Science and Faith, by C. John Collins ★★★★★

This book must not be confused with the book “The Language of Science and Faith” by Francis S. Collins, a book that would not even be worthy of one star even though written by a highly “eminent” scientist. Jack Collins here produces a lay language masterpiece, originally intended to help homeschool parents discuss issues of science, creation, geology, evolutionary biology, the social sciences, the question of miracles, etc., from a biblical Christian perspective. Jack is completely effective, while not betraying the faith as Francis S.C. has done. This book supplements other books by Jack Collins, including “The God of Miracles” which is supposedly a more technical version of this text, as well as texts that I have previously reviewed on this site. Jack Collins has a masters in electrical engineering from MIT, as well as numerous other degrees, and now teaches Hebrew at Covenant Seminary in St. Louis. I happen to know him on an acquaintance basis.

Collins tackles a formidable enterprise in his endeavor to show that the Christian faith and much of what we learn as science are not in opposition with each other. The first two chapters of the book are a basic philosophical discussion of the intention of the book. Collins then undertakes to discuss the creation narratives with a scientific perspective, especially addressing his preference for viewing the days of creation as days in God’s time, not ours. He has a chapter discussing the problem of man’s fallenness in observing the world. He discusses the issues of God’s providence and miracles in the face of the post-Hume worldview of the impossibility of miracles. He even includes a chapter on environmentalism and how Christians should view the world. Subsequent chapters deal with the age of the earth (he is in the “old-earth” camp), evolution and the development of animals. Two chapters are devoted to the defense of intelligent design. He concludes with thoughts on the social sciences. Finally, the book is ended with a discussion of the culture wars and our approach to the sciences. Though the entire book was excellent, the last two chapters were the best, and it is worth sticking with Collins to the end of the book. He especially notes how Christians have been in bitter attack against each other over minor differences in their view of the entire creation scenario.  About the only thing I wished he would have discussed would have been flood theories, the tower of Babel incident (especially since Collins is a philologist), and some of the other Biblical miracles that often come under attack by the scientific community (eg., Jonah surviving being eaten by a big fish). This book is one of the must-reads for anybody strongly engaged in the sciences to help form a Christian basis for their scientific thinking.

Here is a book that I’ve suggested others read, yet have not (until now) read the book. It is the second book which I read on a Kindle.

This book is a truncated autobiography of Chuck Colson, known of Watergate fame. It details his rise to power within the Republican organization through low-handed politicking. Eventually, he was chosen to be one of the special consuls for Richard Nixon. He served through Nixon’s first term, and then intended to go back to his law practice when the Watergate scandal hit the fans across the country. During the time between Nixon’s second term and the Watergate scandal, pressure on Colson eventually led him to seek counsel from a friend when he became a Christian. Colson eventually was convicted, and served 7 months in federal prison, before getting released to then focus on prison ministries.

There are many aspects of this book that can be addressed. Certainly, Colson offers his own running commentary on his view of Nixon, Watergate and crisis that occurred. Much of the book is Colson coming to know himself, and realizing that he had a tendency to take control of matters. His fall from (political) grace forced a rethink of his own political arrogance. In this regard, Colson was truly moving. Colson’s change of heart to truly desire God’s will is none other than miraculous, and a testimony that we all must take to heart.

Colson always professed innocence in the Watergate events. I tend to find his testimony as believable. Apparently, he had no clue as to what happened. Colson ended up being the first person to plead guilty, which he did because he felt he did obstruct matters of investigation of the Watergate event, done mostly to protect the president. Oddly, Daniel Ellsberg, who was giving away top secret state information got off scott free.

It is a little bothersome that by the end of the book, Colson ends up as a pentecostal. I certainly hope his thinking has matured a bit since his release from prison. He also tended toward social do-goodism, defending prisoners against an unjust prison system. Sadly, this has two sides, since too often punishment in prison is not commensurate with the crime committed. Colson has a tendency to focus on wrongful imprisonment, when typical imprisonment for many is only too kind. Colson does make a good argument against the explosion of the prison system in our country, yet offers too few of suggestions as to how to really fix that.

Being a lawyer, Colson goes way too soft on addressing the problem of law and justice in our country. He tends to suggest that there are a few bad lawyers that ruin the soup. In reality, the entire legal system is rotten to the core, and Colson simply won’t admit it. His own conviction was based on the most eminent lawyers in the land, who did NOT make the judgment against Colson based on either evidence or due process of law, but rather out of pressure from a small but very vocal public sentiment. Unfortunately, with the  loss of constitutionalism in our court system, we can only expect this to get worse with time.

I agree with Colson in that the prison system is way overused, and tends to serve contrary to its mission, which is to reform the inmates. Supposing that Colson was truly guilty of his crimes, the best punishment would have been 39 lashings, total disbarment, and obligatory public service of 7 years duration at minimum wage and no diminishment of sentence based on good behavior, though extension of sentence based on bad behavior could be enforced.

Colson was kind on the news media. The Watergate scandal was essentially a creation of the news media. Ellsberg should have been behind bars and is not, thanks to the liberal press. It is no wonder that the large news services are dying. I’ll shed no tears for CNN or MSNBC. Colson was kind on liberals. He tended to feel that anybody that called themselves brother were acceptable. Yet, content of belief does matter. I hope Colson has learned this since his conversion. Those belief structures will order our thinking as well as behavior. For Colson to find vehement enemies that suddenly become best friends once discovered that they are Christians is a terrible witness of the “worst enemy-best friend” people, regardless of how “spiritual” they conducted themselves.

So, I truly enjoyed reading the book, but gave the book only three stars for lacking the depth it could have had. Colson is a delightful writer, but I do not intend to read any more of his books, which I understand are quite a few at this time. I am most delighted at his conversion to the Christian faith, and see in Colson’s story a common tale that reflects God calling us to Him, and NOT us accepting Him. I wish that Colson could have seen that in his conversion. I’m glad that God saves us in spite of ourselves, and Colson stands as a most visible example of this truth among every one of us that call ourselves Christian.

This is the first book that I have read in electronic format, on a Kindle. I have mixed feelings about the Kindle, and then comments on the book itself.

The Kindle is a great idea. I received the Kindle Touch about a month ago. I really didn’t wish for a microscopic keyboard and heard that there were problems with the color edition of Kindle, so opted for the Touch. There are problems with it. 1. The touch mechanism doesn’t always work consistently 2. if you accidentally bump the screen or try to clean off the screen to read it better, it will react. 3. since you always have to touch the screen to read, such as with changing pages, the screen is always being made dirty again. 4. After reading Foxe, the Kindle has shown a drastic reduction in speed, and multiple crashes, almost like it got a virus.  5. There is no mechanism for reading in dark circumstances, as you need an external light to see the screen.  6. Maneuvering through a book that you are reading can be a challenge, especially if the table of contents is not well constructed. They don’t have a reverse function like surfers have, so that you can’t instantly go back to where you came from.  The advantages of the Kindle are 1. It’s a great idea, 2. when it works, it has great functionality, like keeping track of where you are in a book across all systems. My solution to the Kindle dilemma is to use Kindle on an Apple apparatus. I am just waiting for iPad3 to come out.

Now, for Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. I didn’t realize until I contacted my book resource David Davis that the original Foxe is about 7000 pages, and anything we read is a serious abridgment of that text. In addition, since Foxe died in 1587, any details after that are additions to his book. Thus, the hardcopy edition of Foxe’s Book and the Kindle edition do not resemble each other at all in their organization. Strangely, Wikipedia, and most Google internet sources don’t clue you in to this. The Kindle edition has multiple stories up to about 1830, many of which are quite rambling. At the end are very brief biographies of the main reformers, which are too brief to be of any value. The greatest value of Foxe’s Book is in his discussions of the martyrdoms around the time of bloody Mary. There is prolific language against the Papists and popery, all of which should NOT be forgotten by the present day church. The Romish church has not changed significantly since the 16th century, and we shouldn’t forget that. The Pope and his minions have not made a kinder gentler church that has learned its lessons. It is a superb defense of the notion of protestantism.

