Postmillenialism - An Eschatology of Hope by Keith A Mathison Paperback - 287 pages including indices.
The Legend of Bagger Vance by Steven Pressfield Mine is a paperback - 282 pages
Okay, so I haven’t gotten much farther, but I do have more to say.
Style and Method
This book is one of the most understandable and readable and pleasant books I have ever picked up in theology. Wright is always a master of extended metaphor. His understanding of the way that Paul writes comes out in the way he himself writes, always drawing in narrative, always alluding to controlling narratives.
As to method, I just intend here a comment about the question “Will Wright cut to the chase?” It seems that Wright is being direct, and intensely clear about his views. He is also keeping the gloves off and not pulling any punches. While I never see Wright being mean, he is not putting on pleasantries in order to converse in a friendly way at a dinner party. Wright is doing what he needs to do at this point. He is actually saying, “So and so theologian gets x wrong and misses x passage.” So my hope, up through page 37, is that the book will continue to speak so plainly.
When I was first encountered Wright in 2000-2003, I kept wondering “Is he not aware of what people are saying about him over here, in America?” I wondered this because, most times when I heard a fellow reformed christian criticizing Wright, the criticism was about works-based salvation [which, make no mistake, he thoroughly repudiates and denies]. But I never seemed to read him saying anything about it. The fact that it wasn’t a concern for Wright to deal with such a matter just seemed to fuel many fires and make people say that he was in fact a gospel-denier – a works preacher….
But, like Augustine retracting his disbelief in miracles after many miraculous proofs, I have now heard and seen Wright speak about this so many times I have to say “He absolutely is not what they all think he is.”
Now, Instead of wondering whether he knows that they are blaming him of Pelagianism, I wonder, “Does anyone know that Wright has answered this question satisfactorily MANY times?
This book should only make that answer louder and more accessible to the public.
Yesterday, on my birthday, I was really excited to get a gift in the mail via Amazon.
I intended to just sit down for a couple of pages, really just a few before going to sleep. I read 17 pages – up through page 30 – and just couldn’t stop reading. Of course, it isn’t into the meat of the book at all yet. But the writing is so good, and Wright is so interesting, that it is just a real pleasure to read.
I am terrible about book reviewing, and I happen to be reading several (many) other books right now. But this Wright book takes an important priority, as its historical moment of discussion is upon us.
Sometimes Christians mistakenly think that the Old Testament saint was saved by keeping the law. This is a destructive mistake, because it makes us separate ourselves from the Old Testament based on a false claim. I review Psalm 130 to show that grace, not works is the way of salvation in the OT.
How do you think Christians should or should not go about using satire? I think sometimes it is clearly written to teach, but sometimes it is mainly written to hurt.
I have been reading some Christian doctrinal satire lately that is so funny I end up crying. But I am afraid of redirecting readers to it, because I don’t want to share in any offense that the authors might give. I find the particular site I am reading to be TREMENDOUSLY educational – however, it is EXTREMELY polemic.
We are basically stuck in a merry-go-round as long as we accept our current system. The Democratic Political world kills babies. The Republican political world kills foreigners. No one cares for the constitution. Both of our parties (BOTH) are likely to keep our servicemen in interminable, illegitimate warfare in the middle east.
Christians: “our” side may not be for abortion, but we sure permit a lot of lies and powerplays that are full of ungodliness.
We must stem the tide of abortion – but while we must be active politically, we cannot rely on the Republican Party to be a savior.
On the Day of Judgment, no one group will be held more responsible for its systemic action about this issue than the church. And I don’t mean about how the church voted. I mean – did we actually do anything to lessen the occurence of abortion? Did we make women’s lives easier and make them feel taken care of and accepted and loved so that they had the hope and help necessary not to feel pushed into abortions?
Christians ought to be the ultimate “pro-woman” helpers in society.
BTW – I think it is completely irresponsible for this otherwise good video to be from a “nohussein” website. As if Barack Obama’s middle name has ANYTHING to do with a REAL intellectual argument. It sinks the level of discussion to ad hominem. I apologize that the video is flawed in this way.
1. Fairest Lord Jesus, ruler of all nature,
O thou of God and man the Son,
Thee will I cherish, Thee will I honor,
thou, my soul’s glory, joy, and crown.
2. Fair are the meadows, fairer still the woodlands,
robed in the blooming garb of spring:
Jesus is fairer, Jesus is purer
who makes the woeful heart to sing.
3. Fair is the sunshine, fairer still the moonlight,
and all the twinkling starry host:
Jesus shines brighter, Jesus shines purer
than all the angels heaven can boast.
4. Beautiful Savior! Lord of all the nations!
Son of God and Son of Man!
Glory and honor, praise, adoration,
now and forevermore be thine.
This was one of my Dad’s favorite songs. —– *I* especially like v.4 which sounds very Daniel 7 to me.
Found these above lyrics and the below information at: hymnsite
Text: Munster Gesangbuch; trans. by Joseph August Seiss Music: Schlesische Volkslieder; arr. by Richard Storrs Willis Tune: ST. ELIZABETH, Meter: 568.558
This book is one of the most understandable and readable and pleasant books I have ever picked up in theology. Wright is always a master of extended metaphor. His understanding of the way that Paul writes comes out in the way he himself writes, always drawing in narrative, always alluding to controlling narratives.
