Craig's Book Reviews

As we have seen from last week, in The God Who is There, Schaeffer has been discussing the line of despair. This is the point at which man has given up “hope of achieving a rational unified answer to knowledge and life.” (p. 23) This began in philosophy and worked its way through until it finally reached theology. Thus man turned to what is called existentialism in the search for meaning. Modern existentialism began with Kierkegaard but it was Karl Barth who open its door into theology. This new theology, as Schaeffer describes it, ” has given us hope of finding a unified field of knowledge. Hence, in contrast to biblical and Reformation theology, it is antitheology.” (p. 54)

In the second section, The Relationship of the New Theology to the Intellectual Climate, Schaeffer gives two examples of how the line of despair has impacted theology, thus creating the “new theology”. First, in regards to liberal German theology Schaeffer observes:

The old liberal theologians in Germany began by accepting the presuppositions of the uniformity of natural causes as a closed system. Thus they rejected everything miraculous and supernatural, including the supernatural in the life of Jesus Christ. Having done that, they still hoped to find an historical Jesus in a rational, objective, scholarly way by separating the supernatural aspect of Jesus’ life from the “true history.” (p. 52)

Those who have kept up with the historical Jesus Seminar can see where this came from and that it has not changed it its underlying assumptions.

Second, Schaeffer makes a telling observation in how the new theology uses words as they tried to apply the use of symbol from the field of science. Within the scientific field symbol has a well-defined meaning in order to bring further precision to the discussion and ones understanding. Schaeffer notes:

But the new theology uses the concept of symbol in exactly the opposite way. The only thing the theological and scientific uses have in common is the word symbol. To the new theology, the usefulness of a symbol is in direct proportion to its obscurity. There is connotation, as in the word god, but there is no definition. The secret of the strength of neo-orthodoxy is that these religious symbols with a connotation of personality given an illusion of meaning, and as a consequence it appears to be more optimistic than secular existentialism. One could not find a clearer examples of this than Tillich’s phrase “God behind God.”

At first acquaintance this concept gives the feeling of spirituality. “I do not ask for answers, I just believe.” This sounds spiritual, and it deceives many fine people. These are often young men and women who are content only to repeat the phrases of the intellectual or spiritual status quo. They have become rightly dissatisfied with a dull, dusty, introverted orthodoxy given only to pounding out the well-known cliches. The new theology sounds spiritual and vibrant, and they are trapped. But the price they pay for what seems to be spiritual high, for to operate in the upper story using undefined religious terms is to fail to know and function on the level of the whole man. The answer is not to ask these people to return to the poorness of the status quo, but to a living orthodoxy which is concerned with the whole man, including the rational and intellectual, in his relationship to God. (p. 60-61)

I think what Schaeffer has said here still has relevance for today. I am a thirty something and I can attest to the pull there is today towards abandoning historic Christian orthodoxy for avante garde theology. It is new for the sake of being new and not old. There are those within theological academia who are pushing for theological expressions that are edgy. Everyone has to say something new and everyone wants to be the next theological maverick. Orthodoxy has been given a black eye by this kind of theological thinking.

I am reminded of two passages from the New Testament that we would be wise to head:

I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3)

Follow the pattern of sound words that you have heard form me, in faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. By the Holy Spirit that dwells within us, guard the good deposit entrusted to you. (2 Tim. 1:13-14)

From Ante Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1: Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr & Irenaeus:

Ignatius: Epistle to Polycarp, Chap. 3 – Exhortations:

Let not those who seem worthy of credit, but teach strange doctrines, fill thee with apprehension. Stand firm, as does an anvil which is beaten. It is the part of a noble athlete to be wounded, and yet to conquer. And especially we ought to bear all things for the sake of God, that He also may bear with us, and bring us into His kingdom. Add more and more to thy diligence; run thy race with increasing energy; weigh carefully the times. Whilst thou art here, be a conqueror; for here is the course, and there are the crowns. Look for Christ, the Son of God; who was before time, yet appeared in time; who was invisible by nature, yet visible in the flesh; who was impalpable, and could not be touched, as being without a body, but for our sakes became such, might be touched and handled in the body; who was impassible as God, but became passible for our sakes as man; and who in every kind of way suffered for our sakes.

Ignatuis: Epistle to the Tarisans, Chap. 2-4 – This deals with the doctrine of Christ esp. the Incarnation:

I have learned that certain of the ministers of Satan have wished to disturb you, some of them asserting that Jesus was born [only] in appearance, was crucified in appearance, and died in appearance; others that He is not the Son the Creator, and others that He is Himself God over all. Others, again, hold that He is a mere man, and others that this flesh is not to rise again, so that our proper course is to live and partake of a life of pleasure, for that this is the chief good to beings who are in a little while to perish. A swarm of such evils has burst in upon us. But ye have not “given place by subjection to them, no, not for one hour.” For ye are the fellow-citizens as well as the disciples of Paul, who “fully preached the Gospel from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum,” and bare about “the marks of Christ” in his flesh.

Mindful of him, do ye by all means know that Jesus the Lord was truly born of Mary, being made of a woman; and was as truly crucified. For, says he, “God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of the Lord Jesus.” And He really suffered, and died, and rose again. For says [Paul], “If Christ should become passible, and should be the first to rise again from the dead.” And again, “In that He died, He died unto sin once: but in that He liveth, He liveth unto God.” Otherwise, what advantage would there be in [becoming subject to] bonds, if Christ has not died? what advantage in patience? what advantage in [enduring] stripes? And why such facts as the following: Peter was crucified; Paul and James were slain with the sword; John was banished to Patmos; Stephen was stoned to death by the Jews who killed the Lord? But, [in truth,] none of these sufferings were in vain; for the Lord was really crucified by the ungodly.

