-about sections of scripture. I've preached it, in whole and in part, in my time in this parish, and there are probably more books on it than anything else. The sermon by Jesus early in Matthew's Gospel is compelling, attracting students and writers and preachers from the words were first uttered.

In this ebook, Scott Evans tackles the 'Beautiful Attitudes: Living out the Christian Manifesto.' Right at the start, he places the text in its proper context:

'This moment in Jesus' life is not just crucial for the teaching it gives us but also for how it shapes our understanding of the ministry that follows. It's a revolutionary manifesto about being people who bear the image of God and what it means to live that out... this sermon is an invitation for them [the disillusioned and disenfranchised] to become participants, to be builders and citizens in a new Kingdom.'

Through the course of the book, Scott examines each of the Beatitudes in turn, with greater or lesser success. As with his earlier book, Closer Still, there are some things that he says well, and others that sound unorthodox or ill-advised. Again, it's all in the mix, and unpicking the issues would cause the whole garment to become threadbare.

On the whole, I liked this better than Closer Still, but it's still not something I'd be recommending. If you want to go for it, Beautiful Attitudes is available for your Kindle.

Book Review: Closer Still

This has been a difficult book to review. The Church of Ireland is such a small beast, that almost everyone knows everyone else. Lots of my friends have raved about this book, but I'm not just as enthusiastic to recommend it. There are some interesting insights, but on the whole, I'm not a fan.

In many ways, the book is an autobiographical reflection on several Bible passages, as the author, Scott Evans (youth worker and speaker) tells of his experience of Christianity, his reaction to it, and his returning:

'By my mid teens, if I was asked what a 'Christian' was, I would have answered that 'a Christian is someone who has accepted Jesus as their Lord and Saviour and doesn't get drunk, get high or get laid.' This probably hasn't been the case for everyone, but growing up in church taught me what a Christian was defined by what he or she didn't do.' (Loc 35-38)

His experience is further illustrated by the following: 'I can see why it was confusing to follow Jesus. On one hand, I have a very clear list of the things that a Christian does not do, while on the other, I had no idea who to be.' (Loc 43-48)

Lamenting on our need for the quick fix, Evans writes of Jesus: 'He calls people - messy, broken, unreliable people - to follow Him. And answering the call doesn't fix them; they don't just agree to follow Him and magically transform into the people He wants them to be.' (Loc 62-65) Rather, 'The life of faith is not a five- or eight- step plan, it's a journey.' (Loc 69-70)

Some of the Bible passages he focuses on are the woman at the well (John 4), the parable of the talents, the healing of the woman with the issue of blood.

There's also an extended reflection on how doubting Thomas has been misunderstood. 'Why couldn't he muster enough faith to proclaim that Jesus had risen? Perhaps because belief is not the central issue of Thomas's story. Perhaps it's because whether or not Thomas believed in Jesus was not as important as how much he loved Him.' (Loc 392-394) Yet that's not the point that Jesus makes in John 21 when he shows that it's all about believing, especially those who have not seen Jesus, that is, the rest of us!

The majority of the book is centred on the Parable of the Lost Sons, helpfully pointing out that 'there are two ways of running from God, two ways of losing ourselves and losing Him, the foreign land and the field.' (Loc 457-461)

His attitude to the Bible is, at times, interesting. 'I generally don't like passages that I've heard preached on a million times. It's like hearing a song or seeing an episode of The Simpsons one too many times: you lost interest and it loses its impact.' (Loc 72-74) Yet he also rails against the out-of-context plucking of Bible verses - such as the oft-quoted and oft-misunderstood Jeremiah 29:11. This was a great bit, so often lacking from some modern ministry, where Bible verses are wrenched out of context and misapplied.

Yet he then seems to drift into a similar misunderstanding by seeking to read yourself into the text and find yourself in the story: 'One of the things that I tell my students who are interested in reading the Bible is to read it imaginatively. To encounter Him, we must go beyond reading the text to reading ourselves into the text, imagining ourselves in the shoes or sandals of characters within the story, especially those who encounter Jesus and sometimes even Jesus himself.' (Loc 331-336) I'm not convinced that this is the why we have the Bible, nor that it is the way it is to be read.

