Chosen in Christ (Book Review)

 

Chosen in Christ: Revisiting the Contours of Predestination by Cornelis Venema (Reformed Exegetical Doctrinal Series, Christian Focus, Fearn, Ross-shire, 2019) 

It's been a while since I've done a book review on blog, despite having read a number of excellent Christian books in the last year. So, I thought it was high time to do one and the book I have just finished, is well worth reviewing and recommending.

The difficult doctrine of predestination or election has long been of particular interest to me and Cornelis Venema's book on the subject is an excellent contribution to this area of doctrine, often regarded as being at the heart of Reformed theology. As might be expected, Venema takes a Calvinist point of view and endorses unconditional election. This is reflected both in his positive presentations of his view and in his critiques of other approaches to election and predestination.

The book reads like a collection of essays on topics concerning predestination rather than a single cohesive treatise or argument on the subject. 

The first part of the book takes a biblical theological tour of the Bible's teaching on election and predestination across three chapters that look at, in turn, the doctrine of election in the Old Testament, the doctrine of election in the New Testament (excluding Paul) and then the doctrine of election in Paul's epistles. This material takes up about a third of the book.

The remaining chapters take a more historical theology perspective, with chapters on election and predestination in Augustine, Reformation theology, Arminian conditional election, Karl Barth's doctrine of election, and what Venema calls "Neo-Arminianism" - more commonly called Open Theism. As expected, Venema's treatment of Augustine and Reformed theology is positive, while his assessment of Arminianism, Barthianism and Open Theism are negative critiques.

The final chapter is entitled Concluding Theological and Pastoral Reflections where the author presents his own reflections on some common objections to the Reformed doctrine of predestination, such as regarding evangelism and the gospel offer.

Election and predestination are scarcely the simplest of Christian doctrines and any treatment of them is bound to be somewhat complex. Venema's book is no exception. In my view, this is at least a semi-technical treatment, aimed at theology students and pastors more than a general Christian readership, I think many people would find it difficult to work through this book. It offers an in depth treatment, particularly of the various deviations from the Reformed doctrine. I would not recommend it as a first read on this topic by any means. For that, I would suggest various other works, whether one of the many books on the Five Points of Calvinism, or A. W. Pink's The Sovereignty of God or James White's The Potter's Freedom. In addition, the relevant chapters of a good Reformed systematic theology, such as Berkhof, would be worth reading before turning to this book from Cornelis Venema. 

The work is valuable for a more in-depth study of the subject, particularly as I said, for the historical analysis and context.

Christian Standard Bible Anglicised Edition

When the Christian Standard Bible came out in 2017 I thought it was one of the best English translations to come out in a while. It ticked pretty much every box for me in what I look for in an English translation, except that back then in was not available in a British English or anglicised edition. This is important to me as a reader as the American spelling of many important biblical words are jarring, especially Saviour and other "our" words.

 I actually wrote to Holman (the publisher) to ask if there were any plans to bring out a British English edition. Initially, there were no plans, but I was delighted when the CSB Anglicised edition came out about a year ago in summer 2024.

I really do think the CSB is an exceptionally readable and accurate translation that does not consider itself bound by Bible translation tradition. A good example would be John 3:16, which is traditionally rendered something like: "For God so loved the world that he have his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him would not perish but have eternal life.

 The CSB reads: " For God loved the world in this way: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life."

I would highlight three improvements in translation in this rendering.

1.  The Greek word Houtos normally refers to the manner in which something is done, not the degree to which something is done. Although "so" can used in either sense, the natural understanding in English of "For God so loved the world" would be that John was referring to the degree of God's love rather than the manner of God's love (which is what the Greek word means). Therefore the CSB's "For God loved the world in this way" is more accurate to the Greek.

 2.  Most scholars now recognise that monogenes does not refer to someone being only begotten, but to them being unique (literally one-of-a-kind). The CSB's "one and only" is therefore preferable to the traditional "only begotten".

3. The Greek literally refers to "every believing one" in the second half of the verse. There is no generic "whoever" in the Greek. The CSB's "everyone who believes" is much more accurate than "whoever believes".

This is just one verse, though a very famous verse. I'm sure similar points could be made throughout the CSB.

 I use the Bible Gateway website for much of my Bible study and I was delighted to see that the Christian Standard Bible Anglicised edition is now an option on the site. I haven't checked the app but I'm sure it will also be on there.

Having the CSB in British English is a great move by Holman and I now plan to use the CSB as my main Bible from now on.

On the translation spectrum, the CSB is somewhat more literal than the NIV and more natural than the ESV, which I think is an ideal balance. The footnotes in the CSB with alternative, sometimes more literal translations, are also excellent in this version. 

Why I Am Not an Arminian

Why I Am Not an Arminian
Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams
Inter-Varsity Press, Downers Grove, IL, 2004

This very useful book is written by two Reformed theologians, both professors of theology at Covenant Theological Seminary in St Louis, Missouri. The book's purpose is to explain in some detail the problems these scholars have with Arminian theology and, indeed, the problems Arminian theology has with the biblical testimony.

The authors say in the Introduction that they would have preferred to have written a biblical defence of Calvinism and entitled the book Why I Am a Calvinist but the publisher wanted a polemical work against Arminianism to counterbalance another book they published called Why I Am Not a Calvinist written by Jerry Walls and Joseph Dongell that was published around the same time. However, they state that the real answer to the question why are you not an Arminian is because they are Calvinists and so their treatment of the various subjects under discussion is to present the Arminian viewpoint as fairly as they can, to explain what's the problem with it, and thirdly to present a Calvinist alternative.

The book features a mixture of two types of chapters. Chapters Two and Five deal with historical theology, with Chapter Two exploring the fundamental difference between the theology of Augustine and Pelagius in the Fifth century AD, and Chapter Five exploring the 17th-century controversy between Jacob Arminius and the Calvinists of the Dutch Reformed churches, culminating in the Synod of Dort in 1618-19 which condemned Arminianism (though this happened some years after Arminius's death in 1609).

The remaining chapters cover subjects including predestination, perseverance, inability, freedom, grace and atonement in which they examine the problems with the Arminian view of each of these topics and explain the Calvinist view.

The authors are careful to present Arminian views carefully, often quoting from primary sources such as the writings of Arminius himself, as well as the likes of John Wesley, H. Orton Wiley, Carl Bangs, Ray Dunning, Kenneth Grider, and Clark Pinnock.

I also appreciated the gracious tone of the book as both authors affirm Arminians as fellow Christian believers. "We do not think of Arminianism as a heresy or Arminian Christians as unregenerate" (p.13) and "the Calvinist and the Arminian are brothers in Christ." Yet they are clear that "at certain points Arminianism presents a skewed picture of the gospel" (p.13)

Earlier, I said that the authors present a Calvinist viewpoint and I say so deliberately because there are places where not all Calvinists would agree with Peterson and Williams' views. For example, the authors clearly sympathise in some ways with Arminius's rejection of Beza's supralapsarianism, which they also seem to strongly reject, though of course they believe Arminius went too far. I'm also sure not every Calvinist would entirely agree with their treatment of how divine sovereignty and human responsiblity and free will co-exist.

Having said this, this remains a useful guide to the problems with Arminian theology from a Calvinist perspective.

