Wednesday, 6 April 2011

Lausanne World Pulse (April 2011)


The themed articles in April 2011’s Lausanne World Pulse are devoted to the Cape Town Commitment:


Chris Wright

The Cape Town Commitment: The Inside Story

The vision for the Cape Town Commitment began in December 2009, with a gathering of theologians from every region of the world. Here, Wright shares how the CTC came together before, during, and after Cape Town 2010.


Rose Dowsett

The Cape Town Commitment, Part 2: A Call to Action, a Summation

Part 2 of the Cape Town Commitment, ‘A Call to Action,’ should not be separated from Part 1, because to do so would leave us with unrooted activism, Dowsett writes. Here, she gives an introduction to Part 2 and offers suggestions on how to put it into practice.


C. Rosalee Velloso Ewell

Why Today’s Church Needs the Cape Town Commitment

The Cape Town Commitment is needed today as a tool for both calling back and pointing forward – memory and vision, writes Velloso Ewell. She points to two recurring themes at Cape Town 2010, being felt around the world: the decline in biblical literacy and the Church’s failure to see peace and reconciliation as integral to the gospel message.


Lindsay Brown

We Have a Gospel to Proclaim: Cape Town 2010 Concludes

An abbreviated version of a closing address given by Lindsay Brown, Lausanne International Director, at Cape Town 2010, during which he touched upon four hopes and visions for the Church, as well as core elements, including mission that is Christocentric, being people of integrity, and having perseverance to the end.


Lasse Holmgaard Iversen

Post-Cape Town 2010 Meeting in Denmark

Danish participants who attended Cape Town 2010 gathered in January 2011 to reflect on what they heard and plan for the days ahead.


The Executive Summary is available here, and the full version here.

Tuesday, 5 April 2011

Biblical Interpretation and Application Reading Room


From Tyndale Seminary comes this full and helpful list of books on biblical interpretation and application with links to Google Books.

Christopher Hitchens on the King James Bible


Vanity Fair (yes, Vanity Fair) carries an interesting piece (here) on the King James Bible by Christopher Hitchens (yes, he of God is Not Great fame), one of its columnists.


Here’s how the article is positioned:


‘An unbeliever argues that our language and culture are incomplete without a 400-year-old book – the King James translation of the Bible. Spurned by the Establishment, it really represents a triumph for rebellion and dissent. Accept no substitutes!’


In telling something of its history, Hitchens describes the translation as ‘a fairly conservative attempt to stabilize the Crown and the kingdom, heal the breach between competing English and Scottish Christian sects, and bind the majesty of the King to his devout people’.


But, he notes, ‘the translators’ legacy remains, and it is paradoxically a revolutionary one, as well as a giant step in the maturing of English literature’.


‘Though I am sometimes reluctant to admit it, there really is something “timeless” in the Tyndale/King James synthesis. For generations, it provided a common stock of references and allusions, rivaled only by Shakespeare in this respect. It resounded in the minds and memories of literate people, as well as of those who acquired it only by listening... A culture that does not possess this common store of image and allegory will be a perilously thin one. To seek restlessly to update it or make it “relevant” is to miss the point, like yearning for a hip-hop Shakespeare. “Man is born unto trouble as the sparks fly upward,” says the Book of Job. Want to try to improve that for Twitter?’


He blasts what he calls ‘stilted, patronizing, literal-minded’ attempts ‘to shift the translation’s emphasis from plangent poetry to utilitarian prose’. Referring to the proliferation of ‘niche Bibles’, he notes that special interest groups can have ‘their own customized version of God’s word’, yet ‘there will no longer be a culture of the kind which instantly recognized what Lincoln meant when he spoke of “a house divided.” The gradual eclipse of a single structure has led, not to a new clarity, but to a new Babel.’


He closes by saying that the abandonment of the King James Bible by churches (he refers to ‘the Church of England establishment’) ‘is yet another demonstration that religion is man-made, with inky human fingerprints all over its supposedly inspired and unalterable texts’.

Saturday, 2 April 2011

Nicholas King on Translation and the KJV


Nicholas King, ‘Translation and the KJV’, Scripture Bulletin 41, 1 (2011), 19-29.


King explores four points:


‘In this essay, I should like to argue that i) all translation is a political act; that is to say, it involves the exercise of various kinds of power; ii) that all translation, especially biblical translation, fails; iii) that all translation is done into and out of a particular context; and iv) that the question of what you are doing when you translate runs close to the heart of the human quest for meaning’ (20).


The same issue also contains an an assessment, by Adrian Graffy, of the recently-published Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini, the post-synodal document to the 2008 Synod on the word of God.

Friday, 1 April 2011

Gary J. Dorrien and Millard J. Erickson on Evangelicalism and Evangelical Theology


Gary J. Dorrien, The Remaking of Evangelical Theology (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998), x + 262pp., ISBN 9780664258030, and Millard J. Erickson, Postmodernizing the Faith: Evangelical Responses to the Challenge of Postmodernism (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1998), 163pp., ISBN 9780801021640.


[I first wrote this review of these two books in August 1999, and it was published on the London School of Theology website at that time. I’m aware that everything has in this debate moved on since then, but a question from a friend has prompted me to post mention of these books here. Dorrien’s volume, in particular, I think, still stands as a significant contribution.]


The last few years have seen something of a renaissance in discussions of evangelical theology. Most of these have remained at the level of ‘prolegomena’ – but such works of preliminary statement are important, and we may hope they anticipate some healthy constructive proposals in the not-too distant future.


The first of the ones mentioned here is not even by an evangelical! In fact, Gary Dorrien’s book has been heralded as the first major work of its kind by a non-evangelical theologian.


