The middle chapter of Spurgeon’s life—where he rose to fame at the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London—is what most people remember. What they forget is the great controversies that highlighted his Calvinism, Baptist theology, and doctrine of separation. The main subject in this work is Spurgeon’s thought and teaching. This is not a biography. The chapters are centered around the three major controversies of his ministry: (1) The strong proclamation of Calvinism while at Park Street, (2) the Baptismal Regeneration controversy of 1864, and (3) the Downgrade which drained the energies of his closing years.

Spurgeon and Calvinism

Spurgeon believed that man is responsible to believe the gospel, yet because of his sin is wholly unable to do so. Hyper-Calvinism solves this problem by denying there is a universal obligation to trust in Christ, while Arminianism affirms that the ability to believe is universal. Spurgeon embraced neither.

Spurgeon was a soul-winner: “I do feel a longing for the conversion of my hearers, such as I cannot describe. I would count it a high privilege if I might sleep in death this morning, if that death could redeem your souls from hell” (38). But he was also a Calvinist: “The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach today, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such things as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine” (55-56).

He vigorously attacked the Arminian notion of free will. “The error of Arminianism is not that it holds the Biblical doctrine of responsibility but that it equates this doctrine with an unbiblical doctrine of ‘free-will’ and preaches the two things as though they were synonymous. But man’s will is always exercised in harmony with his nature and, as his nature is at enmity to God, so is his will. Man being fallen, his will cannot be neutral or ‘free’ to act contrary to his nature. ‘Free-will has carried many souls to hell, but never a soul to heaven yet.’”

Until the very end, Spurgeon’s Calvinism was ridiculed. Joseph Parker, a London Nonconformist second only to Spurgeon in pulpit influence, said: “The kind of Calvinism which the one occasionally represents I simply hate, as I hate selfishness and blasphemy. It is the leering, slavering, sly-winking Calvinism that says, ‘Bless the Lord we are all right, booked straight through to heaven first-class’.”

Spurgeon and the Papacy

Murray called Spurgeon’s second major controversy “one of the most violent ecclesiastical controversies of the last century.” It arose and blew over in 1864. The opposition party was called “Tractarians” because they wrote tracts defining the church as did the Papacy during the Reformation. They pushed apostolic succession, asserting that there could be no church or salvation without bishops. This subtle push toward Rome forced a debate on baptismal regeneration.

What followed was the most popular sermon Spurgeon ever preached, producing over 350,000 copies. In “Baptismal Regeneration” he wrote: “It is impossible but that the Church of Rome must spread, when we who are the watchdogs of the fold are silent, and others are gently and smoothly turfing the road and making it as soft and smooth as possible, that converts may travel down the nethermost hell of Popery. We want John Knox back again” (128).

Spurgeon and the Baptist Union

As the Baptist Union fell toward liberalism, Spurgeon declared: “We are going down hill at breakneck speed.” The end of the 19^th century brought the rise of Higher Criticism and spectacular advances in science and philosophy. In this milieu Spurgeon’s final controversy, the Downgrade, was born.

Central to the whole controversy was denominational loyalty. The Baptist Union preferred denominational peace to the duty of dealing with error, deliberately using language so ambiguous that two meanings would result. The Union professed one thing and believed another. “It is mere cant to cry, ‘We are evangelical; we are all evangelical’ and yet decline to say what evangelical means” (25). With this, Spurgeon pulled his church out of the Baptist Union. “It is our solemn conviction that where there can be no real spiritual communion there should be no pretence of fellowship. Fellowship with known and vital error is participation in sin.”

Conclusion

The beliefs of Spurgeon are what have been forgotten. Murray helps us to remember. Love him or hate him, Spurgeon cannot be called ambiguous. He was clear in his theology and was willing to stand contra mundum. In the end, the controversies sent him to an early grave. He wrote: “I feel that, if I could live a thousand lives, I would like to live them all for Christ, and I should even then feel that they were all too little a return for His great love to me” (20).

From 2005-2007, I read and listened to everything I could from R.C. Sproul. Then I moved to John Piper. For the last couple years, the author du jour has been Douglas Wilson.

So a few weeks ago when my colleague handed me a stack of 52 back issues from Wilson’s Credenda Agenda (C/R), I was elated. The issues I had were published between 1995 and 2011, and having read them in no particular order weeks, I had fun surfing through articles referencing Y2K, Beanie babies, the OJ trial, Sega games and sermons on cassette.

If you are not familiar with this very thoughtful pastor and theologian, I’d encourage you to give him a look. Here’s a snapshot of his beliefs.