A Fellowship of Differents

A Fellowship of Differents
Scot McKnight
Zondervan, 2014

I have read a number of books by the American New Testament scholar, Scot McKnight, and have never found one that wasn't both interesting and useful. His book A Fellowship of Differents was no exception. As the title might suggest, the theme of the book is that the Christian Church is supposed to be a fellowship of people who are all very different from one another. Different sexes, races, nationalities, social classes and temperaments all coming together in a shared life as God's new community and new humanity through faith in Jesus Christ.

The book's subtitle is "Showing the World God's Design for Life Together" and that captures one of the book's key themes - the importance of sharing life together as Christians. As the author makes clear, God's church is intended to show the world a new way of being human and form a new community composed of followers of Jesus, and most importantly, that this isn't some high-flying spiritual theory - it is meant to be lived out in practice at each local gathering or congregation of Christ's people, namely at the local church where you go on Sunday morning or to events during the week.

Somehow, McKnight manages to make this a practical look at what church should really be like and a theological reflection on why this should be so. Above all, it is realistic about what our expectations of our local church should be.

At a time when my own local church is facing issues of people leaving because the denomination to which we belong is deemed by them to be unworthy of their continued membership and support, I was particularly struck by a profound quote in the book from Dietrich Bonhoeffer: "Those who love their dream of a Christian community more than the Christian community itself become destroyers of that Christian community though their personal intentions may be ever so honest, earnest, and sacrificial" (p.112, from Life Together). McKnight's point is that we cannot desert the real churches that we find down the street from where we live in pursuit of an imaginary church where everything is perfect: perfect doctrines, perfect worship, perfect people. Such a quest is not only delusional, but damaging to the real church. 

I was also fascinated and moved by a passage where McKnight describes a "typical" church service in New Testament times, maybe in a Roman city like Rome or Pompeii. The passage is too long to quote (pp. 100-102), but it describes a Roman woman going along to a church meeting in a rich person's house, seeing people from all different Roman classes sitting together and sharing in a meal together (in these times communion was taken as part of an actual meal, not in the ritualised form of "meal" we find in most modern churches). Such an act was revolutionary in Roman society where it was unthinkable for wealthy patricians and common slaves to sit at a table for a meal which celebrates God's grace for people through the death of the Messiah on the cross, and they take the bread and wine as equals and—perhaps even more amazingly—as a family gathering together.

Throughout the book, the author blends teaching with examples of real people in real churches, which also help to keep the book grounded in practical realities as the discussion moves through a number of different subjects including grace, love, communion, holiness, new life and the Holy Spirit—and there are useful insights on each of these subjects along the way.

This book would be great for anyone interested in the importance of their local church, maybe especially for anyone who is a bit jaded and needs to be reminded that the events in that building you go to, and the interactions you have with the people there (yes, even the odd ones, the strange ones, the ones who are as unlike you as you can imagine), despite how it might seem, are actually God's chosen mechanism for changing the world and making a new humanity. Think about that next Sunday and every Sunday in your local church.

Generous Justice (Repost)

Generous Justice
Timothy Keller
Hodder & Stoughton 2010

I have recently re-read this book and have to say I still agree with my own review of it from a couple of years ago. I think it is worth reposting.

I've pretty much enjoyed everything I've ever read by Tim Keller and Generous Justice is no exception. It seems to me that Keller's central thesis in this book is crucial in our time to the health, vitality and witness of the churches, particularly the evangelical churches, who perhaps need to hear this message most. Keller's thesis is simply that doing justice, in our daily lives as Christians at a personal, social and societal level, is a necessary outworking of the grace of God we have experienced through the gospel.

Keller writes in the introduction for example: "There is a direct relationship between a person's grasp and experience of God's grace, and his or her heart for justice and the poor...I have observed over decades that when people see the beauty of God's grace in Christ, it leads them powerfully towards justice." (p. xix).

It is immediately apparent that Keller wants to challenge several wrong views. To begin with he challenges the secular voices that claim that the Bible is somehow a hindrance to establishing justice in our world. But more interestingly from my point of view, he also challenges the still all-too-typical evangelical mindset that sees the church's true biblical role as "saving souls" and teaching correct doctrines, especially salvation by grace alone, in Christ alone, through faith alone. For too long there has been a false dichotomy in many churches between the evangelical gospel of salvation and the so-called liberal gospel of social justice. Keller is a Reformed theologian and minister of an evangelical Presbyterian church, yet he correctly sees that social justice is fundamental to the church's mission, not as a replacement for the gospel (which is where liberal Christians go wrong) but as a necessary outworking of the gospel.
The rest of the book explores a variety of angles of justice to give a rounded picture of the biblical material.

To begin with, Keller looks to define "justice" and finds that in the Bible it is about far more than simply punishing sinners. Again, too often in evangelical circles, "justice" is restricted to enforcing morality and punishing wrongdoers and we can end up looking simply like the religious equivalent of the "hang 'em and flog 'em brigade"! No, biblical justice is more akin to "social justice" that looks after the poor, the widow and the fatherless. It is about doing what is right for everyone and about living in a "harmonious peace" (as Keller defines the key Hebrew concept of shalom) with our fellow human beings and with all creation. It is about fair treatment of immigrants. It is about making sure workers are paid fair wages and work in decent conditions. The list of applications of the biblical principles could go on and on. Keller also points out that justice in biblical terms is not about doing the bare minimum of good for others, it should be generous. Why? Because when we act like that we reflect God's own character. The Scriptures say that God is on the side with the weak, the poor and the oppressed. And as we claim to be the people of God, so should we.

Later chapters highlights material from the Old Testament, especially the prophets, and the New Testament, especially the teachings of Christ himself, that all back-up the point of view outlined. Keller's treatment of the Parable of the Good Samaritan was a particular highlight.

A later chapter in the book called "How Should We Do Justice?" is very practical and very challenging. In it, Keller gets down to the nitty-gritty of actually putting the theory into practice and I found it useful when he talks about three levels of doing justice called "relief, development and social reform" and how Christians are called to involvement at all three levels. Relief is immediate help given to someone in need. Development is longer term involvement to help someone in need improve things so the need no longer exists. Social reform challenges governments to change the law and/or society to stop the situation that caused the need from happening in the first place. In the example of the old proverb, relief is giving a man a fish, development is giving a man a fishing rod and teaching him to fish, social reform questions the government why the poor have to live off fish while others have plenty to eat.

The book ends with a chapter where Keller links peace, justice and beauty and reiterates the link between the gospel of grace and living out a gospel life of grace that seeks justice for others (in the true biblical scope) and closes with a final challenge to us as Christians. In essence, if we have received so much blessing from God's hand, shouldn't we be more willing to bless others from our hands? In Keller's own words:

Proverbs 14:31 says, "He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker." The God of the Bible says, as it were, "I am the poor on your step. Your attitude towards them reveals your true attitude toward me." A life poured out in doing justice for the poor is the inevitable sign of any real, true gospel faith.

Now, if that doesn't challenge any Western Christian who reads it, what will?

What St Paul Really Said

What St Paul Really Said
by Tom Wright
Lion Publishing, 1997

I don't often re-post old stuff, but I was re-reading What St Paul Really Said by Tom Wright in the last week and thought it worth putting up the review I first did back in 2009. I have only altered the review slightly where my views have shifted since 2009 or where the wording needed changed to reflect that my first reading of the book was four years ago

--

When I first read What St Paul Really Said I was determined not to like it. In fact I was resolute that I was going to hate it, find it heretical, say so in a scathing review and then chuck it in the nearest bin. It was the first book I read by N. T. Wright, one of the world's most eminent New Testament scholars, (then) Anglican bishop and churchman and leading proponent of the so-called New Perspective on Paul.

