Miss California and the Blog World

It didn't take long for the bloggers and commentators to pick up on the Miss California USA controversy (that's what blogging is all about right?). My two favorites, so far, are from Mike Wittmer and my good friend Paul Adams. Paul also refers us to a commentary by Chuck Colson which is not on the issue of Miss California but on the more general issue "Same Sex 'Marriage' and Religious Liberty." Both Mike and Paul make astute comments about Dobson's involvement in this whole matter.

The issues are important and the stakes are high. We can't afford to be uninformed or to think the problem will just go away.

Blog Tour with Michael Wittmer

Michael Wittmer’s book Don’t Stop Believing has three characteristics: 1) it is rooted in Scripture, 2) it is rigorous in its logic and 3) it is civil in its tone. Wittmer does not side step the hard questions that have been raised by what he terms “postmodern innovators (PI).” He uses this term to represent “the left wing of the emerging, postconservative, or younger evangelical church” (18). You can tell that he has genuinely listened to their (PIs) concerns and questions and he thinks the traditional church can learn from them. But he is equally serious in saying that some of their answers to the questions they raise are skewed at best and heretical at worst. I have only a couple of questions.

Wittmer says, “The notion that church membership is optional for Christians is a novel idea. Until recently, most Christians believed Cyprian’s famous saying that ‘outside the church there is no salvation.’ In case someone thinks that this statement is too Roman Catholic for Protestants to accept, ask yourself whether it is possible to belong to Christ if you pointedly choose not to belong to his church. Can you be connected to the head if you are not part of the body?” (pp. 107-08)

So here’s my question: If someone is not a “member” of a church is he really not part of the body? Does this confuse the visible and invisible church? Was there such a thing as “membership” as we understand it today in the original house churches of the first century or is the term “membership” being used as a synonym for regular attendance?

Next question: What would your advice be to a Christian who is attending a church that predominately teaches the views of PIs?

Thank you Mike and Zondervan for allowing me to participate in this blog tour. If you would like to see all the participating blogs on this tour go here and if you would like to see Mike's blog go here.

New from Bethany House: True for You But Not for Me

True for You but Not for Me is an excellent introduction to answering many of the objections to the Christian Faith. Paul Copan is the Pledger Family Chair of Philosophy and Ethics at Palm Beach Atlantic University. In this revised edition Copan has significantly revised all of the chapters of the first edition and added several new ones. Among the new topics treated are “It’s all a matter of perspective,” That’s just your opinion.” And “You can’t legislate morality.” The book is divided into five segments: 1) Absolutely Relative, 2) The Absolutism of Moral Relativism, 3) The Exclusivism of Religious Pluralism, 4) The Uniqueness of Jesus Christ: Myth or Reality? And 5) “No Other Name”: The Question of the Unevangelized.

Copan’s gift is in getting to the heart of an objection and providing clear responses. Many will object that he makes the issues seem simplistic as if once you throw out Copan’s suggested response the skeptic will be left speechless. Copan is not blind to this. He says, “These responses are not intended to be given as what cynics might call ‘sassy answers to stupid questions,’ but rather as encouragements to reopening conversation in an engaging, relational setting” (13). He continues, “An atheist or a relativist has a deeply engrained worldview. Moving from atheism to agnosticism is progress—an indication of God’s grace at work! Go slowly and prayerfully, and then let the discussion begin” (16). This book should be viewed as helpful ways to get the dialogue going and not being shut down by favorite skeptic one liners.

The “Further Reading” sections are invaluable. Because of the brevity in which the topics are dealt these sections guide the reader to more in-depth treatments. This could have been made a little better with some annotation. Some of the books suggested are quite advanced and others are good popular treatments. A small note indicating which books would be the next best step would avoid the reader going from this book to, say, Moral Relativism by Paul Moser and Thomas L. Carson which would be quite a leap (75). Copan recommends Paul Eddy and Gregory Boyd’s book The Jesus Legend which is an excellent reference work (165). But it would have been nice if he had also mentioned the popular (condensed) treatment by the same authors in Lord or Legend?: Wrestling with the Jesus Dilemma (The omission may be explained due to the fact that the book is regrettably out of print). Other materials can be found in the many footnotes which are replete throughout the book. This may be an introductory volume but it provides a wealth of other material for the interested reader.

I found Copan’s discussion of morality to be particularly strong. He wisely observes, and this is an important point Christians must hear, that “belief in God isn’t a requirement for being moral” (98). On the other hand “one can’t be a moral being unless God exists” (98). The distinction is crucial to understanding the importance of the existence of God as the ground for objective moral values. Given naturalism what is the basis of the value of human life? We are just the result of the random collision of matter plus time. This is a valueless process and “from valuelessness, valuelessness comes” (99). These chapters should be read carefully by every high school student.

Calvinist readers should be aware that Copan’s preferred answer on the question of the unevangelized is the Molinist doctrine of middle knowledge as popularized by the Christian philosopher and apologist William Lane Craig. This solution has enjoyed more acceptance among Arminians though some Calvinists have attempted formulations of it within a Calvinist structure most notably Terrance Tiessen and Bruce Ware. See the recent discussion by Paul Helm who does not believe middle knowledge is a valid option in our understanding of God's knowledge. This is but a small caveat to a great book.

