Apologetics

Review: Did Jesus Really Say He Was God?

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image of "Did Jesus Really Say He Was God?" by Mikel Del Rosario

Did Jesus Really Say He Was God?

Did Jesus Really Say He Was God?, Mikel Del Rosario. IVP Academic (ISBN: 9781514011010) 2025.

Summary: Using methods of historiography, demonstrates that Jesus opponents believed him to be claiming divinity.

Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God, eternally God with the Father and the Holy Spirit. We also believe he assumed a fully human nature, God and man in one person. But did Jesus ever say he was God in those words? The honest answer is “no.” And for some, this leads to the belief that subsequent to his time on earth, the church “made” him God. However, many of us point to statements in the gospels in which Jesus implies his deity in conversation with his adversaries. They believed him to be making a blasphemous claim to deity and Jesus does not deny it. Furthermore, Jesus teaches and acts in ways consistent with a consciousness of deity. But can we trust these accounts to provide us with reliable, historical information?

That is the question that troubled Mikel Del Rosario as he encountered questions similar to those raised above. In this book Del Rosario focuses on two passages from the earliest gospel, Mark, where Jesus makes implicit claims of divinity understood in those terms by his adversaries. He uses historiographical methods to determine the probability of the different elements in these two passages and the overall probability that the implicit claims of divinity are highly evidenced facts. The two passages he considers are Mark 2:1-12, the healing of the paralytic, and Mark 14:53-65, Jesus examination before the Jewish Sanhedrin.

In the first part of the book, he discusses his historiographical methods and the rules of evidence he and other historians use in investigating Jesus. He sets out seven rules of evidence which he will apply: 1. multiple attestation; 2. dissimilarity (from both Jewish sources and subsequent church sources; 3. rejection and execution; 4. coherence; 5. embarrassment (elements that would be embarrassing to the church); 6. contextual plausibility; and 7. inherent ambiguity.

In Part Two, he examines the healing of the paralytic. He identifies five historical facts that he believes are at least highly probable: Jesus reputation as a miracle worker, the core scene, Jesus forgiveness saying, the scribal response, and Jesus authority saying. The conclusion was that it is highly probable, historically, that Jesus exercises divine authority to forgive sin.

In similar fashion he applies the rules of evidence to examine five historical facts in the Jewish examination of Jesus. Firstly, the authenticity of Jesus rejection by Jewish leaders and crucifixion, which he deems certainly historical. Then the remaining four facts are highly probable: the authenticity of the core scene, the authenticity of the high priest’s question, the authenticity of Jesus’ reply, and the authenticity of the blasphemy charge. Again, he concludes it was highly probable that Jesus spoke of himself as the Son of the Blessed. Likewise, it’s highly probable that his adversaries understood this as a blasphemous assertion of deity.

Then, in the final part of the book, he assesses this conclusion against those of Bart Ehrman, Tobias Hagerland, and Daniel Kirk. He found that in terms of plausibility, scope, explanatory power, and the use of less ad hoc, his analysis came out better than each of these. He concludes that Jesus did implicitly say he was God, and there are good historical grounds to believe this. And this was believed by the earliest Christians, not made up in later years.

All this stands and falls on the validity of his historiography. Can the probability of the core facts of these passages be established using the methods he uses? As far as I can tell, he uses methods used by others. I would like more discussion of why others reach different conclusions. I do appreciate the engagement with other prominent scholars. Above all, he gives even firmer grounds for those of us who have used these passages to argue Christ’s deity. He likewise provides a good basis for the conviction that this idea came from Jesus himself. He does all this carefully and methodically. This is a valuable and encouraging study.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Why I’m Still a Christian

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image for "Why I'm Still a Christian" by Justin Brierly

Why I’m Still a Christian, Justin Brierly. Tyndale | Elevate (ISBN: 9781496466938) 2025.

Summary: After two decades of interviews with atheists and skeptics, the author explains why he still follows Christ.