The truth proved to be a bit different. Not quite a Damascus road experience, but I finished the book convinced that far from being the heretic that some have caricatured him as, Tom Wright has more in common with the spirit of the Reformers than some of his opponents, even if he sometimes comes to different conclusions than them. His sole concern, it seems to me, is to find out what the Scriptures say, over against any traditions, even those of evangelicalism. Of course that does not settle the question of whether he does, in fact, succeed in finding out what the Scriptures say and in showing that his view is the correct one and the more traditional interpretations of say Romans and Galatians are in error, but in reading Wright it always feels as if his heart is in the right place.

"What St Paul Really Said" is his popular-level treatment of Paul's place in Christian theology. It is an engaging read, extremely well-written and fairly easy to read though dealing with a complex subject matter in considerable depth. In fact, it is a fine example of how interesting prose by theologians should and could be.

I am not convinced by everything Wright says. In fact, I strongly disagree with some of his conclusions - he does not always give enough credit to "old perspective" theology, its emphases, and the arguments of its greatest theologians. Often Wright frames the discussion in "either/or" terms when it might just as well be framed as a "both/and" situation. Justification is not just about ecclesiology in my view - it is also about soteriology and I think Wright overplays his hand on this point. Justification is at least partly about salvation, about how a sinner can be in the right relationship (i.e. be righteous) with a holy God, not just about the fact that Gentiles should be allowed to eat with Jews as members of the one covenant people.

That's not to say that the fact that every Christian is saved on precisely the same basis should not have massive ramifications for ecclesiology and the unity of the people of God. I think Wright is on to something when he emphasises those aspects of justification that Reformed and Lutheran theology has traditionally downplayed. To put it another way, I think the Old Perspective is fundamentally right on the substantial points regarding justification, but the New Perspective has valuable insights to offer regarding the implications of the doctrine of justification for the Church's and the individual Christian's life. Our fellowship with other Christians, our being the church, our being the covenant people of God is, after all, on the basis of this justification we have all equally received through faith.

I think it was Howard Marshall who made the comment about accepting what the New Perspective affirms but having a problem with what it denies. I would certainly share that view.

This book and indeed all Wright's work demands to be read by any evangelicals serious about New Testament theology, particularly the New Perspective on Paul, because I believe there are insights here that are valuable and can be taken on board even by evangelicals who reject the central claims of the New Perspective.

For me personally, I think the central planks of the New Perspective are correct and we need to work to bring the Old and New Perspectives together rather than play them against each other. As I said, affirming what the New Perspective affirms without accepting what it denies.

What St Paul Really Said is thoroughly recommended reading for the thoughtful Christian.

What's So Amazing About Grace

What's So Amazing About Grace
Philip Yancey
Zondervan 1997

I loved this book. I really loved this book. I suppose I am very late arriving at the party as the book is more than 15 years old and is now considered something of a modern classic. I can only say the reputation is well-deserved. Reading it was like a spiritual breath of fresh air.

The first thing to say is that the book is very easy to read. It is targeted at the average Christian; in fact at the average reader. Although it deals with the some of the most important of Christian truths it does so using not only language but a way of communicating that is both easy to grasp and very engaging for any reader. Rather than detailed exegesis of biblical texts or complex theological arguments, which let's face it can be off putting for people who are not theology geeks, Yancey mostly makes his points by telling a number of stories and anedotes. But then teaching by using parables has an impeccable Christian pedigree, doesn't it?

The main point Yancey makes is that grace - that most precious and uncontaminated of Christian concepts - ought to be at the very heart of the lives of individual Christians and of churches, but too often is missing. Grace is unmerited favour. Grace is treating people better than what they deserve. It is the attitude that God shows to sinners when he offers a saving relationship with them, and it is the attitude that Christians ought to show to others inside and outside the church. Yet it is often not there. So often Christians come across as narrow-minded, judgmental, moralistic and legalistic. Yancey uses the umbrella term "ungrace" to cover these kinds of attitudes.

Every church needs to think about its atttitudes and how it actually treats people. Just throwing the word "grace" around isn't enough. Just knowing the theological technicalities of salvation by grace is not enough. What's needed is the embodiment, the very incarnation of grace in people's lives. That is how Jesus lived. His life was the ultimate life of grace. It is what his followers are called to copy.

I can't see how any Christian would fail to benefit from reading this book. Go and get yourself a copy and be prepared to be encouraged and challenged in equal measure.

Ethics in a Permissive Society

Ethics in a Permissive Society
William Barclay
Collins, Fontana Books 1971

I first read William Barclay's little book on Christian ethics when I was a student in the early 1990s. I found a copy in the University library and remember reading it one rainy afternoon. The book was about 20 years old at that point and despite the dated title (the "permissive society" was a term used in the 1960s as shorthand for the huge changes in social, political and moral norms that were taking place in the UK at that time) it still read as an interesting book on Christian ethics. Now the book is over 40 years old and it still reads well as a vision of practical Christian ethics and paints a picture of the good society built on the Christian ethic of loving your neighbour that many of us would like to see.

The book originated in a series of public lectures (the Baird Lectures) that were televised on BBC. That in itself is a sign of how old the book is. Can you imagine a professor of divinity's lectures on Christian ethics being televised on BBC these days? Unfortunately I could find no trace of the broadcasts online but if anyone knows where these can be found, please put a link on a comment!

Barclay was a popular Christian figure during his lifetime. His books and commentaries are still widely read today. Barclay was a liberal Christian and there would be parts of his teachings (denial of miracles etc.) that I would strongly disagree with, but this book on ethics sticks quite closely to lines of biblical thought. Barclay's writing style is easy to read and marked by a welcome clarity and wisdom.

The first three chapters of the book sketch out some of the main ethical teachings of the Old Testament, Jesus and Paul respectively. Then Barclay explains and critiques the then popular ethical notion of "situation ethics" where there are no absolute rights and wrongs, it depends on the situation. From this platform, Barclay then explores a Christian view of work, pleasure, money and community in subsequent chapters and ends the book with a chapter on "Person to Person Ethics".

I found the chapters on the ethics of work and of pleasure the most useful. You don't often see "pleasure" being discussed in Christian ethics books but Barclay's practical approach is very wise and useful. Barclay sums up the view he defends like this:

In life there must be pleasure, and the ideal pleasure is that which is harmless to the person who indulges in it and to all other people, which brings help to him who practices it and happiness to others.

I don't think many Christians would disagree with that.

I also found it interesting that on ethical matters at least, a man who was a prominent liberal in the Church of Scotland 40 years ago would now likely be regarded as holding to very conservative evangelical ethical views. Whatever his other views, I think Barclay is to be commended for his honesty and integrity here. As the Church of Scotland prepares to debate the issue of homosexuality once again at this year's General Assembly in a few weeks, perhaps some might reflect on the words of Barclay's ethical views. Though discussing heterosexual sex outside marriage (I think Barclay would have taken it for granted that homosexual activity is wrong and it would certainly be included in the "sex outside of marriage" that he criticises), his words have a relevance for the forthcoming debate that is hard to miss:

If we support sexual intercourse before marriage or outside marriage, then I do not see how we can continue to call ourselves Christian, for a man cannot be a Christian and flatly contradict the teaching of Jesus Christ. It is one thing honestly to say that we will abandon the demands of Christian morality; it is quite another thing to abandon them and to deceive ourselves into thinking that we are still keeping them.

