Books to be cautious of...

[mpethe]

Orthodox Christianity and 'evangelicalism' (depending on how you define it) are under continual attack these days. The number of books trying to knock down sound Biblical teaching is growing. Fast.

What are some books you have read that you would caution others in reading? I do not say that we should not read them, rather that they should be read more cautiously because of their subversive nature and the flaws inherent to their main precepts.

This thread is not meant to bash authors who think differently than we do. I hope it will be a place where bad theology and wrong thinking are shown for what they are.

[rgrove]

Unless someone is doing research on Open Theism (they deny God knows the future) I would recommend the regular lay person staying clear of their works. One of them snuck in under my radar when my wife was at Christian Supply. Gregory Boyd's book "letters to a skeptic", which are letters between him and his father, have some incipient dangers that are far more obvious in his works directly dealing with the doctrine of God. I didn't realize he was one of them until I was reading a book by Bruce Ware when he named the fellow, and then quoted some from his works. I thought the name sounded familiar and sure enough, it was the same guy. I began looking at it closer and I was pretty upset. I had unknowingly told my wife to go ahead and get a book that contained outright heresy. I read a lot and I'm pretty theologically aware for a lay person. If it can slip by me, then who knows what people are letting their kids buy (for example) from a "Christian" bookstore. I don't think they need to be doctrinal censors or anything, but having books on the shelves by people who deny God knows the future? Please...

Some of the more popular Open Theist authors that bookstores carry are:

Boyd, Gregory A., God of the possible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books), 2001.
Pinnock, Clark, et. al., The Openness of God, (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press), 1994.
Sanders, John, The God who Risks, (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press), 1998.

Thank you,
Ron

[Soulfyre]

Excellent thread, mpethe. And thanks for the information concerning the books on Open Theism (essentially the "evangelical" counterpart to the Process Theology of Alfred North Whitehead, also referred to as Neoclassical Theology), rgrove. I consider this one of the most dangerous current trends in theology.

God bless and keep you and yours,

Matthew (soulfyre)

[mpethe]

I'm just about finished reading a controversial new book by William Webb entitled: "Slaves, Women and Homosexuals".

In this work, Webb tries to show how cultural factors influence our understanding of Scripture.

I'm sure we'd all agree that there are some things in the Bible that are clearly 'cultural' and that don't necessarily make sense for our world today. I would also agree with Webb that when these texts are interpreted for today, that we need to 'move up the ladder of abstraction' as he puts it and attempt to derive the principle at the root of the command etc.

"Greet one another with a holy kiss" (found muliptle times in the NT is a great example) - should probably no longer be taken litterally, but the principle of lovingly welcoming somebody still applies.

Having said that, I think Webb takes his hermeneutic too far. He goes on to say that along with moving up the ladder of abstraction, we also need to see that the laddder is moving towards an ultimate ethic - not necessarily found in the Bible.

He uses what he calls a "redemptive-spirit" hermeneutic to derive the meaning of Biblical texts. Under this method, there is an Ultimate Moral Ethic that the Bible is pointing towards and can be traced by moving from Old Testament teachings to New Testament teachings, but that the moral ethic found in the NT is not where God desired us to stop. To find this ultimate moral ethic, one must try to shed all of the culturally relative components and then determine in which direction God ultimately desires to go.

The underlying reason for this book is that Webb is trying to introduce a concept called "complementary egalitarianism" or "ultra-soft patriarchy". But don't really be fooled by those terms - Webb is absolutely an egalitarian - though he tries to present the work as a middle ground aimed at getting both sides of the issue in dialogue.

In some respects I admire his efforts, but I ultimately think he opens the doors to a dangerous method of interpreation. Under his very complex system of filtering texts through 18 cirteria, one could conceivably come up with any number of "ultimate ethics". For Webb, it seems that the NT is not really that authoritative, but rather is quite mired in cultural trappings that need to be removed.

It has been an interesting read, and written somewhat persuasively in parts. All in all however, I think this work deserves to be read critically and that his method should not be followed.

[Soulfyre]

mpethe said:

"Greet one another with a holy kiss" (found muliptle times in the NT is a great example) - should probably no longer be taken litterally, but the principle of lovingly welcoming somebody still applies.

I know this is a side point, but I might mention that the "holy kiss" to which the epistle refers is a greeting still practiced among many cultures. The practice of a brief embrace and "kissing" on both cheeks is quite common. In Russia, it is not unknown for men to kiss on the lips. While one might argue that the admonition was not, in fact, a command with wooden literalness attached, but might be similar to one of us writing in a letter, "give them a hug for me" or even as you said, "embrace one another warmly as members of the same family", the "holy kiss" is not, in fact, an archaic practice.

I will be anxious to look at the book. While I think using the lenses of history, culture, language and context are always important, it sounds like this authors method, if applied extensively, would cause any concept of meaning and authority within Holy Scripture to die the death of a thousand qualifications.

God bless you and yours, Paul.

Matthew (soulfyre)

[mpethe]

Soulfyre said:

I know this is a side point, but I might mention that the "holy kiss" to which the epistle refers is a greeting still practiced among many cultures. The practice of a brief embrace and "kissing" on both cheeks is quite common. In Russia, it is not unknown for men to kiss on the lips. While one might argue that the admonition was not, in fact, a command with wooden literalness attached, but might be similar to one of us writing in a letter, "give them a hug for me" or even as you said, "embrace one another warmly as members of the same family", the "holy kiss" is not, in fact, an archaic practice.

Yes, I agree with you. Commands like that still may be applied literally today with no problems. I guess my point was that they don't have to be.

I will be anxious to look at the book. While I think using the lenses of history, culture, language and context are always important, it sounds like this authors method, if applied extensively, would cause any concept of meaning and authority within Holy Scripture to die the death of a thousand qualifications.

Both Grudem and Schreiner have written reviews of this book. I've yet to read Schreiner's; Grudem's is ok - somewhat fair and pretty convincing on a number of points. Unfortunately it seems there's a bit of a personal issue that has developed between these two scholars - they don't seem to like each other very much and it shows in their writing.

[rgrove]

A new one to be careful of has come out. See James White's comments on it here:

www.aomin.org/index.php?itemid=411
www.aomin.org/index.php?itemid=414

Ubelievably Eerdmans (a Christian publishing company) has publisdhed a book by a well known Mormon apologist named Bob Millet called "A Different Jesus?". Unfortunately since Eerdmans has chosen to publish it without a Christian witness in it the book will probably be picked up by Christian bookstores. Unsuspecting people potentially unprepared for the poison within may purchase it. To be clear: Mormonsim is polytheistic paganism that uses Christian figures and symbols, but not Christian and not a Christian denomination.

Yours In Christ,
Ron