Most troubling is his interpretation of the offering of Isaac and the faith of Abraham in Genesis 22. Following Rob Bell, Evans insists that God stops the knife to show that He is not like the other gods, who demand child sacrifice. 'It's not simply an issue of whether or not God can trust Abraham, it's Abraham's opportunity to discover that he can trust God, that he will not be subject to the cruel, insatiable hearts of others.' (Loc 614) And so on: 'To push this somewhat controversial interpretation of this passage even further, I sometimes wonder if Abraham actually failed the test. He has already shown his faithfulness so I'm not convinced that, after 25 years of obedience, God needs more evidence.' (Loc 614-616). It's a very controversial interpretation, which fails to take account of how the Bible interprets the incident - Hebrews 11 declares that 'By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac... He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.' (Heb 11:17-19)

The misunderstanding continues, as Evans then states that 'I wonder if God was hoping that Abraham would say no. Or at least ask why. In doing so, he would be living according to the heart of the God who reveals himself throughout the narrative of Scripture. Whether he passes or fails God's test, what's crucial is that this is God showing that He is not bloodthirsty, He is not insatiable, that His heart is good. That He can be trusted with our lives, our loves and our dreams.' (Loc 619-622). The offering of Isaac was replaced by a substitute, whose blood was offered. The sparing of Isaac points to the sacrifice of Jesus, where the good God who is also love, just and holy, is satisfied through the blood of the substitute. It is in this that God's love and goodness is revealed, rather than in hoping to provoke Abraham to refuse.

Similarly, the author seeks to reinterpret prayer by quoting positively a story of Mother Theresa who claimed that she doesn't say anything when she prays, nor does God, but rather, in his words, 'I think this is what home with God is like, what intimacy is all about. A communicative silence, two hearts becoming one, our lives changed by the life and heart of God.' (Loc 676) It seems to me to be in such contrast with Jesus who taught his disciples how to pray, by saying, 'When you pray, say...' (Luke 11:2)

As I've said, there are some useful insights, but there are also strange and dangerous interpretations of central Bible themes. For this reason, I just don't think I can recommend the book.

Book Review: The Intolerance of Tolerance

I've heard Don Carson speak a few times, and either during the session, or else during the question time after, modern culture has inevitably raised its head. On the past few occasions, he mentioned about the intolerance or the new tolerance, and how there was probably a book in it. And now, here it is: 'The Intolerance of Tolerance.'

Carson traces the development our culture which has led to a disappointing redefinition of tolerance. Originally, it meant that you would accept and tolerate the existence of other views - rival truth claims, defending their right to believe such. Nowadays, though, the new tolerance is rather 'intrinsically intolerant' - that all views are equally correct, and to challenge this is 'intolerant.' With a generous portion of contemporary examples from America, Britain and further afield, the intolerance of tolerance is exposed - often in ridiculous and what would be funny ways - if it all wasn't so serious.

Having introduced his theme, given a survey of the current state of play, traced the history of tolerance, Carson then asserts that what is happening is worse than inconsistency - it is inconsistency with an agenda. As he states, 'It is in fact smuggling into the culture massive structures of thought and imposing them on others who disagree, while insisting that the others are the intolerant people.' Inclusion, used to force Christian student groups to include non-Christians on their committees, is not universally applied to also force Christians onto the atheist group committee, or Jews onto the Muslim committee or so on... 'They appeal to tolerance selectively in order to promote their own selective values.'

The centre of the book is a reiteration of the Church and Christian truth claims, as well as morality. Rather than God being tolerant in the modern (or postmodern) sense, God is patient, not wanting any to perish, but judgement will come. 'His love is better than tolerance; his wrath guarantees justice that mere tolerance can never imagine.'

On discussing inter-faith dialogue, he writes of three religious ladies, a Christian, a Jew and a Muslim, who meet together to share together. They have a happy unity, but as Carson points out, 'Interfaith dialog... will likely come to this sort of happy friendship provided no participant believes very much to be true within his or her respective traditions.'

At times when reading Carson, my head begins to hurt because his material is so heavy (or else above me), but even in this, it's clear to follow his thought and to sense the urgency in his message. The chapter on 'Tolerance, Democracy and Majoritarianism' appears to be mostly concentrating on the American system, with American history sampled and American concerns. The final chapter, however, is relevant for everyone, as he gives ten words, ten action points to seek to change the culture, based on the observation of the book. While all are worth taking on board, the stand-out ones for me were to 'practice civility' (by commending the Lord Jesus through our actions and interactions, rather than sounding off and turning people away); and being prepared to suffer - which appears to be the trajectory we are on.