Justin Brierly hosted a podcast called Unbelievable? for nearly two decades. During this time he interviewed numerous atheists, skeptics, and believers from other religions. Among his guests were Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, and Philip Pullman. They had spirited, no-holds-barred but civil conversations. Sometimes Brierly hosted dialogues between Christians and skeptics. Despite a steady diet of atheist and skeptic challenges to Christian belief, Brierly remains a Christian. In this book, he offers his reasons why, often elaborating these in the context of those conversations.

However, Brierly begins by explaining why he pursued these conversations. In short, he was tired of Christians talking to themselves in their own echo chambers. He wanted better conversations–ones that weren’t scripted but rather open-ended. He sought real dialogue between thoughtful skeptics and Christian believers. It wasn’t “safe.” He confesses that it caused him to struggle afresh with questions about his faith. But he created a space for honest discussion, something many seekers appreciated.

The next seven chapters offer Brierly’s reasons for believing in the context of issues raised in his discussions. These include:

  • God makes sense of human existence. He explores why there is something rather than nothing, the fine-tuning of the universe, and multiverse explanations.
  • God makes sense of human value. Why do we believe in human rights and dignity? Why are some things just wrong? While skeptics often concur with these judgments and live moral lives, Brierly argues Christianity provides the best explanation for why we value human beings.
  • God makes sense of human purpose. Humans are purpose-oriented creatures. But why is this so? Is it just biology? Should we worry about this or just enjoy life? The fact of our longings, as Lewis pointed out, may be best explained by the idea that we were made for another world.
  • The evidence for Jesus. Some, including Richard Dawkins, propose that the very existence of Jesus is a fiction. Others reinvent him into a guru, a zealot, or even a husband. He points to an interview with skeptic Bart Ehrman, who dismantles these claims, as well as pointing to Richard Bauckham’s work on the gospel as credible eyewitness accounts of Jesus.
  • Facts that only fit the resurrection. Perhaps the clearest evidence for the life of Jesus is the evidence of his death and his followers claims that he rose from the dead. But how is this plausible? Brierly discusses the “minimal facts” approach of Michael Licona and Gary Habermas including five facts best explained by the bodily resurrection of Jesus. He also considers objections to this approach.
  • The atheist’s greatest objection: suffering. He takes on board the serious challenge this poses and the limits of any explanation. He notes that the objection implies a moral basis to the universe and that doing away with God doesn’t do away with trying to explain suffering. He also notes the realities of human free will–that we are responsible for much of the world’s evil–and that we are in a spiritual war zone.
  • Atheism 2.0. Brierly addresses five “atheist memes” that have been raised by Richard Dawkins. One of these concerns a God who would send one to hell not being worth worshipping. We learn that Brierly is among those who would endorse an annihilationist rather than eternal conscious torment understanding of hell (as did John Stott).

In the final two chapters Brierly addresses those “deconstructing” their faith and those investigating Christianity. First, Brierly notes the reasons people “deconstruct” and then draws on a dialogue between Jon Steingard, a former Christian, and Sean McDowell. pointing the way toward reconstruction. Finally, Brierly talks about choosing to live in the Christian story, including “atheist prayer experiments,” the question of what evidence will convince someone to believe, and that above all, God seeks not belief but relationship. Ultimately, quoting Os Guinness, he asserts “The Christian faith is not true because it works; it works because it is true.”

What sets this book apart from other apologetic texts is that it roots reasons in real conversations rather than hypothetical topics. For many of us, it was conversations with skeptical friends that drove us to clarify our reasons for believing. Or it was our own investigation of Christianity, asking our own hard questions and honestly seeking answers. That’s what makes this such a helpful resource whether you are the Christian engaging a friend’s skepticism or a skeptic giving the faith an honest look.

There are no “silver bullets” or ‘lead pipe cinch” arguments here. What you have are reasons to believe that have proven sufficiently credible to sustain Brierly through two decades of conversations with skeptics. They’ve helped remove obstacles on the way to faith for some. That’s not everything. But it’s something to be reckoned with.

