Christ the One and Only, A Review

In thinking about world religions, one is forced to recognize the tensions inherent in confessing a particularistic faith in the marketplace of ideas. This tension is especially true for many in western evangelicalism, and the current work—edited by Sung Wook Chung—is an attempt to grapple with the uniqueness of Christ in a pluralistic milieu. Since the thesis of this work is to illustrate Christ’s uniqueness in relation to world religions (x-xi), the essays that most illustrate this thesis will be reviewed.

Elias Dantas offers the initial essay entitled “The Incarnation of Christ and its Implications to the Ministry and Mission of the Church” where the topic under consideration concerns the incarnation and its implications for our modern world. Dantas rightly stresses the importance of this doctrine and is correct to place so much emphasis upon the virgin birth: it is, after all, a part of the historic Christian faith. He then goes on to offer seven assessments, each one indeed dire and problematic—though some more than others. For example, he asserts that the denial of the virgin birth leads to the denial of all miracles and into liberalism (4), and this does not follow. One could affirm the mythic nature of Christ’s birth and passionately affirm the historical resurrection of Jesus Christ (c.f. Pannenberg, Jesus—God and Man, 141-150). One would be hard pressed to place someone like Pannenberg in the liberal category on par with one who denies miracles! While Dantas’ passion is well placed and his emphasis is certainly noteworthy, he is quick to castigate those with whom he disagrees and he seems most interested in reflecting a highly dogmatic point of view instead of the intended ecumenical nature of the project as a whole—especially when he quotes almost exclusively male and Reformed voices.

Clark Pinnock takes us next through “The Uniqueness of the Life and Teachings of Jesus” and by means of introduction, he points to a gap in the Apostle’s Creed where there is nothing said about the life of the Messiah. Intending to fill this gap, Pinnock surveys the various controversies in the Gospels surrounding Christ’s birth, charges of illegitimacy, ministry, place in society and some of his theological contributions. Pinnock tells us that Jesus uniquely emphasized the Kingdom of God and coupled this with his emphasis on justice, on “a God who gives priority to the ethical above the cultic” (30). Pinnock offers us a compelling glimpse into the mystery of Christ as he related to a world that was both ‘other’ and ‘one another.’ This Jesus “embodied what he had announced” (33) and thus his life was unique compared to the religious leaders of his day.

Beginning with the historical context of Scripture, Graham Tomlin surveys Scripture’s early reflections on the meaning of Christ’s death on the cross and especially St. Paul and Corinthians. The uniqueness of the cross is not in the manner of death, but in how the early Christians applied meaning to the death of the Messiah, which makes the meaning of Jesus’ death significant and confounding. Much of Tomlin’s essay centers on Luther and Blaise Pascal (who is a surprising addition). He places Pascal alongside St. Paul and shows how both of these theologians had to react to the various worldviews of their day, and this is applicable to the modern Church, as she must grapple with the question of those not in Christ and those who seek a more pluralistic inclusion of other religions. The final simple comparison between Muhammad and Jesus is compelling: “both knew the struggle of being a persecuted and misunderstood prophet…” (61), and yet Jesus chose the path of nonresistance, making him distinct from Muhammad—thus the similarities seem to end where Golgotha begins. Tomlin’s historical assessments are certainly helpful and necessary, but one is left wondering where the ancient church fathers and mothers fit into his framework, as he jumps from Paul over them straight to Luther.

All of Christian orthodoxy depends upon the resurrection of Jesus. So contends Gabriel Fackre, and his essay is intended as a grand theological narrative sweep across the entirety of Scripture. Those who share a love of storytelling and cinema will be delighted by this unique structure. He starts with the stories of creation and fall, moves through the patriarchs of the Old Testament, and lands upon Jesus of Nazareth, who is the intersection of history. What makes Fackre’s contribution unique is the structure he utilizes, namely the great themes of systematic theology: creation, incarnation, and the last things to name a few. This is not unlike the structure of a film: acts one through three, culminating in the grand finale of the last things. Those familiar with these grand topics will not doubt enjoy the novel arrangement and Fackre’s presentation, though he breaks no new theological ground and does not quite address the central topic of Christ’s uniqueness in resurrection. For instance, resurrection was not an uncommon belief in the world of Jesus, and exploring ancient concepts such as reincarnation and karma could have helped explore this needed issue.

The sensitive topic of Jewish/Christian relations is the subject of Ellen Charry’s work and her words are hard-hitting and frustrating. For instance, “Paul had to pervert scriptural texts” (148) in his attempt to bring the Gentiles into Christ. This is frustrating because the scholarly debate between Paul and his Jewish background is extraordinarily complex from a historical point of view and Charry shows little awareness of the complexities of this. To describe Paul’s interpretiv

e methods in terms of ‘perversion’ is unfortunately distracting. Paul’s method of interpretation, though idiosyncratic, does not seem to be far from the Jewish mainstream (c.f. Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul). Paul is certainly not above criticism, however well deserved, but Charry’s essay often takes the form of harsh criticism of Christianity, and the tone and rhetoric are indeed a shock compared to the rest of the volume. While one cannot ignore the one problem of Jewish/Christian relations, Charry answers the ‘uniqueness of Christ’ question in purely negative terms (i.e. Christians aren’t Jews) and appears to interpret Paul in the least attractive light possible. She does not mention the recent proposals of the New Perspective and their works could help alleviate some apprehension regarding Christianity and Judaism, especially as regards the law. The work of James D.G. Dunn could have been of further assistance but no NPP proponent is considered. A further problem is that Charry cites few historical sources to bolster many of her historical claims, most of which are not substantiated or annotated. In short, this essay is more polemic than is necessary, making it stand out negatively in comparison to the other essays.

