How to Think Theologically by Howard Stone and James Duke

29 Sep 2024 · Reading and Readers

00:29:41

Everyone wants to know how to make money, how to lose weight, how to make friends and influence people. But before all that, more importantly, the first thing we got to know is how to think -- and as people who live our lives before God -- specifically, it is knowing how to think theologically.

Hi, my name is Terence and I’m your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. Today I review “How to Think Theologically” by Howard W. Stone and James O. Duke. 142 pages, published by Fortress Press in 2006. 2006 is the second edition. The fourth edition, published in 2023 is available in Amazon Kindle for USD14.99.

Reviewing the 2nd not the 4th Edition

Why am I reviewing the 2nd edition and not the 4th edition? Because I got the 2nd edition for free. Even though I was not reviewing books for the past 6 months, I still made sure to get the Logos free book of the month. For June, the free book was “How to Think Theologically”.

You might be wondering whether it’s worth listening to a review of the second edition when, if you do read the book you would get the latest edition. In any case, my review is still helpful in your buying, reading, decision.

First, whatever is good in the 2nd edition will be in the 4th edition. That is why there is a 4th edition.

Second, when you hear all the good things I have to say about today’s book, you might resolve, like I have, to never miss a free book deal. And if you did get the Logos free book for June, this review might just persuade you to read it.

I Could Not Help You... Until Today

The book resonates with me because it describes the one thing I have been trying to excel in all these years.

When I was a young Christian I did not know what thinking theologically meant. I knew it was imperative for us to think biblically but what does that mean?

I only understood after I read books like Don Carson’s “Showing the Spirit”, a commentary on 1 Corinthian 12-14. That book fundamentally transformed my thinking process.

Now, many good books later, I try to bring the Bible to bear in everything, to understand God and his work in myself, the people around me and the world across space and time.

If you ask me, “Terence, I want to learn how to think theologically too, can you help? Can you do what you do best and recommend a book?”

A few weeks ago, my answer would be, “I wish I had a simple guide for you. Everything I practise, I learnt it the hard way through many books, by many writers, on many diverse issues, over many years. You could read Don Carson’s book but you would learn by observing the master. The master is not explaining what or why or how. He is busy doing the thinking through the Bible on the topic. In Don Carson’s case, thinking through 1 Cor 12-14 on the topic of the Holy Spirit. I wish I have that one book to recommend to you.”

And today, I have!

Buy this book. Read this book: “How to Think Theologically” by Howard W. Stone and James O. Duke.

Dynamic Duo

Howard Stone is a psychologist, marriage and family therapist, theologian ,and professor emeritus at Texas Christian University. James Duke is Professor of the History of Christianity and the History of Christian Thought at Brite Divinity School.

They have put together this concise how-to guide for Christians who never knew they were theologians and don’t know where to start.

So let me share my thoughts on the book.

Embedded vs. Deliberative

First, I found the distinction between embedded theology and deliberative theology to be immensely helpful.

This is the way I understand it. Embedded theology is what you grew up with in church; it's the air you breath. It's instinct, reflex, it's how you do the faith.

Deliberative theology is questioning your growing up years; it's putting the air you breath into a mass spectrometer. It's inquisitive, reflective, it's asking why you do faith in this way and not that.

Deliberative theology is the theology I tend to force unto the people around me. Embedded theology is what they wish we could all do instead.

When we make a distinction, we are drawing a line, we are pointing out differences. Sometimes, often times, that leads to quarrels. Other times, making that distinction helps people to reconcile.

We recognise that embedded theology is what everyone practises and it is good enough until it isn't. And then deliberative theology becomes necessary. Christians who are able to do deliberative theology within the faith are less likely to deconstruct themselves out of the faith.

They are more equipped to handle crisis. In this book, the authors use many real world examples. But two stick out the most.

First is the Great Hymnal Controversy. The church wrestles with whether to buy new and different hymnbooks to replace the ones falling to pieces. You can replace this controversy with the one you have in your church.

The second crisis moves away from the religious assembly to the personal home. Tom’s mother has terminal cancer and the doctor suggests removing life support. Tom doesn’t know what is the right thing to do. All of us have faced devastating dilemmas before. And if you have not, you will.

Do you know what to do? Do you know how to think theologically?

The Reason You Read This Book: How-To

Stone and Duke are here to help. They will teach us in a systematic way.

The first three chapters of the book sets up the motivation and principles. Then the next four chapters show us how to do it, and lastly the final two chapters describes how thinking theologically works in the Christian community and in spiritual formation.

When we come to the how-to chapters, the authors give us a template to work from. Three sets of diagnostic exercises covering three areas: The Gospel, the Human Condition and Vocation.

I quote:

Each question in turn (though not necessarily in order) can be applied to every issue that calls for our theological deliberation. The exercises surely will not cover all that could be said about the meaning of the Christian message of God. But they strike near the very heart of the concerns of Christian faith. In exploring these questions, something is disclosed of the breadth and depth of the Christian message. They provide a staging area for later, more complete, reflection.

Let’s look at the questions in the first set, the Gospel set.

What is the gospel?How does the gospel reach the people?How do people receive the gospel and its benefits?

Hmm... the questions are not ground-breaking. A bit basic. And that’s the point, to go back to basics and re-evaluate our situation in light of the basics, the gospel!

This is how it works, I quote:

For the church council debating the purchase of new hymnals, a clearer understanding of the church’s role in promulgating the gospel might have facilitated the discussion. Tom, who is already searching the Scriptures on his own for help in dealing with his mother’s imminent death, might be prompted to seek more help from the church: as a companion to the Scripture in making the gospel of Jesus known and as a potential source of guidance and strength in making his hard decision regarding life-support removal.

We now turn to the chapter on Human Condition. The questions are:

What is the basic problem with the human condition? (What is Sin?)What is the resolution to that problem in the human condition? (What is Salvation?)How is the problem resolved? (What is the means of Salvation?)

This chapter reminds me of another book I read, “Gospel Fluency” by Jeff Vanderstelt. Vanderstelt makes this audacious claim: “For every problem, the gospel is the solution.”

When I first heard it, I thought, "That couldn’t possibly be true."

But as Vanderstelt explains, I begin to realise that, indeed, underlying every quarrel, addiction, fear and anger, is sin. And once I saw the True Enemy, it was easier to see The Solution, because there is only one solution to Sin, and that is Jesus Christ.

So far we have only looked at two sets of questions. You can do so much with these questions.

Find a quiet place to sit. Reflect on the questions that Stone and Duke ask in their book. Don’t give the Sunday School answers. See the issue as a Christian.

And when you do some reflections, you can be surprised at how an incidental reading leads to unexpected assurance.

That was what I got.

What is Sin is Not Incidental

It all started when someone told me, “Nobody is born with a sin nature. We are all born as a blank slate.” In theology, this means a denial of Original Sin.

I believe we are all born with Sin. But I went back to study why I believe so. Along the way, I read Augustine’s Anti-Pelagian writing, which became a podcast review. I searched for Christian books that deny Original Sin, I couldn't find any. There are books that deny Original Sin, but they were not within the broad spectrum of the Christian faith.

But the biggest pushback I faced seems to not be whether to affirm or deny Original Sin, but whether it even matters. The issue is not veracity, but practicality or necessity.

Some say: “Why don’t we accept both interpretations as equally valid? After all, many Christians hold different interpretations on many parts of Scripture and have learnt to look past these differences to unite on the main thing, the Gospel.”

So I have been questioning myself over and over again, whether am I being unnecessarily difficult. Yet, over and over again, as I study Scripture, I cannot see how one church can hold two opposing interpretations on what Sin means.

Stone and Duke's chapter on the Human Condition just reinforces my conviction that this matter is of critical importance.

To be clear, this is not a book written to affirm or deny Original Sin. But I note that one of the questions they ask is: What is the basic problem with the human condition? In other words, What is Sin?

How you answer this question affects how you understand salvation. What did Jesus do? He saved us from our sins. But what is Sin?

And as the book makes clear, answering these questions affects how we live life. The authors do not see Sin as something out there, something that lives in the books of dead theologians to be dissected by theologians who have too much time in their hands.

Sin is the basic problem with the human condition. Just this fact demands our every effort to get what it is right. We should not just sweep distinctions aside and claim all interpretations leads to Jesus.

Not Just a Series of Questions

I have only discussed two sets of the diagnostic exercises. The third set covers Vocation. The questions are:

What deeds are Christians called to do?What are the reasons for performing a service or action?Why is one course of action the most fitting in a given situation?

You could say, "If I knew how to answer those questions in the first place, I wouldn't be in a dilemma!"

That is why we have to understand, the book is not just a series of questions. If it was, it would be two pages long and not 142 pages.

There is more to the practise of theological reflection and the authors do a good job explaining them. Except when they don't.

More Explanations Would Be Better

Some parts could be better explained.

In chapter 3, the authors quote theologian David Kelsey. Kelsey lists four ways theologians draw biblical texts into theological reflections. According to Kelsey, the Word of God is identified in:

Propositions about divine truthSymbolic expressions of faith experiencesRecitals of God’s identityInvitations to existential possibilities for new life

Then without further explanation the authors challenge the reader, I quote:

Try listening for Kelsey’s categories in the next sermon you hear. When the minister quotes Scripture, ask yourself: What is this speaker using the Bible to ask me to do? Or, put the same question to a sermon or lesson that you deliver: What are you asking your hearers to do when you quote the Bible?

Challenge not accepted. I don't understand what Kelsey means by those four ways. I could guess but I should not have to.

In chapter 8, the authors ask us to think critically using a process that includes description, analysis, framing a view, judgment and response.

They explain what description means. They explain what analysis means. But they explain framing a view by describing how a camera frames the subject. I like photography. I know how to frame a subject. But I don't know how to transfer my photography skills into theological thinking.

What is the difference between analysis and framing a view? The authors do not explain. I could guess but I should not have to.

I appreciate how the authors want to keep the book short. They succeeded in doing that. But I wish they could have a few more extra pages so that they can explain things properly. And I guess many other readers thought so too because the 4th edition has 40 more pages. The book must be good if people want more of it right?

Two Starting Points and One Correction

However there was one part of the book that I felt needed correction.

In the authors' introduction to the theological method, they describe two starting points. I quote:

Christian theology is reflection on the faith in the Christian message of God in Jesus Christ. The connection between faith and God’s message is an invitation to reflect either on the human side of the connection (faith) or on its divine side (God’s message).

These two tracks have given rise to a distinction between theologies with an anthropological or human starting point and those that begin with divine revelation.

They then proceed to explain the merits and risks of each starting point. They give the impression that both are equally valid starting points. I disagree. I believe we should always start with divine revelation.

When preparing for a sermon or bible study, we must start with the text. We mustn't allow the congregation's felt needs direct where the text wants us to go.

When a preacher is doing a book series, preaching verse by verse, how much more amazing it is when we hear how the Word of God speak to the people's needs without the preacher ever knowing about them.

The problem with the church today is our tendency to put us, our wants and needs, first and not God. We think we know better, but we don't. I could rant about this for hours but let's just skip to the part where I changed my mind.

As I was preparing for this book review, I read up on the authors. Stone describes himself as psychologist, marriage and family therapist first, then theologian. So I started thinking from his perspective.

And I realised I was framing the discussion wrongly. I was interpreting the two approaches strictly from a preaching or bible study point of view.

In preaching, I still hold strongly to everything I just said. We start with the text.

But when it comes to counselling, if I have Tom in front of me, and he has all these questions. If he agrees to the medical experts to withdraw life support for his mother, is it euthanasia or is it allow nature to carry its course? Is he honouring God or participating in the culture of death?

As I listen to him, obviously my starting point is him. I would be scrambling to pick from my mind anything from Scripture that deals with his issue. So in counselling, the Word of God is responding to the believer's confusion, pain, doubts and fears.

Then when I zoom out, reframe this conversation I am having with myself, I remind myself that the point of the book, is for everyone to think theologically about all parts of life. I was so zealous to establish divine revelation's primacy that I had tunnel vision.

So instead of correcting the authors, I found myself corrected. And this is good. That means I am growing.

Every Christian should experience correction. If a Christian never finds himself or herself corrected in the Christian walk, then humanity has just found the next perfect person after Jesus Christ.

The People Who Should Read This Book and Don't

Speaking of correction, I can think of many categories of people who should read this book but won't.

Those who think theology is for overly-intellectual people. That is not true, the authors refute that from the get go.On the other extreme, those who think they already know how to think theologically. They are seasoned fighters in theological MMA. Bashing people online over doctrine is not theological thinking. You should read this.

In an ideal world, everybody would read this book. In an ideal world, this book would be required reading to graduate from elementary school. Okay that's a bit exaggerated. Required reading to graduate from high school.

This is because theology needs to be done in community. I quote:

[Indeed,] theological reflection is insufficient if it is done in isolation. Theological reflection occurs in the context of community. Because it is communal, it is also collaborative and dialogical. Even though we eventually come up with our own unique operational theology, its formation occurs in testing, sharing, talking, and listening to others.

If you and I both read this book, when we have a dispute, maybe over hymnbooks or something else, then if we say let's look at this biblically. We understand each other. Naturally, we each want to prove that we are right, but we now engage in a process of exploration and discovery.

Even if I totally disagree with you, it is edifying for me that we looked at the issue through the Gospel, the Human Condition and Vocation, and went further from there. Although we have different answers to the questions, I could, in the years to come, reflect on your answers and eventually it might make sense to me and the process leads to my correction.

So the experience is not of two warriors grappling in the octagon, trying to bash the other senseless, but it is of two seekers continually exploring the divine landscape in search of truth. Sharing what they have found in hopes that the other will join them on the correct path.

Outro

In conclusion, this book is not the only way to learn how to think theologically. But it might be the most concise and practical guide for all Christians in that process.

This is a Reading and Reader’s review of “How to Think Theologically” by Howard W. Stone and James O. Duke. 142 pages, published by Fortress Press in 2006, which is the second edition. The fourth edition, published in 2023 is available in Amazon Kindle for USD14.99.

For more book reviews and contact details, you can visit readingandreaders.com. Thanks for listening. Bye bye.

Book ListHow to Think Theologically by Howard W. Stone and James O. Duke. Amazon 4th Ed. Logos 2nd Ed.

Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
Follow Unfollow
Share

Episodes

Year 4
3 May· Reading and Readers
Reading and Readers is now 4 years old! And I just missed the anniversary. It's official. The romance has gone!
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Philemon (MacArthur NT Commentary) by John MacArthur
14 Apr· Reading and Readers
A letter from an apostle to a slave owner; a letter brought to the owner through his runaway slave. The apostle never asks his friend to release the slave, only to receive him as a brother in Christ. But what does that request mean for the slave, for the owner, for the rest of us?
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Missing episodes?

