Exegesis and Theology

The Blog of Brian Collins

Books and Articles Finished in October

by

Books

Lewis, C. S. The Abolition of Man. HarperSanFrancisco, 1947.

A natural law argument against reducing all value judgments to mere personal sensations. Lewis argues for the necessity of a natural law by showing the impossibility of functioning without one.

VanDrunen, David. A Biblical Case for Natural Law. Studies in Christian Social Ethics and Economics. Edited by Anthony B. Bradley. Grand Rapids: Acton Institute, n. d.

VanDrunen argues successfully for the existence of natural law. His deployment of the concept with in a Klineian two-kingdoms model is on shakier ground. For instance the Noahic covenant is about making space for the other redemptive covenants to be worked out (see esp. Jer. 33:20-21); it is a covenant also instituted in connection with a sacrifice of atonement. It is thus not a covenant about making space for a common kingdom. VanDrunen also seems to equivocate between biblical kingdom language and the way kingdom language is used in the history of theology. This is especially problematic because VanDrunen ends up connecting theological kingdom language to the Noahic and Abrahamic covenants whereas in the Bible the kingdom of God is most closely connected with the Davidic covenant, a covenant that gets very little attention from VanDrunen.

Van Drunen’s hope that natural law can provide the basis for common morality is also on shakier ground that his argument for the existence of natural law. Attempts to reason from natural law apart from explicit Scripture are often unconvincing. This is even further exacerbated by the prevailing religious pluralism in which there are real competing value systems at work in a society. Though the Fall has not eradicated mankind’s sense of the law, it has so distorted it that competing systems are now in place. Finally, secularists and/or pluralists are no more inclined to concede to natural law than they are to concede to Scripture.

Watson, Thomas. The Godly Man’s Picture. Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth.

Watson begins by challenging his readers to self-examination about their conversion, helpfully sketches out in concrete terms what a godly life is, and concludes with comfort for believers who recognize their failure to measure up. Excellent.

Lewis, C. S. That Hideous Strength. New York: Collier, 1946.

This, the last of Lewis’ Space Trilogy, is the hardest to get into on first read. The characters seem to be entirely different, the setting is earth, and the action is minimal. In fact the first hundred pages seem to be about the debates of college professors about trivial college matters. But rereading shows this book to be the one of the three with the greatest depth. Lewis is working on many different levels (pay attention to weather and lighting). Also reading Lewis’ essay “The Inner Ring” and his book The Abolition of Man will prepare readers for many of the themes of That Hideous Strength. Brushing up on Arthurian legends won’t hurt either, though the book works fine standing on its own.

Articles

Wenkel, David. “The Logic and Exegesis behind Calvin’s Doctrine of the Internal Witness of the Holy Spirit to the Authority of Scripture.” Puritan Reformed Journal 3, no. 2 (July 2011): 98-108.

Overly, Paul. “Some Thoughts on the Meaning of Music from a Christian World View.” In Barrett, Michael P. V. The Beauty of Holiness: A Guide to Biblical Worship. Greenville, SC: Ambassador, 2006.

Argues that Christians need to evaluate music according to its culturally assigned meaning as well as according to its formal elements, which contribute to its meaning.

Beall, Todd S. “Contemporary Hermeneutical Approaches to Genesis 1-11.” In Coming to Grips with Genesis: Biblical Authority and the Age of the Earth. Edited by Terry Mortenson and Thane H. Ury. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2008.

A good evaluation of non-literal approaches to Genesis 1-11.

Averbeck, Richard E. “The Sumerian Historiographic Tradition and Its Implications for Genesis 1-11.” In Faith, Tradition, and History: Old Testament Historiography in Its Near Eastern Context. Edited by A. R. Millard, J. K. Hoffmeier, D. W. Baker. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1994.

Helm, Paul. “Review of God Without Parts: Simplicity and the Metaphysics of Divine Absoluteness by James E. Dolezal.”

Favorable review of a 2011 WTS dissertation that defends divine simplicity against modern philosophical detractors.

Hall, Gregory V. “Applying a New Perspective Understanding to Romans 2:12-16,” Ashland Theological Journal (2010): 31-39.

