A (Sort of) Book Review: Contesting Catholicity

Curtis W. Freeman, Contesting Catholicity: Theology for Other Baptists. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2014.

As I’ve noted elsewhere, I sometimes find myself not fitting in comfortably among Baptists, but still very much rooted and unmoving from my people. I know I don’t lean towards the more fundamentalist/conservative evangelical camp, and I’m not entirely comfortable among the “liberal”/progressive camp either. Sometimes those of us who don’t fit in either group get labeled the “muddy middle”, implying perhaps that we’re unclear, or wavering, or unwilling to take a stand one way or the other, or that we’re trying to be some sort of via media between two warring camps to avoid controversy. Curtis Freeman calls folks like us “other Baptists”, but seeks to develop a vision for Baptist theology which is neither “liberal” (I hate using that term for theology, but that’s another story for another day) nor fundamentalist, but is something other than an attempt to sit in between, but to move beyond that battle. Contesting Catholicity builds on earlier work by James Wm. McClendon Jr, Steven Harmon, and others trying to break free of the fundamentalist-liberal battles which have characterized Baptist theology since at least the 19^th century, both sides of which Freeman suggests (echoing McClendon) are unsustainable.

Freeman explores Baptist history, to demonstrate that early Baptists attempted to chart a course within the stream of (emphasis on small c) catholicity, but as contesting voices within that community. Echoing Harmon, Freeman suggests recovering some of that heritage can provide a renewed vision of Baptist theology which is rooted in the historic catholic identity but distinctly Baptist. In part one, Freeman explores the current situation, the “sickness unto death,” which characterizes Baptist theological conversations and the alternate visions cast by the two camps. He suggests that the solution is to develop what he calls a “generous liberal orthodoxy”, which is not liberal in the sense of the common usage of that word as a pejorative label which refers to leaving behind traditionalism in favour of subjective, experiential redefinition of religious truth, but is liberal in the sense of making use of the tools developed in modern scholarly work to be put to use within the confines of confessional orthodoxy. This “liberal orthodoxy” is also “generous” in making space for ecumenical dialogue and resourcing from differing camps within, an also beyond the Baptist boundaries.

Part two then lays out some theological areas for building a foundation for Baptist theology. The areas he proposes for this foundation include: 1) a robust (Nicene) trinitarianism; 2) a vibrant priesthood of all believers (with a refined/clarified vision of soul liberty/competency); 3) a deeply communal ecclesiological space for doing theology (in contrast to the often individualistic trends of both fundamentalism and “liberal” theology); 4) a discerning approach to biblicism which allows room for “more light from the word” through a “communal hermeneutic”; 5) an “evangelical sacramentalism” which views baptism and the Lord’s supper not as “magical” but not as “mere symbolism”, which is to think little of them and makes them optional, but as actions performed in the presence of God which have an ontological impact; and 6) a willingness to rethink the relationship between baptism and membership, as the typical closed membership approach of requiring believer’s baptism by immersion for membership for confessing Christians, which reduces baptism to a means to join membership in the local church, rather than an entry into the death and resurrection of Jesus.

This book is incredibly encouraging and objectively well-written. Freeman presents extensive research in Baptist historical primary sources, from a variety of documentary sources (sermons, newsletters, tracts, books, confessions/faith statements, etc.) and perspectives (particular Baptists, general Baptists, Southern, British, etc) which develops a diverse picture of Baptists through the 400 years of our history. Freeman draws Baptist identity out from under the attempts to homogenize or revision the origins of the Baptist tradition. The final vision is of a theological framework for Baptists which taps into all the resources our history has at its disposal. The vision is robust, anchored in a solidly orthodox foundation, but also able to make room for conversations, clarity, nuance, and diversity in practice in order to respond to the needs “on the ground” for each local community- and the local community is very much at the heart of Freeman’s vision. Thus, this vision allows for greater ecumenical work with other traditions, while not losing a distinctively Baptist identity. Freeman does not seek to impose a set of “set in stone” doctrinal positions which should define Baptist theology, but a set of core principles which define the space for theological exploration and a vision for what Baptist theology can do and should be doing.

Odds are, this vision will rub both fundamentalists and “liberals” the wrong way, but I think that may have been the point- to generate a vision which is “other”. However, the risk in this is that the “other baptist” vision may simply turn a two party battle in a three sided battle. On the flip side, by developing a vision for “other Baptists”, Freeman clearly marks out the possibility of a theological space which is not stuck in between two parties, but is something else- not a muddy middle trying to survive in no-man’s land between the two sets of trenches refusing to take a hard stand. Instead “other Baptists” can present a robust theological vision which is not rigid, but not wishy-washy either. The vision Freeman offers needs to percolate and be refined some more, but it is a very helpful starting point for an important conversation. As an “other Baptist” myself, it is encouraging and vital to have this book at my disposal for framing my own theological vision, and leading in a Baptist congregation where theological specifics are diverse but all are seeking to faithfully live out our calling as contesting voices in the Church catholic.

Christ at the Centre

Sunday, October 29th, 2017. 178th Anniversary service. “Christ at the Centre” Speaker: Pastor Emeritus, Rev. Dorman Quinton.

Book Review: Of Seeds and the People of God

Michael P. Knowles. Of Seeds and the People of God: Preaching as Parable, Crucifixion, and Testimony. Eugene: Cascade, 2015.*

Michael Knowles, a professor of mine at McMaster Divinity College, previously wrote a masterful book on Paul’s theology of preaching (We Preach Not Ourselves: Paul on Proclamation. Brazos, 2008). This more recent book builds from that book, looking at Paul again, but spending more time on Jesus parables, the Gospel according to John, and homiletic theory (focusing on Augustine, Barth, Brueggemann, and Ricoeur) to expand the thesis which is foundational in Knowles’ teaching of homiletics and missional theology- that both the content and the form of preaching must be formed in a cruciform way, that is, anchored in the self-emptying love of Christ demonstrated in the incarnation and death of Christ, which provides the hope of sharing in his resurrection. The message of the Gospel which is preached must also be embodied in the life of the preacher, and the act of preaching, or as Knowles repeatedly reminded us “preaching is predicated on spirituality”. What this means for the preacher, is that preaching must an act of self-emptying, of setting aside self to elevate Christ, and allow the Holy Spirit to bear fruit through our obedient acts. In a world of celebrity preachers, and the never-ending temptation to preach in such a way as to impress the audience and build a reputation as skilled orator, this approach to preaching is sorely needed. Throughout this book, Dr. Knowles skillfully hammers home this point, and over and over again calls preachers to take up their crosses and imitate Christ in their ministry of proclamation.