Click here to refresh the feed.
Changing Normal by Jolene Kinser
19 Mar· Reading and Readers
There is an old Chinese Proverb, “化干戈为玉帛” which translates to, “Turning weapons of war into gifts of jade and silk”. It means turning hostility into friendship. That’s what today’s book is all about.
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
40 Questions About Christians and Biblical Law by Thomas Schreiner
12 Feb· Reading and Readers
The Old Testament is all about the Law; the New Testament is all about Grace. That statement over-simplifies the relationship of the Law in the Christian life. If you have questions that need answering, I have a book for you.
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Silence and Beauty by Makoto Fujimura
19 Jan· Reading and Readers
Transcript: https://readingandreaders.com/podcast/silence-and-beauty-by-makoto-fujimura/
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Year End Reflection 2024
31 Dec 2024· Reading and Readers
Transcript: https://readingandreaders.com/podcast/year-end-reflection-2024/
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Silence by Shusaku Endo
29 Dec 2024· Reading and Readers
Silence by Shusaku Endo. Amazon.
Transcript: https://readingandreaders.com/podcast/silence-by-shusaku-endo/
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Philippians by J. B. Lightfoot
22 Dec 2024· Reading and Readers
Philippians: Crossway Classic Commentaries. Amazon. Logos.
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
The Rest of Life by Ben Witherington III
1 Dec 2024· Reading and Readers
Many of us only think about God and our faith come Sunday when we pray, praise God, hear the Word then say good bye as we go back to the rest of our mundane life. But what if the mundane was revealed to be glorious?
Transcript:
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Preaching and Preachers by Dr Martyn Lloyd Jones
17 Nov 2024· Reading and Readers
Rejuvenation for the weary preacher. A siren call for sluggish Christians. The book that re-established the primacy of preaching in the church.
Transcript: https://readingandreaders.com/podcast/preaching-and-preachers-by-martyn-lloyd-jones/
Support Me: https://buymeacoffee.com/terencetan
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
What Grieving People Wish You Knew About What Really Helps (and What Really Doesn’t) by Nancy Guthrie
27 Oct 2024· Reading and Readers
What can you say to those who grieve? What can you do for those who have lost a loved one? How can you do all that without coming off as an insensitive oaf? If only they would tell us how to comfort them.
Hi, my name is Terence, and I’m your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review books for you. Today, I review “What Grieving People Wish You Knew About What Really Helps (and What Really Doesn’t)” by Nancy Guthrie. One hundred ninety-two pages, published by Crossway in September 2016. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD 9.97 and in Logos for USD 12.98.
## Grieving Mother and Friends
Nancy Guthrie has published ten books on Bible studies, six on Grief and Suffering, nine devotionals and many more. In today’s book, she writes as a mother who has grieved for two children, Hope and Gabriel. Both were born with a rare genetic disorder, Zellweger Syndrome, and only lived for six months.
She is acquainted with grief and with others who grieve. She introduces us to the GriefShare ministry, I quote:
> When your friend attends a GriefShare group, he or she will be surrounded by others who are working their way through grief too — people who understand the tears and fears, the angst and anger, the questions and frustrations of grief. It can be such an unexpected and welcome relief just to be surrounded by people who get it.
GriefShare facilitators and members are prominently featured in the book. You can almost consider them co-authors or Guthrie, a curator.
This comes across as a writing project from the community of the grieving who want everybody outside this circle to know how to walk alongside them. They have been helped. They have been hurt. And this is their collected wisdom.
So, let me start by telling you two ways I got grief wrong.
## Call Me If You Need Anything
First, I thought it was good of me to say, “Just call me if you need anything.”
Then I read this:
> I will never forget the line of people at the cemetery. They passed by hugging my mother and all seven of my siblings as we put Daddy in the ground. All the words blur together, except that they would be there for us. I remember wondering what they meant. The following spring, after Daddy was buried, one neighbor drove up our mile drive and asked what he could do. Any fences need fixing? Any chores the boys need help with? He just came. Every time he came I remember thinking about that line of people at the graveside. They were loving people who meant well. This man did well. He just came. I don’t remember if he ever actually had to do anything. But he came and offered his strength to help.
I reflected on this, and I realised that while I was sincere in my offer to help -- if I got the call, I would have dropped everything to help -- I also realised that when I gave that offer, I thought I had already done my part, my job. Now, it was up to them to take up my offer. By giving up the initiative, I was off the hook. By passing the initiative to them, I was passing on the burden to them of asking for help.
## Click to Like My Grief
Another thing I got wrong is about grief on social media. I was surprised to find a whole chapter on this.
When I see someone share their grief online, I don’t usually comment or like the post. If it’s a person I know well enough, I would write a personal message.
My reason is:
1. If I am not close to the person, I think it’s hypocritical to show up to make a quick comment or click on a sad emoji.
2. I see social media as a frivolous medium. People are flippant and shallow on social media, but grief deserves a more solemn medium.
3. When I make a public comment or post on social media, I realise that I write not just to my friends but also to everybody else. So, this sense of performing for onlookers seems wrong when dealing with a tremendous personal loss.
4. I am a private man and not the type to express my grief publicly. So, when I refrain from responding to social media posts, I am applying the golden rule: I am treating others as I would like to be treated.
After reading this chapter, I realised it’s not about me; it’s about the one who has suffered loss. Love is also treating others how they would like to be treated.
They have already made their grief public. That gives permission to everyone to respond publicly; that is an invitation to acknowledge their grief with a click or a comment. She writes:
> to neglect or refuse to comment on a post by a friend who has poured out his or her sadness on Facebook is to see their great sorrow and look the other way.
And if I excuse myself because I'm not their close friend, that's convenient because I don't have any close friends, I'm joking, I do have friends, close enough I think. Anyways, I was surprised to repeatedly read how close friends were disappointments and strangers became treasures. We don't need to be close to care, just as the Samaritan man didn't have a checklist before he decided to help people.
## Everything is Wrong
I learnt many things from this book, and I only shared two. Some may be wondering whether I am too hard on myself. After all, some people don't like others coming over to mow the lawn; they want to do it by themselves, or perhaps they want to be left alone.
Guthrie shared how gutted she was when her friend, who meant well, came to wash up her departed child's clothes. Guthrie wished she didn't because she missed her baby and her baby's scent.
At one point in the book, Guthrie describes the conflict within her:
> I remember in those early months that I headed to church each week with two significant fears. I was afraid that everyone would ask me about Hope. And I was afraid no one would speak to me about Hope.
When I read this, I thought if she doesn't know how to feel and how to respond, then there is a good chance that whatever I do is just wrong. How can I possibly get the words right, the timing and the tone right when the grieving does not know what is right? Only everything is wrong?
When I say I got it wrong, I don't mean I sinned. I just mean I didn't think much about how I could do things differently. And in hindsight, I just didn't care enough to think how I could be more helpful.
Sure, I would get things wrong, but that shouldn't stop me from being a better person when helping the grieving.
After reading this book, if you love to talk, you learn that the grieving can appreciate you talking less. And if you are the one who never says anything because you are scared of saying something wrong, you need to learn to open your mouth because they need to hear that you care.
How do we know when to speak and when to be quiet? When to mow the lawn and when not to? That is wisdom. And Guthrie suggests we get our cue from the mourner. Let the griever set the tone and direction. That and a dose of wisdom from above.
## God's Will
I have shared with you two things I got wrong. Let me now share two things I got right, but most people get wrong.
First is the matter of the Will of God. Is it ever appropriate to say to a widow next to the coffin, "It is God's Will"?
As someone who loves the doctrine of the Sovereignty of God, if I say, “Yes, because it is true”, then it is a torturous act inflicted on someone already in unbearable pain. If I say, “No, because it is cruel, " it feels like my convictions are only valid when convenient, so maybe I don't believe them to be true after all.
Guthrie offers wisdom here:
> I have come to think the term is our inadequate human language trying to make divine mystery manageable and tolerable. The words themselves are simply inadequate to carry the weight of the reality—especially when used in a simplistic way.
Later on, she writes:
> Was it God’s will for two of my children to be born with Zellweger syndrome and live very short lives? I don’t think this question can be answered on these terms, nor does it need to be. We think we had two children who died because of the corrupting impact of sin on this world—the brokenness of this world has infiltrated even our genetic code so that we have defective genes. We don’t think God picked us out to have two children who would die. But we would also say that nothing happens to us that is somehow outside of his control. God has ordained a world in which he accomplishes his will through secondary causes such as the laws of nature and human choice. As I’ve heard my friend Joni Eareckson Tada say, “Sometimes God allows what he hates to accomplish what he loves.”
We know God remains in control. We just don't need to insert this profound truth at inappropriate moments.
It's the same when we attend a non-Christian's funeral. We don't tell the grieving widow, "Your husband is in Hell."
Nor do we, in our attempt to comfort, tell her, "Your husband is in a better place."
## Heaven
Guthrie tells us that Heaven cannot be assumed:> ... while our culture assumes that most people—or at least all “good” people who die—go to heaven, that is not at all what the Bible teaches. The Bible makes clear that there is not one person who is good enough to enter into the holy presence of God (Rom. 3:9–20).
In this chapter, she presents the gospel. She quotes Ephesians 2:4, 8-9 and writes:> A person who has been made alive together with Christ may die physically but will never die spiritually. The person who was dead and was made alive together with Christ is as likely to die as Christ is likely to die. And Christ will never die.
And she continues:> But of course we know that there are those who do not see their need to be made alive with Christ. And when those people die, the sorrow for those left behind is multiplied. We should not always assume that the grieving people we talk to are confident their loved one is in heaven enjoying the presence of God. Imagine yourself in that situation (or maybe you are actually in it). Imagine that you never saw any sign that the deceased had a desire to be joined to Christ by faith or perhaps that person flatly rejected or ridiculed the need for Christ. If someone were to bring up heaven and want to assure you that your loved one is there, it would create anxiety, not peace. It would add to your agony instead of giving you assurance.
If we can’t say of the non-Christian, “At least he is in a better place”, then what can we say?
In this chapter, which I cannot reproduce here, Guthrie helps us navigate by showing grace and love, yet never compromising or distorting the truth.
I especially appreciate this chapter because it shows us the Christian difference. When a Christian dies, when we look back and see the spiritual fruit in her life, we can confidently say that she is in Heaven.
But when a non-Christian dies, we can only say, "Sorry for your loss." No mention of Heaven or Hell. No offence and also no comfort.
"Death where is your sting?" is a victory cry reserved for the Christian.
## Too Much Of a Good Thing
If I am forced to give one criticism it's it gives too much of a good thing.
Imagine you attend a talk by Nancy Guthrie. She speaks for 15 minutes, then invites one of her team members to share a few words on the topic from her personal experience. You listen, and it just hammers everything home for you. The personal sharing just makes it more real, more vivid.
Then Guthrie invites the second person to share. Again, wow. Then the third, then the fourth. You start to wonder when we will move on to the next topic.
In the FAQ chapter, there is this question, "There’s a Bible verse I want to share. Should I?" Guthrie answers by sharing the example where her friend, without any warning, lost her husband. Guthrie writes:
> So I got on the private Facebook group for couples who have attended our retreat and asked them to respond with nothing other than a verse of Scripture which Starr could take hold of, and choose to believe in those difficult hours.
She then lists the responses to the request—all 31 of them.
Am I heartless to say that she could have picked ten examples that best made her point? Maybe there is a reason she wanted to show the complete picture. Maybe I am heartless and would only truly appreciate what she has done here someday in the future.
Overall, the book does an excellent job of balancing Guthrie's and the contributors', so I am really just nitpicking.
## What If I Get It Wrong Again?
Let me close this review with the biggest encouragement I got from the book.
Throughout the book, Guthrie teaches us to be better friends to those in grief, answering questions from those who want to comfort. This is the only question posed from the other side's perspective.
> I’m the one who is grieving. How do I respond to all the people who say and do so many things that seem to add to my hurt instead of soothe it?
Guthrie answers:
> The truth is that most people are hoping to be helpful, trying to let us know they can relate in some small way to what we’re going through. If we put ourselves in their shoes, we realise it’s tough to know what to say to someone who’s grieving. So we can be prickly and sensitive about the things people say to us that we wish they hadn’t, setting very high hurdles for people around us to jump through with their words. Or we can choose to see their brains searching for a connection, their hearts wanting to show us they care—even though they may not have the words to express it well. We can extend a hand to help people around us overcome the hurdle of awkwardness.
That is just grace. If these people who have gone through so much pain can say, in essence, "Forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing," then I think we can do better.
Ecclesiastes 7:2–3 (ESV)
It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting, for this is the end of all mankind, and the living will lay it to heart. Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad.
For a long time, I never understood what that meant. But after attending a few houses of mourning and reading books like today's, I can see how sorrow is better than laughter. May the wisdom of God be with us all as we comfort the grieving around us.
## Outro
This is a Reading and Reader's review of “What Grieving People Wish You Knew About What Really Helps (and What Really Doesn’t)” by Nancy Guthrie.
I got this book for free. It was the Logos book of the month. I downloaded it, not knowing whether I would ever read it, and I'm sure glad I did. If you want more book reviews, subscribe to the podcast or visit my website, www.readingandreaders.com. Thank you and bye-bye.
## Book List
* “What Grieving People Wish You Knew About What Really Helps (and What Really Doesn’t)” by Nancy Guthrie. [Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/Grieving-People-about-Really-Helps/dp/1433552353). [Logos](https://www.logos.com/product/227267/what-grieving-people-wish-you-knew-about-what-really-helps).
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Married for God by Christopher Ash
13 Oct 2024· Reading and Readers
In the past, many got married for sex and thus for personal fulfillment. Nowadays, many don’t see a need to get married to get sex. Yet, whether married or not, people were not being personally fulfilled. How do marriage, sex, and personal fulfillment come together, if at all?
Hi, my name is Terence, and I'm your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. Today I review “Married for God: Making Your Marriage the Best It Can Be” by Christopher Ash. 176 pages, published by Crossway in August 2016. Available via Amazon Kindle for USD10.16 and via Logos for USD10.79.
