Review of The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: Who Really Goes to Hell? by David Rudel

As I've noted on another post here, I signed up for a website where you can get books so long as you blog/review(revog?) them after the fact. By doing this, they are getting publicity in all sorts of places that may not otherwise get, etc. I really appreciate this and enjoy reading books I otherwise may not read. This book is through a program called viralbloggers.com. This does not seem to be limited to a specific publisher but rather gets books from different ones.

The first book I received was The Gospel You’ve Never Heard: Who Really Goes to Hell? by David Rudel.

A brief synopsis given to me that engaged me enough to choose this over others:

Do you ever struggle with how limited our contemporary understandings of the gospel seem? How Jesus and Paul sometimes seem to be saying different – indeed, opposite – things about the ‘good news’? About why there seems to be the good news of Jesus and good news about Jesus? If so, then The Gospel You’ve Never Heard by David Rudel is for you. The Gospel You’ve Never Heard makes a lateral move away from conventional descriptions of the Bible’s teachings in a way that allows the reader to view modern dogmas of the Left and Right alike through a fresh lens. The book’s first two chapters raise questions evangelical Christianity has considerable trouble answering. Rather than attempt incredible rhetorical acrobatics to explain away these very real issues, the author asks the reader to entertain, at least provisionally, that there might be genuine Biblical problems with the gospel portrayed by the modern church.

How poignant! I figured this would be great as much of these questions and issues are essentially a major part of where I find myself right now. Additionally, I looked forward to this because it appeared to be much less weighty than other books I have read recently(with portions going over my head) which have brought me to my current state. After reading this, however, I found it was not weighty enough. While the main thrust of his points I found solace in(namely there are too many doctrines read into the text rather than text truly forming cohesive doctrines), I found his approach to be extremely frustrating and lacking in scholarly grounding.

His approach was very critical of groups of people and he tended to make broad brush strokes in his critiques. Throughout the book he said how "evangelicals," "conservatives," "liberals," and "commentators" were incorrect for various reasons. I put these in quotes because I can only assume what he means by these different words are found mostly in the COUSA(church of United States of America) and we are to blindly follow his assumptions that different viewpoints fit the whole group. I wish we would have been more direct in truly wrestling with a specific person or doctrinal statement. He spends more time saying what he doesn't agree with and less on what he actually means and this is very unfortunate.

In addition, while I don't need an endless bibliography or footnotes taking over pages, it would have been helpful for him to note the study he did in preparation for the book. Instead by mostly citing Scripture only and not having much outside help we are left with a book that is trying to make many points written by someone who has not established themselves in the world of biblical scholars.

This was just too difficult a pill to swallow and combined with his unfair critiques, typos(citing James Dunn as "James G. D. Dunn" was the kicker ), and eyesore of Scripture quotes all bolder made this a frustrating read. It was especially frustrating because I wanted to like this. I wanted this to be a book that would appeal to a larger audience so that necessary questions will be asked. I still think some of this will happen, but if done at the "evangelicals" expense, the tradeoff for perpetuated disunity is unfortunate and discouraging.

So what?...

The past couple days I had the privilege of attending the 2010 Wheaton Theology Conference where the focus was on N.T. Wright's work on Jesus and Paul and so included papers read by those that were both critical and in support as well as a response and sessions by Wright himself. As I am relatively new to the whole theological world and likewise have no formal training, a good portion of this conference went over my head. This largely stems from not understanding a lot of background through New Testaments studies as well as where each speaker was coming from. Given this, however, there was still much I was able to retain as well and I'd certainly much rather be learning from people of their capacity rather than below mine. I think it was fair to say their collective iron was able to sharpen my aluminum.

One of the presentations during this time was by the couple Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat. The way they presented was a dialogue of sorts in that they asked questions that folks might likely have and sought to answer them as well. They were certainly the most socially-focused of all presentations and practice this by engaging in organic gardening in Canada(and also Walsh has done some writing/work on/with homelessness). Also, through their presentation and the sharing that took place with Wright, we learned that Walsh and Wright debated many times early on in their studies over the importance of what they were studying. Walsh always sought to bring Wright to task on his work by providing the helpful question of "So what?" To be sure, this certainly is an important question that should constantly be before scholars(as well as people with other disciplines within Christendom) as they argue the seemingly nit-pickiest of items(clearly a subjective statement and not to be taken across the board as hopefully this blog will try and show from my viewpoint!).

