Book Reviews In Short and At Length – Free of Charge: Giving and Forgiving in a Culture Stripped of Grace
February 14, 2012
In Short
This is a book that many readers will enjoy “living with.” Volf’s stated purpose for the book is to encapsulate the whole of Christian living within two axiomatic concepts. In other words, what does Christianity really look like when it is lived in a contemporary life? In Free of Charge, Volf’s answer follows two principles – one that flows from the nature of who God is and, by way of extension, another that reveals the heart of the Gospel. According to Volf, the Christian life can be summarized by participating with God in giving and forgiving. Because God’s nature is so bound up in his ability to give purely, forgiveness becomes the backdrop of all of his interactions with a creation marred by sin. If we truly follow, then our lives must mirror such giving and forgiving.
As such, the book serves as a wonderful devotional tool. While it is deeply theological, it is admirably accessible. He does not drown the text in technical writing or lofty language. I have many friends that started reading this book a long time ago. Often, in eager anticipation of their thoughts on the book, I’ll ask how it is going. They always reply, “It is so good, but I can only get so far before I have to put it down and reflect on it.” In this sense, this book is not only a wonderful resource for those that want to practice generosity or forgiveness, but it might just be the kind of reading experience that drives self-reflection in order to help those who struggle with selfish ambition or unforgiving hearts break those chains of bondage.
At Length
In Volf’s own words, the book does four things. First, it is an examination of whether the landscape of Christian perspective can appropriately be viewed through the lens of giving and forgiving. Honestly, while some will have no issue with such a conceptualization, I think there will be many others that will not be ale to fit all of their theological identity under both of these concepts – especially, not the way that Volf visualizes forgiving.
Second, the book is an interpretation of Paul’s theology. This, however, is likely to be a perspective that is widely accessible and acceptable. He confesses that he has not taken any scholarly stance, referencing the recent fighting going on over Pauline discourse (think N.T. Wright and John Piper). It turns out, that this kind of spiritual rumination over Paul may be much needed medicine for the soul. Honestly, though, I’d be surprised if those unfamiliar with theological discourse are not quite able to appreciate the nuanced way that Volf interacts with the primary source.
Third, we get a glimpse into Volf’s academic work on Martin Luther. At every turn in the book, he interacts with Luther on important points of Protestant theology; namely, Luther’s time honored perspectives on grace and faith are explained in the context of practical Christian living. I don’t want to spoil any of the content, but much of Volf’s interaction with Luther has the same freshness that his atypical approach to Pauline theology has. The book is a beautiful demonstration of how deeply careful theological inquiry can impact our every day lives.
Finally, the book was selected by the Archbishop of Canterbury to be used as the church’s official Lenten reflection in 2006. The spiritual formation facet of the book is perhaps best attested to by the fact that I have seen several friends carrying this book around with their Bibles for weeks on end. The book deals with not only the deep things of faith, but also the deep things of life – which, ironically, are not concomitant in Christian writing often enough.
In my estimation, the greatest value of this book is the practical advice it provides on giving and forgiving as spiritual disciplines within the Christian life. I have not seen many other books with a straightforward process for giving and forgiving. Volf provides clearly defined and well thought out processes for each. Consequently, the careful reader can come away with a list of things detailing what pure giving and true forgiveness really look like, as well as a process for disciplining oneself into becoming that kind of pure giver and true forgiver.
I must also confess, though, that there are stories in this book, the stories of real people and real hurt, that tore at my heart. It is, at times, difficult to read, especially if you tend to put yourself in the place of the people in the stories you read. Not once do you read Volf using a petty or trite situation as an affirmation of his points. The issues he deals with are the real issues of humanity, the gut-wrenching issues – and he interacts with them in courage and a true sense of compassion. There is no “feel good” theology going on here.
Perhaps the greatest praise I can give any book, I can give Free of Charge with out qualification. I will come back to this book again. It is worth reading over and over.
Joseph Ratzinger in Communio: Vol I, The Unity of the Church
Eerdmans - 978-0-8028
Get it Here
My thanks to Eerdmans for the review copy!