The spread of Islam in the modern world demands an essay like Ng Kam Weng’s. He highlights the similar views of Jesus found both in Islam and Christianity (i.e. both view Jesus as a prophet), and surveys the vast data found in the Quran regarding Jesus and his role in history: while Jesus is important, he is thoroughly subordinate in Muhammad (196), pushing Jesus away from such high Christology texts such as John 1:1 and 14. No prophet is ever said to be “in the form of God” (c.f. Phil. 2:6) and one wonders where the writings of Paul fit into Islam’s conception of Christ’s identity with the Father. The singular strength of this chapter is Weng’s charity towards the faith of Islam.

KK Yeo’s essay is remarkable in its tackling of the theme love as a means to connect Confucius (ren) and Paul (agape). Concise, intimate and genuine, Yeo’s work is a breathe of sincere ecumenical air. While an evangelical, he is dedicated to teaching the “law of Christ” as mutual bearing of one another’s burdens, seizing upon Galatians 6:2 (though more could be mentioned, c.f. Eph. 5:2, 21). Love is a term that has gone largely untouched in this volume and Yeo states unequivocally that “to be human is to be bound to God” (218), pushing both concepts together in a way that does not minimize the differences. What makes this applicable is that Yeo concludes on the practicality of his findings, finding that the love of neighbor is a key ethical grounding.

The editor Sung Wook Chung has the final word, and he further presses the “points of contact” (233) between Buddhism and Christianity. After discussing their differences—the doctrine of creation, where Christians affirm an actual creation, whereas Buddhism affirms an eternal universe—Chung points to four main similarities, with one of them being suffering. This is a key Christian concept as well, as the suffering of Christ on the cross will attest, and this has practical implications. Suffering is an unfortunate reality in our world and thus both faiths are in some sense yoked together in this reality. This finds its application in that we seek the similarities among one another, and do this in love and reverence for Christ.

In summation, Pinnock, Sung Wook Chung, and Yeo offer essays that sparkle with verve, creativity, and clarity. However, there is no engagement with patristic sources and liberation or feminist theologies, thus the uniqueness of Christ is not fully explored from an ecumenical perspective. It rightly affirms the uniqueness of Christ yet does not fully exhibit a consistent ecumenical spirit in part because of unnecessarily polemic arguments (Dantas/Charry). The volume also lacks a Scripture and subject index, making navigation difficult. Ultimately, although the volume has some marvelous essays, it contains too many caveats for a whole-hearted endorsement.

NQ

A Review of Hans Schwarz's "Eschatology"

This is my second assignment for ST503 and Dr. Crisp. Its an early draft so be nice. Its my second paper to ever make it to the graduate level.  Enjoy!

A highly recommended book.

In the multifaceted world we inhabit, eschatology can encompass a multitude of disciplines: philosophy, science and theology. Hans Schwarz has offered the world an exceptionally readable volume that attempts to synthesize the best of all the aforementioned disciplines into a broad survey of the last things. He treads where many systematic theologies do not, especially in exploring various secular and progressive worldviews, seeking the truth in all of them. He largely succeeds and offers the reader his findings in three major parts.

Part one engages with the diversity and unity of both Testaments as they relate to eschatology. The historical background of the Old Testament “…was basically a death-driven culture” (32). As is often the case, existentialism and the knowledge of death are never far from each other where “…the living know that they will die but the dead know nothing” (Eccl. 9:5). Schwarz notes the heightened “emphasis on the this-worldly aspect of life” (36) and because of this reality, to live seventy or even eighty years was desired above all else (Ps. 90:9-10), though these years were still a breath. Though his survey is expansive, Schwarz could have shown that the Old Testament attests to a longing for justice and that punishment of the wicked (Ps. 110:6; 139:18-20) does not happen in this life (Job 21:7; Jer. 12:1). Because of the lack of justice in this earthly existence, YHWH will act in the next life to bring judgment upon Israel’s oppressors, thus suggesting Israel and the world’s need for cosmic justice and the possibility of resurrection of the righteous and the wicked (Dan. 12:2; Isaiah 66:15-24).

Based off Schwarz’s findings in the Old Testament, he moves on to show that the New Testament has a more developed outlook on the question of eschatology with special attention placed on fulfillment in Christ. For example, Matthew “wants to show that the Old Testament promises have found their fulfillment in Jesus” (84). Schwarz then rightly insists upon continuity between the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament as both Testaments testify to Jesus and his mission and exaltation, though this was not as developed because the importance of Second Temple Judaism is left largely unmentioned. In regards to Jesus’ messianic understanding, Schwarz correctly claims that, “[Jesus] never delineated a chronology of life eternal nor a geography of the beyond” (80); this biblical obscurity has resulted in over two thousand years of speculation on the part of the Church, and it is indeed the most troubling aspect of Christian eschatology; especially since it lacks any sort of future details and relies on fragments to paint a broader picture. In sum, the biblical portraits are fractured and leave us to gather up the various portions. However, for Schwarz the biblical tensions are less worrisome because “Christ anticipates the resurrection of the dead through his own resurrection, thus providing us with a foundation for hope” (96). The resurrection of Jesus is paradigmatic of our future experience and this is congruent with Paul and John’s teachings regarding this matter (1 Cor. 15; John 5:29).