Christopher Ash is Writer-in-Residence at Tyndale House in Cambridge. He is a full-time preacher, pastor, teacher, and writer. According to Amazon, he has 40 titles and there is one tantalising title I would like to read, “The Book Your Pastor Wishes You Would Read (but is too embarrassed to ask)”. But that is a book for another day.
Today I review Ash's book on marriage.
Anyone who intends to get married should go for a pre-marriage counselling course. I say this even to non-Christians. And if you are reluctant to sit down with a pastor, you should get a book to go through together.
Marriages include arguments. I could also say many marriages end with arguments. The tragedy is some of those arguments could have been avoided. When one says, “My dream is to have children.” And the other shocked says, “But dear, I don’t intend to have children.” This is a conversation they should have had before they got married.
For Christians such conversations is ever more important because God does not approve of divorces. If the marriage is not working, the biblical answer is: make it work.
Today's book is not just helpful for those about to get married.
If you have been married long, this book will strengthen your marriage.
Bizarrely, if you are single, this book will also strengthen your single life. More on that later.
Let's open the book.
In the introduction, the fundamental statement put to us is:
> We ought to want what God wants in marriage.
Ash later on continues:
> ... when we ask what God wants, we are asking what is best for us. What is best for us is not what we want, but what he wants. When I ask what God wants for marriage, I am saying that I want my marriage to cut with the grain of the universe.
Wow. Your love for one another, this private connection between a man and a woman is part of a cosmic design.
If you have never considered marriage in that light, there is more to come. In fact whatever you think marriage is, put that aside. Make a commitment to hear from God first. So if whatever God says goes against what you think marriage is about, go with God. This is how Ash ends the introduction chapter, with a call to repentance.
## Baggage and Grace
But what happens if God, who is awesome and holy, wants what I don't want? What if, in the light of his holiness, he exposes me? The part I have kept hidden from family and friends, and frankly, intended to keep hidden from my future spouse?
And so Christopher Ash, theologian and pastor, right at the start has a chapter titled, “A Word about Baggage and Grace”. I will just read the section headings and you will see why you need not fear God's will for you.
1. The Bible Speaks to Those Whose Sexual Pasts Are Spoiled
2. Jesus Christ Offers Forgiveness and Restoration To Those With Spoiled Sexual Pasts
3. God’s Grace Enables Us to Live Lives of Purity
The chapter ends with six questions and discussion points. Let me read question 4.
Question 4:
> If you are (or may one day be) married, what kind of “baggage” do you think you bring into marriage, in your thinking and expectations?
If you are reading this book on your own, that is great for your self-reflection, but what about your fiance? The temptation here is to think he or she doesn’t need to know your past. But your past, whether you want to or not, in one way or another, will affect the marriage.
But if you share your deepest darkest secrets, what happens if your fiance cancels the wedding? Or what if one day she takes this painful part of your life and throws it in your face?
The fear bubbles up and chokes, and tempts you to do what you have always done. Hide.
"Hahhaha... question 4 is asking about baggage? I guess my baggage is I once forgot my baggage at the airport."
The couple laughs. Love makes lame jokes funny. Quick! Let's read the next chapter before something ruins the moment.
It takes courage to answer soul-baring questions. It takes wisdom to navigate this treacherous waters, which is why I encourage couples to invite their pastor into pre-marriage discussions.
A good and experienced pastor will establish a safe space and frame the discussion to ensure that the couple does not dwell on the baggages but eventually move on to the next part: what comes after question 4, I quote:
> Pause to bring this “baggage” quietly before God. Pray through the truth of grace in this chapter and ask God to put them deep in your heart. Claim the forgiveness and cleansing of Christ for your past.
After this point, you have: 1) responded to the call to repent and 2) received the gift of grace. No matter how dirty and unworthy you think you are, you need Jesus. No matter how clean and pure you think you are, you also need Jesus. You are now ready to read Chapter 2: Married for a Purpose.
Chapter 2 is a good example of what to expect from the rest of the book. So I will spend most of my time here, then quickly outline what to expect from the rest of the book, share two criticisms, and finally conclude the book review.
## Married For a Purpose
Ash starts each chapter with a story. This is how he starts Chapter 2.
> Laura felt lonely and bitter. She and Andy had been married for four years now. She thought back to their wedding day, which had been amazing.
Fast forward to the last paragraph of the story.
> To be honest, marriage for Laura was really not all it had been cracked up to be. It really didn’t match the description on the tin, or not the description given her by that pastor. And in her bitterness she wondered if there was really any point in keeping it all going, if the rest of her life was going to be like this. What was the point?
Ash tells us the standard Christian answer: The point of marriage is to have children, to demonstrate faithfulness, and to preserve social order.
Ash then does my favourite thing, which is to open up the Bible. He expounds first from Genesis 1:26-31, which includes these familiar verses: “God created man in his own image, ... male and female he created them” and “God saw everything that he had made, and it was very good.”
But I bet you have never heard his interpretation before. As he unpacks the verses, he eventually reaches a conclusion. The marriage motto is sex in the service of God.
“That can’t be right! Marriage is more than sex!”
Ash already knows what’s going through our minds so I will let him deflect our indignation.
> Like all mottos, this simplifies my point. I do not mean to suggest that marriage is only about sex. But it is sex that distinguishes marriage from any other friendship or partnership. By “sex” in this motto, I mean a shorthand for the whole of marriage as it develops and grows out of its heart and core of sexual intimacy and faithfulness. Sex is shorthand for the marriage relationship in all its fullness: in intimacy, friendship, partnership, fun, and faithfulness. The motto is to remind us that the whole business of marriage in all its fullness is to be lived in the loving joyful service of God, as we look outward from our marriages and as couples seek to care for God’s world together.
The big insight is not ‘sex’. Until recently, everyone knew that sex and marriage came as a package. The big insight is in the words ‘in the service of God’, which he explains further.
The next passage is Genesis 2:15-25. This contains the must read verses on marriage, “It is not good that the man should be alone” and also “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.”
Interestingly, Ash tells us how Genesis 2:18 is wrongly understood. The text says, “It is not good that the man should be alone” but does Adam being alone mean he was lonely?
Ash makes this distinction and draws out the implication. If Adam was lonely, then this verse means God designed marriage to solve loneliness. But what does that mean for single men and women? Or even the married men and women who still feel lonely.
Ash writes:
> For those who are married, their marriages ought indeed to be places of fellowship that are remedies for loneliness. But marriage is not the remedy for loneliness. Wherever there is fellowship there is God’s remedy for loneliness. Not all human beings are able to marry, but all human beings are invited into fellowship with God and with one another in Jesus Christ.
I like how Ash puts it here:
> This irony, that we expect so much of marriage but find it disappointing, is an irony the Bible understands perfectly. It calls it idolatry.
But if Adam was not lonely, but was as the verse says, alone. Then, reading that verse in the wider context, we see that Adam was alone in his task to care for the garden. So God created Eve so that Adam was not alone. And they were to have children who have more children, all in order to take care of God's creation.
Ash writes:
> Surprisingly, the key to a good marriage is not to pursue a good marriage, but to pursue the honor of God. We need to replace this selfish model of marriage with one in which we work side by side in God’s “garden” (that is, God’s world), rather than gaze forever into each other’s eyes.
## The Rest of the Book
Let me read the titles for the remaining chapters along with my short comments.
Chapter 3: What is the Point of Having Children? Many couples who struggle with this will find an answer here.
Chapter 4: What is the Point of Sex and Intimacy? A good read for soon-to-be married for those long married and also for singles.
Chapter 5: God’s Pattern for the Marriage Relationship. It's not obvious what this chapter is about so let me quote something from this chapter. I quote:
> I was reading a book of marriage services for Christians from different denominations and noticed that the list of suggested Bible readings omitted the only three readings in the New Testament which are directly addressed to husbands and wives (Eph. 5:22–33; Col.3:18–19; 1 Pet. 3:1–7). This would have struck me as curious, except that all three Bible passages tell wives to submit to their husbands, and I am sure were omitted because the compilers simply could not stomach this teaching.
As a young man, I too could not stomach this teaching because, you know, equal rights. God's command for the wife to submit has been used by abusive husbands to abuse their wives. But when I learnt to read it in context in consideration with what the Bible as a whole says about submission, I can see God’s design for marriage. But it wasn’t easy to overcome years of social programming. Hence, the call to repentance; to make a commitment to God’s Word first.
As one man against the world, Ash has to clearly show submission in marriage is truly God’s pattern. And we need to break out of what we think it looks like and consider what it truly looks like. It is not God's design for the husband to be a tyrant and the wife a mouse, nor is it God's design for the wife to be bossy and the husband to abdicate his responsibility. If you think otherwise, repent!
Chapter 6 is titled “What is the Point of the Marriage Institution?” It answers the wider society questions like, “Why marry when you can just live together?”
Chapter 7 is a pleasant surprise in a book about marriage. It’s not a question a pastor would obviously ask in a pre-marriage counselling: “Is it Better to Stay Single?” If the couple is a high-risk for cold feet, this question could make one (or both) run. On the other hand, this much needed perspective on marriage could help both make an informed decision with a happier outcome.
Chapter 8 asks, “What is the Heart of Marriage?” Oh, what would be your answer? God, Jesus? Ah, the safe Sunday School answer. Not wrong, but not what Ash has here. Love? Close.
As Christopher Ash puts it beautifully:
> ... the reason that faithfulness lies at the heart of marriage is that faithfulness lies at the heart of God, and therefore at the heart of the universe. Those of us who are married are called to keep the covenant promises of marriage, because God keeps his covenant promises.
With that whirlwind run through the book, let me mention two criticisms to round up the review.
## Criticisms
The first is from Chapter 3, “What is the Point of Having Children?” Here, he makes a strong and powerful biblical case for children. I am just not sure whether he has over-reached. I quote:
> If you regard children as a curse and don’t want them, don’t get married!
From a Christian perspective, whether married or not, obviously we must not see children as a curse.
I just wonder whether if a couple comes to him and do not to have children, not because of exceptional circumstances, but simply as a matter of choice, would Ash tell them not to get married?
My second criticism is from Chapter 6, “What is the Point of the Marriage Institution?” In arguing against co-habitation, does he over-simplify his analysis? I quote:
> ... sex outside marriage is always sex “under law” (as it were): always seeking to prove, always striving to do well enough to keep the other one in the relationship, always anxious lest at any time the other may decide there is not enough in it for him or her, always under trial.
For context, Ash is making the contrast with sex within marriage which is “sex under grace”. There is no pressure to keep the relationship going with good sex because the relationship is secured by a vow to God and to one another.
But when Ash says that sex outside marriage is always seeking to prove, always striving to do well, always, always, always, I can imagine a co-habitating couple scrunching their forehead saying, “No. That is not true.”
They go on to describe their sexual relationship as a give-and-take, learning to love one another with their bodies, in language and tones similar to a married couple’s. So while I completely agree with Ash’s distinction between “sex-under-grace” vs “sex-under-law”, I think some co-habitating couples would not recognise his description as valid since they practise a resemblance of sex-under-grace.
And so, I think Ash missed an opportunity to present a more nuanced commentary here. Could he have angled his comments so that some of those co-habitating couples who think whatever they have is good and great, sees that what they have is merely a resemblance, not the reality of what is good. Good as in God is good. Good as in Grace is good.
Before I conclude, I have to tell readers what you don't get in this book. You don't get an in-depth discussion on how to manage financials as a couple. Or how to effectively communicate. Or how to resolve conflicts. Or despite the motto being "sex in the service of God", there is no how to have great sex. For that, you have to look at other books.
This is not a criticism of Ash's book. What he set out to do, he achieved them brilliantly. This book explains how marriage is for God. And truly, while everything else is important, none is more important than knowing marriage is for God.
Let me end this review by quoting my favourite passage in the book. This passage reminds me of the purpose of my own marriage and makes me want to do better for God.
I quote:
> ... I like to think that men and women may say to themselves as they watch a Christian marriage: “I have never seen God. Sometimes I wonder, when I look at the world, if God is good, or if there is a God. But if he can make a man and woman love one another like this; if he can make this husband show costly faithfulness through sickness as well as health; if he can give him resources to love when frankly there is nothing in it for him; well, then he must be a good God. And if he can give this wife grace to submit so beautifully, with such an attractive gentle spirit under terrible trials, then again he must be a good God.” If you are married or preparing for marriage, pray that others may be able to say this of you in the years ahead.
## Outro
This is a Reading and Reader’s review of “Married for God: Making Your Marriage the Best It Can Be” by Christopher Ash. 176 pages, published by Crossway in August 2016. Available via Amazon Kindle for USD10.16 and via Logos for USD10.79.
Thank you for listening. Bye bye.
## Book List
* Married for God by Christopher Ash. [Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/Married-God-Making-Your-Marriage/dp/1433550784). [Logos](https://www.logos.com/product/168264/married-for-god-making-your-marriage-the-best-it-can-be).
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
How to Think Theologically by Howard Stone and James Duke
29 Sep 2024· Reading and Readers
Everyone wants to know how to make money, how to lose weight, how to make friends and influence people. But before all that, more importantly, the first thing we got to know is how to think -- and as people who live our lives before God -- specifically, it is knowing how to think theologically.
Hi, my name is Terence and I’m your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. Today I review “How to Think Theologically” by Howard W. Stone and James O. Duke. 142 pages, published by Fortress Press in 2006. 2006 is the second edition. The fourth edition, published in 2023 is available in Amazon Kindle for USD14.99.
Reviewing the 2nd not the 4th Edition
Why am I reviewing the 2nd edition and not the 4th edition? Because I got the 2nd edition for free. Even though I was not reviewing books for the past 6 months, I still made sure to get the Logos free book of the month. For June, the free book was “How to Think Theologically”.
You might be wondering whether it’s worth listening to a review of the second edition when, if you do read the book you would get the latest edition. In any case, my review is still helpful in your buying, reading, decision.
First, whatever is good in the 2nd edition will be in the 4th edition. That is why there is a 4th edition.
Second, when you hear all the good things I have to say about today’s book, you might resolve, like I have, to never miss a free book deal. And if you did get the Logos free book for June, this review might just persuade you to read it.
I Could Not Help You... Until Today