Summarized New Perspective approaches to this passage but did not advance beyond what anyone would gather simply by reading Dunn or Wright’s commentaries on this passage.

Barnes, Peter. “Prayer: Some Suggestions,” Banner of Truth (Aug-Sep 2011): 1-3.

Eagleman, David. “The Brain on Trial.” The Atlantic, August 2011.

An argument that reduces (almost?) all human behavior to brain functioning beyond the scope of any individual will and the suggested legal ramifications to such a view.

Gruenke, Jennifer, and Justin D. Barnard. “Don’t Put the Brain on Trial.” Public Discourse, October 4, 2011.

An argument that the scientific claims in Eagleman’s article were overstated and that the current legal system is already prepared to handle the extreme kinds of cases discussed by Eagelman.

Frame, John. “Review of David Van Drunen, A Biblical Case for Natural Law (Grand Rapids: Acton Institute, no date).”

Affirms the concept of natural law but takes issue with the exegetical arguments VanDrunen uses to establish his two kingdom’s approach.

Helm, Paul. “Natural Law and Common Grace.” Helm’s Deep, November 1, 2008.

Helm argues that natural law and common grace are aimed at affirming the same thing. Only by the confusing of Counter-Reformation teaching with medieval teaching do they end up opposed.

Saucy, Mark R. “Canon as Tradition: The New Covenant and the Hermeneutical Question.” Themelios 36, no. 2 (2011).

An argument against D. H. Williams and others who seem to give patristic tradition some level of authority in doctrinal formation. Saucy argues that the fathers are not sufficient guides for right interpretation because they fail to appreciate the canon’s emphasis on the new covenant as a necessary hermeneutical guide.

Ward, Wayne E. “The Worship of the Church.” In The People of God: Essays on the Believers’ Church. Edited by Paul Basden and David S. Dockery. Nashville: Broadman, 1991.

Hiestand, Gerald. “Augustine and the Justification Debates: Appropriating Augustine’s Doctrine of Culpability.” Trinity Journal 28, no. 1 (Spring 2007): 115-139.

An argument in favor of Augustine’s doctrine of justification over against that of Calvin, Hodge, and others in the Reformation tradition. He favors Augustine’s view that justification is equivalent to regeneration (there is a real, essential change rather than only a forensic change in justification). He ties this to the fact that Augustine more consistently held to a realist view of why people are culpable before God rather than a view that moves toward placing greater stress on the imputation of Adam’s sin forensically. Michael Horton’s Covenant and Salvation provides a more traditional Reformation view of justification that does not neglect its connection to transformation.

Walters, Stanley D. “Reading Samuel to Hear God,” Calvin Theological Journal 37 (2002): 62-81.

A helpful article that deals with Samuel’s canonical location and with its structure.

Van Til on Sola Scriptura

by

Certainly, Van Til believed in sola Scriptura in the traditional Protestant sense: that only Scripture serves as the supreme authority for human thought and life. . . . Nevertheless, Van Til did not hold a mechanical view of sola Scriptura, as if we could develop our knowledge from Scripture alone, without any use of our own reason or senses. He understood that in any instance of knowledge, there is simultaneous knowledge of God, the world, and the self. We cannot know one thing without relating it to other things and to ourselves. We cannot know God rightly unless we know him as Creator of the world and as our own Creator-Redeemer. We cannot know Scripture without relating it to ourselves and to the world of our experience. General and special revelation always work together, though certainly the latter must provide the ultimate criteria for understanding the former.

John M. Frame, Cornelius Van Til: An Analysis of His Thought (P&R, 1995), 121.

Books and Articles Finished in September

by

Books

DeYoung, Kevin. Why Our Church Switched to the ESV. Wheaton: Crossway, 2011.

A helpful, non-technical comparison between the ESV and NIV that shows the benefits of a translation that seeks to remain transparent to the form and metaphors of the original languages when possible.

DeYoung, Kevin and Greg Gilbert, What Is the Mission of the Church? Wheaton: Crossway, 2011.

See previous post.

Webb, William J. Corporal Punishment in the Bible: A Redemptive-Movement Hermeneutic for Troubling Texts. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2011.