The Intolerance of Toleranceis a good read to get a sense of our bearings in the current climate, and to prepare us for what may eventually come our way in this part of the United Kingdom.

Book Review: Seven Days That Divide The World

It's Day Two of my Genesis book reviews, and perhaps appropriately, it's a book that deals with the creation days themselves. This wasn't strictly part of my sermon series prep, but further background reading by an author I respect on a related topic. John Lennox is emerging as one of the leading Christian apologists in the realm of science and evolution, so it was interesting to read his take on the creation.

It might be a recurring observation by all the writers this week, but Genesis is not an easy subject: 'The biblical announcement of the fact of creation was as timelessly clear as it was magnificently appropriate. However... when it comes to the timing and means of creation... people over the centuries have found the book of Genesis less easy to understand.'

Lennox declares that 'the topic is clearly a potential minefield.' Yet he continues to argue that there is hope of a harmony of the Bible and science both properly interpreted. After all, belief in creative intelligence was the starting point for modern science, which therefore doesn't disprove God's existence. Indeed, Lennox examines the trouble surrounding Galileo, that famous test case of religion against science. Rather, 'The conflict was far more between two 'scientific' world pictures than between science and religion.'

Continuing to discuss bible interpretation, Lennox points to a number of examples where the 'literal' sense of the words used can be inadequate and even misleading - 'since there can be different levels of literality.' So, with the discovery that the earth revolves around the sun: 'Even though our interpretation relies on scientific knowledge, it does not compromise the authority of Scripture.' Therefore: 'The Galileo incident teaches us that we should be humble enough to distinguish between what the Bible says and our interpretations of it.'

With this foundation in place, Lennox examines the text of Genesis 1 to discover what it actually says. He explains that there are a variety of meanings for the word 'day' in the Hebrew, whether the period of sunlight; a twenty-four hour period; or an age. He also considers the possibility of the six creation days being solid days, but spaced throughout a longer period of time (ie not just in the one week).

Moving on, the problems of the origin of humans and death are raised. Were Adam and Eve just a pair of humanoids that God decided to begin with, or were they a special creation? Did evolution play a part in their rise? Did death exist before the fall? Lennox' answer seems to push for an ancient world, with an attitude of humility as the 'best fit' for the evidence of Scripture and science.

His fifth and final chapter appears to be the strongest, as he turns from science to focus instead on the message of Genesis 1, displaying the truth it reveals of God to the reader. In a series of simple points, Lennox again and again points to the God who is, the creator, the one who formed us, and calls us to relationship with him.

There are also a number of interesting appendices, providing a background to Genesis, an examination of the Cosmic Temple view, thoughts on the beginning of time, a brief discussion of the suggestion that there are two accounts of creation, and an analysis of theistic evolution and the God of the gaps.

All in all, it's a book that will raise the salient points in the discussion and provide much food for thought. I'm not sure that I agree with all his conclusions, but at least I've been provoked to think more carefully about my position, and am now better informed about the issues. Any book by Lennox also equips the reader for apologetics, which is also a bonus!

Book Review: The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World

This was probably the ideal book to read immediately after Pete Rollins' How (Not) to Speak of God, so the review should also naturally come immediately after! As with previous books, The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World is a write-up of the 2006 Desiring God Conference, with contributions from a variety of speakers and writers. What's even better is that it is available free as a pdf!

David Wells kicks off by examining the postmodern worldview, and how it came to be so prevalent. He discusses the 9/11 terrorist attacks, in order to show how they exposed certain elements of American culture - it being 'morally and spiritually adrift'; the West's 'growing ethnic and religious complexity'; and the scarcity of a spiritual gravitas in the church to address 'such issues of seriousness.'

He goes on to consider the rise of therapeutic spiritualities, no longer 'a matter of theorizing from a safe distance but rather a matter of daily encounter in neighbourhoods' - which ironically seem strangely familiar to evangelical spirituality that is 'therpeutic and non-doctrinal.' The tragedy is that the church begins to look like the world, rather than being distinctive and different, recognising the problem of sin and the only cure - the Agape love of God reaching down to rescue, rather than our Eros love reaching up towards God, but never reaching him.