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Finally, thanks for visiting Bob on Books.  I appreciate that you spent time here. Feel to “look around” – see the tabs at the top of the website, and the right hand column. And use the buttons below to share this post. Blessings! [Adapted from Enough Light, a blog I follow.]

Review; An Essay on Christian Philosophy

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image of "An Essay on Christian Philosophy" by Jacques Maritain

An Essay on Christian Philosophy, Jacques Maritain. Open Road Media (ISBN: 9781504081245) 2022 (first published in 1955).

Summary: Explores what is distinctive about Christian philosophy with notes on apologetics and moral philosophy.

Can there be any such thing as a “Christian” philosophy, and if so, in what does it consist? In 1931 Jacques Maritain, a Catholic philosopher delivered a paper at a conference at the University of Louvain. He addresses these questions in the context of a dialogue between Etienne Gilson, Emile Brehier, and Maurice Blondel. This occupies the first part of the essay, in which the question of whether philosophy and faith have anything to do with one another.

Maritain argues that Christian belief can enrich philosophy in offering new ideas for rational consideration including that of creation, of God subsisting in God’s self, and unique perspectives on the question of the person raised by the Triune revelation of God. Maritain argues that such insights are not removed from reason but may enrich it. He proposes that reasoning from nature provides knowledge of the existence of God but this is enriched by revealed insights.

At the same time, he contends that philosophy is always ancillary, or a handmaid, to theology. Moreover, he contends that moral philosophy in a fallen world is subalternate to theological ethics. In all this he draws heavily on both Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, believing the latter’s work provides a foundation for Christian philosophical work.

This work also includes brief essays on Maritain’s ideas on the role of faith-informed reason in the work of apologetics, and further elaborating the ideas already touched on concerning moral philosophy.

I found this a challenging read. Some has to do with Maritain’s context, unfamiliar to me. The writing is also dense, laden with philosophical jargon. This edition helps with providing a glossary of many of the technical terms Maritain uses. This is an academic paper, given for other specialists. I hope at some point that someone will produce an annotated version. The ideas are important as a model of what it means to think Christianly about anything. Maritain significantly influenced John Paul II’s personalism. This essay is a concise summary of a significant part of his thought. It is worthy of explication.

Review: Beyond the Wager

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment
Cover image of "Beyond the Wager" by Douglas Groothuis

Beyond the Wager: The Christian Brilliance of Blaise Pascal, Douglas Groothuis. IVP Academic (ISBN: 9781514001783) 2024.

Summary: Argues that Pascal’s brilliance extends beyond his famous “wager” to his scientific, philosophic, and Christian insights.

Justly or unjustly, Blaise Pascal is often most known for his “Wager.” He argues that faith in God is in one’s best interest. If indeed God exists and rewards belief in him, this is of infinite gain while unbelief entails infinite loss. By contrast if one believes and God does not exist, the losses are relatively minimal. In Beyond the Wager, Douglas Groothuis not only defends the Wager but argues for the brilliance of Pascal, particularly as a Christian thinker, as revealed in Pensees.

Groothuis, a noted Christian apologist, has been reading Pensees since 1977. This work is a revision and expansion on an earlier work, On Pascal, published in 2003. Specifically, he adds chapters on miracles and prophecy pertaining to Christ, the excellence of Christ, “Christianity, Muhammad, and the Jews,” and on Pascals critique of politics. In addition, he includes a delightful imagined dialogue between Pascal and Descartes.

In introducing his subject, Groothuis proposes that Pascal is both well-known and unknown. He made contributions in math and science (as well as inventing the first prototype of mass transit, the omnibus). What is less understood is his brilliance as a Christian thinker. Pascal, without jettisoning reason, recognized that belief “involved submitting the core of one’s being to a supernatural being who calls one into a transformational encounter and ongoing engagement” in response to the heart’s perception of God. This is what is behind his statement that “the heart has its reasons of which reason knows nothing.” He understands Pascal as one who lived between the Medieval Age and the Enlightenment, both a devout Catholic and yet reformer in sympathy with the Jansenists. And he was both a philosopher who endorsed much of the Cartesian world, yet never separated science from God.

