The Reformers and Their Stepchildren.
By Leonard Verduin.
The Dissent and Nonconformity Series, #14.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964.
Reprint by The Baptist Standard Bearer, 2001.
Pp. 304. Paper $16.00.

By Wes Kenney, currently a student at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

In this classic volume, the task that Leonard Verduin seeks to accomplish is to describe thoroughly the major issues that separated the magisterial Reformers, such as Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli, from those who believed the reforms did not go far enough. These he identifies as the stepchildren of the Reformers, justifying this moniker by their treatment at the hands of those in whom they had early placed such great hope. With a focus upon the relationship between the ecclesiastical and the civil authority, Verduin details the distinctions between these two groups as they arose around various beliefs and practices of the stepchildren. The Anabaptists, of course, were among these “stepchildren.”

Verduin accomplishes his task by detailing, in eight chapters, eight of the terms of derision hurled at the stepchildren by the Reformers. Each of these terms is simultaneously descriptive and misleading, which was likely the intent behind their use.

The first, and lengthiest, chapter, Donatisten, gives a detailed description of the controversy that arose in the fourth century surrounding the followers of Donatus in northern Africa. In his description of the Donatist schism, Verduin devotes considerable space to the development of the concept of a “sacral society,” by which he means a “society held together by a religion to which all the members of that society are committed” (23). He casts the rebellion of the Donatists as a protest against that ideal, and describes how the stepchildren came to be derided as “neo-Donatists.”

This “sacral society” concept Verduin identifies as coming to dominate the West in the “Constantinian change,” wherein the formerly persecuted primitive church becomes the unifying religion of the empire, and the object of rebellion not only for the stepchildren of the Reformation but for “heretics” throughout the medieval period. This will be foundational to Verduin’s argumentation in much of the rest of the book.

The second chapter, Stäbler, discusses the penchant of the stepchildren for carrying a staff as a symbol of their protest against the coercive power of the sword that had been brought into the church at the Constantinian change. Chapter three, Catharer, describes the Radical emphasis on the changed life of the truly converted, as contrasted with the “conductual-averagism” necessary to a church coextensive with the empire. Chapter four, Sacramentschwärmer, discusses the development of the sacramental view of salvation in the established church, and the stepchildren’s biblical aversion to it.

The fifth chapter, Winckler, is not as concerned with the secrecy of Radical gatherings that led to the epithet as with the unlicensed nature of the ministry carried out by them. Wiedertäufer, chapter six, is a signature of the Radical Reformation. The Anabaptists themselves, of course, saw themselves innocent of the charge, convinced as they were by Scripture that only a believer could truly be baptized. Kommunisten, the charge that the stepchildren had not only their possessions but also often their wives in common, is dealt with in chapter seven. Chapter eight, Rottengeister, is something of a catch-all, describing several practices for which the Radicals were accused of faction-making.

This volume has many strengths for which to recommend it, and comparatively few weaknesses of which to complain. Verduin’s depth of knowledge of the subject shines through his many appeals to primary sources, the quotation of which is well balanced and helpful. And while the focus throughout the book is upon the period of the Reformation, readers of a free-church persuasion will appreciate the author’s recognition of “heretics” throughout history who have stood for the principles for which the Radical Reformers suffered greatly.

A couple of potential negatives bear mentioning. Readers may take issue with Verduin’s characterization of the Anabaptist’s argumentation against infant baptism, reliant as it was on the New Testament witness, as a “demotion of the Old Testament” (e.g., p. 210). Perhaps the reference is only meant to be comparative to the Reformer’s supposed elevation of the Old Testament, but the repeated use of this phrase by the author can leave the impression that the Radicals held a sub-orthodox doctrine of revelation.

Additionally, readers not fluent in the German, Dutch, or French languages may be discouraged by the amount of material missed in the largely untranslated footnotes. These minor quibbles, however, should not be an obstacle to thorough enjoyment of an enormously beneficial book.

It is difficult to overstate the timeliness of the principles for which the stepchildren of the Reformation suffered, principles that leap from every page of Verduin’s excellent work. This is especially true for Christians in America.

The biblical principles for which the Radical Reformers stood, principles that led to the contemptuous nicknames that headed each of these chapters, all struck at the heart of the monolithic society created by the Constantinian change. Such a society, bound together by a religion embraced by all of its members, had no room for the dissenter, and those whose conscience led them to different conclusions were either forced underground or set ablaze. The courage of the Anabaptists and their Radical brethren began the slow process of change to this ideal, culminating with the enshrinement in the United States Constitution of the ideal of what Verduin repeatedly calls a “composite society” made up of many constituent parts of which the church is but one. The constitution forbids the state from establishing any religion by its favor and from inhibiting any individual from the exercise of his religion according to the dictates of his own conscience. In such a system, the church was free to be the church, to persuade men, and to carry out its work, simultaneously unaided by the coercive arm of the state and unmolested by it.

Verduin devotes significant space in his postscript to contemporary dangers to America’s composite society. More space is given to the danger he sees in the potential of the ecumenical movement to establish an “American religion,” one “to which every right-thinking American would be expected to rally” (278). He rightly suggests this would lead to “a new sacralism” requiring a new “second front” rebellion.

Considerably less space is given to Verduin’s concerns regarding secular pressure on the free exercise of religion, a danger that, nearly fifty years after his writing, looms substantially larger than the rise of any “American religion.” Contemporary American society is unlikely to codify as official the status of any religion rising out of ecumenism, no matter how unified. But in an age of state-controlled health care and other major industry, it takes no imagination whatever to see the danger posed to those whose convictions would forbid them to participate in whatever a secular government might insist is mandatory. In America today, the “free exercise” clause of the first amendment is under direct assault. Lessons learned from the stepchildren of the Reformation will serve well the convictional free churchman forced to navigate these disturbing waters.

Pastoral Theology in the Classical Tradition
By Andrew Purves.
Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 2001. Pp. 152. $14.99.

By Wes Kenney, currently studying at SWBTS.

INTRODUCTION

This little book seeks to address the author’s concern that the practice of pastoral care “is, by and large, uninformed by historical practice” (5). Purves identifies the need for “a profound reappraisal of core working assumptions in pastoral theology” (5), and to this need, seeks to apply wisdom gleaned from five figures in church history: Gregory of Nazianzus, John Chrysostom, Gregory the Great, Martin Bucer, and Richard Baxter.

His selection of these five was directed by the fact that they wrote directly about the work of the pastor, rather than addressing specific issues of theological debate.