The book and its “editions” has left out much, including Savaranola, the Scottish martyrs, and persecution of the church by protestants on protestants. The revisions include lengthy details of the Quaker movement, which was unnecessary, and lengthy details of a person in Lebanon who was under pressure to conform by the Marionite church. The quality of the additions to John Foxe are low, and should have been left out. So, read the book, but not the Kindle edition.

I had met Baruch Maoz at church a number of years ago, and found him to be quite thought provoking regarding the nature of the Messianic Jewish movements. Maoz is Jewish, grew up in Israel, and now is retired, though served many years as a pastor and evangelist to a Jewish Christian church in Israel. I decided to read this book after noting how some Christians are quite enamored with things Jewish, many of whom incorporate Jewish traditions into a Christian worship service, and speak Hebrew phrases in an attempt to have a Jewish flavor to the worship. Maoz notes that there is a wide range of Messianic Jews, many of whom are actually Gentiles, to some who would not even call themselves Christians, to a few that would disavow the doctrines of the trinity.  Maoz notes several things.

1. Messianic Jewish movements often have the wrong focus, being more concerned about Jewish tradition than on the Lord Jesus himself.

2. Jewish tradition, especially in Gentile hands, is often seriously confused, misplaced, poorly performed, and oftentimes insulting to real Jews, of whom this movement is attempting to reach.

3. Rabbinic Judaism is to be adamantly repudiated, since it places focus on a works righteousness, and is definitely not Biblical.

4. Well intentioned Messianic Jews often do more harm than good by forcing a Jew-Gentile split, yet failing to adequately reach Jews. As evidence, it is noted that most Jews that came to Christian faith did it outside of Messianic movements.

While reading this book, there were many times when I wished to give it only 3 stars. It is very poorly edited, and often one will find incomplete sentences. The content and arguments in this book are superb, Maoz is highly competent, reformed, and exceptionally knowledgeable in matters of Christian faith and Judaism. This is a book that many should read and take to heart. Maoz skillfully focuses the attention away from traditional Jewish cultural practices, to focus on the Bible alone to guide worship and Christian practice.

This film was given to me by a very good friend who had converted from Anglicanism to Buddhism. It was his desire to demonstrate the virtues of Buddhist thinking. So, I watched it with as open of a mind as possible. The film was made in Tibet at the main centers of Buddhism. It showed the principle sites of worship, temple artwork, adherents coming to worship, and various outdoor scenes, some with religious events occurring. The commentary throughout the film was heavily oriented toward anti-Chinese sentiment regarding their purported destruction of a culture.

This film failed  to evoke sympathy for the Tibetan Buddhist tradition. Countless cultures have come and gone throughout history, without any argument for their preservation. In Tibetan Buddhism, there was presented no argument that the culture offered anything worth preserving. True, the artwork was nice. True, a small subset of Tibetan devotees have the “right” to worship as they please. Yet, the film fails to suggest that Buddhism offers anything superior to the Christian faith, or any other religion or ideology. Even in Buddhism, they have the good and evil spirits, yet there is nothing to argue why the evil spirits are evil and the good spirits are good. All are one, and none should be given preference. In real life, Buddhists seem to be as violent as anybody else when given the opportunity. Similarly, I don’t see the same “Free Tibet” group arguing that Israel needs to be set free for the Israelite/Jew, since that is their legitimate homeland. I don’t see a war-cry that Temple worship should return to Judaism as restoration of a culture that should not have been destroyed by the nasty Romans. There seems to be a great degree of hypocrisy in the Free Tibet movement.

Oddly, the film reminded me much of our recent visit to Rome. In Rome, we saw devotees spending hours praying to artifacts, doing ritual climbs on “sacred stairs”, lighting of candles, holy water, endless repetitions of the Rosary. Is this no different than prayer wheels. If only we could automate our spirituality, or make it so that all one needs to do is to perform certain perfunctory functions. It is odd how Christ stated so plainly that God doesn’t listen to mindless repetition, yet this is how universal public religion has evolved. It is no wonder that the Roman Catholic church has often had the greatest problem in defending that Christianity is the only way to God as written in the Bible. The RC faith doesn’t offer anything much different from the Buddhists.

So, the film did not suggest that Buddhism is worth exploring. It only made me appreciate my Christian faith all the more. I am glad that I am able to have a personal relationship with the God of the universe. I am content with an Absolute in morality, truth, and existence, by whom I gain my own existence. I am comforted that I don’t have to seek to attain to god-hood, yet never be sure if I could be good enough to do that. What could be more assuring than to have the God of the Universe provide forgiveness solely through true faith in Him, and trust in Him. Christianity gives a God who truly loves, truly feels, and encourages love for ones’ brother while seeking to attain progress in life through secular work and sacred worship together, as neither are better than the other, yet neither can do without the other. Life does not end up as an endless circle, but as a linear progress, so that I can view the future as a non-repetition of the present. It is a pity that too often Christianity degenerates into a mechanism, to which it offers no advantage over any other world religion.

I would love to take a trip to Tibet since I’ve read much about it. Yet, I’ll probably do it with my Chinese friend, and probably not feel bad that Tibet is now mostly Chinese.

This is the second book I’ve read by Jon Krakauer, the first being Into Thin Air, a story of a disastrous climb on Everest. Though Krakauer has a very likeable writing style, he is not always the best at contending for historical facts. The Everest climb story held some extremely slanted and monocular views of events that clouded an unbiased appraisal of what really happened on Mt. Everest. In terms of the Everest climb Anatoli Boukreev offered a much more believable account. Both of those books (Into Thin Air, and The Climb) have been previously reviewed by me. Krakauer makes similar editorial mistakes in this book.

Under the Banner of Heaven, according to Krakauer, was intended to be a critical historical review of the Mormon church. During his investigations, the book instead morphed into two intertwined stories, both complementing the other, of the development of the Mormon church, and using that history to offer insights into the murder of a mother and child in the heart of Mormon-land. The two main accomplices in the murder, the Lafferty brothers, committed the crime under the rationale that God gave them clear instructions to do so, based on their Mormon faith. While exploring the history of the Lafferty family, Krakauer necessarily unveils a large contingent of strict Mormons that are part of break-away sects that also practice polygamy. The details of these colonies, scattered throughout the Western United States, Western Canada, and Northern Mexico also bring to light the complex thinking that leads people in the Mormon faith to proclaim that God has spoken to them. After all, they are simply following the example of their leader, Joseph Smith. Many of the “fundamentalists” manifest an extreme political viewpoint that fits neither “right- nor left- wing” ideology, that of absolute freedom of the individual with limited government and extreme patriarchy ruling over an extended family.

This book has strengths and weaknesses. Krakauer is a poor historian in not adequately exploring the various interpretations and viewpoints to an event, before discussing why he chose a given viewpoint. Krakauer is superb at writing a good story, and, criticisms aside, does a very capable job of noting how bizarre the Mormon faith happens to be, and how quickly it can transmogrify itself to suit the needs of the moment, such as abolishing polygamy or accepting blacks into the eldership of the church. The story fits other readings that I’ve had of Mormon history, and it defies explanation as to why Mormons would hold so tenaciously to a belief system that hides its past and pretends it really doesn’t exist. This, in and of itself, makes the book very much worth reading.