After a brief biography of Pascal, who died at 39, he explores how Pascal developed our understanding of both the nature and limits of science. Then he turns to the theological controversy he engaged on behalf of the Jansenists against the Jesuits. The Jesuits argued that divine choice and human freedom were incompatible and emphasized human choice. Pascal, anticipating the Protestant Reformers, argued for compatibilism, that external determination and personal choice were compatible.

Following this discussion, Groothuis turns to the Pensees, which will occupy the remainder of the book. Noting its fragmentary and incomplete nature, Groothuis calls attention to Pascal’s basic plan for the work. Pascal divided it in two parts: the wretchedness of man without God and the happiness of man with God. He defends it as an apologetic and delineates Pascal’s three orders of being: the body, the mind, and the heart. Each are essential to knowledge of God.

Subsequently, Groothuis deals first with Pascal’s arguments for God, including his sense of the limits of natural theology. Instead he shows how our human condition as “magnificent wretches” points us not only toward God but toward our need. He explores Pascal’s ideas in the light of skepticism about the hiddenness of God and how this relates to our fallenness. Groothuis show how Pascal argues from the human condition to our need for divine revelation and redemption. He then discusses Pascal’s treatment of miracles and prophecy to attest to the uniqueness of Christ as the Savior who atoned through the cross, addressing the human condition. All of this culminates in a chapter on the excellence of Christ, captured in Pascal’s description of Christ’s “offices” in 106 words. Groothuis discusses what this means for our spiritual life, our experience of suffering and for a thinking body of Christ.

Given the contemporary challenge of Islam, Groothuis shows how Pascal argued for the superiority of Christ and the Bible. Interestingly, he outlines Pascal’s argument for Christianity from Judaism and against Islam, that Jesus, not Muhammad, is the prophet foreseen by Moses. Then, Groothuis comes to the Wager, expositing Pascal’s framing of the Wager, showing how one must wager and addressing objections to the Wager. This is followed by a chapter summarizing Pascal’s critiques of culture and politics. Pascal had a penetrating view of the pomps and pretenses of politics and culture. He argues that Christ offers the only sane point in an insane world.

Groothuis concludes by commending Pascal as a guide. He is a mentor who exemplifies ardent love for Christ. Pascal’s grasp of the human condition helps us understand both ourselves and others. His literary gifts across multiple disciplines may motivate writers to excellence. As an innovative scientist, he models a philosophy of science reflecting a biblical worldview. His biting wit as he considers culture and politics challenges us to forsake worldly embraces of pomp and power for godliness. And Pensees is a goldmine of insight for apologists.

Douglas Groothuis makes a strong case for renewed attention to the life and writing of Blaise Pascal as a Christian thinker. He brings a framework to our reading of the fragmented and unfinished Pensees, helping us to recognize the intellectual as well as devotional brilliance of this work. He defends Pascal against his detractors, including the arguments against Pascal’s Wager. But beyond all this, his discussion of the thought of Pascal shows the far-reaching character of his brilliance. Now to find my copy of Pensees….

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Persuasive Apologetics

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment

Persuasive Apologetics, Jeffrey M. Robinson. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2023.

Summary: Discusses how we use various apologetic approaches adapted to the various people we meet, thoughtfully and gently seeking to undercut their objections, giving reasons for our hope in Christ.

Jeffrey Robinson is convinced as a pastor that there is still a need for apologetics, indeed for persuasion in seeking to call people to belief in the gospel. He believes persuading people of the truth is simply part of the call all of us have to faithful witness, that it glorifies God, and flows from the commands to love God and others with all our being, including our minds. But our demeanor is crucial, calling for integrity and gentleness.

Understanding a person’s worldview suppositions is crucial to persuasion. For one thing, often only Christians are assumed to have them, when in fact we all do. Robinson offers examples of uncovering these in conversation, exposing inconsistencies, and showing how Christian belief better addresses these, or even how other systems live off inherited Christian belief.

