The title of this book is alarming, certainly by design. But the subtitle is even more so. Does it mean that the whole American church (all traditions, denominations, locations) is committed to an “alternative Gospel?” Or is it that, though part of the American church upholds the true, biblical gospel, there is within that church a movement (evidently a significant movement) to the contrary?Read the rest of Frame’s review here.
We should keep in mind that such language makes the most serious indictments. To be Christless is to be doomed to Hell (John 3:36). And if someone preaches an “alternative gospel,” contrary to the gospel preached by the apostle Paul, he is to be accursed (Gal. 1:8-9). People who preach “another gospel” are not Christian friends who happen to disagree with us on this or that matter. Rather, they have betrayed Christ himself. The whole church ought to rise up against such persons and declare that they are not part of the body of Christ and that they have no part in the blessings of salvation. Indeed, if they do not repent, they have no future except eternal punishment.
In my view, many Christians (especially those in the conservative Reformed tradition that Horton and I both inhabit) use this sort of language far too loosely, even flippantly. It is time we learned that when we criticize someone for preaching “another gospel” we are doing nothing less than cursing him, damning him to Hell.
But Horton actually indicates to his readers that these charges are not to be taken seriously. So Horton backs away from the serious language of his title:
“Before I launch this protest, I should carefully state up front what I am not saying. First, I acknowledge that there are many churches, pastors, missionaries, evangelists, and distinguished Christian laypeople around the world, proclaiming Christ and fulfilling their vocations with integrity. (20)”
So evidently “Christless Christianity” is not the gospel of the American church. Many of its members are assuredly not Christless. Further,
“Second, I am not arguing in this book that we have arrived at Christless Christianity but that we are well on our way. (20)”
Whew! Evidently Christless Christianity is not yet the gospel of the American church, though we are on our way to adopting it.
This is something of a “bait and switch.” Horton scares us to death with his brash title, telling us that we are headed for Hell. But then he backtracks, says he didn’t really mean it.
Since Horton spends a great part of this book telling us that we have lost seriousness about the issues of God’s law and gospel, we should hold him also to a high standard of seriousness. To say that we are under God’s curse, and then to turn around and say, “well, not really,” is not to meet such a standard. We might conclude that Horton is not joking here about holy things, but he is “well on his way.”
Here it is late Pentecost and I’ve made little progress. Ah, well.
Recently finished…
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, J.K. Rowling. Fun. I’m told they get even better. Can’t wait.
Hell on Trial: The Case for Eternal Punishment, Robert Peterson. I read this for my cyber-column. An adequate treatment of an awful subject. I’ll be writing on that subject soon. Interestingly, thinking about this has helped me see the intimate connections between the doctrine of divine wrath and the Problem of Evil (a subject I just finished writing about over at Examiner).
Reading…
Letters of Francis Schaeffer, ed. Lane Dennis.
Primeval Saints, James Jordan.
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, J.K. Rowling.
Pastoral Theology in the Classical Tradition by Andrew Purves
Andrew Purves, Pastoral Theology in the Classical Tradition is a helpful volume that successfully demonstrates that across the vicissitudes of history and the developing landscape of Christian theology from the early church on there has been a consistent, if contextually varied tradition of concerns and loci in pastoral theology. What I found most helpful about the book was its practical emphasis. Purves is concerned first and foremost not with academic questions about manuscripts or the theological minutiae of historical debates, but with the broad contours of the thinking and teaching of such leading lights as Gregory of Nazianzus and Martin Bucer on the calling and vocation of the Christian minister. Further, Purves has a zeal to translate that which seems historically distant or idiosyncratic into modern categories for the sake of training better ministers to serve Christ’s Church. Continue Reading…
As usual, I am sidetracked. My 2009 reading list is looking ever more elusive. Right now I’m working on:
Primeval Saints, James Jordan
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, J.K. Rowling
Metamagical Themas, Doug Hofstadter
The Book of Job
The Gospel According to St. Luke
[Notice none of the above is on my 2009 list. Sigh]
The Hofstadter book is a fascinating compilation of his articles from Scientific American from 1980 - 1983. He touches on a wide range of topics, from linguistics to memetics. His own description of the meta-category for his articles is “mind and pattern.” I picked it up for its memetics discussion and have been delighted so far with every page.
Btw, does anyone know whether to put books of the Bible in quotes or italics or neither?
Local company performs Lewis’ classic
This weekend the Clayton Community Theater will be performing its rendition of C.S. Lewis’ The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The production is dramatized by Joseph Robinette…The recent surge of productions of Lewis’ stories raises questions, however, about the limitations and desirability of converting such books into visual media…[I]n a letter to Lance Seiveking, BBC producer, in 1959, Lewis wrote:
“I am absolutely opposed–adamant isn’t in it!–to a TV version. Anthropomorphic animals, when taken out of narrative into actual visibility, always turn into buffoonery or nightmare. At least, with photography.”
Wright’s response to Piper and elucidation of his understanding of Paul’s writings on Justification is available here on sale.
