Category Archives: Uncategorized

David Powlison’s Anger: Escaping the Maze

Posted on by
Reply

Anger is something that all of us are tempted with. Be it on the road or in the house, the desire to express oneself through anger is an ever present threat. For this reason, David Powlison’s basic study of anger is an invaluable resource.

Powlison begins by questioning the myths of anger. Most poignantly, he notes that anger is not a vague “something within us”, but rather a choice we make. This is comforting for all who have ever wondered if they can control their anger. It will undoubtedly be a long hard journey for some, but, Powlison argues, it can be controlled. Ultimately it comes down to our relationship with God.

Powlison goes on to recommend a few questions that will help a person before anger gets out of control. The questions are: (1) What is my situation? (2) How do I react? (3) What are my motives? (4) What are the consequences? (5) What is true? (6) How can I turn to God for help? (7) How should I respond in this situation to glorify God? and (8) What are the consequence of faith and obedience? These questions create a very helpful framework in which we can better evaluate our anger before it gets out of control.

You will benefit greatly from this book whether you consider yourself to struggle with anger or not. It is very brief, a pamphlet really, and serves primarily as a primer on the issue of anger. Nonetheless, if you have ever gripped the steering wheel and felt the anger creeping up from your toes, you will find much to think about here.

Frank Schaeffer’s Dancing Alone: The Quest for Orthodox Faith in the Age of False Religion

Posted on by
Reply

Dancing Alone is the literary equivalent of finger nails on a chalkboard. It is shrill, intense, head splitting, and irrefutably attention grabbing. Having some familiarity with Frank Schaeffer because of my appreciation for his dad, the late Christian writer/pastor/apologist and pseudo-philosopher Francis Schaeffer, I was not completely caught off guard by this. Anyone who has viewed the film series for the book Whatever Happened to the Human Race? knows that Frank, who directed the film for his Dad, is not necessarily…um…subtle.

My wife and I read Frank’s thinly veiled autobiographical book Portofino and found it to be an extremely well written and hilarious book. We look forward to reading the sequel, Saving Grandma, as soon as we can. Dancing Alone is Portofino on speed. It makes and elaborates all of Portofino‘s basic contentions (i.e., the bankruptcy of the modern Protestant movement) but does so with none of Portofino’s charm. In this sense, it is louder than Portofino but not necessarily more persuasive.

But don’t get me wrong: it is persuasive. Frank Schaeffer is one of many Protestants who have joined the Greek Orthodox Church in search of a true depth of worship and a historical validation of theology and church practice. He rightly lambastes the cultural (for that is mainly what it is) “born again” movement and argues instead for a call to conversion that is substantive, grounded in the authentic church, and real.

Schaeffer’s answer to the shallowness of much Protestant life is the utter and complete rejection of Protestantism itself. He feels that Protestantism is inherently unsalvageable due to the fact that the shallowness and emptiness of Protestantism is a necessary outcome of its flawed foundation. I disagree. I disagree very much.

For one thing, Schaeffer’s brush is too wide. I know of no one who would not bemoan the current state of Protestant Evangelicalism. But I dare say that the assertion that there is not vitality in Protestantism borders on hubris and absurdity. God is certainly moving in mighty ways among Protestant believers and much good work is being done. There is also much substantive worship happening as well.

Protestantism is not a monolithic entity, and it appears that there is no longer a real consensus of theology under girding it anymore. I for one argue that certain branches of Protestantism are more legitimate than others. It is impossible to dismiss the whole.

Schaeffer disagrees. He argues that the Orthodox Church is the one, true, apostolic church. But in doing this he has bitten off more than he can possibly hope to chew. He cannot, I am sure, have hoped to dismantle the Protestant theology of the church, salvation, worship, and ecclesiology in this exhausting book, but this is certainly what he wants.

