Category Archives: Book Reviews

Book Review – The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience (Ronald J. Sider)

Posted on by
1

I bought this book mainly because of the high commendation from Discerning Reader who think it may become “the most significant book of 2005”. Sider is a man with a message. His thesis is that basically evangelicals are living pretty much the same as nonchristians. The Bible calls us to a holy life but we have ignored this call to be the church and conformed to our own culture, replacing the whole gospel with cheap grace. He offers not just doctrinal correctives but some practical suggestions and ends by giving some hope that there are comitted Christians who are bucking the trend.

The book is only 130 pages long, and so he doesn’t go into great depth on any one topic, preferring to passionately plead that we weep over the state of the church and start praying for and working towards change. While I am in broad agreement with the main message of the book, there are some issues with the way that Sider has presented it which I fear may rob it of some of its impact.

Chapter 1 (out of 5) provides statistics to prove his thesis that Christians (in America) are not living biblically in the areas of divorce, materialism and the poor, sexual disobedience, racism and physical abuse in marriage. Statistics can of course be used to prove all kinds of things, and they are not used in the same way in each section. For example, the statistics on divorce show how evangelical marriages end in divorce as often if not more than nonchristian ones, while in the section on materialism evangelical giving was compared not to nonchristian or nonevangelical giving, but to the standard of a 10% tithe. In the section on physical abuse in marriage, he implies that evangelicals who don’t hold to an egalitarian view are liable to beat their wives, which is perhaps something he should have explored in another book where he has the space to deal with this subject more fully and sensitively. In short, the statistics sometimes show Christians living like the world even though they think differently, sometimes thinking and living the same as the world, sometimes not living like the world but still missing the biblical standard, and sometimes used to prove points of doctrine. When Christians use statistics, they should be careful to state not only what trends they demonstrate, but also note their limitations – what they don’t prove.

Chapter 2 is one of the strongest in the book, and sets out to demonstrate that the New Testament everywhere expects Christians to live a transformed life. This is hardly a controversial point, but it is worth noting how emphatic the New Testament is on this subject. Sider is convinced that the key to evangelistic breakthrough is Christians living transformed lives, and he forces this home time and again in this chapter as in the rest of the book. According to the New Testament, we have an obligation to put to death the deeds of the old sinful nature. In my view this should have been the first chapter of the book, so the argument ran: this is what the Bible teaches, now look how far short we have fallen.

In chapter 3, Sider sets about explaining how we have got into this mess. First we have replaced the whole gospel with cheap grace. While he is at pains to point out that he believes in justification by faith and doesn’t in any way want to encourage legalism, he argues that accepting Jesus as Saviour but not Lord is to modify the gospel beyond recognition. He criticises a seeker-friendly approach that ignores the cost of discipleship. The gospel is not that we are just forgiven but also changed. Sider’s second point was rather less expected. He argues that another problem is that we see people as souls only. Rather than merely talking about “saving souls” we need an understanding of people as a body-soul unity and an emphasis on the importance of community. This third point is that evangelicals have become too embarassed to talk about sin and have completely lost the category of social sin. Amos is held up as an example of a prophet who spoke against sinful structures. He is adamant that the world can’t actually be changed “one person at a time”, suggesting that evangelicals have assumed that they don’t need to get involved in challenging unjust structures.

In chapter 4 the options are set before us – we can conform to our culture, or be the church. Here Sider reiterates some of his main emphases – the importance of community rather than individualism and the need for accountability as well as church discipline. He criticises the lack of accountability that individuals, churches, church leaders and para-church organisation have. Churches should join denominations and Christians should be in small groups. He seemed particularly impressed with the Wesleyan model of directly asking people to confess their sins. He even went so far as to suggest Christians examining and critiquing each others financial situations and experimenting with communal housing schemes. If Christians were accountable in small groups, he believes the need for church discipline to sort out gross sin would be greatly reduced.

Chapter 5 provides some balance to the statistics in chapter 1. Other studies have shown a marked difference in the way that deeply commited Christians live, even if there is still quite a way to go. He urges prayer for revival and a deep commitment to obeying Scripture as the way for the modern Laodecian church (which is how he sees American evangelicalism) to avoid being spat out by Christ.

Overall, I agree that Sider has a message that needs to be heard, even for those like myself who are not American evangelicals. Perhaps if he had chosen some of his statistics and anecdotes more judiciously, and nuanced his suggested practical solutions more carefully, he would have reached a wider audience. Nevertheless, those who read this book will be deeply challenged to think deeply about how Christians can live the radically countercultural life that the Bible calls us to. Those who lead churches or small groups will also have food for thought about how Sider’s suggestions could be implemented in their context.