SUMMARY

After a brief introduction, to which I shall return in my critique, Purves summarizes the contributions of each of these five figures in successive chapters. Each chapter is divided into a brief biographical section, a discussion of common themes in the subject’s theology, and finally an analysis of the pastoral theology of each man. These chapters are headed with the title of the work for which each figure is credited by Purves with having contributed significantly to the development of pastoral theology.

Chapter one, Gregory of Nazianzus ‘In Defense of His Flight to Pontus,’ identifies several recurring themes in Gregory’s theology, such as his belief that the theologian must receive “a special call” (13), and his understanding of the final goal of the Christian life, which he called “deification” (14). Purves also briefly discusses Gregory’s understanding of the Trinity, Christology, and anthropology, before moving to a discussion of his pastoral theology. This section discusses at length Gregory’s view of the pastor as a “physician of souls,” whose goal it is “to contend on behalf of God and thereby to lead people back to God” (19). Other topics addressed include the difficulties of pastoral work, the spiritual requirements for being a pastor, and the life background, call, and obedience to that call of those who aspire to the pastoral office. The chapter concludes with an outline of Gregory’s The Flight to Pontus.

John Chrysostom and his Six Books on the Priesthood are the subject of chapter two. Following the biographical summary, Purves addresses Chrysostom’s approach to exegesis by describing the difference between the heavily allegorical Alexandrian school of Origen and Philo, and the Antiochene approach, of which Chrysostom is “the best-known representative,” and which “clearly aimed at ameliorating the excesses of Alexandrian allegorical exegesis and spirituality” (39). Purves then discusses “Chrysostom’s Antiochene Christology,” before moving to a treatment of his pastoral theology. In discussing the nature of the pastoral office, Chrysostom was clear that it “must be understood theologically first of all to be a sharing in Christ’s own love for his people” (43). Before anything else, a pastor must heed Christ’s call to Peter: “Feed my sheep.” Purves concludes the chapter with a discussion of Chrysostom’s teaching on the moral and ethical dimension of pastoral work.

In chapter three, Purves turns to Gregory the Great, and his enduring work, Pastoral Care. Themes identified by Purves in the theology of Gregory include the relation between the natural and the supernatural, the balanced approach to life which Gregory called consideratio, and the nature of the Christian life. Gregory’s belief that “in salvation the human also must act” has far-reaching consequences for his understanding of the Christian life, a life in which “ambivalence and terror . . . never go away” (62). This will have many implications for his pastoral theology.  Much of this theology is discussed in terms of the character of the man who would hold the office. This was of primary importance to Gregory, whom Purves quotes: “No one does more harm in the Church than he, who having the title or rank of holiness, acts evilly.” (65) Purves then examines Gregory’s teaching on the life of the pastor, as well as his understanding of the practice and complexities of pastoral work.

On the True Pastoral Care, says Purves, is “the principal Reformation text on pastoral theology” (76). Martin Bucer, its author, is the subject of chapter four. After a biographical summary, Purves identifies election and justification, Scripture, love, and the Eucharist as themes in Bucer’s theology. In his pastoral theology, Purves recognizes two dominant themes that inform Bucer’s teaching: the role of the Bible and a focus on Christ. Indeed, says Purves, Bucer “displays a remarkable awareness of the active personal rule of Jesus Christ in and over his church” (84). These themes are woven throughout his examination of Bucer’s understanding of the scope of pastoral care, addressing such themes as evangelism, pastoral discipline, and care for the weak.

Richard Baxter and The Reformed Pastor are the focus of chapter 5. The biographical summary in this chapter is preceded by a brief history of Puritanism. Themes in Baxter’s theology identified by Purves include the practical application of the Christian faith to everyday life and the doctrine of justification. The discussion of Baxter’s pastoral theology begins with an emphasis of the spiritual formation of the pastor. This is primary for Baxter, as Purves notes, “he is more concerned with the pastor’s life in God than with the parishioner’s, because adequate attention to the latter is possible only by one who has paid attention to the former” (105). He then discusses Baxter’s emphasis on conversion as a pastoral goal and concludes by looking at Baxter’s insistence on pastoral care as individualized care, as a “personal ministry to persons” (111).

Having surveyed the lives and pastoral theologies of these figures, Purves reaches several conclusions in his final section regarding the confessional content of pastoral care, the necessity to root both pastoral care and pastoral theology in the study of the scriptures, and the necessity of the office itself. Purves also offers conclusions about the need for pastors to care for themselves and the accountability to God for their conduct of the office. In each of these conclusions, Purves bemoans the current state of pastoral theology and argues that an intentional reclamation of the classical tradition will lead to a more robust and balanced practice of pastoral care today.

CRITIQUE

I found this book to be enormously helpful for gaining a broad look into the lives of men about whom I knew practically nothing. While I recognized all five names, I knew them only as placeholders on a timeline of the history of the church. This book introduced them to me afresh as serious and passionate men of God, men who thought deeply and wrote helpfully from their perspectives in order to advance the practice of pastoral care. As someone called by God to serve His people in a local church, I am grateful for the lives and writings of these men and grateful to Purves for his excellent summaries. If nothing else, I can recommend the book for this.

My concerns with the book are mainly to do with its stated purpose. I know nothing about the author that is not revealed in this book, but he clearly writes from a mainline Protestant liberal perspective. He seeks to rescue pastoral care from the modern movement, a movement he says, “within the North American Protestant theological academy by and large revolves around psychological categories regarding human experience and symbolic interpretations about God” (3). I have no doubt this is the case, but Purves offers the wrong cure. This is a book summarizing what five men have written regarding the work of the pastor. If Purves wants to save us from “human experience and symbolic interpretations,” the solution is not going to be found in the writings of fallible men, however inspiring and truth-filled they may be. The solution is going to be found in the infallible Word of God. Sadly, the “North American Protestant theological academy” has long-since abandoned that solution.

CONCLUSION

Purves opens his book with a story about being called to the bedside of a dying former church member. He talks about this woman’s need for “a reminder of the reality and truth behind the central doctrines of the Christian faith as they applied to her life at the point of her death” (1). The solution to the problem of contemporary pastoral care identified by Purves as his reason for writing lies here, in “reality and truth” as revealed in Scripture. A good grasp of the historical development of pastoral theology is certainly useful, and this book does a good job of at least introducing the reader to the topic. But recovering pastoral care from the pop-psychology and humanistic practices that are so prevalent today requires a return to the conviction that in the pages of the Bible, we have a sure and certain Word from God that informs all of the work we do and the lives we live as under shepherds of the Great Shepherd.

