A. T. B. McGowan, The Divine Authenticity of Scripture

I am way behind on my posting, and this one has been on my desk for well over a month now. I've been reading a lot of books lately that I have really appreciated. And this one is no different. In the very contested area that is the evangelical doctrine of Scripture, McGowan makes what I believe to be a very valuable and important contribution. First, he sets out to situate the current evangelical landscape with regard to Scripture, and particularly inerrancy, in its historical context, focusing especially on the rise of liberal theology and biblical criticism in the nineteenth century and on the conservative reaction in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. His purpose is to show that the doctrine of inerrancy was formulated in a very particular landscape. He further asserts that while if pressed he would choose an "inerrantist" position over an "errantist" one, he presses the discussion in a different direction, proposing a reformulation of the doctrine and a retrieval of the term "infallible" as a robust alternative. He then concludes his study with studies of how the doctrine of Scripture should relate to confessions and also how it relates to preaching and the proclamation of the Word.

There are a number of reasons why I think McGowan's contribution is to be particularly commended. First, I think it lends a very important non–North American perspective to this debate, and firmly and repeatedly demonstrates how the errantist vs. inerrantist debate may be raising a false dichotomy, or at least asking the wrong question. And as he demonstrates, this isn't incompatible with many of the more nuanced inerrantist positions, in which the notion of "error" is carefully qualified to fit with the setting and intention of the Bible's authors. Second, I think McGowan's restatement of the doctrine helpfully emphasizes Scripture's role in the Trinitarian economy of communication, and emphasizes the need to move it from a prolegomenon to an item under the doctrine of God in theological statements and considerations of doctrine. (Incidentally, the new Evangelical Free Church in America Statement of Faith does just this, moving the statement on Scripture from first to second.) Another helpful facet of McGowan's book is that he proposes a constructive doctrine of Scripture based around the word infallibility, and is careful to mine the work of past evangelicals, especially Herman Bavnick, showing how others have approached the doctrine and how it fits into their larger theological program.

Much more could be said about this very interesting book. I need to continue digesting a number of his arguments, but I will certainly keep this book close at hand as I continue to reflect on these extremely important theological questions.

Fell off the blogging planet . . .

Well, except for one little book review, I've been silent on my little blog for what seems like an eternity. But let me assure you, I haven't abandoned it. I've just been really busy. I just finished copyediting a book on early Judaism that included a lot of excerpts from the relevant texts (mostly OT, Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Josephus, and Philo), which I greatly enjoyed. And I'm finishing up a huge typesetting project today: an intro textbook for the Hebrew Bible with a ton of images, which is taking way more time than I expected. But both have been great projects. I haven't stopped reading, but just haven't had time to blog. My twin boys (who are now almost 18 months old) have also keept me plenty busy, especially now that Lucas is walking and Paul is not far behind. So that's all to say I've got a few book reviews I need to get up here: Kevin Vanhoozer's Drama of Doctrine being the big one. Let me just say, what a great book. Vanhoozer is such a solid theologian, and this book was worth every second I spent on it. I've also got A. T. B. McGowan's book on the doctrine of Scripture to review.

I am also in the middle of some study on Paul, mostly for my own personal edification. I'm reading Walter Wangerin's novel Paul, for one narrative take on Paul's life. It has certainly been worthwile reading. I've also been reading various introductions on Paul's life and travels, as well as a number of the relevant articles in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. My first big book on Paul is Eckhard Schnabel's Paul the Missionary, which I just started. So more to come on that book, and on Paul in general. There certainly is no shortage of books on Paul, and I've come across some really good ones.

Well, that's it for now, but more to come in the coming days and weeks. Thanks for sticking with me.

