Book Review: The Christian Atheist by Craig Groeschel
Publisher: Zondervan, 2010

Author Craig Groeschel coins the term “Christian Atheist” to denote a believer who isn’t living his or her life in a way that exhibits that belief. Far from judgmental, this book is an exhortation for the reader to experience a fullness in their relationship with God. Groeschel uses several anecdotes from his own life to explore such weighty topics as shame, love, prayer, worry, and evangelism. Groeschel’s work reads almost like a biography documenting his own journey from Christian atheist to maturity in faith.

The goal for this book is to encourage the reader to strive for and embrace what Groescel refers to as “Third Line Faith.” Groeshell paints the picture of a Christian who crosses three separate lines on their road to spiritual maturity. The first line denotes a Christian who believes in the gospel of Christ just enough to benefit from it. The second line represents the Christian who has matured enough to have the desire to contribute to the Kingdom of God as long as it is comfortable to do so. The third and final line represents the Christian who believes so devoutly in the gospel of Christ that they are willing to give their entire life in service to it.

I don’t want to reveal too much because my hope is that you will read this book. I highly recommend it to all Christians who seek to grow and mature in their faith. Personally, I had a couple of “light-bulb” moments as I read this book; specifically when reading Groeschel’s chapters on forgiveness and worry. This book encompasses enough subjects that any believer who reads it should be able to identify their own obstacles on the road to spiritual maturity.

I’ll be adding this book to my list of highly recommended titles.

Clark

Book Review: A New Kind of Christianity by Brian McLaren
Publisher: HarperOne, 2010

In past reviews of Brian McLaren’s books I have always attempted to hold my criticism back a little. This is due in large part to not wanting to harshly judge a fellow Christian in a public forum. After reading A New Kind Christianity I am no longer concerned with holding back. I suppose this is because McLaren is also no longer concerned with holding back. In the past, McLaren has always been hard to pin down.  His opinions are vague because he will never make a claim of truth in what he writes. He has said that what he writes is merely a contribution to the ongoing “conversation” we humans are invited to engage in about God and seems to think that the moment someone claims an actual truth regarding God the conversation is muffled. The problem is that McLaren seems to apply his relativist outlook to the rock solid truths of the Bible leaving us all swimming around in a sea of uncertainty.

In A New Kind of Christianity McLaren comes as close as he ever has to showing his cards. In this book he denies hell, the fall of man, human depravity, and seems to think the greatest Christian minds throughout history have all been reading the Bible in the wrong way. McLaren submits that for millennia Christians have been reading the Bible through a faulty Greco-Roman world view. He claims that this worldview has led us all to come to fundamentally wrong conclusions concerning Jesus’ role in our lives. Thank goodness McLaren has come along to save us from the false teachings of the greatest minds the world has ever known. While McLaren doesn’t explicitly state it, if he is correct concerning the things he writes, than the likes of the apostle Paul, Saint Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and C.S. Lewis have all been wrong. McLaren’s claims reek of arrogance.

Rather than reading the Bible through our faulty Greco-Roman reading glasses (according to the author, these glasses lead us to read the Bible as a constitution that reveals too much truth), McLaren suggest we should read it as an ongoing conversation. The most attracting aspect of this “conversation” is no doubt that it will never lead us to a certain or definite conclusion. What McClaren has done is invent a new way to read Scripture due to his inability to juxtapose the God of the Old Testament with the Savior of the New Testament. McLaren submits that the Bible is evidence of the evolution of mankind’s thought processes. In the Old Testament, when man’s thoughts were the most primitive, God was painted as a violent and cruel God that no savvy Christian such as McLaren could ever worship. After a few thousand years, Jesus was portrayed in a much different light because thought had evolved to the point that mankind could imagine a God that was closer to the truth. McLaren takes this theory far enough to imagine a future where Christians will imagine a God that is even more perfect than Christ. In his future, Christians (and God) are vegetarian, earth worshiping pacifists who throw up in their mouth a little when they remember those barbaric Christians who laid the foundation of the church. It seemed to me that McLaren’s God of the future is very much like McLaren himself. McLaren’s book is one of the grossest forms of idolatry I have ever witnessed another Christian commit. Because he is unable (or unwilling) to accept God as He is revealed to us in Scripture, McLaren resorts to recreating Him in his own image. It is the ultimate form of humanism and arrogance.