Ched Spellman is an adjunct professor and PhD student at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and is in the process of completing his dissertation Toward a Canon-Conscious Reading of Scripture. He also has his own blog, chedspellman.com.

Who cares about eschatology? In many circles this query would receive a sharply negative response: no one. We live in a society where increasing numbers of people are becoming less concerned than ever about being “left behind.” However, the churches have the privilege and responsibility of demonstrating the urgent need for clear thinking about what will happen at the “end of days.” Because extravagant caricatures of biblically based eschatological reflection are not hard to find, there is a consistent need for balanced discourse about the end times and the return of Christ. In this volume, David Allen and Steve Lemke seek to provide a cogent and reflective presentation of these issues from a “premillennial perspective.”

Allen and Lemke divide the volume into two main parts that serve two different purposes. In part one, they gather the messages given at the Acts 1:11 Conference that took place in 2009 at North Metro First Baptist Church in Lawrenceville, Georgia. The presenters are all prominent figures within the Southern Baptist Convention and each deal with an important eschatological topic. Jerry Vines begins the volume with a sermon on the central text that served as the launch pad for the conference. From the words of the heavenly messengers spoken to the disciples after Jesus’ ascension, Vines exhorts believers to be “soul winners” rather than “stargazers.” He also highlights the theme of the volume and the motivation for believers to think carefully about eschatology by pointing to the promise that “this same Jesus, who is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come” (Acts 1:11).

In the following presentations, the basic outline of the eschatological timetable is exposited. Ergun Caner surveys a number of millennial options and argues that a premillennial and eminent return of Christ is consistent with Scripture. Danny Akin treats the expectation of believers when Christ returns, including a secret rapture of the church, an appearance at the “judgment seat” of Christ, and the marriage supper of the Lamb in heaven. Paige Patterson discusses the nature of the great tribulation and also outlines the active role of Israel during this period. David Allen surveys the biblical support for a millennial reign of Christ upon the earth prior to the eternal state. Richard Land summarizes what will take place at the final judgment as well as the arrival and nature of the eternal state that will include both a real heaven and a real hell. Evangelist Junior Hill rounds out part one with an exhortation about “what to do until Jesus returns.” He urges the believer not to be a “gazing Christian looking to the past,” but to be a “going Christian, looking to the present and the future” (107).

In part two, five contributors provide additional reflection on issues of eschatology. R. Stanton Norman provides a brief systematic treatment of the doctrine of eschatology, covering both individual (e.g., “What happens when we die?”) and corporate dimensions (e.g., “What happens at the end of the world?”). He also connects the study of the end times to what believers are called to do in the meantime (i.e., a call to evangelism, holiness, and faithfulness). Following this general overview, Craig Blaising explains the way that the millennial kingdom fits into the overall picture of history and the harmony of Scripture. Lamar Cooper surveys the “Second Coming” in the Old Testament, Steven Cox surveys the main eschatological discourses of Jesus in the Gospels, and Michael Vlach concludes the volume with a thematic survey of eschatological topics in the Pauline corpus. Vlach seeks to demonstrate that eschatology is not “merely an appendix to Christian theology” for Paul, but rather a “crucial aspect of the Christian faith” (264).

A clear strength of this collection of essays is its overall focus on the return of Christ. Though sometimes derided by critics, ignored in preaching, or relativized in favor of other areas of theological emphasis, eschatology should matter to any believer that holds out hope in God’s promises about the future. In their own way, each of the essays contributes to this overarching emphasis. Additionally, throughout the volume, key texts that have significant bearing on the millennium and the return of Christ are highlighted and exposited (e.g., Ezek 40-48, Isa 2, Matt 24-25, 1 Cor 15, and Rev 12, 19-22). These features will help orient readers to the main areas of discussion and encourage them to reflect further on these areas of Scripture and their eschatological import. Because the messages of part one and the essays of part two are written in an engaging style, the book as a whole can serve as a resource for both pastors and laymen. In fact, many preachers will find the range, contents, and sequence of topics covered to be a possible outline for a sermon/teaching series on eschatology.

One area where clarification could be helpful is the nature of premillennialism and what it necessarily entails. A more accurate subtitle for this volume might be “A Dispensational Perspective,” or at least, “A Pretribulation-Premillennial Perspective,” as each of the contributors affirm a pre-tribulation secret rapture of the church prior to a millennial reign of Christ on earth (6). Allen and Lemke note in the introduction that “the contributors to this volume all support a premillennial position with a pre-tribulational rapture” and that they seek to present a “scholarly version of that perspective” (6). Indeed, for much of the book, the basic tenets of dispensationalism are assumed when the term “premillennial” is used (e.g., see Akin’s presentation of the “big picture” of the “pretribulation/premillennial understanding,” 50). To give one example, the clear distinction between Israel and the Church, perhaps the hallmark feature of dispensationalism, is consistently maintained (62ff, 198-205, 246-48).

Clarification might also be in order regarding the use of history to support a pre-tribulational, pre-millennial position. The “imminence of Jesus’ return” throughout the volume typically refers to the rapture of the church before the tribulation. Caner argues that the “premillennial view of the return of Christ carries with it a measure of urgency” and that “to be ‘snatched up’ (from the Gr. harpazo) at any moment is tremendously motivating for the believer” (38). As evidence of this position, he quotes Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Phillip Schaff, and a number of Anabaptists. However, in the quoted texts these figures refer not to a pre-tribulational rapture but more generally to the millennial reign of Christ on earth before the eternal state. This type of treatment resonates with the common assumption throughout the book that a natural feature of premillennialism is not only that “Christ will return before the millennium” but also that “in this system, the church will be snatched out before the tribulation” (32). Because a pre-tribulational rapture of the church is integral to the overall perspective of the book, it would have been helpful to include in the “additional reflections” a sustained exegetical argument for a dispensational understanding of the rapture. Moreover, in addition to Akin’s interaction (49-57), further explanation of 1 Thess. 4:16-17 in particular (the locus classicus of a discussion of the “rapture”) and how it relates to other views could be a worthwhile development.