The book resonates with me because it describes the one thing I have been trying to excel in all these years.
When I was a young Christian I did not know what thinking theologically meant. I knew it was imperative for us to think biblically but what does that mean?
I only understood after I read books like Don Carson’s “Showing the Spirit”, a commentary on 1 Corinthian 12-14. That book fundamentally transformed my thinking process.
Now, many good books later, I try to bring the Bible to bear in everything, to understand God and his work in myself, the people around me and the world across space and time.
If you ask me, “Terence, I want to learn how to think theologically too, can you help? Can you do what you do best and recommend a book?”
A few weeks ago, my answer would be, “I wish I had a simple guide for you. Everything I practise, I learnt it the hard way through many books, by many writers, on many diverse issues, over many years. You could read Don Carson’s book but you would learn by observing the master. The master is not explaining what or why or how. He is busy doing the thinking through the Bible on the topic. In Don Carson’s case, thinking through 1 Cor 12-14 on the topic of the Holy Spirit. I wish I have that one book to recommend to you.”
And today, I have!
Buy this book. Read this book: “How to Think Theologically” by Howard W. Stone and James O. Duke.
Dynamic Duo
Howard Stone is a psychologist, marriage and family therapist, theologian ,and professor emeritus at Texas Christian University. James Duke is Professor of the History of Christianity and the History of Christian Thought at Brite Divinity School.
They have put together this concise how-to guide for Christians who never knew they were theologians and don’t know where to start.
So let me share my thoughts on the book.
Embedded vs. Deliberative
First, I found the distinction between embedded theology and deliberative theology to be immensely helpful.
This is the way I understand it. Embedded theology is what you grew up with in church; it's the air you breath. It's instinct, reflex, it's how you do the faith.
Deliberative theology is questioning your growing up years; it's putting the air you breath into a mass spectrometer. It's inquisitive, reflective, it's asking why you do faith in this way and not that.
Deliberative theology is the theology I tend to force unto the people around me. Embedded theology is what they wish we could all do instead.
When we make a distinction, we are drawing a line, we are pointing out differences. Sometimes, often times, that leads to quarrels. Other times, making that distinction helps people to reconcile.
We recognise that embedded theology is what everyone practises and it is good enough until it isn't. And then deliberative theology becomes necessary. Christians who are able to do deliberative theology within the faith are less likely to deconstruct themselves out of the faith.
They are more equipped to handle crisis. In this book, the authors use many real world examples. But two stick out the most.
First is the Great Hymnal Controversy. The church wrestles with whether to buy new and different hymnbooks to replace the ones falling to pieces. You can replace this controversy with the one you have in your church.
The second crisis moves away from the religious assembly to the personal home. Tom’s mother has terminal cancer and the doctor suggests removing life support. Tom doesn’t know what is the right thing to do. All of us have faced devastating dilemmas before. And if you have not, you will.
Do you know what to do? Do you know how to think theologically?
The Reason You Read This Book: How-To
Stone and Duke are here to help. They will teach us in a systematic way.
The first three chapters of the book sets up the motivation and principles. Then the next four chapters show us how to do it, and lastly the final two chapters describes how thinking theologically works in the Christian community and in spiritual formation.
When we come to the how-to chapters, the authors give us a template to work from. Three sets of diagnostic exercises covering three areas: The Gospel, the Human Condition and Vocation.
I quote:
Each question in turn (though not necessarily in order) can be applied to every issue that calls for our theological deliberation. The exercises surely will not cover all that could be said about the meaning of the Christian message of God. But they strike near the very heart of the concerns of Christian faith. In exploring these questions, something is disclosed of the breadth and depth of the Christian message. They provide a staging area for later, more complete, reflection.
Let’s look at the questions in the first set, the Gospel set.
What is the gospel?How does the gospel reach the people?How do people receive the gospel and its benefits?
Hmm... the questions are not ground-breaking. A bit basic. And that’s the point, to go back to basics and re-evaluate our situation in light of the basics, the gospel!
This is how it works, I quote:
For the church council debating the purchase of new hymnals, a clearer understanding of the church’s role in promulgating the gospel might have facilitated the discussion. Tom, who is already searching the Scriptures on his own for help in dealing with his mother’s imminent death, might be prompted to seek more help from the church: as a companion to the Scripture in making the gospel of Jesus known and as a potential source of guidance and strength in making his hard decision regarding life-support removal.
We now turn to the chapter on Human Condition. The questions are:
What is the basic problem with the human condition? (What is Sin?)What is the resolution to that problem in the human condition? (What is Salvation?)How is the problem resolved? (What is the means of Salvation?)
This chapter reminds me of another book I read, “Gospel Fluency” by Jeff Vanderstelt. Vanderstelt makes this audacious claim: “For every problem, the gospel is the solution.”
When I first heard it, I thought, "That couldn’t possibly be true."
But as Vanderstelt explains, I begin to realise that, indeed, underlying every quarrel, addiction, fear and anger, is sin. And once I saw the True Enemy, it was easier to see The Solution, because there is only one solution to Sin, and that is Jesus Christ.
So far we have only looked at two sets of questions. You can do so much with these questions.
Find a quiet place to sit. Reflect on the questions that Stone and Duke ask in their book. Don’t give the Sunday School answers. See the issue as a Christian.
And when you do some reflections, you can be surprised at how an incidental reading leads to unexpected assurance.
That was what I got.
What is Sin is Not Incidental
It all started when someone told me, “Nobody is born with a sin nature. We are all born as a blank slate.” In theology, this means a denial of Original Sin.
I believe we are all born with Sin. But I went back to study why I believe so. Along the way, I read Augustine’s Anti-Pelagian writing, which became a podcast review. I searched for Christian books that deny Original Sin, I couldn't find any. There are books that deny Original Sin, but they were not within the broad spectrum of the Christian faith.
But the biggest pushback I faced seems to not be whether to affirm or deny Original Sin, but whether it even matters. The issue is not veracity, but practicality or necessity.
Some say: “Why don’t we accept both interpretations as equally valid? After all, many Christians hold different interpretations on many parts of Scripture and have learnt to look past these differences to unite on the main thing, the Gospel.”
So I have been questioning myself over and over again, whether am I being unnecessarily difficult. Yet, over and over again, as I study Scripture, I cannot see how one church can hold two opposing interpretations on what Sin means.
Stone and Duke's chapter on the Human Condition just reinforces my conviction that this matter is of critical importance.
To be clear, this is not a book written to affirm or deny Original Sin. But I note that one of the questions they ask is: What is the basic problem with the human condition? In other words, What is Sin?
How you answer this question affects how you understand salvation. What did Jesus do? He saved us from our sins. But what is Sin?
And as the book makes clear, answering these questions affects how we live life. The authors do not see Sin as something out there, something that lives in the books of dead theologians to be dissected by theologians who have too much time in their hands.
Sin is the basic problem with the human condition. Just this fact demands our every effort to get what it is right. We should not just sweep distinctions aside and claim all interpretations leads to Jesus.
Not Just a Series of Questions
I have only discussed two sets of the diagnostic exercises. The third set covers Vocation. The questions are:
What deeds are Christians called to do?What are the reasons for performing a service or action?Why is one course of action the most fitting in a given situation?
You could say, "If I knew how to answer those questions in the first place, I wouldn't be in a dilemma!"
That is why we have to understand, the book is not just a series of questions. If it was, it would be two pages long and not 142 pages.
There is more to the practise of theological reflection and the authors do a good job explaining them. Except when they don't.
More Explanations Would Be Better
Some parts could be better explained.
In chapter 3, the authors quote theologian David Kelsey. Kelsey lists four ways theologians draw biblical texts into theological reflections. According to Kelsey, the Word of God is identified in:
Propositions about divine truthSymbolic expressions of faith experiencesRecitals of God’s identityInvitations to existential possibilities for new life
Then without further explanation the authors challenge the reader, I quote:
Try listening for Kelsey’s categories in the next sermon you hear. When the minister quotes Scripture, ask yourself: What is this speaker using the Bible to ask me to do? Or, put the same question to a sermon or lesson that you deliver: What are you asking your hearers to do when you quote the Bible?
Challenge not accepted. I don't understand what Kelsey means by those four ways. I could guess but I should not have to.
In chapter 8, the authors ask us to think critically using a process that includes description, analysis, framing a view, judgment and response.
They explain what description means. They explain what analysis means. But they explain framing a view by describing how a camera frames the subject. I like photography. I know how to frame a subject. But I don't know how to transfer my photography skills into theological thinking.
What is the difference between analysis and framing a view? The authors do not explain. I could guess but I should not have to.
I appreciate how the authors want to keep the book short. They succeeded in doing that. But I wish they could have a few more extra pages so that they can explain things properly. And I guess many other readers thought so too because the 4th edition has 40 more pages. The book must be good if people want more of it right?
Two Starting Points and One Correction
However there was one part of the book that I felt needed correction.
In the authors' introduction to the theological method, they describe two starting points. I quote:
Christian theology is reflection on the faith in the Christian message of God in Jesus Christ. The connection between faith and God’s message is an invitation to reflect either on the human side of the connection (faith) or on its divine side (God’s message).
These two tracks have given rise to a distinction between theologies with an anthropological or human starting point and those that begin with divine revelation.
They then proceed to explain the merits and risks of each starting point. They give the impression that both are equally valid starting points. I disagree. I believe we should always start with divine revelation.
When preparing for a sermon or bible study, we must start with the text. We mustn't allow the congregation's felt needs direct where the text wants us to go.
When a preacher is doing a book series, preaching verse by verse, how much more amazing it is when we hear how the Word of God speak to the people's needs without the preacher ever knowing about them.
The problem with the church today is our tendency to put us, our wants and needs, first and not God. We think we know better, but we don't. I could rant about this for hours but let's just skip to the part where I changed my mind.
As I was preparing for this book review, I read up on the authors. Stone describes himself as psychologist, marriage and family therapist first, then theologian. So I started thinking from his perspective.
And I realised I was framing the discussion wrongly. I was interpreting the two approaches strictly from a preaching or bible study point of view.
In preaching, I still hold strongly to everything I just said. We start with the text.
But when it comes to counselling, if I have Tom in front of me, and he has all these questions. If he agrees to the medical experts to withdraw life support for his mother, is it euthanasia or is it allow nature to carry its course? Is he honouring God or participating in the culture of death?
As I listen to him, obviously my starting point is him. I would be scrambling to pick from my mind anything from Scripture that deals with his issue. So in counselling, the Word of God is responding to the believer's confusion, pain, doubts and fears.
Then when I zoom out, reframe this conversation I am having with myself, I remind myself that the point of the book, is for everyone to think theologically about all parts of life. I was so zealous to establish divine revelation's primacy that I had tunnel vision.
So instead of correcting the authors, I found myself corrected. And this is good. That means I am growing.
Every Christian should experience correction. If a Christian never finds himself or herself corrected in the Christian walk, then humanity has just found the next perfect person after Jesus Christ.
The People Who Should Read This Book and Don't
Speaking of correction, I can think of many categories of people who should read this book but won't.
Those who think theology is for overly-intellectual people. That is not true, the authors refute that from the get go.On the other extreme, those who think they already know how to think theologically. They are seasoned fighters in theological MMA. Bashing people online over doctrine is not theological thinking. You should read this.
In an ideal world, everybody would read this book. In an ideal world, this book would be required reading to graduate from elementary school. Okay that's a bit exaggerated. Required reading to graduate from high school.
This is because theology needs to be done in community. I quote:
[Indeed,] theological reflection is insufficient if it is done in isolation. Theological reflection occurs in the context of community. Because it is communal, it is also collaborative and dialogical. Even though we eventually come up with our own unique operational theology, its formation occurs in testing, sharing, talking, and listening to others.
If you and I both read this book, when we have a dispute, maybe over hymnbooks or something else, then if we say let's look at this biblically. We understand each other. Naturally, we each want to prove that we are right, but we now engage in a process of exploration and discovery.
Even if I totally disagree with you, it is edifying for me that we looked at the issue through the Gospel, the Human Condition and Vocation, and went further from there. Although we have different answers to the questions, I could, in the years to come, reflect on your answers and eventually it might make sense to me and the process leads to my correction.
So the experience is not of two warriors grappling in the octagon, trying to bash the other senseless, but it is of two seekers continually exploring the divine landscape in search of truth. Sharing what they have found in hopes that the other will join them on the correct path.
Outro
In conclusion, this book is not the only way to learn how to think theologically. But it might be the most concise and practical guide for all Christians in that process.
This is a Reading and Reader’s review of “How to Think Theologically” by Howard W. Stone and James O. Duke. 142 pages, published by Fortress Press in 2006, which is the second edition. The fourth edition, published in 2023 is available in Amazon Kindle for USD14.99.
For more book reviews and contact details, you can visit readingandreaders.com. Thanks for listening. Bye bye.
Book ListHow to Think Theologically by Howard W. Stone and James O. Duke. Amazon 4th Ed. Logos 2nd Ed.
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Portrait of God by Jack Mooring
15 Sep 2024· Reading and Readers
This is a Reading and Readers review of “Portrait of God” by Jack Mooring. 224 pages, published by David C. Cook Publishing in August 2024. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD9.99 and in Logos for USD10.79. I received a free review copy but the publisher has no input to my review. Thank you and bye bye.
## Book List
* Portrait of God by Jack Mooring. [Amazon](https://www.amazon.com/Portrait-God-Rediscovering-Attributes-through/dp/0830786031). [Logos](https://www.logos.com/product/300988/portrait-of-god-rediscovering-the-attributes-of-god-through-the-stories-of-his-people).
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Year 3
25 Apr 2024· Reading and Readers
Hi, my name is Terence and I'm your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. Except I have not been reviewing any books for nearly two months now.

