History, Law and Christianity - A Review

One of the several ways to engage people with the good news of Jesus Christ is through evidential apologetics. In many cases now, the morality of the Bible is so offensive to people they have little initial concern over the historicity of Scripture. However, both within and without the church there are cases where cogent, rational demonstrations of the credibility of Christianity are necessary.

History, Law and Christianity, by John Warwick Montgomery has recently been republished by the 1517 Legacy project, which aims at presenting a Christian apologetic to the world. Montgomery’s book was originally published in 1964, having begun its existence as a series of lectures in response to attacks on the Christian faith. The first five chapters discuss the plausibility of historical evidences of the truthfulness of Christianity. The final chapter provides a “legal defense” of Christianity, as it might occur in a court of law. This edition also includes the original lecture to which Montgomery was responding, as well as an affirmation of the quality of the argument by a non-Christian historian.

Much like Lee Strobel’s book, The Case for Christ, and Josh McDowell’s classic, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Montgomery’s volume points out some of the common challenges to the truthfulness of the biblical accounts regarding Christ. Montgomery shows that, while we cannot have Cartesian certainty of Christ’s resurrection and his deity based on evidence alone, there is such a strong logical coherence to the accounts of Christ’s life that opponents of biblical Christianity are wrong to dismiss the accounts in Scripture as readily as they often do.

Apologetic volumes like these are helpful within the church, because they can shore up existing faith. With a constant barrage of accusations and denials thrown at Christianity from the world, reading a careful, logical defense of the reliability of Scripture can be nourishing to the soul.

In some cases, a book like this can be helpful for people who have not yet come to faith but are asking realistic, honest questions about the integrity of Christianity. Montgomery’s careful argumentation may be the help someone needs to come to grips with the transformative power of the gospel.

One of the benefits of this book is its size. The actual argumentation of the volume is a mere 76 pages. It took me a couple of hours to read it fairly carefully. Many apologetics books, in attempting to be perfectly thorough, become weighty tomes which are unlikely to be picked up by the casual inquirer.

Another strength of History, Law and Christianity is the precision with which Montgomery argues. His carefully argued points are shaped as only the lawyer can do (one of Montgomery’s earned degrees is a J.D.). The book, then, is up to the logical  scrutiny of a rational skeptic.

The weakness of the book is that it may be answering questions that most people aren’t asking in our day and age. This book will be a solid entry into a debate with someone with a modern epistemology, which is rigorously rational (often excessively so). It may not be as effective in convincing the post-modern skeptic, who is willing to accept truths but not Truth. As such, this is a tool that will be most effective when provided to the proper audience.

All in all, this is a well written book. It has withstood the last half-century well. It is a book I am glad to have on my shelf and will gladly recommend to others.

Ulrich Zwingli - A Bitesize Biography

William Boekestein’s contribution to the Bitesize Biography series, Ulrich Zwingli, is the latest of these little books to make it to press. I’ve previously reviewed the volumes on John Chrysostom and George Whitefield. All have been enjoyable and engaging.

Ulrich Zwingli follows the basic formula of the series, which includes a timeline, a brief introduction, and a walk through progression to importance, major conflicts, and reason of significance. The volumes all end with a summary of the legacy of the individual. This means that these books, including Boekestein’s recent edition, have all the pieces necessary to a good biography.

Summary

Zwingli is an interesting character within Church History and often less covered than other reformers, like Luther and Calvin. This is, as Boekestein notes, in part due to Zwingli’s untimely death, which prevented him from publishing revisions (as Calvin) or as much (as Calvin and Luther).

Zwingli was a first generation Reformer. His shift from the Catholic Church occurred roughly simultaneously with Luther and in parallel. While there was undoubtedly some interaction between the two early on, the theological movement away from the Roman church had a basically independent genesis for each of the men.