Voddie Baucham considers Truth in a postmodern world, in world which 'calls evil "good" and good "evil" - where sin is celebrated and righteousness is mocked - that the Christ of Truth shines most brilliantly.' In his own forthright style, Voddie declares:

'Postmodernism is not supreme in this world. Christ is the one who is, and always will be, supreme. So if there is a conflict between Christ and postmodernity, Jesus wins all day, everyday, and twice on Sunday!'

John Piper speaks about joy. 'The point is simply to affirm the precious truth of doctrinally based joy over against the postmodern debunking of propositional revelation and biblical doctrine and expositional preaching - as though there were some other way to attain Christ-exalting joy.' What a counter to Rollins!

Don Carson presents some reflections on love and the supremacy of Christ by examining John 17 and how they reveal the love of God. As you would expect, it's stirring and powerful stuff, as he shows the various intertwining aspects of love in the cross - the Father's love for the Son, the Son's love for the Father, their love for the church and the world and so on.

Tim Keller speaks on the Gospel in a postmodern world, asking how we should do evangelism in a new context. Picking up on a paper by Martin Lloyd Jones, he suggests that America and the UK is perhaps the most challenging mission field yet, because society used to be Christian - a new mission field where people have been inoculated against the gospel. These changed circumstances lead Keller to believe that everything has to change (!) but he helpfully sets out six ways of change, based on Jonah's mission to Nineveh. There are lots of challenges here, as we seek to move from comfortable church life to realising we are on the mission field.

Mark Driscoll closes the book by thinking about the church, and speaking of how he used to be linked with the emergent guys before breaking fellowship with them.

The book also contains some interviews with the speakers, with some helpful bits as the issues are drawn out and expanded on. All in all, it's a great book, and very useful for anyone wanting to consider the main issues of posstmodernity, and the Christian response of witness and evangelism. Plus, it's free as a pdf for your Kindle!

Book Review: How (Not) To Speak of God

On coming to review this book by Pete Rollins, I'm discovering just how hard it is to try to work out what he's actually saying, and what the point of it all is. Rather than 'difficult and dangerous', it's just confusing. So many times, it's as if Rollins wants his cake and to eat it, living in a world of contradictions and complexities, demonstrating the postmodern mindset to the nth degree. Early on, he indicates that 'The book as a whole is aimed at either those already involved in what has been called 'the emerging conversation' or those who would like to understand it in a deeper way.'

Further, he declares that 'the movement is not so much developing a distinct religious tradition within Christianity, but rather is re-introducing ideas that help to both revitalize already existing religious traditions and build bridges between them. It is not then a revolution that is in the process of creating something new but rather one that is returning to something very old.'

Part one of the book reflects on the struggle of academic theology according to the postmodern theory - wherein 'the argument is made that naming God is never really naming God but only naming our understanding of God.' and thus to introduce the idolatry of our concepts as divine. Rollins proposes that his way is to avoid the binary of 'right belief' or 'wrong belief' - and particularly the Northern Irish preoccupation with right belief by instead focusing on 'believing in the right way.' At times, it seems as if he just plays with words, making them slippery for his own purposes, and this was certainly one of those times.

It appears that Rollins may helpfully point out that there is still a future tense to our salvation: 'that we are becoming Christian, becoming Church and being saved,' but he emphasizes this to the neglect of the past tense parts of the faith and salvation, seen throughout the New Testament. Following (or perhaps preceding) Rob Bell, he declares that 'we need to be evangelized as much, if not more, than those around us.'

Returning to the idolatry of our attempts at speaking of God, and with emphasis on the Western idolatry of theology, he tries to make the point that 'God cannot be revealed through human logos.' But what if God has spoken and revealed himself in human logos? On this point Don Carson's 'Becoming Conversant with the Emergent Church' is untouchable. Further, if God is incapable of being understood, then how can Pete himself seek to be understood and communicate ideas?

There are further bizarre ideas in the rest of the first section, but I really can't bring myself to seek to present them. The second part presents a series of meetings from Ikon in Belfast, Rollins' postmodern church community, with strange liturgies and scripts that leave you wondering what they are trying to achieve. In most, it appears to be the subversion of the truth, in an ironic (and almost hipster) postmodern way.

For those seeking to understand postmodern theology, I would definitely recommend Don Carson's work rather than Peter Rollins'. While he claims to be part of Christianity, and uses the language, it's hard to see in reality how it is Christian.

The Whole Truth

How should we think of the gospel? Is it one option among many? Is it just an opinion sincerely held? Is it just good for us, but others might find their own way?