Knowles begins with the parables, suggesting that one pervasive theme in many parables of Christ is surprising (even at times absurd) results, which are beyond the control of the participants- the gracious Divine provision of abundance. Knowles links this with Paul’s theology of preaching, which declares that in his weakness, in his self-abasement, God produces a harvest; that the success of his ministry has nothing to do with his own skill or strength, but with a surprising divine provision of grace, and the results themselves are evidence of the grace he proclaims. Knowles suggests that the parables point us to a striking conclusion: that the act of preaching is actually meant to serve as a parable for the message it proclaims. We proclaim a Gospel of God’s provision of grace through the incarnation, death and resurrection of Christ, to meet our need, and the act of preaching itself should embody this. In the same way we cannot come to salvation of our own abilities, but require the intervention of God. Fruitful preaching cannot be of our work, but must be an expression or incarnation of God’s grace at work through the preaching of the Gospel.

Knowles then combines this with Jesus’ own statements about his own ministry, especially in the Gospel According to John, that he does nothing of his own accord, but only that which the Father sent him to do, and he does not speak his own words, but those of the Father, and he does not glorify himself, but is glorified by his Father through his own complete obedience and self-abandonment to the will of the Father.

The section on homiletic theory was, for me, the weakest section. It dragged quite a bit, and grappled with technical, abstracted theory, which I sometimes appreciate, but is not where Dr. Knowles is strongest (and I think he’d admit that).

The concluding chapters brings all this together to emphasize that preaching is an act of bearing witness and “Parabolic Testimony”, that is, both in the content of the message (we testify to the Gospel which we’ve heard, and received) and the method of presentation, we testify to what we have encountered and experienced. To preach a message of the grace of God, we must first know the grace of God, and rely on that in our proclaiming of that grace. Preaching is not an act of devising clever and persuasive arguments, but should resemble the testimony eyewitnesses in a courtroom bring. The Apostles announced what they saw and heard- that the promises they had heard announced in Scripture had been fulfilled in the death and resurrection of Jesus and the pouring out of the Spirit to the Church. Their message, and method of preaching directed attention away from themselves, and towards Christ, and demonstrated that the message was not their own, but empowered by the Spirit. Knowles uses this as a paradigm for modern preachers- that the ultimate fruitfulness of our work comes from the Spirit-empowered preaching of the message of Christ crucified and raised, bearing witness to the grace poured out to the preacher who must be crucified with Christ in each act of preaching.

This book is best read together with We Preach Not Ourselves, but is, I believe an important work which in many ways runs counter to so much of modern homiletic teaching. The theology of cruciformity is well established now, and Knowles application of that to preaching makes a vital connection which has been explored by some more broadly in terms of mission and discipleship, but not to the ministry of preaching specifically. Dr. Knowles has thus effectively filled a void with a book which sums up and reflects his years of work bringing together biblical theology and homiletics. Having been a student of Dr. Knowles, I’m incredibly thankful for his books now, as they build on the foundations he provided, which made (and continue to make) me a better preacher and pastor. I’d strongly recommend this book to all preachers, as it is both meaty (in regards to biblical theology, spiritual theology, and ministry praxis) but also highly encouraging and relevant to our weekly schedule of tasks and expectations. If absorbed and lived out, Dr. Knowles suggestions will make better preachers, and more fruitful local congregations; of that I am quite certain, not because Dr. Knowles is brilliant (though, of course, he is), but because he faithfully bears witness to Christ, and his commitment to forming better preachers has always reflected it. His words carry even greater weight for those of us fortunate enough to know his character and faithfulness; his life and his words align, testifying to the truthfulness of his words.

*Wipf & Stock/Cascade kindly provided a free reviewers copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. Many thanks.

Book Review: Towards Baptist Catholicity

Steven R. Harmon. Towards Baptist Catholicity: Essays on Tradition and the Baptist Vision (Studies in Baptist History and Thought Volume 27). Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2006.

There are objectively good books (well researched, beautifully written, well structured, etc), and there are books that truly resonate with you personally- which address the exact thing you need addressed, and sometimes you may even find books that are both. This one is both for me. Steven Harmon has written the exact book I needed to read at this point. And I don’t just say that because we’re “friends” on Facebook and I am pretty sure he’s going to read this. This truly is the book I needed in my current context, and it is truly superbly written. My hope is to write a follow up piece to this review which unpacks some of the more personal context surrounding why this book resonated the way it did, but that would not fit into a review of the book itself.

Towards Baptist Catholicity is a collection of various essays, most of which come out of prior papers and lectures Harmon presented, now collected together and reworked to be coherent around a single topic: the inherent value in Baptists recovering tradition (particularly from patristic sources) as a source of authority and direction to bring revitalization to the Baptist vision and movement. Harmon demonstrates how early Baptists sought to maintain a connection to antiquity and included resonances of the ancient creeds in their confessions of faith (using specifically Nicene rather than biblical vocabulary) consciously placing themselves within the historic, catholic, apostolic tradition, albeit as voices of dissent against the then present state of the Church. Later Baptist confessions began removing these explicit resonances, or in some cases, ditching confessions and creeds altogether in favour of a “no creed but the bible” approach to theology. In doing so, the Baptist movement developed under an increasing influence of modernity, and the triadic narrative Gospel (the work of God in history through the three persons of the Trinity) was displaced by a Gospel of intellectual assent to a collection of more abstracted doctrines extrapolated from newly developed methods of exegesis (this influence manifested in two separate directions within protestantism; fundamentalism and “liberal” theologies equally drinking from the same well). Harmon’s suggestion is that as modernity continues to shift away from the Enlightenment ideals, the narrative forms of traditional orthodoxy and catholicity, and the means of communicating that theology liturgically, can and should be recovered as a guide for the Baptist movement, shifting from its position as dissenters from outside of tradition, to dissenters within the catholic tradition. We need not become Catholic in the sense of Roman Catholic, but develop a sense of Baptists as part of catholicity- a “thick ecumenism” which draws heavily from the broader church rather than reduced to the results of individualistic modern exegesis.

Throughout, Harmon shows his skill as a historical theologian, digging deep into early English Baptist confessions and the changes which come in later Baptist confessions (the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, the New Hampshire Confession of Faith, and the various revisions of the SBC’s Faith and Message). He also digs into his speciality: patristic sources, as well as several modern theologians who sought similar recovery of patrisitic sources for the 20th and 21st century church (Oden, Barth, etc.). The primary source research is stunning, as is the frequent engagement with secondary sources from a variety of perspectives (though at times perhaps a bit heavy on folks with whom he agrees).