A brief note to any of my friends from Southampton reading this – if you want to borrow this book (or any of my books), just ask. This one won’t take you long to read.

Book Review – The Pillar New Testament Commentary on Mark (James R. Edwards)

Posted on by
7


The Pillar commentary series sits in between the devotional and academic styles of commentary. It is evangelical, and designed primarily for preachers and serious students of the Bible. This volume is the third gospel to be covered in this slowly growing series, under the editorship of Don Carson. It weighs in at over 500 pages of commentary (not counting indexes), which translates to a few paragraphs on each verse or group of verses, with room for a few excursuses and brief introductions to each pericope or section. Despite this reasonably generous size, there are a number of typical commentary features not found in this volume.

The biblical text is not included, and Edwards rarely interacts directly with other commentators (when he does, it is normally in a footnote). He only occasionally provides refutations to scholars who doubt the historicity of some of the accounts. Also, he does not often attempt to harmonise with parallel passages in the other gospels, prefering to simply note how the other accounts differ. This is no doubt in part due to his acceptance of the theory that Mark was the first gospel to be written, probably around AD65, and most likely by John-Mark, with the Christians in Rome in mind as the original intended readership. Finally, don’t expect exhaustive details of the Greek grammar and translation issues here. Where the Greek is discussed, it is usually to explain the meaning of one word, and is transliterated.

So what does Edwards fill the space with? His commentary emphasises the historical setting, the literary devices and the theological purposes of Mark. There are also a number of useful excursuses on key themes in Mark (for example, the Messiah and the transfiguration). An appendix rejects the “secret gospel of Mark” as a forgery. As with other Pillar volumes, key words are highlighted in bold at the start of a paragraph that defines them.

The historical aspect is served by Edward’s regular appeals to ancient literature, which he uses to help give a good picture of the historical context and meaning of the verses in question. The key word definitions are very useful for explaining terms, customs and places in a succinct way, but without intruding into the flow of the commentary. In addition, Edwards seeks to keep us alert to some of the literary techniques Mark uses, such as the “sandwich technique” (whereby Mark interleaves two mutually interpretive passages), as well as the irony and the insider / outsider motif. He gathers evidence for the theory that Peter was John-Mark’s primary source as he moves through the book.

On the theological side, Edward’s brings a number of Mark’s themes to light, particularly those of what true faith and discipleship is, of who the Christ is and the command to silence. But its not just about “Mark’s theology”, as he often makes brief yet profound statements of the theological and practical implications for believers.

Whilst Edwards rarely brings a highly controversial or obscure interpretation to a passage in Mark, he is not simply restating other people’s conclusions, and regularly brings fresh insights. Jesus’ prophetic teaching in Mark 13 is understood as referring alternately to the destruction of Jerusalem and the parousia, with the phrases “these things” and “those days” serving as delimiters between the near and far focuses. He argues that the women of chapter 16 are used by Mark as negative examples (in contrast the the normally positive role of women in the gospel) of fear rather than faith in contrast to Joseph’s boldness in approaching Pilate to ask for Jesus’ body. He sees the climax of the gospel as the centurion’s declaration at the cross in Mark 15:39.

Although unsurprisingly Edwards does not consider Mark 16:9-20 to be part of the original gospel, he does provide commentary on it in a chapter devoted to questions of the ending. While he notes that an ending at Mark 16:8 may “work” for some people, he strongly doubts that Mark did in fact stop so abruptly, again drawing on his thorough knowledge of ancient literature to argue that this type of literary technique was virtually unknown. He believes that the writer of Matthew had access to Mark’s original ending, as the end of Matthew provides the types of things required to conclude the themes Mark has been developing.

In conclusion, I highly recommend this as an excellent commentary on the book of Mark. I have been reading it over the last 18 months as I have been studying my way through Mark. It does not address every issue that could possibly be raised, but this prevents the commentary from becoming bloated and allows Edwards to give space to his areas of expertise. Those who read this will see Mark’s gospel come alive when viewed through the historical, literary and theological perspective that Edwards has brought in his commentary.

Book Review – The Message of Revelation (Michael Wilcock)

Posted on by
2

Michael Wilcock is a regular writer for the Bible Speaks Today series, having written four on Old Testament books (the one on Chronicles is particularly good) and two New Testament titles. The book of Revelation provides its own special challenges for a series such as this one, which intends to be expository rather than academic. Wilcock admits from the start that due to the extremely diverse range of possible interpretations encountered in Revelation studies, this book falls somewhere in between the “academic and sermonic”.

