Books Read in 2012: No. 9 – The Moody Handbook of Theology

By Clark Goble | May 18, 2012

Title: The Moody Handbook of Theology
Author: Paul Enns
Completed on February 18, 2012

I’ve had this book in digital format for quite some time and had the pleasure of pulling it out as required reading for a recent class. It proved to be a valuable resource. Paul Enns provides readers with a reference text that breaks down, defines, and explores all the various branches of theology. He accomplishes this by first identifying and the breaking down the five major divisions of theology: Biblical Theology, Systematic Theology, Historical Theology, Dogmatic Theology, and Contemporary Theology. Each of these divisions represent  a major section of the text. Enns first summarizes and then critically examines all of the various approaches and opinions concerning these branches of theology.

By breaking these main divisions into their smaller components, Enns successfully makes an enormous subject approachable. It should be pointed out that Enns was not attempting to create a non-biased look at all the branches of theology. Rather, he critically examines those views that he finds inferior. If the reader is looking for a purely non-biased primer on theology, this text will not be sufficient.

TwitterWordPressFacebookMySpaceStumbleUponEmailGoogle GmailShare

Why My Fellow Christians Frustrate Me On Twitter

By Clark Goble | May 16, 2012

I love Twitter. I find it much more enjoyable than other forms of social media. It’s short and it’s sweet. Plus, no one ever sends me tweets trying to get me to play Farmville. However, my fellow Christians, I’ve had enough with your lack of Twitter etiquette. Here’s a list of the things you do that are frustrating me:

Endless Self-Promotion: You wrote a book, that’s awesome. It’s also pretty cool that you have a blog. But you don’t have to tweet about it five times every hour. Put the link to your website on your profile. Tweet when you write a new blog post. That’s cool, but I want to see you promote Jesus more and you less. Okay?

Flaming: Twitter is a wonderful place to share opinions and exchange ideas, thoughts, and etc. But we all need to watch our tone at times, especially when criticizing other Christians publicly. Remember that Twitter may not be the best forum to “speak the truth in love.” At 14o characters, we are often left with blunt truth and no love. I recently watched in dismay as a fairly intelligent pastor accidentally offended T.D. Jakes via a tweet. From where I was sitting it was pretty obviously a product of Twitter’s limited content. From where T.D. Jakes was sitting it was simply hurtful.

You Follow Me Just to Drop Me: This actually infuriates me. It happens all the time. I get followed by a Christian with a book, website, blog, radio show, or ministry and I follow back only to be dropped a week later by the person that initiated the whole thing. I must be honest, if you’re following me just to add to your numbers or to get me to buy your book or for any reason other than you find what I say interesting – don’t bother. It’s rude.

Automated Direct Messages: You’re not fooling anyone. When I follow you and immediately get an automated “thanks for following” direct message, I know you didn’t write it for me. It’s the equivalent of getting a form letter. It will never appear to be personal and I will almost always resent it. I’m trying to think of a single automated message that I thought was well done … nope, can’t do it.

My brother (@brewologist) tweets about beer. He writes a weekly beer-column for the newspaper that has become fairly popular. The last time I checked he had well over a thousand followers. Here’s what I’ve noticed about his beer crowd. They’re not trying to sell anybody anything. They follow one another because they share a particular interest in all things beer. They review different brands and share tips and brewing techniques. They seem fairly polite even when they disagree with one another. They encourage one another all the time by saying things like, “Hey thanks for the tip!” or “Nice review last week!” Basically, they are enthusiasts gathered around a particular interest. It’s fun to watch. It makes me want to know more about beer.

Shouldn’t the Christian community on Twitter resemble the beer-drinking crowd? Should we be enthusiasts gathered around our particular interest in Jesus Christ? We should be more encouraging to one another. We shouldn’t view one another as just a market to peddle our brand, but rather as fellow disciples of Jesus Christ. Our tweets should ring with the celebration of our salvation. When we disagree, we should enter into debate cautious of twitter’s limitations and an awareness that others are watching us. Our tweets should make non-Christians want to know more about Christ and the Bible.

Shouldn’t they?

 

TwitterWordPressFacebookMySpaceStumbleUponEmailGoogle GmailShare

Books Read in 2012: No. 8 – Banned Questions About the Bible

By Clark Goble | May 15, 2012

Title: Banned Questions About the Bible
Author: Christian Piatt
Completed on February 15, 2012

When I stumbled upon this book as a free download to my kindle I was fairly pleased. It looked like it would be right up my alley. Bible, questions, answers … can’t miss, right? Wrong.

The premise behind the book is actually a noble one. Christian Piatt’s goal is to ask all of the questions that got him kicked out of Sunday School as a child. As a student of the Bible (and a Sunday School teacher) I would agree that tough questions should be asked of the text. In fact, if your Bible study class doesn’t encourage questions than I would recommend you find a new Bible study class. In this I agree with Piatt completely, however, I disagree with his execution.