Harmon also includes considerable personal reflection from his own experience within the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) which went through tremendous conflict while Harmon was in the theological education process. That conflict ultimately saw a more conservative demographic take over leadership and reshape the identity of the denomination leading to a large group breaking with the convention to form the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF), with whom Harmon is currently affiliated. The concluding chapter addresses the question “what keeps you from becoming Catholic”; a reflection on why Harmon remains part of the Baptist tradition while still pushing for a development of catholicity within that tradition rather than change affiliations. My own thinking and experience has been similar to Harmon’s, and I hope to share some of my own thoughts in the follow up piece. Harmon’s conclusion is that Baptist identity is not something to be shed easily. He identifies some reservations around Catholic, Anglican, and Orthodox practice and doctrine, which he argues are important, but would not ultimately be insurmountable for him to make a shift. For Harmon it is the ecclesial identity which keeps him where he is; he was formed and shaped within a particular tradition, and moving from one body to another would require breaking of fellowship; to become Catholic is to sever a relationship with Baptists, to break communion, and in essence assert the body which discipled him to be a false body. He concludes that a far better way forward is not to break with one and join another. Instead he suggests; “before the separated churches can move towards visible unity, they must first go deep within their own traditions in order to recover elements of catholicity that once characterized their own churches but have been subsequently neglected.”(202) In other words, the unity of the Church as a whole cannot be achieved through individuals severing ties with their formative traditions, but through a consistent reflection on the way in which one’s community has moved and developed, and a push to recover an identity as part of the catholic church. By revisiting the sources of Christian tradition, and looking at the means by which the Church communicated its faith in early catholic expression (liturgy, calendar, eucharist, etc.) Baptists can recover an identity within a tradition flowing out of and in communion with the Church through history, rather than a voice of dissent distancing itself from everything which came in between the Apostles and the present.

Harmon’s challenge is an important one, not just for Baptists but for all protestants- to think deeply, creatively, and critically about what the ramifications of our break with tradition and catholicity really means for us. The refusal to accept tradition as a source of authority in favour of a “no creed but the bible” approach has consequences, some of which are quite harmful. It fails to recognize the role and impact of individual interpretation. Harmon includes a “case study” of sorts highlighting the patristic exegesis of the Epistle to the Hebrews and how many modern conflicts, especially when Calvinists and Arminians examine Hebrews 6:1-8, could potentially be rerouted, because the text in patristic exegesis never produced the same conflicts, because they approached the text differently. The “no creed but the bible” approach has proven to have fracturing effect among evangelicals rather than a unifying one. Harmon suggests that the tradition of the Church can possibly assist in finding unity not in uniform interpretation of Scripture, but in the core narrative expressed in the early creeds. By recovering this catholicity by going back to the creeds, the church year which walks through the narrative each year, increased frequency of the Lord’s Supper, and other aspects which were part of early Baptist identity, but later cut out, we can potentially bring a renewed sense of unity to a fractured group.

I would certainly place this into the “required reading” category for Baptist leaders. Harmon’s voice is one which, if heeded, I believe can make a difference in drawing people back together. The individualism, dissension, anti-traditionalism, “chronological snobbery”, and in some cases anti-intellectualism/fundamentalism often evident in recent (mid 18th century – present) Baptist thought is confronted with gracious, constructive, and highly intelligent reminders of our identity and a vision of what can be recovered and built on. The work begun in this book (and by other Baptist theologians who have worked closely with Harmon on some join statements included as appendices) can help us chart a course towards a renewed, constructive, unified identity which will be of great benefit as we seek to respond to the challenges of the shift in our cultural context.

Book Review: Paul and Gender

Cynthia Long Westfall. Paul and Gender: Reclaiming the Apostle’s Vision for Men and Women in Christ. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2016.

“Of making many books there is no end” (Eccl. 12:12). Sometimes this is how it feels with the debates surrounding gender and the Bible. The back and forth between complementarians and egalitarians goes on and on, with seemingly little or no new ground being broken, and the same basic arguments being reproduced. It gets a little wearisome at times. This was my fear when I got wind that my former professor at McMaster Divinity College, Dr. Cynthia Long Westfall was publishing a book on Paul and gender. Would this be a rehashing of the content of Keener and Payne’s work on the same topic? Could anything be added to those lengthy studies? However, I was also cautiously optimistic, since Dr. Westfall’s expertise in discourse analysis, Greco-Roman rhetoric and culture, and prowess with the subject matter, could bring some nuance and clarity. She exceeded any expectations I had. I knew it would probably be good, but this was outstanding (and, yes, I have a bias because she was my professor, and because we agree on this subject, but bias aside, this is still objectively a great book).

The Bible in general, and Paul more specifically, is often a source of tension with regards to gender. Paul has been accused of being sexist, or at the very least, that he put significant limitations on women’s roles within the home and the Church with strict prohibitions against their participation in leading, teaching, or having authority (cf. 1 Cor. 14:34-35, 1 Tim. 2:11-15). But, as studies have continued to show, things are not as simple as they may seem. Dr. Westfall reads the Pauline letters as complete wholes (rather than in snippets used as proof-texts) and does so within the context of Greco-Roman and Jewish culture, and social structures (with special attention given to patron-client relationships). By doing so, she reads the “clobber passages” within the complete discussion of gender, and places that discussion within Paul’s discussions of authority more generally (the vocabulary and imagery used in depicting leadership and authority), the body, creation, eschatology, etc. and demonstrates that much of the imagery and language runs counter the common understanding of male leadership and female submission.

A good example of how Westfall brings a fresh reading comes as she interprets Paul’s images of leadership, which often invoke imagery which in the first century would be understood to be feminine, and how that applies to relations between men and women. One the key examples is one of complementarianism’s key passages; Ephesians 5:22ff. There, Christ’s “headship” (and Westfall does do an awful lot of fleshing out of the meaning of the Greek word kephale, showing it rarely means authority over, and carries a sense of origin or source or preceeding from) which is mirrored in the husband’s “headship” in relation to his wife, which is couched in images of washing and stain removal. The man’s “headship” looks like doing laundry. Given the call of all Christians to submit to each other (Eph. 5:21) and the discussion of husbands and wives flowing from that, which uses different terms than we see in parent-child and master-slave discussion, we see Paul shifting out of patriarchal understandings rather than upholding them. Thus, the husband’s call to love as Christ loved, is followed by an explanatory image of submission and service, not a typical image of authority. This opens up a whole new way of reading texts like Romans 16 in which Paul commends multiple females leaders, who he identifies as deacons, patrons, apostles, co-workers and people who “toil” with him. The Greek verbs “co-work” (synergeo) and “toil” (kopiao) are indicators of leadership, as Westfall indicates through Paul’s use of these terms in 1 Cor. 16:15-16, which instructs the Corinthians to submit (Greek hypotasso) to anyone who co-works or toils.

Payne’s work on manuscript data, and grammatical study was solid, but what Westfall adds to the discussion through her discourse analysis and investigation into Greco-Roman rhetoric on gender, builds on the work which precedes, and cuts new ground. By reading not just the clobber-texts, and the counter-clobber-texts, but rather the whole sweep of Paul’s work, and examining how the piece of gender roles fit together with the other pieces of creation, fall, eschatology, authority and leadership, and cultural norms of the first century, we see a newer, more robust picture emerge.