And [know ye, moreover], that He who was born of a woman was the Son of God, and He that was crucified was “the first-born of every creature,” and God the Word, who also created all things. For says the apostle, “There is one God, the Father, of whom are all things; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things.” And again, “For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus;” and, “By Him were all things created that are in heaven, and on earth, visible and invisible; and He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.”

Ignatius, Epistle to Hero, a Deacon of Antioch, Chap. 2 – Cautions Against False Teaching:

Every one that teaches anything beyond what is commanded, though he be [deemed] worthy of credit, though he be in the habit of fasting, though he live in continence, though he work miracles, though he have the gift of prophecy, let him be in thy sight as a wolf in sheep’s clothing, labouring for the destruction of the sheep. If any one denies the cross, and is ashamed of the passion, let him be to thee as the adversary himself. “Though he gives all his goods to feed the poor, though he remove mountains, though he give his body to be burned,” let him be regarded by thee as abominable. If any one makes light of the law or the prophets, which Christ fulfilled at His coming, let him be to thee as antichrist. If any one says that the Lord is a mere man, he is a Jew, a murderer of Christ.

Igantius, Epistle to the Philippians, Chap. 1 -2 – Reason for Writing the Epistle – This represents trinitarian thinking:

Being mindful of your love and of your zeal in Christ, which ye have manifested towards us, we thought it fitting to write to you, who display such a godly and spiritual love to the brethren, to put you in remembrance of your Christian course, “that ye all speak the same thing, being of one mind, thinking the same thing, and walking by the same rule of faith,” as Paul admonished you. For if there is one God of the universe, the Father of Christ, “of whom are all things;”and one Lord Jesus Christ, our [Lord], “by whom are all things;” and also one Holy Spirit, who wrought in Moses, and in the prophets and apostles; and also one baptism, which is administered that we should have fellowship with the death of the Lord; and also one elect Church; there ought likewise to be but one faith in respect to Christ. For “there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is through all, and in all.”

There is then one God and Father, and not two or three; One who is; and there is no other besides Him, the only true [God]. For “the Lord thy God,” saith [the Scripture], “is one Lord.” And again, “Hath not one God created us? Have we not all one Father? And there is also one Son, God the Word. For “the only-begotten Son,” saith [the Scripture], “who is in the bosom of the Father.” And again, “One Lord Jesus Christ.” And in another place, “What is His name, or what His Son’s name, that we may know?” And there is also one Paraclete. For “there is also,” saith [the Scripture], “one Spirit,” since “we have been called in one hope of our calling.” And again, “We have drunk of one Spirit,” with what follows. And it is manifest that all these gifts [possessed by believers] “worketh one and the self-same Spirit.” There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to “baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three [persons] who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honour. (Italics mine)

Ignatius, Epistle to the Philippians, Chap. 3 – Christ was truly born and died – This is on the Incarnation of Christ:

For there is but One that became incarnate, and that neither the Father nor the Paraclete, but the Son only, [who became so] not in appearance or imagination, but in reality. For “the Word became flesh.” For “Wisdom builded for herself a house.” And God the Word was born as man, with a body, of the Virgin, without any intercourse of man. For [it is written], “A virgin shall conceive in her womb, and bring forth a son.” He was then truly born, truly grew up, truly ate and drank, was truly crucified, and died, and rose again. He who believes these things, as they really were, and as they really took place, is blessed. He who believeth them not is no less accursed than those who crucified the Lord. For the prince of this world rejoiceth when any one denies the cross, since he knows that the confession of the cross is his own destruction. For that is the trophy which has been raised up against his power, which when he sees, he shudders, and when he hears of, is afraid.

The Epistle of Barnabas, Chap. 4 – Antichrist is at hand: let us therefore avoid Jewish errors:

It therefore behoves us, who inquire much concerning events at hand, to search diligently into those things which are able to save us. Let us then utterly flee from all the works of iniquity, lest these should take hold of us; and let us hate the error of the present time, that we may set our love on the world to come: let us not give loose reins to our soul, that it should have power to run with sinners and the wicked, lest we become like them.

The Epistle to Barnabas, Chap. 11 – Baptism and the corss prefigured in the OT – This is an interesting interpretation of Psalm 1:

Let us further inquire whether the Lord took any care to foreshadow the water [of baptism] and the cross. Concerning the water, indeed, it is written, in reference to the Israelites, that they should not receive that baptism which leads to the remission of sins, but should procure another for themselves. The prophet therefore declares, “Be astonished, O heaven, and let the earth tremble at this, because this people hath committed two great evils: they have forsaken Me, a living fountain, and have hewn out for themselves broken cisterns. Is my holy hill Zion a desolate rock? For ye shall be as the fledglings of a bird, which fly away when the nest is removed.” And again saith the prophet, “I will go before thee and make level the mountains, and will break the brazen gates, and bruise in pieces the iron bars; and I will give thee the secret, hidden, invisible treasures, that they may know that I am the Lord God.” And “He shall dwell in a lofty cave of the strong rock.” Furthermore, what saith He in reference to the Son? “His water is sure; ye shall see the King in His glory, and your soul shall meditate on the fear of the Lord.” And again He saith in another prophet, “The man who doeth these things shall be like a tree planted by the courses of waters, which shall yield its fruit in due season; and his leaf shall not fade, and all that he doeth shall prosper. Not so are the ungodly, not so, but even as chaff, which the wind sweeps away from the face of the earth. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in judgment, nor sinners in the counsel of the just; for the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous, but the way of the ungodly shall perish.” Mark how He has described at once both the water and the cross. For these words imply, Blessed are they who, placing their trust in the cross, have gone down into the water; for, says He, they shall receive their reward in due time: then He declares, I will recompense them. But now He saith, “Their leaves shall not fade.” This meaneth, that every word which proceedeth out of your mouth in faith and love shall tend to bring conversion and hope to many. Again, another prophet saith, “And the land of Jacob shall be extolled above every land.” This meaneth the vessel of His Spirit, which He shall glorify. Further, what says He? “And there was a river flowing on the right, and from it arose beautiful trees; and whosoever shall eat of them shall live for ever.” This meaneth, that we indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God] and trust in Jesus in our spirit. “And whosoever shall eat of these shall live for ever,” This meaneth: Whosoever, He declares, shall hear thee speaking, and believe, shall live for ever.

