The Jesus Paradigm

Book Review- The Jesus Paradigm, David Alan Black, Energion Publishers, 2009.

First off, I must apologize for taking such an incredibly long time to read and review this book. In order to get an advance copy, I told the publisher I would read it, write a review, and publish it on my blog. Well that was over a year ago, I think, and here I am, finally getting around to it. Before I get to the review proper, I want to say a little bit about why now, after so many months, did I finally read this relatively short book. In a nutshell, the Lord has been teaching me a great deal lately about the need to be a radical follower of Jesus. I listened to some very influential sermons by folks like Paul Washer, Bob Jennings, and others, on the need to be totally devoted to Christ. Also, I have been convicted of the need to live out the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture. We as Evangelicals like to say a lot about the innerancy of Scripture, but not much is ever mentioned about the sufficiency of Scripture. I have come to believe more and more that the Bible speaks just as clearly to how we are to live and order our lives as it does to what we are to believe. So, as I was thinking of these things, mainly the question, “How do we work out the sufficiency of Scripture as radical followers of Jesus in 21st century America?” I remembered The Jesus Paradigm, sitting in my office gathering dust, addressed many of these issues. I picked it up last Wednesday evening and decided to read it during my day off. Now I know the reason I never got around to reading it last year was due to the simple fact that I was not ready for the contents on these pages. God had not yet brought me to the place where I saw my great need to be totally and completely different than the world around me. I had yet to embrace the need to be radically different than even most “Christians.” Enter The Jesus Paradigm.
The main theme of the book is the sufficiency of Scripture to order every aspect of our lives. Every chapter seeks to bring to bear the sufficiency of Scripture on a particular topic. I genuinely appreciate the way in which brother Dave continually seeks to call his reader back to his need to decide whether or not the Bible will be his ultimate authority. Several times in the course of the book, Dave points out that the church is at a cross roads: business as usual or radical adherence to the New Testament. If the main theme of the book is the sufficiency of Scripture, the main question is, “How does one follow Jesus unreservedly in the twenty-first century?” (p.15) The solution one finds fleshed out in the various topics addressed through the course of the book is rather simple; in short, by restoring the Scriptures to their proper place in our lives and by following the example of Jesus, the humble, suffering Christ.
Subsequently, in each chapter Dave seeks to address some key areas in which this answer must be implemented in order to see true change in our churches and culture. First, we must return to the eminency of the local church. We can no longer play at church. We must really be the church like the writers of the New Testament and our Savior command us to be. “The church is simply a group of radical Jesus-followers ministering to each other sacrificially and reaching the community about them with the Gospel in word and deed.” (18)
Second, we must make a clean break with Christendom and churchianity in order to follow Christ. Believers today must decide if they are going to follow the Word wherever it leads them or only some places. The church needs to be restored to the New Testament. Will we do what it takes? Or will we be shackled to denominational tradition? On this point Dave utilizes the help of the Anabaptists to show us how this can practically be done. “The Anabaptists greatest gift to the church…was their ability to cut to the core of our problem as Christians: our refusal to repudiate churchianity and to be radically committed to Jesus as Lord.” (21)
Third, we must implement New Testament patterns of body life into our local assemblies. Dave points out the correlation between the majority of American’s abdication of responsibility and husbands’ abdication of their roles as leaders and fathers. Simply put, every member is a minister, but men have systematically abandoned their responsibilities to the pastors, and so we’re left with top heavy, entertainment driven organizations where people come to get felt needs met rather than to function as the body of Christ. What the church needs is a fresh realization that “God’s call to salvation and his call to mission are one and the same.” (75)
Fourth, Dave explains how the church must begin taking leadership cues from Christ and the Bible rather than from denominational tradition and the world. One-anothering and plural, equal eldership are necessities. Because Jesus is the only senior pastor, all church leadership must be non-hierarchical. We are all brothers in Christ and there are no second rate brothers.
Fifth, Christians need to return to the politics of Jesus. Jesus wasn’t anti-political, He was apolitical. He never took sides with any of the ruling parties of his day, never tried to bring about His kingdom on earth, never gave undue priority to kings or magistrates. Instead, He placed all priority on the Kingdom of Heaven, which is not of this world. We too ought to do likewise, “Christians today must maintain an ultimate commitment to Christ and eschew loyalty to a political party—any political party.” (106)
Sixth, by focusing on missions, giving our all to God, and loving our neighbors, we will take the Jesus paradigm to the ends of the earth. In his final chapter, brother Dave makes a heart-felt appeal to believers to be about missions, taking the gospel to those who need it most. Are we going to be Great Commission churches? families? individuals? What will we be known as? Dave’s words are convicting, “Fundamentally, my wife and I want to be known as ‘Great Commission Christians,’ people burdened by the needs all around us, including the ‘ends of the earth.’” (133)
Finally, the book concludes with an afterwards on the future of theological education. In this section Dave briefly states the need for biblical education to be returned to the local church and for local congregations to become the primary training center for pastor-teachers, and the primary sending agency of missionaries. He ends with a challenging word, “Let us confess and cooperate with God by throwing out the stuff that is displeasing to him and recommitting ourselves to a Gospel- and kingdom-driven lifestyle.” (143) I pray the Lord will give me the strength to do this!
On the whole, this is a tremendous book, and I’ve already recommended it to several folks since reading it. I am so thankful for Dave’s emphasis on the sufficiency of Scripture and the priority of the local church. These are two things that have been on my heart lately, and it leapt within me in agreement many times while I read. I also appreciated the candid nature and down to earth writing style Dave employs (there are so many quotable one liners!!)
But, the book is not without its faults. Unfortunately, the entire book has an undercurrent of criticism of the Bush administration and Iraq war that pop up in the most unexpected places and seem to color a fair portion of the discussion. Because of this, the section on the Politics of Jesus is very muddled and difficult to read without getting a bit annoyed. Not that I even necessarily disagree with Dave, but his biases shine through so clearly that you have a hard time believing he’s adopted the apolitical mindset he seems to be advocating. Aside from this, I have no other criticisms.
In sum, The Jesus Paradigm is a timely book that will really challenge you in all the right ways. Are we going to continue to seek success in manner in which the world suggests? Or, will we travel the downward path to Jesus and embrace the better way of Scripture and suffering. The choice is left up to the reader, but one thing is clear: upon reading The Jesus Paradigm, a choice must be made.

