Book Review.
McKnight, Scot. The King Jesus Gospel. The original good news revisited. Zondervan. 2011
S.M. - (PhD. Nottingham)- professor in religious studies at North Park University, Chicago, Illinois.
Comment. Henry.
I have found in my reading that authors are saying significant things about topics (issues) that I have wondered about for years. Those are important moments for me. Scot is one of those authors. For most of my life the ‘Salvation Culture’ that Scot talks about has been the paradigm of my spiritual experience. It is all about ‘making a sale’. That is what evangelism is all about. Since I was not ‘making sales’ I was sure that I did not have the gift of evangelism. Scot has helped me with that dilemma. Sometimes (I think) he seems to overstate his thesis, perhaps to reinforce his message. I appreciate his ‘charity’ in not insisting that his is not an ‘either/or’ position. The tensions experienced by reading this book are, will be, healthy.
Introduction- N.T.Wright, Dallas Willard.
The gospel is more than salvation. It cannot be reduced to ‘napkin presentation’. We have a massive, non-disciple Christianity.
Scot gives this very brief summary of this book, “Most of evangelism today is obsessed with getting someone to make a DECISION; the apostles, however, were obsessed with making DISCIPLES.” (18) The gospel is understood by most professing Christ-followers in terms of salvation which in turn is expressed as a decision/commitment (justification by faith). “We have created a ‘salvation culture’ and mistakenly assumed it is a ‘gospel culture’”. (29)
Scot explains his defining of the gospel as arising out of “four categories”. (34) It begins with “The Story of Israel/the Bible. (Then) The Story of Jesus. (Followed by) The Plan of Salvation. (And finally) The Method of Persuasion.” (34) A ‘salvation culture’ stresses the last two categories.
Creating a gospel culture begins with Paul’s teaching in 1Cor. 15. It was the gospel that formed Paul’s original connection with the Corinthians. Paul was authorized to preach this authentic gospel about the story of Jesus, his death, burial and resurrection. This story brings to completion the story of Israel, according to the Scriptures. “The gospel is the resolution and fulfillment of Israel’s story and promises.” (51) The death of Jesus provided three ‘pillars of support’ for salvation; “identification, representation and substitution, and incorporation into the life of God”. (51) Jesus is central to a gospel culture and as such his resurrection, second coming and the coming of the Kingdom are also a part of that gospel. God’s purpose for man as stated in creation will not be completed until ‘his Kingdom comes’.
Support for the gospel is encapsulated in the creeds. “Creed and gospel are connected.” (68) “The Augsburg Confession and the Genevan Confession” (70) are significant documents that impacted the change from a gospel culture to a salvation culture. The personal testimony is a distinguishing element of this culture. Dallas Willard calls this “the gospel of sin management”. All four Gospels include evidence of the Israel Story. The Jesus Story marks the completion of the Israel Story. Paul makes a strong defence for this claim. “Jesus preached himself as completing the Israel Story.” (100) This claim becomes the key ‘cornerstone’ of the gospel culture.
The seven (or perhaps eight) “gospel sermons in the book of Acts” (114) demonstrate their support for and interpretation of the Israel Story, i.e. ‘according to the Scriptures’. The ‘apostle’s gospel’ focused on “the summons to respond in faith, repentance and baptism”. (121) This is the ‘how to’ of the gospel. Faith is the key and repentance and baptism are the manifestations.
“Gospeling” (132) according to the book of Acts (and other N.T. references), rests on a four-fold footing; “Israel’s Story, the lordship of Jesus, summoning people to respond, and the gospel (which) saves and redeems”. (132-133) six comparisons are made between the gospeling of the apostles and our “plan of salvation approach today”. (133) This is not an either/or comparison. The concern is about what is missing in our approach.
How then do we go about “creating a Gospel Culture”? “To grasp the gospel we have to grasp what God is doing in the world, and that means we’ve got a ‘story to tell’. The assumption- that the gospel can be reduced to a note card- or a napkin- is already off on the wrong track.” (148) note: Does that invalidate an ‘abbreviated’ form of presenting the gospel?
We must begin with Israel’s Story and then immerse ourselves in the Story of Jesus. From here we move to the apostle’s gospel which is the “story of the church” (156) This story, which is our story, counters the world views of the culture we live in. In our ‘gospeling’ our emphasis on baptism and the Eucharist needs to remain strong.
Henrydirksen.blogspot.com
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
An Introduction to Kierkegaard.
Book Review.