I am glad that Frank Schaeffer is Orthodox. He seems to have found his home. His experiences in fundamentalism were obviously troublesome, and I sympathize with him. In short, his diagnosis of the symptoms are irrefutable. But his diagnosis of the supposed disease behind the symptoms, much less his proposed cure, leaves much to be desired.

John Stott’s Baptism and Fullness: The Work of the Holy Spirit Today

Posted on by
4

John Stott’s fascinating and controversial book, Baptism and Fullness: The Work of the Holy Spirit Today, will almost certainly cause all who read it to rethink many of their assumptions surrounding the Holy Spirit and His work today. In a day in which Pentecostalism is the fastest growing expression of Christianity in the world, this book will be found to be as timely and relevant as it was when written over twenty five years ago. Furthermore, Stott’s work takes its place among the most important and significant pneumatological works available today.

While at all times respectful to those who differ, there can be little doubt that Stott wrote this work as a corrective to the more crude and deficient ideas surrounding the Holy Spirit today. His central thesis seems to be that there is no Biblical basis for the so-called “baptism of the Spirit” as defined as a second, post-conversion, individualistic empowerment by the Holy Spirit. Instead, Stott argues for a universal, one-time “baptism of the Spirit” among all believers at the point of conversion and then differentiates between this and subsequent “fillings of the Spirit” that Christians should rightly pray for. What is more, Stott argues that there is no basis for arguing that speaking in tongues and miraculous healings are signs of a special blessing from the Holy Spirit.

Stott goes on to discuss a myriad of issues surrounding his central theme: the question of miracles today, the definition of “tongues” in the Bible, the number and nature of spiritual gifts, etc. In discussing all of this, Stott employs his characteristic tone of maturity and care. His conclusions are based on solid exegesis and a thoughtful reading of Scripture.

While there is something in this book to make everybody pause, and while there is probably something in this book that everybody might disagree with, it cannot be doubted that Stott’s voice on these issues deserves to be heard. I, for one, greatly appreciate his views on the Spirit (as well as his views on most other things!) and would heartily recommend this book to any who want to think again about this most important issue.

D.M. Thomas’ Solzhenitsyn: A Century in His Life

Posted on by
Reply

Through current authors such as Os Guinness and Chuck Colson, interest in Solzhenitsyn continues to be cultivated in Evangelical circles. Interestingly, one may walk into any Family Christian Store and find the latest biography on Solzhenitsyn written by Roman Catholic author Joseph Pearce, a sign of his abiding influence. Truly, he is a man worthy of our consideration and, I would say, appreciation.

That being said, Thomas’s biography will disturb many Christians who perhaps have a white-washed view of Solzhenitsyn. While Thomas’s work has an overall laudatory tone about it, he does not shy away from Solzhenitsyn’s dark side: his affair and subsequent marriage to his mistress (his current wife), his harshness in dealing with those around him, his insensitivity to his first wife, and his temper. Yet he also highlights Solzhenitsyn’s strengths: his conversion to Christianity in the Russian Gulag, his ideological honesty, his dogged determination, his brilliant and fearless condemnation of Communism and Western materialism, his stringent and massively productive work schedule, and his genuine care over the fate of the world. What readers are left with is a picture of a deeply flawed and deeply determined man.

I am glad I read this book. In addition to having a more balanced understanding of this paradox of a man, I have a renewed appreciation of the fact that God uses broken vessels. There is much in Solzhenitsyn that is lamentable. There is much worthy of emulation. Read this book carefully and cautiously. You will be moved deeply by this story.

Os Guinness’ Time for Truth

Posted on by
Reply

There’s really no such thing as a “little” Os Guinness book. Most of them are fairly short, but none of them are “little.” Guinness has achieved what most social commentators lack: the ability to communicate deep truths with brevity. Time for Truth (like Dining With the Devil and Fit Bodies, Fat Minds: Why Evangelicals Don’t Think and What to Do About It) is no exception.