Before he became Pope Benedict the XVI, he was Joseph Ratzinger; what is not known by all is that he has been one of the greatest Roman Catholic theologians of the post Vatican II era. It is unfortunate, much like the venerable Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, that his time in a significant See has been deeply controversial, marred as it has been by many unfortunate and very public happenings. Indeed, his actions as Pope have often confused and frustrated me.
But I have come to know much more about Pope Benedict on account on the first of what aims to be a three volume collection of essays put out by then Joseph Ratzinger in the massively influential journal Communio. Published by Eerdmans, these are part of a larger series dealing with the “Ressourcement” thinkers within Roman Catholicism. This certainly solidifies Eerdmans as a premier ecumenical publisher and their work in this series is to be greatly appreciated.
This first volume of essays float around the topic of “The Unity of the Church.” The future volumes will deal roughly with “Anthropology” and “Theological Renewal.” Many of these essays are previously untranslated and I must point out how much I enjoyed these translations. Oftentimes I’ve found translations of German theology to sound rough and rude; these on the other hand maintain a warm and learned tone throughout. The essays are all thoughtful, purposeful, and academically serious but none are abstract and could be read by most any thoughtful Christian. This quality, along with the relative brevity of the essays themselves, make for very fast reading, which gave me a sense of accomplishment and allowed me to finish the book quite quickly.
What was also rewarding was that some of my own fears with respect to ecumenical dialogue were put to rest by learning that Pope Benedict has spent time thinking about topics that I’ve wondered whether they are considered at such a high level of authority within Roman Catholicism. For instance he considers in “What Unites and Divides Denominations? Ecumenical Reflections” that it may just be the nitpicking insanity of theologians and bishops arguing about angels and pin heads that keeps us apart; a conclusion that he does not feel is sound; or also, in his essay on the ecclesiology of Vatican II, he explores several ways of seeing the Church; as Mystical Body; as Eucharistic body; as related to the collegiality of bishops; and as the People of God. This resists some who claim that the “body of Christ” vision is a single minded and ideological ecclesiology within Roman Catholicism.
There are many topics covered in this volume, from relations with Jews, discussions on Luther’s theology to an excellent essay about the theology of Hans Urs von Balthasar. Much like the sympathetic and concise readings of Barth and de Lubac by Balthasar himself, when Ratzinger discusses his friend Balthasar one feels like they are let in on a fireside conversation between scholars; a treat to be sure. Ratzinger looks into liturgy and sacred music, justice and religion, economics and the Church and much besides.
In my opinion one thing that the book obviously needs is an index but otherwise I greatly enjoyed this, I look forward to the future volumes, and I highly recommend it for the edification of a divided Church.
Upcoming Reviews
April 27, 2010
In the coming months I am set to come good on review books that have been sent my way. By no means do I hope to overwhelm you the readers with an excessive and unnecessary slew of reviews but all the books I requested I think are pretty swell and I hope that you will be encouraged to look into some of them at least. After this I will return to a more moderate pace of reviews of around 2-4 per month.
From Westminster John Knox I’ve Kevin Vanhoozer’s The Drama of Doctrine and George Lindbeck’s justly famous “The Nature of Doctrine.” I’m hoping to have a couple posts that go off of these two concerning possibilities for evangelism, catechesis and unity in light of their work.
From Baker Academic I’ve received the next two books in the “Church and Postmodern Culture” series; the one by John Caputo and the other by Carl Raschke. This series is ending up slightly different than I expected so they should be interesting reviews. Also I received a great volume edited by James K A Smith and James H Olthuis entitled “Radical Orthodoxy and the Reformed Tradition: Creation, Covenant and Participation.”
I will bring this book into conversation with the next two books that Routledge sent me, namely their soon to be released introduction to Radical Orthodoxy and the accompanying Reader which I already have. I will likely use these three books to perhaps explain a bit more what Radical Orthodoxy, conceived broadly, is and how I hope to work within friendly reach of its program.
Eerdmans also sent me a couple both from last year and from this upcoming batch of new releases. Two books by new prominent Pauline scholars, Michael Gorman’s “Inhabiting the Cruciform God” and Douglas Campbell’s absolutely massive “The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul.” Finally I’ve received the first in what will eventually constitute a three volume collection of essays by now Pope then theologian Joseph Ratzinger comprised mostly of work done for the journal Communio. This volume deals with issues related to Church Unity and I’ve found it a stellar and quick read.