The book is long out of print but you may be able to find a second hand copy, often at a very low price. It would be a worthwhile purchase even for the chapters on work and pleasure alone, but there is much else here in a short book worth reflecting on.

The Divine Spiration of Scripture

The Divine Spiration of Scripture
A. T. B. McGowan
Apollos

Professor McGowan's book is interesting but rather odd. Its main arguments are simple enough to grasp and make for interesting discussion:

• The doctrine of the Bible should not stand as a separate subject in systematic theology but form part of the doctrine of God ("theology proper") and the Holy Spirit in particular.
• We should stop referring to the "divine inspiration" of Scripture and start using "divine spiration" instead.
• We should stop referrring to the "inerrancy" of Scripture and use the word "infallibility" instead.

The ideas are clear enough, but the book takes a rather meandering path through the subject matter which mean that the main points are often lost amid screeds of words dealing with a number of different subjects. Personally, I felt this distracted from the main points.

There are also some difficulties with the main points themselves that need to be addressed.

First, to argue for a change in vocabulary from inspiration to spiration is a difficult one to sell. The word inspiration is so entrenched as a term of art in theology that it is hard to imagine it being displaced, especially by the rather odd word "spiration" which few people will even have heard of. While it is true that inspiration is often misunderstood and confused with the way purely human writings are said to be "inspired" and while it not a very accurate rendering of theopneustos in 2 Timothy 3:16 ("God-breathed" or "breathed out by God" are much more accurate and descriptive), I do not think McGowan makes a sufficient case for replacing what is a problematic term with another problematic term. It is not immediately apparent what "spiration" means. Rather than looking for a Latinate term of art to replace "inspiration," might we not be better to stick the robust Anglo-Saxon term "God-breathed" in future to describe the doctrine?

Second, one of McGowan's central arguments is that there is a divide between American theologians who argue for the concept of inerrancy and European theologian who argue instead for infallibility. Here he pits the likes of Warfield and Hodge against Kuyper and Bavinck. This view of a radical difference between the two continents is not universally accepted. The book would have been helped, in my view, if McGowan had spelled out more clearly what he actually means by infallibility, in particular how this differs from inerrancy.

Third, where we categorise the doctrine of Scripture in systematic theology is of little interest to anyone except professional systematic theologians. McGowan does not really explain why it matters very well.

Because of the book's problems, it is unlikely to achieve what McGowan would like. It seems to be destined to be a mere footnote in the body of evangelical theology on the inspiration and authority of the Bible.

Readers who want to read a more detailed review could do worse than read John Frame's review here.

Café Theology

Café Theology 
Michael Lloyd
Alpha International 2012

It has always been one of my passions to discuss and communicate theology with clarity and simplicity while avoiding being simplistic. This difficult balancing act is more than achieved by Michael Lloyd in this book.

In some 400-odd pages, Lloyd provides an excellent, sensible overview of evangelical theology, dealing with such central subjects as creation, the fall, providence, incarnation, atonement, resurrection, the Holy Spirit, the Trinity, the End Times, and the Church.

What I was impressed by was that Lloyd manages, as well as giving a general overview, to make some very interesting arguments that I haven't come across elsewhere in my theological reading.

His chapter on the Fall was the most interesting for me in the book. Here Lloyd tackles some huge issues and tries to explain how the Fall means far more than simply that we are all sinners. It also means that the world is not exactly as how God would have it. For Lloyd this is the basis for dealing with such matters as the problem of evil and why there is so much suffering in the world from both natural disasters and moral evils.

Lloyd also touches on an idea that the fall of Satan occurred prior to the fall of humanity and accounts for death in creation among animal species even before man was created and fell. This allows him to affirm that death is as the result of sin while affirming animal death prior to humanity's fall. Thus he presents a kind of "Gap Theory" for creation.

It is not surprising that this book comes from Alpha course producers. It is an evangelical theology book designed to be read by the modern, thoughtful, 21st century Christian and would be eminently suitable for new Christians who have maybe been through an Alpha or Christianity Explored course and who wants to explore the faith in greater depth.

This is one of my theology books of the year.

Love One Another

Love One Another
Gerald L. Sittser
Inter-Varsity Press, Nottingham 2008

Love One Another is an interesting book about the right attitudes and behaviour we ought to have for one another in the Christian church (and all too often are sadly lacking in it must be confessed).

The chapters are all good expositions of the subjects they deal with, though I felt that the book is far stronger in describing what our attitudes should be like than it is in advising or guiding how we might actually change our churches and ourselves to be like this.

Each chapter begins with a relevant Bible verse. Even to look at the chapter names and the verses is helpful in seeing the kind of aspirations we might have as Christians for the churches where we worship:

1. The New Commandment

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." (John 13:34-35)

Jesus' most fundamental commandment to his followers is both simple and profound - that we should love one another. The church is therefore a community of people who love each other. The rest of the book explores eleven ways in which we might seek to foster and develop our local fellowship as such a loving community.

2. Welcome One Another

"Therefore welcome one another as Christ has welcomed you, for the glory of God." (Romans 15:7, ESV)

The most basic thing the church needs to get right is that when we see each other, or when strangers join us, we are to welcome each other. We have to actually be glad to see each other, and we are to make everyone feel that we value their company. Yet it is amazing how many churches fail in this regard.


3. Be Subject to One Another

"Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." (Ephesians 5:21)

Christ commands his people to be different to the way the world is. We are not to "lord it" over each other. Instead, we are to submit to each other. We are to put one another's needs and one another's views and opinions before our own.

4. Forbear One Another

"Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love." (Ephesians 4:2)


Bearing with one another or forbearing each other means giving each other room to be ourselves, to express our doubts and fears, to sometimes fail, and sometimes disappoint. It is one of the most attractive qualities of a good Christian fellowship.

5. Forgive One Another

"Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you." (Colossians 3:12-13)

It is inevitable in any group of people that at times people will do things they shouldn't and things we don't like. In such occasions, Christ and the apostles exhort us to forgive one another just as we have been forgiven for our sins by God.

6. Confess Sin to One Another & Pray for One Another

"Is anyone among you in trouble? Let them pray. Is anyone happy? Let them sing songs of praise. Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church to pray over them and anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise them up. If they have sinned, they will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective." (James 5:13-16)

The Bible is at times admirably clear and it is often those clear statements that we find the most difficult to put into practice. But here James is clear we are supposed to confess our sins to each other - to admit when we've done wrong to those we have wronged. Confession is almost the mirror image of forgiveness in a healthy relationship. As well as confession, we are to regularly and always pray for one another.

7. Serve One Another

"You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love. For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: 'Love your neighbour as yourself.'" (Galatians 5:13-14)

One of the most practical expressions of Christian love is in serving one another. Far too often the simple things like offering a helping hand is overlooked, but it is at the heart of the new humanity that Christ is building in the Kingdom of God.

8. Encourage One Another

"Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing." (1 Thessalonians 5:11)

Offering encouragement, using our time with others to be positive and build them up, is another of those little things that is easily overlooked, but when present in a fellowship is like oil that lubricates and keeps the machinery working smoothly. It is something we Scots are very bad at in general. We could all do with giving more encouragement and accepting such encouragement when given in our lives.


9. Comfort One Another

"Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves receive from God." (2 Corinthians 1:3-4)

Giving comfort to others operates in a similar way to encouragement, but whereas the latter focuses on when things are going well or when we've done something good, comfort focuses on when things aren't going so well. We all need to be comforted at times of sadness, grief or regret.