Unlike Luther, however, who had a political power to support his religious efforts at Reform, Zwingli became much more involved in the daily political squabbles of his Swiss canton. This also contributed to the diminished literary production of Zwingli, as well as some of the attitudes toward reform, which for Zwingli required convincing many more people along the way. Switzerland was also in a more precarious political situation because of the small size of the Cantons and their proximity to Italy.

Boekestein highlights these differences and brings out some of the unique contributions that Zwingli, often considered the father of the Reformed faith, makes to church history. This story is told in a winsome manner, in general. The writing is alive and engaging. This volume, like the previous in the series, is an enjoyable evening read for someone interested in history and theology.

Analysis

My greatest point of contention with this volume is the Boekestein diverges from the pattern, which is generally descriptive theologically and historically, to insert a paedobaptist polemic into the volume. Certainly the issue of the proper subject of baptism is bound to come up in a volume on Zwingli, since it was Zwingli’s teaching in Zurich that lead Conrad Grabel and others to follow the text of Scripture to the doctrine of believer’s baptism.

Dealing with the controversy was inevitable, but this doctrine is handled differently than other controversies. Unlike the concern over iconogrophy, marriage of clergy, and the controversy of the Lord’s Supper, all of which Zwingli engaged in and which Boekestein covers descriptively, this volume presents a defense of Zwingli’s position and describes the Anabaptists as “rebaptizing” repeatedly, instead of presenting their belief that they were merely baptizing for the first time.

I appreciate Boekestein’s desire to demonstrate the importance of the doctrine, due to his commitments to a covenantal understanding of salvation, which leads to the idea that baptism replaces circumcision as the sign of the covenant. However, this digression into polemicism is a blemish in an otherwise excellent volume, and completely unnecessary for the project under consideration. As a Baptist, I obviously reject the notion that infant baptism is preferable to believer’s baptism, and would have preferred if this controversy had been handled in the same manner as the others.

One danger of descriptive biographies like this is the potential to devolve into hagiography. Thankfully, Boekestein does not do this. He relates in general terms the sexual sin Zwingli participated in before finally getting married. The volume also relates some of Zwingli’s failures in judgment, including his support of the persecution of the Anabaptists. These are points that much be discussed, but which do not diminish the overall contribution Zwingli made to the history of the church.

I am pleased to see that this latest volume includes a brief list of recommended reading, which was a lacuna I first noted in my review of the volume on John Chrysostom. Boekestein provides a single paragraph summary of where the interested reader should go for more on Zwingli, which makes the helpful approach of the Bitesize Biography series even better.

Conclusion

Laying aside the small digression discussed above, this is an excellent volume. This was an enjoyable little book to dive into, sitting in my overstuffed chair on an evening near the end of the semester. There is healthy balance between history, theology, and good story telling that make this entire series a treasure for the contemporary church.

I recommend this series, and this book, heartily. These books make good pleasure reading for adults, and would be useful volumes for studying church history in the upper grades of a homeschool curriculum. I look forward to many more volumes to come in the series.

Ulrich Zwingli
$11.99
By William Boekestein
Buy on Amazon

Note: A gratis copy of this volume was provided by the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.

A Theology for the Church - A Review

Only seven years after the first edition of Danny Akin’s A Theology for the Church, B & H Academic has issued a revised edition. I read the first edition when it came out  and have been interested to see what changed. 

One of the best changes about the book is the formatting. The revised edition is a larger format with more information on each page. Personally, I find this change beneficial and the newer edition feels like it has more room to breathe. For the seminarian reading thousands of pages, typeface and formatting really do make a difference.

Updates and Revisions

Four chapters saw significant changes in this revised edition. The theological method chapter was replaced by a newly written chapter by Bruce Ashford and Keith Whitfield. They commend a missional approach to theology, which tries to root the study of theology in the greater picture of God’s redemptive work through the whole of Scripture. In my opinion, this is a helpful approach, as it avoids some systemic pitfalls that come from an overly emphatic interest in some particulars of Scripture over others. It also tends to avoid the abstraction that is native to some philosophical approaches to theology.