Because some readers will possibly hold to a form of non-dispensational premillennialism (sometimes called “historic premillennialism”), a little more discussion about how the concerns of the book apply equally to this camp would enhance the conversation. This perspective is mentioned twice in the book (34-35, 49), but the more frequent dialogue partner in the discussion is the amillennial position that interprets the 1,000 year reign as an example of apocalyptic symbolism. This decision makes sense because amillennialism and premillennialism are at opposite ends of the eschatological spectrum and provide the strongest interpretive contrast. However, readers aware of an alternative option regarding the thousand-year reign of Christ might wonder where the key differences lie between dispensational and non-dispensational premillennialism.

As Blaising notes in his essay, “the firm belief that Jesus is coming again” is “central to the Christian faith” (141). If read sympathetically, this volume has the potential to encourage believers to continue clinging to Christ and resting in the staggering promise of his return. A number of times while reading this book, I put it down and picked up my Bible (and even my Greek lexicon a few times) to examine a passage or the textual context of a point being made by an author. This biblical examination of eschatological themes seems to be the effect intended by the contributors and editors.

By Dr. Lemke, Provost, Professor of Philosophy and Ethics, occupying the McFarland Chair of Theology, Director of the Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry, and Editor of the Journal for Baptist Theology and Ministry at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary.

John Calvin Goes to Berkeley is a novel, not a theological treatise, and thus affords a creative approach to the Reformed-Arminian debate, which has evoked many one-sided theological treatises but little meaningful dialogue. We often learn more from dialogue than from a monologue, more from a story than a lecture, more from a novel than from a theological treatise. The format of a novel allows us to overhear the debate over Reformed theology as a bystander without feeling pressed by a one-sided author to affirm that position. Overhearing the debate provides the readers with a balanced presentation of multiple sides of the issue, and allows the readers to think through their own positions without feeling defensive.

The author, James McCarthy, is a converted Catholic who serves as an elder at Grace Bible Chapel in San Jose, California. He also teaches in the Discipleship Intern Training Program hosted by Grace Bible Chapel and Hillview Bible Chapel, which ministers in part to students at the University of California at Berkeley. After authoring four other books and co-authoring another on ministering to Catholics, John Calvin Goes to Berkeley is McCarthy’s first novel, and the first in an intended University Christian Fellowship series.

The storyline in John Calvin Goes to Berkeley concerns the University Christian Fellowship (UCF) at the University of California at Berkeley, in which the issue of Calvinism and predestination became divisive. Five members of UCF covenanted to meet together and study the issue in depth until they could resolve the issue. However, the storyline is enriched by a number of subplots, including an irresponsible investigative reporter who accused UCF of being a part of the Dou Yat Ji Lou doomsday cult, an accusation of UCF President Alex Kim for an alleged cheating scandal, a tie to Patricia Hearst and the Symbionese Liberation Army, the salvation of a student from Singapore, a drug-crazed vagrant man who kept assaulting UCF displays, a trip to Geneva to learn more about Calvin, and a number of personal struggles experienced by the UCF members. This is an interesting novel even if someone were less interested in the theological issues about which it rotates.

When dissension arose among the UCF leadership, their President Alex Kim (a Korean American engineering student) called a series of meetings at the Graduate Theological Union library in Berkeley. The Calvinist protagonist in the discussions was UCF Vice-President Rod Sutherland, who hoped to attend Westminster Theological Seminary. The other participants were not as committed to a particular doctrinal tradition, though had their own presuppositions: Angela (a Hispanic student with a Catholic background), Elliot (a doctoral student in mathematics), and Jamie (a popular “Joe College” surfer boy). The group researched theology, history, and the Bible, and yet still struggled to come to a consensus answer. However, the discussions present all the major arguments from Scripture and theology for and against the Reformed view of predestination. These discussions are helpful to anyone who wants to hear both sides of these issues and a survey of the relevant biblical texts in order to think through these issues. In fact, the various views are presented with such balance that the reader will not be sure which way the majority of the group is going to go until the very end of the book.

Without “spoiling” the end of the story for the future reader, the research group surveys all the major views on the subject, and some of them come up with their own distinct proposal. Rod leads part of the UCF to leave and start a Reformed Christian Fellowship, while the others agree on a compromise proposal in which God enlightens those who are willing to repent and believe.

Many of the theological texts on Reformed theology are either written for laypersons and are too simplistic for theological precision, or are written for scholars and are too technical for the typical layperson. John Calvin Goes to Berkeley strikes a good balance – although it is obviously not a technical theological treatise, is does discuss the key biblical texts and theological issues impinging on predestination, and even word studies of key biblical words relating to predestination. It is an excellent book to recommend to a college student, seminarian, or informed layperson who is interested in with this important doctrinal issue.

In Part 1 in an earlier post, I began a review of Ten Myths about Calvinism: Recovering the Breadth of the Reformed Tradition, by Kenneth Stewart (himself a Reformed Theologian).[1] The first post dealt with the first four “myths” that Stewart proposes, which are myths he believes that Calvinists are circulating, but they should not be doing so.  These four Calvinist-propounded “myths” are:
(1) that one man (John Calvin) and one city (Geneva) is determinative of all of Calvinism,
(2) that Calvin’s view of predestination must be ours,
(3) that the ‘TULIP” is an appropriate yardstick concerning who is truly Reformed in theology, and
(4) that Calvinists take a dim view of revival and awakening.

Four Myths that Non-Calvinists Propagate, But Should Not

The next six “myths” are those propagated by non-Calvinists, but Stewart believes they do so inappropriately.  These six myths being circulated by non-Calvinists are:
(5) that Calvinism is largely antimissionary,
(6) that Calvinism is antinomian,
(7) that Calvinism promotes theocracy,
(8) that Calvinism undermines the creative arts,
(9) that Calvinism resists gender equity, and
(10) that Calvinism has engendered racial inequality.

Myth 5: Calvinism is largely antimissionary.

In some ways, Myth 4 (propagated by Calvinists) that Calvinists take a dim view of revivals and awakenings seems closely related to this Myth 5 (propagated by non-Calvinists), that Calvinism is largely antimissionary. Stewart’s evidence is rather anecdotal, listing a few well-known Calvinist missionaries but never providing adequate evidence that this was true of Calvinism as a whole.  Stewart also drifts off-target in this chapter by addressing the missionary efforts of Catholics, Lutherans, and others, which does little to establish his premise about the missions’ efforts of Calvinists.