So there you have it, look forward to these coming soon!
2009 Reflections…
December 28, 2009
Readers will know that this last semester has drastically reduced my ability to post. I’ve been pretty weak on regularity until my recent binge with daily Propositions.
Over the short time that I’ve been blogging, blogging has helped me learn to focus my thoughts and hone my (incredibly limited) writing skills. I’ve enjoyed greatly all the interaction and pushback I’ve gotten from readers from which I’ve grown immensely.
I hope I will be forgiven then for allowing Reflections on the past year flow over into 2010. I had late finals and the Holidays have totally cramped my style. I am excited to throw out some of the things that have been rumbling inside my head.
I also hope I will be forgiven for some of the narcissistic perspective many of them will take. There are few things that will make me unsubscribe from a blog than daily spewing forth what are essentially poorly written journal entries. But, being in The Episcopal Church, and considering all that has happened in the last year, I wanted to throw out there some thoughts on what is going on in Anglicanism.
I will certainly make for these reflections to be theological, but I imagine that some will fall back into sentiment and they will have a sense of arbitrarity, for which I cannot apologize. It may seem that at times I will ramble but I hope, especially for our Anglican readership, that my fears and hopes will reveal a bit about the struggles in our Churches to be faithful both to the “gospel” as we perceive it, and to ourselves as a Communion of Churches.
I’ve grown a bit more into the role of a “Traditionalist” in matters of theological revision but I hope that I will never be received as a “Stand Firm” type. I have no pretensions about having the whole of Truth wrapped up and if I say things that are “conservative” or whatever the damn word we want to use, I am quite passionate about living together in diverse minds. But it is the width and nature of and reasons for diversity that is up for question.
Without further ado:
“My Reading and How It’s Affected Me”
2009 marks the first solid year of me reading “academic theology.” I’d read some theology before this but mostly it had been the historical and exegetical work of N.T. Wright and the theology of Walter Brueggemann.
I read a substantial amount of the work of Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. I stumbled through his organized book of essays “On Christian Theolgy,” as well as most of the sermons in “A Ray of Darkness.” I was astounded at his incredibly concise but deceivingly deep account of Christian spirituality “from the NT to St. John of the Cross” in “The Wound of Knowledge.” I came to understand facets of Anglicanism (especially with his two essays on Hooker) that I hadn’t known about in his “Anglican Identities,” I found fresh air in his collection of poems and I got a glimpse into his ability to make wonderfully revisionist yet clearly insightful readings of historical theology in “Where God Happens,” which as it so happens I took to be an excellent primer on Rowans ecclesiological leadership “method.” I felt his introduction to Christian theology was just the book I would give to one to be confirmed or evangelized or an ‘old soul’ who needed to hear just how Christian theology makes any sense or difference. His book on Christ’s “Trial Narratives” also unearthed the hidden ways that we can will to power. I’ve begun but not finished his book on violence, on church history and on “cultural bereavement” and will soon take up his essays on St. Teresa Avila, Modern Theology, Christian devotion, art, Russian theology and literature and the formation of orthodoxy. There are several other books I’m looking forward to reading, he’s a rather prolific author.
All of these were an utter joy to read. I came to get a feel for his style, for his themes, for his perspective and for a deftly compelling vision of how and why to do theology. “Theology,” he says “Moves between the Celebratory, the Communicative, and the Critical styles” – On Christian Theology xiii
From my completely objective and unbiased perspective, the crown of his work that I’ve read so far and the most powerful book I read this year was his essay “Resurrection: Interpreting the Easter Gospel.” It’s a paradigm for how I should like one day to perform theological reflection. It moves almost seamlessly through the three registers of theology he spoke of above, at times fully aware of the historical-critical problems, at other times practically doxological and always conscious of being a work directed to the Church, not simply among theologians.
The Archbishop is acutely aware of our propensity to deceive ourselves into thinking we can control our safety, our identity, our orthodoxy, or even those of other peoples. So the Gospel is often Judgement, Christ is preached to those who condemned him and so condemned themselves. He extends his forgiveness to those who abandoned him and those who betrayed him. And forgiveness is nothing other than the giving of mission and restoration of trust.