William Webb applies his problematic Redemptive-Movement hermeneutic to corporal punishment. The central problem with his approach is that it seems difficult to avoid a Whiggish view of history (or in this case, ethics) with this kind of hermeneutic. He seems to imply that the judicial use of corporal punishment on criminal adults is ruled out with the redemptive-movement at its present stage. But why should an increasingly secularized 21st century West determine this. Why not a more Christianized 19th century? Or why the West; what of the East? Corporal punishment is still practiced in Singapore. Which is more humane, locking up people up in prisons for extended periods of time or instituting corporal punishment for certain crimes? These are questions that Webb fails to wrestle with. He also unhelpfully mixes discussions of child-rearing with passages that seem to deal with criminal punishments. He furthermore gives his readers false options by implying that either one adopt his redemptive-movement hermeneutic or accept as still valid various provisions of the OT Law.

Fitzpatrick, Elyse M. and Jessica Thompson. Give Them Grace: Dazzling Your Kids with the Love of Jesus. Wheaton: Crossway, 2011

The discussions of the law and the gospel could have benefited from some recognition of the third use of the law. Nonetheless, as the practical discussions unfolded, it seemed that this category was implicit. Readers would also benefit from reading and keeping in mind John Frame’s cautions on redemptive-historical preaching as they read this book. As with redemptive-historical preaching, the emphasis here is on the indicative, and there should be some cautions about not avoiding the imperatives for fear of moralism. Those caveats given, this is a good book. The overall thrust of the book is that parents should not try simply to produce good children. They should instead seek for gospel opportunities in discipline situations. This does not mean that discipline disappears but rather that it is contextualized with the gospel. The book also stresses that following the right formulas will not necessarily produce good children but that God’s grace is necessary to transform children’s hearts. Thus parents must consistently pray for God’s work of grace in the hearts of their children.

Kärkkäinen, Veli-Matti. An Introduction to Ecclesiology: Ecumenical, Historical & Global Perspectives. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2002.

Good overview of various ecclesiological proposals and the state of the discipline. Negatively, it is slanted toward unorthodox views.

Ryle, J. C. Expository Thoughts on Matthew. 1856; repr., Banner of Truth Trust, 1986.

Ryle designed this work for family devotions and it is worthy of continued use for that purpose over 150 years from its original publication.

Hannah, John D. An Uncommon Union: Dallas Theological Seminary and American Evangelicalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009.

Hannah provides an interesting institutional history. It doesn’t have the same narrative quality as George Marsden’s history of Fuller Seminary or Gregory Wills’ history of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Hannah goes into more detail about curricular changes and other details which break up the narrative. But the discussion of how Dallas emerged from the Bible Conference movement and developed in relation to fundamentalism and evangelicalism was interesting.  Hannah placed Dallas somewhat between fundamentalism and the neo-evangelicalism spearheaded at Fuller Seminary.

Goheen, Michael W. A Light to the Nations: The Missional Church and the Biblical Story. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011.

I think this has been the most disappointing and most profitable book that I’ve read recently. Disappointing because I came to the book with high hopes and found that I disagreed with his basic thesis. Profitable because it is not only full of wise thoughts but because even when I disagreed I found my thinking helpfully provoked. Goheen did not convince me that the church is defined by its mission. It seems that the church most be more than a “come and join us people.” Its definition must include the what for which people join. Nonetheless, missions is vital to the church, and Goheen’s discussion of mission and missions remain helpful. I also disagree with Goheen’s relation of the church to Israel. This ended up being a major theme of the book. Nonetheless, Goheen has sparked an interest into researching further OT prophecies about the role of Israel in spreading the gospel to the Gentiles.

Wilson, Douglas. What I Learned in Narnia. Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2010.

One of the reasons Lewis’s books are so enjoyable for Christians is that they help them see with fresh eyes the foolishness of evil and the wisdom of a God-oriented life. These lessons are not sermonizing within the stories. They are baked into the narratives themselves. And they are the kind of things that stick in the mind and are recalled unbidden when similar circumstances or ideas arise in real life. Wilson highlights these lessons in this book. An enjoyable read.