Chad Brand’s chapter on the work of God is a helpful new chapter. Additionally, David Dockery revised his chapter on Special Revelation and John Hammett updated his chapter on the Doctrine of Humanity. These new chapters include more recent scholarship and some improvements over the previous offerings. In particular, Hammett’s chapter shows the fruit of his ongoing work toward a monograph on the Doctrine of Humanity.

Approach and Content

The chapters are staged to ask for main questions, in this order: “(1) What does the Bible say? (2) What has the church believed? (3) How does it all fit together? and (4) How does this doctrine impact the church today?” Scripture is given preeminence in the discussion, but not to the exclusion of history, system, and application. This is a healthy thing and helps make the volume a valuable introductory resource.

Each chapter has a separate author, so this is a Systematic Theology text by committee. Beginning with four constant questions helps prevent this from becoming a structural Frankenstein. Akin and the other editors did well to ensure the chapters stay true to the formula, which provides cohesion in the chapters. One real advantage of this approach is that the authors often specialized in the topics on which they wrote. It also means they were able to drill down into one doctrine and do more thorough research (or as thorough research in a shorter time) than one theologian could do in a comparable volume. Each of the chapters, then, is lively and well researched.

Analysis

There are two weaknesses of this approach. First, the theological diversity of the authors prevents it from being a truly systematic theology. In other words, each author has his own theological system that he brings to the table. While there is unity in this diversity, it is a somewhat less cohesive unity than would be possible with a single authored Systematics. The second weakness is that the writing style of each chapter is different, which it makes it harder to get into a reading groove. This can make sustained reading somewhat more laborious.

Despite these weaknesses, which are native to the approach and not problems unique to this volume, the diversity adds value. Not only, as discussed above, does it allow for more thorough and timely research, but it ensures that one individual’s system does not overrun the text. While there are distinct advantages to single authored Systematics, in the sometimes divisive world of Baptist thought, it is good to see men with different perspectives on a host of issues working together to do theology for the church.

Conclusion

Both editions of this text have been, as the title claims, A Theology for the Church. The preposition in the title is hugely important, as it is not a theology of the church or to the church, but one designed to be accessible for the church. In other words, unlike many Systematics, which are written by theologians for other theologians, Akin’s text was written with the intelligent but theologically untrained in mind. Thus it does not get caught in jargon and leave insider references unexplained. It is crafted so a person in the pew can pick it up and benefit from it. Because of that, it makes an outstanding introductory Systematics for a Bible college or seminary.

The one improvement that could be made, if there is another edition released, is to add a glossary to the back. While the indices are helpful and the chapters are written well, that would make this an even more beneficial reference volume.

If you are theologically inclined, or thinking about seminary in the future, this is a theology text I would recommend as a place to start. It is accessible, orthodox, and sufficient to make a sound beginning in the study of theology for the benefit of the church and the glory of God.

Note: A gratis copy of this book was provided by the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.

Exploring Calvin and Hobbes

When the latest Calvin and Hobbes book appeared on my front porch, there is little chance the postman recognized he was delivering a piece of my childhood in a hand addressed manila envelope. That is, however, exactly what happened.

For those of you who don’t know, Calvin and Hobbes, is an American cultural landmark. It is a comic strip that ran from 1985 until 1995 in papers across the country and around the world. Unlike many current comics, Calvin and Hobbes was always humorous and often side-splittingly hilarious.

Some comics currently in print have continued for decades, often recycling jokes, offering overly complicated plots with a multitude of extraneous characters, and losing the crispness and energy that once made them great. Thankfully Bill Watterson, the man behind Calvin and Hobbes, knew when to walk away and stopped drawing the strip after a decade.

Bill Watterson is a somewhat enigmatic artist. He did very few extended interviews while the strip was in print. Since he retired from drawing Calvin and Hobbes he has largely been out of public view. Many creative people are ready to write an autobiography to cash in on their celebrity as soon as they’ve had success, often providing tedious details of their creative processes. Watterson, on the other hand, has left his many fans largely in the dark.

