My friend Dee Dee Warren (who owns the largest orthodox Preterist site in the world) has put together a page of reviews of Preterist and Postmillennial books. My review of Matthison’s Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope is included.
Heaven Misplaced
Douglas Wilson introduces his case for “historical optimism” by asking that the reader willingly suspend unbelief (10). Tolkien was once asked if he believed Middle Earth was real, to which he replied: “one hopes.” Wilson’s Heaven Misplaced is a call to suspend unbelief. Unbelief in what? Unbelief that the knowledge of God will cover the earth before the Second Coming; unbelief that Jesus Christ will be the desire of nations before the end of this world. If one who is by nature a product of American evangelicalism is willing to suspend unbelief even to read such a short book, then it is at least possible that though not persuaded by the end, he may reply: “One hopes.”
New Covenant Theology and the Decalogue, Part IV
Introduction
I have attempted to make some general observations, as well as offer some commentary on Barcellos’ critique of New Covenant Theology entitled In Defense of the Decalogue. In continuing our review/summary, the Introduction offers some general characteristic of NCT. Contextually, NCT is a “movement within conservative, Evangelical, and Calvinistic Baptist circles (11).” With the rise of Calvinistic thought in the SBC, it is probable that NCT might become a haven for SBC refugees. D.A. Carson and many others find NCT intriguing, if not compelling.
NCT avoids traditional CT emphasis on continuity and Dispensational emphasis on discontinuity. Focusing on passages like Jeremiah 31:31-34, NCT advocates conclude that in the New Covenant there is a new law, “which is higher and more spiritual than the Law of Moses” (11). This seems to be a perplexing conclusion. Is the main difference between the Old and New Testaments that the New is more spiritual than the Old, thus making the OT insignificant when it speaks of ethics?
NCT speaks of the new law as the Law of Christ ( following I Cor. 9:21 and Galatians 6:2). Thus, the Law of Christ of Christ replaces the Mosaic Law. Jesus incorporates selective passages from the law of Moses, but not its whole. In my mind, not even the strictest theonomist would have a problem with this statement. Bahnsen, for instance, spends a considerable amount of time in his Theonomy in Christian Ethics detailing the discontinuities between the law of Moses and the law in the New Covenant. For Bahnsen, if the New Testament does not rescind an Old Testament law, then the Mosaic Law continues in the New Covenant. NCT advocates would dispute this claim by stating that Jeremiah 31 abrogates the OT law with a new law that indeed (and this is important) incorporates some Mosaic laws, but dispenses or abrogates others. Still, theonomists or other CT advocates see no problem with the abrogation of some of the Mosaic Laws, in particular what CT theologians call Ceremonial Laws (see Ken Gentry’s Covenantal Theonomy).
NCT interpreters see Matthew 5:17-20 as a crucial passage in understanding what occurs in the ethics of the New Covenant. They argue that the OT law “undergoes a redemptive-historical shift in application (12).” Again, Amen! Bahnsen, Jordan, and many others would echo this view. Klineism would welcome it with greater intensity than most Covenant theologians. In fact, I wonder how much commonality there is between the NCT and Klinean CT (sacraments aside, there is lots of similarities in their view of ethics).
Finally, Barcellos concludes with words of praise for the NCT effort to pursue a rigorous exegetically-driven theology, but yet his concerns remain. The following chapters will seek to offer a response to NCT, while defending the “perpetuity of the Decalogue” (13).
Book Review: Crossing the Threshold of Hope
{Disclaimer: I am not sure why I need a disclaimer, but for those who may be thinking I am on the Road to Rome for reading this book , I assure you that I am a happy Protestant and will be to the end of my days.}
In the fifteenth year of the papacy of John Paul II, Vitorio Messori posed a series of question to present pope of Rome. These questions and answers form the content of this 230-page book.
In light of the Auburn Avenue Conference, 2010 on the Necessity of the Reformation—which, was a scathing critique of Roman and Orthodox theologies and practices–I thought I’d pick up and read this unique book on my shelf for educational purposes. I confess I learned quite a bit more than I expected from John Paul II.[1] The questions range from the authority of the pope in the Catholic world to the Catholic answer to religious pluralism.
John Paul II was a highly trained scholar. He contributed unique philosophical insights, as well as insights into marriage. Many of the questions centered on deep existential concerns such as “If God Exists, why does He appear to be hiding?” and “Is there really hope in the young?”