1. Religious folk, not the pagans, should be in the cross hairs of Christians. C/R is a bimonthly satirical periodical written by a dozen or so Reformed guys (and girl). Since Jesus spent little time attacking prostitutes and drunkards, and most of his time rebuking and mocking the Jewish Torah-thumpers, they try to do the same. That means they aim their sling of skylarking not at Madonna, but Thomas Kinkade, Left Behind, trendy youth pastors, Christianity Today and everything else they find silly in evangelicalism.

2. Satire is a valuable, biblical tool. Wilson gets so much criticism for his sarcasm (“Clinton has the ethical integrity of Caligula”) that he wrote The Serrated Edge as a defense of Christian satire. He writes with spunk and conviction. He won’t, for example, take it easy on pastor’s wives from his own denomination who are going liberal. “I am very sorry to be put in the position of having to show rudeness to a lady. But Mrs. Irons wants to be a Christian writer and thinker, and she is not up to the task. And if she can’t stand the heat, she should get back in the kitchen.”

3. “All of Christ, for all of life, for all the world.” As postmillennial believer, Wilson wants to reform everything (e.g. government, education, music, food), bringing all things into line with the Word of God. His motto above fits. He believes the millennium will slowly, progressively become a golden age. Lets get busy, he says. So he talks a lot about the good life, and using forklifts to disseminate Christmas gift to the grandkids. Amill and premill believers, however, are more apt to talk about the suffering and decline of this present world. Here’s an example of one of the magazine’s intros: “The magazine is designed as a tribute to the good life, the life that can only be known in a world in subjection to the Trinity. This life is one full of meat on the grill, wine in the belly and ketchup on the shorts. C/A attempts to revel in these and all other causes for faithful laughter. Especially kites.”

4. WE ARE FAM-UH-LEE! C/E is heavily geared toward the home, every issue having separate articles on children, parenting, husbands, and wives. Doug goes after husbands and fathers and Nancy Wilson writes about issues facing mothers and wives, anywhere from contact sports and hospitality to tomboys and chick flicks. This is where the Wilson’s are strongest.

5. Federal Vision – Federal Vision is an effort to articulate a consistent paedobaptist theology. A few years back FV was an enormous controversy in the Reformed world, with imputation, justification, and the New Perspective on Paul under discussion. But the hullabaloo can be boiled down to one thing: children. It is paedobaptism taken to its logical conclusion, which is why FV embrace paedocommunion. They correctly point out the inconsistencies in the PCA’s take on paedobaptism, with quotes from Peter Leithart like: “Paedocommunion lurks behind the whole Federal Vision debate. Paedocommunion disambiguates the ambiguous “God is/isn’t your God” that paedobaptism without paedocommunion declares to our children.” In other words: “If sprinkling your baby means ‘God is your God’, why not let Johnny take communion?” That is a strong argument.

I agree with John Piper that FV (though not heretical) is very confusing. They say things like “we deny the common misunderstanding of baptismal regeneration” but later aver, “baptism formally engrafts a person [including children] into the Church, which means that baptism is into the Regeneration.” Douglas Wilson has said that baptism and communion are effectual means of salvation to worthy receivers. The Federal (Covenant) Vision of parents is an expectation for their children’s conversion. It is an effort to revive the doctrine of covenant succession (God has promised salvation to the children of faithful Christian parents). An effort, I believe, without biblical merit.

If you pastor a small church or consistently feel the pangs of ministerial discouragement or secretly wonder if the small numbers in your assembly are due more to your incompetence, read Memoirs of an Ordinary Pastor and find encouragement.

What a paradox. Carson records his father Tom’s oft-discouraging ministry in French Canada to uplift very ordinary pastors today.

Most Pastors are Ordinary

Most pastors will not regularly preach to thousands, let alone tens of thousands. They will not write influential books, they will not supervise large staffs, and they will never see more than modest growth. They will plug away at their care for the aged, at their visitation, at their counseling, at their Bible studies and preaching. Some will work with so little support that they will prepare their own bulletins. They cannot possibly discern whether the constraints of their own sphere of service owe more to the specific challenges of the local situation or to their own shortcomings. Once in a while they will cast a wistful eye on “successful” ministries. Many of them will attend the conferences sponsored by the revered masters and come away with a slightly discordant combination of, on the one hand, gratitude and encouragement and, on the other, jealousy, feelings of inadequacy, and guilt. (9)

Two thoughts come to mind. First, how wonderful it would be if our church actually had bulletins. Second, I have paced miles before Sunday services wondering similar things: is our fledgling flock due to the shepherd or the sheep?