Have I quit the podcast? No. I am still looking forward to the 100th episode of Reading and Readers. I have a special book in mind for that one. So if I do end this podcast, and I don't have any intention of doing so, I would definitely do it after the 100th episode.

Why the delay? I used to do a book review every two weeks. That was a crazy pace. I could sustain that pace until my responsibilities elsewhere -- in the office, church and home -- increased. I found myself having to read more books but not books I would later review.

So I have decided to take the podcast slow. Instead of a sprint, or a jog, it will be stroll or a walk. I will still be downloading the monthly free books from Logos. I will still be on the look out for good books.

If I see a must-read book, I will read it. If it is a must-share book, then I will review and share my thoughts with everyone.

This was not how I expected to celebrate the Reading and Reader's third year. However, I am hopeful that once things settle down, I will get back to reading and reviewing Christian books for you. Thank you for your support. Until next time, bye!
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology by Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer
25 Feb 2024· Reading and Readers
Today's book could be the most important book of the year. Hopefully not the decade. Because I would really hate to talk about Critical Theory again. If everybody in the world read today's book, we would never have to talk about it ever again.
Hi, my name is Terence and I’m your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. Today I review “Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology - Implications for the Church and Society” by Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer. 582 pages. Published by Harvest House Publishers in October 2023. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD21.99 and in Logos for USD16.49. But I got it in Logos for the low low price of USD6.99 because every month I eagerly wait for Logos' free and deeply discounted books.
Eagerly Awaited
This book came up. And there is no other book that I have more eagerly waited for than a Neil Shenvi book on Critical Theory.
I first knew of Shenvi from Voddie Baucham’s “Fault Lines”, a book on Critical Race Theory that I reviewed in Episode 9. From Voddie Baucham's book, I found myself in Neil Shenvi’s website and was floored by the thorough analysis of the many many Critical Theory books he reads.
I knew then that if Shenvi ever decided to compile his knowledge into a book, I must read it. As good as anyone's articles, interviews and seminars are, the best way to make a case is through a well-written book.
But there is another author to today's book. Pat Sawyer. Sawyer was in the banking industry for 17 years before he took a PhD in educational and cultural studies. He wrote a dissertation on social justice.
It seems that the fusion of these two men, Shenvi and Sawyer, has released an incredible amount of energy. Their combined powers of observation, subject expertise, analytical skills and commitment to the Christian faith has made them, I would say, very dangerous men.
Just as the emperor who wears no clothes can no longer walk around naked after a child tells the truth, so the reader can no longer be complacent or be outraged under false premises after Shenvi and Sawyer tell the truth on Critical Theory.
Critical Dilemma is divided into three parts.
Part 1: Understanding Part 2: Critiquing Part 3: Engaging
Understanding Critical Theory
The book begins with an honest painful look at Slavery and Jim Crow. This disarms the Social Justice Warrior. Here is outrage over slavery and Jim Crow. This disarms the Christian Culture Warrior. Shenvi, why are you opening old wounds? Sawyer, why are you taking the enemies talking points?
By starting with these "Shadows of the Past", the authors establish their credentials as unflinching truth tellers. When people are ignorant of history, they are vulnerable. When good people hear of the victims, they want to right those wrongs.
Why is Critical Theory so effective in channeling this righteous anger through the government, schools, churches and families? That question is answered in Part 1.
Later, the authors challenge the reader to say they do not go far enough. Our righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the Social Justice Warriors. But not in the way you may think, I will explain more later.
Know Them In Their Most Plausible and Persuasive Form
The authors take Critical Theory seriously. They don't caricature it. No strawman here. Not trying to score points with the groupies. They went through the Critical Theory literature to know what it says and have made a sincere attempt to present it to us.
How do we know it's sincere? They quote extensively the main proponents of Critical Theory.They state up front that some of these guys would deny being members of Critical Theory. Shenvi and Sawyer refuse to get into a fight over labels. The key is to discuss ideas. And they show through those extensive quotes that if it walks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, at the very least, it's in the bird family.They explain all this without imputing motives. They have a chapter titled, "Positive Insights" that lists positive aspects of Critical Theory. We need to properly understand the appeal of Critical Theory in order to make a proper critique over it.
Why do they make such a great effort? John Mills puts it well.
He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side; if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion…Nor is it enough that he should hear the arguments of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. That is not the way to do justice to the arguments, or bring them into real contact with his own mind. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them; who defend them in earnest, and do their very utmost for them. He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
Shenvi and Sawyer see their own work as an illustration of John Mill's claim.
Contemporary Critical Theory: The Big Four
By now, I am sure everyone listening is dying to know what is Critical Theory that has turned the world upside down.
"Rejecting racism is racism." "Whiteness is wickedness." "There are more than two genders."
The Grand Unified Theory behind the madness, which Shenvi and Sawyer has termed "Contemporary Critical Theory", can be expressed in its four characteristics. The Social Binary. Society is divided into oppressors and the oppressed, white and people of colour, heterosexuals and homosexuals, Christians and non-Christians.Hegemonic Power. Oppressors impose their values, traditions and norms unto society. For example, Christians see marriage as a one man, one woman, construct and have imposed this value, tradition and norm unto society.Lived Experience. If you are a man, shut up about abortion. If you are white, shut up about racism. Because you don't have the lived experience of being a woman or a person of colour.Social Justice. We want action. We want to change the world. So if you don’t speak up, then you are complicit in the injustice.
Wait a minute. You just told me to speak up for injustice. But you also told me to shut up because I don't have the lived experience to speak to the problem.
Yes, that is the lose-lose scenario you have as a privileged person. You can’t do anything right. Just cry and feel their pain but don’t cry and make this all about you.
Critiquing CCT
Once we understand what is Critical Theory, we are in the position to critique it.
In Part 2, the authors do not assume readers share their faith. The reader may be a Christian, may profess to be a Christian but doesn't know what is Christianity, or may be an Atheist. The book is written for all. And so, they give a crash course on evangelical faith.
As a Christian, instead of seeing it as a mind-numbing regurgitating of what I already know, I see it as confirming that Shenvi and Sawyer and I are actually on the same page when it comes to the fundamentals of Christianity. This is important because they will make their strongest critique of Contemporary Critical Theory not based on secular reasoning, for that you can read Cynical Theories by Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay but based on the Bible.
In a rigorously argued chapter that compares the four characteristics of Contemporary Critical Theory against Christianity, the authors make an assertion that no Christian can ignore. Let me quote at length the summary of that chapter.
They write:
Contemporary critical theory is skeptical of singular narratives and universal truth claims, viewing them as bids for power. Yet Christianity is itself a singular narrative of redemption and makes numerous universal truth claims. Contemporary critical theory exalts lived experience and downplays objective reasoning as masculine and Eurocentric. Yet Christianity argues that our hearts are sinful and that our fallible interpretation of our lived experience must be subordinated to God’s revelation in Scripture, apprehended through reason. Contemporary critical theory views privilege as collective and rooted in oppression. Yet Christianity recognizes that some norms are God-ordained and that privilege is not necessarily unjust, although it should be used to serve God and bless others. Contemporary critical theory posits an adversarial relationship between different genders, classes, and ethnic groups. In contrast, Christianity insists on fundamental solidarity between all human beings and a nonnegotiable familial relationship between Christians. Finally, for all these reasons, contemporary critical theory is rightly viewed as a worldview or metanarrative. It is not a narrow analytic tool. It makes sweeping assumptions about human beings, purpose, lived experience, meaning, morality, knowledge, and identity that inevitably bring it into conflict with Christianity.
This is what I meant by "Our righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the Social Justice Warriors." Their analysis of the human condition is wrong and their solution flawed but what zeal to change the world! Christians should be more zealous for the Truth, for Christ.
I wish I had more time to discuss each point in that summary. I stress it is a summary. Shenvi and Sawyer make really good points, piling on the evidence, drawing on, so-to-speak, written testimonies. Held against Scripture, their own words condemn them. And that is true for the whole book.
I had a hard time preparing this book review. I wanted, at first, to go through the flow of the arguments in the book, but it is beyond my ability to summarise them without turning it into a dry and boring outline.
At this point, you know something about what is in Part 1: Understanding and Part 2: Critiquing.
Masterclass
What you may not yet fully appreciate is this book is a masterclass on how a Christian deals with a controversial subject, even a dangerous one. Some would accuse Shenvi and Sawyer of violence all because they dare to question what others hold to be true... and sacred.
The clarity in the organisation: Understanding, Critiquing, Engaging. This should be the layout for any number of topics. I got one right now. I would like someone to write a book on anti-semitism. I don't understand why anti-semitism is still so prevalent. Why can't societies shake it off?
It's also a masterclass in reasoning. I would not be surprised to find out that Shenvi and Sawyer were both world-class debaters. They very cleverly reveal poor arguments.
Very quickly, one example. Bulverism. Bulverism is when you say something is true, but instead of explaining why its false, your opponent imputes motive.
They write:
Do men argue that abortion is immoral? That’s because they’re trying to control women’s bodies; therefore, their claim is false. Do White people think we should be polite? That’s because they’re trying to police the emotions of people of color; therefore, their claim is false. Do Christians claim that homosexuality is sinful? That’s because they’re trying to protect their heterosexual privilege; therefore, their claim is false.
Until I read this book, I didn't notice this pattern. After reading it, I see it everywhere.
The book is peppered with ways to detect flawed arguments which in the wrong hands could make you a worse person to talk to. Nobody likes the guy who points out the faulty lines in your argument.
Which is why Part 3 of this book is so important.
Engaging CCT
Part 3: Engaging is a shorter section of the book but a crucial one.
It's not enough that we understand Contemporary Critical Theory and can see how Christianity offers a true description and solution to the problem, we need to engage.
And it's not that easy. I'll just show you one that might trip you up.
Consider this statement: Justice is part of the gospel.
Do you agree?
Justice is part of the gospel.
Surely, the answer is yes.
Depends on what you mean by justice right? If you have the gospel, if you know the gospel, then you are thinking of God's justice. Man sins, Jesus saves, glory to God.
But if you say, "That is justice in a religious sense, what about justice in society? There is so much injustice. Surely Christians, the church, the gospel has something to say about that." This is how Shenvi and Sawyer put it:
The key point here is that seeking justice is an imperative. It is urged on us as God’s command, as something we ought to do, as a moral obligation we ought to fulfill. But these are all imperative statements. We therefore need to be exceptionally careful not to intermingle seeking justice with the gospel. We would rightfully shrink back from saying that “sexual purity is part of the gospel,” or “financial stewardship is part of the gospel,” or “pro-life activism is part of the gospel” not because these activities are wrong but because they cannot save us. They are not the good news of God’s redemption in Christ.
It's so important we hear this. We do not minimise seeking justice. But we do not conflate that with the gospel of Jesus Christ. No matter how well-intentioned we may be.
Who Should Read This Book
Who is this book for?
This book should be in every seminary, church library and pastor's study. The church cannot afford to get this wrong and this is the best book that explains why and how.
If you say you can be a Christian and still hold to Critical Theory or parts of it, then read and weep.
The highest praise I can say for this book is this: If you are a Critical Theory activist, then Critical Dilemma is the book to destroy. If you can make a winning argument against this book, you have cut the legs off your opponents. You have won the war. The tragedy is, if Shenvi and Sawyer are right, the Contemporary Critical Theory activist is not in a war for Truth but a war for Power. Until we understand this, we will not be able to make sense of Contemporary Critical Theory and the world today.
The emperor is wearing no clothes. Who dares to tell the truth?
This is a Reading and Reader’s review of “Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology - Implications for the Church and Society” by Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer. 582 pages. Published by Harvest House Publishers in October 2023. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD21.99 and in Logos for USD16.49. But I got it for USD6.99 in Logos last month all because every month I eagerly anticipate their free and deeply discounted books.
Book List“Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology - Implications for the Church and Society” by Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer. Amazon. Logos.
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
The Spirit of Grace by Alister McGrath
28 Jan 2024· Reading and Readers
I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried; he descended to the dead. On the third day he rose again; he ascended into heaven, he is seated at the right hand of the Father, and he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.
The Apostles Creed. What does it mean?
Hi, my name is Terence and I’m your host for Reading and Readers. Today I review “The Spirit of Grace” by Alister McGrath. 128 pages. Published by SPCK Publishing in Dec 2014. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD9.99 and for free in Logos in January.
Scientist and Theologian
McGrath graduated with a first class honours in Chemistry at Oxford, then a doctorate in molecular biophysics, a first class honours in theology, and just to make the rest of us feel small and tiny, he went on to two more doctorates in theology, and intellectual history.
I see here he has a long history as a Professor of Theology in Oxford, London, then back to Oxford as the Andreas Idreos Professor of Science and Religion in 2014. In 2022, he stepped down from this endowed chair, and is now the Senior Research Fellow at the Ian Ramsey Centre for Science and Religion at Oxford.
McGrath has written many books. There are many interesting titles here that I want more time to talk about them. So I'll do that at the end of this review. Let’s look at today’s book, "The Spirit of Grace".
The Title Under-Promises (Or The Book Over-Delivers)
When I picked up this book, I thought I knew what it would be about. The title says, “The Spirit of Grace”, so the book must be all about... the Holy Spirit. To my surprise, it was not.
This is actually the fourth book in a series. The series is designed to explain Christian creeds and Book 4 covers this part of the Apostles Creed:
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins,
The rest of it: “the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.” will be covered in Book 5, “The Christian Life and Hope.”
This is great. I don’t mind reading another book on the Holy Spirit but I haven't read a book on the Apostles Creed. But McGrath surprises me once again by giving more than expected.
Let me read the chapter headings and we'll see if you were paying attention.Chapter 1: The Holy Spirit: The giver of lifeChapter 2: Humanity: the climax of God’s creationChapter 3: Grace: the gift of a courteous GodChapter 4: Church: the communion of saintsChapter 5: One holy catholic and apostolic Church
The Apostles Creed doesn’t say anything about humanity. Yet, McGrath wisely notes:
If we are to understand the important place of spirituality in the Christian faith, we need to grasp both the idea that humanity has been created in order to relate to God and the role of the Holy Spirit in enabling and sustaining that relationship.
If I was assigned to write a book on the Apostles Creed, I would just do what I was told. There are four lines for this book? Then I'll have four chapters.
But McGrath has a higher level objective. He wants to explain the Christian belief to everyone, to describe the heart of the faith. If we need biblical anthropology, if we need to know what the Bible says about us, to understand Christianity he gives it to us.
Before we delve into a few chapters as examples, I just want to say that this book provoked many thoughts. Which at first I thought was strange because it's not as if I am encountering something new, a new concept. I know the Apostles Creed. When I go back to my hometown, the church I go to would in every Sunday service flash up the Apostles Creed for the congregation to read together.
I know the theology behind the Apostles Creed, having read books on the different elements of it: the Holy Spirit, forgiveness, the church. So why has McGrath's book been so stimulating?
And I concluded it's because the truth he speaks of is timely and timeless, it applies to what is important in our lives. When I'm guided by an able guide as McGrath, my latent thoughts, my worries and concerns, hopes and dreams, engage with the truth.
Let me share what I mean.
Holy Tensions Resolved
In Chapter 1 on the Holy Spirit, McGrath describes the experiential approach emphasised within the Charismatic and Pentecostal movements. He writes:
An emphasis on the experience of the Spirit can be argued to represent a welcome move away from very bookish or intellectual ways of thinking about the Christian faith. Why should those who cannot read, or who find abstract reasoning difficult, be disadvantaged in matters of faith? The Holy Spirit is the great leveller, making the rich experience of the living God available to all.
Then before one can accuse McGrath of being a Charismatic, he writes:
But not everyone feels so positively about experiential approaches to faith. Dorothy L. Sayers wrote to C. S. Lewis on 5 August 1946, making clear they made no sense to her. ‘All spiritual experience is a closed book to me; in that respect I have been tone-deaf from birth.’ Sayers relied on reason and imagination to generate and sustain her faith, and saw no cause to appeal to the vagueness of religious experience to express or defend it. Others are wary of a ‘touchy-feely’ faith, which they consider may open them to the charge of emotionalism or subjectivism—that is, making what they feel the basis of what they believe.