Articles

Schreiner, Thomas R. “A Biblical Theology of the Glory of God.” In For the Fame of God’s Name: Essays in Honor of John Piper. Edited by Sam Storms and Justin Taylor. Wheaton: Crossway, 2010.

A helpful overview of the centrality of the glory of God in every part of the biblical storyline/canon.

Dever, Mark. “The Church.” In Understanding the Times: New Testament Studies in the 21st Century: Essays in Honor of D. A. Carson on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday. Edited by Andreas J. Köstenberger and Robert W. Yarbrough. Wheaton: Crossway, 2011.

A basic unpacking of the doctrine of the church in terms of its four ancient attributes and two/three Reformation marks. Includes helpful thoughts on church membership

Kidd, Reggie M. “What John Frame Taught Me about Worship.” Speaking the Truth in Love: The Theology of John M. Frame. Edited by John J. Hughes. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2009.

He likes Frame, Clowney, Old, and Webber. But the essay is pretty thin on content.

Wolters, Al. “Reflection by Al Wolters.” in Four Views on Moving beyond the Bible to Theology (Counterpoints: Bible and Theology). Edited by Gary T. Meadors. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009.

When I referenced this book for my dissertation, I found that Wolters had the most perceptive reflection on the four views presented. In the dissertation, I drew on him for his critique of Vanhoozer’s theodramatic view. This time I read him to refresh my mind on his critique of Webb. Here too he was perceptive. He notes several problems with a redemptive-movement hermeneutic: (1) It treats ANE ethics monolithically. There were multiple ethics in multiple cultures. Further, some may have been more advanced that Israel if one assumes the “ultimate ethic” that Web lays. (2) His approach depends on the Bible reader having access to ANE background information that many ordinary readers don’t have access to and that even scholars did not have access to before the nineteenth century. Even today scholarly knowledge of the ANE is patchy. (Wolters is clear that he is not against making use of ANE background materials.) (3) “There appears to be no standard by which to measure what an ‘ultimate ethic’ might be. A clue to what is in fact the implicit and unacknowledged standard for Webb is provided by the proximity in the diagram of ‘Ultimate Ethic’ to ‘Our Culture.’ To be sure, the latter is qualified by the words in parentheses: ‘where it happens to reflect a better ethic than Y,’ but no criterion is provided by which we can judge that ‘our culture’ on this or that point reflects a better ethic than Y. This is a remarkable statement when we recall that Y represents ‘the concrete words of the text,’ that is, the biblical text. For all practical purposes it seems that Webb’s ‘Ultimate Ethic’ is pretty well equated with ‘Our Culture,’ at least insofar as the latter is the bearer of human and liberal values. It looks for all the world as though the values ‘we’ hold trump the explicit ethical instruction of Scripture” (p. 306).

McDaniel, Stefan. “Flogging: The Best Hope for Our Broken Prison System?” The Public Discourse (2011).

It was interesting to happen across this article shortly after having finished Webb’s book on corporal punishment. It comments on Peter Moskos’s work, In Defense of Flogging, which raises the issue of whether flogging might be more humane than locking people up in prison. He tentatively proposes the flogging be an option that those convicts who are not a danger to society may choose instead of a prison term. This is interesting because Webb rhetorically reacts in horror at the idea of corporal punishment as a punishment for adult criminals. But what if Webb’s trajectory toward from Scripture toward our culture isn’t a trajectory to that which is more humane after all? This article at the very least raises that question.

Campbell, Donald K. “The Church in God’s Prophetic Program.” In Essays in honor of J. Dwight Pentecost,. Chicago: Moody, 1986.

Lewis, C. S. “The Inner Ring.” In The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses. HarperCollins, 2001.

An excellent application of the tenth commandment to friendship. The best fictional correspondence to this address in Lewis’s writing is the character of Mark Studdock in That Hideous Strength.

Osborne, Grant. “Hermeneutics and Theological Interpretation.” In Understanding the Times: New Testament Studies in the 21st Century: Essays in Honor of D. A. Carson on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday. Edited by Andreas J. Köstenberger and Robert W. Yarbrough. Wheaton: Crossway, 2011.