Concerning the deep philosophical questions of the existence of God, John Paul II argued not only on the basis of the Thomistic arguments, but he also details a long line of philosophical traditions in answering this question proving his vast knowledge of the Christian history of philosophy.
In many ways, John Paul II answered these philosophical questions with the same precision as many evangelical apologists in our day. I find this similarity perturbing, since in my opinion classical apologists have in many ways capitulated to the Roman Catholic apologetic methodology, yet they criticize Roman Catholicism with great vigor. Van Tillianism is a distinctly Reformed response to the apologetic of the Roman pope, as well as to the evangelical courtship—perhaps marriage—to these classical arguments, which cherish neutrality.
The pope expresses great hope in the youth of the day. His papacy was spent largely in the presence of youth stirring them to love the church and to not fall prey to the moral corruptions offered in the world. The repercussions are many, especially in relationship to the abortion issue; a topic that is very high on the Roman Catholic agenda.
Conclusion
Evangelicals and Catholics share much in common. Apart from the Creedal commitment, we also share many of the same objectives on the moral reformation of our society. We should join in their efforts to bring about moral reform (one reason why I signed the Manhattan Declaration). However, we should be cautious with the cult of Mary made explicit in the latter part of this book, and John Paul’s deep conviction that Christ will save this world through Mary. This is biblically preposterous! May we not fall prey to the Roman liturgy trap.
[1] I prefer to use his name, since I do not have any allegiance to his role as pope of the Roman Church.
Review of Infant Baptism: What Christian Parents Should Know by John P. Sartelle
My Background
Sartelle’s little book had been on my shelf for years. One day I decided to pick it up and work my way through it in an hour or so taking notes along the way. Having read many books pro and contra infant baptism, I was curious about Sartelle’s approach to the topic (though I had my suspicions)
The book published in 1985 offers some helpful insights into the unfortunate fact that Protestants do not know why they baptize their babies. Even though infant baptism is the majority position in the Church of Christ today, one cannot help but feel pity for naive paedobaptists who are confronted by zealous Baptists with what appears to be “clear evidence” against baptizing babies.
My understanding of infant baptism before becoming a Presbyterian and even in my first couple of years as a Presbyterian was that there was only one line of defense for infant baptism, which came from the circumcision/baptism connection of Colossians and perhaps a random reference to the Gospels where Jesus addresses little ones, and of course, a quick reference to I Corinthians 7:14 where Paul calls children of covenant parents, holy. In my seminary days, Richard Pratt’s lecture Why we Baptized Children opened up new doors of understanding infant baptism. But it was not until I read Lewis Bevens Schenck’s The Presbyterian Doctrine of Children in the Covenant that my eyes were opened to a diversity of arguments and differing opinions on the efficacy of baptism, the role of baptism in the life of the Church, the vast contrast between southern and northern Presbyterians on baptismal regeneration; add to that, the peculiar Kuyperian language of presumptive regeneration, and then with the rise of Federal Visionism, we have the development of Calvinian (to use Nevin’s language) high sacramentology. With all this said, for the baptists or the young paedobaptist converts who are attempting to understand Reformed sacramental theology, the task ahead is great indeed.
General Book Review
Personal context aside, Sartelle falls into the traditional southern Presbyterian camp. His emphases on circumcision as the Old Covenant sign and baptism as a the New Covenant sign is a standard connection in the Reformed tradition. Further, he notes that God has a special affection for the covenant household, as expressed throughout the Old and New Testaments. God, he writes, ” has always had a special regard for the families of His people (13).”
Significant to Sartelle’s argument is the continuity between covenants. According to Sartelle “every doctrine taught in the New Testament has its roots in the Old (11).” Further, noting the circumcision/baptism fulfillment theme, the author concludes that “we follow in the footsteps of Abraham circumcising Isaac when we bring our children to be baptized (11).”
The latter part of the book answers some common questions about infant baptism. Does infant baptism save? What about a child raised in a non-Christian home? The author addresses and answers several other questions.
Conclusion
Sartelle’s book offers a standard introduction to paedobaptism. For the credobaptist who has never heard of why the Reformed Presbyterian tradition baptize infants, this is a good introduction, which can be read in 30 minutes.