My first observation is that the title of this book is slightly misleading. “Tough Questions”, “Discouraged Questions”, or “Questions to Frustrate Your Bible Study Teacher”, all might of worked … however, Banned Questions About the Bible? Who banned them? What happens if you ask one of the banned questions? Does a band of rogue, fundamental, haters that interpret the Bible literally swing down from the ceiling and cut out your tongue?

As I read the book, its title began to make sense to me. Piatt’s book is written from an extremely liberal point of view with the implication being that orthodox, fundamental Christianity has banned his questions because it has no adequate answers for them. I’m sorry, but that’s hogwash. Piatt parades out a handful of scholars to answer his questions and each one seems to share a liberal perspective. Thus the questions (and the answers that follow) are all geared to advance a particular agenda rather than to engage Scripture in an honest attempt to derive an answer.

A much better (and entertaining) method would have been to ask questions of a wide array of theologians from both the conservative and liberal branches of theology. Answers could have been presented in a debate fashion that left the readers to decide for themselves which answers best reflected Scripture.

As it stands, however, Piatt’s book asks some fairly interesting questions and leaves the readers with some highly inadequate answers.

I don’t recommend this book.

TwitterWordPressFacebookMySpaceStumbleUponEmailGoogle GmailShare

Books Read in 2012: No. 7 – Interview With an Exorcist

By Clark Goble | May 10, 2012

Title: Interview With An Exorcist
Author: Fr. Jose Antonio Fortea
Completed on February 6, 2012

I actually picked up this book after a fairly interesting discussion concerning exorcism in one of my classes. The range of opinions regard possession and exorcism in my class ranged from those who all suspected it was bunk to those who wanted to buy the whole Exorcist movie lock, stock, and barrel. I tend to fall somewhere in the middle. I do believe in demon possession although I do not believe the assertion that believers indwelled by the Holy Spirit can be possessed. I also believe that possessions can fall into the category of “self-inflicted” in that the more a persons believes it can happen to them the more likely they are to experience the symptoms.

Reading this book was an attempt on my part to simply learn more about possession. Of course, most books on the subject are written from the perspective of the Catholic Church while Protestantism tends to ignore the subject all together.

I found this book to be engaging and interesting. Of particular value was the author’s treatment of Angels, Demons, and the existence of evil. Also of interest is Fr. Fortea’s explanation of the difference between religion and magic:

While religion is defined by adoration, magic is defined by dominion or control over supernatural forces or entities. It does not matter whether these forces are good or evil; a witch or sorcerer seeks to harness their power. In magic, one is not dealing with the transcendant, since God by His very nature is omnipotent and therefore unable to be dominated. As such, one is dealing with powers that, no matter how powerful that may be, can be dominated by a technique.

I believe Fortea’s words are highly relevant in an age that has seen a renewed interest in New Age and Pagan faiths. He also admirably explores subjects such as sin and temptation with great eloquence and insight.

I found this book to be a wonderful resource and consider it a valuable addition to my library.

 

TwitterWordPressFacebookMySpaceStumbleUponEmailGoogle GmailShare

Open Theology PART 5: The Concept of Time

By Clark Goble | May 8, 2012

By default, an acceptance of Open Theology requires the believer to accept a concept of time where the future does not yet exist. This means that “open theists must reject the view of time that is held by the majority of physicists and that held by many philosophers of time, namely, the B-theory (also “static” or “tenseless” time)” (Cuthbertson, 2005, p. 78). This theory of time holds that there is “no ontological difference between the past, present, and future [and] that the temporal change we all experience is relegated to a psychological anomaly” (Cuthbertson, 2005, p. 78). The B-theory of time stands opposed to the A-theory, which posits that temporal changes are real, and Presentism that suggests the past has ceased to exist and the future has yet to exist – leaving only the present (Cuthbertson, 2005, p. 78).

At the present time there may be no way of knowing which of these theories of time is the most accurate, however, I would suggest that the B-theory of time seems the most Biblical. Consider this, as temporal beings mankind can only remember the past, experience the present, and anticipate the future. God, however, is atemporal as He exists outside the boundaries of time. It is hard for temporal beings to imagine, but the Bible declares that God fills Heaven and earth (Jeremiah 23:24). God is omnipresent. He is everywhere. If the B-theory of time is correct, this means that God exists in the past, present, and future alike with no respect to the passage of time. This would explain how God can boldly exclaim how His plans will unfold in the future. It is a vision of God that is both Biblical and awesome in power. Open Theology’s vision of God simply does not account for His work in the past, present, and future.

Source
Cuthbertson, M. R. (2005). Time, the “open acquittal,” and divine omniscience: Two internal problems with open theism. Westminster Theological Journal, 67, 75-83.

TwitterWordPressFacebookMySpaceStumbleUponEmailGoogle GmailShare