The End.

Part two reflects the larger debate between science, secularism and philosophy as they all relate to eschatology. Schwarz covers discussions over various theologies including process, feminist, liberationist and pluralism: the advocates comprise Wolfhart Pannenberg, John Cobb, Jürgen Moltmann and Leonardo Boff among others. Each theologian’s perspective is examined and given a place at the table for a fair exchange, though not without critique. Process theology is specifically singled out and one must ask to what extent Christian doctrine is maintained amongst a pluralistic worldview—a point of view decidedly not shared by the New Testament. Because of this, Schwarz notes “Cobb’s proposal seems more akin to the Hellenistic striving for oneness as demonstrated by Platonic and Aristotelian ontologically grounded philosophy. The Christian faith, however, is characterized by individuality in unity” (169-170). This is a successful critique and could be pressed further to include the imagery of incorporation of human beings into Christ’s body, his Church (1 Cor. 12:12-28), illustrating the necessity of all Christians, American and other, citizen and immigrant, and male and female, to be one in status in Christ (Gal. 3:28). Individuality is maintained and corporatized, allowing personality to thrive within community. It is also worthy to note the claim that Scripture appears soteriologically exclusive rather than pluralistic, as the famous Shema  (Deut. 6:4) proclaims a strict Jewish monotheism. Paul also affirms (and expands) this famous text in 1 Cor. 8:4-6 to include Jesus (see Gordon Fee, Pauline Christology, Hendrickson, 2007, 88-94), making pluralism (and subsequent process thought) difficult to accept on the basis of biblical texts as the exclusive divinity of Christ is attested above all other faiths (John 14:6).

With his mind tuned to environmental concerns, Schwarz adds to the discussion concerning the ecological crisis, where “life is sustained only be exploiting the inanimate world” (195). Life feeds on life, and this appears to be an apocalyptic outcome of consumerist exploitation (196), which compounds the problem of the greenhouse effect (196-199) and overpopulation (201-202). The issue is that “humanity elevated itself into God’s place…and ‘for the glory of God’ was replaced by the glorification and deification of humanity” (205). We live in a seemingly limited creation and this brings up an ominous question: was earth meant to sustain human life forever? Human progress has taken a left turn in the dark and Schwarz thankfully recognizes that without hope, humankind has nothing left for itself: “…what can we, as Christians, actually offer in terms of the content of hope?” (243). Schwarz does not despair, and pushes on with the task of offering hope to a dying world.

In the final part of his work, Schwarz covers four controversial areas of Christian eschatology: setting an actual date for the end of all things, the millennium and its various flavors, universal salvation and purgatory. Schwarz flatly rejects any attempt to place a time to the coming of Christ as “not about outguessing the Lord but being faithful to the call” (321), and like many church fathers (Luther, Augustine) he discards the timetable method and opts for hope. In doing so, his points stands well under scrutiny as the New Testament never set a date to the return of Christ. As regards the millennium, He takes the greatest exception with dispensationalism and concurs with Dale Moody; “we could simply discard these [end times] theories as ‘undue speculation over highly symbolic teachings’” (335). The damage done by this apocalyptic teaching is not glossed over by Schwarz and it has no doubt “been misused for political and religious purposes” (336), especially within the context of modern fundamentalism which misses the purpose of apocalyptic imagery: to bring hope to those who are oppressed, “not…in a triumphalistic manner, but as a pastoral comfort” (337). Schwarz is certainly on point with this admonition, and those of us who have come out of fundamentalism will resonate because of the entrenched emphasis on the rapture and fighting culture wars instead of the necessity of justice for widows and orphans (James 1:27).

Oh Camping.

Considering the doctrine of universal salvation, Schwarz pointedly concludes “we have little biblical ground to go on for a universal homecoming or a restoration of all things to God” (337). In light of the numerous judgment texts in Scripture (Isaiah 66:24; Matt. 10:28; 25:41-46; Jude 7), one would concur that universal salvation is indeed a difficult theological proposition to embrace. However, Schwarz does not engage the strongest Universalist arguments from the basic proof texts (Rom. 5:18, Col. 1:20; Eph. 1:10). This reveals a missed chance to answer lingering questions in the minds of many evangelicals who opt for universalism on the basis of such verses.