Myths 6, 8, 9, and 10

I will not deal with each of these purported “myths” individually, mainly because Stewart builds a fairly convincing case against the charges of antinomianism, undermining the creative arts, gender inequity, and racism. Some of these non-Calvinist “myths” might equally be said of other denominational traditions as well, though they may seem at points to attach to Reformed denominations more particularly. For example, the issue of racial inequality comes to mind for the Reformed tradition not only for their involvement in the slave trade in Europe and America but for the more recent practice of apartheid in South Africa (in a nation dominated by a Dutch Reformed church). However, other evangelical denominations have their own challenges with many of these issues, and Stewart cites adequate counterexamples to demonstrate that this practice is not inherent in the Reformed tradition.

Having acknowledged that other denominations share some of these problems, and with the numerous counterexamples that Stewart lists against each of these non-Calvinist propagated “myths,” it would seem to establish the fact that these accusations are not accurate of all Calvinists, and not characteristic of Calvinists as a whole. However, non-Calvinist readers may still be left with some doubt. There was a reason that Stewart listed each of these myths – they are indeed common accusations about Calvinists based on anecdotal evidence. For each of these four myths, it is easy to think of examples to demonstrate why such a charge might be made. It seems evident that there are at least some Calvinists, probably many Calvinists, for whom these charges are facts, not myths – or nobody would ever think such things. As the old saying goes, “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.”  These accusations were not fabricated out of the air, but come from real life experience – and thus Calvinists should be on guard lest what is true of a few becomes characteristic of the whole.  But again, Stewart builds a sufficient case to demonstrate that these charges do not pertain accurately to all Calvinists, and that they are not characteristic of the Reformed tradition as a whole.

Myth 7:  Calvinism promotes theocracy.

The way that Stewart frames Myth 7, that Calvinism promotes theocracy, is disappointing in that it misses the main point of this concern or accusation about the Reformed tradition. It is true that the early Calvinist church-state unions were essentially theocracies. However, theocracies have been largely absent in Western culture outside the Arab world in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Furthermore, rather embarrassingly, Stewart hides the Calvinist Christian Reconstruction or Theonomy movement led by R. J. Rushdoony, Gary Bahnsen, and others in a footnote at the end of the chapter. However, the key issue is not the narrow issue of theocracy, but the broader question of whether Calvinists resisted religious liberty and separation of church and state.  Of this there can be no question, despite Stewart’s weak evidence to the contrary.  Calvinism has thrived primarily in settings such as Geneva in which it was the official state religion, backed by the power of the government. On this issue, the record of Calvinists is not stellar.  Allow me to challenge Stewart’s weak evidence with counterevidence.

Unlike Calvinists, it was the Baptists who were separatists rather than establishmentarians, advocating religious liberty rather than the establishment of a state church. Many Baptists came to America seeking to avoid the religious persecution they had experienced in Europe, only to find the persecution transported to America as well. Roger Williams, pastor of the first Baptist church in America, was exiled to Rhode Island from the Massachusetts Bay Colony because of his religious convictions, driven by the established Calvinist Congregationalist church. He protested against the religious persecution in Massachusetts in works such as The Bloody Tenet of Persecution (1644) and The Bloody Tenet of Persecution, Made Yet More Bloody (1652). Imprisonment, taxation, whipping, and seizure of property were commonplace vehicles of this persecution.

John Clarke, who detailed persecution by Calvinist authorities in Ill News from New England, was imprisoned with Obadiah Holmes for the “sin” of ministering in Massachusetts. Holmes was also brutally whipped thirty times with a three-pronged whip. Governor Endicott explained that these Baptist ministers were being imprisoned because they “denied infant baptism” and that they “deserved death.”[2] Isaac Backus, originally a Congregationalist deeply influenced by Jonathan Edwards’ theology, helped restore Calvinistic theology to the Separate Baptists.  But he was tireless in writing tracts and petitions for religious liberty in Connecticut. His mother, like many Baptists, was imprisoned for thirteen weeks for refusing to pay the tax for the established Congregationalist church.[3]

The Baptist leader John Leland, after playing a key role in winning religious freedom in Virginia and helping obtain the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, moved back to Massachusetts and experienced even more persecution. He wrote tracts such as The Rights of Conscience Inalienable; and therefore Religious Opinions not Cognizable by Law: Or, The Highflying Churchman, Stript of His Legal Robe, Appears a Yahoo (1791), in which he called for religious liberty in Connecticut for not only Baptists but for “Jews, Turks, heathen, papists, or deists.”[4] He even brought a 1,200 pound block of cheese to the White House on January 1, 1802, to lobby President Jefferson for religious liberty.[5] The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution became federal law in 1791, but the Presbyterian/ Congregationalist established churches in the New England states continued to fight doggedly against disestablishment in their own states.  The state of Massachusetts did not disestablish the Congregationalist state church until 1833, forty-two years after the First Amendment.[6] So while Baptists were at the forefront of the fight for religious liberty, Calvinists such as the Congregationalists fought it in a delaying action for four decades after the First Amendment granted freedom of religion.  So, on this point, Stewart ignores a great amount of counterevidence and has not provided adequate evidence to substantiate his claim.

Conclusion

Stewart concludes Ten Myths about Calvinism with a reflective chapter which weaves together the various threads of Calvinism and makes his projections for the future of Calvinism.  Entitled “Recovering Our Bearings: Calvinism in the Twenty-First Century,” Stewart recommends that Calvinism get more in touch with the diversity within its own tradition and urges his fellow Calvinists to reject triumphalism in favor of an humbler, more cooperative Calvinism that seeks out commonalities with other believers rather than constantly hammering on areas of difference.

Ten Myths about Calvinism is a great read, a well-researched, well-documented, and interesting book.  I believe that it will become a standard book in the field; I already see references to it in numerous publications. I strongly recommend this book whether you are a Calvinist or not. You will be enriched by reading it.

 
By Dr. Lemke, Provost, Professor of Philosophy and Ethics, occupying the McFarland Chair of Theology, Director of the Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry, and Editor of the Journal for Baptist Theology and Ministry at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary

The subject of Calvinism and Reformed Theology has been one of the “hottest” topics in the evangelical world generally, and among Southern Baptists in particular. Ten Myths about Calvinism[1] makes a valuable contribution to that dialogue. It is authored by Kenneth Stewart, a professor of theological studies at Covenant College in Georgia, who embraces Reformed Theology but writes with balance and fairness that is missing many times in this discussion.