Exploring Calvin and Hobbes

This new book from Andrews McMeel Publishing is a breakthrough for the hungry Calvin and Hobbes fan. Exploring Calvin and Hobbes: An Exhibition Catalogue begins with an extended interview with the man who curated a recent exhibit of Calvin and Hobbes strips at the Billy Ireland Cartoon Library & Museum. In this interview, Watterson discusses his childhood, how he became interested in cartooning, his various attempts to break into the industry, and how the production of Calvin and Hobbes took place for its decade-long run.

The second section contains ink on paper samples of some of the cartoonists and illustrators that influenced Watterson. These samples were chosen and annotated by Watterson himself. Next, there are samples of Watterson’s early efforts at editorial cartooning and submissions to syndicates that never made it to press. Finally, the collection includes many pages of samples of published cartoons from the strip’s epic run. These are original, ink on paper drawings that sometimes have whiteout, pencil marks, and even scotch tape visible. The final portion of the collections was selected by Jenny Robb, who is an associate professor at Ohio State University and a curator of the Billy Ireland Cartoon Library and Museum. They reflect her choice of some of the best and most representative strips that Watterson created.

Conclusion

To say that this book is a delight is an understatement. The pages are visually appealing, the layout creative, and the arrangement of the material tells the story well. The interview is engaging and highlights some of the information any true fan of Calvin and Hobbes should want to know. This is a pearl of great price.

Exploring Calvin and Hobbes is not the best entry point for people new to the strip. Starting here would be like trying to read the appendices to The Lord of the Rings before reading the book itself. Every true fan will read the appendices, but only after they have carefully digested the main body of work. The same applies for Watterson’s oeuvre.

However, for those that have read most or all of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoons, especially those who remember poring over the graphic delights offered by the strip during its newspaper run, this is a true gift. It is worth the time and well worth the money if you have the good fortune to be able to buy this volume.

You can see the daily strips and subscribe to have them in your social media account through the GoComics web distributor: Click Here.

Note: A gratis copy of this volume was received from the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.

Nonviolent Action - A Review

There are, generally speaking, three distinct understandings of war. The first is pacifism, which holds that war is never right and a nation is never right to go to war, even in self-defense. The second is just war, which argues war is a last resort, but that there are conditions under which war is justified. The third is crusade, which finds war is acceptable for ideological reasons regardless of other considerations.

Ronald Sider is a pacifist. Unlike earlier voices in his tradition, however, Sider has gone from proclaiming pacifism as normative for Christians alone (as earlier anabaptistic pacifists did) to claiming pacifism in a universal norm. While this book is about more than rationale for war, it is still no surprise that Sider ends up claiming nonviolent action is the expected response of all Christians in all situations. I disagree with the breadth of Sider’s conclusion, but there is much to learn from Sider’s perspective nonetheless.

Summary

The book is divided into four parts. In the first part, Sider recounts some of the instances in history of nonviolence apparently achieving its tactical goals. He includes Gandhi’s resistance to the British Empire, Martin Luther King, Jr., resistance to guerrillas in Nicaragua, and the overthrow of Marco is the Philippines. Each of these highlights a place where non-violence was the primary form of action used against a political threat, with a positive result.

Part II recounts the use of nonviolence on a grander political scale with the overthrow of the Soviet Empire in both Poland and East Germany. The third part covers more recent resistance movements, including the impact some Liberian women had through prayer and protest, the nonviolent tactics used in some portions of the Arab Spring, and the recent growth of peacemaker teams, which are equipped and trained for nonviolent interference in political situations.

Part IV moves from description to prescription as Sider calls for a renewed dedication and investment in nonviolent action, including training volunteers who are willing to die to nonviolently resist in conflict areas.

Analysis

Nonviolent Action will convince only those who are already inclined to believe that Christian Ethics really demands such methods which have never really been tried. First, the bulk of the book is designed to show places that nonviolent action has been tried in response to oppression and aggression. Second, Sider makes no defense for his premise that nonviolence is the only course of action for Christian ethics. Instead he argues that nonviolence is better than violence, so we need to be nonviolent. Even sympathetic readers that dislike violence should demand more careful support for a position.