Having read even this much of ++Williams’ work it is strange to me that so many find his way of being Archbishop so unpredictable, unstable and dispassionate. He has been nothing if not consistent that he is not interested in the role of condemning and controlling members of the current Communion. But, he also has an intimate understanding of how Christians have come to perceive themselves historically (see his work on Arius as well as on doing Church history). It is incredibly difficult for me not to believe honestly that God has raised up Rowan to be Archbishop at this crucial time. I am so grateful for having chosen him to read in these the formative years of my own training. I have the same feeling I had after having read N. T. Wright’s “Christian Origins” trilogy…”Let’s do that again.” And as I did just that I may run through a couple Rowan books before I move on.
At the risk of lengthening this post to an obscene length, for the sake of keeping on topic I wanted also to mention another book that was paradigm shifting for me but was not a part of my ++Williams regiment. That book is “Hope Among the Fragments: The Broken Church and It’s Engagement With Scripture” by Rev. Dr. Ephraim Radner.
Radner is famous as a central voice in the Traditionalist group of pastor/scholars known as the Anglican Communion Institute and as one who has helped frame the Anglican Covenant. He has also been an incredibly creative and passionate theologian in regards to the Church, especially it’s boundaries and in discerning the “form” of Christ in diverse and sundry members thereof. In addition to this Radner has also contributed to a series of Biblical commentaries that take an explicitly theological tenor. An earlier book of his obviously provides a trajectory for this one which aims to look at how a Broken church can and should reflect theologically on Scripture. Certainly there are few churches as broken as us Anglicans right now.
Though himself a self-styled “conservative,” Radner never comes off as a biblicist. In fact it is difficult to read him as any kind of “Evangelical” conceived along any modern historical way of understanding the term. This is because he reads Scripture Christologically following the famous Anglican-Catholic theologian and influential member of the “Oxford Tractarians” John Keble, who in Tract 89 laid out an impressive vision of Patristic exegesis.
Having set out a case for Christological interpretation Radner begins to reflect on “The Form of Christ” in Scripture and in the Church covering topics ranging from diagnosis of current ecclesiological ills to homosexuality and “bad bishops.” All the while refraining from cheap biblical shots at those with whom he disagrees looking for Christ’s own form in them and in their readings of Scripture.
Keeping in mind Radner calls himself a “conservative,” and that he lays out a “traditional” sacramental reading of heterosexual marriage, it should astound “progressives” as much as “evangelicals” that he argues for the toleration of private practice and conscience in matters of sexual practice provided that the Church’s vision of Holy Matrimony is left unaltered. Not, mind you, because he is a relativist or a closet liberal or “unconcerned with sin” (or some other boneheaded conservative phrase) but because he can see Christian faithfulness even in committed homosexual Christian couples!
This book really shook me up. First, it challenged me to begin to learn to read Scripture, especially the Old Testament, Christologically. I have long been captive to a narrow view of modern historical-critical exegetical methodology but this book, along with certain philosophical considerations, has convicted me that I’ve been reading Scripture incompletely, narrowly and even biggotedly as I poured scorn on so-called “metaphorical” readings of Church fathers and even of New Testament authors.
It also confirmed in me a conviction that I need to “commit” to this Anglican mess. I must confess that even still, being a “johnny come lately” to this group of churches, finding in it a home and room to breathe, but also a gun to my head forcing me to “pick sides,” I’ve been hesitant to feel settled. I’ve often got a sideways glance to the East as fundamentalist evangelicals and liberal revisionists fight this to the bitter end. But this book stresses the virtue of “staying put” in a church. In this he is much like Hooker: Submission to a fixed law, even if perceived to be wrong, is preferable to chaos and rebellion and can even be the ground for greater growth.
Finally, and I’m pairing this with my previous thoughts on Rowan, I’ve been encouraged that our current struggles are not going to be solved by “a Pelagian ratcheting up of the theological task” (Radner, 202), as if we can just nail down this or that dogma or wing of the Church we can force the stability that we all so eagerly desire. Other Christians, even and perhaps especially those with whom we disagree strongly, cannot be seen as people and identities to bring under our control. The form of Christ in their own life must be allowed to be seen.