Vardy. Peter. An Introduction to Kierkegaard. Henderson Publishers, 2008.
P.V.- vice principal of Heythrop College, University of London.
Comment. Henry.
As the title suggests, this is a fine introduction to Kierkegaard and his writings. He was no friend of those who represented ‘Enlightenment’ and those who championed modernity. Nor was he a friend of the institutionalized church which in Denmark was the Lutheran Church. He was a friend and champion of those who sought a genuine relationship with God; these were by Kierkegaard’s definition, Christian. He draws a very distinct line between reason and faith and how these two cannot be ‘blended’. It is a situation of ‘either/or’ not both/and. This is a great resource for anyone wanting to know in a nutshell (105 pages) what Kierkegaard is all about.
“K. Is a psychologist, philosopher and Christian thinker” (intro) even though he would likely have rejected all these disciplines. His concern for his readers was that they should “think deeply about life and make decisions about how to live and how to die”. (intro) This was the starting point for a good relevant philosophy.
As a young writer K. Fell in love with Regina Olsen and was engaged to her. He broke off this engagement because he was sure he could never make his beloved happy. He never married but he left his estate to Regina who married another man. He became famous for his writings. The details of his life were irrelevant to that fame.
“One of his (K’s) central objectives was to examine the relationship between religious faith (particularly Christian faith) and reason. What would the logical consequences be if in fact Christianity were true?” (8) He challenged Kant and Hegel regarding the priority of reason (over faith). One of the conclusions of the argument for the uniqueness of Jesus, i.e. Incarnation, becomes an element of the definition of faith, “a willingness to trust that God has intervened in human history”. (13) These conclusions are not presented as proof that Jesus is God but consequences of such a declaration. The truth that God’s love is demonstrated by his incarnation is a truth beyond reason. It is an “Absolute Paradox” (19) which can only be accepted by faith. This faith is a gift from God.
The book “Concluding Unscientific Postscript” was written under a pseudonym Johannes Climaus. Here K. declared that reason leads to the conclusion that there is no ultimate Truth. Faith goes beyond reason. “Faith cannot depend on tests or be affected by arguments. It is a subjective being.” (24) What we know is not nearly as important as how we live. “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,” (29) Faith is made real by a life that demonstrates it in relationship. This involves risk. “Reason has no right to cheat people out of their faith.” (34) (Here, here!)
K. talks about three “stages of life; the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious”. (38) The focus in the aesthetic is the temporal, the ego. The love of this stage is seductive with pleasure being transitory. Unchecked and unchallenged, this stage enters into a “demonic” (44) stage, e.g. Don Giovanni and Faust. This is the ultimate stage of anxiety.
Marriage is portrayed as “the paradigm of the ethical stage”. (49) It demonstrates love as a high calling, of a duty freely chosen. Ethical choices can result in complacency and confidence that lead to relational bankruptcy. “Both the aesthetic and ethical stages end in despair.” (56) From this despair, however, can rise the religious stage which “entails a personal relationship with God and a direct accountability to God”. (57) There are two steps that lead to this relationship. First there comes an awareness of God that provides a “freedom from the distractions of the temporal”. (57) The second step is a step of faith which requires a commitment that implies suffering. The three stages of life are among other things different approaches to love. K. Talks about “religion A and religion B”. (62) It is faith that makes for this difference. There is a great difference between being an admirer of Christ and being a follower of Christ. “Faith is shown in how one’s life is lived.” (64)
When Abraham responded in obedience to God’s command to sacrifice Isaac he was placing obedience above ethics. K. Calls him a “knight of faith”. (72) The journey of faith is personal and is strengthened by community.
Prayer changes those who pray it does not change God. The motivation for a relationship with God cannot be sustained by rewards from God or by the fear of punishment. “Egocentric service” (84) and limited commitment will not do in developing a relationship with God. There will be suffering when we respond to Jesus’ challenge, “take up your cross and follow me”. There will be rejection. When the day comes for us to ‘give an account’ before God it will be on the basis of our relationship with him and how we lived not on what we believed. There is a work of faith and it is (unconditional) indiscriminate love.
K. was not a friend of the institutional (Lutheran) church in his later life. Church leaders “proclaimed a message of comfort and good cheer. And K. did not think Christianity was comfortable”. (99) He declared that the Bible was “a clear handbook which could guide someone who wished to live a life accountable to God” (100), not a book that should be examined critically by scholars. When he was threatened with ‘ecclesiastical sanction’ he responded sarcastically. A Christianity that is limited to social action is not Christianity.
Henrydirksen.blogspot.com
Vardy. Peter. An Introduction to Kierkegaard. Henderson Publishers, 2008.
P.V.- vice principal of Heythrop College, University of London.
Comment. Henry.
As the title suggests, this is a fine introduction to Kierkegaard and his writings. He was no friend of those who represented ‘Enlightenment’ and those who championed modernity. Nor was he a friend of the institutionalized church which in Denmark was the Lutheran Church. He was a friend and champion of those who sought a genuine relationship with God; these were by Kierkegaard’s definition, Christian. He draws a very distinct line between reason and faith and how these two cannot be ‘blended’. It is a situation of ‘either/or’ not both/and. This is a great resource for anyone wanting to know in a nutshell (105 pages) what Kierkegaard is all about.
“K. Is a psychologist, philosopher and Christian thinker” (intro) even though he would likely have rejected all these disciplines. His concern for his readers was that they should “think deeply about life and make decisions about how to live and how to die”. (intro) This was the starting point for a good relevant philosophy.
As a young writer K. Fell in love with Regina Olsen and was engaged to her. He broke off this engagement because he was sure he could never make his beloved happy. He never married but he left his estate to Regina who married another man. He became famous for his writings. The details of his life were irrelevant to that fame.
“One of his (K’s) central objectives was to examine the relationship between religious faith (particularly Christian faith) and reason. What would the logical consequences be if in fact Christianity were true?” (8) He challenged Kant and Hegel regarding the priority of reason (over faith). One of the conclusions of the argument for the uniqueness of Jesus, i.e. Incarnation, becomes an element of the definition of faith, “a willingness to trust that God has intervened in human history”. (13) These conclusions are not presented as proof that Jesus is God but consequences of such a declaration. The truth that God’s love is demonstrated by his incarnation is a truth beyond reason. It is an “Absolute Paradox” (19) which can only be accepted by faith. This faith is a gift from God.
The book “Concluding Unscientific Postscript” was written under a pseudonym Johannes Climaus. Here K. declared that reason leads to the conclusion that there is no ultimate Truth. Faith goes beyond reason. “Faith cannot depend on tests or be affected by arguments. It is a subjective being.” (24) What we know is not nearly as important as how we live. “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,” (29) Faith is made real by a life that demonstrates it in relationship. This involves risk. “Reason has no right to cheat people out of their faith.” (34) (Here, here!)
K. talks about three “stages of life; the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious”. (38) The focus in the aesthetic is the temporal, the ego. The love of this stage is seductive with pleasure being transitory. Unchecked and unchallenged, this stage enters into a “demonic” (44) stage, e.g. Don Giovanni and Faust. This is the ultimate stage of anxiety.
Marriage is portrayed as “the paradigm of the ethical stage”. (49) It demonstrates love as a high calling, of a duty freely chosen. Ethical choices can result in complacency and confidence that lead to relational bankruptcy. “Both the aesthetic and ethical stages end in despair.” (56) From this despair, however, can rise the religious stage which “entails a personal relationship with God and a direct accountability to God”. (57) There are two steps that lead to this relationship. First there comes an awareness of God that provides a “freedom from the distractions of the temporal”. (57) The second step is a step of faith which requires a commitment that implies suffering. The three stages of life are among other things different approaches to love. K. Talks about “religion A and religion B”. (62) It is faith that makes for this difference. There is a great difference between being an admirer of Christ and being a follower of Christ. “Faith is shown in how one’s life is lived.” (64)
When Abraham responded in obedience to God’s command to sacrifice Isaac he was placing obedience above ethics. K. Calls him a “knight of faith”. (72) The journey of faith is personal and is strengthened by community.
Prayer changes those who pray it does not change God. The motivation for a relationship with God cannot be sustained by rewards from God or by the fear of punishment. “Egocentric service” (84) and limited commitment will not do in developing a relationship with God. There will be suffering when we respond to Jesus’ challenge, “take up your cross and follow me”. There will be rejection. When the day comes for us to ‘give an account’ before God it will be on the basis of our relationship with him and how we lived not on what we believed. There is a work of faith and it is (unconditional) indiscriminate love.
K. was not a friend of the institutional (Lutheran) church in his later life. Church leaders “proclaimed a message of comfort and good cheer. And K. did not think Christianity was comfortable”. (99) He declared that the Bible was “a clear handbook which could guide someone who wished to live a life accountable to God” (100), not a book that should be examined critically by scholars. When he was threatened with ‘ecclesiastical sanction’ he responded sarcastically. A Christianity that is limited to social action is not Christianity.