Beyond the flaws in the argument, there is an unacknowledged limit of the scope considered in the context surrounding the nonviolent movements. In other words, Sider describes situations in which nonviolent action was taken and positive results achieved, then he asserts nonviolence was the ultimate cause of success. This may be the case, but Sider’s analysis is not sufficient to justify his conclusions. The fall of the communist regimes in East Germany and Poland may have been expedited by nonviolent resistance, but the communist capitulation may have had nearly as much to do with the underlying economic weakness of socialism causing a collapse.  Similarly, Sider does not consider that the nonviolent resistances of Gandhi and King may have been made possible because a world with a conscience and a will to fight stood by to watch the proceedings. In other words, nonviolence may have worked in some cases because there was an external threat of violence if things got out of hand.

Ronald Sider

Ronald Sider

Those criticisms are significant, but they do not undermine the overall value of the volume. Sider’s larger point is that nonviolent action should be the first effort and be more robustly invested in. Seeing the long term impact on combat veterans makes looking for alternative solutions when possible a more appealing alternative. Additionally, the recent events in Ferguson might have been more helpful and less polarizing had the protestors taken a stronger stance toward nonviolence. Sider’s expectation that nonviolence will really work in all situations is unrealistic, but his description of the success in some circumstances warrants further, more detailed evaluation.

A second strength is that Sider is advocating for action. The flaw in some pacifistic argument is the ostrich-like hope that if violence is ignored it will eventually go away. In some descriptions of the position, the pacifist approach boils down to a non-interventionist strategy, which has had significantly negative results historically. Instead, Sider recognizes the evil in the world and calls for action to end conflict through nonviolent resistance, even to the point of losing life. There is something worth consideration in Sider’s case.

Conclusion

This is basically a popular level book with some sociological research to support it. The conclusion outpaces the argumentation at several points, but this is still a thought provoking text. It has some significant weaknesses, but the strengths are sufficient to make it worth reading. Nonviolent Action is unlikely to become a classic text on the subject, but it makes a contribution to an important conversation in turbulent times.

Note: A gratis copy of this volume was provided by the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.

Engaging the Doctrine of Revelation - A Review

One of the biggest divides between Roman Catholics and Protestants has been the understanding of the relative weight of authority of the Church and Scripture. Roman Catholics have tended to have a very high view of both sources of authority with equal or nearly equal weight given to both when making doctrinal determinations. Protestants, with their famous motto sola scriptura have tended to minimize the importance of church tradition in understanding doctrine.

Many of the radical reformers (i.e., Anabaptists) and contemporary fundamentalists have clung to Scripture alone, when the reality is that suprema scriptura is probably more consistent with the intent and practice of the reformation. Scripture alone is the supreme authority in making doctrinal determinations. However, if Church tradition is entirely neglected and a foundation for doctrine is laid only on one’s own interpretation of Scripture, then Mormonism, the Campbellite doctrine of baptismal regeneration, and Charles Finney’s (near) Pelagianism is a likely result. “No creed but the Bible” is a warning sign that heresy is soon to come. This is a pattern that has been reinforced by Church History.

On the other hand, the approach Matthew Levering takes in Engaging the Doctrine of Revelation: The Mediation of the Gospel through Church and Scripture, is not correct. Levering is Roman Catholic. Therefore, when he finds a dual source for revelation in both the Church and Scripture, it is not surprising. His conclusions, like my own, were likely to go no farther than his presuppositions. However, Levering makes the case so clearly that, were I to be converted to a Roman Catholic understanding of revelation, this would be the sort of argument that I would find most convincing.