Learning a Foreign Language is Difficult, Especially for Moms

Despite [Mom’s] brightness and insight, the one area she never mastered was spoken French. This severely limited her ability to minister to women and others in the church unless they spoke English. Even in her late sixties she tried to beat this handicap by taking conversational French courses at the local college. But she never really cracked the barrier. At the ministry level, Mum was cut off from many conversations and developments, and this had isolating effects for both her and Dad. (33)

Tom Carson’s French was much better than his wife’s, but this wasn’t due to his greater intelligence; Don implied the opposite was true. But Tom spent so much time in the French language—through visitation, study and preaching—that he was able to gain a serious advantage on his wife who stayed home to rear the children. This should lead ministers, and especially foreign missionaries, to be patient with their wives who take significant time to learn the language; husbands should heap praise upon them if they succeed.

Protecting Self and Children from Bitterness

On why Tom never told his son Don about the wrongs a minister had done to him:

[Mom] and I decided we needed to protect our own souls from bitterness. So we took a vow that neither of us would every say an unkind thing about [him]. And we have kept that vow. (60)

On Honest Reports from Small Ministries

New pastors wrote spectacularly interesting prayer letters to their Anglophone constituents and sending agencies, making a great deal out of every tiny gospel advance but almost never reporting the failures and disappointments, the spurious conversions and instances of falling away owing to lack of perseverance. [Later, people] visited these congregations, and were often surprised and bewildered, not to say let down, when they saw the paucity of enduring results. For better or for worse, that was not Tom’s style: he was scrupulously faithful and even handed in his reports.” (65)

Missionaries struggle to know the correct balance here. If we address too many discouragements in our reports, we’ll appear negative and cynical; if heavy handed with glowing advances, we will look unrealistic.

Perfectionism as a Cause of Discouragement

[This] played a big part in his failure to finish his thesis: the work was never good enough, so it was never complete. And the sense of failure from not completing it added to the pattern of failure, which in turn engendered more defeat. (92)

Mixing Work and Play as Another Cause of Discouragement

Mum used to tell us kids, ‘Work hard, and play hard, but never confuse the two.’ But Dad never learned Mum’s simple maxim. The total number of hours he put into his calling each week was excessively high, but occasionally—as much out of fatigue as discouragement—he would permit something else to intrude, and then feel guilty about it. Mum’s maxim should be posted on the mirrors of most ministers. (93)

Fundamentalists are famous for gearing whole conferences, seminars, sermon series, college courses, and camp themes around the idea of worldliness. But I do not know of any books from this sector devoted specifically to this topic. This is unfortunate because as our culture is becoming increasingly saturated with the media, the church needs biblically grounded books moored us to the truth about the allurements of the world.

Strengths

C.J. Mahaney, a pastor probably most comfortable with the moniker “conservative evangelical” has edited a timely volume encouraging Christians to resist the temptations of a fallen world. I commend this book for several reasons. First, evangelicalism neglects and sometimes even mocks the topic. The chapters are specific enough to make the book controversial. That’s a good thing. So we should congratulate the authors simply for devoting 200 hundred pages to the idea of worldliness. Second, Worldliness addresses the right issues. Among the topics are (1) a definition of worldliness (“love for this fallen world”), (2) media, (3) music, (4) stuff, and (5) clothing. Like it or not, these are the issues people want to talk about. The authors understand this and devote an entire chapter to each one.

Second, the chapter on “media” was the best and most marked up chapter in the book. It addresses the hazards of thoughtless TV watching. It knocks down the argument that says: “The Bible records sexual sin, so its OK for me to watch sexual sin in movies” (52). Best of all, the chapter gives us dozens of “time”, “heart”, and “content” questions to ask ourselves before watching a movie. The questions go far beyond that of sex scenes and cursing, but toward ideas like: “How much time have I spent on media today?”, “Am I watching this because I’m bored or lazy?”, “What does this film mock and glamorize?”, and “Does its content reflect truth, beauty, or goodness?” (57-59).

Finally, Mahaney’s chapter on “God, My Heart, and Clothes” was surprisingly good. He addressed the heart issue, promoted modesty, quoted often from his wife and other women, and pushed men to take responsibility for their daughter’s dress. The two appendices “Modesty Heart Check” and “Modesty on Your Wedding Day” were also very good.

Weaknesses

There were a couple of areas of disagreement. I’m not sure I agreed with Mahaney’s definition of legalism. He writes: “A legalist is anyone who behaves as if they can earn God’s approval and forgiveness through personal performance” (44). Of course we know that justification is by grace alone with no personal effort earning any merit before God (Eph. 2:8; Acts 15). But is it true that legalism is seeking “God’s approval through personal performance”? God does delight in the obedience (or “performance”) of his children (1 Sam. 15:22). We know, however, that we cannot take personal credit for acts of righteousness, for it is God working in us (Phil. 2:13). Still, I think this definition opens the door for ridicule upon those who are seeking to please God by living holy lives.