Particularly important to Wilcock is the structure of the book. He argues for eight scenes, each with seven sections. Whilst in a few places, his division of the material is less than convincing, his overall scheme does make sense, and is reinforced as he goes through the book by demonstrating the parallels between corresponding sections of different scenes. The book is furnished with the RSV text (reflecting the fact that this is one of the older volumes in the BST series – originally published in 1975).

The letters to the churches are the subject of the first scene, and Wilcock stresses their relevance as the church will tend to follow the same repeating patterns of errors. Scene two concerns the seven seals – which are interpreted as suffering for the church. Throughout the book, there are a number of short excursuses, dealing with problems of interpretation. In one on the meaning of numbers, he provides a useful discussion of 12, 24, 7 and 4, which he uses as he progresses through the book.

Wilcock tries to be even-handed towards those of all schools of interpretation of Revelation, but he quickly dismisses the historicist interpretation, as he sees that each scene is capable of rewinding and going over the same period again. The general approach is reminiscent of John Stott’s recent writing on Revelation in “The Incomparable Christ”, which is is not surprising since Stott is the editor of this book. The four horsemen are thus not a sign of the end, but representative of the suffering that will go on throughout history.

In scene three (the trumpets), Wilcock is careful to harmonise with Matt 24, which he takes as the definitive guide to the end times. The trumpets are specifically warnings and suffering for the ungodly. He thankfully does not provide fanciful speculations on how these might come into effect. Scene 4 is “the drama of history”, and Wicock defends his breaking the book into scenes by showing how various “openings” mark the start of each one. The existing chapter divisions are almost all in the wrong places as far as he is concerned. The “beast from the earth” is identified as false religion, although he seems to imply that miracluous signs are always now a sign of the false church. His paraphrase of the verse about 666 was also interesting (it’s not a problem for us to work out).

Scene five is concerned with punishment for the world, and Wilcock stresses the battle of ideologies that plays throughout history between the world and the church. Many of the symbols both here and in future scenes he interprets as relating to this ideological struggle. In scene six (Babylon the Whore), there is a helpful excursus on identifying symbols and why only some are explained, where he argues that these are not so much symbols as realities viewed from another perspective. He has a particularly interesting interpretation of Rev 17:9-12, which he does not view as primarily prophetical concerning particular kings or rulers, but archetypal of worldly governmental systems.

Finally in scene seven we get onto the subject of the millenium, which is the subject of another excursus. He outlines the options, along with their strengths and weaknesses, and explains why he has chosen an amillennial interpretation. This scene, along with the next give him some opportunity for some excellent devotional reflections on the gospel (e.g. on the book of life, the bride’s garments etc). As he begins the eigth scene, he argues the case for why a book with so many sevens should have eight scenes. This is the scene of new beginnings, just as after the seven days of the week, Jesus rose on the eighth day. This vision is not just of what the church will become, but what the Lord is making us into now. The book rather unexpectedly closes with a strange section explaining that the book of Revelation is unnecessary but beneficial since it is a “sacrement”. The command not to add to the book is understood as a warning not to modify the gospel.

I have always found parts of the book of Revelation difficult to understand, and I can’t pretend to have found a complete explanation in this book. But certainly there are a number of insights that will prove very helpful as I return to study Revelation in the future, and Wilcock’s structural analysis of the book is the most convincing I have heard so far (perhaps until I read another commentary!).

Book Review – The Message of Deuteronomy (Raymond Brown)

Posted on by
1

The book of Deuteronomy brings us more than a simple reiteration of the law, but a series of sermons that teach about the character of God, revelation and grace. They were full of practical application of how God’s law should be put into effect in everyday life. This is how Brown introduces the book to us, and from the outset he declares his intent to take the paradigms and find their contemporary relevance, rather than simply dismissing the teaching as “no longer applicable”.

In the early chapters Brown draws some leadership lessons from the life of Moses, but from then on the dominant theme is the character of God. As his fine section on the Ten Commandments shows, the laws are not simply designed to teach us how to obey God, but how to be like God. He accepts analysis of the structure of the book that link it to an ancient treaty document, with its stipulations in general and specific terms as well as warnings against breaking the covenant. In this model the Lord is the “suzerain” who would provide benefits to his “vassal people” the Israelites if they kept the terms of the covenant which are spelled out in some detail.