Krakauer makes a mistake at the end of the book by trying to wax philosophical. His spiritual mentors, of whom he freely quotes, are Karen Armstrong and William James. Specifically with James, Krakauer accepts the notion of religious experience being nothing other than a psychological event. Yet, he (and James) fail to notice that all human experience is essentially psychological, including whatever scientific knowledge we may possess. Like the miracle worker who has events come true when commanded, the scientist notes that his theories lead to “events” that come true that furthers their faith in the religion of science. That is a dangerous road to take, because it deconstructs any possible experience of anything, whether or not you define it as sacred or secular.  The assumption is that since there are  ”quack” religious groups, all religious groups must be suspect. Even worse is the assumption that because there is not 100% uniformity of opinion as to truth regarding “god”, “god” must not exist or is at least unknowable. Similar arguments could be made against the sciences, since any disagreement suggests that ultimately even scientific truth is unknowable. Epistemological nihilism becomes the only truth. The underlying assumption in all of James statements is the God simply does not exist, or is absolutely and totally unknowable.  Thus, his arguments of the psychological nature of religious experience is a circular argument that offers no proof for or against God, nor for the veracity of the experience. Christian doctrine suggests that there is a connection between the “5th dimension”, or the “alternate universe” and ours, and in that alternate universe, a battle is raging with forces both good and evil, the good eventually winning. Religious experience could be encountered from either the good or evil forces, and the ultimate determination for the side may be evaluated through God’s word to man in the form of the Scriptures. Using Scripture as an ultimate reference point, the Mormon doctrines don’t stand, and suggest any religious experience of a Mormon nature be through the evil forces that wage battle against the good.

Krakauer spends a chapter discussing the issue of the insanity defense that Lafferty’s lawyers gave to prevent the execution of Dan Lafferty. This legal argument continues to rage. Public legal assumption is that any belief structures that extremely differ from normative must be proof of insanity. This denies the possibility of a person simply being evil. Hitler, Stalin, Mao Ze Dung, Pol Pot, and W. Churchill all must have been insane since they all lived the most desperately evil lives (though Churchill managed to maintain a sense of acceptability!). It is interesting that even in illiterate third world countries or among savages, a concept of insanity exists, and that insane people are clearly seen and identified without the aide of a psychiatrist.

The appendix offers Krakauer’s rebuttal to a response by a high ranking elder in the Mormon church to Krakauer. This elder appropriately identifies Krakauer’s weaknesses, yet fails to see his own dismal historical weaknesses. It is clear that the Mormon church will force an interpretation of history that best suits their own agenda, rather than the known facts of the historical events.

All in all, this is a good book to read. It is a good reminder of the consequences of reacting against the whole of society, as many I am personally acquainted with have tended to do. It is also a warning against the Mormon church, which appears quite innocent, yet there is something rotten in the church from its very inception, that troubles the church today.

Bonhoeffer’s is a story worth reading, and well told by Eric Metaxas. It is the tale of a young German growing up in the academic circles of Berlin, deciding to go into theology, only to break away from the liberal tendencies in theology as found in Berlin. Through experiences as a young pastor and student in Spain, London, and NY City, Bonhoeffer matures in his faith towards seeing God not as a distant “other” but somebody with whom daily life interacts. Changes in the German political scene with the rise of Hitler and state interference with the church caused Bonhoeffer to form the separate Bekennendekirche (Confessing church) movement, as well as the institution of a seminary to train young pastors. Bonhoeffer then becomes involved in a plot to kill Hitler. Though jailed initially for other reasons, he ultimately is executed for his role in the conspiracy to kill Hitler.  The books reads well, though often would be better served by leaving long quotes as footnotes.

Metaxas develops Bonhoeffer as a remarkable person, able to see through the vapidness of his theology professors, yet still able to treat them with respect and honor. Bonhoeffer was a man who operated on principle, with an ever deepening faith in God that controlled his entire life. Metaxas also paints Bonhoeffer as a person whose life raises serious questions. I will offer three comments.

1. Is he a model of virtue that we should all follow, especially in regard to our reaction to an evil state? My personal answer is that he is  not. Bonhoeffer, being executed for his role in plot against Hitler, and not for his role as a pastor, makes him an accomplice to an assassin and not a martyr. “Let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer… yet if anybody suffers as a Christian let him not be ashamed” IPeter 4:15-16a. The test of time proved that attempts to assassinate Hitler were providentially ineffective, and God was able to handle Hitler and his henchmen quite nicely at the appropriate time.

2. Bonhoeffer proposes a graded absolutist ethic, which is fraught with intense problems. His ethic is not novel, and is usually discussed in most ethics texts. In it, Bonhoeffer allows that a lesser evil (such as the murder of Hitler, or lying), is permissible in order to accomplish a greater good (freedom of the world from a tyrant) or to avoid a greater evil (the killing of masses of Jews). Unfortunately, this ethic essentially permits any action to occur, since all of our actions are designed to enact a “good”, either to ourselves or to a specific group. The arguments against graded absolutism would be very lengthy and not appropriate for a book review.

3. Bonhoeffer never divorces himself from the liberal camp, becoming at odds with Karl Barth not for his bad theology, but for his bad social approach to the Nazi regime. In his 1939 visit to New York, his identity with American Christianity was mostly limited to his exposure to the dead theology circles of Union Seminary. Bonhoeffer develops a deep spirituality, but this is in the context of social activism, and not in the context of seeking a correct theology. Never do we see a Bonhoeffer whose highest good is the truth. Put in a Christian context, Bonhoeffer holds that worship and obedience take precedence over truth, yet Bonhoeffer fails to see that in reality, they are indivisible, and orthodoxy and orthopraxy are intimately bound. Bonhoeffer’s interest in visiting Ghandi is puzzlesome. Not that Ghandi is not an admirable person, but that Ghandi does not provide a Biblical solution to man’s dilemmas and offers no explanation for the evil that comes out of man, which was soon to destroy Bonhoeffer.

This book is recommended as the spirited retelling of a life worthy of mention, and often an example for all of us in standing against evil. It is a warning of Christians to not compromise their beliefs in the accommodation to the state. It is a devotional plea to always live ones’ moments as corum deo. Thus, it is a book recommended to all.

The Rage Against God, by Peter Hitchens ?????
This book was loaned to me by Jonny (son) as a “must-read”. Jonny was correct, in that the book is excellent. Hitchens dialogues his adventures from growing up in a nominally Christian home and school system, and deciding to become an atheist at the young age of 13. Over time, he pursued his personal ideology, spending time in the former Soviet Union as a reporter. Slowly, Peter was able to see the inevitable consequences of a militant atheistic ideology, compelling him to move back into the realms of being a Christian. Much of this book engages the reader in exploring the consequences of atheism, particularly as Peter saw it in the communist countries that he visited. He also discusses encounters with his brother Christopher, who is an outspoken atheist and well known in the liberal press. Peter Hitchens offers valuable insights into the consequences of atheistic thinking. He discusses at length the fall of the west from Christianity to atheism, and shows that it has served us no good. The middle segment of the book addresses particular questions that are raised against Christianity, such as the issue that religion tends to create wars and not peace, that religion tends to be very harmful to children, especially in regard to sexuality and the lust of pedophile priests, and that faith in God tends to breed gullibility. Each of these charges and others are capably answered by showing that atheism has a far greater challenge of answering these same charges. The book is a wonderful read, I appreciated much of what he had to say about politics and religion, and appreciate Jonny for introducing me to the book.

I have long sought for performances of the Zion’s Harp songs, the hymnal used by the Apostolic Christian Church. Kufchak has done a memorable service to this music by providing well-performed and orchestrated renditions of many Zion’s Harp songs, as well as a few of his own compositions and other music. Many of the songs had a ACCA translation (?), not the translation that  I was used to with the ACCN hymnal. Orchestration tended to be one-dimensional, in that the orchestra essentially paralleled the 4 part harmonies, with only an occasional embellishment. Kufchak tended to limit the amount of brass used in these pieces, and probably for good reason since the trumpets were seriously marginal in their performance.  I would wish that Kufchak continue his work, as he is to lauded for a great start in making public many Zion’s Harp songs. I hope that as he ages, his orchestrations develop a sophistication that complements rather than simply parallels the choir.