The Qur’an: One Protestant’s Lacking Review
September 29, 2009
As with any document that claims to be revelation from a divine source, the Qur’an concerns itself with divulging the meaning of existence within the cosmic context. Like all holy books, its basic presuppositions find their locus in not only the actual existence of a deity but also in the desire of said deity to communicate with its creation. Within the broader socio-religious context, the Qur’an claims to be the successor and final authority in the tradition of monotheistic religions coming out of the Middle East begun by Judaism and continued by Christianity. The Qur’an is seen by Muslims as the miracle that ratified Muhammad’s prophetic ministry: a revelation delivered to a devout man born fatherless in the lower caste of a tribal culture.[1] As such, the Qur’an follows the Judeo-Christian tradition in expounding the will of the transcendent God, Allah, to his creation in order to reconcile fallen humanity to himself. This review will examine the interplay between Allah, humanity, and prayer as themes within the Qur’an.
The Qur’an reveals Allah to humanity in a style informed by eastern traditions. Namely, while Allah is personally concerned for humanity he is seen primarily as transcendent by Islamic traditions. Consequently, humanity does not know Allah through personal intimacy, but rather through Allah’s self-revelation in the Qur’an and a strict adherence to the righteous lifestyle it prescribes in the Five Pillars. While Islam has a rich theology which stems from the ninety-nine names used for Allah, four attributes in particular seem to be communicated about Allah in the Qur’an. First, Allah is the one true God, the Creator of all that exists. Second, Allah is the sovereign ruler of all that he created. Third, Allah is the righteous judge of all, believing and non-believing Muslims alike. Fourth, Allah is truly merciful and understanding to those who will confess him as the one true God and Muhammad as his prophet.
The Qur’an proclaims that Allah “created all things and gave them due proportions” (87:2). His power to create is a demonstration of his status as the one true God (6:102; 65:12; In verses which echo the biblical account of creation in Genesis[2], Allah created all things perfectly in six days (32:7), divided the heavens and earth (21:30), put the sun, moon and stars into orbit (21:33; 41:37), and caused the sun to give light to the day while the moon gives light to the night (10:5; 6:96). Additionally, humanity is the pinnacle of Allah’s creation (45:13; 55:3-9; 67:2). These claims are foundational to the Muslim understanding of Allah’s essential attributes. The picture the Qur’an paints of who Allah is thoughtfully extends concentrically to notions that prove logically necessary.
If Allah is the one true God, and he is the Creator of all that exists, then it logically follows that Allah is also sovereign over his creation. Allah’s is a sovereignty that first encompasses the created order (18:26). He has perfect control of the universe, space, time and all their workings (25:2; 35:13; 2:255). He has also ordained the existence of living creatures (11:118), kingdoms and tribes (2:107; 3:189; 5:17-18; 9:116), and even personal affliction (6:17-18; 10:107). Indeed, he directs all of the personal affairs of his people (9:51). Interestingly, Allah has also directly guided the evolution of his prophets’ messages. The revelation, mistakes and subsequent corruption of Allah’s message within the Jewish and Christian traditions were all directed by the hand of Allah (6:106-107, 148-149). Ultimately, however, the outcome of all the created order and even those who submit to Allah are all an outcome of his volition (7:178-179; 10:99; 11:118-119; 16:93; 32:13).
Two attributes of Allah that are set in tension against one another in the Qur’an, much like the biblical picture of God, are judgment and mercy. The judgment of Allah is preeminently fair (95:8, 6:73). In fact, the predominant idea surrounding Allah as judge is his ability to set everything to rights. Islam teaches that a final judgment in which every person’s account is settled will occur. Each, believer or unbeliever, will be accountable to Allah for their behavior (25:25-26; 40:15-17; 2:123, 254; 22:56; 3:9, 25). The view of Allah as preeminent judge is juxtaposed with the proclamation of his mercy, sometimes within the same passage (6:12). Often, the reach of Allah’s mercy is as ubiquitous as his sovereignty (38:66, 4:110; 39:53); and in many regards, the mercy of Allah seems far more inclusive than that expressed in the Bible (53:32; 14:7; 35:45). Allah, then, is communicated as a divine ruler, the Creator of everything that is lavish with his mercy and fearsome to those who will not submit. While the sin of humanity is pervasive and an affront to Allah, the Qur’an communicates a high anthropology.
