Pages Menu
TwitterRss
Categories Menu

Posted by on Dec 19, 2012 in Book Reviews | 3 comments

Review of Understanding Spiritual Warfare: Four Views

understandingspiritualwarfareHaving spent some time recently thinking through many questions I’ve had about spiritual warfare, I decided to read the newly released book, Understanding Spiritual Warfare: Four Views. I want to give a brief summary of the different views represented, as well as a succinct analysis of what was presented. The book follows the same structure as the other four views books, in which each chapter presents a view, followed by responses by each of the other three representatives.

Overview of the Four Views

The World Systems Model by Walter Wink

Wink’s view is distinguished by his rejection of Satan and demons as personal, autonomous beings. He argues that Satan is presented by Scripture as one of God’s servants rather than one of his enemies, and so has been massively misunderstood. But he also argues for a panentheistic worldview in which the “spirits and powers” of which Scripture speaks are the “spiritual interior” of human social structure, and thus the primary mode of spiritual warfare is engaging the evils in human society, particularly violence, especially violence in the name of anything sacred.

The Classical Model by David Powlison

Powlison argues that the devil and demons are real, that spiritual warfare is real and to be taken seriously, but that the primary way one fights the spiritual war is through the ordinary means of grace that God has provided, which lead to repentance and sanctification. He primarily devotes his chapter to expositing Scripture, though he also discusses a few practical examples where he illustrates fighting the spiritual powers of darkness through the means of prayer, the word, and repentance from sin.

The Ground-Level Deliverance Model by Gregory Boyd

Boyd argues that living like Jesus, particularly in social causes, is a key way we fight the spiritual war, but he also believes that deliverance from demonic possession is also an important piece of spiritual warfare. Similar to Wink and Greenwood, he also sees importance in rejecting the societal structures that are used by demonic forces. But he differs from the last view in that he sees activist-type solutions as primary.

The Strategic-Level Deliverance Model by Peter Wagner and Rebecca Greenwood

Wagner introduces the view by giving some personal background to the topic, and Greenwood explains the view as an academic and as a field practitioner. Their view is similar to that of Boyd, but they argue that not only do we need to deliver individuals from bondage to demons, but also directly confront the demonic powers behind social ills, territorial spirits. Additionally, they do not view these aspects of spiritual warfare as sometimes necessary, as Boyd indicates, but instead that they are keys for normal frontline spiritual warfare.

Some Thoughts on Each of the Four Views

The World Systems Model

For anyone who is evangelical, committed to the inerrancy of Scripture and the omnipotence of God, Wink’s model will come across as at best bizarre, and at worst, extremely dangerous. His exegesis of Scripture is odd at best, and his focus on nonviolence seems quite forced, ironically, on much of the discussion. Additionally, he rejects God’s sovereignty (an open view of the future), which seems to have many disastrous consequences for how we view our role and God’s in spiritual warfare.

The Classical Model

Powlison carefully engages Scripture, particularly Ephesians 6, where Paul most explicitly discusses spiritual warfare in the life of believers. He seeks to not minimize the reality of spiritual warfare at all, but to ask how Scripture indicates we ought to fight the spiritual war. He also (somewhat reluctantly) provides some illustrations of how his view has helped others get to the root of real spiritual problems instead of doing the “deliverance” type of ministry that Boyd and Greenwood advocate.

What I found particularly compelling even beyond his exegesis of Scripture was that when faced with serious problems among people, he doesn’t deny the role of evil spirits, but rather says that rather than looking for a “demon of fear” to cast out, we ought to instead be probing to see what sin issues there are that need to be repented of. When we proclaim the gospel and apply it to sin, we will see real change. I may write later of specific things that he said that were helpful to me.

The Ground-Level Deliverance Model

I don’t want to prejudice readers based on Boyd’s other views, but Boyd is an open theist, so that very much affects how he views this topic. That necessarily affects how he views God’s role and ours in spiritual warfare, so it is worth being aware of going into his chapter. His writing makes it seem as if being a socio-political activist is a primary way that we engage in spiritual warfare, with pacifism being a large peg in his system. This seems like a difficult view to prove, given that Paul’s discussion of spiritual warfare in Ephesians 6 certainly does not discuss any of those types of things.

He affirms deliverance ministries as a way of rescuing people from the clutches of demonic activity, activity which has led them to sin and misery. He also affirms casting out territorial spirits as a secondary (at best) aspect of deliverance ministry. His view of Scripture also seems suspect, though not quite as far left as that of Wink. He seems to associate demonic oppression and possession with moral, sinful problems, i.e., the demon of fear, or worry, etc.