Bob Kauflin’s chapter on music was good, but followed the status quo by emphasizing the lyrics of music and ignoring “style”. I’m not sure I agreed with his comments on page 71: “[Melody, harmony, and rhythm] in themselves carry no moral value. There are no ‘evil’ melodies or ‘false’ rhythms. Music alone is incapable of lying to us or commanding us to do wrong. Music by itself is also unable to communicate ‘truth statements’ to us.”

Conclusion

This is a good book that everyone will find something to disagree about. But I would encourage people to read it because it doesn’t fall into the trap of legalism. It puts the gospel at the center, doesn’t avoid the key issues, and gets the big ideas right. Mahaney may be correct: “The greatest challenge facing American evangelicalism is… seduction by the world” (22).

In 1940, philosopher Mortimer Adler wrote the best-selling classic How to Read a Book. Over forty years later, he penned its companion volume How to Speak/How to Listen. He writes: “Engaging in good conversation—talk that is both enjoyable and rewarding—is one of the very best uses that human beings can make of their free time” (17). Conversation is interrupted speech and it is impossible to be skilled in this without learning how to speak and listen well.

In Part One, the author establishes the four uses of language: writing, reading, speaking, and listening. People in the past were better listeners because there were fewer books. More than ever, the modern man must be taught how to listen well. Speaking and listening is more complex than reading and writing because it is social and transient, always involving human confrontations.

Part Two addresses uninterrupted communication such as persuasive speech. Adler distinguishes this from “sophistry”, the use of clever arguments to convince people. This is a misuse of rhetoric by using unscrupulous means to persuade others. Rather, all persuasive speech contains ethos (the establishment of the speaker’s credibility and character), pathos (arousing the emotions of the listeners) and logos (the marshalling of reasons and arguments to establish your point). The logos well-stated is what will ultimately tip the scales in the speaker’s favor.

Part Three applies Adler’s fifteen rules of reading to the skill of listening. He avers that listening is primarily an activity of the mind—not the ear—and must be active. Listening is not keeping quiet, but involves the constant asking questions (with the mind or mouth).

Part Four surveys the different forms of dialogue or two-way talk, like the question and answer forums and the seminar (teaching and learning by discussion).

How This Book Helps the Christian, Husband, Pastor, Friend 

• The Christian should be understood and zealously seek to understand others. This procedure is time consuming because it requires patience and persistence. Strive for what Adler calls “the meeting of the minds”, and let chapter 12 guide you.
• The husband and father should cultivate the contents of chapter eleven (“Conversation Profitable and Pleasurable”) into family time conversations. Earnest, lively dialogue must be taught. I have yet to find a clearer, more concise guide than this tremendous chapter by Adler.
• Every missionary should gather as many cultures and worldviews as possible around his kitchen table, plop page 192 in the center, and discuss it at length. It may be one of the most entertaining, enlightening, and edifying conversations in a while.
• The highest form of friendship is the communion and conversation of persons alike in their moral virtue. Treasure this.

Douglas Wilson is at his best when writing on familial issues, and Reforming Marriage is no exception. While Standing on the Promises and Future Men focus more on child rearing, this work addresses marriage, with  topics such as gender roles, reconciliation, birth control, child rearing, sexuality, and divorce.

Among Wilson’s strengths is his call for men to awake from their stupor of irresponsibility and reclaim godly leadership  in the home. He addresses wives, but directs more of his comments toward husbands. For example: “When a couple comes for marriage counseling, my operating assumption is always that the man is completely responsible for all the problems” (32) and “wives are much more likely to be wronged by their husbands than the other way around (133). A possible weakness may be that because the book is so heavily geared toward rebuke and admonition toward the husband (which I applaud), it may not be as helpful a read for wives.

Wilson is known for being a funny, witty writer, so this could be a fun read with your spouse.