10. Bear One Another's Burdens

"Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ." (Galatians 6:2)

This is a practical aspect of loving and serving each other. Sometimes we just need to get stuck in and help people in practical ways. Often such help is more deeply appreciated than all the words we could say or offers of prayer we could make.


11. Stir Up One Another

"And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near." (Hebrews 10:24-25, ESV)

The key words could be also be translated as "spur one another on" (NIV). It is a special form of encouragement and a real gift for a fellowship that has to be used with much wisdom and discernment. When others are in a period of stagnation or have become lukewarm, this stirring up or spurring on is a healthy prod to get them back on track and more active in Christian life and witness.
 

12. Admonish One Another

"Let the message of Christ dwell among you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom through psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit, singing to God with gratitude in your hearts." (Colossians 3:16)

Finally another gift for a church that needs to be used carefully and wisely. In essence it means that there are times when we need to gently point out to others where they have strayed and in a Christlike way seek to bring them back to faith and obedience to God's Word once more.

The King Jesus Gospel

The King Jesus Gospel
Scot McKnight
Zondervan 2011

In this challenging, radical, yet somehow comforting book, Scot McKnight tackles the centrepiece of evangelical theology - the gospel itself - and makes the stark claim that evangelicals have often failed to understand or preach the full biblical gospel. In fact McKnight takes us back to basics by asking the question: What is the gospel?

Now this is a question that evangelicals think we know the answer to. It's our question. Par excellence. We feel we own it.

McKnight argues that evangelicals have traditionally answered this question wrongly because we confuse the gospel with the plan of salvation. We have often been content with a partial gospel about our own personal salvation instead of the gospel preached by the apostles and by Jesus himself which was much bigger than just answering the question "How do I get saved?"

To borrow a telling phrase from theologian Dallas Willard, we have reduced the gospel to being about mere "sin management"rather than being about Christ's lordship over the whole world and all of life. And we have too often concentrated on making converts rather than - as Christ and the apostles focused on - making disciples. In this respect, McKnight says what we call evangelical Christianity would really be more accurately dubbed soterian Christianity or salvationist Christianity.

The trouble is that a soterian approach leads to a soterian culture instead of a genuine gospel culture. Church life becomes all about getting people into the "saved club" rather than Christ's lordship of all of life and church life being about all of life. A gospel culture's focus - just like the New Testament's focus - is about making disciples, not just converts. Rather than focusing on getting people in, the focus is on what to do with people once they are in.

I found McKnight's analysis convincing. I think he is right that there is a tendency to separate the plan of salvation from its biblical moorings in the Story of Jesus which is in itself rooted in the Story of Israel. McKnight makes the point that the plan of salvation is not the gospel. It exists. It is biblical. It emerges from the Bible's Story. The plan of salvation is dependent on the gospel, but it not the gospel.

It is well into the book before McKnight finally answers the question. The gospel is the Story of Jesus as culmination and resolution of the Story of Israel. The gospel is the announcement that God's King (Jesus) has now come to rule God's world.

He shows that this is the gospel Paul preached, regarding 1 Corinthians 15:1-5; 20-28 as the essence of the gospel:

• Christ died for our sins
• Christ was buried
• Christ is risen from the dead
• Christ has appeared to people
• Christ is victorious over his enemies

It is the telling of this story that is the gospel proclamation and it is the telling of this story that brings people to salvation. Salvation flows from the gospel.

This means that the four books we call "the Gospels" actually are the Gospel. They are therefore not mere story books before we get to the theology of the Pauline letters. They are preeminent. They are the gospel. That's why they are each called "The Gospel [singular] according to..."

This also means the ancient creeds are the gospel. I have heard evangelicals say they believe the Apostles' Creed but are disappointed it doesn't deal the gospel - by which they mean the plan of salvation - but if the gospel in summary is about who Jesus is and what he's done, then the creeds are very close to the 1 Corinthians 15 passage.

And therefore we can also agree that Jesus himself preached the gospel. (It is surprising how many evangelicals would deny this, thinking that we don't get to the gospel before the book of Acts and the letters of the New Testament.) Yes, Jesus preached the gospel because as the Messiah he is the very embodiment of the gospel in his actions as well as his teachings.

On this view, the Jesus of the Gospels with his Kingdom of God emphasis is in total harmony with the Christ of the Epistles. As McKnight shows, Paul's gospel was also Peter's gospel and all the other apostles, and it was also Jesus' gospel. One of the great things about McKnight's understanding is how it really brings the whole New Testament together.

It will come as no shock that I really liked The King Jesus Gospel. I have a feeling that because Scot McKnight challenges the heart of what we evangelicals think we are about he will be attacked for this book and these insights. It is now predictable that this will be so. The same people attacked proponents of the New Perspective on Paul (with which McKnight's views have much in common) for the same reasons. The truth is that McKnight's gospel does not take anything away from us. It gives us a whole lot more. Whether we like the more - the need to build communities of disciples rather than clubs of the saved - is another question again.

The Dawkins Letters

The Dawkins Letters: Challenging Atheist Myths
David Robertson
Christian Focus Publications 2007

I borrowed a copy of this short book from the local library. It is actually a series of open letters from David Robertson (a minister of the Free Church of Scotland in Dundee) to Richard Dawkins about Dawkins' book The God Delusion.

It is amazing how reviews of this book and others like it - and Dawkins' own book to be fair - on places like Amazon are almost all sharply divided down Christian/Atheist lines. Perhaps that should not surprise me, but it does. Basically, atheists seem to love Dawkins' book and hate Robertson's book. And vice versa for Christians.

Well as a Christian, I liked Robertson's book. I thought in the ten letters he succeeded in the most important point, which is pointing out that atheism is primarily a philosophical and not a scientific position. Dawkins' position is in the end consistent with science but not derived from science. Yet I would say the same can be said for many theistic views.

In fact, Dawkins' worldview at times relies on "the science of the gaps" (a phrase I loved that Robertson uses a few times) in theories that sound as much science fiction as science and therefore are as much faith based as Christian doctrines - parallel universes and alien implantation of life on earth and so forth.

In the final analysis, I think theists and atheists tend to bring presuppositions to the table before looking at the evidence. The same evidence leads one man to say "there is no god" and another to say "the heavens are telling the glory of God."

No one book, whether Dawkins' or Robertson's, is going to lay the knock-out blow to the opposing view. But Robertson's book certainly shows that atheist presuppositions and arguments are open to serious criticism, all too often of precisely the same criticisms that are used by atheists against Christianity.

Planetwise

Planetwise
David Bookless
IVP, Nottingham 2008

I think David Bookless's Planetwise is an important book because it makes the case that green issues are something that Christians - and evangelical Christians in particular maybe, people who put the full-orbed biblical gospel at the centre of their lives - should be concerned about.

In the first five chapters of the book, Bookless makes the biblical and theological case that that an interest in environmental causes is not something on the periphery of the Christian faith, but actually is a central implication of the Christian gospel.

The argument runs as follows. As people who understand that the world has been created by God and is still owned by God (Psalm 24:1-2), as people who believe that God has given humanity the world to look after and steward on his behalf (Genesis 1:27-28), as people who believe that the saving purposes of God are not about rescuing us from the cosmos, but of redeeming and renewing the cosmos itself and as part of it (Genesis 9:10, John 3:16, Colossians 1:20, Revelation 21:1-3) - we need to see looking after the planet God gave us as an integral part of living as kingdom people who trust in and serve Jesus Christ as our Saviour and Lord. Too often, evangelicals have given the impression that we are about saving souls for heaven, and treating the world in any way we want since it's all going to be destroyed anyway. Such views, whether stated or merely lazily assumed are dishonouring to Christ, by whom and for whom the world was made (John 1:3, Colossians 1:16), and contrary to the truth of the gospel.