Epistle of Barnabas, Chap. 15 – The false and true Sabbath – Here Barnabas discusses the Sabbath, days of creation and eschatology all together and seems to imply that the 6 days of creation represent the length of time for all of history until Christ comes back for the perfect final Sabbath rest:

Further, also, it is written concerning the Sabbath in the Decalogue which [the Lord] spoke, face to face, to Moses on Mount Sinai, “And sanctify ye the Sabbath of the Lord with clean hands and a pure heart.” And He says in another place, “If my sons keep the Sabbath, then will I cause my mercy to rest upon them.” The Sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation [thus]: “And God made in six days the works of His hands, and made an end on the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it.” Attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, “He finished in six days.” This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with Him a thousand years. And He Himself testifieth, saying, “Behold, to-day will be as a thousand years.” Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. “And He rested on the seventh day.” This meaneth: when His Son, coming [again], shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the-sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall He truly rest on the seventh day. Moreover, He says, “Thou shalt sanctify it with pure hands and a pure heart.” If, therefore, any one can now sanctify the day which God hath sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things, we are deceived. Behold, therefore: certainly then one properly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able to work righteousness. Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having been first sanctified ourselves

Disciples make disciples. Though this three word sentence is as clear as a cloudless sky and given by Jesus in one of the clearest passages of Scripture (Matt. 28:19), it has been one of the most largely undeveloped and neglected aspects of church and Christian life. That is, disciples of Jesus Christ are not so adept at making new converts to Christ into disciples of Christ. While some groups can be very productive in evangelism, that is often where it stops and thus the church is filled with undiscipled disciples of Christ. Granted, once one becomes an adopted child of God they are a disciple of Christ in its most bare sense of the word. However, being a disciple of Christ is not merely a static state of existence one has in relation to Christ once saved. Rather, it is a dynamic relationship that is growing. Thus, discipleship is properly a description of the ongoing growth of a self-identified disciple of Christ.

This idea of disciples making disciples is the passion behind the new book Multiply: Disciples Making Disciples by Francis Chan and Mark Beuving. Chan and Beuving’s desire is to help believers understand what it means to be a disciple (follower) of Jesus Christ. The goal of discipleship is to be like the person you are following. For the Christian that is Christ. “That’s the whole point of being a disciple of Jesus: we imitate Him, carry on His ministry, and become like Him in the process.” (p. 16)

Though disciples are individuals, discipleship is not accomplished individually. “The proper context for every disciple maker is the church. It is impossible to make disciples aside from the church of Jesus Christ.” (p. 51) After all, how would one fulfill and be a recipient of the over 50 “one another” passages in the New Testament on their own outside of the local church? Further, if disciples are to obey the command of Christ to make disciples of all nations, they cannot do that one their own. Discipleship happens in the life of the individual within the life of the church.

While discipleship for the follower of Christ happens within the local church, it is not merely contained within the local church. Growing disciples of Christ will naturally develop an outward focus on the world around them. This is how the church fulfills the great commission to make disciples of very nation. As unbelievers are evangelized and brought within the local church for discipleship, they in turn are driven to evangelize others so that they too might become disciples of Christ and being their discipleship journey within the local church as well. The authors rightly point out:

We are called to make disciples, and strengthening the other members of the church body is an important part of this. But if we are not working together to help the unbelieving world around us become followers of Jesus, then we are missing the point of our salvation. God blessed Abraham so that He could bless the world through him (Gen. 12). (p. 74)

So the natural question that arises is “What does discipleship look like?” Finding root in Matt. 28:20, “Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you,” Chan and Beuving spend the rest of the book (about 230 pages worth of it) discussing how to study the Bible and the content of the biblical story line. So, what is all important to discipleship is knowing Scripture since it is within Scripture that we find all that Jesus has commanded His disciples.

After giving a brief introduction to basic Bible interpretation principles, the authors spend the bulk of the book walking from Genesis to Revelation and drawing out the redemptive biblical story line. I will not rehash it but it is divided into the Old and New Testaments and follows the Creation, Fall, Redemption and Consummation structure while filling out much of the redemptive portion. With this the book ends. What might become readily apparent to those who are more familiar with books on discipleship is that Chand and Beuving have taken a markedly different approach to discussing what discipleship looks like. Most books on discipleship cover the typical topics of prayer (though this is touched on), Bible study, the fruits of the Spirit and the like while not addressing the issue of the whole message of the Bible. This may be because most discipleship books are geared towards (though not always stated as such) Christians who have been saved for a while but are looking for more growth in these areas. Chan and Beuving have perhaps shifted their focus (though it is not stated) more towards new Christians who have not been reading their Bibles and would not be familiar with the overall message of Scripture.