10 Excerpts:

1. A crescent wrench can be used to pound in nails, but that is not what a crescent wrench is for. There are some tasks detached from the home in which women do outstanding work. But just because someone is able to do a job does not mean that he or she is called by God to the task. (31)
2. In order for men to respect weakness [in their wives], they must recognize it as their own weakness. She is not his adversary. The weakness is on his own team; it is his own family. (35)
3. A husband must be jealous and protective. And under numerous circumstances, it is a sin not to be jealous. (45)
4. Many wives… treat being tired as though it were a symptom of having done something wrong. Rather, it is a symptom of having done many things right. (49)
5. When sins are confessed, it is like picking up something that was dropped on the carpet. If a person learns to pick things up immediately, a thousand things can be dropped on the carpet, and the home will still remain clean. But if things are only picked up once every six months, the result will be an overwhelming house cleaning job. (67)
6. Wives need to be led with a firm hand. A wife will often test her husband in some area, and be deeply disappointed (and frustrated) if she wins. It is crucial that a husband give to his wife what the Bible says she needs, rather than what she says she wants. (80)
7. In marital conversation, words like “never” and “always” are attack words. (92)
8. Those who deny that [sexual activity and nudity on the screen] affect them are simply deceiving themselves. There is no way to watch—for entertainment—bed scenes or displays of nudity without being affected negatively in some way. But there are men who deny that such things affect them. ‘That was a really good movie. Shame about that one scene, though.’ But in his heart, that one scene was the morsel he kept under his tongue. (111)
9. Our culture is dong to sex what people who chew with their mouths open do to food. (117)
10. A large number of children are a larger blessing—or a larger curse. Samuel would not have been more greatly blessed if he had had five sons who took bribes instead of two. Joel and Abijah were enough. (120)

The Aussie and Irishman team of Campbell and Miller write Saving Eutychus to save your congregation from the fate of Eutychus, the man known for his near-fatal napping during one of St. Paul’s sermons. They write from a Reformed perspective—the book’s early chapters emphasizing the importance of expository preaching (“the message of the text is the message of the sermon”), prayer, preaching Christ, and heart change.

Every pastor has preached a groaner, or worse yet, a yawner. How can we avoid boring our people to death? The authors think the answer is clarity, especially in content, delivery, and critique. Chapter three addresses sermon preparation and offers ten tips for making the substance understandable. Chapter six is a very brief chapter on the oratorical aspects of preaching and chapter seven promotes peer review of sermons. The final chapter and appendix are samples.

What I Liked

1. Their self-depreciating (“my mush-bowl brain”) and informal style (“Give me a break—that’s not a sentence!”) is helpful in many ways, as it makes the reading enjoyable and the critique easier to swallow knowing it comes from pastors who do not think they have arrived. By the end of the book, however, it becomes a bit distracting.
2. The topic is one in which every preacher wants to improve. Their “Top Ten” lists on structure and delivery are practical and insightful. I implemented several elements immediately.

What I Didn’t

1. Chapter five (“Why Preaching the Gospel is So Hard”) didn’t seem to fit the flow of the book. The hermeneutics of preaching Christ from the Old Testament is helpful, but it seemed forced.
2. The final chapter (“Let’s Build a Sermon”) was disappointing. We look over Campbell’s shoulder as he prepares and preaches next Sunday’s sermon on Acts 8… the whole chapter… in a hair over 20 minutes. If Spurgeon recommended 40 minutes, does that mean in 50 years time we’ll be down to eleven? As a lecturer in rural Africa, I’ve got to think our pastoral students would be more discouraged than encouraged after reading that among the ways to keep people awake are PowerPoint, a video clip, and preaching through a 40-verse narrative in 23 minutes.

Excerpts:

1. [When scripting your sermon], forget everything your English teacher taught you. (54)
2. Don’t sweat over illustrating the complicated stuff—just illustrate the obvious. (58)
3. When you’re quoting a verse, help out the listener by setting it up before you read it, rather than after. (60)
4. Never bury the gospel of what Jesus has done in an avalanche of great ideas about what we need to do. (77)
5. Make sure you are sold on the big idea of your sermon. Make sure you’re driven by it. Then you’ll know how to say the things you say, because they will come from a heartfelt passion. (110)
6. [On the importance of sermon critique] Sometimes we say stupid things. And someone needs to tell us. (115)

Conclusion:

Brief. Self-effacing. Expositional. Practical. Perhaps the best compliment you can give a book on homiletics is that it makes you want to preach. Saving Eutychus does this. Read it, but shield your eyes from the last chapter, or save your money and read classics like Preaching and Preachers or Lectures to My Students.

As a pastor, author (penning a massive exposition of Hosea), and member of the Westminster Assembly of divines, Puritan Jeremiah Burroughs (1599-1646) is best known for his classic work The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment. In typical Puritan style, this volume is clear, illustrative, and full of warm appeal to the heart.

Burroughs defines contentment as: “That sweet, inward, quiet, gracious frame of spirit, which freely submits to and delights in God’s wise and fatherly disposal in every condition” (19). He explores many facets of contentment, including Jesus’ take (chap. 5-6), the sin of murmuring (8-10), thirteen excuses of a discontented heart, and directions for attaining contentment (chap. 12-13).