Robinson then discusses different apologetic approaches: fideism, classical apologetics, evidentialism, and presuppositionalism, and reformed epistemology. Rather than advocating a single approach, he would propose that an eclectic apologetic is what we need–different approaches to persuade different people. In the same chapter, as he discusses the noetic effects of sin, he cites James Spiegel’s The Making of an Atheist to talk about “father wounds”–absent, abusive, and aloof, fathers–and the many famous atheists for whom this is true (no counter-examples are listed). I found this intriguing but have also found there were “church wounds”–whether the dismissal of questions or personal observation of hypocrisy or abuse

He turns to the role of undercutting defeaters (UCDs), which rather than rebutting conclusions, undercut and reveal the flaws in a reasoning process. He shows how Jesus does this in the hypothetical of the woman with seven husbands who died, his response to being accused of casting out demons with Satan’s power (the house divided argument), and the question about paying taxes to Caesar. He then explores examples that arise including the hypocrisy in the church objection. He follows this with a discussion comparing Jesus to other religious leaders. He then concludes with reasons for hope in the incarnation and the resurrection and how the work of Christ addresses evil and death.

This work does not replace classic works on apologetics but refers the reader to these. Rather, Robinson argues for the part of persuasion, off both offering reasons to believe and gently but with conviction encouraging others to examine their own beliefs. He offers help in how we respond to and undercut objections to the faith, and how we speak to the crucial issue of hope. A willingness to contend for truth can be an act of loving well.

I found much of value here, including the reaffirmation of the importance of persuasion. At the same time, I would love to see a discussion of persuasion that includes the witness of beauty, the power of loving Christian community, and even the persuasive power of being in the presence of praying Christians. I have seen people come to faith through all of these and wonder how the author would incorporate this into his “eclectic” and “versatile” apologetic. Personally, I like the idea of using everything at our disposal to make known the wonder of God’s saving work through Christ!

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: The Deconstruction of Christianity

/ rtrube54 / 2 Comments

The Deconstruction of Christianity, Alisa Childers and Tim Barnett. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale Elevate, (Forthcoming, January 30,) 2024.

Summary: A study of what the authors term the “deconstruction movement.” why this needs to be taken seriously, and how to respond to loved ones who are “deconstructing.”

As I read some of the copy associated with this book, I was initially inclined to be somewhat skeptical of the contention that there is a “deconstruction movement.” I’ve worked in collegiate ministry for over forty years and have witnessed alarmist scares over a series of “movements”: scientism, postmodernism, New Age Aquarian conspiracies, the new atheism, Critical Race Theory, and more. We get people in the pews very concerned with “be afraid, be very afraid” rhetoric. And it sells–at least until the next scare arises. In a few years to a decade, the prominence of these ideologies tends to recede into the melange of ideas that shape our cultural mindset. None of these has been a “slate wiper” for the Christian community but rather an intellectual challenge to be met and engaged in the lives of real people who hold these ideas and embrace these beliefs.

The authors of this book made a case for me that faith deconstruction is more than merely a personal experience a number of Christians are undergoing, one that may actually lead to a deeper walk with Christ. For one thing, it encourages a mindset that goes beyond asking questions, expressing doubts, or processing negative, even abusive experiences with the hope of reformation, coming to a deeper grasp of what one believes, discerning what was a false expression of biblical faith, and more deeply loving God. Rather, it pursues a route of not only denouncing abuses but dismissing the Bible, rightly understood, as the authoritative source for our lives, first questioning and then deny what God has said, making the only authority in our lives the autonomous self. There are not toxic aspects of Christianity. Christianity as an undifferentiated whole is dismissed as toxic. And young people who once identified as Christian are walking away in droves.

The other aspect is the network of communication channels, podcasts, and figures who self-syle themselves as deconstruction coaches. They document the number of figures in the Christian celebrity culture who have “deconstructed” and proclaim their deconstruction as vigorously (and sometime profitably) as they proclaimed their faith. One of the authors, Alisa, was part of the girl group, ZOEgirl and describes the corrosive aspects of that culture that could be disillusioning and more.