Since the content of Multiply seems to be driven in this direction the book is more for new Christians rather than seasoned ones. And that is fine because for new believers this is an excellent resource. In fact, the book is accompanied by a series of videos you can find online at www.multiplymovement.com. Here you can listen to each chapter read aloud. In addition, there is a corresponding video for each chapter in the book in which Chan and David Platt discuss the content of the chapter. As such, Multiply is designed not just for individuals to read on their own but to go through with others in a group with a leader.

Multiply is a great book to get into the hands of new believers. There is nothing worse than seeing a person commit their lives to be a disciple of Christ to only sputter along in their Christian life never really growing as a disciple of Christ. This book provides a needed tool to help new believers understand their identity as disciples, get properly oriented within the context of the local church as the place their discipleship takes place and to get an early grasp on the message of Scripture so they can understand all that Christ has commanded them. I recommend buying several copies of this book to have ready to give to new believers!

NOTE: I received this book for free from David C Cook and was under no obligation to provide a favorable review.

In 1979, after having been a public school science teacher and part-time speaker on creation during the weekends, Ken Ham retired from teaching to start a ministry that would later become what many today know as Answers in Genesis (AiG). Not even a decade after Ham began his now world famous creation ministry he published his first book in 1987, The Lie. This book encapsulates the message that lies at the heart of everything AiG stands for and teaches. This message is that God has given us a record of how He created everything in the book of Genesis and that the scientific theory of evolution as everything was an accident and all life evolved over millions and billions of years from a single cell, is a lie.

This year marks the 25th anniversary of The Lie and Master Books has published an
updated version. While the core of the book is the same, Ham has added new more contemporary examples with a few additional appendixes and has updated the cover of the book. Some of the diagrams in the book have been updated as they have been changed to more accurately reflect how Ham presents the creation/evolution debate (see castle diagram in Appen. 1, p. 197).

The basic content of the book is a compilation of lectures Ham was doing, and continues to do to this day, in churches and schools while teaching on creation/evolution. If you have watched any of his videos or heard seen him speak then some of the material will sound familiar. The basic thrust of the book is to call Christians back to the book of Genesis as our starting point for understanding origins rather than following the evolutionary teaching of secularism. For Christians, Genesis is to shape our worldview. If the church accepts evolution as the basis for origins then it will naturally produce a contrary worldview which it at odds with Scripture. If evolution is true, Ham points out, then we are left with a worldview that has no room for God and will naturally result in the moral and spiritual degradation of society.

Through the apologetical method of presuppositionalism, Ham does a good job of getting the heart of the issues within the creation/evolution debate. It needs to be pointed out that Ham employs a modified version of presuppositional apologetics from its more well known proponents like Cornelius VanTil, Greg Bahnsen and John Frame but this is not the place to tease this out. Presuppositionalism addresses ones starting point. For Christians it is the existence of God and his revelation to man in Scripture. To accept evolution as the explanation of human origins is to silence the voice of Scripture, and thus God, and therefore replace one set of presuppositions about life and reality for another. When it comes to the area of science and evidence ones presuppositions have a great impact on how a person interprets the data. Overall, Ham does a good job making the connection as to how accepting evolutionary thinking about origins leads to a worldview that is at odds with Scripture.

While there is much to commend Ham for in the book there were two things that stuck out to me that I had a hard time with. I only mention them because they are central to the books argument. First, I am not convinced about the hard line Ham draws between observational and historical science (see chap. 2 & 3). If one were to accept Ham’s premise that historical science can tell us nothing about the past because the evidence exists in the present, then we must throw out, possibly among other things, the whole field of archaeology which I know AiG engages in, and rightly so (see. pgs, 47, 49 & 57). Second, while I hold to the days of creation as being six 24 hour days, I do not see all of the creation day views as mutually exclusive like Ham does. While I hold to a young earth I do not hold to a young universe and I do accept part of the cosmic temple view as popularized by John Walton though I reject his functional ontology view of creation.

Those differences aside, The Lie is the go to book for the heart of AiG’s message. Readers will come face to face with the obvious differences between the worldview of Scripture and secularism/evolution. Ham is passionate about the truth and about Christians knowing the truth. Ham employs ample Scriptural support for Christians to consider and come to grips with. This is Ham’s clarion call for Christians to wake from their slumber of ignorance about the origins debate and arm themselves with understanding and truth about the issues at stake.

NOTE: I received this book for free from Master Books in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.

As anyone who has studied another language can attest to, having shorter versions of your grammar and syntax books can be a big help for translating. No one wants to have to lug around their big language books and flip through numerous pages to find a verb or noun translation chart on a page you cannot remember. Much less, having small sticky notes sticking out of the top pages of the book makes you look, well, nerdy – right?

For several years now linguists and grammarians of New Testament Greek have been producing short helpful summaries of the various paradigms students need to have memorized and be able to refer to quickly when translating. While most of these helps have come in the form of laminated charts (ranging from one to six connected sheets) Douglas Huffman has written a very helpful little book titled The Handy Guide to New Testament Greek: Grammar, Syntax, and Diagramming. And handy it is!

Purpose

Huffman justifies the form and purpose of this book for several reasons. First, while it would be of help to beginning first year Greek students, the book is primarily and most helpful for second year students. Second, while in book form, the contents are mainly comprised of every chart one would need with a few explanatory remarks on the nature of nouns, verbs and those slippery  (but important) prepositions. Third, given the contents of the book it is ideal for quick review in between semesters or before a final exam. This will also make it easier for pastors to keep up with their Greek right out school while adjusting to new ministry demands. No one intends to lose their Greek but it happens and this can certainly help prevent it. Fourth, the size of the book (5.1″ x 7.4″) makes it smaller than your Greek NT and thus not a hindrance to always keeping it with your Greek NT.