The author presents contentment as both mystery and paradox. The most contented man in the world is also the most satisfied. The man who has learned how to be content with his place in life is also most unsatisfied with the pleasures of this world. “A little in the world will content a Christian for his passage, but all the world, and ten thousand times more, will not content a Christian for his portion” (43). A Christian often does not reach contentment by addition but by subtraction. When we subtract our desires to fit our circumstances, we will be content.

Best Lines

The Puritans were brilliant at illustrating spiritual truths. Here are the most memorable:

1. Contentment of the soul is like a man who warms his wet cloths with his own body heat, whereas a sickly man must warm his clothes by some outside source (28).
2. Discontentment comes when desires and circumstances are not equal, like the man who can walk more comfortably with two short legs than the man with one long leg and one short (46).
3. Seeking contentment from outside circumstances is like a sick man who puts sugar in his medicine to make it taste better (55).
4. The man who seeks contentment from worldly things is like the craving stomach that seeks satisfaction by sucking in the wind, then concluding that he is dissatisfied because he did not take in enough wind. But this man is dissatisfied because the wind is not suitable for a craving stomach. Why are we discontent? “O poor deluded man! It is not because you do not have enough [worldly comforts], but because it is not the thing that is proportional to the immortal soul that God has given you” (91-92).

Conclusion

The Puritans were masters at saying the same thing many different ways. Burroughs takes over 200 pages to express to us the meaning of contentment in terms we can understand. Read this for warmth and illustration.

Skeptics ask hard questions. Why does God allow suffering? How can there be one true religion? How could a loving God send people to hell? Timothy Keller—Presbyterian minister, Manhattan church-planter, and prolific author—answers winsomely in his book The Reason for God. His audience: spiritual seekers, skeptics, and even some Christians. His method: use little Scripture and lots of philosophy, literature, reasoning, and real-life conversations.

In Part 1 “The Leap of Doubt”, Keller “examines the beliefs beneath the seven biggest objections or doubts people in our culture have about the Christian faith” (119). He asserts that, contrary to atheistic opinion, it is impossible to leave one’s worldview behind in the public sphere. Evil and suffering is actually evidence for God (chap. 2) and denying God’s judgment actually encourages violence (chap. 5). Part 2 “The Leap of Faith” moves from attacking reasons for disbelief to offering sufficient reasons for belief. He addresses the problem of sin, the knowledge of God, the cross, the resurrection (“the issue on which everything hangs”), and the Dance of God (the Trinity).

A classic example of Keller’s pursuit of relevancy is chapter 12: “The (True) Story of the Cross.” Keller beautifully examines the tie between forgiveness, the cross and why God can’t just forgive us. He does this with anecdotes, personal stories and quotes from Gandhi, Stott, O’Conner, Bonhoeffer, and N.T. Wright—and not a single Bible verse. He is not unbiblical, only in search of a particular audience: seekers and skeptics.

How This Book Changed Me

1. Chapter Three (“Christianity in a Straitjacket”) was the best in the book, which gives a glimpse into Keller’s method of ministering to New Yorkers. He forced me to ponder if our church plant here is as African as orthodoxy will allow.
2. Keller pulled ideas from everywhere. From Wilberforce and Lewis to Bono and Darth Vader, there was no genre off-limits. I determined to glean better from every source of knowledge.
3. The basis and argumentation for what I believe became more tight and accessible.

Conclusion

Its been a while since I’ve read a well-reasoned, theological book that I would call “fun”. But what made Reason for God such an enjoyable ride was the route he took. He passed the exit on “Scripture” (though it still supports his points clandestinely) and got off on “Reason” where the skeptics live. He uses argumentation they can understand. His knock on Creation Science (called “Conflict model”) and support for natural selection (he takes Francis Collins’ view) was bad exegesis and a weak attempt at winning the scientific crowd—but don’t let that turn you off. A fundamentalist could never have written this book. It’s too relevant, too winsome, and too rich. Buy this for your library and a seeking friend.

Is the Gospel for unbelievers only, or is it also for seasoned Christians? The thesis of the author, a Bob Jones and Master’s seminary grad, is that Christians ought to rehearse the Gospel every day. He bases this on Romans 1:15, where Paul writes to the Roman Christians: “I am eager to preach the gospel to you.” Thus, Christians need to hear the gospel even after conversion (“gospel” defined as: “the good news of salvation to hell-deserving sinners through the Person and work of Jesus Christ”).