Four Myths that Calvinists Propagate, But Should Not

Of the ten “myths” about Calvinism that Stewart proposes, the first four are myths he believes that Calvinists are circulating, but they should not be doing so.  These four Calvinist-propounded myths are:
(1) that one man (John Calvin) and one city (Geneva) is determinative of all of Calvinism,
(2) that Calvin’s view of predestination must be ours,
(3) that the ‘TULIP” is an appropriate yardstick concerning who is truly Reformed in theology, and
(4) that Calvinists take a dim view of revival and awakening.

Myth 1:  One man (John Calvin) and one city (Geneva) is determinative of all of Calvinism.

Regarding the first “myth,” Stewart builds a convincing and well-documented case that Calvin’s writings were impactful in his own day, but no more so than Reformed leaders of other Swiss cantons.  Calvin’s theological impact had “actually gone into eclipse by the late sixteenth century” (p. 29), and a hybrid form of “Anglo-Calvinism” that had blended with other traditions had emerged (p. 29). Indeed, even in Geneva, Anglican evangelical writer Thomas Haweis remarked in 1800 that “I doubt if there remains a single professor or pastor at Geneva who adheres to Calvin” (p. 25); and British visitor Henry Drummond was unable to find a single volume of Calvin’s Institutes available for sale in Geneva in 1817 (p. 31). It was Victorian England that brought a resurgence in interest in Calvin’s thought by republishing and promulgating his works.  In tracing the influence of the other Reformed thinkers other than Calvin himself, Stewart is, as the subtitle of the book indicates, attempting to recover the full breadth of the Reformed tradition.

Myth 2: Calvin’s view of predestination must be ours.

Stewart also provides compelling evidence to debunk the second “myth,” that Calvin’s view of predestination must be ours. First of all, Stewart traces the development of the doctrine of predestination in Calvin’s own thought.  In the first edition of the Institutes, Calvin endorsed only a modest “consolatory” perspective on predestination, that is, as an assurance of the salvation of believers (p. 49); and a confession penned by Calvin in the same year (1536) to which all the residents of Geneva had to subscribe did not even mention predestination or election (p. 49). It was only after Calvin’s expulsion from Geneva and his contact with the higher predestination view of Martin Bucer in Strasbourg that Calvin took a stronger stance on predestination (pp. 51-56). Key second-generation Reformed leaders such as Heinrich Bullinger and Peter Martyr Vermigli soft-pedaled Calvin’s perspective on predestination, particularly with regard to unbelievers.  It was largely the third generation of Reformed thinkers (principally Theodore Beza and William Perkins) who developed and popularized the stronger Reformed view of predestination (pp. 57-63).  However, most standard Reformed confessions follow Bullinger and the softer “consolatory” view of predestination, namely the Formula of Concord of 1577 (in Lutheranism), the Articles of the Church of England (1547, 1563), the Belgic Confession of 1559, the Scots Confession of 1560, the Heidelberg Catechism of 1563, and the Second Helvetic Confession of 1566 (pp. 63-65).

Myth 3: The ‘TULIP” acronym is an appropriate yardstick concerning who is truly Reformed in theology.

It is Stewart’s third “myth” (that the “TULIP” acrostic is not regulative of what is or is not legitimate Reformed Theology) that has garnered the most comment about this book, and is probably its greatest contribution. Stewart notes that the “sovereign grace” school of Calvinism has considered the TULIP as a “sacrosanct” historical formula, while the “apologetic” school of Calvinism attempted to alter and reword the acrostic to soften its negative impact on non-Calvinist hearers. Stewart asserts, however, that both of these schools are “unwittingly working from a mistaken premise,” namely the “unwarranted belief” and “common assumption that the acronym TULIP is itself historic” (pp. 76-77).  Stewart traces how Calvinist theologians in the seventeenth and eighteenth century addressed the five doctrines arising from the Synod of Dort utilizing a variety of terms, and none used the TULIP acrostic.  The use of the TULIP acrostic as we now know it does not appear in the record until the twentieth century. The earliest published references are in a periodical article by R. M. Vail in 1913 (reprinted in the appendix of this book), which Vail took from some lectures by a Dr. McAfee in 1905 2(pp. 291-292).  The earliest best-known published source Stewart found (pp. 78-79, 86-87) was Loraine Boettner’s 1932 book The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination. However, even Boettner warned against “a too close identification of the Five Points and the Calvinist system.”[2] Stewart provides a useful chart summarizing how each of the major Reformed theologians in the last few decades has utilized the TULIP (pp. 93-95).  Since Stewart asserts that the TULIP acronym is built on a misunderstanding of the historical basis of this acronym, he challenges the “slavish, unquestioning loyalty” to the five points (p. 87).  Noting that various Reformed confessions do not align with the five points of the TULIP, Stewart boldly states, “Calling the paraphrasing of Dordt by TULIP a broad-brush approach is arguably too kind. TULIP cannot be allowed to function as a creed” (p. 93).

Myth 4: Calvinists take a dim view of revivals and awakenings.

Stewart does not build as strong a historical basis for the fourth “myth,” that Calvinists take a dim view of revivals and awakenings.  While he notes the involvement of some Calvinists in various awakenings and revivals, he must also list others who opposed the awakenings and revivals. For the most part, Stewart is offering only a moderately convincing apology for Calvinism in this chapter.  The same is true for the next chapter, the first of six myths that non-Calvinists should not be circulating, but they are. Somewhat related to Myth 4, Myth 5 asserts that Calvinism is largely antimissionary. Stewart’s evidence is rather anecdotal, listing a few well-known Calvinist missionaries but never providing adequate evidence that this was true of Calvinism as a whole.  Stewart also drifts off-target in this chapter by addressing the missionary efforts of Catholics, Lutherans, and others, which does little to establish his premise about the missions efforts of Calvinists

In addition to myth (5) that Calvinism is largely antimissionary, the other myths that non-Calvinists propagate are:
(6) Calvinism is antinomian,
(7) Calvinism promotes theocracy,
(8) Calvinism undermines the creative arts,
(9) Calvinism resists gender equity, and
(10) Calvinism has engendered racial inequality.

These will be the subject of the next post.

Steve Lemke, one of the contributing editors to SBC Today, recently published The Return of Christ: A Premillennial Perspective. Charles Savelle, editor of the Bible X(position) blog, recently posted information about The Return of Christ, and interviewed Dr. Lemke about the book. You can read the interview at bibleexposition.net.