The authors’ suggest that we not use a distinction between “good” and “bad” deconstruction. They propose instead, the idea of reformation for a process of winnowing out cultural falsehoods, wrongful abuses from the truth of the gospel. They freely admit to a number of the problems that many exiting churches note: biblical literalism, patriarchy, homophobia, political conservatism, and nationalism. They note how many were discouraged from asking questions by leaders but also the thin veneer of instruction and formation in the faith many received. Reformation brings all this to God, examines all of this in the light of scripture, brings lamentations of trauma and hurt to Christ. Deconstruction is different, not only leaving behind toxic elements, but branding it all toxic, including God.

The authors look at the rhetoric used on social media. They observe how scripture is distorted, often in convenient meme statements. The identify the methodology behind deconstruction of identifying a societal problem, showing ways the church was complicit, and concluding that the cause is warped evangelical theology. They explore what we mean by “true” and “faith.”

The book concludes on a note of hope. The authors explore the importance of questions but also of helping questioners be honest about whether they are seeking answers or exits. They offer wise counsel for loved ones of those amid deconstruction, including prayer, being a safe presence, doing triage (are they truly deconstructing or simply asking questions, are they moving away from or toward God, and they set and respect boundaries. They tell stories of those who have returned to a deeper, vibrant faith.

I think the one place where the book weakens its argument is in its attempt to defend complementarianism against charges of patriarchy in the church and its brief attempt to refute Beth Allison Barr’s critique in The Making of Biblical Womanhood. Complementarianism as it has been lived out in many churches, including the ways it was reflected in purity culture, has contributed to the disillusionment of many with the church. I can envision some putting down the book at this point, which is unfortunate because it is ancillary to the basic argument of the book.

That argument, what people are doing when they deconstruct, the complex of ideas that undergird deconstruction, and the network of speakers, media channels, and coaches advocating and supporting deconstruction, needs to be reckoned with as we try to understand what is happening with youth who are walking away from not only from churches but the Christian faith. The alternative, reformation, is one we would hope many would take. But it is not only disillusioned youth in need of reformation. The deconstruction the authors describe can point to toxic practice and theology, albeit distorted and exaggerated by deconstructors in their rhetoric, for which the church is also desperately in need of reformation. Even as we hope to point those questioning back to scripture and to King Jesus, so we need to join them to hear what the Lord would say to us all.

________________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher.

Review: The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God

/ rtrube54 / 2 Comments

The Surprising Rebirth of Belief in God, Justin Brierly. Carol Stream: Tyndale Elevate, 2023.

Summary: A journalist and podcast host makes the case that we may be seeing a new wave of people coming to faith in God and why this is so.

This book opens with Matthew Arnold’s “Dover Beach,” which describes the ebbing of the “Sea of Faith” hearing “Its meloncholy, long, withdrawing roar.” It has seemed that we are in the midst of such a time. We have witnessed the rise of the New Atheism, a self-confident attack that ridiculed the irrationality, and indeed, the immorality of the God of Christianity. Various scandals of money, sex, and power in the churches, combined with the intertwining of church and extreme political positions sent many to the exits. We witnessed the rise of the “Nones” and a series of confessional blogs of people “deconstructing” their faith, often de-converting in the process.

Justin Brierly observes that tides that ebb also flow back, and he contends that he is also seeing a return to belief in God, with an embrace of Christianity by many but not all who do. He’s in a unique position to do so, hosting the Unbelieveable podcast, bringing together believing and secular thinkers in conversation, and being surprised at what is happening in the lives of some of his “secular” guests.

He begins with a chronicle of the rise and fall of the New Atheism movement, chronicling its self-destruction amid sexist and racist pronouncements, and its inability to come forward with meaningful proposals to replace what it was tearing down. Meanwhile, its challenge energized a new generation of Christian apologists who discovered that faith is often strongest under attack.

He describes the turn toward Christianity of figures like Jordan Peterson and Peter Boghassian, once an atheist firebrand who increasingly found himself siding with Christians. He recounts interviewing Douglas Murray, a gay, agnostic journalist haunted by the faith he once scorned. Ancient historian Tom Holland is another he discusses, who came to the realization that the Western view of the world, even in its secular humanist version, that stood in such sharp contrast with the ancients, was fundamentally Christian at its roots.