Summary

A Gospel Primer for Christians is light on bibliography (he quotes only two books) and heavy on Scripture (there are over 300 Scriptural footnotes). Vincent divides this work into four parts. Part one contains thirty-one Reasons to Rehearse the Gospel Daily, designed to encourage Christians to run to the Gospel with every imaginable situation they face.  For example:

When my timid heart questions why God would want to love one so sinful as I, I read the answer, “to the praise of the glory of His grace.” I figure, then, that my unworthiness must actually be useful to God, because it magnifies the degree to which His grace might be glorified as He lavishes His saving kindness upon me (54).

Each reason is about two paragraphs long and contains some valuable blessings which the gospel can render in life like: sufficiency for all I need, freedom from sin’s power, liberation from self-love, and a heart for the poor (e.g. the needy may be that way because of sin or ingratitude, but haven’t we been spiteful to God when seeking His help?). Part two and three are Gospel narratives, prose and poetic versions respectively. The final part is entitled “Surprised By the Gospel”, which is the story behind this primer.

Strengths and Weaknesses

This is an excellent guide to help Christians embrace the gospel more fully. It could be used to introduce the gospel to someone for the first time, or deepen a believers resolve to embrace the gospel more holistically. Don’t expect this book to be profound in its insight; its greatest strength is the concept: rehearse the gospel in every situation.

Still, the book contained one idea that gave me pause. Vincent seems to make no distinction between the removal of God’s positional and temporal wrath upon sinners. Of course, we know that God’s wrath upon sinners was appeased legally at the cross (Rom. 3:25), but does this mean that God is no longer angry or wrathful toward his children when they sin? Vincent seems to think so. He writes: “As a justified one, I am under God’s gracious favor at all times because of what Jesus did! This favored standing with God has nothing to do with my performance, but only with the performance of Jesus!” (pg. 94, emphasis mine).

But is this true? If Annanias and Sapphira were believers, did not their “performance” meet God’s wrath (Acts 5)? Does not God hate pride and lying in believers just as he does in unbelievers (Prov. 6:16)? “The anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzzah” (2 Sam. 6:7). Can’t we say, then, that at the moment of every sin, God’s temporal favor is not on us? Perhaps Vincent is only speaking of our legal standing before God, but he gives no evidence of this. Again, he writes:

Now I realize that 100% of the wrath I deserve for my sins was truly spent on Jesus, and there is none of God’s anger left over for me to bear, even when I fail God as a Christian. Hence, God now has only love, compassion, and deepest affection for me, and this love is without any admixture of wrath whatsoever. God always looks upon me and treats me with gracious favor, always seeking to work all things together for my ultimate and eternal good. All of these realities hold true even when I sin.

My question is: at the moment I lust after more money or tell a falsehood, does God’s love for me have an “admixture of wrath”? Does God only have deepest affection for me when I sin? Don’t government officials carry out “God’s wrath” on wrongdoers, including Christians (Rom. 13:4)? Christians can grieve the Spirit (Eph. 4:30) and ought to renew their minds daily in order to discern what is pleasing (and not pleasing) to God (Rom. 12:2). Even the BCF of 1689 says that sinning believers “incur God’s displeasure” (17.3). If the author would agree with this, he could have been clearer by distinguishing the facets of God’s wrath. The danger is that Christians may be comforted superficially to think that God is always happy with us—even when we sin.

Milton Vincent has given us a gift that encourages us to embrace and rehearse the Gospel in every sphere of life. Further, with so many Scriptural texts, it could be used as an excellent tool for new Christians to understand a fuller meaning of the Gospel.

Dr. Kunhiyop is a native of Nigeria who received theological degrees from conservative seminaries in America. He currently serves as provost of the doctrinal program in a South African seminary. African Christian Ethics is an ethics textbook from an African point of view and is long overdue. It is concerned with truth and how it applies to the litany of moral dilemmas that Africans face. He encourages the reader to be grounded in the words of the Triune God rather than oral traditions of their forefathers.

What exactly is “African ethics”? Part I (“Ethical Foundations”) probes several facets of African morality. First, understanding African ethics is difficult because so little is written down. Many of the sources are customs and oral tradition. Second, African’s are “incurably religious” (15). Religion permeates all aspects of life. Contrary to many Western foundations, debate about the existence of God is ridiculous to the African. But while Theists they are—orthodox they are not. To the African, God is only good. When evil happens (death, lightning, sickness), the spirits are responsible. Spirits have great power, but not like God. They can help or hurt, so pleasing the ancestors is crucial. Third, a major aspect of African morality is community. The idea of “we” and “us” in ingrained in every child’s mind. A proverb from the Lube tribe says: “When you get meat, share it with your family, or no one will share with you when you don’t have any.” The idea of “me” is Western. For the African, “I” exist only because of “we”.