While many of the conclusions are the same as other egalitarians’ works, the arguments are strengthened considerably by this new, deeper, contextual, more sensitive reading. These new questions are vital. How does Paul’s hellenism and his Judaism inform his choices of imagery and rhetorical style, and where does he seem to deviate, and how would that be heard by his original audience? How does Paul’s understanding of creation, fall, and redemption relate to gender? How does Paul’s reading of the body and sexuality (e.g. 1 Cor. 6-7) inform relationships in the family and church? How do the household structures of the ancient world, and social relationships outside it, when employed to describe gender affect how we read Paul’s discussions of gender? What about eschatology and soteriology, especially in texts like Galatians 3:28? Does this not affect how we understand gender roles rather than just equal soteriological standing? (Hint: yes, it absolutely does) If the person and work of Christ and the ongoing presence of the Spirit form leadership and authority, and redeem humanity, male and female, slave and free, Jew and Gentile, from the effects of the fall, what does that look like, and what does Paul’s choice of the imagery of service and domestic roles mean?

As a result of the tearing down of these destructive systems, many women in Paul’s circle came into key leadership positions, and the women in Corinth were encouraged to exercise freedom to prophecy and pray in the gatherings (1 Cor. 11), with heads covered, which was a cultural symbol not of subjugation but of honourable status for women. This reinterpretation of the head-coverings is a remarkable distinction between the work of Westfall among other egalitarian scholars (e.g. Philip Payne). She argues that Paul is encouraging all women, not just those of married free-woman status to wear the symbol of honour. Young, unmarried women, and female slaves were typically not to wear head-coverings, and the wearing of head-coverings symbolized a woman coming under the cover of a man. Thus, Paul is arguing a woman has an honour of her own, not through marital or social status, but from her creation in the image of God as a woman, and that woman as “the glory of man” is not an indicator of subordination, but that she shares in the image of God and of man, and was created to complete man, and carries an additional glory. Thus women are neither ontologically lower than men, nor restricted in role, with the provision that she cover her head to demonstrate her honour, rather than remain uncovered suggesting a lower position. Since 1 Cor. 11 states that women in Corinth were praying and prophesying, and 11:11-12 speaks of the mutual dependence and origin (Eve came from Adam, and all subsequent men being from a woman), any assumptions of women being prohibited from leadership in the gathering of the church or in the family doesn’t capture the overall picture Paul is creating for the home and the church.

One final argument worth noting is the emphasis Westfall places on the location of the gathered church- in the home. In Greco-Roman thinking, a woman’s sphere was the home. Paul even calls young widows to remarry and to oikodespotein (“rule the house”; often softened to “manage their homes”, but this is misleading). The church gathering was not a public gathering, but a domestic one. In the domestic world, women were used to leading and managing. Thus, in the early church, women naturally stepped into leadership roles.

Westfall’s conclusion is that Paul supports a movement away from patriarchy towards an egalitarian view of gender, in which men and women partner together and support each other in fully expressing their giftedness, and all leadership roles, whether in the home, church, or society, are open to both genders. This does not in any way remove the distinction between the genders, or reduce gender to anatomy. But it does allow for women to fully engage in leadership, and use their gifts for preaching, teaching, leading, or whatever, recognizing that these tasks may legitimately be done by people of either gender, even though the expression of those roles may look different coming from one gender than it does from the other.

She does this not, as some suggest of egalitarians, by setting aside clear directives from the New Testament, but by showing how those passages read in light of a larger theology, and the flow of Paul’s argument, and through close examination of Paul’s overall argument and choice of vocabulary, do not support the complementarian reading. The proof-text approach does not hold up to the scrutiny Westfall brings. The picture which emerges from Westfall’s research is a coherent theological vision of power structures like patriarchy being counter to the vision of God at creation, and the vision which Christ’s work in the world is bringing into being as Paul taught.

Westfall puts the most often cited complementarian arguments (Carson, Schreiner, Moo, Grudem, Piper, etc.) under close scrutiny and reveals their shortcomings. She has put together a masterpiece of a study, which should (and I think probably will) become standard reading for seminarians as we attempt to shape a theology of gender within a broader biblical (or more specifically Pauline) theology, as opposed to the cherry picking bible verses to define gender roles approach. What Wesfall has presented is thorough, compelling, honest, and overall a “game changer” of a book. I didn’t think there was new ground to break, but was happily proven wrong by this one. This brings fresh perspective, and sets a new course of investigation. She doesn’t just present a new piece, but broadens the possibilities for future discussion in her breaking of new ground. By taking a different road than egalitarian scholars, the same data (the letters of Paul) yields new and important conclusions and raises new challenges.

Book Review: Compassion and the Mission of God

Rupen Das. Compassion and the Mission of God: Revealing the Invisible Kingdom. Carlisle: Langham, 2016.

Objectively reviewing books written by acquaintances, colleagues, and friends is always difficult to do. This is eased considerably when the work they’ve produced is undeniably really, really good. Such is the case with Rupen Das’ new book, Compassion and the Mission of God. Rupen gave me a copy when he came to speak at Centre Street in May. Rupen Das and his wife Mamta are our partners in mission (PIM) through Canadian Baptist Ministries, currently working out of Amsterdam on development and relief projects through the European Baptist Federation. His work focuses considerable attention and resources on the Syrian refugee crisis both in Europe as refugees flee the Middle East, but also in the Middle East itself through partners like LSESD, and local congregations on the ground. I first met Rupen in Beirut, Lebanon in 2013 when I was there to see first hand the amazing work happening through Baptists in Lebanon. After returning home, and sharing about what is happening, Centre Street enthusiastically decided to make Rupen and Mamta our new PIM, as Colin and Karen Godwin were coming back to Canada with Colin taking up a new position at Carey Theological College in Vancouver.

Compassion and the Mission of God centres around the questions of integral mission- how it is that care and concern for the poor relates to the proclamation of the Good News. It would not be disputed among Christians that the Church should be engaged in charitable work; using our resources to help those in need. But what is the theological grounding for that? And where does the work of development to alleviate not just immediate concerns, but systemic issues of poverty, insecurity, and lack of access to things like education, medical care, etc. fit into all of this? Is that the work of NGOs or government aid? Or does biblical theology place this as a major concern for God’s people? Rupen Das argues that all of these things are part of the biblical picture of the Kingdom of God.

All of this flows from the prelimary question (p. 9-12) why does the bible seem to commit so much time, and reveal such a deep concern for the poor? If the mission of the Church is focused on the issues of redemption from sin through repentance and faith, why does the care for the poor still have such a seemingly central place? How are these things connected? Chapter 2 frames the discussion, by discussing hermeneutical concerns, and surveying the key common conclusions drawn by Christians of different stripes. Then in chapters 3, 4, & 5, Das examines the biblical text’s consistent call for concern for the poor (The Old Testament, the Gospels, and the Epistles and Early Church respectively) and which inform Christ mission. Das demonstrates that throughout the entirety of Scripture concern for the vulnerable is a key component of justice and righteousness; that God’s concern is care for his creation, and we as his image bearers must show the same concern, especially for the poor and vulnerable.