New blog

Hey there fellow bloggers and bloggettes. I'm writing to inform you that I've created a new blog by the name of LibraryHumor. This blog will be mainly devoted to funny books I find around the library. I know that sounds like a dumb idea at first, but if you had any idea some of the stuff I've seen on these shelves you'd understand. I'll add it to the blogroll of the left. Enjoy!

"Whole" Salvation or "Soul" Salvation?

As I mentioned previously, I've been working my way through N. T. Wright's newest book: Surprised By Hope. In the final third of this book he is discussing the implications of life after life after death for the local church and the lives of believers; how do we live out the consequences of the resurrection here and now? The first way in which Wright suggests that we ought to change our thinking and practices is in the area of salvation. He states that believers need to seriously rethink what salvation means in light of the fact that heaven is not our "final resting place" or our ultimate goal, as many Christians mistakenly believe. He makes some good points and raises some good questions. One that has particularly got me thinking is his question of whole salvation versus soul salvation. Whole salvation, he contends, is the salvation of the entire person, soul, mind, body, life, etc. Soul salvation is simply being saved from sin and to heaven, or something along those lines.

I applaud Wright for calling people to realize that you can't just get someone "saved" and then leave them in the exact condition in which you found them. The church I am a member of here in Raleigh, Treasuring Christ Church, emphasizes this point frequently. People need to hear the gospel, but they may also need help financially to get them out of a life of bondage to poverty, or counsel to help them get on track to get free from debt, or an education to free them from the slavery of illiteracy and ignorance, and the list could go on and on. So, I definitely understand what Wright means when he says we need to recapture a theology of whole salvation. However, I had a problem with his exegesis to get to this point. His main text was Mark 5 and the parallel passage in Matthew 9, which tell the story of the healing the woman with the issue of blood. My great trouble with Wright's exegesis was his translation, and subsequent interpretation, of Mark 5:34 and Matt 9:22. In Greek, both of these passages use the word sozo, which is commonly translated "to save." However, no major English version translates Mark 5:34 or Matt 9:22 as "saved." They all opt for another meaning of sozo; "healed," or "made well." Herein lies my main disagreement with Wright. It seems as if from his translation and exegesis of these passages that he believes this woman experienced whole salvation that day, obviously Jesus had no problem saying that she was "saved," and this ought to be our model for understanding salvation. I just don't see that in these passages. I do not believe that Jesus was making a pronouncement on this woman's spiritual condition, but rather her fleshly one: she was saved from her illness. After all, the text of Mark does go on to say "Go in peace and be healed (hugies) of your affliction." This leads me to my next problem with Wright's exegesis. By using these passages, which are devoid of any mention of the spiritual or forgiveness of sin or anything of that nature, Wright seems to forget these elements in his whole salvation paradigm. In short, he emphasizes the physical to the detriment of the spiritual.