The Strategic-Level Deliverance Model

I don’t want to be uncharitable, but Greenwood’s exegesis is incredibly sloppy with many unproven, fairly wild assertions. E.g., regarding Acts 16 and the exorcism of the slave girl, she writes,

A fairly inescapable conclusion would be that the demonic spirit in this young woman was indeed a territorial spirit or principality that had maintained this region in darkness. (p. 181)

Such a conclusion is only inescapable (even possible) if one comes to the text assuming the work of territorial spirits in the chapter. Nothing in the text even hints at such an idea. Her chapter is riddled with this type of argumentation.

Greenwood’s charismatic leanings come through emphatically, as she relates a story of casting a territorial spirit out of Kansas (presumably so as to stop a high abortion rate), in which a combination of God revealing to her in a dream that Lilith (mentioned once in Scripture as a normal creature, but that developed into a mythological creature in later literature) was the name of the territorial spirit and seeing an owl confirmed to her that she needed to cast out this spirit. It was, to say the least, bizarre.

Not only is she advocating her approach to spiritual warfare as possible, she’s advocating “strategic-level deliverance” as primary strategy in spiritual warfare. That is, that we will not see change in nations and communities without directly confronting territorial spirits. Paul did not seem to similarly adopt such a strategy in Acts, but rather proclaimed the gospel and cast out demons when they directly interfered with his ministry.

Conclusion

Though I certainly had leanings in his direction before reading the book, I certainly found Powlison’s position not only the most thoroughly biblical, but also the most rooted in the realities of life in a sinful world. Having said that, I still have questions unanswered about the topic that I would love to hear Powlison address, so I will read his fuller book-length treatment of the topic.

One important reminder that came through in every chapter and from every view was the Importance of prayer in spiritual warfare. Even where I might end up disagreeing with most of the authors, I can’t help but be challenged by their dedication to prayer in pursuing Jesus and advancing the gospel.

Read More

Posted by on Nov 16, 2012 in Book Reviews, Ecclesiology |

Review of the Creedal Imperative by Carl Trueman

creedalimperativeThe Creedal Imperative by Carl Trueman is vying for best book I’ve read in 2012. I found it compelling, engaging, and convincing, and I hope that many of those in the young, restless, and Reformed crowd reads it.

Trueman’s burden in the book is his “belief that creeds and confessions are vital to the present and future well-being of the church.” He makes a well-reasoned case for why we should have creeds and confessions, including the ongoing use of those from the past. Given that in my ordination vows I stated that I agreed the Westminster Standards contain the system of doctrine found in the Scriptures, I greatly appreciated his explanation of why it is important to have such creedal standards.

Perhaps the most important point that Trueman makes in the book is this: everyone has a creed or confession–but not all of them are written down. In his words:

I do want to make the point here that Christians are not divided between those who have creeds and confessions and those who do not; rather, they are divided between those who have public creeds and confessions that are written down and exist as public documents, subject to public scrutiny, evaluation, and critique, and those who have private creeds and confessions that are often improvised, unwritten, and thus not open to public scrutiny, not susceptible to evaluation and, crucially and ironically, not, therefore, subject to testing by Scripture to see whether they are true.

In other words, when pastors say, “I just believe the Bible,” what they are really saying is that they hold a certain set of beliefs that cannot be publicly examined because they aren’t written down. This alone gives a pretty convincing case for why creeds and confessions should be written down: so that we can compare them carefully with Scripture to see if the doctrine contained in the confession is taught in Scripture.

The Creedal Imperative works systematically through the bases and arguments for confessionalism. In chapter one, Trueman analyzes why our contemporary culture (even evangelical culture) is skeptical about creeds and confessions, particularly older ones. His observations are insightful and instructive for the groundwork that may need to be laid in order for churches to begin to embrace creeds and confessions more today.

In chapter two, Trueman argues from Scripture itself that creeds and confessions are indeed a biblical idea anticipated by how Paul trained leaders in the early church. This is a powerful chapter, as Trueman anticipates arguments suggesting that creeds and confessions will reduce our commitment to sola Scriptura, arguing that instead creeds and confessions allow us to continually make sure that the “tradition” we pass down is in line with Scripture.

In chapter three, Trueman looks at the development of the earliest creeds in the church, such as the Apostles’ Creed and the creeds that came out of the early ecumenical councils. These are instructive as they represent the importance the early church attached to written summaries of Scripture’s teaching.