Chapter 6 deals with theological challenges- defining the Gospel (which Das connects very closely with the Kingdom of God coming on earth, thus involves a strong sense of reordering God’s creation according to his design and character) and the influence of various eschatologies on the practice of relief and development, in particular the ways in which dispensationlism downplays the need to steward creation and develop communities since the time is close at hand for God to destroy the planet and start over. Das argues against this depiction, instead demonstrating that God’s renewal of heaven and earth is close at hand, and we are bring the future vision of the new creation to bear in the present as part of our witness to life in the age to come.

Chapters 7-9 look at the influences on modern mission; liberation theology, fundamentalism, the Lausanne Covenant, and the Micah Declaration, and how the notions of what mission in the world looks like, shifting from a colonial mindset towards integral mission- a balanced approach of word and deed in sustainable ways which preserve dignity of indigenous cultures- and the development of a mission focused on transformation through witness as both proclamation of the Gospel and the tangible outworking of the message of the coming Kingdom of God through justice, care, relief, and transforming communities to places where God’s care and concern for the poor is lived out.

Chapter 10 then develops the notion of the character of God as the basis for all of this. Das argues that because God creates out of his own goodness and continues to extend compassion to his creation, this is the theological anchor for the integral mission pattern developed in chapters 7-9. Ultimately our call to show care and concern and to work with communities and individuals to develop and just and caring pattern or system is a reflection of who God is.

Compassion and the Mission of God is perhaps the best thing I’ve read on this topic. Thoroughly researched, anchored in solidly biblical witness, and good systematic and hisorical theology, and effective practice of experts in missiology, Das doesn’t just regurgitate the already well established notions and practices, but draws various streams of thought together, critiquing the flaws honestly but graciously, and affirming the helpful aspects, and also then putting his own contribution on top of that, moving the conversation forward. Das is not trying to reinvent the wheel, but rests on the fine work of Stott, Newbiggin, Bosch, Niebuhr, Sider, Yoder and others. But he also brings to bear his decades of work in the field of community development and disaster relief. He weaves together good biblical theology, with missiological principles, and first hand experience. You are fed in multiple ways, and challenged in a very real sense to fit various pieces together in an integrated theology, rather than having theology on one side and mission as something only somewhat connected on the other.

Stylistically, it is clearly and methodically composed. The central argument is developped in a logical way, and doesn’t get lost in tangents. All the pieces fit together in a way that makes sense, and makes the point clear. In just 200 pages, he is able cover a whole lot of ground, because the focus is specific, and he stays on task. To draw together a biblical theology of mission, a systematic theology of mission, with historical development of mission into a concise volume without making one feel like something is missing would seem like a insurmountable task, but I think Das has managed just that.

Perhaps it’s just my own bias coming through, but at every point I found myself nodding in agreement, and affirming the argument being presented. I would wholeheartedly back Das’ vision of mission which reflects the Kingdom of God breaking into our world. The alleviating of suffering and brokenness caused by poverty, systemic injustice, disaster, oppression and violence is a steady and persistent thread in the biblical text. It’s a central focus of the early Church’s work. In no way can we separate the work towards care and concern for the vulnerable from the proclamation of the Gospel. This really should be required reading for Churches, parachurch groups, seminarians, and denominational bodies. In a globalized world, with the technology and opportunities we have in front of us, we can do far more to alleviate suffering than was possible in the past. Our reach has extended considerably, and Das has provided a solid theological foundation for developing a strong and potent witness which can be worked out in a variety of different situations and in a variety of different ways.

A (Sort of) Book Review: Gospel Women

Richard Bauckham. Gospel Women: Studies in the Named Women of the Gospels. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.

Richard Bauckham is without a doubt an exceptional scholar of both biblical theology and the non-canonical texts of early Christianity and Second Temple Judaism. Gospel Women focuses that immense knowledge and research skill into the topic of the women named in the 4 Gospel accounts, and brings into the conversation the material regarding these women in apocryphal texts. By working together his incredible mind for cataloging and interpreting the texts of Judaism and early Christianity with modern feminist hermeneutics, and complementarian objections, Bauckham shows a multiplicity of skills and keen awareness of modern methodologies (though the methodology discussion in the intro and first chapter can be a bit dry, they do perform an important function).

At times Bauckham brings a bewildering onslaught of evidence and analysis, bringing every imaginable piece of data to bear. At times this becomes a distraction from the specific purpose of the text (for instance bringing a lengthy discussion of the origins of the name Chuza, Joanna’s husband, which doesn’t contribute all that much to the discussion of Joanna). Some sections could have been condensed without hurting the overall impact of the book, and also could have afforded more room for discussing the women who were left of this study (Mary Magdalene doesn’t get a specific chapter, nor do Mary & Martha, which are notable exclusions) and perhaps a summary/conclusion chapter at the end. The book is over 300 pages and still leaves these aspects out, which speaks to the immensity of the data included and analyzed. Given the paucity of references to women’s function in the narratives, it is incredible how much Bauckham has unpacked for us through bringing in the non-canonical traditions, historical context, and evaluating the validity of feminist reinterpretation.

Bauckham brings much needed attention to the role of the specific inclusion of several women in the text of the Gospel accounts. His detailed investigation into Joanna, and her possible identification with Junia, mentioned by Paul (Rom. 16:7) is very intriguing, though of course not completely verifiable, and his critique of Grudem, Wallace and Burer is overwhelming and definitive in demonstrating that their reading which excludes Junia from the apostles is simply not warranted by the textual evidence or the historical evidence. That chapter alone makes this volume worth every penny.

Bauckham’s conclusions are somewhat modest, given the incredible evidence he brings, but he ultimately concludes that although the text of Scripture indicates a role for women in apostolic witness bearing and preaching of the kerygma of the early church, the cultural conditions did result in significant limitations in the expression of that equality. So egalitarians may feel Bauckham doesn’t go far enough, but those who exclude women from offices or functions of authority in home and church will be pushed and challenged by the evidence as it is presented here.

A (Sort of) Book Review: Partners in Christ

John G. Stackhouse Jr. Partners in Christ: A Conservative Case for Egalitarianism. Downer’s Grove: IVP Academic, 2015.

I have openly and unashamedly argued in favour of an egalitarian understanding of gender on many occassions and in many different forms of discussion. I have no reservations about this, and I do so from an evangelical approach, anchored by exegesis of Scripture. So, when a conservative evangelical scholar publishes a book sharing an egalitarian position, that’s encouraging and exciting. John Stackhouse has an established credibility in evangelicalism, but also a courage to be upfront and potentially controversial on sensitive and disputed matters. So I appreciate his presence in evangelical academia. It also helps that he recently moved from Regent College to Crandall (formerly Atlantic Baptist University, where I did my undergraduate studies). Partners in Christ is a theological argument for an egalitarian view from a still conservative vantage point.