The Return of Christ is the second book that Dr. Lemke has co-edited with Dr. David Allen, Dean of the School of Theology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.  Both of these books arose from two conferences sponsored by Jerry Vines Ministries and co-sponsored by a number of theological institutions. The first book was Whosoever Will: A Biblical-Theological Critique of Five Point Calvinism, from the John 3:16 Conference at First Baptist Church of Woodstock, GA in 2008.  Likewise, The Return of Christ: A Premillennial Perspective arose from the Acts 1:11 Conference at Metro First Baptist Church in Lawrenceville, GA in 2009. Both books address key theological issues of interest to the church and contemporary evangelical Christians.

The first section of the book has printed versions of all the major presentations at the Acts 1:11 Conference, and five additional articles which fill out the description of premillennial eschatology more completely. The chapters from the Acts 1:11 Conference participants include sermons from well-known Baptist preachers:

• “Stargazers or Soul-Winners?” by Jerry Vines
• “What to do Until Jesus Returns,” by Junior Hill

The conference also featured five other presentations about different aspects of premillennial eschatology:

• “The Patience of Hope,” by Ergun Caner, Provost of Arlington Bible College
• “A Rapture You Can’t Miss, A Judgment You Must Face, A Supper You Will Want to Attend,” by Danny Akin, President of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
• “Israel and the Great Tribulation,” by Paige Patterson,  President of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
• “The Millennial Reign of Christ,” by David Allen, Dean of the School of Theology at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.
• “The Great White Throne Judgment, Heaven, and Hell,” by Richard Land, President of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention

In the second half of the book are valuable supplementary chapters by other contributors:

• “The Doctrine of Eschatology,” by R. Stanton Norman, Provost of Oklahoma Baptist University
• “The Kingdom that Comes with Jesus,” by Craig Blaising, Provost of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary
• “The Second Coming of the Messiah in the Old Testament,” by Lamar Cooper, Provost of the Criswell College
• “The Eschatology of the Gospels,” by Steven Cox, Research Professor of New Testament at Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary
• “The Eschatology of the Pauline Epistles,” by Michael Vlach, Professor of Theology at the Master’s Seminary

If you’re interested in eschatology, SBC Today recommends that you consider adding The Return of Christ to your library!

One of the honors that I have serving at SBC Today is the occasional book review that comes my way.  It not only allows me to increase my library free of charge, but it also challenges me as I filter the thoughts of others.  Some books become boring and monotonous after the introduction and do nothing to challenge your thinking.  Others hold your attention but are not logically presented and because of their illogical movement presents a challenge to the reader to remember what the writer is trying to communicate.  Holy Subversion by Trevin Wax is one book that not only challenges the reader but it also reads very logically.

When beginning a book I always attack the project in the following manner; Table of Contents, publisher information, endorsements, forward, and either last chapter, or concluding thoughts.  Trevin Wax does not disappoint me in my reading schedule.  He provides a clear Forward and an outstanding summary of his purpose in the Afterward.  He says in the Afterward: “The main thrust of this book has been a call to reclaiming the subversive nature of Christian discipleship.”(p.149)  It was that statement that invigorated my discipleship juices and gave me the idea of using this book in my current one-on-one discipleship class.  I am currently meeting once a week with a brother in a mentoring type of relationship.  I decided to work through this book with him.  Because of using this book in this relationship, I have decided not to do a one time book review but an ongoing chapter-by-chapter review.  Thus, begins part one of an eight part series reviewing Holy Subversion.

The forward does not disappoint as Dr. Ed Stetzer presents his wordsmith qualities to set you up to read the book.  Dr. Stetzer does, this writer believes, get carried away trying to present statistics about today’s Christians.  He uses a Barna research, his own research, and Dr. Brad Waggoner’s research all within three paragraphs. (p.13-14)  It makes the reader say: ‘ok enough of the research stats already’.  It appears, to this reviewer, in Dr. Stetzer’s desire to bring us to the point of the book, he forgets he is doing a forward for Trevin Wax.  But, he eventually brings the reader to the book’s objective and directs one’s attention to Wax’s purpose of expressing and living out Jesus is Lord.

As the author begins the first chapter much groundwork is presented.  This reviewer likes the way the author clearly presents his thesis.  Wax  clearly states his thesis in a question; “…how can we as communities of faith live in a way that subverts the “Caesars” that rule people around us…and seek to rule us too?” (p.26)  The author moves on to identify, what he describes in the Afterward as “a handful of rivals to Christ’s Lordship”. (p.149)

Some areas of disagreement I have with the author may seem to be minor for some but for others it may be an issue.  Personally these areas would not present an issue for this reviewer, it just helps to keep in perspective the bias of the author.  First, the reader is given a clue to the writer’s soteriological bend in the very beginning of the first chapter.  Wax, in expressing how the early church lived out “true Christianity” as being “not merely life-changing” but “world-changing” (emphasis Wax) seems to reveal a reformed soteriology.  He says; “The gospel message was less about inviting Jesus into their hearts and more about people being invited into the kingdom community that represents God’s heart for the world”. (p.24) The statement give the appearance that the early church invited people into the church and not a personal relationship with Christ.  I believe the author would have been wise to avoid this comparison.  It is as if the author downplays the importance of a personal entrance into the Kingdom in favor of a communal entrance.  One other area of disagreement hinges around the importance of communities of faith living passionately for Christ.  Do not mis-read this reviewer, as he is not saying he disagrees with living passionately for Christ in a community of faith.  However, Wax says; “So, how can we as communities of faith live in a way that subverts the “Caesars” that rule people around us…and seek to rule us too”? (p.26)  The disagreement that this reviewer has is that God calls us to live passionately for him privately and then corporately.  By focusing on how we corporately live passionately Wax seems to be directing our focus on the wrong objective.  If our main focus is a passionate love of Jesus in our private arena then that spills over into our corporate community of faith.

The areas of agreement I have with this first chapter are too numerous to mention. I would, however, like to call attention to a few.  First, Wax clearly defines what he means by “subversion” through giving the reader various definitions and then claiming the one he uses for the book.  His definition for the book is “pushing something back down into its proper place”. (p.26) He presents that these areas of our life are not bad, in and of themselves, but need to be pushed back down under the control of Jesus.  Second, Wax clearly lists the areas of our life that become Caesars.  He lists the Caesar of self, success, money, leisure, sex, and power as being those that most commonly battle for complete control over our lives.  Third, Wax teases the reader as he lists these various Caesars.  He briefly describes each Caesar and leaves the reader aware that each one will become more detailed in the chapters to come.