The main title of this book is a bit deceptive, in that it fails to describe the nature of what the book is about. Indeed, the subtitle is a better explanation, in that it is Dembski’s attempt at a theodicy, that is, an explanation as to why there is evil in the world. Dembski is best known for his work in intelligent design, and has proven himself quite capable as a thinker in that regard. Regarding his theological ventures, he proves less adept. Dembski develops a rather rigid form of old-earth creationism in order to develop his theodicy thesis, though he admits that his theodicy would work regardless of whether one was old-earth or young-earth. Thus, it is strange that Dembski spends so much time arguing for an entirely evolutionary scheme to the “creation” of man, the final transformation of man from animal to human happening by God creating a garden in which two hominids (Adam and Eve)  enter and thus become human, after which they promptly sin. To explain death and evil before the garden of Eden and the fall, Dembski evokes the possibility of retroactive effects of the fall, acting on the created world long before the fall had ever taken place. To defend his position, Dembski develops at length the comparison of chronological and kairological time, chronological time being literal time as one would observe on a clock, and kairological time being logical time, time that occurs in the thought process that exists outside of clock-time.  This explains the whole of Genesis 1-11, in that no attempt is being made to demonstrate a scientific view of how the world and first civilizations were brought about. Unfortunately, Dembski’s approach is easily generalized to suggest a logical fuzziness to any of the factual statements of Scripture. I tend towards old-earth creationism, but shudder when I see what Dembski wishes to do with old-earthism to accommodate science. Eventually, God must stick his finger into the world somewhere, whether it be the garden of Eden, or in simply making a man along the models of prior biological entities that he has previously created. Worst, Dembski never really accomplishes an effective theodicy of explaining why God would allow evil, save for answers already given by theologians, that is, that in some way, a greater good would be seen coming out of the evil that exists. Better theodicy works exist. I reviewed one recently (Paul Helm, The Providence of God) that was superlative save for the difficulty in following the ramifications of Helm’s thinking. The End of Christianity ultimately does nothing but contribute to the confusion of our existence. It is an easy read, and thoughtful read, though not a terribly exciting or informative read.

Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, by DA Carson ???

This is actually a combination of two books, the first being a treatise on the sermon on the mount, and the second “Jesus Confrontation with the World” on Matt. 8-10. The latter were derived from sermons that DA Carson preached early on in his life, and the former is a exposition that we also wrote many years ago, though in a sermon type format. It is Carson in the “easy-read” mode, speaking in admonitions and encouragement towards a full Christian life. Carson is repetitive with other writings of his, and doesn’t offer critical insights that one is accustomed to in his more academic writings. This is a book that offers a good read of a “devotional” type.

Practical Religion, by J.C. Ryle ????

This book is a series of 21 papers written by J.C. Ryle, former bishop of Liverpool, on aspects of practical Christianity. In it J.C. Ryle accounts the necessity for regular Bible reading, prayer, and other aspects of life which maintain the health of a Christian person. There was a moderate amount of repetition of examples, and the papers were more like sermons than expository articles. They provided good reading for self-examination and contemplation on how to live the Christian life in a better manner, focusing on the things that are most important in life.

Above All Earthly Powers, Christ in a Postmodern World, by David Wells ?????

This is the fourth in a series of books written by David Wells on the status of the church in the last 20 years. In all of the books in the series, he offers insights into how the church has drifted away from its doctrinal moorings and yielded to the Zeitgeist of pluralism, commercialism, and materialism, while turning the focus of worship from God to self. In this book, Wells takes a particular aim at the influences of postmodern thinking on the nature and behavior of church. In the first several chapters, he defines postmodernism. I tend to agree with his assessment that postmodernism is really just another form of modernism, a form which has run the experiment of the Enlightenment to its bitter deadly end. He then addresses how America has gone from a uniform white European Protestant community to being a multicultural hodgepodge, and how that has affected the way we think and act, as well as the way we “do” church. The next chapter addresses how Americans have actually become much more spiritual across the board, yet much less religious. This is a result of a lost basis for religion, especially the grounding of the authority of Scripture, while enhancing the authority of the inner self, and how one feels about god. Next, Wells discusses how the entirety of “meaning” has found a new home. Whereas the older philosophers such as Sartre and Camus spoke of our existential despair, the new think is almost a sense of giddy irrational joy regarding our meaninglessness. Unfortunately, the Christian response has been sociological rather than soteriological, i.e., has tried to answer man’s quest for meaning in terms of help groups rather than giving the gospel. Wells brushes with how the new thinking about Paul has contributed to the evangelical problem by diminishing the work of Christ on the cross. Next, Wells speaks of how our current age has lost its “centeredness”, attacking the openness theology of Clark Pinnock as contributing to the meaninglessness of events in the world where even God has lost control. Wells does a devastating rebuke of openness thinking. In the end, Wells ends with his characteristic theme of showing how all of these postmodern thought patterns has led to the behaviors that we now see in the church, including the Willow Creek phenomenon, church marketing, and the church as the focus of every sort of commercial enterprise. While Willow Creek style pastors have a true desire to help the church to grow, they have sacrificed truth in the process. Thus, they ultimately have nothing to offer the post-modern man, longing for true truth. Church must “preserve its cognitive identity and distinction from the culture” in order to truly flourish. Christians are not to incorporate into or conquer post-modernity, but rather stand for Christ, as post-modernity will die as all other philosophies have died. This book is a must-read for Christians who truly wish to make an impact on post-modern man.

By Faith Alone, by Gary L.W. Johnson, and Guy P. Waters ??

I did not completely read this book, and skimmed many sections. It is edited texts of a number of talks given by Presbyterian Reformed people, mostly addressing issues of the new thinking on Paul, as now promoted by N.T. Wright, and on the Auburn Theology. The new thinking sections have been more clearly and better handled by others, such as DA Carson, and so little new is offered. The Auburn Theology issue is the creation of a straw man, attacking was they view as a Romish deviation of theology, as first suggested by John Murray from Westminster Theological Seminary. Their complaint is the tendency of Auburn Theology, that is, Federal Vision, to speak of a single Covenant, rather than multiple covenants that God has given to man. They offer no clarification as to exactly what they are contesting except for perhaps the different terminology being used, and I am left bewildered as to exactly where they view the problem with Federal Vision to be. Essentially, they resemble a group of academic Presbyterians with a severe case of constipation. Unfortunately, such name calling has led to potential divisions within the PCA denomination, and we are none the better for the sloppy theology that this book provides. They offer more name calling rather than arguments to defend or contest the statements of the Federal Theologians. Please understand, while I do not support theological orientation of federal theology, it is mostly because I am having such a hard time defining what is exactly is, and how it is so seriously deviant from covenantal reformed theology to lead to such rancor and discussion. My advice is to not waste your time with this book.

The Providence of God, by Paul Helm ?????

This was a hard book to rate, in that it was not an easy book to read. A few sections had to be re-read a number of times, and still pretty much passed me by. I have reviewed other books in the past by Paul Helm. Dr. Helm is noted as one of the premier conservative Christian philosophers alive today, and currently teaches at Regent College in Vancouver, B.C. In this text, Helm tackles the hardest of all possible problems, the issue of God’s providence. This book, as I understand from other sources, was written as the philosophical response to Openness theology. What does “providence” mean? How does providence fit philosophically with the thought of human freedom, with the idea of petitionary or intercessory prayer, with the idea of human responsibility, or with the idea of the existence of evil. Helm efficiently shows how all of these concepts relate to the same issue. He shows that if one believes in a situation where God is not knowledgeable of the precise future, or has not determined all future decisions that one will make (God taking “risks”), it does not lend to easier solutions to the problem of evil, the problem of freedom, etc., than if one believes in a God who ordains all that will come to pass (God in a no-risk situation). So, Helm concludes with a strong “Calvinistic” approach to free-will and providence, though remaining very gracious to disagreement. In the end, Helm does a laudable job at showing the consistency of one’s free will and a God who has determined all that is, was, and will be. Helm shows that not only is a no-risk God the most logical (as well as Scriptural) conclusion, but also the conclusion that offers the Christian the greatest comfort, knowing that the future is not in our hands, but in His. Thus, he provides a rational basis for life and obedience as a Christian person, not in “immobility” of feeling that there is no point in acting, since the fates will be what they will be, but, since we remain ignorant of the future, living out our lives as responsible moral agents under a God who will make all things, evil or good, work out for our best. This is not a book for everybody. Perhaps one needs to possess a certain insanity to even think about the philosophical implications of providence. If your are one of those tormented souls that troubles over philosophical details of good, evil, determinism, and the fates in a theistic context, this is a must read book.