What it’s about:

A theological argument (as distinct from a biblical argument) means Stackhouse is not simply trying to say this is what the bible says, but recognizing Scripture as authority, Stackhouse is attempting connect how Scripture is then worked out and applied in a world where contexts can change (and have changed significantly from the context of the Paul, Luke, etc.). In other words, how do we move from the Biblical text to theological worldview and lived theology for a contemporary context. Stackhouse argues that exegesis by itself will not resolve the disagreements since proof-texts can be appealed to on both sides. Stackhouse argues that the Bible is polyphonic; it does present texts which call for male headship and female submission (albeit in an ad hoc context; e.g. 1 Cor. 14:34-35, 1 Tim. 2:11-15), and other texts which call for the equality of both genders in the Church and family (e.g. Rom. 16:1-7, Gal. 3:28, Acts 18:24-26). From this he views Scripture as presenting an ideal of equality, and calls for a trajectory towards equality, whenever and wherever that is possible and best serves the gospel, while still being sensitive to the real life, on the ground situation. God is accommodating to the context of patriarchy in the ancient world, but still clear that this is not the ideal which the Church should work towards. Historically, there was a reason for allowing patriarchy to remain in operation in the first century; it was for the benefit of the Gospel that Jesus and the Apostles do not immediately and fully upend patriarchy. Were the Church to do that in the first century, it would bring scorn and disgrace on the church, and likely result in the Gospel mission being compromised. But now that the 21st century Western world presents a very different situation, patriarchy is damaging to the Church’s witness, and therefore the Church would be better served by moving toward the equality of genders, which is a good thing, since we would through this moving towards a situation closer to the ideals which God has intended.

So, while Paul had cause to caution against a fully egalitarian situation, which, according to Stackhouse, he does in 1 Tim. 2, Eph. 5, 1 Cor. 14, etc., we have no such reason now. Paul and Jesus undercut many of the assumptions lying behind patriarchy (most notably the sexist views on which patriarchy was built) but did not call for an immediate social revolution, which would threaten the Church’s witness within a patriarchal society. In the present and western context, patriarchy hinders the mission of the Gospel, and thus can be removed as God had set as the ideal for the future anyway.

The Good:

While Stackhouse’s exegetical assertions are a bit of a concession to complementarians (more on that below), his hermeneutical principles are a wise caution to traditional readings of the “clobber passages” invoked by complementarians to defend male headship in marriage and the Church. The Epistles of Paul are ad hoc documents, written in a specific historical and cultural situation. Thus they are conditioned by the cultural context of first century Judaism and Hellenism, which had varying nuances on gender, but on the whole recognized patriarchy as normative. To read these texts insisting on universal application is to miss what is really happening in the text. Noting other texts where women clearly move beyond typical roles in certain situations means that even in the first century church, much had already changed. I would push harder on this than Stackhouse, but his call to note how the text pushes towards amelioration of the patriarchal situation in a trajectory towards equality, which can now be applied in 21st century North America because of the cultural shifts, is welcome.

The distinct advantages of this work over others attempts at building a case for egalitarianism are mainly two; first that it is written from a position of evangelical theology. The attempt to divide people into camps of egalitarians who are “liberal” mainline protestants and complementarians who are “conservative” (I seriously dislike those terms, since they are ideological, not theological, but we’ll leave that for another day) won’t work for this book. The argument that egalitarians don’t recognize the authority of Scripture, or are conceding to culture over Scripture is proven false once again.

Second, it is written for a broader readership. Other defenses of egalitarian views (whether on biblical or theological or philosophical grounds) are often less accessible to most folks in the Church. While this book has some serious meat to it, it is still manageable for a very broad audience. It is good to see the conversation being opened up for people who may not be familiar with the arguments on either side.

The Not-so-good:

It may seem surprising, but I am not a huge fan of Stackhouse’s argument. To his conclusion that we should be practicing egalitarianism in our homes and churches, I wholeheartedly say “Amen”. But while we share convictions that egalitarian views should be brought to bear on the Church and home, I think that Stackhouse concedes too much in his method of argument. I disagree with him regarding the New Testament’s concessions to patriarchy. I think his conclusions regarding the complementarian clobber texts are not the best readings of those passages. By saying the text presents male headship as an instruction from Paul (even with the recognition that these are ad hoc statements restricted by their context) Stackhouse makes his argument easier to dismiss by many conservatives. Firm complementarians will not be convinced by this argument, since the most ardent supporters of complementarianism won’t accept this hermeneutical approach. The common refrains of “God said it, I believe it, that settles it” or “When the Bible speaks, God speaks” or appeals to inerrancy and immutability render this argument easily dismissible (not because these counterarguments are vaild, but because they are assumed in advance). I don’t disagree with Stackhouse’s argument per se, but think it’s effectiveness may be somewhat limited in the debate. It may sway some fence sitters. But will it persuade completementarians? Probably not. It may give them more ammunition. Having conceded that 1 Cor. 14:34-35 and 1 Tim. 2:11-15 do indeed show Paul advocating for patriarchy, many will then say Stackhouse is conceding to the cultural shifts when God has spoken in favour of male-headship. Even though Stackhouse is making a valid point, he is doing so in a way which will likely turned back on him by those who disagree. By building a theological argument that we should be egalitarian while admitting Paul instructed the Ephesian and Corinthian Churches to remain patriarchal, Stackhouse is making his argument less convincing to a very vocal segment of contemporary evangelicalism.

Conclusion:

I admire John Stackhouse. I really do. To remain committed to the conservative evangelical community and take a firm stance, and label himself a feminist is a big move. I am thrilled he wants to bring nuance and openness to conversation which has all too often been characterized by vitriolic accusations of liberalism and cowardice or hardheadedness and oppression. Stackhouse speaks with a firm but charitable tone, and answers many of the challenges of his opponents. But I think he leaves too much for complementarians to build a counter argument against him. I think this book is good, helpful, wise, and deeply charitable. I hope readers of all positions will engage fairly with the argument being presented and hear what is really being said. This certainly won’t settle the argument, but it is a good means to move the conversation forward, and open up the difficulties to a broader audience.

A (Sort of) Book Review: The Prophetic Imagination

Walter Brueggemann. The Prophetic Imagination (Second Edition). Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001.

Few Old Testament scholars have been able to capture the liveliness of the Hebrew Scriptures the way Walter Brueggemann does. When it comes to literary artistry and spirituality of the Old Testament, Brueggemann is arguably the best in the business. He has a keen eye for the storytelling methods, spiritual and emotional context and impact of texts, and the power contained in them which is unleashed if we can really get inside them.

What it’s about:

The Prophetic Imagination is probably Brueggemann at his best. Reworked in 2001 to bring his work to bear on a changed historical context (the original is from 1978, so a lot has changed in the world since then) this book is designed to be a guide for those seeking to capture the method of Old Testament prophet as a model for prophetic ministry in contemporary life. Brueggemann identifies the two key tasks in the ministry of Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and other prophets: “prophetic criticism” and “prophetic energizing”.