Having brought up the tension of the two positions, McGrath then tells us in no uncertain terms: “Divergence within Christianity really reflects a strength.”
Later he concludes:
There is only one Holy Spirit, but our experience and appreciation of that Spirit differs and reflects our individual identity. We are not forced into a template! Each of us is special, with something unique to offer God, who takes the threads of our lives and weaves them into a greater pattern.
What strikes me is how much we need good theologians. We give credit to the tireless pastor, preacher and missionaries but we must not forget the teachers, especially those who have dedicated a lifetime to study the Bible and to describe reality.
Most of us don't have the time to reflect on the theological issues of the day so we need some of us to do what is needed, to do theology.
Too many Christians think that ‘theology’ is a bad word for it leads to divisions. That is a failure to see how theology unites.
When there are divisions between intellectuals and believers who are more experiential, we unite in truth presented through theological analysis: Hey! Many gifts, many types of personalities but one Holy Spirit.
Reading the whole book we see unity in our common humanity, in our common need for forgiveness and once we accept Jesus as our Lord and Saviour, in our common belonging within the Church.
And if you read the whole series which explores the Christian creeds, including the Apostles Creed, you can see how it is our theology, our understanding of God, that unites us in our faith.
Pelagian Controversy Nicely Said
If you subscribe to this podcast, you will know that I recently reviewed Augustine’s Four Anti-Pelagian Writings.
I didn't expect to see Pelagius again so soon. In McGrath's chapter on humanity, McGrath gives a clear and concise summary of the Pelagian controversy.
In just a few pages, he tells us the history between the men, the theological debate and its implications, clearly siding with Augustine's interpretation without villainising Pelagius.
Let me read his conclusion:
The debate between Augustine and Pelagius is often revisited by Christians. On the one hand, Pelagius’ emphasis on the importance of trying to do our best is welcomed. On the other, Augustine’s emphasis on human frailty fits in far better with the New Testament’s stress on God’s graciousness towards us. For Augustine, human beings are damaged, wounded and seriously ill. There is no point in demanding that we improve ourselves when the essence of our condition is that we are trapped in our predicament. Pelagius seems to be in denial about the human situation. His naïve approach, although unquestionably well intentioned, could be compared to ordering a blind man to see things properly. Spiritual healing, not simply moral direction, is required.
This is the calm even-handed way McGrath deals with one of the most recognised and pernicious of heresies. This calm examination of ideas in simple non-technical language allows us to weigh the merits without the outrage. I don't know about you but I think we could do with less outrage nowadays.
Catholic is Understood Universal
One of my favourite chapters in the book is Chapter 5 which contains his systematic unpacking of the words from the Nicene Creed, “One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church”.
Catholic here does not refer to the Roman Catholic Church. Catholic means universal. To explain this, McGrath quotes Cyril of Jerusalem:
The Church is called ‘catholic’ because it extends through all the world, from one end of the earth to the other; and because it teaches completely, and without any omissions, all the doctrines that ought to be known to humanity concerning both things that are visible and invisible and things that are earthly and heavenly; and because it brings all kinds of people—whether rulers or subjects, learned or ignorant—under the influence of true piety; and because it universally treats and cures every kind of sin, whether committed by the soul or the body; and possesses in itself every kind of virtue which can be named relating to words, deeds or spiritual gifts of every kind.
McGrath then explains why understanding the church as catholic is important to Christians today:
The Church is the depository and transmitter of the whole Christian faith, not simply those parts of it that are thought to be relevant to its own situation. As someone who has studied the history of the Church, I have often noticed the tendency of one generation to regard some aspect of the Christian tradition as being of little interest, only for a later generation to rediscover its importance. The survival of the Christian faith depends upon the full richness of its intellectual, spiritual and ethical teachings being preserved and transmitted. We simply do not know what challenges we may face in the future, and which of the many resources of our faith may come into their own in meeting them. Christianity doesn’t always need to develop new ideas; it can reach back into its past, and rediscover ideas and approaches that have a new relevance in today’s context.
McGrath speaks of creeds, tradition and resources. Resources like books.
I started Reading and Readers because I wanted to do something about Christians not reading and not thinking deeply. They are missing out on the best things in life: The devotion and reflections of the faithful.
I was very encouraged.
Three Annoying Aspects (That Are Not The Writer’s Fault)
As I am sure you can tell, I like the book. I recommend it. However, there are three annoying features which intrude on the reading experience.
First, he makes regular reference to the previous books in the series. That’s good because he shows how what was taught previously connects to the present topic. It’s good because we learn better when we can connect ideas together, it reinforces memory and also comprehension. Which is great, unless you did not, like me, read the previous books, making it a bit harder to fully appreciate the references.
Second, I think the title could be reworked. McGrath did explain how the title “The Spirit of Grace” connects all the elements together but it’s not obvious that a book titled “The Spirit of Grace” will contain chapters on Humanity and the Church. Or that the book is part of a series on the Apostles Creed.
Which brings me to my third annoyance. This is a series but it doesn't show up as a series in Amazon. Amazon doesn’t put all the books in the series together in one convenient link. So you would have to search for the title of each book in the series. This is not McGrath’s problem, it’s Amazon’s. To save your time, I have put all five Amazon links in the episodes description below.
Just a quick note, the series was published by two publishers. I read and reviewed the UK’s publisher edition, with the series titled “Christian Beliefs for Everyone”. This is the free book in Logos. In the US, the publisher is Westminster John Knox Press, with the series titled “The Heart of Christian Faith”.
Can I Have More Please?
As far as I am concerned, every church that flashes up the Apostles Creed on the screen or gets their members to read the creed in every service should buy boxes of these books, put them on display and get members to read them.
If you read all the books in the series, you would have read 600 pages but you won’t feel it because each book is only 120 pages. Time will just zip by.
However, if you want a shorter commitment, McGrath has another book, titled: “I Believe: Exploring the Apostles’ Creed”. Only 126 pages and it promises to cover the Apostles Creed in six week study plan.
You could spend the rest of the year just reading McGrath books. He has many interesting titles. If you love C.S. Lewis, you probably already know Alister McGrath because he is well-known for his biography: “C.S. Lewis: A Life: Eccentric Genius, Reluctant Prophet”.
If you don't know Lewis maybe you should read this book: “Deep Magic, Dragons and Talking Mice: How Reading C.S. Can Change Your Life”.
It must have changed McGrath's life because after reading Lewis' "Mere Christianity", McGrath went to to write "Mere Theology", "Mere Apologetics" and "Mere Discipleship".
If you are looking for heavier reading material, McGrath together with J.I. Packer is the editor for the Crossway ClassicCommentaries series. The series has commentaries by long dead guys like John Calvin, Martin Luther, R.C. Ryle, Charles Hodge, and Charles Spurgeon. In fact, I reviewed one of the books in Episode 27, a commentary on Hebrews by John Owen.
If I could just read one book out of McGrath’s long list of writings, I would pick up, “Richard Dawkins, C.S. Lewis and the Meaning of Life”. McGrath is both a scientist and theologian so this should be a good read. It’s only 80 pages! If Logos makes it free I will definitely review it.
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then wanting to read more books by the same author must be the sincerest form of a book recommendation.
Outro
This is a Reading and Reader’s review of “The Spirit of Grace” by Alister McGrath. 128 pages, published by SPCK Publishing in December 2014. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD9.99 and free in Logos.
The next book I review is Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer's "Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology - Implications for the Church and Society". I have finished the book and I was in a dilemma whether to rush the review or do a proper one. Then I thought this could be one of the most important book for Christians to read today so I should not rush it. "Critical Dilemma" is available in Amazon for USD21.99 and it is discounted to USD6.99 in Logos for January. Get it and all that is happening around you suddenly makes sense.
Books ListFaith and Creeds (Book 1) by Alister McGrath. Amazon.The Living God (Book 2) by Alister McGrath. Amazon.Jesus Christ (Book 3) by Alister McGrath. Amazon.The Spirit of Grace (Book 4) by Alister McGrath. Amazon.The Christian Life and Hope (Book 5) by Alister McGrath. Amazon."Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology - Implications for the Church and Society" by Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer. Amazon. Logos.
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
The Legacy of John Calvin by David W. Hall
14 Jan 2024· Reading and Readers
Everyone knows John Calvin was a great theologian but did you know he was more than a theologian? Do you know how he has influenced our schools, governments and our very way of life?
Hi, my name is Terence and I'm your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. Today I review "The Legacy of John Calvin" by David Hall. 112 pages. Published by P&R Publishing in June 2008. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD7.99 and available in Logos for free! Free for January.
Who is David Hall? This is what Amazon says:
Dr. David W. Hall has served as the Senior Pastor of the historic Midway Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Powder Springs, Georgia since 2003.
Is he qualified to write on John Calvin? Amazon continues to say:
In addition to his work as Executive Director of Calvin500, his Calvin500 series contains the following works: The Legacy of John Calvin, Calvin in the Public Square, Calvin and Commerce, Preaching Like Calvin, Calvin and Culture, Tributes to John Calvin, and Theological Guide to Calvin’s Institutes.
Having written so many books on Calvin, we are confident that if anyone could write an authoritative book on John Calvin, David Hall would be the guy. Or he could have written so many books on Calvin that everywhere he goes he sees John Calvin.
The book is divided into three parts. Part 1: Ten Ways Modern Culture is Different because of John Calvin Part 2: John Calvin: A Life Worth Knowing Part 3: Tributes: Measuring a Man after Many Generations
Part 1
Let me start with Part 1.
Listeners to this podcast, should be somewhat familiar with John Calvin. You know him as the theologian. The guy who wrote The Institutes, the bedrock of the Systematic Theology. Other than writing theology, what else did he do? Got nothing? Here are some of the ways your life is all the better because of John Calvin.
Did you go to school? That's thanks to Calvin. In Geneva, Calvin set up the free public school and seminary and, according to a historian quoted in this book, these became "the forerunners of modern public education."
Do you know volunteer societies? They might have helped you or someone you know. That's thanks to Calvin and his deacons who cared for orphans, the elderly and the sick. I quote:
This ecclesiastical institution was a precursor to the voluntary societies of the 19th and 20th centuries in the West.
Do you know what is a Senate? Senators are in the Senate. They have a seat in government. Calvin and other commentators studied the Bible. They studied how Jethro advised Moses on how to govern a nation. Calvin concluded that what worked for Moses and Israel would work for John Calvin and Geneva. Thus, the Senate was established in Geneva. This idea then reached America. As Hall says, "With this idea [of limited government], Calvin altered the trajectory of governance."
In the chapter titled, "Decentralised Politics: The Republic", we have a lot more to thank John Calvin. I quote:
Many ideas that began with Calvin’s reformation in Geneva and later became part of the fabric of America were cultivated and crossbred in the seventeenth-century. Customs now taken for granted, like freedom of speech, assembly, and dissent, were extended as Calvin’s Dutch, British, and Scottish disciples refined these ideas.
With this illustrious list of contributions to modern culture, I was surprised that we don't have John Calvin to thank for slice bread.
Part 2
In Part 2, we have a short biography of Calvin divided into four sections: Calvin's Life, Calvin's Friendships, Calvin's Death and Epilogue.
If you are yet to be persuaded on the giant who is John Calvin, David Hall quotes 19th century Harvard historian George Bancroft who:
traced the living legacy of Calvin among the Plymouth pilgrims, the Huguenot settlers of South Carolina, and the Dutch colonists in Manhattan, concluding: "He that will not honour the memory and respect the influence of Calvin knows but little of the origin of American liberty."
Later we read that the world-renowned German historian Leopold von Ranke reached the conclusion that, "John Calvin was virtually the founder of America."
A French man founded America? How did he do that? Well, we hope to find out in this biography.
Hall gives a standard portrait of Calvin. His early life, how his father sent him to study law because that's where the money was, then a thunderclap. The Reformation happened. Calvin left France and eventually arrived in Geneva. He didn't want to stay in Geneva but he was spiritually bullied by William Karel to stay. So he stayed.
Then he refused to offer communion to some people (he had good reasons not to) and the City Council exiled Calvin. But three years later, those who opposed Calvin fell away, and Geneva insisted Calvin return to continue the good work he did there. So he did. He famously preached exactly where he left off three years ago.
We read how he helped to build up the church, the city, the public school and seminary, the printers, the economy and more. We read about his friends, a Who's Who of the Reformation. John Calvin was not a loner, he probably has more friends than you and I!
In his later years, Calvin was badly sick but that did not stop him from working. They had no painkillers. But he manages to produce great works of literature while most of us spend our time figuring a comeback in Twitter.
Then John Calvin's life ends.
We turn to the epilogue. What I expected to see is how Calvin's disciples went on to continue the good work. I expected to read how they shaped the religious, political, social and economic landscape. I expected a brief sketch of how John Calvin raised up disciples who raised up other disciples who then somehow contributed to the founding of America.
That is what I expected but what I got was a character study. It's an eulogy. It extols what Hall considers Calvin's chief virtue, namely humility. It's a good eulogy. Humble Calvin would protest for thinking so much of him but I still think an epilogue that briefly trace through the lives of Calvin's disciples would fit better with the theme of the book.
Part 3
In Part 3, we have tributes. The purpose of this section is, "to illustrate that Calvin is esteemed by many evangelicals from differing traditions", and that "The passage of time and breadth of acclaim is another measure of Calvin's contribution."
To make that point we have tributes from Baptists (Spurgeon, John Piper, Steven Lawson), Anglicans (J.I. Packer and J.C. Ryle), Independents (John MacArthur), Methodists (John Wesley) and a surprising note from a Roman Catholic (Alexandre Ganoczy).
Part 3 is the weakest part of the book.
The portions are uneven. The tributes from Spurgeon go on and on. While Steven Lawson does not need his name as a sub-heading when all the section says is Lawson wrote a book as a tribute on Calvin's preaching.
And that's the weird thing. The people here pay tribute to Calvin the Theologian, not Calvin the School Builder, or Calvin the Senate Starter, or Calvin the Republican. If Charles Spurgeon had said, "Look at America, they have no king, thanks to John Calvin." That would be something.
The tribute from the Roman Catholic just says John Calvin is superior to Martin Luther and he had his own mind, he was not blindly copying everybody else. That's a lame compliment. You know what would be a good Roman Catholic tribute?
A harsh condemnation.
Pope Leo X once described Martin Luther as a wild boar in God's garden. A condemnation from a pope or a million dollar bounty on Calvin's head would be a public relations win for Calvin. Just for singling him out as public enemy number one, in today's world, would get John Calvin a million followers, a million likes, within hours.
Claims Not Well Supported
Let's now look at the book as a whole.
This book is part of the Calvin500 series. So perhaps my criticisms are unfair because they are addressed in the other books. But as it is, this is the only book I read and it is a mess.
It's a good book for people who love Calvin and want to know another side of his life and work.
It's not so good for people who have no overly fond feelings for Calvin and are not wrong to be sceptical of the grand claims made in the book.
John Calvin as the founder of America? There are many others that would claim some intellectual and even spiritual credit for founding America, but I don't think John Calvin comes up in the list of claimants.
And perhaps that is what today's book is for: to right a wrong. But the book doesn't make the case. Sure, they are historians who say so. There are other experts who say so. But how did they reach their conclusions? I want more than someone saying: America's Founders were influenced by Puritans, the Puritans were influenced by Calvin, ergo the Founders were influenced by Calvin.
What About Schools?
For example, schools. Calvin did not invent schools. Hall never makes such a preposterous claim. But it says here that these schools are forerunners of modern public schools.
But in what way? What was Calvin's contribution? Did he design the syllabus? Did he teach? Did he cast the vision, raise the funds, laid the first brick?
Did someone visit the school and say, "I would like one back home," and built whole nation full of Calvin schools? Unless it's clear what are the unique aspects of Calvin's school and academy, I would argue that schools, even tuition-free schools, existed before Geneva, in other countries.
The Republic?
Hall gives Calvin some credit for republicanism, a system of government where the leader is not a hereditary king but an elected representative from the people. The thing is I am not sure Calvin would claim credit for republicanism.
John Calvin was trained as a lawyer, so let's take a courtroom scenario. Imagine that it was a criminal offence to have significantly contributed to the Founding of America. Now imagine that John Calvin was resurrected from the dead to answer for his crime. The question is would there be enough evidence for the jury to convict him?
Based on this book, no. It would be easy to show that John Calvin was too far away from the events to have any meaningful influence on them. Calvin did establish a limited government in Geneva but Geneva is not America, in size or scope. Therefore, unless the prosecutor has something more substantial than hearsay, any jury would easily acquit Calvin of the charge.