To be candid, when I realized that I was holding yet another book by yet another Christian about the issue of moral relativism I was apprehensive. I have personally reached yawn status with this theme because much Christian writing and sermonizing is beginning to sound like a stuck record and most of the old standard arguments are simply being repackaged and rehashed in new but safe formats (probably more for the benefit of Christian publishers than for the average Christian in the pew.) I approached this book with a “Here we go again!” mind set. I am glad to be proved wrong.

Guinness does indeed make many of the arguments on which writers such as Chuck Colson and the late Francis Schaeffer have spoken eloquently (yet repetitively). The notion of objective truth has been rejected by the culture at large. The arrogance of Postmodernism now reigns supreme. Yet man cannot live consistently within his own parameters, so he must live in hypocrisy. Guinness then goes on to exhort those who hold to the Biblical world view (a word he perhaps mercifully avoids) to defend an objective view of truth, founded upon a recognition of God’s presence.

What makes this book a departure from the standard conservative line, however, is Guinness’s powerful narrative examples of modern man’s despair and inconsistencies, and his challenge to Christians to get the whole argument out of its rut and to re-articulate our case with a new vigor and force.

Most striking, Guinness warns those holding to the idea of the objectivity of truth against merely repeating the old arguments against relativism. For instance, the argument that moral relativism cannot stand up to its own criteria is not sufficient in and of itself to make the case for objective truth. “Relativizing the relativizers” is only one argument and (as Guinness rightly points out) it is a necessarily negative argument.

We most go beyond this to stress the positive argument against “radical relativism.” Namely, we must argue against relativism by “pointing out the signals of transcendence.” (p.101) He explains: “Whereas ‘relativizing the relativizers’ is negative because it highlights the negative consequences of false assumption, ‘pointing out the signals of transcendence’ is positive because it point toward the positive conclusions of true aspirations, unnoticed before.” (p.101)

This is a much-needed admonition. Moral relativism, when closely examined, does reveal many such “signals of transcendence.” Time and again, the relativist must be shown that his very arguments have within them evidence of that which is outside our perceived reality. If this can be realized and utilized, the Christian hoping to communicate truth to those who doubt its existence will go much further than merely calling the relativist inconsistent.

John Stott’s Evangelical Truth

Posted on by
Reply

That titan of twentieth century theology, Karl Barth, near the end of his life was asked what the greatest thought he ever had was. He is said to have responded, “Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.” We may safely believe this was the case, for great men seem to move closer towards the fundamental tenets of their worldviews, not further from them, as they approach the end of life.

It is not surprising, then, to find John Stott seeking to formulate and express the bedrock truths of the faith in this tremendous book. In short, he does a masterful job. After a brief survey of many proposed lists of Evangelical “essentials,” Stott boldly suggests his own:

“It would therefore, in my view, be a valuable clarification if we were to limit our evangelical priorities to three, namely the revealing initiative of God the Father, the redeeming work of God the Son and the transforming ministry of God the Holy Spirit. All other evangelical essentials will then find an appropriate place somewhere under this threefold and trinitarian rubric” (p.25).

This is what might be called “simple brilliance.” By positing these essentials in a trinitarian format, Stott has achieved an undeniably Biblical schema that can be easily remembered (and taught). Evangelicalism is in desperate need of such a system. Over against these essentials, Stott argues that there is room in the tent for disagreement over the particulars of certain adiaphora (matters indifferent). This list of twelve is sure to raise the hair on the backs of some necks. Some of these are: baptism, the Lord’s supper, church government, worship, charismata and women (in ministry). Stott does not argue that these issues are unimportant. Anybody who knows even a little about Stott and his flirtation with annihilationism knows that he is not one to avoid controversy. However, he argues that Evangelicals may honestly disagree with some of the details of these issues but still hold to the title.

This book will delight some and enrage others. However, if a true theology of consensus is going to be achieved that avoids a “lowest common denominator” faith on the one hand and a presumptive, arrogant faith on the other, this will undoubtedly be the result. Stott has given it a go that, while not perfect, is commendable. You will be changed by this work.