I believe that he is on to something in his whole salvation theology. However, it seems to me that he has largely forgotten the spiritual aspect of salvation. If that is left out, there is little value in the rest of the equation. We must never put the salvation of souls in the back seat to social justice or meeting physical needs. This was the mistake of 20th century liberalism and it may very well make a reappearance in our time as well. We cannot rely on any organization, be it the government, civic clubs, or even the church, if all they are seeking to do is treat felt needs in order to somehow "save" individuals. Rather than embracing this distorted view of whole salvation, we need to embrace a real whole salvation; one that addresses the spiritual and the physical. We also must realize that just because we make efforts towards social justice and meeting the physical needs of new believers does not mean that God's purpose for all people is a comfortable, pain free existence. God may keep an individual right where he is, in poverty, or in physical illness in order to bring Himself most glory. And hold on, 'cause here comes a doozy, God may even call the wealthy and affluent to sell all they have, give it to the poor, and follow Him to the darkest corner of the globe! Thus, the question isn't "whole" salvation or "soul" salvation, that is too obvious. The real question is what does whole salvation really entail and how can we be a part of God's purposes to save sinners.

Please let me know what you think about this, I'm definitely looking for feedback as I continue to wrestle through these issues, especially how we can see the needs of people met in the context of the local church.

Half Finished Books

I've been doing a lot of reading lately. I'm about half way into 3 to 5 different books, I think. I have a reading bug. I'll get so far into one book, and then another one will cross my path and I'll think, "Man, that looks really interesting, I should see what they're talking about." Then I end up spending more time reading the other and the cycle just continues.

Right now I'm reading an array of material. I'm stuck half way through The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment by Jeremiah Burruoughs, The Reason for God by Tim Keller, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses by Richard Bauckham, and Surprised by Hope by N. T. Wright.

The Reason for God is a good book, Keller brings up some difficult issues and questions often raised by unbelievers and then systematically shows how they do not either defeat Christianity or give the unbeliever a leg to stand on. It's an interesting read, and I look forward to getting back to it and finishing it out, perhaps in the coming days.

Jesus and the Eyewitnesses is a bit more academic. In it, Bauckham is arguing that the Gospel writers were either eyewitnesses or associates of eyewitnesses. He is deconstructing much of the premises of the Historical Jesus movement as well as much of liberal theology in general. By examining the internal evidence of the Gospels, Bauckham is able to demonstrate that the Gospels were not based on oral traditions, passed down over hundreds of years, but actually written shortly after the events they described based on eyewitness testimony, thus adding a great deal of credibility to what they contain. It's an interesting read, but can be a bit deep at times. That one might have to wait until Christmas time before I can revisit it.

Surprised by Hope is N. T. Wright's most recent book and deals primarily with the topic of life after death, mainly life after life after death: the resurrection. This book is extremely interesting, even though at times I'm not entirely on board with Wright on certain points of his exegesis. He will definitely make you think through the book about much of modern Christianity's doctrine concerning life after death and heaven. Apparently I was fortunate enough to have been a part of a congregation in South Carolina that already greatly emphasized the New Heavens and New Earth, so that a lot of the stuff that Wright is talking about is already old hat for me. But, I can see how much of this book would be revolutionary for some believers who look forward to resting on a cloud for eternity. The book is divided into three main sections: 1. Establishing the foundation for the conversation; 2. Looking forward to understand God's future plan; and, 3. Examining how we are to live today in light of these things. I'm just at the threshold of the third section and am very interested to find out what Wright believes are the implications of the resurrection on our present life. It seems as if his primary focus is going to be in the areas of politics, social justice, and the environment. I'll post more when I find out how he concludes, assuming I don't get sidetracked again for another few months!!!

How Committed am I to the Bible?

I've been thinking a lot lately about how committed am I to the truth of the gospel and other biblical doctrines which I am firmly convinced of. A good bit of this introspection is the result of a semester with Dr. Black in New Testament 2. In that class we were constantly pushed to go back to the New Testament and discern what it had to say about sundry matters. I've also been thinking a lot about the priority of the local church in body-life. The seminary, and so many other para-church organizations, has come in and completely taken over much of what biblical local churches are responsible for. I'm growing to believe that the most commonly held paradigm for training and hiring elders is almost totally unbiblical. As I sit through classes at SEBTS and listen in on conversations around campus, it's truly amazing to me that some people think they're on the road to biblical eldership. They might not use the term "elder" or even hold to an ecclesiology that allows for elders, but it makes no difference: it's the only paradigm the NT knows.