In the final four chapters of the book, Bookless draws out a number of practical implications for how we should then live out our lives as Christian disciples, stewarding the creation as God wants us to. These chapters really made me think about how I live and I have to say that since reading them, some of my behaviour has changed, even if only in little ways to begin with - like not leaving the TV on standby and only filling the kettle with what I need. Much more information and many more suggestions are available through the website of the Christian ecological charity A Rocha and its Living Lightly initiative, both of which David Bookless is heavily involved with.

Any Christian interested in green politics would benefit from the biblical and theological case put forward in Planetwise; any Christian who thinks concern for the environment is part of a liberal or even "new age" agenda needs to read this book now.

Across the Spectrum

Across the Spectrum: Understanding Issues in Evangelical Theology
Gregory A. Boyd & Paul R. Eddy
Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, Michigan 2009

This is a pretty good introduction to evangelical theology, particularly the disputes between evangelical Christians on secondary matters that they disagree about. It is reminiscent of the "Counterpoint" books that present two to five different points of view on disputed doctrine or practice. Across the Spectrum does a similar job in a series of some 17 debated topics each covered by two or three short essays putting forward the arguments for and dealing with common ojections against a number of important subjects. There's also an appendix that deals with a good few other topics very briefly. There is also a decent glossary of terms explained in straightforward words.

To gain an overview of the broad spectrum of evangelical views, this book is ideal.

Some readers would no doubt question how wide the boundaries of evangelicalism are drawn in this book. For example, open theism is presented as a legitimate evangelical option. Also, kenotic theory is discussed alongside the traditional view on the deity of Christ. And other views of the atonement apart from penal substitution are presented.

Personally, I'm fairly sanguine about drawing the edges of evangelicalism a good deal wider than Reformed confessional orthodoxy. We do well to remember the adage popularised by Puritan Richard Baxter: in essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.

One criticism that may possibly be fair is that there is perhaps a lack of balance detectable in some of the essay pairs. Greg Boyd is a well-known open theist, and though Paul Eddy's views are harder to find, it is clear he is no Calvinist. It would perhaps have been more useful to have Calvinist or Molinist views put forward by people committed to these views.

However, in the main, the authors are pretty fair with other views. The reading lists suggested for each topic covered are valuable for anyone wanting to delve deeper into the issues involved.

Arminian Theology

Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities
Roger E. Olson
IVP 2006

This is a very interesting book that claims to introduce Arminian theology as it really is and not as it's opponents too often portray it. As such, Olson is adamant that Arminianism is at least as much a legitimate option for evangelical Christians as Calvinism (and in his view more so).

I have to admit that I was intrigued as I have till now based my judgment of Arminianism almost exclusively on Calvinist resources. I also have to admit serious ignorance of what Arminianism actually teaches. I honestly thought that Arminianism more or less taught simply the opposite to the five points of Calvinism and was surprised that evangelical Arminians affirm total depravity and some also affirm perseverance of the saints (two out of the five points of Calvinism). In this respect, Arminianism can be seen as a kind of moderate Reformed theology rather than the antithesis of it.

Olson's book goes through a series of ten "myths" about Arminianism and seeks to dispel each one. The book focuses a lot on historical theology and unfortunately there is very little biblical exegesis. I don't say this to score a cheap point. It is not a reflection on Arminianism's inability to base its conclusions on the biblical text. I simply think that Olson has chosen to focus on what some of Arminianism's most important theologians have taught. He makes the point that true Arminianism is both misunderstood by its opponents and perhaps by many who claim to embrace it. This confusion amplifies the problem, but the fact is that true Arminianism is more Calvinistic (if I can put it that way) than many of it's proponents think. Olson says that much of modern day evangelicalism is semi-Pelagian not truly Arminian. The problem is that Calvinists looking on, think that when they see semi-Pelagianism they are actually seeing Arminianism, and so Arminianism is semi-Pelagian. But Olson makes a good case for distinguishing sharply between the two. I found Olson's counterpoints a real eye-opener.

The "myths" that Olson seeks to dispel are that:

1. Arminianism is simply the opposite of Calvinism/Reformed theology
2. A hybrid of Calvinism and Arminianism is possible
3. Arminianism is not an orthodox evangelical option
4. The heart of Arminianism is belief in free will
5. Arminian theology denies the sovereignty of God
6. Arminianism is a human-centred theology
7. Arminianism is not a theology of grace
8. Arminians do not believe in predestination
9. Arminian theology denies justification by grace alone through faith alone
10. All Arminians believe in the Governmental theory of the atonement

The corresponding realities are therefore:

1. Arminianism is more like a branch of Reformed theology than its opposite
2. Although Calvinism and Arminianism share much in common, they are distinct theological systems on a number of key points and no hybrid is possible on these points
3. Arminianism is an orthodox evangelical option and affirms all the fundamental points of the historic Christian faith
4. The heart of Arminianism is the loving and gracious character of God
5. Arminianism affirms the sovereignty of God but sees it as choosing to give human freedom rather than meticulously controlling all human choices
6. Arminianism is not an "optimistic" theology of human nature, but agrees with Calvinists that human beings are dead in trespasses and sin by nature
7. Arminianism is a doctrine of grace, recognising that no-one can come to God unless drawn by God's grace through the Holy Spirit. The difference with Calvinism being that Arminianism understands God to draw everyone in the same way and such grace to be resistible
8. Arminians believe in predestination but not unconditional election and reprobation, rather they either affirm the predestination of the church corporately or of believers through God's foreknowledge
9. Arminians strongly affirm the central Reformation insight of justification by grace alone through faith alone, including Arminius and Wesley
10. Many Arminians affirm penal substitionary atonement, including Arminius and Wesley

Late in the book, Olson says that it is incumbent when criticising a position to engage with its proponents (and indeed its best proponents) and allow them to put forward what they actually think. I have certainly been guilty of not doing this.

It seems to me that Calvinists looking to deal with Arminianism fairly could do a lot worse than use Olson's book as a reference. I only wish that Olson had done a lot more exegesis to back up the arguments for his position. Had he done so, the book would have been even more valuable.

Generous Justice

Generous Justice
Timothy Keller
Hodder & Stoughton 2010

I've pretty much enjoyed everything I've ever read by Tim Keller and Generous Justice is no exception. It seems to me that Keller's central thesis in this book is crucial in our time to the health, vitality and witness of the churches, particularly the evangelical churches, who perhaps need to hear this message most. Keller's thesis is simply that doing justice, in our daily lives as Christians at a personal, social and societal level, is a necessary outworking of the grace of God we have experienced through the gospel.

Keller writes in the introduction for example: "There is a direct relationship between a person's grasp and experience of God's grace, and his or her heart for justice and the poor...I have observed over decades that when people see the beauty of God's grace in Christ, it leads them powerfully towards justice." (p. xix).

It is immediately apparent that Keller wants to challenge several wrong views. To begin with he challenges the secular voices that claim that the Bible is somehow a hindrance to establishing justice in our world. But more interestingly from my point of view, he also challenges the still all-too-typical evangelical mindset that sees the church's true biblical role as "saving souls" and teaching correct doctrines, especially salvation by grace alone, in Christ alone, through faith alone. For too long there has been a false dichotomy in many churches between the evangelical gospel of salvation and the so-called liberal gospel of social justice. Keller is a Reformed theologian and minister of an evangelical Presbyterian church, yet he correctly sees that social justice is fundamental to the church's mission, not as a replacement for the gospel (which is where liberal Christians go wrong) but as a necessary outworking of the gospel.