Fisher Humphreys’ Baptist Theology: A Really Short Version

Posted on by
Reply

I picked up this little booklet and read it while waiting to see my brother, David, receive his DMin. from the Beeson Divinity School.  They were honoring Dr. Humphreys and had just unveiled a nice collection of essays in his honor, so “Humphreys was in the air”, you might say.

I like Fisher Humphreys.  I never had the opportunity of having him as a professor during my time at Beeson, but I appreciate his work and I really appreciate his spirit and his obvious commitment to Christ.

Baptist Theology: A Really Short Version is part of The Baptist Heritage Library which is put out by the Baptist History & Heritage Society.  I was a tad bit on guard when I started this.  Dr. Humphreys is more “moderate” than I am, to use the language that surfaced during “The Controversy.”  The Baptist History & Heritage Society is likewise a fairly moderate group.  (I do not consider myself a fundamentalist and would frankly reject outright the suggestion that I am.  I’m an Evangelical and a conservative.  These categories overlap, at times, but there are also significant divergences.)

My suspicions were largely unnecessary.  This is a very helpful little booklet that I believe would be a good resource for helping laypeople understand who we are as Baptists.  It is, like all of Dr. Humphreys writings, accessible, practical, and helpful.  I’m very glad I read it and would recommend it, with some reservations.

I’m never terribly comfortable when somebody uses the phrase “most Baptists,” which Humphrey’s uses here a few times.  I probably don’t have any major qualms with the specific ways he uses it.  I did cringe a bit at this sentence:  “This is folk theology, the theology of most Baptists.”  But there again, I would not disagree.

Humphreys has a catholic heart, and he does want to stress that impulse: “The first Baptists treasured the great Christian traditions that they inherited even as they called for changes in beliefs, such as infant baptism.”

On page 12, Humphreys interestingly notes that Calvinism “entered Baptist life early.  It seems to have been a majority tradition for much of Baptist history; for more than two hundred years it was held by a majority of Baptists who wrote systematic theologies.  But today, most Baptists do not accept Calvinist theology.”  This last sentence is likely true, but, then, as Tom Ascol frequently points out, around 60% of Southern Baptists don’t even show up for worship at their own churches.  So there is a bit of a problem appealing to “most Baptists” today, which, let me qualify, Humphreys does only by way of observation and not for any overarching point. (Here, anyway.  He’s ground that axe elsewhere.)

I was intrigued by the suggestion on page 13 that fundamentalists believe in the “near” future return of Christ.  Is this so?  I’m not so sure.

I was prepared to grow irate on page 18 where Humphreys wrote that “Baptists who had been influenced by the Calvinistic theologian John Gill resisted the proposals of William Carey and his supporter Andrew Fuller to send Carey to India as a missionary.”  This is true, of course (i.e., “Sit down young man…”), but then there is the little matter of Carey himself being a Calvinist.  The temperature subsided a bit when I saw endnote 37 at the back of the book which points out that “Carey and Fuller were themselves Calvinists, but of a more evangelical kind than their opponents.”  I’m glad he included this rather important fact, but I do wish it would have been in the body of the text.

I was also intrigued by Humphreys’ definition of Founders Ministries as “an organization that promotes Calvinism among Baptists.”  I suspect that Tom Ascol would find that definition to be a bit too narrow for what Founders does and somewhat misleading as well.

Again, this little booklet is not without its flaws, and one may see the author’s leanings here and there, but, in all, this is an informative and helpful little introduction to Baptist theology.

Timothy George and John Woodbridge’s The Mark of Jesus: Loving In a Way the World Can See

Posted on by
Reply

What a unique and interesting book Timothy George and John Woodbridge’s The Mark of Jesus: Loving In a Way The World Can See is.  The title and content are meant to pay homage to Francis Schaeffer’s tremendous little book, The Mark of a Christian, and to Schaeffer’s idea of love as the “final apologetic.”  Maybe it’s best to see this book as an update and extension of Schaeffer’s work.