Similar to the account of creation, the Qur’an contains an account of the fall of Adam that runs parallel to the biblical account in many ways. However, in the Qur’an Adam and Eve beg Allah’s forgiveness after their fall (7:23), and he grants them forgiveness, punishing them only with mortal life on earth (7:25). The theological outcome of this account is a high anthropology that concedes humanity’s proclivity for sin (20:124), but rejects any kind of doctrine of “original sin,” stating instead that every person has a natural inclination toward faith and repulsion from sin (95:46; 49:7). The Qur’an lucidly explains that humanity urges itself on to evil (12:53), that sickness dwells in their hearts (2:10), and resentful when good befalls it (70:19-21). Nonetheless, humanity’s ultimate purpose and lifelong endeavor is the pursuit of wisdom and obedience, which the true believer pursues with joy and the unbeliever is incapable of comprehending (22:46).
An interesting paradox occurs within the Qur’an concerning the will of humanity and Allah’s sovereignty, though. While the Qur’an is careful to articulate the sovereign rule of Allah, its high anthropology places each person firmly in control of their obedience to or rejection of Allah. One account of Allah’s interaction with Satan demonstrates that only humanity will be given the discretion concerning which company to keep, to choose a path of evil or righteousness (15:33-50). Even those who pursue paths of destruction are offered respite for a time, so that they might come to the true knowledge of Allah (35:45). In fact, the God who “governs the destiny of all things” will grant help to those who choose to pray and give (22:41-43). Here, and in many other places, the relationship between Allah and humanity emerges. Allah is sovereign and directs the affairs of creations, but it is the will submission of the heart which garners his favor and attention. While all five of the Great Pillars are essential elements in demonstrating submission to Allah, prayers prove a consistent conduit of favor in the Qur’an.
Prayer, as prescribed in the Qur’an, is a daily ritual intended to bring the person’s whole being into alignment through the remembrance of Allah (6:162; 20:14; 29:45). It is intended that daily prayers, the Salaat, be observed throughout a person’s life (19:31; 70:23, 34). Those prayers are to take place three times throughout the day: morning, evening, and the middle of the day (24:58; 11:114; 2:238). There are several stipulations within the Qur’an concerning the ritual of prayer. First, the person praying must perform ritual cleansing with water (4:43; 5:6).
Prayers must be said facing the Ka’ba, and must be observed on time every day (2:125, 143-150; 22:26; 4:103). The prayer should be begun in a standing position, with noteworthy exceptions for riding or driving (2:238; 3:39; 4:102; 2:239). The person praying physically symbolizes the submission to Allah that should be occurring in the heart by first bowing, then prostrating (4:102; 22:26; 38:24; 48:29). Again, unusual circumstances warrant amending the physical ritual during prayer (2:239).
Though the ritual seems to possess a large portion of the Qur’an’s teaching of prayer, there is a call to adopt a contemplative attitude as well (4:43). It is not uncommon for the reverence expressed in prayer to be accompanied by mental recall of one of Allah’s attributes (23:2; 17:111). This of course is intended to be a centering exercise based on the person’s condition or needs at the time of prayer. Prayer is firmly set aside as a time to honor and reflect upon Allah (6:162; 20:14; 29:45). Even mentioning other names during prayer times is seen as an act of rebellion against humanity’s need for God (72:18; 29:45). Ultimately, the purpose of prayer in the Qur’an is to remember and glorify the greatness of Allah, his mercy, and humanity’s dependence upon him (1:1-7; 20:14; 17:111; 2:45). One other unique element of prayer within the Qur’an is its frequent pairing with almsgiving. Often, when Muslims are called to pray, they are also called to give to the poor as a demonstration of a heart that recognizes human dependence on Allah and communal responsibility for those who pray together (2:43,83,110; 4:77; 22:78; 107:1-7). Such expressions of practicality often accompany rituals of devotion within the Qur’an.