Ken Duncan, In the Footsteps of Paul

Thanks to Thomas Nelson for the review copy. In the Footsteps of Paul is a beautiful gift book that chronicles the life and ministry of Paul. The book is a mixture of photographs interspersed with quotations from Acts, brief reflections from Duncan, and quotations from well-known authors. Following the Acts narrative, the book weaves together the story of Paul's life both in word and picture. The images—mostly of landscapes and sites, but sprinkled with artifacts, and artwork—are of exceptional quality, and give life to the narrative. A number of the scenes are truly breath-taking, and make this book worthy of a place on a coffee table, in addition to its other merits as a worthwhile introduction to Paul's travels.

The carefully chosen excerpts from Acts and Duncan's brief comments help to narrate Paul's story, chronicling his movements around Palestine, Asia, and Europe, highlighting major events and important interactions. The narrative is also augmented by well-chosen quotations from biblical scholars such as Ben Witherington, N. T. Wright, and F. F. Bruce, and inspirational writers such as Henri Nouwen, Max Lucado, and Thomas Merton.

In all, the book is beautifully assembled and laid out. The pictures are stunning, and the text helps bring Paul's journeys to life. As Duncan says in his introduction, "I knew [following in Paul's footsteps] would challenge me in my own walk with God. . . . Paul was all in for Jesus." Through words and images, Duncan helps us to see Paul the person, a follower of Christ, dedicated to the mission God laid before him. While I would look elsewhere for a more rigorous introduction to Paul's life and thought, this book makes for a great primer on Paul, and a worthy visual companion to other studies, at times instructing and at times challenging us to follow.

J. R. R. Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings

I love this book. It is without a doubt one of my favorites. Tolkien is a master of words, and when this is wedded with his fertile imagination and his deep faith you end up with a powerful work. And it only gets better with rereading.

I am always struck by the beauty and depth of the world he creates, the reality and dynamism of his characters, and the epic scope of the events. It feels like every page of this voluminous work is built upon a foundation of volumes of history. I also love the powerful themes of temptation and failure, virtue, hope, and redemption. It is truly a theological goldmine, a volume illumined with a "Christian imagination" that propels the action. Simply said, I love it!

McKnight, A Community Called Atonement

In this great little book on the atonement, Scot McKnight lends his capable hand to this very important doctrine, navigating the often contested waters with ease. McKnight asserts the importance of atonement both as a doctrine of the church but even more so as a practice of the church. Does atonement work? He asserts that yes, it does. It can and should create a community transformed by Christ's work, and transformed to further that transformation in the world.

McKnight lays out a nicely rounded out picture of the atonement by situating the doctrine in the larger Christian story, by investigating the biblical and historical roots and developments, and by asserting the continuing validity of the theory and even more the praxis of atonement.

I think this relatively short book is a great entry point into this important field of discussion, and beyond that it is a robust statement of how this doctrine stands at the core of Christian faith and life. A number of helpful avenues are explored, such as atonement as the work of the missional God and creating a missional community. I also think he takes a very even-handed approach to the modern criticisms of penal substitution, showing how the doctrine can be sometimes distorted by some of its defenders, but also emphasizing how it can express an essential aspect of our faith. Last, I think his own summary of atonement as identification for incorporation proves to be a helpful way of approaching this doctrine.

This certainly doesn't constitute a full review of McKnight's broad and far-reaching project, but I hope it gives some of the flavor of this great little book that can help the church to rethink what it means to be an atoned-for and atoning people.

I. Howard Marshall, Aspects of the Atonement

Based in part on his 2004 F. F. Bruce lecture at Highland Theological College, this great little book is an important and even-handed look at the atonement. Its four chapters entail three major foci. The first two chapters deal specifically with the doctrine of penal substitution through a careful look at its two constituent parts, with a careful study of the penalty for sin in chapter 1 and a sustained look at substitution as it relates to the atonement in chapter 2. Throughout these chapters, Marshall carefully takes into account recent critiques of the doctrine as well and weighs them against a careful investigation of the biblical basis. Through this study, he demonstrates the importance of the doctrine of penal substitution but also how it could be better formulated to avoid excesses and misrepresentations. Thus, he carefully critiques and also defends this important doctrine. He looks specifically at issues of violence, wrath, and suffering, as these often come up in critiques of the doctrine. (A proper trinitarian understanding of God and God's action plays a central role here.) In all, he forcefully demonstrates that the fundamental ideas behind the doctrine of penal substitution are important and essential facets of a doctrine of atonement.