Much has changed since Schaeffer wrote, and yet so much has not.  What has not changed is the need for the Christian witness to be grounded in love and borne on the wings of love.  With the rise of Islam and an increasingly tendentious religious scene in the United States (and around the world, for that matter), there has never been a better time for a renewed call for the final apologetic.

Love is the final apologetic because it cannot be refuted or argued against.  Our arguments for Christ or against other religions can be bandied about, debated, and dissected, but genuine love for people cannot be.  This is the case that George and Woodbridge are making, and they do it well.  This is not, by the way, a lapse into sentimentalism.  Strong arguments and truth claims are needed.  But when these are buttressed by love, how much stronger they become.

Anything by Timothy George is worth reading (and I’m sure by Woodbridge as well, though I’m not as familiar with him).  It is nice to see a popular level book by Dr. George, and I do hope he will do even more of these.  Of course, being from the pens of two academic, this book occasionally wanders in fields that some might find a bit tedious.  The long chapter on the rise of fundamentalism was fascinating, but I did occasionally wonder, while reading this chapter, who exactly this book’s target audience is?  Regardless, that chapter in particular is important and helps explain a great deal about media terminology in covering religious realities in North America as well as about how people view evangelicals and fundamentalists.  Furthermore, the authors do a good job in this section of questioning the oft-repeated supposed linkage between Christian fundamentalism and Islamic fundamentalism.

There’s helpful and practical wisdom here about what Christian ecumenism should look like.  The authors refuse to sell doctrine down the river in exchange for dialogue and peace.  No, we are to hold to our biblical convictions and seek to communicate them clearly.  But we communicate our convictions with hearts of love and understanding.

Personally, this is a word I needed to hear.  I suspect it’s a word we all need to hear.  I highly recommend this book.

Friedrich Zuendel’s The Awakening

Posted on by
Reply

The Awakening is a fascinating true story of one pastor’s courageous stand against evil and the revival that resulted from it. The tale concerns a 19th century German pastor named Johann Christoph Blumhardt who’s parish was the village of Mottlingen in the Black Forest. There are two main interrelated sections in this book, Blumhardt’s helping of a young possessed woman named Gottliebin Dittus and the revival that resulted in and around the Black Forest as a result. It is also a story of persecution, as Pastor Blumhardt lost many of his friends and received the guarded censure of the church due to his involvement in this case.

The book is written by a nineteenth century Swiss pastor named Friedrich Zuendel. Zuendel truly created something beautiful with this work. While one of his intentions is the historical defense of the events surrounding Blumhardt and Gottlievin Dittus, he obviously intends to speak to the issue of the church’s reaction to extreme instances of spiritual warfare and unusual movements of the Holy Spirit as well.

The first section of the book does an extremely effective job of helping us understand the admittedly bizarre events surrounding Gottlievin Dittus. Zuendel’s account of the possession and deliverance avoids all of the pitfalls that fictional accounts (and some historical accounts) of such events fall prey to: excessive sensationalism and an over-obvious appeal to the reader’s sense of spiritual voyeurism. He handles it with care and obvious sincerity. His use of Blumhardt’s letters from the time not only lend credence to the alleged events, but also paint a picture of a very careful pastor who battled with own his feelings over the possession.

This is book that both skeptics and gluttons of possession accounts would benefit from. Skeptics will be moved, if not to the point of conviction, then at least to the point of appreciation for both Blumhardt and Dittus. Gluttons of this type of thing will see the painful reality of true demonic possession and, as a result, will be encouraged to treat the issue with more care and caution than they currently do.