In chapter four, Trueman looks at classic Protestant confessions, such as the Belgic Confession and the Westminster Confession. I highly recommend this chapter, as it demonstrates not only the beauty of these confessions, but also the particular historical circumstances in which these confessions emerged. This is helpful as we consider the role of confessions in our own day and how they can continue to be used fruitfully.

In chapter five, Trueman tackles the relationship between confessions and praise. Contrary to the perhaps popular image of confessions as dry and dusty documents, he shows that they ought to lead to doxology. That is, while they teach truth, they are also meant to be used in leading us to worship, and so we ought not to present a bifurcated view of what we teach and how we praise our Savior.

In chapter six, Trueman explores further how creeds and confessions can be used profitably. The appendix is dedicated to discussing the writing of new creeds and amending of confessions.

Again, I highly recommend this work, as it is a much needed antidote to the common mindset that we “just believe the Bible” and so don’t care about what the church has produced in the past as summaries of Scriptural teaching.

Read More

Posted by on Oct 3, 2012 in Book Reviews, Politics |

Review of Left, Right, and Christ: Evangelical Faith in Politics

Left, Right, and Christ: Evangelical Faith in Politics is co-written by two Christians, one a Republican, the other a Democrat. In it, they both seek to explain their views and how they arise from their evangelical faith. I decided to read this book because I have really wondered at times why evangelical democrats have taken the positions that they have. I also appreciate reasoned discourse on politics rather than the political craziness (“Can you believe what he said? But what about what he said? But he’ll raise taxes! No, the other guy will!”…you know the drill) you hear on just about every talk show (from both sides of the aisle).

Before getting to my thoughts on the book, let me encourage you to read it. Don’t read it because you will be persuaded to change your mind about your views. Don’t read it because it will suddenly clarify everything that is happening in the current presidential debate. Read it because it will give you a chance to hear about tough issues in more than absurd 90-second responses (can we all just admit that the way we structure debates leads to a lack of real clarity on the issues?). With that in mind, here a few thoughts on the book.

(1) I was hoping for more direct interaction in the book. I.e., I am accustomed to the 4 views books where each main position is given a response from the other positions. That didn’t happen in this book. Each chapter is broken into two parts, where each other lays out his or her view on the issues. That’s fine, it just wasn’t exactly what I was hoping for.

(2) I found the tone of the Republican representative to be less than helpful. Additionally, he tended to toe the party line more than represent conservative thought in a way that would likely win over any undecided thinkers. Nonetheless, he did articulate the main lines of mainstream Republican thought, as well as how he sees that fitting with a biblical worldview. I do think he may have gone a bit overboard on the “pull yourself up by your own boot straps” motif. While the ethic of hard work is certainly rooted in Scripture, I wonder if the individualistic, independent self-determination he espouses is quite the same as that ethic. His personal history (a Canadian who later received US citizenship) did bring an interesting perspective to the equation.

(3) I found the Democratic evangelical’s perspective insightful, as it gave me much more of a window into the thought processes of politically liberal evangelicals. Nonetheless, I found her perspective quite unconvincing. E.g., in particular, in the chapter on climate change, she gave a passionate appeal for taking care of the earth (which we should all agree with). What she failed to do was defend in any sense the science behind it. That was simply assumed. Given that much of the objection to cap and trade and other issues has stemmed from objections to that scientific perspective, I expected more on that front.

At the end of the day, while I found it helpful to see how she thinks through the issues, I also found some of the explanations to just skirt around the simplicity of certain questions. E.g., she says she wants to stop abortions, that they’re terrible, etc, but then defended Obama’s senate vote against partial-birth abortions because of other consequences of the bill. If we’re against abortions, we have to be against abortions. Period. And that includes–as she stirringly pointed out–fighting poverty, which is one of the leading causes of abortion.

(4) There’s plenty more that could be said about how each of them presented their views on a variety of topics. But I’ll just leave it at that, hoping that you’ll read it, seeking to have a clear understanding of where others come from, even as we all have to develop in our minds how biblical principles will guide us in determining what we will do this coming November.

Read More

Posted by on Sep 2, 2012 in Book Reviews, Ecclesiology |

Thoughts on The Trellis and the Vine by Payne and Marshall

trellis-and-vineThe Trellis and the Vine: The Ministry Mind-Shift That Changes Everything is one of the more helpful books I’ve read this year. Though certainly I can’t agree with every single thing in the book, the basic premise is one that really helped my thinking about how the church–whether in the US or elsewhere–needs to consider the dynamic between church-as-institution and church-as-organism.