Henrydirksen.blogspot.com
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Water Into Wine.
Book Review.
Harpur, Tom. Water Into Wine. An empowering vision of the Gospels. Thomas Allen Publishers.
Comment. Henry.
This is one of the books I selected from the shelf in our public library. I admit it was the title that motivated me. (I judged it by its cover!) Part way through the book I realized I had read this author before. In fact I purchased the book- “The Spirituality of Wine”. This book is quite different. I finished the book as an intellectual discipline, not because I was ‘into it’. To Tom there is no such a thing as a miracle. Hence all miracles in scripture are considered to be myths or allegories. He comes at spiritual truth in the same way as John Spong does. Like Spong, he grew up in an evangelical environment but he was able to ‘escape’ from that untenable position through education (self and academic). His ‘discovery’ that all humans are the Incarnation of Christ does not strike me with same enthusiasm that it did him. To me the value of reading the book was for information of what is actually out there.
“The mythic way is the genuine path towards the goal of a renewal of faith in our time.” (7) Sacred texts in Hellenistic culture were understood as having “both an exoteric and an esoteric meaning. The exoteric sense, the literal, was for beginners, those not yet ready to comprehend the real message. The true, or esoteric, meaning lay within or beyond the text itself.” (7)
“The chief value of a miracle is not that it happened, but the truth allegorically symbolized therewith.” Origen. “The entire Jesus Story (that is all it is) is a mystical drama with a whole range of symbols meant to relate us to the evolution of our innermost selves- our innate divinity.” (86)
Miracles cannot be taken literally. They have value as “exoteric imagery”. (118) A chapter is devoted to the proper interpretation of parables. The Palm Sunday story is just another allegory.
The author declares his personal endorsement and commitment to a “mythological and allegorical interpretation” (212) of scripture. He strongly rejects the historical and literal approach to miraculous events. Miraculous events, e.g. the parting of the Red Sea, must be viewed as “metaphor or symbolism”. (213)
Tom subscribes to a mythical version of “Christ within us”. (222) Paul declares; “This is a mystery: Christ in you, the hope of glory”. Tom interprets this statement as; “Each person was (is) called and challenged to recognize the reality of the Incarnation (of Christ) in his or her own life”. (223)
Harpur, Tom. Water Into Wine. An empowering vision of the Gospels. Thomas Allen Publishers.
Comment. Henry.
This is one of the books I selected from the shelf in our public library. I admit it was the title that motivated me. (I judged it by its cover!) Part way through the book I realized I had read this author before. In fact I purchased the book- “The Spirituality of Wine”. This book is quite different. I finished the book as an intellectual discipline, not because I was ‘into it’. To Tom there is no such a thing as a miracle. Hence all miracles in scripture are considered to be myths or allegories. He comes at spiritual truth in the same way as John Spong does. Like Spong, he grew up in an evangelical environment but he was able to ‘escape’ from that untenable position through education (self and academic). His ‘discovery’ that all humans are the Incarnation of Christ does not strike me with same enthusiasm that it did him. To me the value of reading the book was for information of what is actually out there.
“The mythic way is the genuine path towards the goal of a renewal of faith in our time.” (7) Sacred texts in Hellenistic culture were understood as having “both an exoteric and an esoteric meaning. The exoteric sense, the literal, was for beginners, those not yet ready to comprehend the real message. The true, or esoteric, meaning lay within or beyond the text itself.” (7)
“The chief value of a miracle is not that it happened, but the truth allegorically symbolized therewith.” Origen. “The entire Jesus Story (that is all it is) is a mystical drama with a whole range of symbols meant to relate us to the evolution of our innermost selves- our innate divinity.” (86)
Miracles cannot be taken literally. They have value as “exoteric imagery”. (118) A chapter is devoted to the proper interpretation of parables. The Palm Sunday story is just another allegory.
The author declares his personal endorsement and commitment to a “mythological and allegorical interpretation” (212) of scripture. He strongly rejects the historical and literal approach to miraculous events. Miraculous events, e.g. the parting of the Red Sea, must be viewed as “metaphor or symbolism”. (213)
Tom subscribes to a mythical version of “Christ within us”. (222) Paul declares; “This is a mystery: Christ in you, the hope of glory”. Tom interprets this statement as; “Each person was (is) called and challenged to recognize the reality of the Incarnation (of Christ) in his or her own life”. (223)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