Praying the Lord’s Prayer, by JI Packer ?????

I’ve always enjoyed reading Packer, an have a special affinity for his writings since I took a class from him. He writes exactly the way he speaks, and so one can read him and hear him talking to you. Packer has a distinction of being not only one of the most brilliant people alive today, but also a most personable character. This short book must not be read in a single setting, though it could be easily read in 1-2 hours. Packer provides a gold mine, with every sentence and phrase loaded with gems to ponder. He skillfully brings new life to the prayer we have recited so often at home and at church, and yet really never considered the implications of what we are saying. From the rich manifestations of what it means to have God as our father, and how the prayer is more fitting of a child speaking to a parent, there remain glorious logical products of that relationship that few could ever boast. This book is a must read- but read it slowly, no speed reading, and let Packer help you grasp the Lord’s prayer in a new and fresh way.

Scandalous-The Cross and Resurrection of Jesus, by DA Carson ????

This book is the product of five sermons given by DA Carson to the Mars Hill Church in Seattle. It is a set of loosely organized sermons oriented around the cross, with a focus on the events that occurred at the time of Christ’s crucifixion, including Jesus being mocked, the raising of Lazarus, and the story of Thomas. It also had a sermon on Rom. 3 related to the atonement, as well as a sermon from Revelation about Christ reigning through the cross. I liked this book because Carson provided some fresh insights into the meaning of Christ’s death, spoken in a manner that is not just a theological rehash. Carson tends to always provide practical advise on living based on the theology of the cross. I do find reading sermons to be a bit tedious, since they would be better off listened to, yet Carson manages to hold one’s attention in a delightful fashion, making the book a worthy read.

How Evil Works, by David Kupelian ?????

This book is the sequel to The Marketing of Evil, also recently reviewed by me, by the same author and published by World Net Daily Books. Kupelian systematically attacks the many cultural fixtures of our society, showing how their abandonment of the Christian ethic and ethos has led to the current morass that we are in. Chapters include discussions as to why and how politicians lie to us, the rise of sexual anarchy, the grip of terrorism, the cult of celebrity and Hollywoodism, the rash of “mental illness”, the turn to vulgar religions, feminism and its destructiveness, and finally the acceptance of hate in society. Kupelian not only discusses how these traits are seated in our society, but also suggests a solution, which is returning to the Christian base from whence we came. His is a harsh but accurate reflection on our society, which is typically not found in modern print as well thought out as Kupelian has done in this book. Thus, a book highly to be recommended.

Telling the Truth, edited by DA Carson ???

This book is written as a compendium of a series of talks given as conference held at Trinity Theological Seminary in Chicagoland. The subtitle suggests that the focus in on addressing the gospel to the post-modern world. The first few talks help to define in a very cursory fashion the nature of post-modernism, with a focus on the writings of Richard Rorty and Michel Fouchalt. Subsequent chapters deal with the issues of evangelism in the community. The book does a poor job of developing the thought structures of post-modernism. The development of evangelism specifically to the post-modern mindset was really not discussed well. The use of various post-modern terms, such as “metanarrative” was used in just about every chapter to make it post-modern oriented, though dealing with a post-modernist seemed similar to dealing the pre-modernist or modernist, i.e., speaking and living the truth. The book is written almost entirely by either academic or college evangelists, such as Campus Crusade or Inter-varsity personnel, with emphasis on how to reach students. It leaves the assumption that students and academics are the only post-modernists, and not necessarily the man on the street. The book thrives on the discussion of techniques, failing a Reformed perspective of God’s work in evangelism. Several chapters simply should have been omitted completely, such as a chapter emphasizing Christ-centeredness in all Biblical reading which does violence to best Biblical hermeneutic. Worst, as mentioned before, the lengthy advice given for evangelism is true regardless of whether one is witnessing Christ to a post-modern, modern, pre-modern or normal person. There was no connect on how to specifically engage a person devoid of truth concepts, outside of the normal engagement of the person. I don’t wish to be too hard on this book. There was much good thought and discussion about engaging the culture which I found relevant to my own personal life. I think that Francis Schaeffer, though writing 30-40 years ago but definitely not dated, offers still the best advice about the engagement of culture. A Teaching Company series by Louis Markos is excellent at exploring (in the last three lectures) the modernist and post-modernist mindset from a Christian perspective.With Markos, the Modernist is a person who rejects the ability to communicate or know truth but will never deny the existence of truth. With post-modernism, communication may occur, though you are communicating nothing relevant, since truth simply does not exist. Yet, as Schaeffer insists, the modernist (and post-modernist) cannot live by his own assumptions. Penetrating those inconsistencies in a clear and loving way was not discussed in this book. We live in a society which one would love to escape. The moral turpitude, the despair and mindlessness of even the academic elites, the wonton materialism and narcissistic hedonism which governs our culture makes it challenging to survive let alone thrive. Yet, God calls us, and this book challenges each of us to creativity at the task of preaching the gospel in an intelligent yet winsome fashion. Lord help us.

This book has been around a while, but still remains timely. Written by D.A. Carson as his magnum opus, it engages the themes to pluralism, tolerance, and the disappearance of the acceptance of true truth in our society. Such loss of respect for truth and ability to communicate that truth has sunk into all aspects of society including the thinking and behavior of Christians. Carson is a tour de force who tackles pluralism in a clear but uncompromising fashion. The book is broken up into four sections. The first details how pluralism came about, discussing the history of thought in regard to matters of epistemology and linguistics, ending in the modern despair that truth is unknowable and so that all truth, contradictory or not, is true. The next section covers how this secular thinking has pervaded the Christian community. Carson covers how pluralism has affected the Christian community, and what it has done for our thinking on basic doctrines and ethics in the church. The third section attempts to detail Christian responses to living in a society soaked in pluralistic thinking, and the last section details particular themes, such as speaking the truth in matters of evangelism, and doctrinal issues, such as loss of the doctrine of hell.

Carson began life as a chemist, and then went to divinity school, studying in England for a period of time. I have a deep appreciation for the way he thinks, in that he’ll take a particular matter, and then slowly whittle away at it, giving lists of 5-10 reflections on the subject, leaving no stone unturned. His thought processes are exactly how I wish all theologians would write. He is not an easy person to read. I’m sure that if I re-read the book, I would see much that I missed the first time around. One cannot read this book quickly and expect to leave understanding all that Carson has to offer. So, I recommend this book to anybody who has the patience and time to read it. Hopefully, you will be seeing yet more Carson book reviews coming on this blogsite.

A person that I knew from early on in life became a local celebrity in Portland for her authorship of a article about her problems with church (click here to read). Though the title is “How to Survive Church”, it would be more appropriately titled “How to survive in spite of church”). In this article, Becky P. describes her problems with her childhood church, and subsequent churches that she has attended. Her final solution was essentially to not take church so seriously. She states in conclusion

I’ve also learned what not to expect from church. In the past, my whole life–family, friendships, social activities, vacations, even employment–revolved around church. As a result, church crises impacted every aspect of my life, and leaving a church meant losing my entire support system. Church is still an important part of my life, but it’s no longer the center of every friendship or endeavor. I interact more with the world around me and pursue relationships outside of, as well as within, my church. Most important, I’ve learned not to put too much stock in human institutions or leaders, who will inevitably let me down. Psalm 118:8 reminds me, “It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in man.”