Contents

The book is divided into three sections: grammar reminders, syntax summaries and phrase diagramming helps. For the grammar reminders all of the first and second year memorization charts are contained. This includes the alphabet, liquid verb contracting rules, noun, adjective, pronoun and verb charts. For all of the grammar parts there is a brief definition of each. For instance, each of the parsing parts of a verb are defined as well as the six verb tenses. What is particularly helpful with the verb charts is that each principle part is color coded so students can separate and see them better on the chart. Further, peculiarities about different parts of speech are briefly noted such as the characteristics of second and third declension nouns.

For syntax summaries there are much fewer charts but more summary definitions. These include case endings (e.g., all 20 uses of the genitive), article and verb usages and the various conditional sentence structures. Along with most of the various syntactical uses of each grammatical part is part of all of a Greek verse in parenthesis to show as an example. The various uses of hoti and hina clauses are explained in chart form. Also, a very helpful yes and no answer chart is used to help with labeling the various participles.

Lastly, the phrase diagramming helps aid the student in diagramming a sentence or paragraph in order to see the flow of thought of the author. This aids not only in exegesis but also interpretation and finally preaching. Huffman focuses on phrase diagramming (as opposed to technical, semantic diagramming and arching) since it is more user friendly for pastors and produces the same results as other more technical forms. Huffman provides an eight step process with examples and charts to guide the student from choosing a passage to diagram to making an outline for a sermon or teaching lesson.

Conclusion

As one who really enjoys NT Greek (though I have not kept up with it as I should) I am very excited about this book! Reading through it reminded me of why I love NT Greek and so much that I learned came to the forefront of my memory. Though aimed more at second year students, I recommend this book for first year students as well. Get it early and use it often! You are sure to wear  this book in with frequent use very quickly. This is the kind of book I am sure many teachers wish they could have made for their students and every student will wish they had years ago when they first started learning NT Greek. Hats off to Huffman for making a resource that will no doubt have timeless use for all NT Greek students!

NOTE: I received this book for free from Kregel and was under no obligation to provide a favorable review.

If you found this review to be helpful can you take a minute to give it a positive vote on Amazon?

I have been wanting to read through The Complete Works of Francis Schaeffer, 5 Volumes and I have put it off long enough. As I am doing with my reading through the church fathers, I am going to have a weekly (hopefully) posting titled Saturdays with Schaeffer in which I will either post a long excerpt, several short ones, summarize a point he makes in the weeks reading or even do a book review once I finish one of the books in the volume I am in. I am doing this for two reasons. First, I have been challenged to read the complete works of at least one great Christian author and so I have choose Francis Schaeffer. Second, I chose Schaeffer because I enjoy apologetics and Schaeffer was one of the greatest apologists Christianity has ever produced.

The first volume is titled A Christian Worldview of Philosophy and Culture which contains the following books:

1. The God Who is There
2. Escape From Reason
3. He is There and He is not Silent
4. Back to Freedom and Dignity

In the first section of The God Who is There Schaeffer discusses what he calls “the line of despair” which is to say people have “given up all hope of achieving a rational unified answer to knowledge and life.” (p. 23) The shift in thinking started in philosophy and eventually reached its way into theology. Before the shift that brought about “the line of despair” man thought rational even though they had no foundation upon which to do so. Schaeffer explans:

Above the line, people were rationalistic optimists. They believed they could begin with themselves a draw a circle which would encompass all thoughts of life, and life itself, without having to depart from the logic of antithesis. They thought that on their own, rationalistically, finite people could find a unity within the total diversity – an adequate explanation for the whole of reality. (p. 10)

At some point in Europe around 1890 and in America around 1935, this all changed within the field of philosophy. Schaeffer explains again:

But at a certain point this attempt to spin out a unified optimistic humanism came to an end. The philosophers came to the conclusion that they were not going to find a unified rationalistic circle that would contain all thought, and in which they could live. It was as though the rationalist suddenly realized that he was trapped in a large room with no doors and no windows, nothing but complete darkness. (p. 10)

Since man could no longer start with oneself to find a unifying answer to all of life they looked without. The “line of despair” marks the point at which man sought an existential experience which seeks for an experience outside of oneself (existential). This experience was incommunicable and yet gives meaning to life. In response to this, Schaeffer shows us how the incarnation of Christ is an answer to those seeking an existential experience to bring meaning to all of life:

“Yes, I have had a final experience, but it can be verbalized, and it is of  a nature than can be rationally discussed.” Then I talk of my personal relationship  with the personal God who is there. I try to make them understand that this relationship is based on God’s written, propositional communication to men, and on the finished work of Jesus Christ in space-time history. They reply that this is impossible, that I am trying to do something that cannot be done. (p. 18)

It is amazing to see that though God has revealed himself to man in the person of Christ, man still rejects Him, instead seeking something else which will only lead him further from God. This reminds me of one of my favorite passages of Scripture, John 1:1-18:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The lightshines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light. The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. (ESV)

As I mentioned last week, I have joined a reading group that literally spans the globe that is reading through all 38 volumes of the early church fathers. There are an estimated 300-400 people in the group with people still joining! So far there have been a number of encouraging sections and things that have shed light on how the early church thought. So far the most notable thing that has caught my attention is how saturated with Scripture their writing is!

Since I realize there are probably many people who would like to read through the fathers but will not, I have decided (as best I can) to share with you a weekly post with excerpts of my weeks reading that have stood out. It will be called Fridays with the Fathers. The excerpts will come from what I have read from Saturday-Thursday. I may give a one sentence context to the quote but the content of the post will mostly be excerpts with the source. Who knows, maybe reading these will ignite a desire to begin reading the fathers along with us!