Even though he is commenting on an Old Testament book, he is quite willing to make links with New Testament passages to show how these things apply in the New Covenant. In fact rather than a verse by verse exposition, he typically will turn a section into a sermon, drawing out the principles and including examples for contemporary application.

Brown does not shy away either from discussing some of the “difficult” sections. These include harsh punishments, obscure prohibitions and even some commands to wipe out certain nations. Without pretending to provide easy answers, his comments bring some perspective on the reasons and context, but also look ahead to the law of Christ expressed in the New Testament.

The end of the book describes the blessings and curses for obeying or disobeying the ‘treaty’, along with provision for the new leadership of Joshua. Lots of space is given to the song of Moses and his blessings of the tribes, whilst the well-known blessings and curses of chapter 28 are passed over surprisingly quickly.

There are approximately 10 pages of commentary for each of the 34 chapters of Deuteronomy, making it a realistic prospect to read this book alongside a daily reading of one chapter from the Bible. This makes a welcome change from some in the BST series that dwarf the size of the book on which they are commentating.

Deuteronomy is regularly quoted by the New Testament writers, but is perhaps not so well known and loved by modern Christians. Brown’s commentary serves as a valuable guide to the main themes and lessons that this book has to offer.

Book Review – The Message of John’s Letters (David Jackman)

Posted on by
3

John’s letters, says Jackman, contain simple vocabulary but profound theology. In his introduction he makes a case for the apostle John as the author of these letters along with the gospel of John. The first letter intends to deal with the problem of the Gnostic false teachers who were vaunting their ‘anointing’ and ‘knowledge’. 1 John stands as a warning against knowing without doing. “Belief and behaviour” and “truth and love” are the major themes.

The commentary is broken into 20 short chapters, each dealing with a few verses. The last two chapters deal with 2 and 3 John respectively and are therefore slightly longer. The NIV text is included at the start of each chapter which is a useful feature that I wish more commentaries had (it’s very impractical to have a Bible and a commentary when reading in the bath). Jackman is willing to discuss issues of translation and Greek on occasions but it is never overly technical. He is also an appreciator of hymns, quoting them on regular occasions throughout the book. He has a good way with words, and at no point did I feel the book got bogged down with too many comments on one individual verse. As with all the New Testament BST volumes, there is a study guide at the end, which has a couple of (thankfully not patronising) questions on each chapter.

As he moves through the first letter, Jackman slowly deals with some of the heresies of the false teachers: their denial of the incarnation, their heretical views about Christ, their claims to perfectionism, their elite holier-than-thou attitude because of their special knowledge and their claiming to speak on behalf of God. Jackman shows how John counters these with affirmations of truth about Jesus and teaching about fighting sin. While the author hints that he can think of a few groups in the contemporary church that tend towards the same errors, he diplomatically avoids direct comparisons.

Love is a major theme of the book and the sections on how much God loves us as well as some practical teaching on how we love others are most valuable. The challenge to love one another is clearly spelled out, as it constitutes the irrefutable evidence of the new birth. Particularly excellent is the discussion of how love and obedience work together, and the way he shows that, for John, love is not merely a duty but a characteristic of real Christianity. The theme of truth is also clearly close to Jackman’s heart as he regularly stresses the importance of sound doctrine.

The chapters on 2 and 3 John both begin with a short discussion of authorship, both arguing for John again on stylistic grounds. In his comments on 2 John, Jackman talks about John’s concern for truth, particularly now that almost all the first apostles had died. He describes the competing trends in the church to either go for ‘new ideas’ or ‘old traditions’, neither of which is intrinsically right or wrong, but argues that the desire for ‘biblical truth’ should be paramount.

The chapter on 3 John is not surprisingly structured around the three men mentioned in the letter: Gaius who was welcoming and supportive, Diotrophes with his self-centred ambition and Demetrius the good example. The lessons they each teach the modern church are as important now as ever.

Book Review – Showing the Spirit (D A Carson)

Posted on by
8

This is the second time I have read and reviewed this book. The first review was fairly short, so this will be the “in depth” version, giving me opportunity to interact with some of Carson’s observations. For the most part, it is a study of 1 Corinthians 12-14, reading in many ways like a commentary, but with a specific intent of shedding some light on the issue of the charismatic movement. Carson does go into a fair amount of exegetical depth, and expects readers to be comfortable with frequent discussions of the Greek text.