Youth Pastors should give True for You but Not for Me to graduating seniors or better yet go through it with them while in high school when many of these issues are raised by some of their skeptic friends. My repeated references to youth should not be misconstrued. This would also be a good book for any small group study. To help you with this, questions are available online at http://www.paulcopan.com/.

Noted Skeptic and Atheist Converts to Christianity

A. N. Wilson was a convert to atheism from Christianity and has now returned to Christianity. Wilson was the author of the book Jesus where he attempted to dismantle the credibility of the Gospels and portray Jesus as "a Galilean holy man, an heir to the prophetic tradition, who possessed charismatic healing powers; it is improbable that this monotheistic Jew ever believed himself to be the Second Person of the Trinity or that he instituted the Eucharist. Wilson proposes that the feast at Cana may have been Jesus's own wedding; that the woman who poured ointment over his feet and wiped them with her hair is a detail "too strange" to have been invented; that Jesus's cousin John the Baptist came to disbelieve that Jesus was the Messiah; and that the Stranger seen by Jesus's disciples after his death was probably Jesus's brother James. This biography also suggests that Judas was innocent of betraying Jesus, that "the Pharisees were among the most virtuous men who had ever lived," that Jesus was never tried by the Jewish Sanhedrin, and that Paul was the high priest's servant who supervised Jesus's arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane." (From Publishers Weekly).

This is an astounding testimony to the grace of God in this man's life. You can read about it here and and see Wilson's article on "Why we should no longer be cowed by the chattering classes ruling Britain who sneer at Christianity."

Wilson says, "My departure from the Faith was like a conversion on the road to Damascus. My return was slow, hesitant, doubting. So it will always be; but I know I shall never make the same mistake again." (Why I Believe Again)

Kevin Deyoung Store Visit - Reflections

We were honored to have Kevin DeYoung in the store last night. This was Kevin's second visit with us and it was a delight to have him. He talked briefly about his latest book Just Do Something which addresses the ever popular subject of the how to know the will of God. Kevin said the Scripture describes the will of God in two ways: 1) the will of decree which is what God sovereignly wills and 2) the will of desire which are his commands. What he does not see is the "will of direction." This is the plan that God has for each of us and that he means for us to discover. This aspect of the will of God in the traditional "bulls eye" view of the will of God is wholly lacking. At the end of the day the traditional view really can't offer any objective criteria for knowing the will of God. It is nothing more than a "chain of subjectivism." In the traditional view "we want to know the future instead of trusting him who holds the future." One point really struck home with me. When Kevin was invited to another church to be the senior pastor he said he "prayed about it." So what did he pray? It wasn't for guidance. He asked God to keep him humble in the face of becoming a "senior" pastor. He asked God to keep him from fear of failure. These were the sorts of things he prayed and when he finally made his decision (not made independently of his wife he was sure to add) it was his decision. He accepted responsibility for that decision. There is both freedom and wisdom in this approach to knowing the will of God. I encourage you to read Kevin's book. It is a great gift for high school graduates or for anyone who is struggling to know how to understand this issue. You can see more of Kevin at his blog DeYoung, Restless and Reformed.

Coming Soon from Baker Books - Calvin's Commentaries

I'm expecting any day now Baker's new release of Calvin's Commentaries. This collector's edition will be handsomely bound featuring a 500 year gold emblem on the spine. Also included is a free copy of the The Institutes of the Christian Religion by Calvin (Beveridge version). The 23-volume set has a retail value of $1200.00 but will sell for $190.00. I'm amazed at the number of contemporary commentaries that give tribute to Calvin as a commentator or that continue to interact with him. To give one example Douglas Moo in his commentary on Romans says that while he consulted many commentaries on Romans he selected twelve for particularly careful study. The factors in his selection were: "exegetical excellence, theological sophistication, and representative significance." One of those twelve was Calvin. Moo says he considers these scholars as his "exegetical sparring partners." (p. xix) Calvin's first commentary was on Romans which was published in 1540. Almost 500 years later we're still listening and learning.

Coming Soon from Thomas Nelson - The [expanded] Bible New Testament

Thomas Nelson is proudly releasing a new Bible translation this August. Well, it’s not quite new. The new Bible is an expanded edition based on a "modified version" of the New Century Version. Similar to what the Amplified Bible does this new edition expands the text in a variety of ways. The expansions will function in a number of ways: 1) It may offer “other possible ways of translating a word, phrase, clause, or sentence.” 2) It may suggest “a different translation possibility that takes the meaning of the original language in a different direction that the base text does.” 3) It may offer “a more literal rendering of the original language.” 4) It may “provide familiar terms and well-known renderings from past translations, especially those in the King James tradition.” 5) It may “briefly provide historical, cultural, theological, or other explanatory information to help readers better understand a verse or passage.” I’ve never been a big fan of the Amplified Bible because it lead too many readers into thinking the words meant everything that was in the parentheses every where they occur. When I first heard about this edition I was somewhat leery but from what I’ve seen so far I think Nelson has done a good job. In my opinion it is the Amplified Bible done right. The same potential exists for misunderstanding the notes that I’ve observed with users of the Amplified but hopefully we won't see much of that. A note in the Introduction of The [expanded] Bible is helpful: "The goal of this approach is not to suggest that a text can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean (it cannot), but to show that the Bible in its original languages is rich, multi-layered, and profound." At the end of the day this is a problem with the user rather than the version itself. Some will complain that the format itself lends to this sort of problem but while there is some truth to this some responsibility rests with the reader. The more notes are embedded into the actual text, however, the harder it is for the reader to separate note from text. All of this is to say care must be used with this Bible as with any study Bible.