Personally, I’ll join the early church fathers and fundamental Christians over the last two millennia who wished to understand the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as revealed by God Himself in the Holy Scriptures. McLaren’s teaching in this book are so far removed from traditional fundamental Christianity that it is virtually indistinguishable from atheism.

Christ taught that the world would hate us because of Him. This was evidenced in the church fathers who gave their lives to promote the Gospel. It is witnessed to today in various parts of the world where Christians are persecuted and killed for their beliefs.

In this book, McLaren spits on the memories and sacrifices of those Christians and sides with the world. He disregards the revelation of God Almighty and creates a disgusting idol.

Book Review: Five Views on Apologetics, edited by Steven Cowan
Publisher: Zondervan, 2000

Cowan’s purpose in presenting his Five Views on Apologetics is to provide the reader with a “side by side” view of the varying apologetic methodologies so that one may make up their own mind as to which method is correct (Cowan, page 8). Cowan classifies the apologetic methodologies into five separate categories; classical, evidential, cumulative, presuppositional and reformed epistemology. The editor then attempts to accomplish his self-assumed task by allowing a contributor who represents each of the five categories to make a case for their unique methodology. After each apologist completes his presentation, the other contributors are provided the opportunity for rebuttal. While the content of this book is valuable, I do have a couple of quibbles.

The first problem with this text is the layout. While I appreciate that the contributors were afforded the opportunity to respond to one another, I feel that each of the five methodologies should have been fully presented prior to the rebuttals. For instance, on page 56 Gary Habermas begins his rebuttal to William Lane Craig’s take on classical apologetics by pointing out that it has much in common with his own evidential approach. This comment is made before the reader has read Herbermas’ essay and can fully grasp what evidential apologetics is. This problem could be addressed by simply reading the chapters out of order and in retrospect I wish I would have done so.

My second complaint with this book concerns taxonomy. The editor himself seems to suggest this is a problem when he says, “these five apologetic methodologies do not constitute an exhaustive list of apologetic approaches” (page 20). With that in mind, one wonders if Cowan’s choice of five methodologies was somewhat arbitrary. Couldn’t he have divided apologetics into six or seven categories with justification? My concern; however, isn’t that Cowan didn’t differentiate enough between methodologies, but rather that he could have focused more on their similarities. The classical and cumulative approaches seem to be very similar in approach to evidential apologetics; as Cowan observes on page 18, “The careful reader will no doubt note that this [cumulative] method belongs in the same broad family of methods as does the evidential (and perhaps classical) method.” Likewise, the reformed epistemology belief that it is reasonable for a person to believe something without evidence seems to place it in the same family as the presuppositional method. Cowan could have easily presented the material in this book under two wide classifications; an evidential approach verses a presuppositional one. My concern is that the reader will become more concerned with adhering to one of Cowan’s five camps than with presenting the best apologetical argument in a given situation. In all fairness, this issue is addressed somewhat in Cowan’s conclusion beginning on page 375 when he summarizes the agreements and disagreements between the five methods.

Despite the above criticisms, this book is highly valuable and should be recommended for newcomers to the subject of apologetics. Before reading this text, I had no idea of the complexities concerning apologetic methodologies and was unaware of the current debates between apologists. Despite the fact I have a natural affinity for the evidential methods of apologetics, I was extremely impressed with John Frame’s essay on the presuppositional method and his examination of how unbelief effects a person’s perception of the truth (beginning on page 210). Frame and the other contributors do a good job of stretching the reader’s perceptions of apologetics. In sum, will help prepare its reader to give an answer to all who ask and for that it is valuable.