In the third chapter, Marshall sets out to investigate how the resurrection of Jesus relates to atonement. While much thought rightly focuses on Jesus' death as the location of atonement, too often this is done without giving necessary attention to how the resurrection likewise plays an important role. Through a sustained look at Romans 4:25 (Jesus was delivered over to death for our sins and raised to life for our justification), Marshall shows how the resurrection can and should play a helpful and central role in our thinking about atonement, especially as it is connected with the them of new life, and how it should be seen as an essential part of God's work of justification.

In the fourth chapter, Marhshall puts forth reconciliation as a helpful overall scheme for thinking of the atonement. While reconciliation and its attendant word forms are not prevalent in the New Testament, Marshall shows how related themes of forgiveness and peace, which play an important part in the NT, point toward reconciliation as an important and helpful way of thinking about what the atonement accomplishes.

I greatly enjoyed this very readable little book. Marshall is very sensitive to modern critiques of the doctrine of penal substitution, and both shows the value in the critiques and also the enduring value of this historic doctrine. For any who are interested in this ongoing debate, I highly recommend this book. It is also very valuable for its second half, with a great discussion of resurrection and of reconciliation. In all, this is a great exposition of the doctrine of the atonement.

More on the Millennium: Why?

I must admit that one of my principal objections to the idea of a millennial kingdom has always been that it seems so pointless. It is a doctrine that is only taught specifically in one place (Rev 20), and even there the precise reading is contested. It is consistent with some other themes and teaching in the Old and New Testament, but it certainly isn't required by other discussion of the end times elsewhere in Scripture. So this has always raised the question for me of why there should be a millennium. Why not go with a simple (essentially amillennial) approach that understands Jesus return to be immanent, with his return inaugurating the final judgment, the resurrection to the life to come, and the new creation. And I must admit, even in my recent study on the topic of the millennium, and my own movement toward a "premillennial" position, this has been a nagging objection.

But in my continued reading, I've read what G. E. Ladd has to say about the Apocalypse in A Theology of the New Testament (the discussion is at pp 630-31 in the first edition, and quotations come from there). And there, he discusses very helpfully how we might begin to understand a millennial reign of Christ--he puts some logic to it.

(Now I admit that we don't certainly only believe things that we fully understand, and just because I don't see the reason for something doesn't mean that God can't or shouldn't do something that way; and some things we read in Scripture are that way--God reveals to us his ways and plans. So don't read too much into my objections. But in this case, it is of a bit more validity because the question arises of how we should read Rev 20 in relation to the rest of the NT and of the Bible, seeking to shape the reading of one based on the other, so a fuller canonical understanding of eschatology certainly comes into play at some level.)

Anyway, on to the logic of the millennium. Ladd writes, "There should be no objection to the idea of such a temporal kingdom in principle . . ." And he goes on to explain. First, the idea of a temporal reign (that is, Christ reigning within history and not only beyond it) fits with the fact that Christ is currently reigning now in the church age. There is now a sense in which that reign is not fully revealed or realized, but it is still a reality. And this is one of the theological reasons Ladd points to for thinking about a millennial reign: it is the consummation of Christ's reign on earth, the realization of that which is now only partly manifest. And this reign is millennial (and thus only temporary in some sense) because Christ then turns over his glory and sovereignty to the Father in the age to come. (I admit that there is a certain logic to this, in light of various biblical discussions about the end, but I need to do some more reflection on the trinitarian implications of this, including the idea that Christ is in eternal and final subjection to the Father instead of an eternal coregnant.)