N.T. Wright’s book Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense should be on your shelf. It’s just one of those kind of books. If you’re a Christian, and it’s not on your shelf, it should be because you’ve loaned it out. If you’re not a Christian, and it’s not on your shelf it should be because your giving it a careful read. This book has been billed as the Mere Christianity (C.S. Lewis) for our generation, and in my opinion that’s not an unfair description. In the book Wright seeks to lay out the why’s and the what’s of Christianity. What is so beautiful about it is that he presents the Christian faith in an historically accurate and yet contemporarily relevant way (I know, I hate the word relevant too, but I couldn’t think of a better one).
On the one hand he summarily but authoritatively dismisses some of the silliness of contemporary evangelicalism and liberalism (i.e. escapism, gnosticism and pluralism) but at the same time he provides a Biblically sound understanding of what Christianity is and why it fits with what we humans know that we need. This is why it should be read by both Christians and non-Christians. For many evangelicals it will challenge prevalent views of Christianity as a means of escape from worldly existence through special knowledge, and for non-Christians it will provide an understanding of Christianity that engages with and critiques other possible understandings of the world they find themselves in. It is not overly shy or self-abasing, but it does recognize failures among Christians that may serve as impediments to a proper appreciation of what it means to be a follower of Christ.
Furthermore, the book is well rounded. It is divided into three parts. Part One addresses what we might call common universal awareness. It hits the fact that all of us are aware that this world isn’t satisfactory as it stands and that there are things about being human that tell you that there is a reason for that. So, early on you see that this isn’t so much an evidentiary book about the proofs for the existence of god. It is aiming to hit people at a much deeper level. The questions have more to do with what does it mean to be human than ‘is there a divinity.’ This may sound a bit wishy-washy but it isn’t. What Wright explores in this portion of the book are things like the desire for justice, the awareness of a spiritual dimension to life, and the fact of needed, desired and yet constantly broken relationships. He acknowledges and presses these points and then compares the various responses to them showing that Christianity is the only thing that really makes sense of all this.
Part 2 explores the incomprehensibility of God alongside the fact that He has made Himself known. One of the fundamental arguments of the book from Part 1 is that there are three basic options in thinking about humanity and divinity. One is Pantheism (or Panentheism) which argues that all is divine and the divine is (in) all. The problem with this is that it offers no answer to evil, or even to stagnation. The world simply is what it is and all of our longings for justice and truth are misplaced because all that is is divine. The second option leads to things like gnosticism or deism in which there may be a divinity but it is far off and unconcerned with this world. Again, our longings for justice and spirituality are misplaced on this conception. The degree to which this view influences evangelicalism is frightening. This is the view that sees the world operating according to Natural Law and only being interrupted occasionally by a ’supernatural’ divinity.
In contrast Wright argues for a third option in which heaven and earth significantly overlap and interlock, but in which human rebellion has led to an unnatural and impermanent estrangement. Within this framework Part 2 of Wright’s book explores, Israel (including not only her history but her theology and symbolic understandings of her relationship to God), Jesus and the Church as the community that lives by the indwelling of God’s Spirit. Needless to say this is a long section of the book. Wright makes historical arguments, but at the same time challenges worldviews that assume that science sets the limits to what can be believed as credible. His earlier spade work in Part 1 allows him to question empiricism without appearing naive or intellectually unaware.
I will post on Part 3 shortly. In the meantime, order the book.
A Conflict of Visions: The Ideological Origins of Political Struggles
Thomas Sowell
Paperback: 352 pages
Publisher: Basic Books; Revised edition (June 4, 2007)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0465002056
ISBN-13: 978-0465002054
Product Dimensions: 8.1 x 5.3 x 1.1 inches
Buy here: amazon.com
Just finished Thomas Sowell’s A Conflict of Visions: The Ideological Origins of Political Struggles. Super. A great analysis. I would want to add some qualifications from a Christian perspective, and I’m also uncertain about how or whether the “visions” apply to other historical eras than our own. But by and large, a powerful description for our time.
So back in Epiphany, I made myself a list of books I wanted to read this year. (Find the list posted Feb 1) So far, I have not made good progress, I’m afraid. I’ve barely started into my prescribed list, and I’ve gotten sidetracked with a couple of off-list books. Anywho, keeping a log helps me refocus. Here it is:
Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson. Great. Now if only our politicians would bother to read it or something like it before they go screwing around with the economy.
Mark Roberts’ Can We Trust the Gospels?. Superb.
Darrell Bock’s Studying the Historical Jesus: A Guide to Sources and Methods. Great, sane introduction to the subject.
Currently, I’m attempting to finish Thomas Sowell’s A Conflict of Visions, which is fascinating, but somehow I keep getting distracted.
To-day Isn’t any Other Day… or On Procrastination
(Alice to the White Queen) “But really you should have a lady’s-maid!”
“I’m sure I’ll take you with pleasure! the Queen said. “Twopence a week, and jam every other day.”
Alice couldn’t help laughing, as she said, “I don’t want you to hire me–and I don’t care for jam.”
“It’s very good jam,” said the Queen.
“Well, I don’t want any to-day, at any rate.”
“You couldn’t have it if you did want it,” the Queen said. “The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday–but never jam to-day.”
“It must come soemtimes to ‘jam to-day,’” Alice objected.
“No, it can’t,” said the Queen. “It’s jam every other day: to-day isn’t any other day, you know.”
Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass, Chapter V