Prophetic ciriticism, argues Brueggemann (ch. 3), is to speak or through symbol live out a declaration that the prevailing culture is a false ideological construct which cannot stand. The prophet is called to delegitimize and reveal the dismantling of imperial ideology or “royal consciousness” (the way of Pharaoh, Solomon, Herod, Ceasar) with its superficial appearance of affluence, forced labour, and formation of a civil or royally sponsored (and thus controlled or at least controllable) “static religion”. This criticism happens through the prophet vocalizing and/or living out the laments and groans of the people (“The Embrace of Pathos”)- by speaking into and from a place of communal grieving from under oppression, turning to the God who is free to act on their behalf. Thus the prophet identifies and denounces injustice, and speaks to the inevitable toppling of unsustainable oppression.

Prophetic energizing (ch. 4) is the presentation of an alternative way- a new vision for a newly formed people called together to live out the vision. This vision is anchored in the freedom of God to act as he wills, and his refusal to be domesticated by kings and/or priests to serve the royal purpose. God challenges this imperial way with a prophetic word which declares God’s freedom and sovereignty to act, to tear down the unjust royal consciousness, and lift up the oppressed. Thus, the prophets of Israel, and prophetic leaders of the Church in present are called speak boldly of a way other than the prevailing culture, but a way which infuses hope, purpose, and vocation into the community of faith.

This vision of criticism through embracing pathos and energizing through providing a basis from and for amazement and imagination of the possibility for a new way, finds its greatest model in Jesus of Nazareth (ch. 5). Brueggemann walks through the incarnation, ministry of compassion, suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus to show how Jesus enters the suffering and lamenting of humanity, destabilizes power structures, and announces their imminent demise, but also provides a new word of hope and amazement as he overcomes death through being raised, and calls his followers to a life which is lived out in acts of mercy (the ultimate anti-imperial way) which speaks into existence a new people with a renewed purpose (ch. 6); living according the vocation of mankind as defined by God’s character rather than the royal consciousness.

Finally, Brueggemann connects this prophetic imagination to the practice of ministry in the contemporary church (ch. 7). Brueggemann insists that arena for this prophetic mission is in the parish, that the life of the local congregation, is where the criticism and energizing is focused. In other words, those in pastoral leadership, elders, and leaders of ministry programs, are called to embrace the pathos of their people, facilitate lament, and “penetrate the numbness” (117) which comes from complacency under the weight of the royal ideology and immense pressure of the prevailing culture to acquiesce to the agenda of the powerful. Prophetic ministry in the local congregation must also propose a vision of alternative way to be made manifest in the local congregation itself- to become a community which embodies the way joy, compassion, and justice of the Kingdom of God, and lives it out in the public arena.

The Good:

Brueggemann captures beautifully the essence of the prophetic leader. He traces this task of criticism and energizing through Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, to the climax of the redemptive story in Jesus. He astutely picks up on something often overlooked. The “doom and gloom” image of the prophet quite misleading, and this is a helpful corrective. The prophet is a counter to the royal/imperial agenda. A prophet, in the Old Testament tradition, is called to identify, name, expose, and indict exploitation and oppression, and to rally the people to cry out to God for help, and to call the people to live in a renewed commitment to the ways of mercy, justice, and righteousness. The task is a difficult one; a call to suffer with the oppressed, and work against the current, to come up against the denial, numbness, and despair of those who either bought into the royal consciousness, or have given up against the juggernaut of injustice and imperial oppression.

Brueggemann captures the beauty of the Kingdom-at-hand message of Jesus. He comes to not only suffer with and for his people, but to bring the word of hope and joy of the Kingdom breaking into the world to undo the powers-that-be, to critique the prevailing culture, and declare the inevitable demise of existing oppressive power structures and the ideologies behind them. Brueggemann’s prose is unparalleled in theological scholarship. He is able to write solid, profound, intelligent theology with true artistic craftsmanship.

But Brueggemann doesn’t just leave with an abstract, but connects the big picture of Scripture with the rubber meets the road of of the local parish/congregation. His word becomes useful, tangible, liveable. His words are convicting for us pastors, who have a weekly opportunity to speak to these things, and are called be leaders of lament, prayer, grieving, and bringers of hope. The ministry task Brueggemann places in front of us is hard, but it is good. His precision and clarity brings the word from ancient Israel to bear on a very different context. Pharaoh goes by a new name now. But the nature of the royal ideology is very much the same.

The Not-so-good:

Where I think this work comes up short or could use some reworking is really somewhat nitpicky.The first issue I have with this book is that there isn’t more of it (a mere 125 pages without endnotes; which I find so annoying- footnotes for the win!). It’s compact to the point where it’s conciseness becomes a weakness. I would have preferred to have Brueggemann sit longer with different texts. One can feel like there is more in the words of Scripture to be explored in this book. Instead, Brueggemann moves on a bit too quickly from one text to another.

The second issue is that Brueggemann seems to make “prophetic ministry” less prophetic in the traditional sense of the prophet. Scripture seems to present the prophet as a very specific ministry of proclamation. Brueggemann seems to move boundary markers a bit to pull all public ministry under the umbrella of prophetic ministry. Pastor ministry certainly includes what Brueggemann is calling for; sharing in the pathos of the people, facilitating mourning, and helping to move people from a place of lament towards hope. But is this “prophetic”? Not in the traditional meaning of the word. This is pastoral. The New Testament does seem to make the distinction between the two (most obviously in 1 Cor. 12) though the text certainly doesn’t preclude the possibility (or perhaps inevitable?) overlapping. I think Brueggemann’s terminology pushes things a bit.

Overall:

Brueggemann is a must for all students of theology. He is able to bring together exegesis, spiritual theology, praxis, and art in a package to make the text of Scripture something which can, and must be lived out- not just as moral demands, but as a story we join into- the message of the Kingdom of God coming into the present age to tear down oppression and injustice, and bring peace and joy through Jesus Christ. Only when the message of the prophets are examined from multiple angles, as Brueggemann has done, do we understand but also benefit from the text in our striving for kingdom living. This book calls on God’s people in the present to join a story, to reflect what has come before, and speak into the present to shape the future for God’s people. Brueggemann gives us not just an explanation of what was written, but a vision of how that text becomes a model for us to live into God’s ways.

A (Sort of) Book Review: A New Heaven and a New Earth

J. Richard Middleton. A New Heaven and a New Earth: Reclaiming Biblical Eschatology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2014.

Many moons ago (not really, but some days it feels like forever), as an undergrad, I read Al Wolters’ Creation Regained and I remember the hype the instructor and other students had for this book (I was attending Redeemer University College, where Wolters was and still is a professor). I recall being less than completely impressed by it, though I don’t recall why. It was shelved, and, for the most part, forgotten/ignored for many years after that. It was not because I disagreed with Wolters; for the most part I did agree, except on a few nitpicky bits. My best guess is that my interests, studies, and development wasn’t in worldview questions, but elsewhere. Recently I won a copy (three cheers for free books! thanks Baker Academic) of J. Richard Middleton’s A New Heaven and a New Earth, which explores in a fresh and comprehensive way much of what Wolters had written about in Creation Regained. This time around, the topic grabbed me, and this volume is one I got excited about, and which delivered.