Brierly chronicles a crisis of meaning for which atheism did not have an answer. He recounts how actor David Suchet found that meaning in reading the Bible and goes on to discuss how various skeptics have rediscovered the Bible and the reasons for its reliability. Likewise, science, far from disproving faith raises intriguing questions of order and the fine-tuning of the universe and the unique conditions that produced and sustained life on earth. The war is not between science and faith but between scientists who do not believe and those who do, a matter of the heart and not the science. He singles out Francis Collins and Rosalind Picard as ones who changed their minds and have believed. He observes the self-defeating arguments of determinist materialists.

He concludes with the story of Paul Kingsnorth, a naturalist and one-time Wiccan and now Orthodox Christian, who believed because it was a story that made sense of his life. He argues that there are three things the church needs to do to prepare for a returning wave of people coming to faith:

  1. Embrace both reason and imagination
  2. Keep Christianity weird–that is, distinctively Christian
  3. Create a community that counters cancel culture

This last is striking both for the idea of physical community amid increasing isolation, and the ability of the gospel to transcend difference–that allows difference without cancelling.

Brierly is careful throughout to distinguish genuine converts and those who simply have moved toward God. His ability to bring people who differ into conversation means he doesn’t expect neat packages. He also offers the challenge that this time, far from one about which Christians ought be depressed, can be a time of reinvigorated and intellectually stimulated faith. The stories also evidence the work of God as skeptics have dreams, read scripture, or simply take a hard look at the evidence around them.

It might be argued that Brierly is putting forward an overly optimistic case. Time will tell. I suspect that what he does is offer a counter-story to the pessimistic, doom and gloom stories filling much of evangelical publishing and press accounts. Brierly acknowledges the problems but also draws on the evidence of history that these never defeat God and that God is often at work amid these, birthing new life. His stories of real people suggest that what happened with them is possible for others. If you are wondering if there is any basis to hold out hope in a time of apparent decline, this is an account worth reading.

________________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher.

Review: Humble Confidence

/ rtrube54 / 2 Comments

Humble Confidence, Benno van den Toren and Kang-San Tan. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2022.

Summary: A model of dialogical apologetics for a multi-faith world committed to accountable and embodied witness that is culturally sensitive, holistic, and yet centered in Christ.

The world in which Christian witness and the work of the apologist has changed. Once it could be assumed that both the apologist and the person or people he or she was engaged with shared a common, Western outlook. Today, even in the West, let alone other contexts, that assumption no longer holds. The Christian witness finds oneself in a multi-faith, pluralistic context of Eastern religions, primal religions, Islam, secularism, and cobbled-together spiritualities.

In place of the foundationalist apologetics once assumed, the authors propose a model of apologetic dialogue that takes the multi-faith, multi-cultural realities of mission in today’s world seriously, exercising a posture both of humility as learners understanding the outlook of those with whom they engage and confidence centered around the person and work of Christ and its universal relevance to the human condition.

The co-authors, who have lived and worked in missional contexts in various parts of the world contend that such apologetic witness must be embodied in the witnessing community. Theoretical discussions must reflect the lived realities of the witnessing community. This witness also must reflect awareness that truth is embedded in cultural contexts, both of the witness and the listener, but that we are not imprisoned by those cultural realities.

They grapple with how we ought see other religions, refusing to see them merely as idolatrous falsehoods on the one hand, nor their adherents as simply fellow pilgrims on the other. Rather, they employ multiple perspectives undergirded by seeking to discern the work of the triune God in the particular context. This also leads to an understanding of apologetic dialogue as a witness to the God who came to us in the person of the Son and remains present in the world through his Spirit. Apologetics cannot be separated from our witness to the work of the Triune God.