When I was writing my dissertation on theological interpretation of Scripture, I found the literature so voluminous and diverse that I struggled in finding a structure for my analysis. In the end I focused on the role of tradition, the place of pre-critical interpretation as it relates to authorial intent, and how theological interpretation relates to biblical and systematic theology. I was therefore pleased to see that Grant Osborne’s survey of the same material covers these same key areas. Furthermore, I think he points his readers in the right direction on every point. He sees tradition as valuable but supplementary to Scripture, which retains its primacy. He argues that seeking authorial intention is correct and viable. One difference is that he seems to see Childs as a move forward after the collapse of the Biblical Theology Movement. I think that Childs carries many of the same weaknesses. That criticism aside, Osborne’s introduction to theological interpretation is a fine one.

Strange, Dan. “Not Ashamed! The Sufficiency of Scripture for Public Theology.” Themelios 36, no. 2 (2011): 238-60.

Strange provides a description of both Common-Kingdom (emphasis on natural law as the authority for the common kingdom) and Confessional-Kingdom (emphasis on the authority of Scripture for all of life) models of engagement with public life. He sides with the Confessional-Kingdom approach. His survey is helpful and his application to the UK is useful even for those in the USA.

Bookman, Douglas. “The Scriptures and Biblical Counseling.” In Introduction to Biblical Counseling. Edited by John F. MacArthur, Jr. and Wayne A. Mack. Dallas: Word, 1994.

Bookman’s concerns are entirely valid. But in making his case, Bookman seems overly reliant on arguing the definition of terms (while granting what many would identify as general revelation and its application in four affirmations), and even these definitions receive only the most cursory support from Scripture. Bookman’s discussion of general revelation would have been stronger if it had focused on the key general revelation texts, and his case against integrationist counseling would have been stronger if it focused on the substantive issue of psychological theories being equivalent to a theology rather than being revelation itself.

Mayhue, Richard L. “Is Nature the 67th Book of the Bible.” In Coming to Grips with Genesis: Biblical Authority and the Age of the Earth. Master Books, 2008.

Mayhue provides an able refutation of Hugh Ross’s claim that nature is the 67th book of the Bible. But he seems to overly limit general revelation in a few places. First, when he says that the breadth of content for general revelation is limited to knowledge of God alone, this seems to rule out natural law (though he grants Romans 2 deals with both general revelation and moral standards). When he says that the corpus of general revelation does not grow over time, Mayhue excludes history from general revelation. He says he does so on the basis that history does not show up in Ps. 19:1-6; Acts 14:17; 17:23-31; Rom. 1:18-25; 10:18, but I would have benefited from some further discussion on why many theologians include history. Does Mayhue think they wrongly see it in the texts he examines; does he think they wrongly see it in other texts that do not teach general revelation? Mayhue then says to expand general revelation beyond special revelation adds to Scripture. But this is not clear. Scripture is special revelation and general revelation is not. These reservations and questions do not affect Mayhue’s case against Ross; Mayhue successfully refutes Ross’s claims.

Calvin on Christian Liberty and the Law

by

Christian liberty seems to me to consist of three parts. First, the consciences of believers, while seeking the assurance of their justification before God, must rise above the law, and think no more of obtaining justification by it. For while the law, as has already been demonstrated (supra, chap. 17, sec. 1), leaves not one man righteous, we are either excluded from all hope of justification, or we must be loosed from the law, and so loosed as that no account at all shall be taken of works. For he who imagines that in order to obtain justification he must bring any degree of works whatever, cannot fix any mode or limit, but makes himself debtor to the whole law. Therefore, laying aside all mention of the law, and all idea of works, we must in the matter of justification have recourse to the mercy of God only; turning away our regard from ourselves, we must look only to Christ. For the question is, not how we may be righteous, but how, though unworthy and unrighteous, we may be regarded as righteous. If consciences would obtain any assurance of this, they must give no place to the law. Still it cannot be rightly inferred from this that believers have no need of the law. It ceases not to teach, exhort, and urge them to good, although it is not recognized by their consciences before the judgment-seat of God. The two things are very different, and should be well and carefully distinguished. The whole lives of Christians ought to be a kind of aspiration after piety, seeing they are called unto holiness (Eph. 1:4; 1 Thess. 4:5). The office of the law is to excite them to the study of purity and holiness, by reminding them of their duty. For when the conscience feels anxious as to how it may have the favor of God, as to the answer it could give, and the confidence it would feel, if brought to his judgment-seat, in such a case the requirements of the law are not to be brought forward, but Christ, who surpasses all the perfection of the law, is alone to be held forth for righteousness.