The introduction is brief and is aimed at explaining the current tensions in evangelicalism over the “charismatic” gifts. Carson briefly introduces the charismatic and noncharismatic positions, and somewhat humorously (and sadly also very accurately) explains the stereotyped opinions each of these two polarised groups hold with concerning the other.

The key to understanding the second half of 1 Corinthians is finding out what the issues they raised in their letter to Paul were. He proposes that one of their key concerns was “what are the signs of a spiritual person?”, with each faction (maybe even a charismatic and noncharismatic one) wanting him to answer with their own particular shibboleth (tongues speaking, prophecy, working miracles, giving to the poor or whatever). Into this situation Paul responds by emphasising that gifts are given by grace (charismata), and that gifts are diverse yet all given by the one Spirit.

As he moves onto the second half of chapter 12, where Paul uses the body to illustrate the importance of valuing all the diverse gifts, Carson goes on the offensive against two views held by some charismatics. The first is that of baptism in the Spirit as a “second blessing” – that is, an experience entered into some time after conversion. He argues that it is not taught in this text – it has to be read into it. He spends some time on verse 13, to show that this refers to baptism in the Spirit (as opposed to say Lloyd-Jones’ view that it is baptism by the Spirit into the body) and that Paul thought that all Christians had received it. Therefore he concludes that it must be coincident with conversion.

Unfortunately he doesn’t interact with the view of Pawson that the baptism in the Spirit was normally a distinct element within conversion (like water baptism), but could sometimes be missed out due to defective teaching. Thus the idea that there were Christians who had not received the baptism of the Spirit would have astonished Paul. Carson only mentions a variation on this view which is dismissed as “special pleading”. He concludes the brief discussion on the idea of the baptism in the Spirit as a secondary experience to conversion by simply telling us that the view has been refuted comprehensively elsewhere (e.g. Stott on Baptism and Fullness).

The second view Carson rejects is the common Pentecostal teaching that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is always evidenced by the gift of tongues. He argues that this is precisely the sort of imbalanced esteem of one gift above the others that Paul is countering in this passage.

As he arrives in chapter 13, he demonstrates that this section on love is not an irrelevant excursus but integral to Paul’s overall argument. He first takes time to cast doubt on some ingenious interpretations of 12:31 which turn Paul’s comments about eagerly desiring the greater gifts into a rebuke. Much of chapter 13 is thankfully not contentious in terms of its application, but as he reaches the verse on the future cessation of tongues and prophecy he sets out the variety of interpretations in some detail. He strongly argues against the traditional cessationist position that sees the charismatic gifts as ceasing upon completion of the canon (or at the end of the apostolic age). Rather, “that which is perfect” refers to the parousia. He does however point out that while 1 Cor 13:8 does not teach cessation it does not deny it either, and he also notes that it is the prophetic gifts that remind us most clearly that we are still living in the “not yet”.

There are two chapters on 1 Corinthians 14, and the first deals with the controversial issue of defining the gifts. Tongues are treated first and Carson asks whether they are to be understood as cognitive (that is they are real languages) or simply verbalisations of inward feelings. He reports that linguistic studies of tongues detect no grammar or syntax is detected in the modern phenomenon, which is not in itself particularly controversial, but when he states that the evidence is in favour of tongues being cognitive languages, he realises that this casts doubt on the contemporary charismatic claim to have this gift. Perhaps then in charity, he suggests a somewhat ingenious third option that tongues is like a coded message.

As for modern charismatic interpretations of tongues, Carson seems distinctly unimpressed, quoting some very unfavourable assessments and documents some tests where the same recorded tongue was interpreted differently. He even seems quite pleased with the story of someone deliberately embarrassing a charismatic church by posing as a tongues speaker but actually reciting John 1 in Greek. I found this approach to the gift of interpretation rather unusual, as though it should be ‘provable’ with scientific experiments. He does however raise an important point that charismatics are reluctant to address. What criteria are there for determining whether a tongue or an interpretation are indeed genuine, or do we simply accept everything unquestioningly?

Apostles are next up, and he simply claims that there were special apostles (the 12 plus Paul) and all other people who are referred to as apostles in the New Testament are cases of the word being used in a non-technical sense. He may be right, but it seems to me to be a case of choosing the meaning of apostle in each case it is used based upon a prior commitment to a particular view, something he is normally careful to avoid. He does not address the issue of whether some kind of apostolic oversight, particularly in the realm of church planting, might be desirable today.