Consequently, it is these types of rituals, specifically that of prayer, which bridge the gap between a rebellious human population and a transcendent, holy God. While many themes of the Qur’an have been left unexplored here, these three seem to encompass the greater intent of Muhammad’s message to Muslims. Namely, God (Allah) does exist, and he is the sovereign creator of all that exists. Though he transcends all of creation, he is a merciful and forgiving God to those who submit, and a fearsome and perfect judge to those who will not believe. The crown-jewel of his creation, humanity, teeters perilously on the edge of repentance. While all of humanity is capable of and desirous of living well, many have given way to their passions and follow a path of destruction. However, Allah has sent Muhammad with instructions about how to live a life of submission to God. A life that begins with confession and continues in demonstration of faith through holy living.
[1] Some claim that Muhammad was illiterate, and that the beauty of the Qur’an is an evidence of its divine nature. It is a disputed point, but Muhammad was an unlikely source for the Qur’an, illiterate or not.
[2] However, in the Qur’an all living things, including humanity, were brought forth from water (21:30).
Happy Day
August 13, 2009
More presents have arrived and are soon to arrive on my doorstep from generous publishers.
I’ve decided to go with a theme and guide some readers through what I feel are some of the basic “movements” in “post-modern” theology, to the pathetic extent that I know and understand them, and relate it to eccesial practice.
So besides the books already mentioned, I will be reviewing “The Postmodern God” – A theological reader, and “The Blackwell Companion to Postmodern Theology.” Both are from Blackwell-Wiley Publishing (easily one of my favorite publishing houses). So a big thanks to them!
Also, Caitlin at Baker Academic, always supplying surprisingly good books, has sent me the three volumes (so far published) in the “Church and Postmodern Culture Series” – James K A Smith’s “Who’s Afraid of Postmodernism: Taking Derrida, Lyotard, and Foucault to Church,” John Caputo’s “What Would Jesus Deconstruct: The Good News of Postmodernism for the Church,” and Carl Raschke’s “GloboChrist: The Great Commission takes a Postmodern Turn”
And lastly, Baker was also so kind as to send me “Radical Orthodoxy and the Reformed Tradition: Creation, Covenant, and Participation,” which, you guessed it, critically engages the RO theological streams by way of Dutch Reformed theology.
All in all, I think we will have a lot of fun, and perhaps challenge a skeptic or two to not be so down on “postmodernism” as well as challenge a few Emergent types who feel that all theology is is individual predispositions.
The Greatest Books Ever?
October 30, 2008
For at least three of us, the series of books by the Anglican Bishop of Durham, Nicholas Thomas Wright, called “Christian Origins and the Question of God” have been absolutely foundational to our understanding of the world behind the New Testament, as well as to how we understand Jesus and his relation to the Gospels. It has also considerably helped us understand where Paul is coming from (his next book in the Series will be on Paul).
So far the Series includes, in order: “The New Testament and the People of God (NTPG),” “Jesus and the Victory of God (JVG),” and “The Resurrection of the Son of God (RSG).”
In NTPG, N T Wright sketches the world of Judaism at the time of Jesus and Paul. He quotes extensively from original sources which include heavy doses of Josephus, Philo, and the many pseudographs from the period.
In JVG, he provides a picture of the so-called “Historical Jesus.” In incredibly creative ways Wright weaves together his picture from NTPG and the Gospels, revealing a Jesus that is both strange and more alive.
In RSG, he takes 800 pages to speak to the understanding of “resurrection” in the OT, the larger Greek/Roman world, intertestimental Judaism, and in the NT and other early Christian writings such as the Apostolic Fathers.
I would hardily recommend all of these books for serious study by anybody who wants to get in touch with the foundations of the New Testament. If you would rather try out a more accessible version of two of these books first, Wrights “The Challenge of Jesus” is based on JVG, and “Surprised by Hope” is an elaboration built off of RSG. Both worthwhile reads for the non-scholar. At first they are a rather daunting read, each book gets longer and more detailed, yet I cannot overexagerate how profoundly these books have shaped my (our) understanding of Jesus and the NT.
Here is a link to a site where a young scholar, Andrew Perriman gives a rather fantastic synopsis of each of the chapters for all three books. If you feel that you do not have the time or ability to read the originals, or you just want to brush up on the ones that you have read, this site is invaluable.
Tony Hunt
jstambaugh
Shawn Wamsley