Would I recommend this book?
It all depends who is asking. This particular understanding of infant baptism represents a very specific group of Reformed paedobaptists. As long as the reader knows that there are differing views, this is a fine giveaway to those interested in the subject.
What other books would you recommend?
As follow-ups, I would recommend Gregg Strawbridge’s A Case for Covenantal Infant Baptism & Why We Baptize Babies by Mark Horne
Book Review: Covenantal Theonomy by Kenneth Gentry
As an advocate of the theonomic (theocratic) thesis for almost ten years, I am continually perplexed at the attempts of Kline’s disciples to override the theonomic agenda. Like all other theologies, theonomy is not a monolitihic position. The Jordanians and Bahnsenians have gone their separate ways, though both affirming the necessity of God’s law for modern society (for some differences read James B. Jordan’s Through New Eyes).
In his Covenantal Theonomy, Kenneth Gentry responds to one of Meredith Kline’s most fervent disciples, T. David Gordon. Gentry’s response focuses on Gordon’s premise that the Bible is insufficient to address issues pertaining to the civil sphere. Gordon argues that theonomists have abused the law of God by perpetuating the Mosaic Law in the New Covenant. Gordon argues that the law had a distinct purpose and it was meant for a distinct people, the theocratic nation of Israel. However, following the Bahnsenian tradition, Gentry argues persuasively that the law is part of the immutable character of God. Since God does not change, his laws remain the same in every time and place, unless it is rescinded by a New Covenant imperative (the sacrificial laws, as a clear example). Further, Gentry argues that the Scriptures provide a clear case for the accountability of non-theocratic nations to the law of God. Even nations who did not have the disctinct Mosaic laws as their own were judged for violating them.
Unique to this discussion is the exegesis of Matthew 5:17. Gentry spends a considerable time defending the theonomic understanding of this text. This passage is crucial to the theonomic position, though theonomy, as Gentry reminds, is not dependent exclusively on it. The theonomic thesis is “rooted in the presupposition that Scripture is the self-attesting word of God, which is not to be dismissed by man (170).” Thus, Paul and the other New Testament writers assume a theonomic thesis.
The reader will see two clear assumptions as they compare Gentry and Gordon. Gentry is firmly grounded in the Westminsterian tradition. That is, the main confession of the Reformed Presbyterian faith is on the side of theonomy on this issue, as Gentry ably expounds. Gordon, on the other hand, holds no such commitment. He affirms–as his mentor Kline– many times that the “assembly” and “divines” were wrong to assume such continuity between covenants. Thus, confessionally, Gentry and the theonomic tradition are in good standing.
Gordon, though in error in most of his assumptions, brings a freshness to the debate. He raises several crucial questions. Is it legitimate (as I have argued elsewhere) to take exceptions to your tradition’s central confession? Have theonomists been too literalistic in their understanding of civil laws without considering the trajectory and redemptive outworkings of biblical history? Has theonomy minimized the biblical idea of “wisdom” and “maturity” in speaking to areas of the civil sphere? My own perception is that the modern day theonomists (or “theocrats” as Jordan prefers) have matured in their view of biblical ethics. They have filled in the gaps which our early forefathers were not able to do.
Further thoughts:
a) For a more recent expression of the theonomic movement, see James B. Jordan and Peter Leithart’s lectures at the Biblical Horizon’s Conference in 1991.
b) As you read through Gentry’s response, note the level of research in the footnotes. Theonomists have in the words of Gary North “foonoted opponents to death.”
c) If you do not already have Greg Bahnsen’s masterpiece Theonomy in Christian Ethics, you can purchase it from Covenant Media.
Review of “The Vindication of Jesus Christ” by James B. Jordan
The book of Revelation is a book that “often results in confusion,” says author James B. Jordan. In the The Vindication of Jesus Christ: A Brief Reader’s Guide to Revelation, James Jordan seeks to clarify a book often biblically mistreated. Calvin and Luther stayed away from Revelation, as well as many other authors throughout the centuries. In our own day, converts to Christianity neglect Genesis through Jude to find solace in Revelation. This, of course, leads to all sorts of exegetical abominations. From flying helicopters in John’s vision to modern scenarios of warfare, Revelation in the hands of a novice is bound to be treated with utmost disrespect.