I had always wanted to give Becky feedback, since I feel that her conclusions are not only quite dangerous, but just the opposite of what Christ wishes for us to experience with the church, and what I’ve been able to experience the last 16 years. Over the past few years, I’ve learned that

• church is my high-point of the week
• church is the most relevant activity that I do
• church as a formal structure is far more delightful than as an informal structure
• church is where my worship is at its highest and where I am closest to God
• church is where I best see myself for who I really am and God for who He really is
• I survive because of church and not in spite of church

In essence, I am offering a 180° counterpoint to Becky P. Perhaps I should begin with Scripture references to orient and set a reference of how I view church.

One thing I have asked of the Lord, that will I seek after, that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to gaze upon the beauty of the Lord, and to inquire in his temple. Psalm 27:4

How lovely is your dwelling place, O Lord of Hosts. My soul longs, yes, faints for the courts of the Lord; my heart and flesh sing for joy to the living God… Blessed are those who dwell in your house, ever singing your praise… For a day in your courts is better than a thousand elsewhere. i would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God that dwell in the tents of wickedness. From Psalm 84

I was glad when they said to me “Let us go to the house of the Lord” Psalm 122:1

A few relevant theological & historical points need to be made.

• Unlike dispensationalists and other new-church thinkers, I consider the Old and New Testaments to be one book, describing one set of behaviors, by a single God with a single similar character and expectations in the Old and New Testaments.We can thus consider any model of “church” or temple worship in the Old Testament as reflective of the similar form of worship we should be offering corporately at this time.
• I cannot find ever in early church history where church was modeled as house micro-churches. Because of structural limitations, churches were not huge, but Christians always, I repeat, always, built churches or larger structures when the law and absence of persecution permitted it. In the apostolic age before the fall of the temple, worship still continued for Christians in the temple!
• Throughout church history, God always worked through the greater visible church, and not through autonomous individuals. This is not to say that he did not use individuals, or that these individuals never went against the belief structure, but that these individuals always functioned as though part of the greater church.

Biblical and historical references have gone by the wayside in an age where the church and post-modernism have become dear friends, so that many people are rethinking and speaking out or writing about new concepts of church. The so-called cell-group as a during-the-week extension of church has been turned into “church” itself. Hypocrisy and ill-sought gain of many clergy have led many to disavow many of any possibility of clergy in their life. Therapeutic models of church have been found to have the same efficacy as voodoo medicine, and unhealed people conclude that church no longer has a purpose. Entertainment and seeker models of church have worn themselves thin, as electronic and television churches provide an ample replacement, in the convenience of ones’ own home, sipping coffee and eating donuts in a lounge chair while receiving the weekly heavenly instructions and motivations for life. Some will expect church to be a quasi-paradise where theology is all non-controversial and people get along with such contentment for each other that one would think they were at an LSD party —only to discover the truth of Luther (simul justis et peccator), that all Christians are hypocrites and sinners, oftentimes worse than one would encounter on the street, and thus justifying an exit from fellowship with all but a few chosen believers in the comfort of ones’ own home, or at the local coffeehouse or breakfast restaurant.

And so church goes by the wayside. Church has been found wanting, and Christians who desire true worship have found that they must create that environment for themselves. They may still attend church, mostly out of guilt of needing to follow Biblical instructions to not forsake the assembly of other Christians, yet their true worship is found in the loneliness of their private time, one-on-one, tete a tete, with God. If a given church fails to meet ones’ needs, or if it proves either controversial or too impersonal, then one can simply pack their bags and go church-shopping for a fellowship that most satisfies an individuals’ personality. The smorgasbord of churches are huge. There are mega-churches and tiny 2-3 family fellowships struggling for existence. There are young-upstart-meet in a local school building churches, middle age churches, and dying or dwindling churches. There are churches of entertainment, churches with almost no structure to the liturgy, high churches with a rigid structure and formality, pastor as big screen television church, pastor as gee-I’m everybodies friend church, pastor as layperson struggling to survive church. Churches could be oriented around football and sports, movies and entertainment, drama and music; you can find special interests group churches, politically oriented churches, environmental churches, god-save-America-gee-I-love-my-country churches, commie-pinko-freak churches, social justice “feed the poor” churches, and even wife-swapping churches. All of these churches are filled with members that consider themselves not only Christians, but evangelical and with a higher plane of spirituality than the hoi polloi of this world. Yet all of them are doing everything but what a church should do, so it’s no wonder that church itself is driving many sincere folk away.

What then should church be? I could do no better than to quote J.G. Machen, the last paragraph of his seminal book Christianity and Liberalism. He states…

Is there no refuge from strife? Is there no place of refreshing where a man can prepare for the battle of life? Is there no place where two or three can gather in Jesus’ name, to forget for the moment all those things that divide nation from nation and race from race, to forget human pride, to forget the passions of war, to forget the puzzling problems of industrial strife, and to unite in overflowing gratitude at the foot of the Cross? If there be such a place then that is the house of God and that the gate of heaven. And from under the threshold of that house will go forth a river that will revive the weary world.

Scripture establishes the nature and order of a church. Berkhof in his Systematic Theology describes the marks of a church in particular, being 1) the true preaching of the Word, 2) the right administration of the sacraments, 3) the faithful exercise of discipline. We will deal briefly with each of these issues. Regarding true preaching of the Word, this discriminates against heretical churches such as the Mormon church of Jehovah’s Witness, where a false gospel is being offered, or a false Christ. Preaching is the cornerstone of a church service, and about which all revolves. It is here that we offer respect to Scriptures as being alone our motivation, our driving influence, and God speaking directly to us. In the modern church, the message is more often conveyed in other portions of the service, such as the music, the drama, or the personal worship/fellowship time, yet the administration of Gods’ Word is the entire pivotal portion of a service. Too often, a preacher will read a Scripture passage, yet the sermon will be on everything but an attempt to expound the meaning of that Scripture to us. Those are false preachers, preaching of themselves, rather than solely of Jesus Christ and Him crucified. The administration of the sacraments have taken an enormous hit in recent times, since “new-think” tells us that the sacraments are devoid of meaning or significance. In regard to the sacraments, I am referring to baptism, the eucharist (communion) and marriage, and not the extended sacraments of Rome. While the Roman Catholic Church has turned the Sacraments into something too much, almost magic, the Protestants have progressively devalued the sacraments into an optional, ritualistic activity symbolic of corrupt institutionalized denominations. They have de-sacralized the sacraments by allowing the administration of the sacraments in a casual fashion by laity and clergy alike, so that you could be baptized by your favorite person, rather than a minister of the church, or have a communion session in a coffee shop with friends. My scriptural basis for the sacraments is found in the orderliness of ecclesiastical practice as described in the NT, noted throughout Paul’s and Peter’s epistles, as well as the even stronger example of the OT, where professional clergy were strictly described. It is a grave error to consider that the OT does NOT provide instruction regarding our liturgy and administration of our sacraments. Finally, the church administers discipline for the growth of the body of believers. Ecclesiastical discipline has been truly been demoted in both the Catholic and Protestant churches, now that you have a supermarket of churches all competing for your attendance and possible donations. To remove oneself from the possibility of discipline would be to remove oneself from anything that you could legitimately call church.

Before I end my statement on church, I will note that church models have been everything that described in Scripture. The growth of mega-churches leaves one wondering why they even waste calling themselves “church”, save that a church can impose God’s wrath as a threat for encouraging financial giving or tithing. The pastor of many churches nowadays serves more as an administrator than a godly messenger conveying and opening Scripture up to the congregation. It is no wonder than church services leave most people feeling empty, something that must be made up with the smaller cell-group meetings or an individuals’ quiet time. It is no wonder that church has taken such a serious hit in recent years.