Calvin, Institutes (trans. Beveridge), 3.19.2.

Books and Articles Finished in August

by

Books

Lewis, C. S. Perelandra.

  • An enjoyable and insightful read about temptation and much, much more.

Metaxas, Eric. Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy. [Audio book]

  • The book has been criticized by Bonhoeffer scholars for trying to make Bonhoeffer too much of an evangelical. This is probably a valid criticism. But Mexaxes likely got the broad outlines of the story correct, and he is a masterful storyteller. For a free audio-book, not bad.

O’Brien, Robert C. Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of Nimh . New York: Scholastic, 1971.

  • Never read this one as a child. Enjoyed it.

Stevenson, Robert Louis, The Black Arrow.

  • I really enjoyed this book as a boy and had fun revisiting it with my wife.

Articles

Bolt, John. “Grand Rapids Between Kampen and Amsterdam: Herman Bavinck’s Reception and Influence in North America.” Calvin Theological Journal 38 (2003): 263-280.

  • An interesting article that deals with Bavinck’s separatist heritage and with its effects on the present-day theological location of Calvin Theological Seminary.

Stek, John. “A New Theology of Baptism? Baptism: A Sign of Grace or of Judgment?” Calvin Theological Journal (1966):69-73.

  • An early, positive review of Kline’s defense of paedobaptism. Kline’s view’s have most recently been expounded in J. V. Fesko’s new book on baptism.

Bauder’s articles on Fundamentalism

Bell, Theo. “Calvin and Luther on Bernard of Clairvaux.” Calvin Theological Journal 34, no. 2 (November 1, 1999): 370-395.

  • Despite a number of errors on Bernard’s part, Calvin saw Bernard as a preserver of true doctrine in the middle ages and a demonstration that Calvin was not an innovator.

Wright, N. T. “Justification: Yesterday, Today, and Forever.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 54, no. 1 (March 2011): 49-63.

  • Wright needs to stop two things: claiming that he stands in the true spirit of the Reformation because Scripture, not tradition, determines his viewpoint and misrepresenting and then distancing himself from the Reformer’s teaching on justification. The Reformers gave tradition an important, if ancillary and non-authoritative, role in their theologizing. If Wright paid it more heed, perhaps he would avoid mis-representing what the Reformers actually taught about justification. At various points, if I read him charitably, it seems that Wright may be approaching aspects of the Reformation doctrine of justification. But he insists that the Reformers are wrong. Should I take him at his word or insist on reading him more charitably than he reads the Reformers?

Schreiner, Thomas R. “Justification: The Saving Righteousness of God in Christ.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 54, no. 1 (March 2011): 19-34.

  • Excellent exposition. Clear. Biblical.

Akin, Daniel L. “Bernard of Clairvaux : evangelical of the 12th century (an analysis of his soteriology).” Criswell Theological Review 4 (March 1, 1990): 327-350.

  • Highlights “evangelical” aspects of Bernard’s soteriology. It’s probably too much to call him an evangelical, but the continuities show why the Reformers liked Bernard.

Manetsch, Scott M. “Is The Reformation Over John Calvin Roman Catholicism And Contemporary Ecumenical Conversations.” Themelios 36, no. 2 (2011): 185-202.

  • An excellent and needed article about the continuing errors in the Roman church that Protestants must protest. See also his helpful critique of Noll’s book, “Is the Reformation Over?”

Peckham, John C. “Intrinsic Canonicity and the Inadequacy of the Community Approach to Canon-Determination.” Themelios 36, no. 2 (2011): 2-3-15.

What is the Mission of the Church: A Brief Review

by

DeYoung, Kevin and Greg Gilbert, What Is the Mission of the Church?: Making Sense of Social Justice, Shalom, and the Great Commission. Wheaton: Crossway, 2011.