On the other hand, Revelation in the hands of an able and biblically-saturated theologian is precisely the reformational agenda. James Jordan is one of the world’s leading scholar on Revelation. He has written on it, he has done 204 lectures on it, and he knows Genesis through Jude like no one else alive today.This makes a Brief Reader’s Guide an invaluable addition.
Jim Jordan argues that Revelation is filled with interpretive clues; clues that facilitate the reading of often complex passages. For instance, one of these clues is that in Revelation “angels are portrayed as bringing final judgment on creation.” This clue affirms that the creation being judged is the First or Old Creation. Since this is the case, the reader can know with certainty that the book was written “before the final destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem in AD 70.” How do we know this? Because the Old Creation (Old Testament) was “superintended by angels, while the New Creation is superintended by redeemed humanity.” Jordan makes no theological assumptions without leading the reader to specific biblical passages to prove his conclusions.
What is unique about this book?
In the preterist camp ( I am using preterism as synonymous with partial-preterism, which is orthodox) there are many who build a case for an early dating of Revelation (pre-AD 70) on the basis of Josephus and other extra-biblical books. Jordan sees this as helpful and useful, but not necessary to make the case for an early dating of Revelation. In fact, he sees the book of Acts as essential in understanding the Revelation. As he writes:
In Acts, we routinely see the Romans defending the Church. Revelation predicts, however, that in the near future Rome, the “Beast,” will also turn against the Church. Revelation extends the history in the book of Acts down to the end of the Old Creation.
The reader will also find a helpful discussion on the “Literary Structure of Revelation,” “The Fundamental Symbols,”The Historical Context of the Trumpets and Bowls,” The Centrality of the Kingdom and the Centrality of Jesus as the Standard of Measurement.” Jordan will define terms, which will allow the reader to more fully recognize and understand their usage in the text.
Anyone interested in the significance of numbers in the book will find it immensely interesting that Jordan does not see 666 as having anything to do with Nero Caesar. He sees it as a reference to false religious leaders of the day (certainly a new preterist interpretation of this Jewish number).
Finally, for those who have read David Chilton’s Days of Vengeance, this short study is an improvement on some of David’s deficiencies.
Revelation is a Divine Liturgical Service.The Church is central to God’s purposes. Her worship is the fear of evil nations who reject Messiah’s claims. Revelation is the wilderness period of the Church from AD 30-70. We live in the day of the conquest of the land.
Helpful Links:
Free Audio Lectures by James B. Jordan
The James B. Jordan Complete Audio Collection (including his 204 lectures on Revelation)
Buy “The Vindication of Jesus Christ: A Brief Reader’s Guide to Revelation”
Book Review of “Charles Hodge: A Look at the Life and Witness of the Great Princeton Theologian”
It is safe to say that the glory days of Reformed theology in the United States were most clearly present at Princeton Seminary. Dr. Robert W. Anderson– in his short biography— provides a look at the great Princeton theologian Charles Hodge.
Hodge was born in 1797 and died in 1878. The book is a summary of Charles Hodge’s life as a family man, his friendships, his afflictions, interests, and some of the Presbyterian controversies of his days. The author depends heavily on Hodge’s son, A.A. Hodge, who wrote a biography of his father in 1880.
Princeton Seminary—today a haven of liberalism—was the academic dwelling place of Dr. Alexander and Dr. Miller, who together with Dr. Hodge formed the “golden age of Old Princeton.” Hodge’s life as a Princeton professor left a deep impression on the Princeton community. In the famous Sabbath Afternoon Conferences, where professors would meet students for prayer and discuss issues related to the Christian life, one student said of Charles Hodge:
Dr. Hodge’s was the voice which all waited to hear…few went away from those consecrated meetings without feeling in their hearts that there was nothing good and pure and noble in Christian character which he who would be a worthy minister of Christ ought not to covet for his own.
Dr. Hodge married the great-granddaughter of Benjamin Franklin. His life was one of beautiful affection for his family. Even though being geographically distant from his family in order to enhance his theological training, Hodge maintained a deep relationship with all his children and his wife, Sarah Bache. His letters are filled with deep intimacy and affection.