In another arresting little phrase Paul won't allow us to get bogged down in religious pluralism or post-modern agnosticism. Here's how he describes the way the Colossians Christians heard of the faith in Christ, the love for all the saints, because of the hope laid up in heaven:

Of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel, which has come to you... (Colossians 1:5-6)

Note the word 'the' there: THE word of THE truth, THE gospel.

The gospel is not, as pomos want us to think, possibly one truth among many truths; it's not my truth (if you'll tell me yours); it's not a truth which works for me; it's not an opinion. It is the truth!

A single truth, not just for one group in society, nor one society, nor one culture - but the truth, the good news which has come to Colossae and transformed these believers, which it is also doing across the world, as verse 6 continues:

the gospel, which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and growing - as it does among you (Colossians 1:5-6)

The truth, delivered once for all to the saints, is changing lives. In a world of opinions, thoughts and ideas; in a world of confusion and doubt; in a world of heresy and false teaching; in a world of lies, half-truths (which are whole lies), and spin: there is such a thing as Truth: the truth - the gospel.

Book Review: Blue Like Jazz

Donald Miller's book Blue Like Jazz had been something that I'd seen in bookshops many times and never bought. It seemed a bit strange, just from the cover and title. Then I found a copy going for 40p in a charity shop recently, and added it to my shelf of 'to-read' books above my desk. There it sat for a while, and then I discovered that the last book I read and reviewed, Why We Love The Church, references this very book in not very positive tones, so it had to be the next book I read.

Just as I imagined it to be strange from the cover, so I continue to think having read it through. The subtitle declares that it is providing 'Non-religious thoughts on Christian Spirituality' which sounds very postmodern, and that's exactly how the book turns out.

At times I loved it, particularly when Miller finds himself reasoning his way to total depravity, that the soul of man, unwatched is perverse. He experiences the truth of the Christian doctrine (not just a fundamentalist dogma) as he reacts to tragedy and evil in the world, realising that 'I am the problem' when it comes to changing the world.

Yet even as he describes self-absorption as the heart of sin - only ever being interested in yourself - the whole book is a presentation of his thoughts, actions and words; his seeking significant spiritual experiences and finding more of them at a notorious college than at church. Very postmodern, very cool, but seemingly very self-absorbed.

Sometimes, he doesn't seem to go far enough, as he bases his faith on his feelings: 'I imagined Him (that is, God) half-angry because His beloved mankind had cheated on Him.' Seriously, only half-angry? It's this under-estimation of God's wrath towards us (borne in Jesus for those who trust him) that is at best a half truth, and ultimately unhelpful.

He also seems to slip up when praising wonder as the grounds for worship: 'Wonder is that feeling we get when we let go of our silly answers, our mapped out rules that we want God to follow. I don't think there is any better worship than wonder.' It seems that all that we know about God, all that God has revealed in the Scriptures through his Son the Lord Jesus is bound up in Miller's phrase 'our silly answers'. Without the revelation of God, we would only be wondering about God, but not knowing anything. Rather our wonder comes precisely through what God has revealed - that despite our great sin, he loves us, that Jesus has carried the punishment that our sins deserved, and that we can be forgiven and saved and redeemed. Wonder isn't abandoning all knowledge, but rather is found in Paul's words - 'the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me.' (Galatians 2:20).

Another classic postmodern quote coming up: 'I don't think you can explain how Christian faith works either. It is a mystery. And I love this about Christian spirituality. It cannot be explained, and yet it is beautiful and true. It is something you feel, and it comes from the soul.' Well, it's hard to know just where to start with that!

I really did struggle with this book. Miller is engaging, clever, humorous, at times entertaining, and he is fairly honest about his thoughts, feelings and doubts. He's also sometimes very clear on what is vital in Christianity: 'I don't think any church has ever been relevant to culture, to the human struggle, unless is believed in Jesus and the power of His gospel. If the supposed new church believes in trendy music and cool Web pages, then it is not relevant to culture either. It is just another tool of Satan to get people to be passionate about nothing.'

He does mention Jesus a few times and his gospel in passing, but never spells it out. Never explains what he means by it, and so, mired in the trappings of postmodernism and seeming emerging church language, it's just so hard to know how to decide on the book. I'm not sure I would recommend it - unless you were going to follow it up straight away by reading either DeYoung and Kluck's 'Why We Love The Church' or Carson's 'Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church'.