One Caesar this reviewer especially appreciates him presenting is the Caesar of sex.  With this Caesar, Wax presents three ways Christian communities can subvert this idol. (p.30-31)  First, for singles there should be a commitment to “a life of chastity (a life of purity) not  merely abstinence.” Second, the community must celebrate “sex within marriage” which translates into a covenant marriage.  Third, Wax encourages Christian communities to stop separating sex from procreation.  When this reviewer first read that statement it was a little daunting, but as one reads Wax’s next sentence one sees his point.  He says; “We will foster a church culture that celebrates large families and sees children as a gift from God.”  How many times does one hear Christians in the church joke about the couple that has four to six children?  Large families have become the abnormal standard now and small families are the ones celebrated.  This reviewer has not read Wax’s completely developed chapter on the Caesar of Sex, but one does look forward to a fully developed theology of child bearing in that chapter.  If there isn’t one this reader will be greatly disappointed.

Just the Forward and Chapter 1 have been covered in this review.  If this is any indication of how the rest of the book is packaged then this will be an enjoyable read.  However, the readability of the book is not the only purpose of this reviewers interest.  This reviewer will also review the chapters to come on each chapter’s ability to develop the disciple.  Looking forward to the journey.

Additional reading helps us to reach these goals.  We all benefit from those who share with us the truth of Scripture and its application to our lives.  We can also benefit from a well-written story which helps remind us of an important truth.  On many occasions as a pastor I am asked to recommend a book, or commentary, or novel for someone to read.  Living in Midwestern Seminary’s town, I have had opportunity to be interviewed by students in our church and answer the question, “What would you consider to be the three most influential books you have read other than the Bible?”

So, just in case your summer reading list is almost completed, let me recommend just a few books I believe are worth everyone’s time…

Saint Ben by John Fischer – This novel, and its sequel, The Saints’ and Angels’ Song, is a heart-warming story about a young boy named Ben Beamering, a pastor’s son.  Set in the late 1950′s, this book also pulled me into what is now my fascination with one of the most incredible, and special, automobiles ever built…the Edsel (read the book & you’ll see why).  This book impacted me as a father and a pastor reminding me that my boys are just that…boys, and not some stereotype of “PKs.”

The Gospel According to Jesus by John MacArthur – This book sets forth a thorough-going, biblical understanding of what many describe as “lordship salvation.”  This book still speaks to a problem faced by our churches today– ‘What does it mean to regenerated by the Spirit of God to a new and living hope?’  Dr. MacArthur provides sufficient eveidence from the gospels that Jesus taught lordship salvation in contrast to the contemporary ‘easy believism’ we find in too many churches today.  The companion book, Faith Works, shows that Jesus’ disciples lived and taught the very same Gospel as Jesus had done.

The Long War Against God by Henry Morris – This book will add a greater understanding to the line from the classic song, “This world is not my home/I’m just-a passin’ through.”  By this I mean that through Dr. Morris’ treatment of the prevasive impact of Darwinian evolutionary theory, and the correlative social darwinism, he shows that no aspect of this world has been left untouched by this kind of thinking.  Dr. Morris also shows the necessity of maintaining a biblically-based, creationist world view for a throughly consistent hermeneutic.

The Agony of Deceit by Michael Horton – This book was the first one I ever read pointing out the dangers of heretical teaching in our day.  Mr. Horton pulled together a stellar team of writers to deal with the problematic issues rampant in the teaching of many popular radio and television ministries.  He was one of the first to name names and set forth a direct comparison of their words to the words of Scripture.  This book has helped me be watchful in my own preaching and teaching ministry as well as to take seriously my responsibility to shepherd the church for which God has given me responsibility to lead.

The Baptist Way by Stan Norman – This book is an exceptional work covering the importance of biblical ecclesiology.  Dr. Norman has articulated very well the historic Baptist position regarding the nature and ministry of the local church.  I truly believe that this book could serve as the most important work in recent years in which we find a clear discussion of those convictions which are at the heart of our identity as Baptists, specifically as Southern Baptists today.

Well, there you have my five recommendations for your summer reading list.  Some who know me well might be concerned about the absence of such great historic writers such as Luther, Calvin, Spurgeon, or Edwards.  Trust me, they are not forgotten.  I think I’ll save them for a “classics” reading list to bring to you later.

Happy reading…remember, reading is fundamental!

By Grace Alone!

Dr. Peter Lumpkins has hit a home run.  Alcohol Today: Abstinence in an Age of Indulgence is a book which is long overdue for our churches and our culture.  This debate seems to have fallen on hard times.  Anyone who would dare assert that a biblical world view should include total abstinence is quickly lampooned and often mercilessly ridiculed.

If anyone is a candidate to take up this trumpet and sound the call of alarm, Peter Lumpkins is definitely such a person.  Along with his trademark, colloquial manner, Peter has infused this work with cogent historical scholarship which makes the convictions expressed in this book both accessible and formidable. He astutely outlines the issue and presents an accurate characterization of all possible points of view concerning the matter of intoxicating beverages and Christian morality while arguing decisively for his assertion that Christians ought not have anything to do with intoxicants, specifically the drug of alcohol.

In a relatively short work (166 pages), Peter manages to convincingly set forth his case.  In fact, as I read it, I was amazed at the wealth of material compacted into this book.  That fact alone should be an encouragement to one and all to pick up this book and read it.  The book is divided into three parts.  In Part 1, Peter outlines the necessity of a book on the issue of Christian belief/living and the use of fermented beverage alcohol.  In Part 2, Peter discusses the five possible positions one could take regarding this issue.  In Part 3, Peter takes up a specific discussion of biblical passages central to the debate between libertines, moderationists, and abstentionists concerning alcohol.  This is not to say that Part 3 is the only place in which scriptural truth is brought to bear on this discussion.  In fact, the whole book is infused with the foundation and reiteration of the authority of God’s inerrant and infallible Word.

If there be any weakness in this book, I could see only one.  In his argument for total abstinence in Chapter 9, I found the discussion of total abstinence from alcohol, the abstinence of fasting, and the abstinence of self-denial to be a little confusing.  I can see the point he is trying to make, but I believe the point is weakened through the analogy of abstinence from otherwise permissible things versus convictional abstinence from something prohibited altogether.  I believe that the argument could better be made by making a comparison of this conviction to the prohibition of such immoral acts as slavery (which is tacitly mentioned in another portion of the book).

Alcohol Today is certainly worth your time.  Pick it up today!  (The picture above is a link to Amazon.com where you can purchase this book.)

[Discussion of this review is hosted at my blog, SolaGratia!]