Hodge’s abilities as a theologian never led him to undermine Scriptural authority, as was so common in his day. His critics mocked his commitment to Scriptures. One critic wrote:
It is enough for Dr. Hodge to believe a thing to be true that he finds it in the Bible…Dr. Hodge has never gotten beyond the Bible. It contains every jot and tittle of his theology.
Hodge was so respected that when he died on June 19, 1878, “all the stores in the town were closed and all businesses suspended in token of respect.” This certainly is a taste of the reputation of the godly. Both in life and in death God was praised by this saint.
His famous Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans was written during the most challenging days of his life. Beginning in 1833, Hodge “endured a period of severe physical suffering and confinement resulting from lameness in the thigh of the right leg.” It is thus uniquely appropriate that when Hodge focuses on Paul’s phrase “thorn in the flesh” in his II Corinthians commentary, he writes that “…even under affliction, the( apostle) was enabled to rejoice in them.” Undoubtedly, Hodge’s “thorn in the flesh” reflected a similar apostolic attitude.
Charles Hodge was the guardian of truth. He rejected any theological innovation that undermined the sufficiency of Christ and His word. As A.A. Hodge observed concerning his father: “That Christ is what he is set forth in the Scriptures to be, and that the Bible is the infallible word of God were facts inseparable from his personal consciousness.” It is no wonder that Dr. William M. Paxton, preaching at Hodge’s funeral, concluded by saying:
From our heart of hearts we render thanks to that God who made him (Hodge) what he was, and blessed the church with his presence for eighty years.
Book Review of “Why the End is not Near: A Refutation of End-Times Hysteria”
Why the End is Not Near! This is the emphatic declaration made by Duane Garner, Associate Pastor of Auburn Avenue Presbyterian in Monroe, LA. It is certainly a bold statement to make in light of the current majority opinion. If you are looking for a concise book to be read in sixty minutes defining and describing the eschatological system known as Dispensationalism, look no further! Duane has summarized the strange history of Dispensationalism beginning with a dream, then to Darby, and Scofield.
The book presents an alternative. Pastor Garner offers an explicitly biblical response to this dangerous eschatology that has paralyzed the modern church. This alternative is an optimistic view of the future based on the promises of Yahweh throughout Redemptive History and fulfilled in the Messiah, the Christ, who ushered His Kingdom in the first century.
What’s unique about it?
There have been many large books refuting Dispensationalism; John Gerstner and Kenneth Gentry come to mind. However, their works are large tomes for the seminary student or the curious layman who has at least eight hours to invest, and further, it assumes certain knowledge of the subject. Helpful and extraordinarily insightful as they may be, these books are not for the simple. Duane’s book is for the layman who is new to the Reformation faith and stumbled upon this controversy he never knew existed. As Garner points in the book, there are some out there who believe that there are no other alternatives to the Rapture frenzy.
The other uniqueness of this book is that it touches on the political consequences of an eschatology of defeat. Pastor Garner pursues vociferously the inconsistencies of Dispensational advocates. On the one hand, they cry out for political justice. On the other hand, they are prophesying the doom of the land; a retreatist posture.
What is Dispensationalism?
Dispensationalism, as the author describes, “… is a system defined largely by its view of the end of the world and can hardly be described apart from it.” (15) With such a defined pessimistic worldview, one wonders what keeps them from selling all they have. Actually some have! Fortunately, the majority do not live consistently with their basic premise.
What’s so popular about this System?
Many have discovered the inherent flaws of this system. Their abuse of passages like Matthew 24 and Revelation are so blatant that it is hard to treat it with any seriousness. Yet, they enjoy the majority of popularity in this country. Michael Horton once wrote that every American has at one time been a “Teenage Dispensationalist.” The story goes that as they come to greater understanding they quickly move away from it. Dispensationalism is a distinctly American eschatology. Garner writes:
The popularity of the doctrine has permeated popular Christian thought so completely that an entire generation of evangelicals and fundamentalists is not even aware of any other way of reading the Bible, and is entirely unfamiliar with any opposing view of eschatology. (17)
The system boasts of some mighty eloquent and persuasive proponents. This may explain much of the popularity. Our only hope is that this small book will spark the interest of some to re-consider their position. Hal Lindsey’s books have made millions, but it has also deceived millions. How much false prophecy makes a false prophet? If this question were taken seriously, the answer would emerge forcefully. But people are merciful, and as long as an ideology fits their imaginative criteria, there is no such thing as a wrong theory.
