A student of mine recently said that she didn’t get a book finished because she didn’t have much free time. Hmmm. There are a number of problems with that statement. For one, time is never free. Second, one should not relegate reading to the leftover time we have after the “important” stuff is done. Third, students should get their assignments done.
And I have failed on that third point. I am hopelessly behind on writing and posting book reviews. This sweep of books and titles will be my effort to try to get caught up, even if points are taken off for the work being done late.
It was over a month ago that I ventured to review all of the books in the picture above. I only succeeded in getting the top four from the stack covered. So, let’s get after the rest.
In the summer of 2021, I had a mild case of the Job experience. Okay, it actually started in 2020 and continued through to the beginning of 2022. But, unemployment, health issues, and other crises brought me to consider our brother in suffering, patient and righteous Job.
I read Christopher Ash’s book Trusting God in the Darkness: A Guide to Understanding the Book of Job sometime over the last year. Ash has a fine commentary on Job, but this work is a short and easy study. I also read Job: A Philosophical Commentary by my friend Owen Anderson. Ash’s book is strong on the devotional side of Job, while Owen’s book helps differentiate the approaches that Job’s misguided friends gave him. And as the subtitle A Philosophical Commentary says, this book rightly puts Job in the field that those pesky Greeks think they should dominate.
Piercing Leviathan is neither a commentary nor a chapter-by-chapter survey of the book. The primary aim is to deal with the issue of what the oft mentioned Leviathan in the book is. Sometimes, commentators and readers have concluded that Leviathan was a whale or a dinosaur or a rhinoceros. But in the last chapters of Job, where God speaks and settles the issues that have been swirling around for nearly 40 chapters, the power of God’s creation has already been stated and presented as Exhibits A-Y. Just adding this big animal as Exhibit Z would not be the capstone, clinching argument. (Yet, I would affirm that if Ortlund is wrong, whatever God says is right.)
Piercing Leviathan is not a case of God telling the story that Melville will repeat and expand (and expand and expand and expand) in Moby Dick. In other words, it is not about the yuge task of actually subduing a white whale. Leviathan represents the forces and power of evil, the kingdom of Satan, the world that has been in rebellion against God since the beginning of time.
Job hears God’s presentation and is more than satisfied. Even though he gets full payment for damages incurred in the events, Job’s bowing before God was done in worshipful awe and not in a hope to gain some favor. One can realize that he was ready to go on with life as he had recently experienced it, full of confidence in the Goodness, Power, Holiness of God. Job had a glimpse of Ultimate Reality: God wins, Satan and evil lose. Cosmic war ends in no arbitration or settlement, but rather in total victory.
To be blunt: I now NEED the 3 volumes of Calvin’s Sermons on Job that is newly published by Banner of Truth. And, yes, I would not mind the John Calvin tumbler as featured and included in the Reformation Heritage deal.
There is a bit of a reformation/renaissance going on at Oklahoma Baptist University these days. The first time I heard of that university, it was from a couple of friends who were swindled in attending what was supposed to be a college that was faithful to the doctrines and teachings of Southern Baptists. They were getting strong doses of liberal theology without the benefit of even a Karl Barth-corrective.
Reformation happens. Unbelief falters and stumbles and doesn’t deliver. God is faithful. A movement is sweeping across quite a few Christian campuses that is restoring the rightful places of Christian views of literature, philosophy, history, and even…theology.
Dr. Alan Noble and Dr. Ben Myers are two of the leaders of these efforts at Oklahoma Baptist University. Myers has written some fine works of poetry and about poetry. Noble has written several books about Christian living.
This book springboards off of the Heidelberg Catechism’s opening answer to the question “What is our only comfort in life and death?” Among other things, that answer states, “I am not my own, but belong with body and soul, both in life and in death, to my faithful Savior Jesus Christ.”
The world always, and for certain in these times, asserts that we are our own. Political liberals state that mantra even as they ease our ownership titles over to state control. But on the political right, Randians, Libertarians, and others, in an effort to preserve individual freedoms, push the idea that we are our own.
Noble’s book uses the theme that we are not our own for some 230 pages. The applications and examination of the theme is far ranging. This is a useful book for discussion or even for some sermon preparation and use. As with Noble’s other works, it is written by an academic, but it is written for all types of readers.
Covenant and Election in the Reformed Tradition by David J. Englesma is published by the Reformed Free Publishing Association. Engelsma has written an incredible number of books published by RFPA.
This is one of two books by Pastor Engelsma that I received and am duty bound to review and am hopelessly behind on getting to. The other book is Federal Vision: Heresy at the Root.
I woke up one day in the middle of a pastors’ conference years ago and discovered that there was a movement called Federal Vision. The duties I had as a pastor of a church, the administrator of a school, the Humanities teacher at the same school, the husband and father at home, etc. kept me from getting involved and informed in the issues.
This theological tete a tete quickly became too heated, too involved, too loud, too distracting, too bizarre for me to wade into. I found it more my style to press on with my too many tasks until I suffered a full blown, much deserved physical and mental breakdown.
You can find more than enough attacks and defenses of Federal Vision online. I have a small stack of books that present defenses and rebuttals, and most are unread.
So, on the one hand, I simply do not and maybe cannot understand what is going on.
On the other hand, I did read a book by Gene Eward Veith on Lutheran theology that sounded almost identical to what I thought the FVers were saying. This led me to wonder why most Reformed and more Presbyterian folks who oppose FV views would possibly accept Lutherans (and Arminians and Dispensationalists and Charismatics) as brothers? I am assuming that they do accept them as such.
The driving gist of this book is that the most trusted, reliable, faithful Reformed approach is that Election precedes Covenant. I was swirling around and sinking during this whole discussion.
Obviously, from some of the reviewers who I have glanced at, this book is well done and a sound refutation of the position they oppose. Obviously, if you are reading what I have said, I am completely muddled as a reader. But here are my thoughts:
- I think Pastor Englesma should have focused the book on the topic of why he believes and affirms those confessional statements that say that election precedes covenant. Teach that truth as found in those statements.
- Potshots taken at FVers were usually in the form of jibs and jabs and insults. Insulting words do not an argument make.
- In the cases of Reformed people in the past, like Klaas Schilder, whose views Englesma opposes, he should have carefully stated their views and why he thinks they are in error.
- Above all, the book should deal more directly with what is plainly taught in the Scriptures rather than what is plainly stated in the historic confessions. Lest I be misunderstood, I love Reformed confessions. I have been using them to teach my evangelical, more fundamentalist, most likely Arminian students in the Bible class I have. But the confessions often build upon theological controversies of the days of yore and sweep past the reader of our times.
Okay, I have grown soft in my older years. Maybe I am embracing heretics, theological deviants, and corruptors of the Faith. Maybe I need to start denouncing someone. I did that for years. I was confrontational for years. I am either wiser now or wearier of battle or just off the grid theologically.
If one is wanting to wade into the Federal Vision versus Reformed Orthodoxy debate, here is a good book. As for me, let me try to explain and share the Heidelberg Catechism’s first question and answer with my students.