The church has weathered many storms, and it will weather the current onslaught or accused irrelevancy. I bring to mind a great Anglican priest and song writer, Samuel Stone, who grew up in south London as a pugilist (boxer) until his conversion. He went into the ministry, working with the roughest and meanest folk in London. It was said that he once even boxed a disorderly parishioner, knocking them out, but later apologizing for that. He wrote the following song as a glorification of the institution that we have now so bitterly devalued.  Stone was a high-churchman. He was not speaking of the fad of do-it-yourself church-ism. He was referring to the grand visible institution of the church of which he was a very dear part of.

The Church’s one foundation
is Jesus Christ her Lord;
she is his new creation,
by water and the word:
from heaven he came and sought her
to be his holy bride;
with his own blood he bought her,
and for her life he died.

Elect from every nation,
yet one o’er all the earth,
her charter of salvation,
one Lord, one faith, one birth;
one holy Name she blesses,
partakes one holy food,
and to one hope she presses,
with every grace endued.

It is in the third and fourth verse that Stone speaks of a heresy going on in the Anglican church in South Africa during the 1860′s. The church has taken many beatings, and will receive many more until the Lord returns, yet Christ’s body will continue to the end.

Though with a scornful wonder
men see her sore oppressed,
by schisms rent asunder,
by heresies distressed;
yet saints their watch are keeping,
their cry goes up, “How long?”
and soon the night of weeping
shall be the morn of song.

Mid toil and tribulation,
and tumult of her war
she waits the consummation
of peace for evermore;
till with the vision glorious
her longing eyes are blessed,
and the great Church victorious
shall be the Church at rest.

The last verse concludes with the proper view of church. It is mystical, yet ordinary. It is an exercise of living with Saints before the face of God. It is an entirely imperfect experience on earth, but reflective of an entirely perfect experience in the life to come. For those who choose to remove themselves from church, to devalue church, or to redefine church as anything less than this description of the church given by Samuel Stone will be all the worse off, and to be pitied indeed.

Yet she on earth hath union
with God, the Three in one,
and mystic sweet communion
with those whose rest is won.
O happy ones and holy!
Lord, give us grace that we
like them, the meek and lowly,
on high may dwell with thee.

I conclude with a plead for individuals to return to a grander image of the church, and for the church to return to a grander image of itself. Our frustration with church should manifest itself by correcting our vision of what a church is, and then encouraging the church leaders to do the same. It is to seek for a church that has a high view of itself, and to be involved. It is not to expect the church to be therapeutic or non-hypocritical, but to be reflective of our own sinful state, a place where together with other sinners we can worship and pray and glorify the God of heaven. May God grant us the view of the church of JG Machen or Samuel Stone, and we will realize that we survive not in spite of the church, but rather because of the church.

The Shack, by Wm. Paul Young ??

23DEC09  I was given this book by a dear friend, who encouraged me to read it and then discuss the book with him. It apparently has been significant in his life. The book is essentially mostly conversations between Mack, and a large black lady, a small Oriental lady, and a blue-collar working man, representing “god”. Mack has a traumatic childhood, followed by the awkward loss of his youngest child, and expresses anger at ‘god’ for his life. ‘God’ then encounters Mack at the shack where Mack’s child Missy was murdered, and Mack engages in a lengthy psychobabble exchange about ‘god’s’ love for everybody, and how  ‘god’ is fond of us.

The book fails in many ways. 1) It attempts at gender-neutrality of God in a way that God never ever described of himself, 2) it is oblivious to the true character of God, his wrath, his morality, his offense at sin, 3) it diminishes mans’ sinfulness, not even speaking of sin, 4) it diminishes God’s authority, making it an interchange between God and man, with a massive Arminian theological flavor 5) it completely misunderstands the nature of Gods’ judgment, assuming that it would represent an angry god or judgmental god. 6) it assumes that relations are the highest good in life, rather than holiness, 7) it expresses distaste for anything institutional or orderly as diminishing Gods’ true expression. In all, the book is a complete failure. The fact that it has achieved such great popularity is quite concerning to me, as many who read it will see God in a new light, a light which is not the God of Scripture at all. There is almost no talk about Scripture in this book, as relationship doesn’t require a book. It relishes in antinomianism, assuming that Paul’s  injunctions about the law suggest that we live by no law at all. Historical movements against “dead” theologizing have usually swung far too far toward completely trashing theology,, but this trend is unfortunately still quite popular if not growing among Christians. It is incomprehensible and saddening how thoroughly the possibility of a theology of God has been abandoned by the new “conservative” Christian. If there is any virtue in this book, it is that it essentially fights a straw-man. It creates a quasi-Christian in Mack who has many false thoughts about God, and anger with God. The weakness of the book is the inability to offer true insights into the nature and character of either man or God. One might ask if the ‘god’ of the Shack is a kinder-gentler ‘god’. In this book, he (she) is, but when looked at with a discerning eye, Young’s ‘god’ ends up as confused as we are. It is only the God of Scripture, described well by the Reformers, that gives us a God that is truly worth loving and giving one’s life to.

Please note well… I am NOT writing about the book Going Rouge!!!!!

Going Rogue, by Sarah Palin ???

This book was read by me, since Betsy and I had lunch with the ghost-writer, Lynn Vincent. The ghost writing is excellent, with good flow and easy readability. This is one of the first times I have ever read a contemporary biography, especially of a political official, since politicians tend to make me nauseated, even when I agree with them (Ron Paul is a rare exception). I actually just finished reading Paul’s latest book on End the Fed, and the difference in the way Sarah Palin and Ron Paul think are quite apparent. Sarah remains a “soccer mom”, unsophisticated, the sort of person who would mouth off on public talk radio, full of great ideas. She did make a reasonably good governor, but national politics, with a larger heterogeneity of thought and opinion tended to overwhelm her. This book helped me to both agree with Sarah while at the same time seeing that she would make a terrible president. The book is best read in skimming mode, since too many details are included, attempting to paint Sarah as an ordinary US citizen, concerned enough to fight to become VP or president of the USA. It also shows a person that doesn’t have the ability to think deeply enough to best serve as the leader of the most powerful nation in the world. This book is not recommended unless you are just deeply interested in Sarah Palin.

Power Religion, edited by Michael Horton ????

02DEC09 The strength of this book is the most capable writers that Horton was able to recruit, including Charles Colson, JI Packer, DA Carson, etc. The weakness of the book is its broad sweeping coverage of “power” issues, leaving individual topics only superficially covered. The sections deal with power in politics (not sure how that relates to the general thesis of the book, but otherwise well written chapters), power evangelism of the Peter Wagner mold, and other power topics of relevance to the early 1990’s, but still applicable to today. This book is best read as disjoint chapters, rather than a comprehensive coverage of a theme. The final emphasis is that our power comes from Christ himself, and not some supernatural power that flows in a magical fashion out from us. To that I say, Amen.

Strange Fire, by Eric Wright ????

This book, written by a Baptist missionary to the Muslim world for 16 years, now a preacher in the Toronto area, writes an in-depth critical review of the Vineyard movement and Toronto blessing. As you might be aware, the Vineyard movement, started by John Wimber in the early 1980’s, attempted to resurrect the “signs and wonders” of the early church into today’s church. The Toronto Airport church went a little further in manifesting extreme physical signs, such as being “slain in the Spirit”, making animal sounds like barking like a God, or laughing hysterically for hours at a time, all during the typical worship service. Wright does an excellent job of reviewing the splits in the Vineyard movement, the total absence of focus on Scripture, and the essential non-Scriptural basis for this movement. It is a must read, though a touch long and often repetitive, of this dangerous movement in the Christian church.

Nineveh: A Parody of the Present – Biblical Clues to the Rise and Fall of America, by Victor Schlatter ?