Just for comparison, if it was a criminal offence to have significantly contributed to Reformed Theology. Then there is no escape for John Calvin. His words, his actions, his disciples are all evidence against him.
Give Me the Full Version of the Book
This is why the book is flawed in concept. It makes assertions but does not go far enough to support them. Part 2 and Part 3 of the book should be scrapped. If you want to know about the life of John Calvin, write another book. If you want to know the tributes or opinions of others, across different denominations, fields, countries over the centuries, write another book.
But for this book, 112 pages of it, write as if you are John Calvin. He was an irresistible force because his top legal mind made theological arguments indisputably built on the Bible. Be like Calvin, make the case.
And if the book was re-worked, it needs a good editor. Let me give one example.
When I read Part 2, the life of John Calvin, I thought the tone was too positive. We need to find fault with the man but there are known issues with Calvin. Servetus, anyone? I have heard a good defence for Calvin with regards to Servetus, but in this book, it's as if nothing ever happened. And that's okay, it is the writer's prerogative to leave some things out and in the case of Servetus, if you can't explain the whole story, it might be best to not mention him at all.
The irritation is the book does mention him but never bothers to explain who he is. In Part 3, we have a John Wesley giving a tribute to Calvin. I quote:
I believe Calvin was a great instrument of God; and that he was a wise and pious man; But I cannot but advise those who love his memory to let Servetus alone. Yet if any one resolves to understand the whole affair,” he may consult a learned account by a Dr. Chandler of London.
Isn't that a teaser? Wesley asks us to leave Servetus alone, but we can't leave it alone now because our curiosity is now aroused, who is Servetus? If you are going to mention him, then tell us who he is, if not, then don't cause Wesley's quote doesn't even need to be there.
I have been highly critical of the book. Is there anything good about it. Well, it's short and it's free. Or it was free in January. If it's no longer free by the time you are hearing this, then you have one less reason to get it.
I do not recommend this book. I recommend you get another book. Maybe another one by David Hall? I do not dismiss his passion and knowledge of John Calvin. Maybe his other books in the Calvin500 series are better than today's one. Maybe today's book was simply an ill-advised idea that came out half-baked. All I know is, this is not the book to inform or excite anyone on John Calvin's legacy in the modern world.
Outro
This is a Reading and Reader's review of "The Legacy of John Calvin" by David Hall. 112 pages. Published by P&R Publishing in June 2008. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD7.99 and available in Logos for free! Free for January.
Thank you for listening. Bye bye.
Book List
"The Legacy of John Calvin: His Influence on the Modern World" by David Hall. Amazon. Logos.
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Jesus and the Land: The New Testament Challenge to Holy Land Theology by Gary M. Burge
7 Jan 2024· Reading and Readers
It's a nightmare that never ends. A nightmare of rape, murder, of unspeakable evil to the young, to the old, to pregnant women and babies. A nightmare that is all too real. What does the Bible say about the Israel-Palestine conflict? Or more specifically, what does the New Testament say about the Christian's posture towards the Holy Land?
Hi, my name is Terence and I'm your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. Today I review "Jesus and the Land: The New Testament Challenge to 'Holy Land' Theology" by Gary M. Burge. 168 pages, published by Baker Academic in April 2010. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD15.99 and was USD3.99 last month, December, in Logos.
Theologian Writing on the Land
Burge is a New Testament scholar who has written, amongst many of his works, extensive commentaries on the Gospel of John and the Epistles of John. I have reviewed his commentary on the Letters of John from the NIV Application Commentary series. So from there I know what to expect of his views on modern day Israel. If you don't know them, you will certainly know them by the end this review.
This book was published in 2010, but it might as well have been published today. The conflict in Israel-Palestine is still ongoing. The Jewish people and the Palestinians are still making exclusive claims to the land.
In his introduction, Burge writes:
This book asks how Christians should understand these competing land claims. Given our theological framework, what is the relationship between land and theology in the New Testament? What did Jesus and the New Testament writers think about the territorial claims of ancient Israel? Did they retain the view of the sanctity of Jerusalem and its Temple? Were they rethinking the relationship between faith and locale? Or were they confident that a sacred place was still to be held for believers?
Old Testament in Brief
Burge starts the book, in the Old Testament, in the time when God promises Abraham, "To your descendants I give this land..." This land, this promise, Burge charts the relationship of the children of Abraham to the land, from the Promise to the Conquest, from the Warning of Exile to the Return from Exile.
We see that the Old Testament doesn't portray the Holy Land as prime real estate. Burge writes:
While it will be a good land, it will not be an easy land. This will be a land that demands faith. Far from being paradise, this is a land that will hone a people. For instance, without a central river system, agriculture must rely on God, who supplies the land with water through rainfall. Culturally the land will not be empty but will be filled with Canaanites (and others) who will tempt Israel to compromise its unique commitment to God. And politically, armies moving from Egypt to Mesopotamia will run through this land as if it were a highway and Israel will be forced to decide whether its security will be found in local treaties and alliances or in God, who promises to sustain its welfare.
Throughout the book, Burge makes his points from Scripture. For example, I quote:
Before Israel enters the land under Joshua’s leadership, Deuteronomy records Moses’ final words of encouragement and warning to the people. (Deuteronomy 4:25-27) When you have had children and children’s children, and become complacent in the land, if you act corruptly by making an idol in the form of anything, thus doing what is evil in the sight of the Lord your God, and provoking him to anger, I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that you will soon utterly perish from the land that you are crossing the Jordan to occupy; you will not live long on it, but will be utterly destroyed. The Lord will scatter you among the peoples; only a few of you will be left among the nations where the Lord will lead you.
Burge comments:
The severity of these words is stunning. This land is not simply a gift the giver has forgotten. It is a gift that has expectations for covenant holiness and justice. God is watching this land. He has personal expectations for this land. It is a land that should evoke memories of his own holiness.
Diaspora Jews
Burge covers the whole Old Testament in one chapter. Before he goes into the New Testament, Burge describes the world of the Diaspora Jews through the writings of Philo and Josephus. What happened during this time?
For one thing:
More Jews were living outside the holy Land than they were living in it. And this brought major implications to Jewish thinking and perspective.
What surprised me is that the Jewish people, before Christians came to the scene, were already moving the theological focus away from the land.
The Jews who were born outside of Israel, who married, did business and made a life outside, were still Jews in their customs and relationships. They were still making pilgrimages to Jerusalem, still paying the Temple tax and many wanted to be buried in the Holy Land, but many did not believe that to be a good Jew meant to rebel against the Romans, retake the Temple and reconstitute the Kingdom of Israel.
Jesus and the Land
This brings us to Chapter 3: "Jesus and the Land" and Chapter 4: "The Fourth Gospel and the Land". Burge is a Johannine scholar so it makes sense for him to dedicate an entire chapter for the Fourth Gospel.
In these two chapters, Burge makes an incredibly persuasive case for how Jesus of the Gospels must have thought of territorial theology.
At one point, he notes:
First, Jesus is surprisingly silent with regard to the territorial aspirations and politics of his day. The national ambitions of Judaism under Rome constantly pressed Jewish leadership to respond. Either Judea was capitulating to the occupation or Judea had to organize to defeat it. However, Jesus is oddly silent about the debate. Moreover Jesus is curiously receptive to contact with the occupiers. In Matthew 8:5–13, he responds to the request of a Roman centurion whose valued servant was ill. Here we find no repulsion of the soldier, no condemnation of Gentiles, but rather we find receptivity and welcome. He says of the Roman: “Not even in Israel have I found such faith” (8:10). What emerges is a general impression that Israel’s national ambitions tied to reclaiming the land live on the margin of Jesus’ thinking.
If Christians are to give the land of Israel-Palestine some kind of special treatment (whatever that means), then we should get some cue from Jesus. But if Jesus did not care much for the dirt under his feet, then should we?
Do you remember how the Pharisees and Herodians asked Jesus, "Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?" We hear Jesus give the famous answer, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's." Burge tells us, "We can fairly interpret this as a refusal to support the tax revolt" and later "The kingdom Jesus advocated could not be co-opted by a nationalistic movement that sought to win back the land by force."
Speculative PointsIn one section, Burge prepares a list of seven critical passages. I can't go through them one by one but I want to share two of them. Not the most persuasive, but the most speculative.
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus declared, "the meek shall inherit the earth." The earth can also be translated as the land. And what would a Jew think when the words 'inherit' and 'land' come up? Well, he would be thinking of the Holy Land. And who does Jesus say will inherit the land? The meek, not the strong.
In Matthew 25:14-30, a rich man entrusts three servants with cash. Two of the servants invest and make a profit. But the third buries the money in the ground. Or as Burge suggests, ground can be translated as land. Is this parable a cautionary tale against territorial theology? Burge himself admits:
Such an interpretation is far from certain since it requires an allegorising of the story that is foreign and arbitrary to the story itself.
When a writer is willing to point out when his point is weak, more credit to him. Too many make too much out of too little. We should call it like it is, not as we hope.
We get the same level of insight and care as Burge gives us a sweeping survey of land theology in Acts, Galatians, Romans, Hebrews and Revelation in chapters 5, 6 and 7.
This excerpt is representative of his conclusions:
At no point do the earliest Christians view the Holy Land as a locus of divine activity to which the people of the Roman empire must be drawn. They do not promote the Holy Land either for the Jew or for the Christian as a vital aspect of faith. No Diaspora Jew or pagan Roman is converted and then reminded of the importance of the Holy Land. The early Christians possessed no territorial theology. Early Christian preaching is utterly uninterested in a Jewish eschatology devoted to the restoration of the land. The kingdom of Christ began in Judea and is historically anchored there but it is not tethered to a political realization of that kingdom in the Holy Land. Echoing the message of the Gospels, the praxis of the Church betrays its theological commitments: Christians will find in Christ what Judaism had sought in the land.
What Burge Does Not Say
As I grow to appreciate from this book, Jerusalem and the surrounding lands are important, Burge does not diminish their importance, but they are important historically, not theologically. Historically because Jerusalem is not Shangri-La. Abraham, David, Mary, Joseph, Jesus, Peter and Paul walked on the same dust Christian tourists walk on. The same dust, I observe, that Israel and Palestine spill blood for.
That's my observation. As I read Burge's analysis and conclusion, I marvel not just in what he says, but what he does not say.
He does not say anything about the current Israel-Palestine conflict, when he could easily do so.
For example, when he explains how the meek shall inherit the earth, it would be easy to take a shot at Christian Zionists. "When Israeli settlers take the land, are they meek?"
Burge mentions settlers once in the introduction to describe the relevance of the topic, says nothing about them for seven chapters, and he only mentions them again, and this time extensively, in the last chapter, chapter 8, where he discuses modern day Israel.
This approach to separate biblical interpretation from contemporary application respects the reader.
I don't need to consider the righteousness of a particular cause, I just need to consider whether his interpretation is right.
I don't need to wonder if it is correct the way he connects our 21st century concerns with the writings of 1st century Christians. If we interpret properly, we will know that 1st century Christians think a lot about the land. More than we do!They see Romans marching up and down it every day!
The Problem with Those Supporting Holy Land Theology
The absence of the modern day conflict in the earlier chapters does not mean the author is detached. Far from it! It is obvious he has strong passions but he aims to develop his theology first, before applying them to his concerns.
He writes:
Numerous writers have critiqued this movement extensively and found in its bold claims to territory (linked to eschatology) an angry and dangerous synthesis of theology and politics. Engaging their writings directly is difficult because it is a populist movement fueled by preachers who use its schema evangelistically. No carefully argued theological study has come from within its own ranks. No New Testament scholar has written in its defense. Its advocacy groups, such as Christians United for Israel, and Camera, are generally run by political activists. Its books come from the pens of popular television preachers or lobbyists. I have been invited to debate some of their leaders and find myself with people who have no training in theology. How can such a widespread movement in the Church be successful without a thoughtful theological undergirding?
He then continues with a scathing critique which I can only give you the headings without the detail:They fail to point out the indisputable biblical motif that land promise is strictly tied to covenant fidelity.They use the prophets to build their worldview, but they fail to hear what else the prophets had to say.They need to call Israel to live by biblical standards of life. The alien and sojourner should be protected because Israel was an alien and sojourner in Egypt.They are naive in applying the historic text of Israel's ancient history to modern Israel.They fail to think Christianly about the subject of theology and the land. A scholar was able to affirm Zionism from the Old Testament, but Burge points out how he neglected to bring the New Testament to bear.
Explain The OT to Me
This brings me to my critique on the book as a whole.
The subtitle of the book is, "The New Testament Challenge to 'Holy Land' Theology", but if one wants to make a deathblow to Holy Land Theology, we need as rigorous an interpretation of the Old Testament as well. We need an OT scholar writing alongside the NT scholar. The book would be thicker. Right now, it's easy to read at 168 pages.
But one chapter for the Old Testament is too short. It's not enough to convince supporters of 'Holy Land' theology who quote the OT.
Burge's critique that territorial theology does not consider the New Testament is valid. But Christians at the pulpit and the pew, need help to make sense of the Old Testament text. It's not enough to just say what the New Testament text says. As it is, it can look as if the OT and NT are shouting over each other.
Can a Two-State Solution Exist?
My second criticism is only a criticism because he did not address the question that emerged in my mind as I read his conclusions. Basically, Burge tells us that territorial theology is wrong because Jesus, Paul and all the New Testament writer has shifted the attention away from the land beneath their feet to the kingdom of God.
But is it possible that it's a matter of timing? For example, Jesus said he was sent only to the lost children of Israel and with some exceptions, he kept to a tight area. Jesus did not preach in Athens, heal in Malta, or die in Rome. If we only had the Gospels, and didn't have Acts or the epistles, we could conclude that the Gospel is limited to where Jesus worked.
"Ah hah!", someone says, "That's why we have Acts and the epistles."
Which is my point, perhaps there is something in the Old Testament that would support some form of Holy Land theology.
Or consider how John the Baptist had to ask Jesus, "Are you the one, or should we expect another one?" He asked that because Jesus did not fulfil many of the prophecies expected of the Messiah.
Maybe the remaining Old Testament prophecies will be fulfilled in a time or manner that we do not expect?
In short, what I am asking is does Burge's interpretation necessarily exclude territorial theology? Can both exist alongside just in different periods?
Based on my reading of this book, I think I know what Burge's answer would be, but I would have liked to know definitively if a Two-State Solution can exist?
So Good, It's Scary
Because, I'll tip my hand now, I am as convinced as I can be that Burge's approach, exposition, analysis and conclusion is right.
I always wished I had the time and ability to study the theological framework behind the Israel-Palestine conflict, and if I had half the ability of Burge, I would have attempted what he did, just go through Scripture, expound it and arrive at a conclusion that informs us on how we are to understand the world today.
I found myself agreeing so much with everything he writes that I questioned myself, "Am I living in the same echo-chamber as Gary Burge?" So near the end of the book, I told myself that if I wanted to make sure that my position here is stress-tested, I need to read a good book that argues the opposite.
And what do you know, Burge gives us a long list of books for further readings.
One list is for theological books. He introduces them:
There have been a limited number of treatments of the land motif in the Bible. Many work directly on the problem of land conflict in Israel-Palestine and then provide theological reflection as a feature of the ethical discussion. Others—Jewish and Palestinian writers—inevitably express their own narratives within the struggle.
Another list is on the modern day conflict itself. He recommends books from both sides of the debate written by ex-American President Jimmy Carter, current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a Palestinian Lutheran pastor and more.
In conclusion, to the Christian who has an opinion on the Israel-Palestinian conflict, I won't say you must read this book, but I would say you must have a theological underpinning for your opinion. Your opinion needs to be informed by both the Old Testament and the New Testament. And if you want to be as well-informed as you can be on this issue that is often played on Christian sentiments, then I would recommend "Jesus and the Land: The New Testament Challenge to 'Holy Land' Theology". It's just as relevant as it was the day it was published 14 years ago, which is one of the rare cases where the writer must wish his book was less relevant today.
Outro
This is a Reading and Reader's review of "Jesus and the Land" by Gary M. Burge. 168 pages, published by Baker Academic in April 2010. Available in Amazon Kindle for USD15.99 and was USD3.99 last month, December, in Logos.
I am currently reading the Logos free book for January. What better way to start the new year than to read "The Legacy of John Calvin: His Influence on the Modern World" by David W. Hall. If you are predestined to listen to it, I'll see you then. Thank you for listening. Bye bye.
Book List

