"Abraham Lincoln, A Man of Faith and Courage"

Like all Americans, I have deep respect of our 16th President Abraham Lincoln. I have enjoyed reading various biographies on Lincoln and have enjoyed reading some of his speeches, stories, and everything else I can get my hands on. But what about his faith? On the one end, I hear so much about his faith, but much of it is over the top. Is it true? On the other end, I hear nothing regarding his faith, which is neglects a serious part of his life. So which is it?

For that, I picked up and read John Wheelers book, "Abraham Lincoln, A Man of Faith and Courage: Stories of our Most Admired President," and my questions were answered. Wheeler makes the argument that Lincoln was a man of faith in whom divine providence played a key role. Wheeler suggests that apart from God's Providence in Lincoln's life, Lincoln would never be who he was nor accomplish what he did.

Throughout the book he gives examples of this providence. One such example is regarding Lincoln's father who was almost killed by an Indian who had just killed Lincolns grandfather. Saved by his brother, the author remarks that if Lincolns uncle had not taken the shot, there would have never been an Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln's life and presidency is a story of providence.

Wheeler walks us through the life of Lincoln with a particular emphasis on Lincolns faith and how it affected his politics, convictions, words, and actions. One cannot deny the clear influence of Scripture and his faith had on his politics. And it is a reminder that despite what many argue today, a President who shapes his policy after his faith is not outside the bounds of the Constitution. In Lincoln's case, it enhanced his policy.

But one point stood out to me that relates more to modern Christianity than it does to Lincoln. The author pointed out that though Lincoln was never a member of a church, he was grounded in Scripture and could quote much of it. This should not surprise us. Most during this time period were never members of a church and yet knew, read, and understood Scripture simply because church's were at times far off with few pastors in the nation.

But Wheeler makes the point that the complete opposite today. Many attend church and yet are Biblically ignorant. And he is exactly right. Sadly, Americans have easy access to church's and yet we remain ignorant of the book that shapes our faith. This is an indictment of Christians and we should be ashamed. I praise God that we have the opportunity to choose our church and be involved, but the Biblical illiteracy is astounding.

Overall, I really enjoyed this book. Of all of the books I have read on Lincoln and the Civil War, this is perhaps my favorite. It is detailed, but not boring. The author not only offers a biography, but also insight into his spiritual life and how it shaped his life, his politics, and his presidency. It seems that we should pray for another Lincoln, and that new Lincoln should learn from our 16th President and know that God is provident and we must be faithful to Him.

"A Generous Orthodoxy"

Brian McLaren hopes to provide a new type of orthodox theology, one that would get the approval of Jesus. As the title implies, McLaren hopes to find middle ground in virtually all of the various dividing points in modern Christian theology. This is rooted in his understanding of postmodernism. In the modern world, one would take a stand on what they believe about the cross, the gospel, election, morality, tongues, etc. and then use the Bible as their weapon to shun those who disagree with them. McLaren hopes to get beyond labels and offers a Christian that both sides of every argument would approve of.

McLaren begins by looking at the seven Jesus’ he has met. These include the conservative Jesus, the liberal Jesus, the charismatic Jesus, the Catholic Jesus, and others. In each "Jesus" He gets a more fuller picture of who He really was and hopes to show his readers that in order to have a generous orthodoxy, we must understand all of Jesus rather than part of His works, ministry, and message.

The problem with this book is not his desire to get beyond the labels that divide us, rather McLaren misses the whole point of orthodoxy: the gospel. Just like the rest of his books, McLaren offers nothing in the form of salvation. In fact, he admits so. Instead of converting just to be insured that we are going to heaven after this life, McLaren hopes to bring heaven to earth: i.e., his understanding of the Kingdom of God. His understanding of the cross is mistaken. His understanding of evangelism is skewed. And his understanding of the gospel is empty. McLaren is right in pointing out that the problem with many Christians is that we over emphasize our eschatology. He is wrong, however, in going the opposite direction.