As mentioned in a previous review of a book by Vic Schlatter, I know him personally, and really appreciate him as a friend. He is a very bright person, and very committed to evangelism. At one point in time in his service as a missionary to a tribe in the hills of New Guinea, he made a transformation to a Charismatic leaning. Now, this text is coming out full-force with his bent toward Christian Zionism. Unfortunately, as with another brother of mine who has emigrated to a third world country, their brilliance is betrayed by their current obsessions. That is a pity. Vic speaks in this book very little about the rise and fall of America, except to indict Obama. He speaks NOTHING of the sin of our nation, or its departure from God. To Vic, everything evolves around how we view the nation of Israel. Unfortunately, there are some Biblical persuasions, such as my own, that view Israel as the children of God, who happen to be us Gentiles grafted into a tree that failed to bear fruit, ie., the Jews. Whether or not there is a future for Israel I have no idea, but I do know that the Jews rejection of the Lord of Glory sustains the Lord’s condemnation. Vic lambasts most Americans as being superficial, yet his writing is about the most superficial writing I’ve read in a long time, speaking as though it was a 10 yo kid talking to another ten yo kid. He addresses God as Abba, Constantine as Connie, never gets to the point, and continually uses parody and flight of idea. By the end of the book, I had no clue as to what Vic was speaking about, save that he remained a Christian Zionist. Vic writes in a very funny style, yet has minimal content. I could not recommend this book to anybody. A pity, as I dearly love Vic, and enjoy my conversations with him.

The Prayer of Jabez, by Bruce Wilkinson ?

This must be one of the worst books that I’ve read in a long time, being so bad that the last half was simply skimmed. I read it in the guest house in N’Djemena while waiting for our plane out of Chad. Bruce provides the prayer of Jabez as a mantra, as a recital that will guarantee one success in life. It is almost Buddist in its orientation, and I suppose some day he will make a prayer wheel out of his book so that the wind will generate increased blessing. To the serious reader, it will do more damage than good, by promising a false way to approach God, and what we might expect of Him. I am sick of books that turns God into Dog, the cosmic puppy-dog that will do tricks for you, or fetch something at your bidding. Unfortunately, the rest of this review was lost in my iWeb “bug”, but wasn’t favorable for the book. I don’t have a copy of the book to refresh my mind as to what else I may have written.

Old Paths, by J.C. Ryle ?????

This book is simply a compendium of articles written by J.C. Ryle regarding the basics of the Christian faith, speaking about sin, conversion, being filled with the Spirit, and living a righteous Christian life. It is straight-forward, easy to read, not comprehensive, and because it was never written as a book, is often very repetitive. As long as the reader understand that, they will find this book a great delight to read and enjoy. This makes 12 books read while in Cameroon!

Luther, starring Joseph Fiennes ?????

This is the third or fourth time that I have seen this film, but have not yet reviewed it. There are several video histories of Martin Luther that have been made, but I feel this to be the best. I have only seen the film in German. J. Fiennes makes a perfect Luther, and the script seems to not deviate too wildly from the history that we have of Luther in order to sensationalize matters. Luther does not need “Hollywood-ization”, yet they still did a moderate amount of this, such as with the mother of a crippled child, and the adulating crowds. Also, they tended to make Luther appear like a dolt in the Augustiner Kloster, yet most history reports him to be quite brilliant even at that time. So, the historical data was reasonable, but not perfect. This is a good film to watch, but hopefully, you also take the time to read books about the Reformation to find out what really happened, and the real theological underpinnings of the Reformation.

The Marketing of Evil, by David Kupelian ?????

I’ve been rare on 5-star reviews, but this book is well-written, reads well, and well researched. The author is Armenian, and appears as a rather homely person on the back flap of the book. He is everything but that. Rather, he is an articulate tiger, writing a book that was nearly impossible to put down. He serially attacks the homosexual agenda, the governmental confusion of separation of church and state, the wholesale sale of pornography, toleration and the false effort at multiculturalism, the destruction of marriage, the sex revolution, the sabotage of the school system, the extreme bias of the news media, the problem of abortion, and the problem of accommodation within the Christian church itself. He ends with quotes from two of my heros, Francis Schaeffer and David Wells, both men acutely seeing Western culture far better than the rest of us. Altogether, the book is precise in identifying the problem of what went wrong with America. The solution presented are for Christians to speak out, but even more than that, for Christians to truly live lives consistent with their Biblical calling. I’d highly recommend this book to all Americans to read as the best description was “what’s going on”. Brother Dennis wrote a book entitled “What’s going On”, detailing the conspiracies and secret societies that control America. Yet, though Dennis is correct, Kupelian does a better job of identifying the precise problems that have led to America’s downfall, which is the loss of faith of its citizens. To that we weep.

10 Books that Screwed Up the World, by Benjamin Wiker ????

This was more an entertaining read, rather than deeply informative. Wiker writes well, and steps through the books and lives of 15 people (he actually reviews 15 books) that have brought humans to the worse rather than the better. Included are Machiavelli, Rousseau, Hobbes, Marx, Nietsche, Hitler, Sanger, Mead, and Kinsey, as well as six other authors. Wiker adeptly points out the destructive philosophy and character of each of these texts. He does not do any in-depth analysis, but provides brief summaries of the characters of the authors, their writings, and philosophical implications of their works. It is a nice work in the “gutter” authorship of the last half of the last millennium. It is not uncommon to see the “top ten” books, but now we have a first review of the “bottom 10” (actually 15) texts since the Renaissance. This is a fun read for idle moments, and worth getting.

Christianity’s Dangerous Idea, by Alister McGrath ?????

I had varied throughout the reading of the book, at rating the book between 3-5. I finally settled on a 5 in spite of a few serious misgivings. Alister McGrath is known as a conservative Protestant scholar working out of Oxford. McGrath takes a fairly event stance in spite of his supposed academic and conservative stance. Sometimes, he goes a little too far in trying to be moderate, such as when he seems to side with Fosdick in the Fosdick/Machen controversy, Machen accusing liberal Christianity of having abandoned Christian roots and thus not being Christian at all. I think Machen was correct. Yet, McGrath also is very even keeled in his presentation of Pentecostalism as being the dominant force now driving the massive spread of Protestantism throughout much of the rest of the world, including South America, Africa, Asia and Korea, as well as possibly the Philippines. Thematically, McGrath holds tight to his thesis of displaying how the Christian “dangerous” idea that put the Bible into the hands of the layman, allowing them to read and interpret scripture outside of the forced interpretation of the church, has allowed the Protestant movement to adapt to other cultures and societies well beyond the expectations of the west. The book is divided into three parts, the first being a standard historical outline from Luther and Zwingli and Calvin to the present day. It is a focused history, examining the fundamental thesis of what happens when you put the Bible into the hands of a layman. True, you get diversity, heresy, secularization, etc., but you also get adaptability to various cultures. The second part outlined Protestant influence on Western culture, including music, art, science, etc. I’m not sure all of his analyses were entirely accurate, especially with issues of evolution and science, but again, McGrath is possibly attempting to not takes sides in the issue. He still leans toward the evolutionists, sadly. The third part speaks of the rapid growth of Christianity through the rest of the world, and his hypothesis as to why that is happening, which is, as mentioned above, Pentecostalism and other forms of spirituality that are more directed to the culture, thinking  of the lifestyle of people outside of the Western world and adapting Christianity to those cultures, rather than forcing a pure Western cultural interpretation on Christianity. Missing in the book is discussions as to how a large part of Christianity has trashed the Scripture. This is especially true of liberal Christianity. Since the basic thesis of this book is the freedom to interpret Scripture, when you deconstruct Scripture rather than interpret it, does that produce a Christian? I don’t think so. Also not included is the concept of the “heretic”. Essentially, Islam, as well as Jehovah’s Witness and Mormonism are heresies, that I would fail to define as essentially Christian, yet he doesn’t address this issue of deviants of interpretation and belief that delegitimize being a Christian. This is a book worth reading, though a bit dense and sometimes controversial, it reads easily and is very thought provoking.

Kein Grund zur Resignation, Peter Hahne ????

This book is obviously in German, and is an encouragement to hang in there. Specifically, it speaks of maintaining time in Scripture, praying, and fellowshipping. Hahne has an easy writing style to understand, which allows me to enjoy his writing, and I appreciate his strength of faith.