In truth, I felt that the last section would be anti-climatic, given the nature of the first section, but I was wrong. Instead, Zuendel’s account of the revival surrounding Blumhardt is even more powerful. The deliverance of Gottlievin Dittus set off a fire storm of controversy and accusations. In a sense, Blumhardt’s involvement in the case set in motion events that he certainly could not control by himself. People, seekers and skeptics alike, began to flock to him. Many claimed that Blumhardt’s prayers resulted in physical and mental healings. These claims brought Blumhardt a great deal of criticism and even some restrictions from his higher ups. Yet, the fact that many people’s physical, mental and spiritual lives were greatly enriched was beyond dispute. There truly was a revival in the Black Forest.

Blumhardt’s letters show that he was no charlatan. On the contrary, they validate the contention that he was actually a man of great moderation and care when it came to matters of healing and deliverance. He struggled himself over who was and who was not being honest in their search for healing, and he even turned many people away when he felt that they were just looking for a show. This meant that Blumhardt received opposition from those on both sides of the controversy surrounding him.

I found this book to be one of the most inspirational and moving stories I have ever encountered. Blumhardt’s moderation in the midst of admittedly extreme circumstances is admirable. The churches obvious reluctance to acknowledge the revival in the midst is perhaps understandable but ultimately regrettable. There are lessons in this book for all of us today and I would encourage you to buy and read this beautiful work.

Gabriele Amorth’s An Exorcist Tells His Story

Posted on by
1

Books on demonology must be approached with a great deal of care. Those who write with an excessive interest in the subject are too often shown to have commerce, not sound theology, on their minds. Some of the most popular Protestant writers on the subject have been discredited and shown to be nothing more than swindlers – hucksters trafficking in sensational tales of the demonic that, upon investigation, prove to be merely the inventions of creative minds. However, the untrustworthiness of many in this field does not excuse us from being serious about the subject or from trying to find works that can be beneficial to our understanding of demonology.

Enter Gabriele Amorth. Amorth is the student of the late Catholic Exorcist, Candido Amantini, who, Amorth explains, “was the only person in the world who could claim an experience of thirty-six years as a full-time exorcist.” (p13) Currently, Amorth is billed as “the Chief Exorcist of Rome.”

He is writing here as a Roman Catholic whose primary concern is the Church of Rome’s failure to take the reality of demon possession seriously. He argues throughout that Bishops must return to a Scriptural understanding of the subject and, furthermore, must begin training and appointing Exorcists once more.

As a Protestant, there are many things in this book that I reject. The use of holy water during the exorcism, the advice to call upon Mary for her protection and help (Amorth has written four books about Mary), and the use of the Roman ritual of exorcism.

That being said, I will still recommend this book to any who would like a serious, pastoral discussion on demon possession. While Amorth is certainly a Roman Catholic writer, he is not an anti-Protestant writer. In fact, Amorth praises Protestants for having taken the issue much more seriously than Catholics and for being very effective in this area. I am not sure I agree with his assessment, but I do appreciate his honesty.

We make take many of Amorth’s concerns and apply them to the Body of Christ at large. Demonology has for too long been shrugged off by the arrogant naturalism of skeptics in the church. On the other hand, it has also been too long squandered and abused by sensationalists who play fast with the truth.

Amorth’s voice stands in the midst of this abuse and calls for understanding. His handling of the inevitable issue of demon possession versus mental instability is masterful. Yes, many (and, Amorth says, most) of those who claim to be demon possessed are not, but some are, and while we must approach each case with wisdom and reason, we must not jettison a Biblical belief in the reality of demon possession in the process. Some people are victims of our adversary who can only be freed by the authority of the name of Christ in the act of Exorcism.

Having been disillusioned myself some years ago by authors on this subject (ever hear of Mike Warnke? Good.), it is refreshing to find a writer who approaches the issue with sensitivity, faith, reason and pastoral care. I have never ceased to believe in the reality of demon possession. And, while I have only encountered one case that I suspect was possession, I cannot help but believe that the spiritual war about which Scripture speaks continues to be waged all around us. Let us be thankful, then, for men such as Gabriele Amorth who take the battle seriously. It is not until we begin to do so as well that we will see victory.