The postmodern influence throughout this book is evident. As the title implies, the author offers a melting pop of Christianity. He likes the emphasis of the Spirit among the charismatics, the social concerns and the "up-to-dateness" of liberals, and the relevance of the Emergents. Put everything together you have what McLaren calls generous orthodoxy. Perhaps no better example reveals the influence of postmodernism in McLaren is the very last sentence of the book that ends with the word "and." The idea is for the reader to continue the conversation. McLaren is not offering answers, only a conversation piece on exactly what generous orthodoxy really is.

"The Secret Message of Jesus"

What is the secret message of Jesus? The Kingdom of God. To McLaren, for the most part, Christians have missed this central teaching of Jesus throughout it’s history. Thankfully, however, McLaren how come along, two thousand years later, and has showed us what Jesus’ mission and message really was. At the same time, McLaren wants to make it clear that he, too, is struggling to understand the message of Jesus. Here again, we see the postmodern influence upon his theology. McLaren offers conversation, questions, and postmodern rhetoric. Final answers and absolutes will not be found here.

However, the picture that McLaren offers can be described as more of a meek and mild Jesus than anything. Since he sees the Kingdom of God language in the gospels as being primarily concerning the here and now, McLaren puts heavy emphasis on the Jesus of peace, meekness, humility, and the like. The Kingdom is so here and now, McLaren redefines words like "eternal," to mean life in this world. And so, whenever Jesus offers "eternal life" to persons like Nicodemus, we are to understand that Jesus offers a better life here on earth, not necessarily in heaven. McLaren, then, has completely deconstructed the clear meaning of the text in order to fit his limited interpretation of Jesus seen through the lens of a social gospel.

McLaren even finds a postmodern Jesus in the Gospels who asks questions rather than gives answers. Jesus, as a type of postmodern, brings mystery rather than complete absolutes. Rather than direct answers, Jesus offers stories wrapped in mystery and hiddenness.

Once again, McLaren, while dedicating an entire book on the theology, the message, and the mission of Jesus, offers no gospel except a social one. McLaren fails to see the cross and the real message of Jesus. The Kingdom of God should be viewed, not just by Jesus healing the blind and teaching about forgiveness, but ultimately through the cross. McLaren does not ignore the cross, but rather misses it’s significance and fails to put the needed emphasis on it. Half of each of the Gospels is dedicated to the last week of Jesus. The climax of each Gospel is the death and resurrection of Jesus. Sadly, one could take in all that McLaren says here and at the same time fail to miss the real message of Jesus. It is not a secret and the Church has not missed it. The message of Jesus is clear, repent and you will be saved!

A Search For What Makes Sense: Finding Faith

Brian McLaren sets out to help possible seekers to find their faith. The problem is, he does not exactly point them to Christianity. The book is full of reference to Scripture and Jesus, but there is very little evangelistic appeal.

First, having fully adopted the postmodern model, McLaren can only encourage conversation, not apologetic arguments. Since the search for faith is not always about facts, he offers mystery and conversation.

Secondly, the philosophical and apologetical points made in the book do not point the reader to the cross. McLaren makes a brief, but precise argument on why atheism and agnosticism fails. He shows the philosophical errors of such worldviews. However, he fails to point the reader to the credibility of the Christian faith. No wonder. His adoption of the postmodern model prevents him from virtually forcing Christianity onto the reader. Out of fear of hurting the readers feelings, McLaren shies away from hard truth.

Thirdly, there is no cross and no gospel. There is a lot of references to Christianity, Jesus, and the other Christians (primarily found in community) but no cross and certainly no gospel. One could walk away and find Christianity appealing and think that if they adopt all that McLaren offers, they will be a Christian just by adopting the title. There is no mention of remissions of sin, faith in the God-man, or repentance of a sinful life. There is no calling for turning from slaves of sin to slaves of Christ. Rather, a shallow "gospel" (if you want to call it that) for those entering the conversation about faith.

"A New Kind of Christian"

Brian McLaren is one of the major leaders in the Emerging Church movement. This book sets out his basic argument as to why this new transition in the Church is pivotal. McLaren writes a fictional story based on a true story. Character names and events are different, but the conversations are very much the same.

The main argument of the book is that since the culture is changing, the Church must therefore change with it. The culture has gone from modern to postmodern and the Church must do the same. If the Church hangs on to it’s modern traditions, making propositions and absolutes, rather than postmodern, and it’s implications, the Church will become irrelevant.

This becomes a major factor in the whole Emergent movement. The Church must adapt to the culture at large. Neo, the postmodern, is helping Dan, a pastor, adapt to this new form of thinking. Through their conversations, not only does Dan renew his faith, he changes it. They radically shift Biblical absolutes on issues like the gospel, salvation, heaven and hell, righteousness, Jesus, evangelism, etc.

Because McLaren is so influential, this is a critical book that lays out the basic argument from McLaren and the Emerging Church as a whole. This is groundwork to what the Emerging Church is trying to do. They seek to move the Church from it’s modern era, with it’s doctrines of absolutes and exclusivities, to a Church that resembles the direction of the culture: postmodern and relative. McLaren lays out how one should view Scripture through the lens of postmodernism.

The one critical error made in the book is it’s self-contradiction. McLaren criticizes Christians for interpreting Scripture through the lens of their culture, and then turns around and tells his readers to do the same with postmodernism.

"Blue-Like Jazz

A common thread among Emergents is that they dislike propositions. Therefore, they usually lean more towards narrative preaching from narrative passages of Scripture. Miller reflects this trend. The book is a collection of stories that illustrate a certain theme for each chapter like sin, worship, grace, etc.

Most of the book seems to be random ramblings that at times seem to have no point. Other times, Miller makes an argument. At best, Miller offers a simplistic theology that does not go much deeper than therapeutic, postmodern theology. Perhaps the one bright moment of the book is when Miller discusses the folly of designing the church after the culture. He sees this as ludicrous and a waste of time and energy.

This book mostly illustrates the Emerging Church’s trend of utilizing narrative over propositions. Miller makes his points by telling stories, not by developing an argument. Throughout Emergent literature, sermons, and theology, story is the main vehicle by which to make a point and Miller utilizes it throughout the book. Narrative is a great way to catch the readers attention, but it fails to change lives. For one, the book has very little Bible to offer, and secondly, very little is actually said that it almost appeals to everyone. Perhaps this is why the book has been so successful.

"Death By Love"

Mark Driscoll is a breath of fresh air in the Emerging Church. That is, if you consider Driscoll as still part of the Emerging Church. Driscoll was one of the first major leaders in the movement but has since removed himself from the movement due to where it was going theologically. For that, I applaud Driscoll for standing on orthodoxy and principle. And his latest book, "Death By Love: Letters From the Cross," is a reflection of his Reformed orthodoxy.

Driscoll characterizes himself as being a Reformed Charismatic pastor. At the outset, this sounds like a contradiction. And as someone who considers himself Reformed and a cessationist, this looks initially like a contradiction, but this is a growing movement nonetheless with men like Driscoll and CJ Mahany holding to this theology.

"Death By Love," is a practical look at a Reformed view of the cross. Driscoll covers issues like justification, substitution, propitiation, and other aspects of the cross. But this is not merely a theological book. It is that, but it is more than dry theology. Each chapter consists of someone in Driscolls life that is need of the gospel message. At the end of each chapter, the authors answer common questions regarding the subject at hand.

This is a book that every Christian needs to read. Not only does Driscoll lay out clearly the gospel message and a theological understanding of the cross, but also the practical, everyday importance of the cross. Redemption is a lifelong process, not something that we deal with one day. Furthermore, Driscoll shows why our ultimate need isn't self-help therapy, but the cross of Christ.

Another thing I appreciated about this book was that it was raw and unadulterated. Driscoll does not offer a sissified, feminized gospel. In other words, Driscoll is driven by the text, the hard truths of the gospel, and does not back down from speaking the truth. He is willing to tell people that they are wicked, the worse of sinners, and not deserving of the cross. In fact, at one point, he spends much time explaining to one certain person how he is the worst person who should rot in hell for what they had done. Driscoll is unashamedly hardcore and straight to the point. There is no room for wimps in this book.

The power of this should be obvious, but it is missed too often in our culture today. Most would read some of Driscoll's words and be appalled at his sternness. We are told to play nice and hope for the best. However, by ignoring the ugliness and seriousness of sin, we rob God of his glory, the cross of it's power, and love of it's overflowing magnitude. It is because Driscoll presents the worse of the worse, the undeserving of the undeserving, that we get a bigger and better glimpse at how amazing God is in His justice and yes, in His love.

I highly recommend this book. It is well worth your time. Every Christian should not only understand the depth of the cross, but also it's practical application. Driscoll does that. He expects much, and he gives much. Go buy this book!

"Surprised By Joy"

CS Lewis will go down as one of the most influential and important Christian figures in the 20th Century. I have been greatly impacted by his writings and have read many of his works. He has influenced the way I think, the things I believe, and how I live out my faith. CS Lewis was no stronger to doubt. In fact, it was doubt that led him away from his faith. But eventually, he could not doubt any longer.

Since CS Lewis was so influential in my life, and after reading some of his biographies, I decided to read his autobiography, "Surprised By Joy: The Shape of My Early Life." As the title suggests, this is not your typical autobiography. Rather it is a reflection on the things in his early life that has shaped him to be the person he became.

Lewis spends much time on his childhood. His mother died when he was young and he never fully recovered. He loved his dad, though his father always struggled over the death of his life. It was this time period that Lewis seems most concerned with. It is interesting how much ink he spills over how difficult it was attending some of the schools he attended. I remember telling myself, "modern psychologists who over analyze peoples childhoods would have field day with CS Lewis." But, nonetheless, Lewis did spend much time analyzing his childhood.

This was perhaps my least favorite part of the book. Though to him the years he spent under tyrannical rule of what we may call superintendents might be insignificant to us, it was nonetheless critical to Lewis, and so he spends several chapters dedicated to the subject.

I was most interested in his conversion. Lewis, from very early on, began to doubt the Christian faith he was taught as a child and continued this atheism for much of his early adulthood. But what made him seriously reconsider the Christian faith was a comment made by a fellow atheist. One of his friends told Lewis that despite their skepticism, there was a lot of credibility to the Gospels. They weren't are far fetched as they would like to believe.

And starting at that moment, Lewis began to reconsider his doubt. After sometime, Lewis would eventually convert to the faith he had long rejected.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

Overall, I enjoyed Lewis' work. However, for the reader that is new to the writings of CS Lewis, I would warn that they probably shouldn't begin here. This is an autobiography that should be reserved for those that love all things Lewis and have a sincere love for the man, his work, and his faith.

One of the reasons for this is that the things that Lewis finds interesting, the average person doesn't. Lewis loved Greek and Norse Mythology, most people couldn't care less. Throughout the book, Lewis makes references to stories found within mythology and how they relate to the topic at hand. Similarly, Lewis is fascinated with things that most overlook or couldn't care less. For this purpose, one might find Lewis boring at times.

Lewis anticipated this. This is why from the very beginning he tells the reader that once they have read a few pages, they will either like it or not. If they do not like what they have read so far, they should stop now for the rest of the book will be the same. I for one enjoyed the book and was grateful for continuing to read. So for the Lewis fans, I think you'll enjoy this intimate look into his life. For those who are not fans of Lewis, it would be best to read something else.