Indeed, this question of "so what?" is certainly helpful for even the likes of this conference in general. While some have done an excellent job of comparing and adding on to why over 1100 people would be showing up for this conference, it still begs the question. This conference was not being simulcast to multiple churches in many countries(although incredibly, free mp3's as well as video are up). This still remains a significant feat within the world of Christian scholarship(as compared to annual SBL meetings), but will the effects of this be felt in the church at large? The world at large? Even Wheaton at large? Personally, I think if Wright's talks were taken to heart by the influential there(and specifically his talk on Paul) the ramifications of it could be absolutely monumental. It was an energizing experience for me and convinced me even further of the importance of Bible study and also Wright's potential influence he could continue to have for the catholic church(especially with Jeremy Begbie's nudging). He spoke of most churches falling into a category of teaching of either the cross or the kingdom, but rarely both. To me, this is incredibly apparent as I have experienced both sides and found them wanting.

Years ago when our family first got a DVD player, we were excited to find out that with that we would get five free DVD's. One of these were Stargate and it was on two sides as I suppose it was a longer movie. Being new to the world of DVD's, I put it in as I would any other and thought nothing of it. After watching until the end, I could not help but be extremely confused and frustrated by the movie as a whole as it completely lacked cohesion and as such seemed incredibly shallow. In case it has not already been figured out, I had put in the second half of the movie and completely missed out on the first. This same identity crisis that I associated with the movie(and still have to this day because I never chose to bother going back to it) is largely similar to that of the church body. The sides of the kingdom or the cross don't dare associate too much with the other side lest they offend those they might want to enter into the fold. With this, however, I think those that are outside the church are subject to seeing a lifeless church that is lacking in cohesion and incredibly shallow.

Wright, sharing the words of Paul and echoing them through to today presented us with the need of unification and called us all, as Jesus did, to understand our role as kingdom dwellers and an announcing of a new lordship that the powers can not simply say no to. This was most definitely a rousing speech to a captive audience and I think there was a spirit amongst a majority of us to instantly want to "turn the world to rights," and yet in spite of this there was a nagging question that persists today as the excitement of it all has died down and "reality" has set in again. So what?

While I plan on taking more seriously the study of the Bible and prioritizing it over other things that I spend/waste my time on, as I went shopping with my wife at Meijer today I noticed the zeal in that room last night was not found in maneuvering the cart amongst people that were blocking the aisle, walking to slow, or just living their life. Indeed, the fruit of patience was not first and foremost in myself and so this question of "so what?" really took shape there as well. Walsh and Keesmaat proclaimed that if we were seeking more after kingdom ethics than what we had to say might be received by more than "a small circle of friends," I believe this still largely misses out on a good majority in the west. What of the average shopper or employee of Meijer?

I wish I had a settled answer for this, however I'm hoping that the question of "so what?" never leaves me as I seek to learn more and become more in the likeness of what I worship.

Evangelism in a Post-Modern World

Andy, this is for you. I tried putting it on your Facebook as a response, but for whatever reason it was not letting me do it. I would certainly covet a response from you as well as your additional thoughts at where you find yourself currently for this difficult question:

I think the more I learn about the Bible, the less relevance I truly see to our society. How do we try and share this good news that we fail to live out so much ourselves? More than that, once we get past the good part, how do we then share these teachings(or torah; chalk me up for one point! haha) that bid us to take up our cross and abandon family and other distractions. I think part of helping this has been coming to some sort of resolve within myself to think through it "logically" rather than through my life's context so far. For me, I can recognize that this world as it exists needs to be "put to rights" and that there has to be some sense of order that has initially created it and seeks to restore that. Now, this is where I am somewhat limited to my context, but I can say at this point the character of the Christian God is most compelling in completing this puzzle in my brain. If I at least have a starting point, I feel this can aide in setting some mutual footing.

Yoder

Although I have not done much reading outside of that for my Pentateuch "class" I'm informally taking through mp3's courtesy of Fuller and iTunes U, I am reading John Howard Yoder's most well-known work "The Politics of Jesus." Although not far in, I can already see that this will be a challenging but rewarding work. He gives a refreshing take assessing the implications of Jesus' purpose and saying as opposed to instilling on Him a certain bias. Some examples:

"...there is often an appeal to Jesus as a revolutionary and political figure; yet this appeal is a slogan-like formal one. It is not linked to a substantial concern for the kind of politics Jesus incarnated. It is thus marked by the absence of precisely the concerns to which the present paper is devoted."

Speaking to folks who come to Jesus' teaching and actions as if he is simply a radical:
"...their style is still sufficiently impressionistic that the theological reader is not sure how much of what they say about 'Mahatma Jesus' should really be taken seriously as exegesis, and how much is simply the new symbolic dress for something they could say without it."