Because of his his rejection of universalism, Schwarz is committed to the two-fold outcome of human destiny. Unfortunately, Schwarz leaves himself open to criticism from another side in the Christian debate as Annihilationists (or Conditionalists) would affirm the twofold outcome of eternal judgment and share his views of an eternal punishment. However, Schwarz rejects annihilationism in favor of eternal conscious torment (395-97; 402) by means of a question: “how can there be an annihilation of anybody if there is no escape from God, since God is everywhere, even in death and beyond death?” (396). The question is a non sequitur and one could answer it this way: as it took a divine act of creation to impute life into that which was lifeless (Gen. 2:7), so it is also a divine act of destruction when God destroys both body and soul (Matt. 10:28). Human finitude is evident in that only God is immortal (1 Tim. 6:16) and any life given to us is derived from the Creator, a sentiment that Schwarz explicitly affirms (257). Thus any eternal life, a phrase that seems restricted solely to the elect (e.g. Matt 19:16; 25:46; John 3:15-16, 36; 10:28; Rom. 2:7; 5:21; 6:23; Gal. 6:8), is denied to those not in Christ.

Curiously, while Schwarz mentions Oscar Cullmann several times throughout his book (73n, 119, 140), he betrays no awareness of the annihilationist arguments in Cullmann’s Immortality of the Soul or Resurrection of the Dead? (Wipf & Stock, reprinted 2000). Cullmann’s words are powerful: “For Christian (and Jewish) thinking the death of the body is also destruction of God-created life. No distinction is made: even the life of our body is true life; death is the destruction of all life created by God” (Immortality, 11). Scripture seems to suggest death (Ps. 68:2; Is. 66:24; Luke 13:3,5; John 3:16; Rom. 6:23) and eternal destruction (2 Thess. 1:9) as the end result of the wicked—not their eternal torment.  To suggest the traditional doctrine of eternal torment seems to promote a vision of final eschatological dualism, one that does not seem to fit comfortably into Schwarz’s theological vision of “the completion of the universe” (404).

@thenakedpastor. Wonderful art.

Eschatology must be seen not as despair, but as hope. Proleptic anticipation, which views the resurrection of Jesus Christ as the commencement of the event of new creation, is the operative lens by which Schwarz concludes his volume. We see everything in light of Christ, and we “anticipate proleptically this future along the avenue which the Christ event provides” (407). Schwarz has written a truly magisterial book and there is much to commend. His depth is illustrated by his familiarity of diverse theologians and his ability to faithfully represent their perspectives even though he may passionately disagree is a model of charity. The chapters relating to science, ecology and scientific reason were especially insightful, bringing material to light to readers who otherwise would not have known about external worldly developments. Because of this inclusion, theologians will now be able to further benefit the church, allowing us to both engage and learn more as we progress in mutual respect towards the future. While a reader may dispute his interpretation on certain doctrines (such as his lack of engagement with annihilationism and universalism), his irenic tone epitomizes Saint Paul’s admonition in Rom. 12:9-21, especially since we are called to “love one another with mutual affection” and we “extend hospitality to strangers.” 

It took everything in me to not jump back to old habits by giving this 4.5 stars. 

Rethinking Hell: A Review

Edward Fudge’s book “The Fire That Consumes” is a very strong case for conditional immortality (or annihilationism). Fudge's work has the bonus of also being the most comprehensive text on the subject, one that actually includes the relevant Old Testament backgrounds. This is missing from much of the debate on eternal punishment and it is to be commended.

This book has moved into the top tier in regards to the literature on the nature and duration of final punishment. The list of contributors Chris Date, Greg Stump and Josh Anderson have assembled is impressive, ranging from the ancient of days (early 20th century) to present day. They include:

E. Earle Ellis. Clark Pinnock. John Stott. John Wenham. Anthony Thiselton. There are plenty more, but this should wet your appetite. 

I will get the negatives out of the way first.

NEGATIVES:

There is some overlap, as is to be expected when you are dealing with biblical texts. Some may find this difficult to wade through, but perhaps a better way to see it as through and exhaustive. Almost every text is examined and every argument at least considered. This repetition illustrates the consistency of annihilationist exegesis.

This doesn’t reflect the book, but I would’ve enjoyed more interaction with universalism, especially within its current more evangelical form. But, safe to say, the book does just fine on it's own.

POSITIVES:

• The positives, I more or less mentioned in the beginning.
• It is exhaustive (E. Earle Ellis include early church fathers and the OT).
• It takes into account the Old Testament imagery and literature in a way that unites the testaments instead of dividing them (Ellis for example, including Fudge's JETS article).
• It presents a robust evangelical engagement with Scripture and esteems the authority of God’s word (most of the authors and contributors would be described under the umbrella of a generous orthodoxy).
• It is charitable (but certainly passionate c.f. Pinnock) in its disagreements with traditionalism. Too often we are prone to shrieks and scratching. Not so with this work.
• It includes scholars from around the spectrum: Pinnock (open theist), Swinburne (Orthodox), Philip E. Hughes (Reformed), Christopher Marshall (Pacifist), and British (ACUTE).
• And I’m mentioned in the acknowledgements. So that’s pretty cool too.

Stand out essays for me are E. Earle Ellis, "New Testament Teaching on Hell"; Ralph G. Bowles, "Does Revelation 14:11 Teach Eternal Torment?" (hint, no it doesn't); Kim G. Papaioannou, "The Development of Gehenna between the Old and New Testaments." All of the essays are helpful, but the level of exegetical and historical detail in these essays is above and beyond. 

For an ongoing review, see Scot McKnight's review of our book.

Rethink Hell. Start with Fudge and this. If you prefer the kindle version, we have that too.