At the same time, just as this entry of God into the world was culturally embedded in Israel and the Greco-Roman empire, apologetic dialogue respectfully listens and learns about the cultural embeddedness of other beliefs while gesturing to a reality beyond both partners in the dialogue against which we reckon our understanding. This includes both tensions between beliefs and realities and also with the desires and will of our dialogue partners.

Along the way the authors address issues such as the trustworthiness of the biblical witness to Christ, the uniqueness of Christ amid cultural relativism, and the critique against the use of Christianity as a cloak for Western imperialism.

The second half of the book applies this framework to case studies of apologetic dialogue with a variety of faith perspectives: primal religions, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, secularism, and what they call “late-modern spiritualities.” We explore ways Christ may subvert some forms of the Hindu quest, tensions in Buddhism between the oneness of all things and the significance of persons, and the dismissal of evil and suffering as illusion that inadequately address lived experience. and the integrity of Christian faith, including the idea of the Trinity in dialogue with Islam.

The case studies are helpful in seeing how they apply their ideas of apologetic dialogue. In particular, I appreciate the focus on attentive listening and understanding of cultures, of embodied and accountable witness, centered in scripture’s witness to the work of the Triune God in the person of his Son and the continuing ministry of the Spirit. Rather than a “we’re right/you’re wrong approach” on one hand and a “let’s all just walk in pilgrimage together” approach on the other, this assumes that while we witness to Christ from within our cultural contexts and others similarly live and believe from theirs, there is truth beyond to which we witness yet do not own, but to which we, and all, must give account.

The book also includes a study guide with recommendations for further reading. It answers a significant need for a resource speaking to how we engage in witness and even apologetic persuasion, yet with humility rather than arrogance, with cultural sensitivity and respect rather than imperialistic blindness to the other.

_______________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher.

Review: Eyes to See

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment

Eyes to See, Tim Muehlhoff (Foreword by J. P. Moreland). Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2021.

Summary: An exploration of how God acts in the ordinary elements of everyday life, the idea of common grace, and how we may be encouraged as we recognize these ways of God at work.

When we think of the idea of God at work, we often look for the extraordinary, and we may wonder why we do not see more of that. Tim Muehlhoff believes in this extraordinary work, but he also wants to help us recognize the ordinary, yet beautiful ways God is at work in everyday life. Classically, this is the idea of common grace, the goodness God pours out on all creation: “He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous” (Matthew 5:45).

Muehlhoff goes beyond the sun and the rain in exploring God’s everyday goodness. He begins with inventions and the instances when human beings arrived at similar solutions to problems, for example the stethoscope. He considers a number of human inventions, and while not arguing this as a proof for God, proposes that there are many instances of this hidden goodness meeting the needs of the world.

In subsequent chapters he turns to different realms in which we see this goodness. In science, we understand the incredible fine-tuning of the universe and our particular location on earth that makes life possible, and also the wonderful breakthroughs to sustain life, such as the accidental discovery of penicillin and the developments of antibiotics and vaccines to complement our amazing immune systems. He calls our attention to the power of art to help us recognize both providence and fallenness in our world when we are otherwise oblivious to it. He weighs the power of words and communication not only to hurt but to heal and illumine with quotes from Hinduism, Buddha, Muhammad, Confucius, Luther Standing Bear, and even atheist Sam Harris. He does not shrink from addressing the horror of war and even discusses Israel’s war against the Canaanites, drawing on the work of Paul Copan. He observes strong tradition of just war, the Geneva Conventions, and the beginnings of the Red Cross. Amid evil, goodness remains and eventually triumphs.

Throughout the book, he addresses objections and comes back to this in the final chapter, preceding his epilogue. He addresses:

  • Is everything common grace?
  • How can we know for sure?
  • Why doesn’t God act sooner?
  • Does common grace limit God’s activity?

Muehlhoff offers a discussion that is concise, carefully reasoned and illustrated with numerous examples from contemporary culture. He concludes the book with the hope that knowing God’s abundant work in everyday life will cause us to “see the world with wonder as we encounter good gifts daily” and fill our mouths with telling the deeds of this God.

____________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher in exchange for an honest review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.