In dealing with prophecy, Carson readily acknowledges Grudem’s significant contribution in this area, and indicates that he broadly agrees with it. In particular, the perceived threat to the canon is dealt with by arguing for a lesser authority on the part of New Testament prophets than that which the Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles enjoyed. He does not however discuss the surely fact that these people also said and prophesied much that was not Holy Scripture in their lives.

Getting back to the text of 1 Cor 14, Carson argues that Paul’s concern is to evaluate the relative, not absolute, merits of prophecy and tongues (which the Corinthians may have thought of as simply two forms of prophecy). He makes some good points on “I would that you all spoke in tongues” (14:5), noting first that this implies some non-tongues speakers in the church and secondly, drawing a parallel with 1 Cor 7:7 should not be taken to imply that in an ideal church everyone would speak in tongues. He also shows from verses 18 and 19 Paul’s strong endorsement of the private use of tongues alongside his intention to rarely if ever use it in public – two points that are seldom put together by either charismatics or noncharismatics.

The second chapter Carson writes on 1 Cor 14 is dominated by surveying the options in some extremely difficult passages. He discusses no fewer than seven possible meanings of tongues being a sign for unbelievers, and there are a similar variety of possible understandings of the instruction that women to be silent, where he indicates his preference for the idea that this prohibition relates to the oral weighing of prophecies.

Carson closes this section of the book with some useful observations on how the prophetic gift, whilst being revelatory, was still subject to the authority of apostolic teaching. He also discusses the tension between the ideas of meetings full of contributions and those where recognised leaders and teachers provide a substantial part of the public speaking. He suggests that both models are biblical and we should seek to provide avenues for both to be expressed.

Carson’s final chapter is the most ambitious. He attempts to develop a theology of spiritual gifts based not only on the preceding exegesis but also on the accounts in Acts of baptism in the Spirit, tongues and prophecy. He concludes that the tongues in Acts 2 were real languages, and the command to wait is not to be considered as normative, nor can it be deduced that everyone baptised with the Spirit must speak in tongues. Carson follows many noncharismatics in detecting special and non-repeatable circumstances in Acts 8, 10 and 19, arguing the need to forge a link with the Samaritans, the demonstration that the Gentiles didn’t need to become Jewish proselytes, and falling through a gap between two dispensations. The underlying assumptions of Paul’s question in Acts 19:2 are not discussed, and I couldn’t help feeling that having accused the charismatics of “special pleading” in 1 Cor 12:13, now it is Carson himself who is allowing himself a good deal of freedom.

He is particularly concerned to show that baptism in the Spirit as a secondary experience to conversion is not normative (though forced to acknowledge that it did happen on more than one occasion). He laments the charismatics’ “uncontrolled” hermeneutics in the book of Acts, but does concede that for Luke “the Spirit does not simply inaugurate the new age and then disappear; rather, he characterizes the new age”. Carson does briefly take his eyes off the Pentecostal view of the baptism in the Spirit to engage with Lloyd-Jones’ view, acknowledging that his emphasis on seeking to encounter God was helpful, but rejecting his exegesis.

The final section evaluating the charismatic movement makes painful reading for charismatics. The negatives far outweigh the positives, although he indicates a more generous attitude to the Vineyard movement. The anecdotes chosen typically reveal charismatics as either mean-spirited and divisive, or gullible and self-deceived. In his view the charismatics are characterised by seriously defective theology on healing, abuses of authority, inane prophetic utterances, sensationalism and triumphalism. For the record, the positives he does find are increased expectation for God to act, commitment to evangelism, and promotion of lay ministry. He is quite gracious about it, but essentially the charismatics have nothing to offer that a good noncharismatic church does not already have.

He makes an important point in suggesting that actually some of the so-called charismatic gifts may be more in evidence in noncharismatic than we might expect. I would agree that there are examples of healings, faith and prophetic preaching in noncharismatic circles. However, when discussing how a church might deal with having members of both persuasions, the solution seems to be mainly in terms of the noncharismatics promising not to be unkind to the charismatics if they in turn will promise to keep their gifts to themselves. This seems to fly in the face of all Paul has said in 1 Cor 12. A theoretical door of opportunity is of course open for them to be used, but in reality most Christians will not feel free to prophecy or speak in a tongue in a church that never uses these gifts and never teaches on their benefits and how they are to be exercised.

So what has Carson achieved in this important book? He has dealt powerful (and in my view, decisive) blows against both a cessationist view on one hand, and a second blessing always attested by tongues view on the other. I am disappointed though that he did not deal with the idea that the baptism in the Spirit might be a distinct element within conversion, and particularly surprised that he does not discuss the evidence for a definite experience of the Spirit – which is not exclusively found in Acts.