This balance that is found here is something that is desperately needed in the church today. While my generation and younger have been influenced largely by many who say Jesus was a social activist and actually fell more on the side of love than hate/dislike. It is definitely attractive and desirable to come to an understanding of faith that involves action and being involved in caring for the needy(which is certainly not unique in Jesus), but it is important to not lose sight of why we ought to be this way. We shouldn't trade or mistake a living and active faith for social action. We are to be a blessing and we ought to be aware that we are carriers of good news for all, however especially to the poor(however that may be defined) because the rich have had and are having their reward.

I'm looking forward to continuing this book and seeing the other things I will learn along the way.

----------------
Now playing: The Onion - Prematurely Born-Again Christian Suffers Complications

Making Wise The Simple

Professor Goldingay uses the text Making Wise the Simple by Johanna W.H. Van Wijk-Bos, and the small portion of it I have read so far as been extremely profound and has really aided in teaching different insights of the Torah.

"The use of the so-called Ecumenical Lectionary in many congregations illustrates this customary devaluing of the largest part of the Bible. Old Testament passages are served up in a fragmented fashion, subordinated to the agenda of the Christian year, and either trumped by New Testmant selections or interpreted as merely a prelude to them."

"Having lost their moorings in the Torah, churchgoers at best assume the central tenets of faith and practice, as love of God and neighbor, to belong mainly to the prophetic critique of biblical Israel's shortcomings, or to have been invented by Jesus and his followers."

"In order to become reacquainted and reengaged with the Bible, it is important to establish and evaluate the distance between us and the text, between our world and that world."

Most of our sermons and our focus are on Jesus and clearly this is with reason, but how can we expect to understand Jesus if we fail to see him as a faithful Jew. To take that further, we must understand that the Torah would have been written on His heart and would greatly shape the way He would look at the world. The holy and perfect teaching and law of the Torah would be central to Christ's purpose in continuing what God had started from the beginning. What God began in Exodus 19 in calling Israel to live and become a blessing to the world was carried through with Jesus' message and purpose as well.

What a shame that we don't take the time in our lectionary and sermons for these texts which undergird that which we do teach every week. We seem to be teaching this message that has no solid foundation and miss out on the richness that is found in the Hebrew Bible.

It is hard to know what to do, however, because it seems that this meaning is not readily available for the common laymen and if it wasn't for my renewed interest and vigor for the Bible by these different authors I would certainly continue being in the dark. I am only now discovering that there is so much to the Scriptures, and it truly has been a blessing to uncover the utter depth that is found there. My increased awe and wonder of the Bible has done the same for how I interpret God.

So much to keep learning...

The First Post

It seems as more blogs are added to the fold on a daily basis there has to be some sort of explanation in justifying yet another. I suppose that I look at this more as a tool for myself to aid in a running timeline of my theological understandings as well as having a place with my thoughts that I can use a search engine on as opposed to spending large amounts of time looking for it through a journal or other similar tool.

The title of my blog comes out of all the new findings lately that have stemmed from me understanding that if I am truly going to begin to learn anything then I must be willing to unlearn first to allow for a fresh understanding. This means that I need to unlearn both what I learned from growing up on the more conservative side and also more recently from the side that is more liberal. A true clean slate. In doing this I need to eliminate any presuppositions I have and allow those who have spent their entire lives studying these topics speak to me of the Scriptures.

Because of the context in which the scriptures were written I am unable to take them at face value because I can only do so within the framework of an American white 25 year old male. I must not make simple presuppositions of what something truly means unless I am willing to understand the culture in which I am reading about. I don't want to assume Jesus was simply concerned only with getting us into heaven or about social justice, lest I do to this central figure what our nation has done in attempting to spread democracy to places that want nothing to do with it. God deserves better than that and I truly believe this is the beginning of a new quest of which I am very excited and intimidated by it all.

This was first initiated by reading works by N.T. Wright and through his rabbit trail that are his bibliographies I have encountered a new world that is so vast and endless. While Wright and other's that he may mention are mostly New Testament scholars, they know that they are unable to fairly approach the New Testament by means of understanding and gleaning from the Old Testament or Hebrew Bible.

And this is where I find myself at this point. I learned that Fuller Theological Seminary had a few classes online and that two were on the Old Testament taught by a guy named John Goldingay. While I didn't know the name initially, I came to find out that he is going to be taking on the For Everyone popular commentary series for the OT that Wright has done for the NT. This was all I needed to hear and from there I decided I would get the books(for Christmas!) so that I could follow along like I am auditing the class. It has already been enlightening and I will actually do another post now to highlight what I have learned so far(to avoid this post stretching on into two browser windows!)

Here goes nothing!