Part II explores 24 contemporary issues. This is where Kunhiyop’s contribution is most evident, as many issues that are given whole chapters are non-existent in the majority of Western ethics books. Examples are: striking, bribes, fundraising, polygamy, domestic violence, widows and orphans, female circumcision, HIV/AIDS, and witchcraft.

Strengths and Weaknesses

ACE is lucid, orthodox, and biblical. I agreed with nearly all of the author’s conclusions (unusual for a book on ethics!). He helped me gain a better grasp on a host of cultural and moral issues. His chapters on corruption, fundraising, witchcraft, and alcohol abuse were especially helpful. The chapter on contraception was one of the largest in the book. Not surprisingly, when I taught on ethics to a classroom of Zimbabweans, Tsongas, and Vendas, there was no topic that brought longer discussion and greater emotional intensity than the issue of birth control.

There were a few areas of weakness. He calls the mandate for a newly converted polygamist to forsake all of his wives but one a “rigid and unsympathetic view” (225). Admittedly, this is a very difficult issue, but Kunhiyop aroused in me more questions than answers. Also disappointing was the closing section on female circumcision (commonly known as Female Genital Mutilation). He actually implores us to “respect” the honorable people who practice this (298). Finally, the author is naïve when he downplays immorality as the overwhelming cause of HIV in Africa (319).

Conclusion

I thoroughly enjoyed this work and agreed with the majority of the author’s conclusions, especially on matters that are so rarely written about. May God rise up more African scholars willing to grapple with the moral dilemmas facing their continent.

Bibliography

Samuel Wojo Kunhiyop. African Christian Ethics. Nairobi, Kenya: Hippo Books, 2008. 400 pp.

This is a novel, not a historical account and acts as a song of love for one’s country.  Author Alan Paton was a native South African, Christian, and outspoken opponent of apartheid. Though the novel has sold millions of copies, it should not be surprising that it came with mixed reviews. Upon release, few Afrikaans newspapers would review it.

The protagonist is Stephen Kumalo, a kind, elderly priest who leaves his small village to find his sister and son in the giant city of Johannesburg. He originally received a letter saying his sister Gertrude had taken ill, but upon arrival he found that she was selling her body in prostitution (“she has many husbands”). But most of the book centers on Kumalo’s desperate search for his son Absalom. He had left for Joburg years earlier but had never written (“when people go to Joburg, they don’t come back”). Hot on the trail, Kumalo and the friendly priest Msimangu learn to their horror that Absalom had been in trouble, impregnated a girl, then murdered a white social activist during a burglary gone bad.

Kumalo’s heart is broken. Absalom is convicted and sentenced to die. Gertrude fails to return home like she promised and becomes a nun. John, his brother, betrays his familial roots. But the story ends happily. James Jarvis, father of the slain, is a wealthy landowner and neighbor of Kumalo. He buries his hatred and takes up his son’s cause for racial justice. He even agrees to build a dam for Kumalo’s poor village. The book ends on the day of Absalom’s execution.

…But This is What I Don’t Get

A common placard during the apartheid days

As an American missionary who has lived in a rural Shangaan village for seven years, I am striving to understand the history of South Africa and the nature of the invisible walls that still exist between whites and blacks. After finishing this book, I was still perplexed as to why so many white South Africans are opposed to it. Why was it banned for years in South Africa? Why did an Afrikaans pastor friend of mine snarl when I mentioned it?

True, Beloved Country does unearth some of the racial injustices in South Africa, but most of it depicts the white man as virtuous and the black man as troublesome but oppressed. There were repeated examples of blacks murdering and looting innocent whites, fornicating, lying, and arguing. The whites helped the blacks, sought social justice, turned the other cheek, and gave generously. Cry is filled with quotes like: “It was the white man who brought my father out of darkness” (55). “There are some white men who give their lives to build up what is broken” (56). “It will lift your spirits to see what the white people are doing for our blind” (102). If any thing, its the blacks who should have the greatest gripe.

Conclusion

This work is considered to be one of the great South African novels. With apartheid officially becoming law just a few months after Cry was published, I am thankful that Paton courageously addressed the sins of racism. Unfortunately, the book is largely ignored. What would happen if a multi-cultural, gospel-centered, racially sensitive church encouraged its members to read though this book with another member of a different skin color? What would happen if whites and blacks used this book to foster serious dialogue about the litany of racial issues that still exist in South Africa today? Though this book is not Christian in nature, I believe God would use it as a tool to strengthen the local church.

Bibliography

Alan Paton. Cry, the Beloved Country
. New York: Scribner, 1948. 316 pp.