The rest of the book explores a variety of angles of justice to give a rounded picture of the biblical material.

To begin with, Keller looks to define "justice" and finds that in the Bible it is about far more than simply punishing sinners. Again, too often in evangelical circles, "justice" is restricted to enforcing morality and punishing wrongdoers and we can end up looking simply like the religious equivalent of the "hang 'em and flog 'em brigade"! No, biblical justice is more akin to "social justice" that looks after the poor, the widow and the fatherless. It is about doing what is right for everyone and about living in a "harmonious peace" (as Keller defines the key Hebrew concept of shalom) with our fellow human beings and with all creation. It is about fair treatment of immigrants. It is about making sure workers are paid fair wages and work in decent conditions. The list of applications of the biblical principles could go on and on. Keller also points out that justice in biblical terms is not about doing the bare minimum of good for others, it should be generous. Why? Because when we act like that we reflect God's own character. The Scriptures say that God is on the side with the weak, the poor and the oppressed. And as we claim to be the people of God, so should we.

Later chapters highlights material from the Old Testament, especially the prophets, and the New Testament, especially the teachings of Christ himself, that all back-up the point of view outlined. Keller's treatment of the Parable of the Good Samaritan was a particular highlight.

A later chapter in the book called "How Should We Do Justice?" is very practical and very challenging. In it, Keller gets down to the nitty-gritty of actually putting the theory into practice and I found it useful when he talks about three levels of doing justice called "relief, development and social reform" and how Christians are called to involvement at all three levels. Relief is immediate help given to someone in need. Development is longer term involvement to help someone in need improve things so the need no longer exists. Social reform challenges governments to change the law and/or society to stop the situation that caused the need from happening in the first place. In the example of the old proverb, relief is giving a man a fish, development is giving a man a fishing rod and teaching him to fish, social reform questions the government why the poor have to live off fish while others have plenty to eat.

The book ends with a chapter where Keller links peace, justice and beauty and reiterates the link between the gospel of grace and living out a gospel life of grace that seeks justice for others (in the true biblical scope) and closes with a final challenge to us as Christians. In essence, if we have received so much blessing from God's hand, shouldn't we be more willing to bless others from our hands? In Keller's own words:

Proverbs 14:31 says, "He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker." The God of the Bible says, as it were, "I am the poor on your step. Your attitude towards them reveals your true attitude toward me." A life poured out in doing justice for the poor is the inevitable sign of any real, true gospel faith.

Now, if that doesn't challenge any Western Christian who reads it, what will?

How to Be Evangelical Without Being Conservative

How to Be Evangelical Without Being Conservative
Roger E. Olson
Zondervan 2009

This is an interesting book by Arminian scholar, Roger Olson, which seeks to show that being an evangelical Christian does not mean that one has to therefore be a "conservative" politically or even theologically.

I have to admit that the book resonated with me, though I am not sure that Olson's picture of "conservatism" which is a distinctly American one, travels that well on this side of the Atlantic. In the UK, evangelicals are less linked intrinsically to conservative political and social causes (far less to the Conservative Party) than appears to be the case in the USA. In that sense, Olson's ideas are less controversial here than they may be in America.

Some of the chapters of the book deal with distinctly American situations, but others are relevant as much to Britain.

Though I don't agree with everything Olson says, I think that in most of the chapters he does score hits against opponents and makes valid criticisms of the assumption that anyone who is evangelical (and therefore to some extent at least conservative theologically) must therefore be conservative across the board.

Olson's definition of an evangelical is hardly controversial. He emphasises five beliefs common to all evangelicals (adding the fifth to David Bebbington's well-known quadrilateral):

1. Biblicisim - holding the Bible in high regard and placing its teaching at the centre of faith and practice.
2. Conversionism - the belief that human beings need to go through a conversion process to saved.
3. Crucicentrism - that the atoning work of Christ on the cross lies at the centre of the faith.
4. Activism - the belief that the implications of the gospel outworks in practical activities in the world, particularly mission.
5. Respect for the Great Tradition of Christian doctrine - respecting though perhaps not slavishly following the Christian traditions of the past.

Olson then goes on to attempt to show that a person can embrace these five beliefs and therefore be a genuine evangelical, but not then necessarily have conservative political views or in fact take a conservative (in the sense of traditional) line on all theological issues.

After an initial chapter explaining what he means by evangelical and conservative, Olson then goes through a number of chapters explaining that to reject "the conservative line" on a subject does not mean abandoning an evangelical position. I felt some of the chapters were more successful than others - in this sense the book overall must be rated "patchy" but each one has at least something interesting to make you think in it.

The chapters are entitled as follows:

"Being Biblical without Orthodoxy" - here Olson marks the difference between the Bible's own authority and the lesser authority of accepted "orthodoxy" by the church. He points out the need to distinguish between the biblical text which is the Truth, and our interpretations of it, which may or may not be true. I felt this was a successful chapter.

"Building Character without Moralism" - in this chapter Olson criticises attempts to force "Christian behaviour" through legislation on non-Christians. He also criticises a judgmental attitude that I'm afraid many evangelical Christian do display at times. Instead he says the church should be focused on discipline within the church rather than the morals of those outside it. And instead of looking to law to change behaviour, we should be looking to the gospel to transform people's lives. Again I felt this chapter made many good points.

"Celebrating America without Nationalism" - this chapter is very America-focused. I don't think the attitude that Olson explores - that America is a nation specially chosen and blessed by God - is one that really exists in the UK now (that Britain his the special nation) though it certainly did when Britain was the world's superpower. Olson's criticisms are fair and I think the distinction he makes between patriotism and nationalism is valid and does transfer to other countries, including Scotland at this time in history. For Olson, patriotism is a good thing, but nationalism isn't.

"Seeking Truth without Certainty" - this chapter explores the difference between "faith" and "false certainty" and argues that it's okay for Christians to have honest doubts at times. He suggests that Kierkegaard was right to distinguish certainty with certitude. "Certainty" is the absolute knowledge that something is true and Olson thinks that this is inconsistent with the real life of a Christian. "Certitude" is "the settled, inward assurance of faith; it believes without proofs and learns to live with doubts." Although interesting, I'm not yet sure how much of this I agree with or not, but since doubts are okay, that's not a problem!

"Taking the Bible Seriously without Literalism" - here Olson distinguishes fundamentalism which claims to take the whole Bible literally, with evangelicalism which takes the parts of the Bible that are meant to be taken literally, literally. I pretty much agree with everything he says here. Olson claims that since the term "fundamentalism" gained a bad press many who would at one time have been seen as "fundamentalists" now fly under the banner of "evangelical" in effect shifting evangelicalism "to the right" as it were.

"Being Religionless without Secularism" - here Olson argues that one can be Christian and evangelical without being "religious". By religious he seems to mean traditional in Christian worship, church structures and practice. I struggled to understand what he was really saying here. If he simply means that non-traditional ways of doing church are still valid, then I agree.

"Transforming Culture without Domination" - This chapter is similar in some ways to the one on moralism.

"Redistributing Wealth without Socialism" - This is a chapter that I think many evangelicals will hate, but I liked it. Olson argues in effect that it's okay to be an evangelical Christian and lean towards the left politically. Phew!