Dorrien carefully and critically, but not without sympathy, surveys the history and varieties of evangelical theology. He begins by examining the origins and development of evangelicalism, outlining the contributions of seventeenth-century scholasticism, the pietist movements of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the modernist-fundamentalist controversy, and the neoevangelicalism of the mid-twentieth century. Along the way, he describes the thinking of a number of influential evangelical theologians, especially Charles Hodge, B.B. Warfield, James Orr, J. Gresham Machen, Gordon Clark, Edward John Carnell, Carl F.H. Henry, and Bernard Ramm. I especially enjoyed this historical sketch provided by the book. In successive chapters, he discusses debates over biblical authority, and Arminian and Catholic options in evangelicalism.


Dorrien distinguishes three dominant types of evangelicalism – Classical, Pietist, and Fundamentalist – and argues that a fourth type – Postconservative – is presently coming into being. This movement is shown in the works of, among others, Clark Pinnock, Stanley Grenz, J. Richard Middleton, Brian J. Walsh, Nancey Murphy, and others. In the writings of these figures, Dorrien argues, the meaning of evangelicalism is being redefined. It represents evangelical theology in a postmodern mode, and may well provide a mediating model for bringing ‘liberals’ and ‘conservatives’ into dialogue with each other.


Millard Erickson’s book intersects here, as does his previous work: The Evangelical Left: Encountering Postconservative Evangelical Theology (Carlisle: Paternoster/Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1997). In the 1997 book, Erickson offers a largely critical appraisal of postconservative evangelical theology, focusing especially, though not exclusively, on the works of Clark Pinnock and Stanley Grenz. After placing postconservative evangelical theology on the evangelical map, and a chapter on the task and method of theology, he deals in three successive chapters with the doctrine of Scripture, the doctrine of God, and the doctrine of salvation, outlining the traditional evangelical views, then the postconservative evangelical views, and then a brief evaluation.


In Postmodernizing the Faith, Erickson summarises and critiques various evangelical responses to postmodernism. After an opening chapter of orientation, he considers in turn David Wells, Thomas Oden, Francis Schaeffer, Stanley Grenz, J. Richard Middleton and Brian J. Walsh, and B. Keith Putt. The theologians are placed on a spectrum which moves from generally negative to generally positive assessment of postmodernism for evangelical theology.


So far as I am aware, he summarises accurately the gist of the individual contributions. B. Keith Putt will probably be a new name to many readers; Erickson acknowledges that Putt’s published works are relatively few and not as readily available as the others discussed. And it’s a shame that other evangelicals who have contributed significantly to the debate (e.g. D.A. Carson, Kevin J. Vanhoozer) are not considered.


Each chapter outlines the contributions, and then concludes with comments of criticism, where Erickson lists positive and negative points. This procedure can appear somewhat artificial, as if what matters is how many of which kind of points are left over at the end! More important, however, to draw such points of assessment implies that Erickson is working with a larger framework in mind (which informs whether he agrees or disagrees with those discussed) – but he nowhere declares this larger framework of thought.


Although a brief final chapter offers perspectives on the church’s witness to a postmodern culture, Erickson goes only so far. He indicates that this is the firstfruits of a larger harvest, so we must watch this space for further and fuller discussion.


Both books considered here stay largely confined to the North American scene. What all of this looks like in the UK context might be a different story altogether.

J.I. Packer et al. on Reading the Bible


Justin Taylor, at Between Two Worlds, draws attention to the availability of a 10-page excerpt from the ESV Study Bible on ‘Reading the Bible’, containing the following mini essays.


J.I. Packer

Reading the Bible Theologically


Leland Ryken

Reading the Bible as Literature


John Piper

Reading the Bible in Prayer and Communion with God


David Powlison

Reading the Bible for Personal Application


R. Kent Hughes

Reading the Bible for Preaching and Public Worship

International Journal of Frontier Missiology 27:4 (2010)


The main articles in International Journal of Frontier Missiology 27:4 (2010) are devoted to ‘The Globalization of the Frontiers’.


In the lead essay – ‘Globalization, Christian Identity, and Frontier Missions’ – Todd M. Johnson draws attention to two trends in the demography of Christianity and frontier missions: ‘1) Numerically, Christianity has shifted to the Global South. 2) Amidst all the global migrations and increasing proximity of once distant peoples, Christians have maintained limited contact with Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists’ (165).


These two trends, he suggests, can be examined from the perspective of globalisation and Christian identity. In his ensuing discussion, he draws attention to Andrew Walls’ distinction between an indigenizing principle and a pilgrim principle:


‘He [Walls] acknowledges that Christianity can and should go deep within each culture of the world but at the same time is never fully at home in any particular culture. It’s in this dynamic between the particular (indigenous) and the universal (pilgrim) that we can better understand global Christian identity’ (167).


According to Johnson, the emphasis in the study of world Christianity has been almost exclusively on the indigenizing principle, or the ‘particular’, and it is critical, he says, ‘to emphasize also the pilgrim principle, or universal side, of world Christianity’ (168).


He draws a nice analogy from a study of world music by Philip Bohlman:


‘Philip Bohlman examines the inherent tension between what world music tells us about human diversity and what it tells us about human similarities. Neither tells the whole story. Bohlman tries to strike a balance in his description of world music by emphasizing difference as one feature and similarity as another... He also recognizes the way in which world music is, at the same time, both local and universal’ (168).


Frontier mission, Johnson hopes, will ‘bridge the possibility of a fully indigenous form of Christianity and one that is tied into the whole of Christianity around the world and throughout human history’ (169).


And a concluding reflection:


‘With the recent expansion of Christianity around the world and the anticipated spread of the gospel into all peoples, we can hope to realize the beauty of both the particular and the universal in a truly global Christianity’ (169).