"Jesus and the Land" by Gary M. Burge. Amazon. Logos.
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Saint Augustine: Four Anti-Pelagian Writings
31 Dec 2023· Reading and Readers
A theologian writes a critical response to a popular teaching. He destroys it. The teaching and teacher are irredeemably branded as heresy and heretic. Augustine vs. Pelagius, the battle of the ages. Today I read what nobody else wants to read to find out was Saint Augustine correct? Is Pelagianism a heresy and Pelagius a heretic?"
Hi, my name is Terence and I'm your host for Reading and Readers, a podcast where I review Christian books for you. Today I review "Saint Augustine: Four Anti-Pelagian Writings" translated by John Mourant and William Collinge. 372 pages, published by The Catholic University of America Press in January 1992. It's available in Amazon for USD42.24 (as of the date of recording) and in Logos for USD30.99.
Pelagius Was Not A Heretic
"Pelagius was not a heretic. The church has gotten him wrong."
This was news to me. When I first started reading theology, I learnt that Pelagius taught that man, by nature, is able to live completely sinless lives and that this was heresy. And the man who succeeded in destroying this heresy is a hero of the church, the same man who wrote Confessions and City of God, Saint Augustine of Hippo.
So I was surprised to hear that heretic Pelagius was misunderstood and great man Augustine wrote a hit job on him. I have no skin in the game, if Pelagius was truly innocent of the charges, then let justice be done.
I began by reading Pelagius in his own words. I found Pelagius' Letter to Demetrias, which is available for free online. And I was shocked!
Let me read from that letter:
Nor is there any reason why it is made difficult for us to do good other than that long habit of doing wrong which has infected us from childhood and corrupted us little by little over many years and ever after holds us in bondage and slavery to itself, so that it seems somehow to have acquired the force of nature. We now find ourselves being resisted and opposed by all that long period in which we were carelessly instructed, that is, educated in evil, in which we even strove to be evil, since, to add to the other incentives to evil, innocence itself was held to be folly.
Pelagius does not believe that we inherit the sinful nature from Adam, but instead we copied what we see around us. In short, Pelagius does not believe in, what we know today as, Original Sin, an idea we have Augustine to thank for. Augustine was right to condemn it!
Without reading Augustine, I already know I am against Pelagianism. Someone might say that's because I have already been corrupted little by little over many years by Augustine. In response, I concede that the books I read favour Augustine, but I truly believe my convictions come directly from the Bible.
I could leave it as that. Sustaining my position on biblical grounds. But since the discussion is on two separate but related questions: Is Pelagianism a heresy? Is Pelagius a heretic?
If we want to properly answer these questions, we should read the man who was instrumental in the condemnation. We should read Augustine's own words and not what other people said he said. We need the primary source.
Read The Primary Source
I searched and bought a translation of Saint Augustine: Four Anti-Pelagian Writings. I hope to find out answers to a few questions like: What did Augustine understand of Pelagianism? Was he fair in his criticism? Did Augustine respond with biblical truth or philosophical arguments or did he just rile up religious fervour?
Most, if not all, of the answers to those questions can be found in the first two writings collected in the book. They are On Nature and Grace and On the Proceedings of Pelagius. They were written in 415-416AD, shortly after Pelagius went to court. These are hot off the press responses from Augustine on the events of the day.
The other two are shorter and written much later. The titles are On the Predestination of the Saints and On the Gift of Perseverance. These were not written to address Pelagianism directly but they are here because Augustine is dealing with a related problem.
Working Out Theology is Not Neat and Tidy
The first thing that struck me was how messy everything was. Let me explain. Any good book on Systematic Theology will say this is what Augustine believed, this is what Pelagius believed. If the book had a bit more space to spare, they quote a sentence, a paragraph from Augustine and/or Pelagius. Everything is neat and tidy.
When you read this book, it's not. Here, you see Augustine trying to get a handle on Pelagius. "Did he really say what he said?" Christian leaders are pestering Augustine to respond to Pelagius' teaching. Augustine is reluctant to go after the man but is compelled to go against the teaching.
Listen to this.
The love we have for him [Pelagius] now is different from the love we had for him formerly; then we loved him as one who seemed to be of the true faith, whereas we now love him in order that, by the mercy of God, he may be set free from those antagonistic views which he is said to hold against the grace of God. It was not easy to believe this about him, when the rumor began to be circulated some time ago -- for rumor is usually a liar -- but what brought it home to us and made us believe it was a certain book of his which aims to set forth theories intended to destroy and remove from faithful hearts any belief in the grace of God bestowed on the human race through the one Mediator of God and men, Christ Jesus.
Some have accused Augustine of misrepresenting Pelagius. They say, "If only we had his writings, then we could show how arrogant Augustine villainized poor Pelagius."
To those people I say, "Have you actually read Augustine?" Because I didn't before and what I see here astounds me. He liberally quotes Pelagius. Augustine tells us that he was himself accused of saying things he did not say. So he does not want the same thing to happen to Pelagius. Over and over again, he gives Pelagius the benefit of the doubt, saying in effect, "While it is possible that we have misunderstood him, to the best of our knowledge, what I quote here is what he wrote and what he wrote should be condemned."
Are Man Able To Lead Sinless Lives?
Pelagius says that Man are able to lead sinless lives. Augustine says that Man cannot for all man are born sinners.
Let me read from the middle of the argument. Listen to how Augustine interacts with Pelagius.
He [that is Pelagius] adds still further, Because indeed the possibility of not sinning does not depend upon us, even if we should want not to be able not to sin, we cannot not be able not to sin. He has said this in a convoluted manner and for this reason somewhat obscurely. But it is possible to put it more clearly as follows: because the possibility of not sinning does not depend upon us, then, whether we wish it or not, we are able not to sin. For he does not say, “Whether we wish it or not, we do not sin” — undoubtedly we do sin if we wish to. Nevertheless, whether we wish it or not, we have, he asserts, the possibility of not sinning, which he says is inherent in our nature. Yet it can reasonably be said of a man with healthy feet that whether he wish it or not he has the possibility of walking, but if they are broken, then even if he wishes, he does not have this possibility. Thus our nature is corrupted, of which it is written, “Why is earth and ashes proud?” It is corrupted and it implores the physician: “Save me, O Lord,” it cries; “Heal my soul,” it cries. Why does Pelagius block these cries, and thus hinder the future health [of the soul] by defending it as a present possibility?
I Do Not Think Grace Means What You Think It Means
Defenders for Pelagius are quick to remind all that Pelagius was cleared of the charges brought against him.
The church leaders asked Pelagius whether Man could live sinless lives by the grace of God. He answered yes, by the grace of God, yes. And, if I can paraphrase Pelagius, he says, "As I have said many times, it is possible to lead a sinless life by the grace of God. Maybe it has not happened yet but how can we deny that possibility? Why do people accuse me of denying the grace of God?"
Surely what Pelagius said doesn't sound so bad after all? If God saw fit to empower, through the Holy Spirit, a man to lead a sinless life, who are we to deny God? And for that reason, on this position, the church leaders heard Pelagius and declared him orthodox. His belief is acceptable within the church.
Augustine was anguished. He does not blame the council for their decision. They were good people. The problem was they were not familiar with Pelagius' teaching and so they did not ask the right questions, namely what does Pelagius mean by the grace of God?
This is how Augustine responds to Pelagius affirming the grace of God:
When I read these words, I confess to you, dear ones, that I was suddenly filled with joy, because the author did not deny the grace of God, through which alone a man can be justified. It is such a denial that I detest and dread above all else in controversies of this sort. But in continuing to read further, I began to be suspicious, at first because of some of the comparisons he presented. For he writes, Now if I were to say that a man can dispute, a bird can fly, a rabbit can run, and I were not also to mention the means by which these acts can be accomplished, namely, the tongue, the wings, and the feet, then have I denied the conditions of these activities, when I have recognized the activities themselves? It certainly seems as if he has mentioned things which are effective by nature, for these members, namely the tongue, the wings, and the feet, have been created for natures of a particular kind. Nor has he proposed anything that we would want to understand to be of grace, without which no human being is justified, for there the question concerns the healing rather than the formation of natures. From here on I began to read with misgivings and soon discovered that my suspicions were not unwarranted.
Why does Augustine have such deep misgivings? If both can agree that it is possible to lead a sinless life by the grace of God, does it really matter whether the grace of God is God creating in us a human nature able to overcome sin, so Pelagius, or the grace of God is the Holy Spirit indwelling in us, so Augustine?
This is how Augustine and the church has understood the implications.
Augustine writes:
Could he [a man], or could he not, have become just by his own nature and free will? If they say he could have, then see what amounts to rendering the cross of Christ void: to contend that without it anyone can be justified by the law of nature and the choice of his will. Let us also say here: “Then Christ died in vain."
If a man can be just without Christ, then Christ died in vain. It would actually be a cosmic joke because the son of God descended, suffered and died, when he didn't have to. If it was possible, if I only needed to try harder to be sinless, then I can rightly boast that all I needed was the body or nature that God gave me in the beginning, and I have no need for the cross of Christ. This religion of works is contrary to the Gospel.
And yet, despite all the evidence, Augustine is still willing to give Pelagius the benefit of the doubt. Maybe Pelagius did not mean what he wrote.
For it is “the grace of God, by Jesus Christ our Lord,” the grace by which Pelagius has nowhere been willing to say we, when we pray, are helped, so as not to sin. If by chance he implicitly acknowledges this, he must forgive us for having suspected otherwise. In that case, it is he himself who is the cause of all the discredit which he suffers on this matter, for he is willing to acknowledge it and yet unwilling to confess or declare it.
Internet Forums in Antiquity
You know what this book reminded me of? It reminded me of the drama in some internet forums. There are some who are quick to put words in other people's mouths. This is what you say, what you mean, and you are bad for even saying such things. Then there are some who genuinely try to understand what the other guy is saying, even when it sounds wrong, but he hopes that it was all a misunderstanding. That would be Augustine. When you read this book, you don't just learn the proof text and theological points, you also sit under a saint.
Familiar
There is more to the Pelagian controversy than I can get into in this review. There were multiple charges against Pelagius, not just one, but the one I described was one of the main charges.
As you read the book, there are many things familiar and many things foreign.
When Augustine writes on the Grace of Final Perseverance, he expounds from the Lord's Prayer, and concludes that people who pray to God, by their actions, admit God to be sovereign. This is what J.I. Packer presented in his book, "Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God", which I reviewed in Episode 87.
Almost like a side remark, Augustine points out that we believe God puts people in earthly kingdoms, so why should we find it difficult to believe that God puts people in his heavenly kingdom? John Piper elaborated on this and more in his 800-page book "Providence", which I reviewed in Episode 7.
Let me share one more familiar note:
Faith, then, both in its beginning and in its completion, is a gift of God, and let it not be doubted by anyone who does not wish to contradict the most evident sacred writings that this gift is given to some, but to others it is not given. Why this gift is not given to all should not disturb the believer, who believes that from one man, all have gone into condemnation, a condemnation undoubtedly most just, so much so that even if no one were freed therefrom, there would be no just complaint against God.
If God did not save anyone, he would still be just.
I am not saying that Augustine originated these ideas, I would argue everything I just read comes from Scripture. The sense of familiarity makes reading easier and gives the reader confidence to read further and push through unfamiliar territory.
Unfamiliar
One that comes up often is baptism. Pelagius, Augustine and the early church have a different understanding of baptism than I do.
Pelagius is quoted to say, "through baptism the Church is purified from every spot and wrinkle."
The synod approves of this saying.
And Augustine? He writes:
For who among us denies that the sins of all men have been remitted through baptism and that all the faithful arise without spot and wrinkle from the bath of regeneration?
Because of this, I have to adjust my understanding to make sense of some of the points made in this book. And I'll be honest, sometimes I fail to make sense of it, so I skip.
I have learnt to not let what I don't understand prevent me from getting what I do understand. If I insisted on understanding everything that I read, I wouldn't be able to read past Genesis 1:1. With the Bible, we get help from commentators. With Augustine's Anti-Pelagian Writings, we get help from the translators.
Translators
There are four writings in this book and each of them has their own introduction from the translators. They give the background, synopsis, translation issues and appendix.
You could jump straight into Augustine's writings, just like you could jump straight into the middle of a TV series. But if you want to understand what is going on, it helps to have someone next to you explain who are the characters, what is the motivation behind their actions and what are they aiming for.
Before this book, I only knew Pelagius, as well, the heretic. This is how the translator presents Pelagius:
Pelagius must be understood as primarily a moralist, a religious teacher calling for a reform of Christians’ lives according to a more demanding standard than that which he perceived to be prevalent, and not as a speculative theologian. Nevertheless, his moral teaching drew on (and perhaps also issued into) a distinctive and fairly well articulated theological anthropology.
If we keep this in mind, it helps to understand Augustine's reluctance to go on the attack and also his annoyance in having to do so. It also helps explain why Augustine had written a letter to Pelagius commending him, which Pelagius read out in his defence, much to the consternation of Augustine.
I found it useful to read the synopsis first so that I have a mental map of where Augustine is going. Hearing this, a purist might argue that I'm letting the translator influence my interpretation of Augustine. I am aware of the danger. But as I said, I found the translator's sypnosis helpful, otherwise I would be lost. And I make a conscious effort to read Augustine's text for myself. That's why I am reading this book and not someone's write up of Augustine.
Redeeming Pelagius
Let's go back to where I started this review.
"Is Pelagianism a heresy? Is Pelagius a heretic? Was Augustine fair in his treatment of the teaching and the teacher?"
Can the answer to these questions be found in today's book? Yes.
And anyone who is serious should read this book because no one can give the excuse that this book is too difficult to read. It's harder than what we are used to reading today but it's not inaccessible.
There are some today who wish to see justice done for Pelagius, for they believe he was wrongly accused of heresy. I commend them for desiring justice but I think they are redeeming the wrong guy.
Consider this, if there is a court, with a proper judge and jury, who are sincerely doing their duty to evaluate the evidence and make the right verdict, and they find a man guilty. Then later, much later, people raise doubts on the verdict. The right way is to review the case, are there are new evidences? Was there a mistake? If there was a miscarriage of justice, then let justice prevail, though delayed. There are people who wish to overturn the verdict, by ignoring the original witnesses, by relying on what others heard from the witnesses.
In the case against Pelagius, Augustine recorded his words and his own words bear witness against him. If Pelagianism is accepted, then Christ died in vain. Then anyone who accepts Pelagianism, also shares in Pelagius' condemnation. Am I being too harsh here?
I don't enjoy calling others heretics. Neither does Augustine.
If you are not particularly motivated to read Augustine's Anti-Pelagian writings, a better place to start on Augustine is his Confessions or City of God. I haven't read them yet, they are in my bucket list.
Before I end this review, let me read the concluding paragraph in "On the Predestination of The Saints". Augustine writes:
Therefore, we undertook, as far as we could, to show that even this very beginning of faith is a gift of God. And if we have done this at greater length than might have been desired by those for whom it was written, we are ready to be reproached by them for it, provided that they nevertheless will admit that, even if at much greater length than they would like, even at the cost of boredom and weariness on the part of those who understand, we have accomplished what we set out to do: that is, have shown that even the beginning of faith, like continence, patience, justice, piety, and other things of which there is no dispute with our brothers, is a gift of God. Therefore, let us conclude this volume, that too great a length of one book may not be displeasing to the reader.
Isn't that every writer's hope? That too great a length of one book may not be displeasing to the reader.
Outro
This is a Reading and Reader's review of "Saint Augustine: Four Anti-Pelagian Writings" translated by John Mourant and William Collinge. 372 pages, published by The Catholic University of America Press in January 1992. It's available in Amazon for USD42.24 (as of the date of recording) and in Logos for USD30.99.
Book ListSaint Augustine: Four Anti-Pelagian Writings" translated by John Mourant and William Collinge. Amazon. Logos.
- Listen Listen again Continue Playing...
- Listen later Listen later
Show more

Episodes

Year 4

Philemon (MacArthur NT Commentary) by John MacArthur

Changing Normal by Jolene Kinser

40 Questions About Christians and Biblical Law by Thomas Schreiner

Silence and Beauty by Makoto Fujimura

Year End Reflection 2024

Silence by Shusaku Endo

Philippians by J. B. Lightfoot

The Rest of Life by Ben Witherington III

Preaching and Preachers by Dr Martyn Lloyd Jones

What Grieving People Wish You Knew About What Really Helps (and What Really Doesn’t) by Nancy Guthrie

Married for God by Christopher Ash

How to Think Theologically by Howard Stone and James Duke

Portrait of God by Jack Mooring

Year 3

Critical Dilemma: The Rise of Critical Theories and Social Justice Ideology by Neil Shenvi and Pat Sawyer

The Spirit of Grace by Alister McGrath

The Legacy of John Calvin by David W. Hall

Jesus and the Land: The New Testament Challenge to Holy Land Theology by Gary M. Burge

Saint Augustine: Four Anti-Pelagian Writings