So, here are some excerpts for this weeks reading:

Epistle to the Ephesians IX:

Nevertheless, I have heard of some who have passed in among you, holding the wicked doctrine of the strange and evil spirit; to whom ye did not allow entrance to sow their tares, but stopped your ears that ye might not receive that error which was proclaimed by them, as being persuaded that that spirit which deceives the people does not speak the things of Christ, but his own, for he is a lying spirit. But the Holy Spirit does not speak His own things, but those of Christ, and that not from himself, but from the Lord; even as the Lord also announced to us the things that He received from the Father. For, says He, “the word which ye hear is not Mine, but the Father’s, who sent Me.” And says He of the Holy Spirit, “He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever things He shall hear from Me.” And He says of Himself to the Father, “I have,” says He, “glorified Thee upon the earth; I have finished the work which, Thou gavest Me; I have manifested Thy name to men.” And of the Holy Ghost, “He shall glorify Me, for He receives of Mine.” But the spirit of deceit preaches himself, and speaks his own things, for he seeks to please himself. He glorifies himself, for he is full of arrogance. He is lying, fraudulent, soothing, flattering, treacherous, rhapsodical, trifling, inharmonious, verbose, sordid, and timorous.

Epistle to the Magensians XIII:

Study, therefore, to be established in the doctrines of the Lord and the apostles, that so all things, whatsoever ye do, may prosper both in the flesh and spirit; in faith and love; in the Son, and in the Father, and in the Spirit; in the beginning and in the end; with your most admirable bishop, and the well-compacted spiritual crown of your presbytery, and the deacons who are according to God. Be ye subject to the bishop, and to one another, as Jesus Christ to the Father, according to the flesh, and the apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit; that so there may be a union both fleshly and spiritual.

Epistle to the Philadelphians II:

Wherefore, as children of light and truth, avoid the dividing of your unity, and the wicked doctrine of the heretics, from whom “a defiling influence has gone forth into all the earth.” But where the shepherd is, there do ye as sheep follow. For there are many wolves in sheep’s clothing, who, by means of a pernicious pleasure, carry captive those that are running towards God; but in your unity they shall have no place.

Epistle to the Smyrneans VIII:

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out [through their office] the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as where Christ is, there does all the heavenly host stand by, waiting upon Him as the Chief Captain of the Lord’s might, and the Governor of every intelligent nature. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize, or to offer, or to present sacrifice, or to celebrate a love-feast. But that which seems good to him, is also well-pleasing to God, that everything ye do may be secure and valid.

People like to tell stories and they like to listen to them. They like listening to the retelling of history in story form and the telling of made-up stories for the purpose of making a point. While interpreting the retelling of history is fairly straight forward the interpreting of made-up stories is not. Many people groups and religions use stories for various and similar purposes. Christianity is no different. Stories that are made-up with the intent of teaching a lesson are typically called parables. While there are few parables within the Old Testament the Gospels in the New Testament are saturated with them.

Following a long line of contributions to the field of hermeneutics and parables, and amidst a myriad of proposals, Craig Blomberg has updated his original work on the parables with the second edition of his Interpreting the Parables by IVP. In many ways this is two books in one as it deals with both the history of hermeneutical method and a discussion of proper hermeneutical method. Further, as one reads the book it becomes apparent that the book serves as more of a handbook (though a rather long one) than a straightforward theology of the parables since there is only one chapter dealing with the theology of the parables and the section dealing with Blomberg’s proposed hermeneutical method is not exhaustive (though extremely helpful).

History of Method

The first section addresses the history of methods that have been employed by various interpreters of the parables. Blomberg points out that the various methods that have been proposed have been so varied because interpreters have landed in different places when it comes to defining the nature of parable and allegory. Parables have basically been thought of as a story told with “one main point of comparison between the activity in the story and Jesus’ understanding of the kingdom of God, and thus they teach one primary lesson.” (p. 33) Allegories on the other hand are “more complex stories that require numerous details in them to be ‘decoded’.” (p. 34) The point at which such varied interpretations of the parables has arisen is in seeking to answer the question as to how much of the parables or an individual parable is to be interpreted allegorically, if at all. In an effort to better grasp the point to which the parables are allegorical in nature, Blomberg looks at the contemporary literature of the Gospels and rabbinical literature. In the final analysis of each, Blomberg concludes that the parables contained in the Gospels are “sufficiently similar to other demonstrably allegorical works that many of the too must probably be recognized as allegorical.” (p. 79)

Following this introduction to the hermeneutical debate upon which interpretation of the parables hinges, Blomberg spends three chapters discussing and critiquing the attempts of form and redaction criticism and the new literary hermeneutical methods. In conclusion to this section Blomberg summarizes the debates and methods with eighteen summary statements a few of which are worth noting:

1. In summarizing the contributions of all methods, “A better approach distinguishes among various degrees of allegorical interpretation, recognizing that every  parable of Jesus contains certain elements that point to a second level of meaning and others that do not.” (p. 192)
2. Following #1 – To avoid the errors of past allegorizers, modern interpreters must also assign meanings to the details of parables that Jesus’ original audiences could have been expected to discern.” (p. 192)
3. In regards to interpreting the meaning of a parable – “No interpreter captures it all, but some do better than others.” (193)
4. “The Synoptic parables may be accepted as authentic sayings of Jesus, assuming that authenticity is defined in terms of ipsissima vox Jesus and not just ipsissima verba Jesus.” (p. 193)
5. “Differences between parallel accounts of the same parable nevertheless prove that both oral tradition and the evangelists in their editorial activity have modified the exact wording of Jesus’ original speech.” (p. 193)
6. Following #5 – “But these differences serve only to improve the style and intelligibility and to highlight distinctive redactional themes; they do not in any way distort what Jesus originally said or meant.” (p. 193)

Interpreting the Parables

In his attempt to lay out for the interpreter a balanced hermeneutical approach to the parables, Blomberg categorizes the parables into four groups: simple three-point, complex three-point, two point and one point. In these categories the word “point” refers to the focus(es) of the parables. The following is a brief description of each group with examples.