In the past few days I've been reading John Hammett's new book, Biblical Foundations for Baptist Churches: A Contemporary Ecclesiology, and I suppose that has a bit to do with getting the ol' wheels in my head a turnin'. In this book Hammett is seeking to define what a church is, who a church is, how a church is governed, what the church does, and where the church is going. I'm a little bit over half way through the book. The first two sections are good, it's hard to be a conservative baptist and not have a good definition of what and who a church is. Regenerate church membership is one of his strongest arguments in this section, however, as he continues to flesh out the implications of regenerate church membership in his section on how a church is governed, things start to unravel. His arguments for congregationalism are almost entirely pragmatic. He even admits in several places that congregationalism is a pragmatic conclusion. At one point he goes so far as to say the following, I was shocked:

"In the end, they [the congregation] are the ones who must give financially to support the ministry he [the pastor] envisions; they must act if the church is to love and reach and disciple people as he desires. They are far likelier to give and act on plans they have had a part in developing. And, if the members are maturing spiritually, why would a church or its pastors want to cut themselves off from the wisdom they may contribute?" (p.211)

I've digressed into the subject matter of the book instead of going where I had intended with this post, so if you don't mind, I'm going to get back on track and not comment on that quote. I don't think I can handle it right now...

So, like I was saying, I've been thinking a lot about my commitment to the Bible and it's principles. As you may be able to tell already, I'm specifically concerning with church polity and my role in the local church. Here are some things that I'm struggling with:

1. What is the role of para-church organizations in the life of the local church?
2. What is my personal conviction concerning my responsibility to act on what I believe to be biblical?
3. Where should I be focusing my energies at this point in my life?
4. Is pursuing a career in a Bible-college or seminary setting right for me?
5. Where are my priorities? Am I more concerned with earning a degree and getting a job or with 1 Tim. 3:1-13?

For as much as I dislike Hammett's pragmatism, I see so much of it in myself. I'm afraid that I may be paralyzed by the thought of having to start from scratch to get into a career of any other sort than the one that I'm currently pursuing.

When I was at NGU, loving the Bible and theology and the things of God seemed to me to be a clear pointer to further studies in order to one day be able to teach those things to others. Now I believe that loving the Bible, God, theology, etc. is something that every Christian ought to aspire to, not just the seminarians. Like a good friend of mine pointed out the other day, the qualifications in 1 Tim 3 are not reserved for elders and deacons, they are necessary for all believers. It's not the elders who are barred from drunkenness and immorality, it's every Christian: thus, every Christian male should either be aspiring to be an elder or a deacon. I don't know if I'm ready to say every, but I think probably most, and if they're not aspiring to the office, they should at least be serving in those ways unofficially.

I apologize for the sporadic nature of this post, all this is compounding in my mind and heart, and has spilled over here. I simply desire to be true to the Bible and it's teachings. Any thoughts or suggestions?

Summer Reading

I finished my first summer reading book yesterday. I figured after a semester of molanist teaching in Theology 2 it would be good to read something a little more in line with what I believe the Bible teaches. Not only that, but I had heard of this book before and always wanted to read it. So, I decided to include Redemption: Accomplished and Applied by John Murray to my list of summer reading. It was a very good book, divided into 2 sections: 1. Redemption accomplished, 2. Redemption Applied. I flew through the first section and was greatly encouraged by it. The second section was also uplifting, though not quite as much of a page turner for me. One quote really sums up the content of the book:

"Christ discharged the debt of sin. He bore our sins and purged them. He did not make a token payment which God accepts in place of the whole. Our debts are not canceled; they are liquidated. Christ procured redemption and therefore he secured it. He met in himself and swallowed up the full toll of divine condemnation and judgment against sin. He wrought righteousness which is the proper ground of complete justification and the title to everlasting life. Grace thus reigns through righteousness unto eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. He expiated guilt and "by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." "Being made perfect he became the author (the cause) of eternal salvation to all them that obey him." In a word, Jesus met all the exigencies arising from our sin and he procured all the benefits that lead to, and are consummated in, the liberty of the glory of the children of God."

Having finished this first book I've moved on to my next installment of summer reading. I have always wanted to read the Puritans, but have never really gotten around to it, but what better time than now? I began reading Jeremiah Burroughs' The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment today. It is a very down to earth, practical guide to how believers can learn to be content in all things (Phil 4:11). I trust that I will benefit greatly from digesting the truths contained within its pages.

Great food and cheap books

Tonight Lisa and I went to the Hollander's for dinner. Much thanks to them for their hospitality. The food was excellent.

The post dinner trip to Mr. Otsby's was also excellent. There Blake acquired Owen's massive 7 volume commentary on Hebrews for a mere $35 as well as many other gems. I was able to snag about 15 books for under $40. Of one D. A. Carson laments, "That it is now out of print is a serious loss." I'm happy with my purchase and the envy for Blake's good fortune is slowly subsiding.



I think I will need some more shelf space soon...



Here are my summer reading books...



Finally, I thought I'd share with you this painting my friend Matt Tolbert did for me. I love it.