What it’s about:

A New Heaven and a New Earth is written as a corrective to theological assumptions (worldviews) which Middleton shows has been influenced by the inclusion of ideas from Greek philosophy with Christian theology. More specifically, Middleton is addressing the view of the ultimate direction of the created order as a whole, and humanity within that world, and the cosmic salvation and renewal of creation which Scripture presents- that is, he is taking a narratival approach to the scope of Scripture and the vision for the future in provides. The common picture of “where we are going” in many circles is of death as a separation of soul and body, with disembodied souls “going to heaven” after death. This, argues Middleton doesn’t square with the biblical depiction of a renewed creation which, having the curse of sin removed and creation healed, will reflect the original intent of creation as a place of flourishing and abundance on the earth which God made good, and into which God placed humanity to cultivate and function as God’s vice-regents. Middleton is seeking to recover the vision of resurrection life in the new creation.

Middleton begins (Introduction) with the roots of the problematic view of “otherworldly” salvation; where did this notion come from, and how did it shape the Christian worldview? Next (Part 1) he examines the picture Scripture gives us of the original design behind creation- a place for the flourishing of human activity, a place of harmony, peace, completeness; a venue for God and creation to be in an abundant connectedness. He also comments on the catastrophic result of human sin, bringing division between humans, a struggle for dominance, and an abuse of creation. Parts 2 & 3 examine the trajectory of biblical salvation; the story of the Old Testament (Part 2) declaring the hope of God’s working for salvation through the Exodus paradigm and the prophetic vision of the Day of the Lord which would bring judgment and salvation and the fulfilment of that paradigm (typology) and vision in the New Testament (Part 3).

Part 4 specifically looks at the texts which have often been drawn on to prop up the problematic view of otherworldly salvation which typically views eschatology as expecting the end of the created world and the continuation of the saved as disembodied souls in heaven following the cosmic conflagration; a total destruction of the corrupt physical world. Middleton aptly unravels the problems and insists that those texts which at first glance appear to speak of a coming end to the physical creation in fact do not, but instead speak of earthly judgment using cosmic imagery and symbolism- that in all these texts the age to come which follows is still centred around God’s people inhabiting God’s new creation.

The final section explores the ethical implications of this understanding of the big picture of biblical worldview. Middleton focuses in on Luke 4, Jesus’ first recorded public announcement in Luke’s Gospel, in which Jesus declares the fulfilment of Isaiah 61. Jesus states that with the coming of God’s renewed creation under his reign, all things are reoriented around justice, mercy, compassion, healing, repentance, and reconciliation. Thus, as participants in the kingdom’s coming on earth as it is in heaven, we are pressed with a Christ-like ethic of care and concern for the vulnerable, and a proclamation of the coming kingdom of God, inviting people to come and be reconciled to God. Thus, a kingdom coming/cosmic salvation view challenges us to move away from an “us vs. them” mentality, to a Christ-for-us view, which seeks to live out the love and grace of God to brother/sister, neighbour, and enemy alike. Thus, our Christology informs our soteriology and eschatology, which informs our ethics and ministry model.

The Good:

Although I already shared Middleton’s view of cosmic salvation, and fully appreciate the narratival approach to Scripture and how that informs both worldview and ethics (at almost every juncture I was nodding in agreement with Middleton), it is wonderful to be reminded of the beautiful vision which Scripture gives us, and the hope which comes from it. There can often be a temptation to specialize, and narrow our theological discussions, and so it can be vital to step back, take glance at the big picture and see how the whole works together. Middleton covers the sweep of Scripture, beginning to end, incorporating all sections of Scripture, even bringing in Wisdom Literature which is sometimes overlooked in discussions of biblical eschatology, as well as capturing key typological connections between the Old Testament and the Gospels, and the ways in which Paul interprets the death and resurrection of Christ in presenting his eschatalogical vision.

His argument is convincing, well laid out, fully substantiated, and considers all the evidence equally and offers gracious correction to opposing views. It is a solid example of how good scholarship should work; avoiding invective, focusing on the text of Scripture, carefully weighing all the data, and working through the practical implications of the conclusions for the Church.

Though not a central concern, I very much appreciated Middleton’s courage to take on two specific issues which are of note for my own interests and personal studies. First, in unpacking Genesis 1 & 2, Middleton takes a firm egalitarian reading, noting the shared vocation and complete equality of male and female in the created order, which is distorted and sent into a destructive and oppressive patriarchal way as a result of the fall into sin, which is being corrected in Christ, removing the stratification of gender relations (Gal. 3:28; see 50-55, 275-6, 276 n. 16). Secondly, Middleton hints at a reading of the new creation which fits with the view of conditional immortality. Middleton offers this not as a dogmatic view but a reasonable and probable conclusion from the biblical evidence using the terms “annihilation of the person” and “cosmic disinheritance, permanent exile from God’s good creation” (207).

The Not-So-Good:

While the implications section is very much welcome in order to work out how the biblical picture of eschatology applies to the life of the Church, there is a bit of a gap here. Middleton’s exegetical and theological work is beyond the average pew-sitter. Most of those who have been through formal theological education have been exposed to most of what Middleton is advocating for in the previous sections. Many (perhaps even most) Pastors and Academics have for quite some time had this view in mind (as best I can tell), but part of the struggle is bringing doctrinal/worldview conclusions from the world of the formally trained, to the pews where the problematic view still persists. Most average church-goers are not prepared to read a 300+ page work dealing with the historical development of eschatalogical and soteriological assumptions, and the influence of Platonic and Stoic ideas on anthropology, eschatology, etc. The basic model Middleton presents has been presented by Wolters, NT Wright, and others at the scholarly and, to a lesser extent, more popular level. While Middleton’s treatment (in my humble opinion) exceeds previous work on this topic which I’ve read both in comprehensiveness and style, it doesn’t bring much in terms of an original vision. It does what has been done before, only better. What hasn’t been done in anything I’ve seen, is take this vision and make it more accessible. I know this wasn’t Middleton’s goal- he wasn’t writing a popular level book, but an academic one, but I think what the church needs is a well crafted popular level version of this. Theologically trained leaders will need to do some of their own work with this to make this reflect in their leadership.

Overall:

Middleton can be commended for producing a fine piece of theological scholarship. As someone whose has recognized expertise in biblical exegesis and theology as well as worldview studies, this is clearly a book which Middleton can produce with excellence (and he has). Profoundly biblical, expertly arranged and written, and firm in its conviction but still gracious in tone, this deserves to be required reading in bible colleges and seminaries. Pastors need to work with this, so that this vision can be brought into the pulpit so that congregations can move away from the problematic view of disembodied souls being taken away from the earth. If this vision takes hold in the Church, the negative view of God’s creation, and the entrenched, triumphalist, exclusive, “circle the wagons” mentality, which has been a dark spot on the Church for far too long, may begin to be chipped away. The Gospel of the Kingdom offers new life. Our Gospel proclamation ought to reflect that, as should our view of both the present and the future. This is a gift to students and pastors which in turn, I hope and pray, will be brought to bear on the leadership they bring to congregations.