DeYoung and Gilbert argue that the mission of the church is the Great Commission: “the mission of the church is to go into the world and make disciples by declaring the gospel of Jesus Christ in the power of the Spirit and gathering those disciples into churches, that they might worship and obey Jesus Christ now and in eternity to the glory of God the Father” (p. 241). Much of the book provides helpful responses to those who extend the mission of the church so broadly that the core of the Great Commission is minimized or lost. They convincingly argue that the missio dei and the mission of the church do not necessarily coincide, that incarnation is not the best metaphor for church ministry, and that Stott’s interpretation of John 21 is not the most accurate. They could have made their argument stronger, however, be canvassing Acts and the Epistles for further indications of the church’s mission.

According to DeYoung and Gilbert, the gospel can refer to all the good that results from God’s plan of redemption, but they rightly center the gospel on the provision of atonement and how it may be received by individual humans for salvation. They tell the story of Scripture as centered on humans and sin rather than on creation and corruption. This is basically correct, but there does seem to be some overcorrection on this point. The Creation Blessing/Mandate gets little play in the redemptive historical survey chapter. In a later chapter it is reduced to something that Adam failed to do, that no other human is tasked with doing, and that the Second Adam will accomplish apart from our work. This incorrectly ties the Creation Blessing with Adam’s probationary test. Genesis 1 and 9 present the Creation Blessing as something that all humans have, even though it is now twisted by the Fall. It is not uniquely Adamic.

DeYoung and Gilbert view the kingdom of God as a spiritual reign of God in men’s hearts. While Ladd, whom they draw on, is correct that “reign” rather than “realm” is foremost in the NT concept of kingdom, it is difficult to reduce the NT teaching about the kingdom to the spiritual realm alone. Involved is the regeneration of all things. They do get this right in their chapter about the new heavens and the new earth, in which they carefully delineate what we can and cannot say about continuity and discontinuity between the two. DeYoung and Gilbert rightly correct loose talk about building the kingdom or bringing in the kingdom and instead point out that Christians await the kingdom. Even so, there ought to be an emphasis on living consistently with the anticipated kingdom in one’s present vocations.

Two chapters cover the important topic of social justice, and a third deals with doing good works. They show both what social justice passages demand and they correct sloppy interpretations and applications of these passages. DeYoung and Gilbert helpfully show how to avoid pitfalls that equate social justice with particular political programs. They distinguish between the institutional church and the organic church and note that Christians as individuals sometimes must do certain things that the institutional church is either forbidden or permitted but not required to do.

Overall, DeYoung and Gilbert have tackled a complex subject and gotten a great deal right. What is more, they have offered a correction to common misconceptions. They could make their argument stronger in the future by reconsidering their treatment of the extent of the Creation Blessing and of the nature of the kingdom. In the end, however, they have provided a useful, readable contribution to a complex subject.

Emotionalism no reason to disregard true affections

by

They [the authors of the textbook Lewis is critiquing] see the world around them swayed by emotional propaganda—they have learned from tradition that youth is sentimental—and they conclude that the best thing they can do is to fortify the minds of young people against emotion. My own experience as a teacher tells an opposite tale. For every one pupil who needs to be guarded from a weak excess of sensibility there are three who need to be awakened from the slumber of cold vulgarity. The task of the modern educator is not to cut down jungles but to irrigate deserts. The right defense against false sentiments is to inculcate just sentiments. By starving the sensibility of our pupils we only make them easier prey to the propagandist when he comes. For famished nature will be avenged and a hard heart is no infallible protection against a soft head.

C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (New York: HarperCollins, 1947), 13-14.

Contextualization must Reckon with Antithesis

by

“The first generation of Doleantie pastors were retiring and making way for the next generation, who thought differently and had only heard about the Herculean struggles and high price that was paid for Doleantie pastors to extricate themselves from the grip of the rampant liberalism in the Old State Church (HK). Bavinck’s students from the Free University were now occupying pulpits, and some were not as adept as their teaching in dealing with the problems of modern society. Whereas the older generation had emphasized the idea of the antithesis vis-à-vis culture, the younger generation was more in tune with the concepts of what today is called contextualization and accommodation in spite of what Bavinck and others had taught them.”