"Relativizing without Rejecting Theology" - Olson's point here is that we need to put "theological systems" in their correct place, and not end up putting our system above Scripture. That doesn't mean of course that all systems are equally valid. To be honest I had some problems with this chapter in the details though Olson may be correct on the broad brush strokes.

"Updating without Trivializing Worship" - In this chapter Olson simply points out that being an evangelical isn't tied to any one worship style.

"Accepting without Affirming Flawed People" - I found this chapter the most challenging in the book. Olson points out that though evangelicals acknowledge with our heads that we are all sinners, in our hearts and in our practice we act as if some of sinners should be excluded from fellowship, while others are embraced. I think this is by-and-large true. He says that it is strange that once a person is "in" as long as they only lapse into "acceptable sins" they will be supported and looked after, but other people will never "get in" because of their "unacceptable sins". The answer seems biblical to me - we need to be accepting of all people without affirming that their sins are "okay".

"Practicing Equality without Sacrificing Difference" - in this chapter Olson argues that it is okay to be evangelical and egalitarian (supportive of women being allowed to hold all church offices).

The book ends with a postscript advocating a "postconservative evangelicalism". I'm not sure about that. Rather I think we need an evangelicalism that neither unthinkingly takes nor rejects the "conservative line" but seeks to be reformed and always reforming in line with God's Word.

Simply Jesus

Simply Jesus
Tom Wright
SPCK, London 2011

I can't help but thinking that N. T. Wright is getting distracted from finishing the long-awaited massive volume on Paul in his Christian Origins and the Question of God series as writes more and more popular level books. So far we've had Simply Christian, Surprised by Hope, Virtue Reborn and several volumes to complete the New Testament for Everyone series. Now in that same vein comes Simply Jesus.

The book aims to answer three simple, yet central and profound questions for the Christian faith: who was Jesus, what did he do, and why does it matter?

There is little new here for those who have read some of Wright's previous work, but it was still gripping reading to see the arguments laid out in such a straightforward manner in this book.

For Wright, Jesus is very much the Jewish Messiah who "embodied Israel's God" (I think that's a direct quote - if not, Wright certainly says something very similar). He came to do for Israel what Israel could not do for itself - namely be God's light for the Gentiles and the rightful Lord and King of the whole world. Through this, he is able to bring salvation to everyone who has faith in him.

As we might expect, Wright takes the historical background to Jesus' life and ministry very seriously. He talks about a "perfect storm" in the form of a combination of Jewish expectations of deliverance by the Messiah, the power of imperial Rome, and God's strange and powerful purposes for history all coming together at the time of Jesus' life and shaping Christ's life, death and resurrection.

One thing I noted in this book is how firmly Wright seems to have moved towards the Christus Victor view of the atonement as the primary view, although not denying that penal substitution is also a motif in the New Testament, though a secondary one. I would perhaps take issue with this. I do not think Christ could be victorious without penal substitution.

Though most of the book explores who Jesus is and what he came to do, I actually found the short third section on what it means for us to say that Jesus is the king of the world in practical terms to be the most challenging and interesting part. Perhaps this is because I was already familiar with most of what Wright says in the earlier sections from his other books. But this third section where Wright begins to apply his views to normal life was new to me and fascinating. I was certainly excited by Wright's invitation to join in and play our part in God's work of building his kingdom.

In the end, it still seems to me that Wright says the very same things that thoughtful evangelical Christians have always said, but it's as if the thoughts are translated into a different language, using different words at times. This explains how he can both be lambasted by conservatives as a closet liberal and by liberals as a closet fundamentalist! Truth is he is neither, but in good Anglican tradition, he occupies middle ground, yet middle ground much more familiar to evangelicals than liberals I would say as he always seeks to honour what the Bible teaches over all traditions. This is very evident in the extended metaphor of the perfect storm he uses in the first part of the book, where he seeks to show that neither the liberal Jesus of social action, nor the conservative Jesus of deity and salvation in heaven do justice to the New Testament's full-orbed doctrine of Christ and his work.

Providence and Prayer

Providence and Prayer: How Does God Work in the World?
Terrance Tiessen
Inter-Varsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois 2000

This book on providence and prayer is great. It is one of the best Christian books I have read this year. In it, Tiessen explores various models of God's providence and how the various views have an impact on how we might view intercessory prayer.

Tiessen presents a total of eleven different models of providence. The first ten models he presents with meticulous fairness, presenting each model in as positive a light as possible (as if being presented by a proponent of the view) without negative criticism. The models presented range in a spectrum from "semi-deism" at the one extreme through to "fatalism" on the other extreme. The viewpoints explored include:

• The Semi-Deist Model
• The Process Model
• The Openness Model
• The Church Dominion Model
• The Redemptive Intervention Model
• The Molinist Model
• The Thomist Model
• The Barthian Model
• The Calvinist Model
• The Fatalist Model

One of the most interesting aspects of the book is that Tiessen presents a fictional scenario to begin with in which a man's son who is a missionary has been kidnapped with two others and is being held for ransom in a foreign country. The father then goes to his church prayer meeting and people pray for the men who have been kidnapped. Each chapter ends with how a person holding to each of the models of providence might pray in the circumstances in line with what each model teaches.

Towards the end of the book, Tiessen changes approach from a neutral presentation of facts to a more polemical approach favouring an eleventh model of providence which is his own preferred choice. Tiessen calls this view "Middle Knowledge Calvinism" (hereafter "MKC"). MKC is an attractive model somewhere between Molinism and Calvinism.

MKC differs sharply from Molinism because it rejects libertarian free will and accepts compatibilist free will - that we have a free will to make choices voluntarily, but not independently of our own desires, characteristics, circumstances, etc. Because God can influence these things, he is able to achieve his plans and purposes through the free choices of human beings without using anything like force or coercion. In effect, God has an infallible ability to influence us to do what he wants through doing what we want.

MKC is basically a form of infralapsarian Calvinism. The only difference being that in Tiessen's MKC, God does not need to positively foreordain everything in order to foreknow it will happen. Because he has middle knowledge of everything a free creature would do in any set of circumstances in any one of an infinite number of possible worlds, God merely has to choose to realise or "actualise" the particular world in which what human beings do what he wants to fulfil his purposes. God's will is then perfectly carried out while human beings act perfectly freely in the world God chose to actualise. The difference in Tiessen's view from standard Calvinist models is that MKC gives a much greater place to God's permission of events to achieve his purposes. If God knows what creatures would do in particular circumstances, all God has to do is create this particular world in which those circumstances arise to render certain future events without having to directly control them or even cause them. Due to middle knowledge, much of what happens in history only has to be left to happen because it is foreknown, though God is still free to intervene or display his power in direct action whenever he wishes to do so.

It seems to me that MKC is an excellent model of God's providence that preserves the biblical teachings on God's sovereignty and on human responsibility and freedom. Tiessen's view combines the sound aspects of several different models of providence. Although basically Calvinist, it also incorporates the key idea of middle knowledge from Molinism, and the concept from Open Theism that God's emotional responses to events are real and not merely anthropomorphisms.

Tiessen's book concludes with a chapter on how MKC offers a useful background to a sound doctrine of prayer.

Though not an easy read in that it deals with some of the most complex issues in theology, Providence and Prayer is not a technically difficult book. The chapters are all well-written and clearly explain the ideas involved in each model presented. It deserves to be better known that it is. It is a classic treatment of the doctrines of providence and prayer.