1. Simple three-point – These include an authority figure with two contrasting subordinates. Examples include the prodigal son (Lk. 15:11-32) with the father as the authority figure and the sons as the contrasting subordinates and the two debtors (Lk. 7:41-43) with the creditor as the authority figure and the two men forgiven different amounts as the subordinates.
2. Complex three-point – These “have more than three main characters or groups of characters but ultimately display the same triangular structure” as simple three-point parables. (p. 269) Examples include the talents (Mt. 25:14-30; Lk. 19:12-27) with a master and a wicked servant and a good servant who himself also has good and bad servants.
3. Two-point – These parables have either two contrasting figures with no authority or an authority and one subordinate. Included is the wise man and the foolish man who build their houses on different foundations (Mt. 7:24-27; Lk. 6:47-49) and the unjust judge (Lk. 18:1-8).
4. One-point – While hard to distinguish from two-point parables, these parables “seem to be so brief and to concentrate so intensively on the protagonist of the plot that they may be grouped into a distinct category of parables.” (p. 381) These include the mustard seed and the leaven (Lk. 13:18-21) and the sheep and the goats (Mt. 25:31-46)

What is so helpful about Blomberg’s approach is the simplicity these four groups can bring to informing ones interpretation of the parables. They are not meant to flatten the parables but rather point out the inherent structure of the parables to make interpretation easier and more anchored in the text. This is in turn helps to control ones allegorizing of the parables in order to keep one from interpretations that the original readers would have never imagined nor could have since they were intended to be understood by them. Blomberg offers many insights into each parable he discusses (which is most of them) and shows why some interpretations cannot fit with the intent of the passage.

A Theology of the Parables

Arguably, the primary theological focus of the parables is the kingdom of God. Underneath the focus on the kingdom of God are three smaller supporting lenses through which the parables can be seen: God, His people and those who are not His people. Since there is a time element wrapped in the parables, Blomberg rightly points out both the already and not yet aspects of the kingdom. Further, one cannot help but discuss the nature of the kingdom as it relates to the reign of Christ in regards to one’s millennial views. Feeling that neither postmillennialism, amillennialism nor classic dispensational premillennialism get it right, Blomberg champions the historic premillennial understanding of the kingdom and millennial reign of Christ (p. 425). This kingdom of God focus of the parables is best described as “God’s dynamic, personal rule through the universe, a rule that fashions a community of faithful flowers to model his mandates for creation.” (p. 445) Regardless of one’s millennial view of the kingdom of God, any adherents to the various views could agree with most or all of Blomberg’s definition whether or not they see it being played out in the same manner.

Conclusion

Interpreting the Parables is a great place to start a study on the parables for a few reasons. First, the overview of the history of interpretation will help readers see and appreciate the varied interpretational methods others have employed. While it may be right to snicker at overly allegorical interpretations of the parables, one has to appreciate the desire others have had to truly grasp their meaning – it is not always an easy task. When he clearly disagrees with an interpreter he does so respectfully. Second, while this is not an exhaustive treatment of the parables, the discussion Blomberg does provide will help to anchor readers of the text to the text itself with an eye to the original audience. Blomberg does a good job of modeling responsible use of allegorical understandings of the parables. Most of the parables are discussed and many of them have several pages of helpful discussion and exegesis. Third, in the final chapter on the theology of the parables, Blomberg helpfully synthesizes the main theological ideas addressed within them. He shows how the varied parables contribute to the whole message of the kingdom of God.

This is a helpful and responsible book for pastors, students and laymen alike.

NOTE: I received this book for free from IVP and was under no obligation to provide a favorable review. The words and thoughts expressed are my own.

If you found this review to be helpful can you take a minute to give it a positive vote on Amazon?

For evangelicals, there are few hot button theological issues that will incite a myriad of responses like discussing the doctrine if inerrancy. There is much debate that is as broad as Evangelicalism (including Fundamentalists) itself. For many evangelicals it is a deal breaker for claiming to be an evangelical. For others who want to stretch the stakes and broaden the evangelical tent, inerrancy is an outdated doctrine that needs to be either abandoned or better informed based on modern scholarship in a myriad of fields.

What can often times be missed in the discussion is the role that one’s worldview plays in the discussion. It is to the issue of worldviews and inerrancy that Vern Poythress tackles in his recent book Inerrancy and Worldview: Answering Modern Challenges to the Bible published by Crossway. The essential argument of the book is that the fundamental divide between those who disagree over the possibility of an inerrant Bible lies at the level of one’s worldview. “Modern worldviews are at odds with the worldview put forward in the Bible. This difference in worldview creates obstacles when modern people read and study the Bible.” (p. 14) As such, this is not a book that seeks to articulate and defend the traditional doctrine of inerrancy from a more theological stance.

Through a series of thirty six chapters divided under ten sections, Poythress briefly addresses a number of modern challenges to the traditional view of inerrancy. The chapters are short and by that I mean the shortest at just under four full pages and the longest at barely eight pages. Undoubtedly, Poythress is writing for the laymen and acknowledges that he is merely scratching the surface with the issues addressed in each chapter. Nevertheless, the succinctness of each chapter enables one to see the broader worldview issue(s) in view without drowning the reader in a deep theological hole.

What one gleans from the book is that the modern challenge to the traditional view of inerrancy is not a simple objection but is rather broad in scope, thus showing the breath and interconnectedness of one’s worldview. This is the point of course. Even putting inerrancy aside, one can easily see the stark differences between the worldview of a modern and an Evangelical throughout the book. Worldviews influence every facet of a person’s thought world or belief system.

For Poythress, at the heart of the worldview focus as it relates to inerrancy is whether ones worldview is open or closed. That is, does one’s worldview allow for the intervention of an external agent to act within the natural world or not. Further this speaks to whether ne has a personalist or impersonalist worldview. For an impersonalist there is no room for an outside agent. For those who hold a personalist worldview there is room for an external agent to act within the universe and on earth among mankind.

An example of how this shakes out can be seen in the hotly debated use of the historical-critical method as it is applied to Scripture more specifically. Poythress defines it as a tradition that “attempts to treat the Bible as a collection of books from human authors, like any other books by human authors – it does not focus on or think about God as divine author.” (p. 46) Following the lead of Ernst Troeltsch, he sums up the three principles of the historical-critical method as follows: (1) Criticism of past documents as unreliable, (2) Analogy of past events to present ones in order to verify the claims of the past and (3) Correlation of events before and after the event in question. (p. 47) Ironically, Poythress believes that these principles have their foundation in God though on an impersonalist worldview they are greatly misused. (p. 48) So, the basis of the principle of criticism is the ability make judgments which has its root in God. Analogies exist due to the constancy and permanency of the created order which was created that way by God. Finally, the principle of correlation as cause and effect is founded in the way in which God made the natural world to operate and well as mankind. The misuse of these principles is summarized as follows:

The historical-critical method rests on unsound foundations. In fact, it denies at the beginning the existence of the God described in the Bible. Over time, generations of very gifted people working with this method can produce plausible explanations for the origins of the Bible by rearranging, hypothesizing, and building layer on layer of plausible sequences of naturalistic explanations. They end up with naturalistic explanations because naturalistic explanations are the only ones they are searching for and the only ones that count within the framework that they have already adopted. The result, though it contains some positive insights by common grace, is an illusion. (p. 55)

Including the historical-critical method, Poythress addresses many claims against the possibility of inerrancy in the fields of science, language, sociology, anthropology and psychology. Additionally, Poythress goes to the depths of the human condition as affected by sin. For Poythress, the heart of the issue for impersonalists is that sin has corrupted their minds (Eph. 4:17-18). It is this corruption of the mind by sin and its only remedy in the gospel of Jesus Christ that Poythress spends part eight addressing. Part of the transforming power of the gospel is its ability to remove the effects it has on the human mind and thus enable one to accept the truth of God’s Word as it speaks to, among other things, the truth about the nature of God and His written Word, Scripture. Since God speaks to man in Scripture revealing truths about Himself in it Scripture is a testimony to and bears the marks of the character of God Himself. Thus, as it applies to the point of the book, if God’s character is wrapped up in the revealed truth of Scripture then it cannot be with error for to be so would call into question the character of God. Poythress elaborates,

The Bible contains many forms of communication, including not only assertions but questions, commands, exclamations, and expressions of personal feeling, which belong to various genres. Some people think of “truth” as confined to assertions. So we need to think about how God’s trustworthiness applies to other forms of communication as well. God is trustworthy in all the forms of communication that he uses: he uses each form in accord with its own character that he has ordained. His trustworthiness includes the truthfulness of what he implies in these various forms of communication. (p. 205)

So with all of the helpful worldview critiquing of an impersonalist view of inerrancy, how could one find fault with the book? I do have one issue with the book. While Poythress does address the difference in worldviews through various sides of the issue, he could have done a better job of tying in at least each main section topic to the doctrine of inerrancy itself. I think there were less than ten uses of the word inerrancy in the whole book. The core thesis of the book could have had more impact and clarity had there been a summary at the end of each section that explicitly connected the discussion at hand to the doctrine of inerrancy. For instance, how, on a personalist worldview, can the fields of sociology and anthropology actually contribute to the defense of inerrancy on a worldview level?

That criticism aside, Inerrancy and Worldview is a view of the debate from 30,000 feet in the air as it address the worldview issues that underlie the possibility of an inerrant Bible as written by the hands of men and inspired by the Spirit of God. Given the potential for each section to have become a book in itself and the highly intellectual writer that Poythress is, overall, the brevity of each chapter introduces the reader just enough to the issue at hand without losing one’s interest in utter simplicity. He gets to the heart of the matter in a very short span of pages which speaks to his grasp of the issues he addresses and the doctrine of inerrancy. This is a good place to start to get one’s feet wet on the bigger issues at hand before one delves into the more theological discussion of the doctrine of inerrancy.

NOTE: I received this book for free from Crossway and was under no obligation to provide a favorable review.

If you found this review to be helpful can you take a minute to give it a positive vote on Amazon?

Read the Fathers by Luke Stamps at CredoMag. The web site explains the process as follows:

By reading seven pages a day for seven years, you can study a vast library of theology, history, liturgy, apologetics, biblical commentary, and devotion written in the first seven centuries of the Christian church. We provide a schedule of readings, the texts in English translation, and—most important—a community to discuss what you’re learning. Laypeople, clergy, seminarians, students, and Christians of all denominations will benefit from joining our community to read the church fathers.

Though a seven year commitment is a long time seven pages a day is not. If you do it in conjunction with your devotions then it should not be much more reading each day. You can purchase the hardback copies of the books or access the Christian Classics Etheral Library to read online for free. You can even sign up as a user to be able to highlight text and add notes to the highlights.

The plan began on Sunday Dec. 2nd but it is not too late to join in and even catch up on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon.

So, who else is in!?