The younger generation argued that “in order for the Reformed church to remain relevant in Holland, it had to busy itself with seeking and finding ‘new paths’ for both church and society. Interestingly, the astute student of church history can find this pattern and these sentiments repeated throughout the ages. Equally interesting are the statistics that point inexorably to the truth that when a church starts down such a path, the results are often disastrous. Those desiring to be creative or innovative in the church usually compromise the gospel somewhere along the line, and the same holds true for those who are intent on ‘engaging the culture.’ They fail to realize that the culture will engage you back, and you had better be more than prepared to deal with both the blatant aspects as well as the subtleties of unbelief. Bavinck, Kuyper, Rutgers, Noordtzij, and other had developed an excellent way of working out a biblical life and worldview. . . . These youngish theologians were neither Kuyper nor Bavinck. They were lacking the requsite intellectual tools and life experience to analyze and to correct culture in the manner in which Bavinck had learned to do. Wanting to be Kuyper and Bavinck ‘clones,’ these young men fell short of the mark. Even though their intentions were honorable, without the requisite intellectual prowess and wherewithal their embrace of the new questions raised by culture carried the seeds of destruction for the Reformed church, as the history of the Dutch church would manifest.”

Ron Gleason,  Herman Bavinck: Pastor, Churchman, Statesman, and Theologian (P & R Publishing, 2010), 408-9, 412.

Suffering: The Price to Be Paid for Living Distinctively

by

Pluralism is the accepted relationship between church and state in the contemporary West. Such an approach has been manageable while the competing religions have shared ethical norms. But what happens when perceptions of right and wrong sharply diverge.

Howard Chua-Eoan wites on Time.com in qualified praise of the legalization of homosexual “marriages” in New York:

But in one very important way, gay marriage will not quite be marriage even in New York, even 30 days from now when the law goes into effect. . . . Marriage without a church or temple wedding isn’t the real thing. Why can some people have all the bells and whistles in the church of their choice but not me? Of course, there have been and will be congregations and churches that allow gay men and lesbians to be married in their midst and to bless those unions, recognizing that God loves them just as much as Governor Andrew Cuomo does. But some rich and influential religious institutions are not only free to continue to reject gay men and women as equal beneficiaries of all aspects of faith but will now also rally their congregants to reject politicians who are willing to abide with this extension of secular civil rights — no matter how much acceptance there is of same-sex marriage elsewhere, no matter how many wedding announcements appear in the New York Times.

https://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2079861,00.html

In Chua-Eoan’s system of ethics rejection of homosexuality is a sin. Thus the offenders’ liberty must be curtailed so the righteous can freely enjoy theirs. Is pluralism workable in such a situation?

Michael Goheen, drawing on Newbigin, notes:

“No human societies cohere except on the basis of some kind of common beliefs and customs. No society can permit these beliefs and practices to be threatened beyond a certain point without reacting in self-defense.” . . . When ultimate believes clash, the dominant worldview strives to become the exclusive worldview, exerting tremendous pressure on dissenting communities to abandon their uniqueness and conform to the dominant community. Dissenters must opt either for accommodation or to live out the comprehensive call of the gospel faithfully and pay the price for their dissent with suffering.

Micahel Goheen, A Light to the Nations 95.

The Universal Blessing of the Abrahamic Covenant Fulfilled through the Davidic Covenant

by

The Davidic covenant "also reestablishes the universal horizon of [Israel’s] calling: a king in David’s line becomes the object of future hope. God makes a covenant with David, promising that one day one of David’s descendants will rule over a universal and everlasting kingdom (2 Sam. 7:11-17). This is more than a promise of political success: it anticipates the goal of God’s redemptive work through Israel—the incorporation of the nations into God’s covenant people. Thus the psalmists celebrate the promise of God’s universal rule through Israel’s king (e.g., Pss. 2:7-9; 72:11-17)." Note, esp., the echo of the Abrahamic covenant in Ps. 72:17. See also the prophets: Isa. 11; 55:3-5; Jer. 33:14-22.

Goheen, A Light to the Nations (Baker, 2011), 55-56.