The scholars involved with the project are Tremper Longman III, Robert H. Gundry Professor of Biblical Studies at Westmont College, Mark L. Strauss, professor of New Testament at Bethel Seminary San Diego, and Daniel Taylor, professor of literature and writing at Bethel University.

Wayne Hastings, Senior Vice President and Group Publisher of the Bible Division for Thomas Nelson Publishers, is offering a free PDF version of the New Testament on his blog Off the Shelf.

Rob Bell and the Gospel

Anything that happens that involves Rob Bell usually gets our attention around here. Several members of his church are co-workers of mine and I’ve enjoyed many conversations about what is happening at Mars Hill. Recently Bell did an interview with Mark Galli, senior managing editor of Christianity Today magazine. One response to this interview was by Greg Gilbert, senior pastoral assistant at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D. C., on the 9Marks blog.

In particular, Galli asked Bell “How would you present this gospel on Twitter?” Bell answered, “I would say that history is headed somewhere. The thousands of little ways in which you are tempted to believe that hope might actually be a legitimate response to the insanity of the world actually can be trusted. And the Christian story is that a tomb is empty, and a movement has actually begun that has been present in a sense all along in creation. And all those times when your cynicism was at odds with an impulse within you that said that this little thing might be about something bigger—those tiny little slivers may in fact be connected to something really, really big.”

Gilbert responds, “Really? That’s it? That’s the gospel?” He continues, “Bell’s answer to Galli’s question is sub-Christian. It is not the message of Christianity. It is not saving. It is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is not even anywhere near it.” These are strong words. I encourage you to read the entire interview, Gilbert’s response and especially the comments that follow. Defining the gospel and its framework are increasingly a topic of conversation. See the recent editorial by D. A. Carson on the gospel in Themelios.

Scot McKnight and the New Perspective

Scot McKnight is starting a series of posts on N. T. Wright's newest book Justification. This will no doubt be one of many. I've started reading it myself and was struck by Wright's comment when he said "But I do know that if a church only, or mainly, relies on the NIV it will, quite simply, never understand what Paul was talking about" (52). That's a bold claim and it doesn't say much for the NIV. So what is The New Perspective on Paul (commonly abbreviated NPP)? There are variations of beliefs within those who would be included under the NPP umbrella but according to The Paul Page (a website dedicated to the NPP) it is "[a]t its core is the recognition that Judaism is not a religion of self-righteousness whereby humankind seeks to merit salvation before God. Paul's argument with the Judaizers was not about Christian grace versus Jewish legalism. His argument was rather about the status of Gentiles in the church. Paul's doctrine of justification, therefore, had far more to do with Jewish-Gentile issues than with questions of the individual's status before God." Scot has a good summary and brief history of the major players in the NPP. Michael Horton says the NPP can be divided into two stages: 1) Paul misunderstood Judaism (a la E. P. Sanders), 2) The reformers misunderstood Paul (a la Dunn, Wright et al). Those looking for a summary of Wright's new book can find it here by Michael C. Thompson.

Coming Soon from Moody Publishers - Why We Love The Church

The church has taken quite the beating the last few years. One begins to wonder if the church is doing anything right. The gates of hell may not be prevailing against it but it seems to be falling apart at the seams. Along comes Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck with a book that promises to say it's not as bad as it appears. In fact, there is much to love! I did get an advance reading copy this week but unfortunately my boss pulled rank (to coin an expression from my military days) and so she gets it first. I love the writing style of DeYoung and Kluck and from what I gleaned this will not disappoint readers.

Michael Wittmer on Brian McLaren's Lament

Mike Wittmer, author of Don’t Stop Believing, says he received a mass email last week from Brian McLaren regarding his “‘Everything Must Change’” tour, in which he lamented that ‘many if not most Christians in the US remain focused on’ their ‘intramural religious debates’ rather than the global crises confronting our world. He wrote: ‘In one Q & A session after another since our tour, I’ve watched the conversation be pulled away from Jesus’ gospel of the reigning of God in relation to life-and-death global crises, and turned toward controversies and inquisitions about doctrinal opinions and ‘theological correctness.’ Some nights, I didn’t even realize what had happened until I went back to my hotel room and just wanted to cry.’”

Wittmer’s comments in response to this, I believe, are exactly right. Wittmer says that while he can sympathize with McLaren’s lament “it’s his own fault.” You can read the entire entry here.