The premise of the book is that there are two types of work in the church: trellis work and vine work. Vine work is the church-as-organism idea, in which the members of the church are called to minister God’s word to each other and to the watching world. Trellis work are the administrative and organizational features that exist to support the vine-work. Prioritizing vine work puts the focus in ministry on people, not on programs or structure. What happens in vine work?

However, despite the almost limitless number of contexts in which it might happen, what happens is the same: a Christian brings a truth from God’s word to someone else, praying that God would make that word bear fruit through the inward working of his Spirit. That’s vine work. Everything else is trellis.

Unfortunately, as the authors point out, many churches have come to focus so much on trellis work that there is very little time left for vine work. Programs often force out discipleship through the word. That was a great reminder for me. Perhaps its a Western mindset, or even an American one, but I think I’ve often felt like absence of programs means lack of discipleship. And that’s not necessarily an accurate way of looking at discipleship in the church.

The authors provide many helpful ways of thinking about how discipleship ought to occur in the church. Working through the book would probably help any community or leadership team in thinking through how to encourage true discipleship, for the focus is on God’s people speaking God’s word in prayerful expectation of the working of God’s Spirit.

Additionally, they strongly encourage churches to take seriously the training of not only members, but also leaders in the church. Future leaders need to have modeled for them what to do, and so the apprenticeship model that they present seems to hold much promise for the future of the church in the West.

There’s lots more to think through with this book, but my big takeaways are these: (1) Focus ministry on people, not programs. (2) Make the regular speaking of God’s word the central element in all ministry. I’m guessing that the Christian life in general and ministry in particular will be a continual exploring of what looks like.

Read More

Posted by on Aug 11, 2012 in Book Reviews, Christian Life |

Review of The Hole in Our Holiness by Kevin DeYoung

Since Kevin DeYoung’s talk at T4G on Gospel-Driven, Faith-Fueled, Spirit-Empowered Effort, I’ve been looking forward to his book entitled The Hole in Our Holiness: Filling the Gap between Gospel Passion and the Pursuit of Godliness. I really don’t have much to say about the book other than that I find it to be very helpful on a number of issues. He weaves together the absolute reality of God’s free grace while yet constantly pointing to the very goal of God’s grace in our lives: our growth in holiness.

I thought that I would just provide some helpful quotes from the book:

Let me be clear about something from the very beginning: stressing the necessity of personal holiness should not undermine in any way our confidence in justification by faith alone. The best theologians and the best theological statements have always emphasized the scandalous nature of gospel grace and the indispensable need for personal holiness. Faith and good works are both necessary. But one is the root and the other the fruit.

So holy people obey, but this is not the same as mere rule keeping. Godliness is more than basic morality and niceness.

Emphasizing free grace is not the problem. The problem is in assuming that good works will invariably flow from nothing but a diligent emphasis on the gospel. Many Christians, including preachers, don’t know what to do with commands and are afraid to talk directly about obedience. The world may think we’re homophobic, but nomophobia (fear of law) may be our bigger problem.

It is the consistent witness of the New Testament that growth in godliness requires exertion on the part of the Christian.

Your friends and family, your colleagues and kids—they don’t need you to do miracles or transform civilization. They need you to be holy.

Plenty to think on, and it ought to be enough to convince you to get the book and read it!

Read More

Posted by on Aug 8, 2012 in Book Reviews, Ecclesiology, Missiology |

Some Thoughts on Total Church by Chester and Timmis

Having had it recommended to me by several people recently, I just read Total Church: A Radical Reshaping around Gospel and Community by Tim Chester and Steve Timmis. I found it to be a compelling and stimulating read, so I’ve decided to write out some thoughts about it. I will likely be writing more on a few specific topics raised in the book, but here are some overview thoughts for now. The table of contents is below:

As you can see, the book covers a number of topics, but its central premise is that the church–from its life and organization to its mission–should be shaped around two pillars: gospel and community. This theme is woven through every page of the book. After laying out this basic premise in the first two chapters, the remaining flesh out how that can look in the life the church. I’ll probably be posting numerous times in the coming days about specific ideas from the book, but for now, I want to offer just a few commendations and concerns.