4.5 out of 5.

--Nick

The Explicit Gospel, a review

THE EXPLICIT GOSPEL

By Matt Chandler and Jared Wilson

PRELUDE

Simply put, Matt Chandler and Jared Wilson see that Christendom has lost it's way in regards to the Gospel, and have assumed it. Their attack is on "moralistic therapeutic Deism" that is rampant in both mainline protestantism as well as within evangelicalism's back yard. The Explicit Gospel sets out to aim our sights back to the original gospel and to a right relationship with it.

STRENGTHS

This is more of a concession on my part, but I don't care for the writing style of Chandler and Wilson. This is, however, a strength because it will work for most who pick up this book. It is robust, blunt and often intentionally provocative. While I prefer works that are more subtle and indirect, The Explicit Gospel to it's credit deserve praise in this area.

Chandler and Wilson marshal some ample biblical evidence in support of their conclusions about the gospel of the ground and of the air. Though they don't quite delve into the meaty areas they bring up (this is a more popular work), their use of Scripture is generally solid and makes some great distinction between both ground and air.

This book strives for practicality and however it works or doesn't work, praise should be offered for attempting to take lofty themes and make them physically feasible.

They also quote N.T. Wright, which is a nice gesture across the aisle. I wish thy had done this more consistently, but like I said, praise is necessary when gestures are made.

WEAKNESSES

I took the chance to listen to Matt's sermons before reading this, and found them to be largely tangental. This is not necessarily a weakness in a sermon, but The Explicit Gospel seems to meander quite a bit as stories are brought up that only vaguely resemble the original thesis.

Chandler and Wilson also take a lot of potshots at those they disagree with, and often they overstep their bounds. In one section, they insinuate that Christians who believe in evolution are doing so to keep their jobs. One could reverse the claim that Chandler and Wilson are doing that same in defending "historic creationism" as I doubt most pastors would be allowed by their denominations and congregations to openly support evolution. This seems to be a short sight on the parts of Matt and Jared.

I do not think these potshots are merited in the manner of which they are asserted. This also happens with their treatment of egalitarians in an appendix, as cultural conditioning is assumed on their part, and no Scripture is cited to support their thoughts. Essentially, these tangents are polemic and seem far more reactionary than needed.

A final weakness, for me, is indeed something I mentioned in the strengths and that is the style of writing. If it works for others, great. However, much of the book read as an extended series of blog posts, and I do wonder if that would've been a better way to approach the issue, as it allows for the authors and readers to dialogue more on these weighty subjects.

CONCLUSION

Chandler and Wilson, despite their slip-ups in regards to their handling of the secondary issues held to be other Christians, deserve praise for writing a popular and passionate defense of their interpretation of the Gospel. In the grand scheme of things, it works quite well. It is concise and not without many wonderful positives. However, the noted flaws and tangents do detract quite a bit, and the rhetoric often devolves into unnecessary polemics. Worth your time (especially if you want a more Reformed view of the Gospel), but most certainly not perfect.

3 out of 5.

--Nick

The Legacy of F.F. Bruce

Furthermore, in his methodology, he practiced a high degree of objectivity at a period when this was still sought and prized as the scholarly ideal. That objectivity was rooted in his conviction that all truth was God's truth, which made him open to receive truth from wherever it came. He did not fit the caricature of the ignorant and narrow-minded fundamentalist which most people expected a member of the Brethren to be, but learned from and related to scholars of all persuasions. As he put it, 'I have sometimes learned most from scholars with whom I have agreed least: they compel one to think, and rethink'(1). He was the least defensive person imaginable, secure in his own faith, never attributing unworthy motives to those with whom he disagreed, and won respect from many for his willingness to argue on the basis of the evidence rather than adopting a party line(2).

In conclusion, we could view Bruce as a 'believing critic', and his sympathy for William Robertson Smith tends to confirm this(3). Perhaps too he was a popularizer of scholarly work, in the best sense of the word. but I would suggest that the most important way to regard him is as a teacher who sought to use his gifts to build up the church and to offer a credible account of the sources on which the Christian faith is founded; David Hubbard, who was president of Fuller Seminary, testified to how Bruce's 'blend of learnedness, clarity, diligence, even-handedness, and devotion to the gospel' had influenced him during the 1960s(4). And Bruce taught not only by his words and writings, but by his life. For that life, many continue to give thanks.

F.F. Bruce, a Life by Tim Grass, pgs226-7.

A life I wish I had known, but I believe that his example offers much to me personally. Hopefully I can be as such as he was.

--Nick

Footnotes:

1. The Epistle to the Colossians, To Philemon and to the Ephesians, pg. xii.

2. IR, pg172-3. Various personal confirmations as well.

3. e.g. F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture.

4. David A. Hubbard, 'Evangelicals and Biblical Scholarship, 1945-1992: An Anecdotal Commentary', Bulletin for Biblical Research 3 (1993): PP. 1-16

Apostolic Nonsense and Rob Bell: Chapter One

I've started a podcast with good friend David Sidebotham entitled "Apostolic Nonsense." We're still working through a suitable subtitle, but that isn't the entire point of this post.

What I want to talk about is what we talk about when we talk about Rob Bell and what Rob Bell talks about when Rob Bell talks about people talk about talk talk talk talk.

You see how confusing this gets, Rob?

Anyway. Moving on.

David and I will be reading through the book chapter by chapter and discussing our thoughts on each chapter via podcast. However, since we've already covered the first chapter in the podcast, I think I'll post some notes on this little book.

Shortly, I don't think there ought be much fuss about WWTAWWTAG. Rob Bell has some great insights into human nature and the societal instinct by which we view God and subsequently each other.

Bell:

Like a mirror, God appears to be more and more a reflection of whoever it is that happens to be talking about God at the moment (pg2).

Bell (and others) isn't satisfied with pat answers, and it shows in some of his probing questions: can God keep up with the modern world? What is God's problem?

Right away, Bell is surprisingly more pastoral in WWTAWWTAG than he was in Love Wins. Here, he seems to have learned from the reactions against his work, and has toned down a bit of the rhetoric. He is curious and surprised by how people respond to the gospel and how they respond and how atheists will spend hours talking about something they don't believe exists.

For Bell, God and Jesus are quite fascinating.

He touches upon the subjects of women in ministry, creation and evolution, and the issue of conflated hyperbole regarding homosexuality. For anyone who has seen the trailer, this won't be anything new. Bell does lose me about halfway through when he seeks to define what he means by God and everything else.

And then it hit both myself and David. We lost interest when he defined him, thus we realized that Bell wasn't saying anything provocative or even remotely unorthodox. Nothing Bell wrote struck us as over the top or sinister or even poorly reasoned. It was general evangelical orthodoxy, though more generous than some.

So, what I and David hope to see is Bell dive into the topics he mentioned and see how they apply to God now and in the future.

Stay tuned!

--Nick

Most Anticipated Books of the Year

MOST ANTICIPATED OF 2013

To state the obvious, I am just now beginning to check these out.

Veli-Matti Karkkainen -- One With God

Karl Barth's -- Church Dogmatics (yes, all ten thousand pages)

Thomas Tobin -- Paul's Rhetoric in Romans

John Goldingay -- Old Testament Theology Vol 1-3

Rob Bell -- What We Talk About When We Talk About God

Shane Hipps -- Selling Water by the River

Veli-Matti Karkkainen -- Christology: A Global Introduction

John Sanders -- The God Who Risks

Veli-Matti Karkkainen -- An Introduction to the Theology of Religions

Jurgen Moltmann -- God in Creation

Allah, a review

OPENING:

According to the back cover of the book, "do Muslims and Christians worship the same God?" Volf's personal answer (as he had nothing to do with the book flap and quote) is far more nuanced. But the question remains:

Do these two vast and prolific religions share and claim the same God?

PROS:

The potentially volatile nature of this project is immediately upended by Volf's keen sensitivity and distinct attention to historical detail. Beginning in the present with 9/11 looming over the nature of religious extremism, Volf begins to trace back the historicity of this conflict, moving through centuries of bloody political conflict. He compellingly paints a picture of how we worship and view God, and how this in turn cashes in on the way we act about our God.

If our God is violent, are we not to be violent?

Volf's conclusions are highly nuanced, but revolve around the ideas expressed in the Qur'an and Scripture about the similar nature of God's sovereignty, His desire for worship, the love of neighbor and others; he builds his case around this, contending that both religions have 'sufficiently similar' views about God to warrant belief in a sufficiently similar deity. With both Islam and Christianity being the world's two largest faiths, bridging the gaps could indeed prove fruitful. Volf's end goal is political (not religious) pluralism.

Volf interacts with both the Bible and the Qur'an in respectful ways, though the strength of his case is philosophical.

CONS:

There are instances where it appears Volf is indeed stretching it. His discussions on the Trinity, though firmly and robustly orthodox, do not fully combine the Muslim understanding with that of the Christian church's idea of Trinity. This is perhaps the biggest difference between both faiths. Our perception of God is trinity, and Muslims seem to believe this instead to be polytheistic. This is a core difference, and it effects our views about God and Jesus.

Though Volf doesn't gloss over differences (and I do not have enough space to give this more attention), he does stress to a fault that Muslims are close enough. However, it should be noted that Volf doesn't ever compromise Christian Doctrine, nor is he interested in reducing both faith's to a watered-down version of their former glory.

CONCLUSION:

This book was a challenge. I went in expecting unbound pluralism and weak exegesis, and was pleasantly surprised. Volf is as orthodox a Christian as one can be, and his measured tone and desire for political unity is to be commended. This is thoughtful and strong material that must be wrestled with.

Though I am not to be numbered amongst his converted, Volf has written a powerful and incisive book that deserves your attention.

4 out of 5 stars.

--Nick

Allah: A Christian Response; Introduction

SETTING THE STAGE

For my birthday, (thanks Noel) I was given a book by Miroslav Volf, a theologian from Yale who studied under Jurgen Moltmann (a personal hero of mine). The book is entitled "Allah: A Christian Response." Thanks mostly in part to Scot McKnight, I became intrigued by the notion put forth by Volf, in that Muslims and Christians worship the same God. Volf does not claim to be a pluralist, and he appears to embrace the trinity in it's orthodox formation. In fact, based on his past, I see very little that doesn't fall under the label "evangelical," which I admit to me is a broad term.

So I cannot instantly dismiss the book, as it appears to be coming from a sharp and articulate evangelical scholar. One who has his pulse on world religions,conflict and reconciliation. Whether or not he is correct, I find that the books that challenge me the most are the one's I always love.

These books are "The Evangelical Universalist" by Robin Parry, "The Coming of God" by Jurgen Moltmann, and "The God of the Possible" by Gregory Boyd. The list is sure to expand. 

GENERAL STREAM OF THOUGHT

Allah came out around the same time as Rob Bell's Love Wins. Rob Bell flirted with Universalism and I do not think he embraced the doctrine. You can read my thoughts here. What I find interesting is that Rob Bell's book, which challenges an evangelical tennant, namely the "born again" experience, drew a firestorm. Volf's Allah didn't. And Volf's book challenges the very exclusive nature of the Christian faith, including the "born again" experience, but also the very concept of who God is and the truth about his revelation to us. This is powerful material and a true paradigm shift of the Christian faith is Volf is correct.

it could be the it is dangerous to talk/write about Islam, but as Bell showed us, tampering with much of anything beyond classic Christian restrictivism pretty much leads to a theological witch hunt.

"Will God save everybody?" is not the same as the question below.

"Do Muslims and Christians worship the same God?"

That is the question posed on the back cover of Allah. Quite provocative. With endorsements from Brian McLaren and Mona Siddiqui, including some kind words from Scot McKnight (whose endorsement is not on the book, but he spoke highly of it in a lecture about Rob Bell's Love Wins).

THE ONE GOD AND THE GREAT CHASM; AN INTRODUCTION

"My interest here is the proper Christian stance toward the God of the Qu'ran and what that stance means for Christians' and Muslims' ability to live together well in a single and endangered world." (pg1).

To again quote Volf, "the stakes are high." For him, this is a universal problem. A cursory glance over the chapter titles includes references to extremism and reconciliation. Muslims and Christians combined constitute over one half of the earth's population, and if these two religions are involved in a war of escalations (so to speak) then we have a problem that involves everybody. Volf doesn't see much of the conflict, in it's current state, going away. Especially in regards to natural resources and population.

At this point, I don't necessarily disagree with anything Volf has written. One slight glance at a news channel or a headline will attest to the current instability of a majority of the world's regions. 

Volf's past is briefly visited. He was born in a country that "no longer exists." Yugoslavia. Though brief, this does set the stage for Volf's thinking, and he is writing primarily to a Christian audience.

CONCLUSION

I'm frankly not convinced by his thesis, but I am eager to see what Volf has in store for us. Quite well-written, and quite interested in reconciliation. If Volf is indeed right, that changes some very foundational aspects of orthodoxy.

We should probably listen and see what Volf says.

Jeff Cook, "Everything New"

This looks quite interesting. I love the pitch video.

--Nick

Conditional Futurism: New Perspective of End-Times Prophecy, a (not so) brief review

Tackling anything remotely theological these days is no small task. From Mark Driscoll’s “Real Marriage” to Rob Bell’s “Love Wins,” there is always something currently charged in the air within Christendom. And the nature of prophecy as it applies to the future is no less controversial. It deals with the creation of a new interpretive lens and collapses in a culmination at the very gates of Revelation.

Simply put, “Conditional Futurism” is the lens of which prophecy is conditional. Or, rather, that while the word and purpose of the Lord never alters, the outcome of the word of the Lord can vary. Prophecy, according to author James Goetz, is often if not always conditional, and based upon cause and effect.

“If this, then this.”

He cites abundant Scriptures, and often it seems his case is simply to let Scripture stand on it’s own. At the very beginning of the book, Goetz simply quotes God’s words in Jeremiah 18:7-8 which state, “If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned.” See also the story of Jonah and Ninevah for another example.

James realizes that this theme of conditional prophecy is not limited to a few isolated texts. Rather, James begins with Genesis and the Mosaic Covenant and works through the Davidic Dynasty to the Gospels and finally ends up at the always open gates of Revelation. The work is consistently engaging and offers quite a bit of support, always deferring to Scripture and often allowing Scripture to speak on it’s own.

There are some elements that I do think James could’ve engaged with in a stronger fashion. There are several different types of prophecy used throughout Scripture, and for the layman who knows little of the finer points, it would’ve been helpful to include a chapter or section exploring the various methods. Very easily, this could lead to a flattening of typology in various prophetic methods. I am not certain James does indeed flatten said typology, but I do think this is an area that could’ve used greater explanation.

“If I say to a wicked person, ‘You will surely die,’ but they then turn away from their sin and do what is just and right — if they give back what they took in pledge for a loan, returns what they have stolen, follows the decrees that give life, and do no evil — that person will surely life; they shall not die.” Ezekiel 33:14-15

The single strongest part of the entire book comes in two chapters near the end. The first chapter is an exegetical study on the letters of 1 and 2 Peter, with specific preference placed on the harrowing of hell, or Christ’s descent into hell. Here. James offers multiple interpretive methods, pulling from Aquinas, Gregory of Nyssa, Origen and Augustine. After showing several interpretations, James delves into his perspective on why these passages support postmortem salvation. Not only was postmortem salvation considered a valid option, it was indeed a dominant option within the early church fathers as the Apostles. Sees the Apostles Creed. James concludes this strong section with his belief that Jesus’s descent included the gospel being proclaimed and salvation being offered to all who dwelt in hell. This is the most controversial part of the entire book, and also the most interesting. Though I already had a fairly strong belief in the possibility of postmortem salvation based on my own research, James’ exegesis has swayed me even closer to embracing the view. For modern theologians who propose the harrowing of hell belief, see Jurgen Moltmann’s “Descent into Hell” and Hans Urs von Balthasar’s “Mysterium Paschale.”