Conclusion
Garner offers an eschatology of hope and not of fear; an eschatology that is not dependent on newspaper exegesis, but on the text of Scripture. The Psalms declare that the glory of God will cover the earth in time and history. This vision of the progressive increase of the glory of God throughout the nations is what led to the great missionary revivals of past centuries. It was the answer then, and it is still the only answer now. As Garner concludes:
Only with an understanding that the kingdom will one day cover the earth can the church consistently take on any task that will have any lasting value. (57)
Review of “Biblical Economics: A Common Sense Guide to Our Daily Bread”
Biblical Economics is a must read for any Christian. In this book, Dr. R.C. Sproul Jr. has declared that the Bible is emphatic about a particular view of economics. The author argues that Biblical economics is beneficial to all of society. Its primary intention is not to bury the poor in a sea of debt, but to give the poor an opportunity to reap the benefits of mass production. R.C. does not treat the Bible as a textbook for every single economic decision we will make, but he does see it as useful for understanding economic issues. Christians are called to build a “social order that reflects the glory of God.” This is only possible in a society where citizens are both productive and aware of God’s law-word.
The book avoids radical approaches to economics; for instance, radical materialism and radical spiritualism. In avoiding the isms, exploring the Biblical view of economics can turn into a God-honoring exercise. Filled with an optimism of God’s work of redeeming this world, R.C. writes that: “Redemption, in the full biblical sense of the word, is both physical and spiritual.” This Kuyperian dynamic is found throughout the book. The world according to God is created as “very good.” The fall cannot hold back what God has intended to accomplish through Christ, and that is the restoration of civilization under King Jesus.
But what does a society look like under biblical economics?
Nations prosper because profit leads to surplus capital and that leads to tools and that leads to production. When this pattern is seen “the common man is allowed to have luxuries once owned only by nobles.” Beyond that, the “poor reaps the benefits of mass production.” The Puritan work ethic is at the center of this biblical understanding of economics. It is this reviewer’s opinion that America still reaps the benefits of our forefather’s commitment to working ethically as Christian citizens in the land.
Modern Christians are afraid of the idea of profit. They believe that it does harm to the little guy, but in reality profit gives the possibility for the little guy to build wealth. Government’s role in welfarism has only led to catastrophic decline. The government seeks to regulate what the Bible gives no authority to regulate. Wealth and welfare are responsibilities of the family and the church. When the bureaucratic agencies interfere in businesses it only hinders progress.
Sproul spends much time articulating on the real culprit of inflation: The government through the fiat printing of money. This book, written over a decade ago, is even more pertinent today in light of the gangster-type mentality of the present Federal Reserve banking system. The more the Federal Reserve goes on denying the real source of this economic recession, the longer it will take to recover.
The final chapters of the book focus on a biblical definition of poverty. All Christians speak of poverty, but rarely do they define it. Poverty is not an absolute term; there are different kinds of poverty. In this section, Sproul responds to those on the Christian left and their absolutizing of poverty.
What is the role of government in our economy? What does the Bible say about equity, debt, capitalism and socialism? Though the Bible does not speak in particular about every detail, its principles are clearly laid out throughout redemptive history. R.C. Sproul make understanding this difficult topic a possible quest for the layman and scholar alike.
Possible Objections
Some may immediately criticize R.C. for treating the Bible as a textbook. My answer is that if a textbook means offering principles for living in such a time as this, then that is a fair criticism. I am well aware that Israel lived in an agrarian system and most of us do not in this day and age. However, it is within that agrarian system that God offered principles and wisdom to be applied in all of life and in every society.
Some may react by saying that capitalism is greedy and full of faults. To that I respond, what system honors labor more than capitalism? What system honors the family more than capitalism? What system allows the passing of wealth to future generations than capitalism? What system allows the gospel to prosper to the nations of the earth more than capitalism? What system made America the most prosperous nation on earth? What system has most been associated with Christianity throughout history than capitalism? As Luther has said: “The abuse of something is not an argument against its proper use.”
Some may object that the Bible is only a spiritual book and not meant to address fleshly concerns. The only answer I can give is to take the critic to the heart of redemptive history. Our history is God’s history, which He created as very good.
Personal Note
My interview with Dr. R.C. Sproul on his book can be found HERE.