Commendations

Chester and Timmis stick to their guns: gospel and community are the two driving forces behind their approach to the church and to church planting. This is evident throughout the book. Whether it’s discipleship, evangelism, apologetics, pastoral care, or any of the other topics they discuss, gospel and community take center stage. And that’s quite refreshing in the program-heavy church church environment in which we now live.

The book is of immense practical benefit in thinking about how the church is always to keep its focus on reaching its community, and how Christians can and should rethink their role in such an effort. To give an idea of where they go with their practical ideas, consider this list of what it might mean to be gospel-centered and community-centered:

  • seeing church as an identity instead of a responsibility to be juggled alongside other commitments
  • celebrating ordinary life as the context in which the word of God is proclaimed with ‘God-talk’ as a normal feature of everyday conversation
  • running fewer evangelistic events, youth clubs, and social projects, and spending more time sharing our lives with unbelievers
  • starting new congregations instead of growing existing ones
  • preparing Bible talks with other people instead of just studying alone at a desk
  • adopting a 24-7 approach to mission and pastoral care instead of starting ministry programs
  • switching the emphasis from Bible teaching to Bible learning and action
  • spending more time with people on the margins of society
  • learning to disciple one another–and to be discipled–day by day
  • having churches that are messy instead of churches that pretend

Now, I might want to quibble with some of the details, but in terms of the big picture, those are some practical goals that are fleshed out with some degree of clarity in the book. It’s also easy to tell that programs are not a big feature of their vision for the church. Instead, living life in community, and including unbelievers in that community, are the central features of the church’s outreach in the community. I would imagine that every pastor would say, “Yes! If only…” In some ways, we probably have programs because church members have either become isolated from nonbelievers, or not encouraged to bring unbelievers into the community, or are just too uncomfortable doing so. I highly encourage reading some of the ideas (and snippets of stories from real life) on how to do and encourage this.

Following up on this, I thought that the application of their two-pronged approach to apologetics had some very insightful comments. Consider this one:

This does not mean that there is no place for rational apologetics. But it means that such approaches must be less ambitious. Their role is not to persuade unbelievers. The role of rational apologetics is to demonstrate that unbelief is a problem of the heart rather than a problem of the head. (p. 172)

They also take aim at the approach that many middle to upper class churches take toward church planting and leadership development.

One of the reasons we have middle-class churches that are failing to reach working-class people is that we have middle-class leaders. And we have middle-class leaders because our expectations of what constitutes leadership and our training methods are middle-class. Indeed working-class people only get into leadership by effectively becoming middle-class. (p. 120)

That’s a bit of a searing indictment, but my denomination must profess that it is at least partially true. Now, I’m grateful for the ordination standards of my denomination, and there have been steps taken in the past few years to make our ordination standards more accessible to those who can’t uproot for 3-4 years to go into full-time seminary. But nonetheless, this is a conversation that the PCA needs to keep having, even as we hold on to our belief that the shepherds of Christ’s church should know Christ’s word.

There’s plenty of other ideas that are helpful in the book, but as I intend to blog about them in coming days, I’ll wait on them and go on to a few concerns.

Concerns

First, the discussion of sermons and preaching seems underdeveloped in the book. This comes through on several levels. The authors seem to encourage moving away from a sermon-centered approach to teaching and worship to a community-led, discussion-based learning model. They even claim that the sermon as such didn’t exist till after Constantine. But little defense is offered for such an approach, other than that there is less likelihood that a whole community will be led astray from Scripture’s teaching when they process it together.

Notwithstanding questions about such a claim, there seems to enough Scriptural testimony on the topic that it deserves more attention than that. While I don’t believe one book can address every issue, if you’re going to take a bite out of such a staple of how church has been done for quite some time, I would think that you’d want some more support for it than that.

Secondly, following up on that, the issue of authority seems quite neglected. In a book entitled Total Church, there is little to no discussion of elders and how leadership as such factors into the planting and discipling of churches. That seems like a glaring issue, as the establishing of local leadership seemed rather important in Acts and the Pauline epistles. Further, they claim that the Protestant response to the Roman hierarchy was that each person was his own individual pope (p. 159).

That seems to be quite a misunderstanding of what the Reformers actually taught, and so it seems to create a false dichotomy between a leadership-led interpretation of Scripture and a community-led interpretation of Scripture.Ironically, the Anabaptists are lifted up as the example of those who followed a community model of interpretation, despite the fact that they were the ones that the Reformers accused of taking individualistic interpretations too far. At the very least, the discussion of this issue in the book needed to be clearer and fuller.

Read More
%d bloggers like this: