Scot McKnight has just published a book called A Community Called Atonement. McKnight is a first rate biblical scholar at North Park University and the man behind the curtain at the always engaging Jesus Creed blog. Using his exceptional writing skills, McKnight takes what can be a very tedious idea and brings it alive.

McKnight does a wonderful job of rescuing the debate from a narrow abstract battle to make this or that model prevail and relocates the discussion in the larger picture of God’s mission in the world. Atonement is not an end in itself. Atonement is a means toward accomplishing a mission; the mission of restoring of that which has been lost. McKnight locates the central themes of this restoration in the concepts of justice (mishpat), righteousness (tesedeq) and shalom. (128)

Reviewed by Michael Kruse.

Read the entire review.

This book is offered as an exposé of sorts, revealing how certain scholars—among them, James M. Robinson, Robert Funk, Bart Ehrman, Karen King, Morton Smith, Elaine Pagels, John Dominic Crossan, and collectively the Jesus Seminar—“distort the gospels” and thus mislead the public to historical conclusions at odds with traditional Christian claims. Evans also takes aim at various popular authors, such as Dan Brown (The Da Vinci Code) and Michael Baigent (The Jesus Papers), for creating what he calls “hokum history” (204). Finally, it is an apologia for the New Testament Gospels: “this book is written to defend the original witnesses to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. When put to the test, the original documents hold up quite well. Despite their having been maligned, even ridiculed, and pushed to the background, it is time to give them a fresh hearing” (17).

Reviewed by Stephen J. Patterson.

Read the entire review.

For more information, see our PastorBookshelf Overview.

What do you get when you combine fear, opportunity, history, distractions and doubt? A typical Christian who ignores a chance to do something significant for the kingdom of God due to insecurity and lack of genuine faith in God.

Mark Batterson has been released from the grip of fear and doubt by the experiences God has granted him. This young pastor writes about his insights in this simple but helpful book that harps on one theme: we have been called to take risks in our effort to transform the world for Christ. The author, who is one of the emerging voices in the post-Boomer church scene in America, provides numerous succinct thoughts about the real meaning of life and how to make the most of it.

Reviewed by George Barna.

Read the entire review.

I spoke to Mark Dever just about a year ago and asked him if there were any books in his future. At that time he mentioned that he’d soon have a book out dealing with personal evangelism but that he had nothing planned after that. It seems that his plans changed! The book on evangelism is due for release in just a few days (September 11). It has been preceded by What is a Healthy Church and will be followed by The Church and Her Challenges. What is a Healthy Church? is a shortened, introductory version of Dever’s previous book 9 Marks of a Healthy Church written primarily for people in the pews rather than the men in the pulpits. After all, church health is not the sole responsibility of a local church’s leadership.

Reviewed by Tim Challies.

Read the entire review.

Phil Newton’s book is not long but it is definitely helpful those thinking about making the change from congregational governance to elder governance. Even though the book is written from a Baptist perspective, it really is insightful for anyone thinking about this issue. He spends the first two parts of the book addressing eldership in the Bible. His exposition of Acts 20 is what got me thinking about Paul’s address to the Ephesian elders. And this text is quite important to the role and necessity of biblical eldership. Of course he also deals with Paul’s letter to Timothy and Titus and then the Hebrews writing on elders in Hebrews 13 and the final words from Peter on eldership.

Reviewed by Sam Shin.

Read the entire review.

One of the purposes of a debate in the formal sense of the word is to persuade. The object is to persuade the audience that your position is the appropriate view to adopt. Over several generations the debate over the theological views developed by John Calvin has become more and more heated. In response, James White (the champion of Reformed Theology) and Dave Hunt (the Opponent of Calvinism) have participated in a lengthy formal debate. The debate has been removed from the classical oral format and collected in the volume Debating Calvinism.

The book’s format is presented in the form of a highly structured debate in which each author is given opportunity to make and develop assertions based on his personal point of view concerning the issue of Calvinism. This statement is followed by a response from the opponent, a defense of the original statement, and final remarks by both authors (each taking his turn). For example, in part one of the book—“Calvinism Affirmed”—chapter one is arranged in this manner:

“God’s Eternal Decree” (a statement of one of the basic tenets of Calvinist Theology) by White

• A response by Hunt
• A defense by White
• Final remarks by Hunt
• Final remarks by White

Each ensuing chapter is similarly arranged with the authors taking turns making statements, refuting those statements or defending them.

As a book this arrangement makes reading cumbersome and at the same time divides the reading into bite-sized pieces that might be easier to digest by the reader. White actually does suggest that the meat of the material lies in the first and second sections of each chapter (that is, the statement and the response). Anything beyond this (the defense and final statements) has a tendency to be repetitive. A danger when trying to review the book is to become drawn into the debate itself and decree a winner. In point of fact, a quick look at Amazon.com shows that many readers do just that—determine the winner of the debate.

In the realm of exegesis, both writers have a tendency to read the Scriptures in such a way to support their point of view, even to the point of arguing over the meaning of specific words in the verse. Both authors accuse each other of eisegesis rather than true exegesis because of this. Hunt and White are both adept in the art of proof-texting—that is, using verses or phrases as a support of their own personal view. Hunt has a tendency to string bits and pieces of passages together ad nauseam to base his claims of scriptural beliefs. White, on the other hand, is a little more subtle in his use of the Bible to support his viewpoint, indicating that his interpretation of certain passages or bits of passages is the definitive viewpoint.

As a debate the use of supporting materials (outside of the Scripture) is lopsided. One of the strict rules that my teacher drilled into me when I was debating was that I must support my arguments with documentation. White, while using the Scripture extensively, has a tendency to use footnoting for the purpose of building his argument more or explanation. Hunt on the other hand suggests extensive use of the library by citing sources from both Calvinist and non-Calvinist authors. This is not to say that White totally ignores the use of source materials, but to indicate that his use of footnotes (a legitimate use) tends to be more along the line of developing the argument more.

If indeed the writers are bent on persuading the audience (the reader) to affirm their point of view, both fall short. Instead, readers approaching the book from the side of Reformed Theology find that White is more articulate, more convincing, and ultimately wins the debate. Others, leaning more toward a viewpoint that vilifies the Calvinist viewpoint—even to the point of spitting the word “Calvinism” out of their mouths with a grimace of distaste—tend to lift up Hunt as the more astute, better founded, and final victor in the debate. Either author seems more intent on pointing out the shortcomings of the other’s point of view that neither seems to build a persuasive argument in their own behalf (although White spends a few more pages building a case, both seem to be more intent on proving how the other is either wrong or inadequate in their argumentation). Finally, the cover of the book shouts to the reader, “Is God free to love anyone He wants? Do you have any choice in your own salvation? It’s time to find out.” The debate sadly doesn’t provide a convincing conclusion for anyone who has not already decided one side of the issue or the other.

I would recommend the book only to those who are looking to learn more about Calvinist teachings. The only readers who might be persuaded one way or the other are those who might not be aware of the debate itself and just need a peg to hang their theological hat on (regardless of the side they choose). Theologians who already have their opinions planted either inside or outside the garden of Calvinism will find little of value in this debate. On the other hand, if a reader is fond of the formal argumentation encountered in the debate format, he will find this volume an invigorating experience.

Benjamin Potter
Sr. Pastor, First Baptist Church of Mulberry Grove
September 11, 2007

Believer’s Baptism, edited by Schreiner and Wright, covers a multitude of theological and historical aspects all centered on the rite of Christian baptism. The goal of their presentation is to show that baptism is only for those who have professed faith in Christ and that the practice of infant- or paedo- baptism compromises the gospel itself. The book is well-researched, and the importance and preservation of this sacred Christian rite are found within this study.

Schreiner and Wright organize their presentation in 10 distinct chapters, each focusing on a different historical practice. Each chapter is written by a different author, focusing first on baptism proper and then often expanding the discussion into the mode and method. Each author concludes his section by summarizing his findings and explaining the necessity of holding to a baptismal view that is strictly for those who have professed faith in Christ.

Reviewed by Stewart MacLean Jr.

Read the entire review.

John Murray’s commentary on the book of Romans has long been considered the answer book for biblical expositors when they come to study the grand epistle. So when I see a biography come along that introduces me to the man behind the works like his Romans commentary and Redemption, Accomplished and Applied, I am helplessly drawn in.

The Life of John Murray is what we have come to expect from Ian Murray (no relation to John). It is a well-written enjoyable chronicle of the life of a significant evangelical player. Ian Murray is able to give us many details without drowning us in peripherals.

John Murray grew up in Scotland and served his country in the military during the first World War, even loosing an eye from a shrapnel blast. In journeying through Murray’s life it becomes clear that his family and country are tattooed on his innermost affections. Throughout his four decades in America he made over twenty trips over the Atlantic to see his family.

Reviewed by Erik Raymond.

Read the entire review.

It is a book that you listen to rather than read, as you eavesdrop on Professor Gunton taking his class on a guided tour of Barth’s theology from its intellectual background and nineteenth century influences; through its development in the commentaries on Romans, the correspondence with Harnack, and the book on Anselm; and then on into the mature thought of the Church Dogmatics, where the focus is on theological epistemology, the doctrine of God, and the Christology-and-soteriology (the hyphens make a substantive point).

The lectures, of course, were well prepared, replete with handouts and diagrams, but what you hear is not only Gunton’s take on Barth but also his taking on Barth even as he speaks. That is, we not only get theology, we actually get theologising—Barth “is a great man to learn to think theologically with”—as Gunton probes on his feet, sometimes with touching tentativeness.

Reviewed by Kim Fabricius.

Read the entire review.

The title is easily misread. The book does not deal with preaching through the narrative sections of the Word of God. The pastor of the Church of the Nazarene in Mid City proposes a style of pastoral preaching and care designed to confront the church with “God’s Story” and the church’s need to become a part of that story. He believes there is much wrong with contemporary Christianity and desires to reform it by changing some of the presuppositions pastors address when preaching. He is on target with much of his evaluation, and there is much of interest and profit for the preacher who is preaching for biblical transformation. One wonders about some of his historical evaluations of preaching (especially of Puritan preaching), but those minor things add interest to the book, even for those who might disagree with his evaluation.

Reviewed by Robert Talley.

Read the entire review (SharperIron).