Within this chapter includes several far more speculative elements. James touches on the nephilim in Genesis 6:1-8, and his findings are fascinating. James draws from the Book of Enoch and and Scripture, concluding that indeed some fallen angels who disregarded their charge to guard humans and instead married women. He makes this claim that these spirits within Peter were human angelophanies based on the following evidence:

It is consistent with modern and ancient understandings of mammalians reproduction. It is consistent with Numbers 13:31-33, which says that the sons of Anak descended from the nephilim. Their appearance, according to Numbers, was like grasshoppers. This also includes Genesis 6 and the judgments that befell the human race, which makes sense if these beings are indeed human of some sort. This includes the wickedness of both pure human and the offspring. All of the wickedness could include these “spirits.” You also have Hebrews 13:2 which says that some people showed kindness to angels while thinking those angels were human. This seems to be a possibility for the spirits imprisoned and that Christ’s appearance offers conditional salvation. Simply put, I’m not convinced by this, but I do find it compelling enough to do my own research. In fact, I would argue that I am indeed excited to further explore the idea.

“Therefore, your majesty, be pleased to accept my advice: renounce your sins by doing what is right, and your wickedness by being kind to the oppressed. It may be that then your prosperity will continue.” Daniel 4:27.

The final chapter deals with judgment and the book of Revelation. This is by far the most complex chapter in the entire book. James begins with his research into the “kings of the earth,” showing the complexity of the phrase throughout. It is used 14 times in the book of Revelation, and it offers multiple perspectives on their meaning. Revelation 1:5 tells use that Christ rules the kings, while Revelation 17:8 tells use that the prostitute instead is their ruler. I’m not of the opinion that Scripture contradicts itself, so we have to be very careful how to interpret everything within this incredibly symbolic book. It is this research that leads James to conclude that the gates of Revelation never close and the kings of the earth are shown entering, and this is consistent with postmortem salvation for those who choose it. I’m not convinced that Revelation teaches the potential postmortem salvation of those outside the gates because of various factors (the second death being one), but it does not strike me as outlandish to believe what James proposes. And his conclusions is gracious enough to allow for future distinction.

Conditional Futurism doesn’t demand postmortem conversion, but it is consistent with it and I believe that James, whether or not he is ultimately successful in his writings, has indeed made it a priority to respect Scripture and maintain a biblically systematic consistency. For a wider case, I recommend Gregory MacDonald’s “The Evangelical Universalist.”

James has kept his personal life uninvolved from the scholarship shown, and for mostly good reason. It is very easy to write off an individual if they proclaim passionately a biblical view one disagrees with. Though this can make for a dry read given how much data is being presented, it does allow the reader to simply wrestle with the data itself and not the passion of the writer. This is entirely subjective, and I believe it worked in a positive manner.

However, in the final chapter after James has worked through objections to postmortem salvation and the kings of the earth, he delves into some brief personal revelations about his past resignation from his ministry due to his belief in postmortem conversions. He gives examples of Carlton Pearson who became an inclusive universalist, which James believes is incapable with conditional futurism as conditional futurism depends solely on Christ for salvation. James also touches on Rob Bell’s “Love Wins,” which he believes is feasible with conditional futurism. James is an exclusivist it seems, and everything from postmortem salvation to universalism must be filtered solely and exclusively through Jesus Christ. Opponents will and should appreciate this exclusive emphasis.

“Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?” Ezekiel 18:23.

Overall, this book was refreshing. It lacks emotional manipulation and offers countless Scriptures to wrestle with. It offers a unique perspective on the “spirits” in prison, and makes a compelling case for the nature of angelic beings. James’ case for postmortem salvation is strong and I am now confident in openly expressing my support of his conclusions on that topic. I’m not entirely convinced of “conditional futurism” as the lacking elements above show, but I do believe this is a reasonable approach to Scripture and I believe there is room for further dialogue on this topic.

To the conversation here, and to the conversation in the beyond.

4 stars out of 5.

--Nick

Site of review, The Christian Manifesto

--resource publications an imprint of Wipf and Stock publishing--

Conditional Futurism

James is co-founder of the Evangelical Universalist forum, and this book looks to present assorted arguments in new and interesting ways. Looks absolutely fascinating! If one has any interest in OT and NT prophecy as well as the end of All Things, this looks to be a good start.

*update*

I've completed my review of it and sent it to my boss. Should be out relatively soon. I won't spoil anything but I will say that it is indeed not something an opponent can easily dismiss. 

Plus, Thomas Talbott endorsed it. ;)

Conditional Futurism -- New Perspective of End-Times Prophecy

--Nick