There are few meaningful correctives to noncharismatics – he doesn’t even entertain the possibility that such a church might consider seeking God for the gift of prophecy. For the charismatics, there is much to learn. The need for greater exegetical care is urgent, although I suspect that this point is not questioned by any charismatics who have taken the trouble to read a book like this. The chief lessons are in the areas of tongues, prophecy and healing.

First, charismatics repeatedly emphasise tongues well beyond the Biblical warrant, and if they were to get this in check could well win over a lot more noncharismatic friends. As Carson points out, the Holy Spirit has undeniably moved in great power many times in history without this particular gift being prominent. Also, the tendency to endorse the teaching of any minister simply because he is a tongues speaker is ridiculous.

Second, there needs to be a determination to seek to test prophecy, and curb the “anything goes” tendency where people’s “visions” and “words of knowledge” turn out to be bizarre, inane, or downright wrong. There is also an urgent need for for being abundantly clear on its subordination to Scripture (both in terms of authority and emphasis).

Finally, a charismatic doctrine of healing is needed that does not make preposterous claims or ignore the substantial teaching of the Scriptures on suffering. False and exaggerated claims of healing should be considered absolutely unacceptable.

In conclusion then, this his a highly significant work that Christians of all persuasions would do well to read. Carson has researched his subject matter thoroughly, as is attested by the comprehensive bibliography at the end of the book. Charismatics who approach this book humbly will learn a lot from it, and maybe one day will be able to respond with some similarly biblically grounded exhortations for their noncharismatic brothers to consider.

Book Review – The Message of Joel, Micah & Habakkuk (David Prior)

Posted on by
1

The commentary on Joel starts by helping us to visualise the plague of locusts and the devastating effect they would have had on Joel’s community. We have almost no historical background on Joel, but his call to repentance for a nation that had lost its spiritual life is as relevant today as ever. Prior provides an overview of the teaching on “the day of the Lord” from the prophets – a day of decisive judgement on which the people were naively assuming they would be vindicated and saved. Nothing less than a genuine and heartfelt repentance from the whole community was required if they were to escape calamity. In response to the people’s repentance, Joel prophesies blessing restored in the near future, the Spirit’s outpouring (fulfilled at Pentecost) and then finally the “day of the Lord” would arrive. In the third chapter Prior draws parallels with modern day nations as judgement is pronounced.

Micah writes to an affluent society who were sidelining God and growing richer at the expense of the poor. It was also a time of political upheaval with the Assyrian empire invading Samaria during his ministry. Prior follows most commentators by dividing the book into three cycles of threat and promise. He does a good job of filling in a lot of the background details (such as the significance of the places) and pointing out where allusions to other Old Testament books are being made. This allows the essence of the prophetic message to be seen in passages that most Bible readers will skip over quite quickly as a generic list of judgement prophecies. As he comments on Micah’s indictment of the pride, greed and injustice of his day, Prior himself takes on a prophetic edge speaking forthrightly into modern political and cultural situations.

Habakkuk is introduced to us as a man zealous for God living in a society filled with violence. Again we are encouraged to see contemporary parallels. Prior spends most time on chapter two as Habakkuk asks the difficult questions of God boldly and yet reverently and waits for his response. He is rewarded with his answer in the form of a vision, but it wasn’t necessarily what he wanted to hear. Finally, Prior argues that Habakkuk has matured through the course of the book, demonstrated as he comes to a place where he rejoices in God purely because of who he is, irrespective of his own personal circumstances.

Prior has provided a helpful resource on these three Old Testament books. It took me longer than I expected to read, perhaps because it is a bit heavy-going in places. In many ways it is like reading the biblical books themselves – there are sections that can seem hard and dry interspersed with some real high points. Its best feature is the way that Prior gives us a feel for what issues these three men might address were they preaching today.

Book Review – One Thing (Sam Storms)

Posted on by
2


Those who are familiar with the writings of John Piper, and in particular, “Desiring God” will inevitably notice significant similarities as they read this book. First off, Storms has been persuaded by Jonathan Edward’s link between glorifying God and enjoying God. This leads him to embrace John Piper’s concept of “Christian hedonism” – living for pleasure in God as the best (and only) way to glorify God.

Storms moves on to discuss enjoying the beauty of God, and uses the book of Revelation as he talks about being lost in wonder. In these early chapters then, Storms succinctly and persuasively champions the cause of enjoying God, and his more accessible style will certainly be appreciated by those who find Piper’s writings a bit dense.