The second logical and theological reason Ladd explores for the millennium has to do with God's justice. The millennial reign of Christ will be a time when Satan is bound and the social environment will be "as nearly perfect as possible." But at the end of this time, Satan will be loosed and will again deceive the nations. Thus, the logic for God's justice goes something like this. Some may say that humans are at least in part not to blame for their sin and their harness of heart due to the environmental and societal factors that come into play. But this objection will be truly and finally demonstrated as false as the millennium demonstrates the true wickedness and hardness of the huaman heart. Ladd writes that "in the final judgment of the great white throne every mouth will indeed be stopped and every excuse voided, to the vindication of the glory and the righetousness of God." In a sense, the millennium is the final proof of God's justice, and provides the backdrop for God's final judgment of all people for all time.

While the logic may not "require" a millennium, it helps make some sense of what God is about. It is certainly food for thought.

Revelation and the Millennium

The EFCA has recently revised its Statement of Faith (see my earlier comments here). One of the major modifications was the inclusion of "premillennialism" in the statement. I must admit that I initially met this inclusion with some skepticism--do we really need to enshrine that particular belief in our statement, especially considering the number of Christians holding varying opinions.

Our church (Oxboro Ev. Free Church) is going to be looking at the changes to the statement in the coming weeks, so I thought I'd begin doing some homework. And though I've studied and read about Revelation and issues surrounding the Millennium before, I've never really delved deeply into it, and never really come to any opinion on it myself, even a provisional one. And I figured this would be a good time to get working. So I pulled a number of books off my shelves and got to reading. At first, I was struck by the breadth of the views I was finding. It seemed that each position had some positives and some negatives.

So I sat down and read Revelation from start to finish, essentially non-stop. (I must say I highly recommend this, especially after perusing an introduction or two to get your bearings.) And was struck by how powerful the words would have been to its first audience, Asian Christians facing persecution. It seems we all too often forget that they are the adressees of the letter! I must admit that this doesn't easily and quickly solve any of the thorny and complicated exegetical issues of the book, but it does immediately and powerfully open up the main thrust of the book: God is holy, mighty, powerful, the Savior! He was and is and is to come. And despite how things may look at the moment, he's got the whole world in his hands, and his judgments are just. We can expect some tough times, difficult persecutions, maybe even death for his name. But don't be fooled--God is on the throne, and he is coming again to vindicate the righteous and to set the world right.

So there's a thumbnail sketch of Revelation. It is easy to see why this book has inspired so many songs, poems, and prayers. (Think Milton, for one easy example.) But what about the Millennium? Like I said, I didn't come up with any easy answers to the thorny questions. But. After a lot of reading (from commentators like Robert Mounce in the NICNT to Craig Koester to Ben Witherington, from the NT theology of I. H. Marshall, and from theologians like Donald Bloesch and Wayne Grudem), I am more and more convinced that while I may have some type of affinity with an amillennial position (more for aesthetic reasons than anything else, I think), I keep being lead toward premillennialism. Though it is also abundantly clear that this is not an obvious road to take (a commentator as responsible and mature as I. H. Marshall essentially dismisses premillennialism out of hand in his NT Theology). And right now, the most clear and convincing piece of the argument goes back to where I started in my exploration, thinking about the original audience. Amillennialism and Postmillennialism may seem like equally viable options now, two millennia later, as we look over the past and possible future. There's a church age, that may be somehow related to the millennium (amillennialists would say it has been and is the "millennium" and postmillennialists would say something like it is becoming or will become the millennium). But, what of the original authors, who didn't have that church age behind them. In fact, one of the clearest and probably most secure pieces of NT data we have is that the NT authors didn't expect a long and extended "church age." They expected Christ's return at any moment. In Revelation, for instance, just turn the page from Revelation 20 and the discussion of the millennium and you get to Revelation 22: Come Lord Jesus! And the same expectation permeates Paul, the Gospels, and the other NT writings as well. Jesus is coming again; soon! While this may not be a totally secure argument for premillennialism, (and while it argues more persuasively against postmillenniallism than amillennialism) it sure makes good sense of the data in a very natural way.