Title: Why We’re Not Emergent: By Two Guys Should Be
Authors: Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck
Publisher: Moody Publishers, 2008

Review: Those that are not familiar with the Emergent movement within the church have not been paying much attention to the book shelves lately. Authors like Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, and Dan Kimball have made the movement a topic of much conversation, and controversy, in the last few years. In a nutshell, the emergent movement argues that the modern church needs remodeled in order to be relevant in the postmodern world we live in. Those within the movement favor a more missional approach to “doing” church. I’ve enjoyed reading some of the books of those authors within the movement and have a genuine affinity for some of them; however, my criticism has always been that, far too often, advocates of the movement seem to throw the baby out with the bath water. In the movement’s zeal to make the church ng relevant, it often goes overboard and abandons the very things that have made the church great. In favoring “right living,” emergents often forget the importance of “right thinking.” I’ve often asked why we can’t have both and have criticized the emergent movement for trying to “escape” the church as we know it.

I realize I have done a poor job of explaining the movement and all the things it has come to stand for, but I will save that for another post. For now, I will simply review the book.

Based on their age and demographics, Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck are two guys that would seem to be ripe for picking by the emergent movement. DeYoung is the pastor if a church across the street from Michigan State University that Kluck happens to attend. This is perhaps the biggest strength of the book. It provides a reaction to the Emergent Movement from both the pulpit and the pew. DeYoung provides an intense scriptural rebuttal while Kluck’s response to the movement seems to come more from the gut. The combination of arguments works splendidly. The authors manage to put words to many of the critiques I have had of the movement and manage to do so in a loving and humble way. Kluck’s chapter on why he doesn’t want a cool pastor and DeYoung’s examination of the seven churches in the Book of Revelations are must reads.

I recommend this book to anyone who considers themselves a fan, or member, of the movement. I sincerely hope it serves as an inspiration for those within the Emergent Movement to reign it in a little and return to traditional orthodoxy. I also recommend this book to anyone who may be looking for ways to refute some of the more outlandish claims of the movement.

Highly Recommended

Title: Love & Respect
Author: Dr. Emerson Eggerichs
Publisher: Thomas Nelson, 2004

Review: In this Focus on the Family book, Dr. Emerson Eggerichs makes a very simple proposition; most of the problems between a man and his wife are communication gaps. Furthermore, these divides can be overcome if the couple can embrace the true meaning of Ephesians 5:33, “Each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.” While this may seem like easy concepts to understand, Dr. Eggerichs explains the common ways men and women fail to grasp them. Using examples from couples that he has counseled, the author covers the wide array of things that can go wrong when a man and his wife fail to employ the wisdom of Ephesians 5:33. In fact, it is these case studies that will strike home with most readers as they will inevitably see a little of themselves in the examples. After examining the common ways couples can fail to show true love and respect to one another,  Dr. Eggerichs provides clear ways for a man and wife to immediately change their ways.

I was grateful for the following on page 76, “[Wives,] When I talk about respecting your husband, I do not mean being a doormat. I do not mean burying your brains, never showing your leadership ability, or never disagreeing in the slightest way. I do not mean that mean that he is superiorand you are inferior in some way. Nor do I want you to ignore your hurts and vulnerabilities.” In that single paragraph, Eggerichs dispells the misinterpretations of Scriptures that have been used in the past to justify the mistreatment of women.

My only quibble with this book is that Eggerichs seems to belabor his points a little. Long after I had a grasp on his theme of unconditional love for women and unconditional respect for men, he was still going on about it. At over 260 pages, I think he could of shaved off about 75 pages with ease. Otherwise, this is an excellent book that I highly recommend for married couples who would like to strengthen their relationship in a Godly manner.

Recommended