Mid-way through the book, Storms begins to encourage us to see the glory of God in creation. He devotes a whole chapter to help us grasp the immense scale of the universe, without assuming any specialised scientific knowledge on the part of its readers. It will seem oversimplified to some, and this part of the book is generously scattered with quips presumably to help those who balk at the thought of studying science.

In fact, much of the later sections of the book read like typed transcripts of sermons, which perhaps goes some way to explain the occasional digressions (e.g. can God create a stone too big for him to lift?). He has a good array of illustrations and examples which should stick in the readers memory, and his use of Greek mythology to help explain the how joy in God aids the believer’s battle against sin is outstanding. The book closes appropriately with a discussion of heaven and also a brief note on the second coming, which is refreshingly free from speculation about how and when.

Storms deserves credit for bringing such an important subject like this into a format that can be appreciated by a wider audience than those who like to read Edwards or even Piper. If you want a point by point argument for Christian Hedonism, Piper is your man, but if you just want to be inspired to enjoy God as much as possible, then this is the book for you.

Book Review – Receiving the Holy Spirit and His Gifts (Terry Virgo & Phil Rogers)

Posted on by
1

This short book aims to provide an introduction to the subject of Baptism in the Holy Spirit, and to encourage the readers to seek this experience if they have not already received it. Theologically the authors’ stance is that baptism in the Holy Spirit is distinct from conversion and is normally evidenced by speaking in tongues or prophesying. A brief rebuttal of alternative viewpoints is offered, though this is by no means thorough.

Though there are two authors, who seem to write separate chapters, there is no indication of who is writing at any one time, which can make the anecdotes somewhat confusing (has the author two wives?). Apart from this, the style is not too heavy and should be accessible to most readers.

It functions as a study guide, often asking the reader to look up particular passages before commenting on them. After dealing with baptism in the Spirit, there is a discussion of spiritual gifts and the need for ongoing filling with the Spirit. Overall this is a good book to introduce the baptism in the Holy Spirit to those in charismatic or Pentecostal churches. Those who want all their theological questions answering may need to do some additional reading, but those simply hungry to experience God in a new and dynamic way could find that this contains all they need to know.

Book Review – The New International Commentary on Acts (F F Bruce)

Posted on by
Reply

The book of Acts is something of a hermeneutical minefield, due to the many different ideas of how to apply the various practices and experiences of the early church and apostles. Bruce mainly avoids comment on these issues, preferring to simply help us get to the bottom of what the text is saying, and showing how the author achieves his purpose of demonstrating that Christianity was not an illegal or subversive religion. He provides excellent background information on the historical, geographical and political features that provide the setting for the book of Acts. It is also a useful source of information for correlating the biographical information in the epistles with Luke’s account.

Although Bruce is willing to discuss matters of theology, he nowhere attempts to develop a Lukan pneumatology or ecclesiology which is probably a good thing, given how controversial these would prove to be (and in any case it is doubtful that Luke expected his writing to be used in that way). His comments are also fairly terse in passages where a less technical commentary might offer some more devotional thoughts. For example, while Bruce provides background details on all the people and places named in Acts 20:4, he only comments briefly on Paul’s great statement in Acts 20:24. Having said that, where he does permit himself briefly to expound a text, his insights are often profound. I actually found the final section of the commentary to be the most enjoyable, as Bruce attacks some of the petty criticisms of Paul from other commentators who judge him for some of his statements during the trial narratives.

It is in fact often when he is engaging with other commentators that the best of Bruce comes out. He is never overt about his personal faith or direct with the moral or theological lessons he draws out, but as he takes down other arguments he leaves the reader to fill in the blanks. He states that Paul is Luke’s hero, and in places hints that the same could be said of himself.

The NICNT commentaries do a good job of keeping secondary issues out of the main text by making extensive use of footnotes and this volume is no exception. Bruce provides his own translation of Acts, and each section of text is followed with a brief introduction before the comments which are usually on one or two verses at a time. This format means that people studying individual sections can get a good sense of context. As with other NICNT commentaries, the introduction is comprehensive without being long-winded. Bruce tentatively accepts Luke as the author but does not presume to suggest his own date (other than saying it is a first century composition), preferring to summarise the options.

Those who need some quick points of application for sermons or Bible study groups may find that this commentary is too “academic” for their liking. However, for those wanting to wrestle with the text themselves, it gives the firm footing of properly understanding the historical context that is necessary before trying to extrapolate principles for today’s Christians.