Summary

After the introduction, which surveys some of the previous academic volumes on this topic, the book is divided into eight chapters. In each of the chapters Levering explains how divine revelation is mediated by the Church through various means. Chapter One begins with revelation mediated through the outward motion of the Church as she fulfills her mission. As the Church participates in the self-denying missio Dei, she demonstrates the very nature of God to herself and the world. The second chapter focuses on revelation experienced through the Church’s liturgy, which is considered a demonstration of God’s character on public display.

Levering then shifts to treating revelation and the hierarchical priesthood, arguing that the accepted hierarchy of the Roman Catholic (and some “high church” Protestant denominations) affirms Jesus’ design for the Church, and represents divine revelation. This is, I think, the weakest of the chapters because there is no clear logical basis for this assertion. Chapter Four relates the relationship between the gospel and revelation. While Chapter One focused mostly on the Church’s collective demonstration of revelation through action, this section zooms in on the life of the individual as impacted by the gospel.

Chapter Five explains the necessity of Tradition and Levering’s belief that Church Tradition has been faithfully transmitted in much the same way Scripture has been transmitted. Levering seems to beg the question in this chapter, as can be seen in his introductory comments that “divine revelation has a specific cognitive content that must be transmitted. Tradition cannot be less than this.” This is valid in the way that Levering intends it only if you assume the premise he is trying to prove. The sixth chapter moves into the relationship between revelation and the development of doctrine, arguing that the Roman Catholic Church has, necessarily, been faithful in transmitting doctrine in the same manner that Scripture has been faithfully transmitted.

The next chapter deals with revelation and biblical inspiration. This is a more helpful chapter, though Levering’s conclusions concede too much ground. He points out the difference between modern expectations for historical and scientific accuracy, arguing for more latitude in interpreting Scripture so that contemporary hermeneutic constraints are not applied to an ancient document. At the same time, Levering’s approach allows the denial of the historicity of significant events without clear guidance as to how one would have faith in certain facts over others. Therefore, he affirms the historicity of the resurrection, which is of first importance, but the same arguments he uses to allow for denial of other historical events could be used to undermine that one. This is problematic.

Chapter Eight closes the volume exploring some of the relationship between Hellenistic philosophy and Scripture, particularly places where Levering believes such philosophical elements were imported (not merely referenced) in Scripture. His conclusion in this chapter is that “we should view Hellenistic philosophical culture as providentially providing the scriptural communication of divine revelation with some important and true insights about God.” It would be easy to overreact to this statement, because it seems to imply too strong a link between pagan philosophy and Scripture. It would be better had Levering nuanced his position to argue Hellenistic provided a helpful framework for expressing truths about God, which is more likely the case. In that sense, such philosophies shaped Scripture, but it does not seem they were a source for divine revelation, as it were.

Analysis

While I appreciate what Levering has done here I am unconvinced. His scholarship is of high quality and his summaries of many different thinkers are fair and accurate, however his case is built upon presuppositions he never adequately supports. His purpose is “to explore the missional, liturgical, and doctrinal forms of the Church’s mediation of divine revelation and to appreciate Scripture’s inspiration and truth in this context.” This is admirable, except that it assumes that the Church and the Church alone can mediate divine revelation. It also seems to imply that the Church has faithfully done so through its history. Levering provides no reason to suppose this is so and history, at least as seen from this Protestant’s perspective, seems to argue otherwise.

Additionally, in trying to argue for the consistent mediation of divine revelation through the Church as a close analogy to that mediation through Scripture, Levering does more to denigrate Scripture than to elevate the Church. He writes,

I agree with Gunton’s view that Scripture’s truthfulness does not depend on an absolute lack of any kind of error, just as I agree with his insistence that there has been no rupture in the mediation of ‘certain beliefs about God, Christ, salvation, the church and the work of the Spirit.’ (26)

 He goes on,

In my view, we need not claim for the later Church the same ‘relation to revelation’ as the apostles, but we can still argue that the Church, like the prophets and apostles, mediates divine revelation in the process of appropriating it under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Without placing the Church over revelation, the Spirit can guarantee the Church’s preservation from error in its definitive interpretations of revelation––which differs from guaranteeing the truthfulness of everything the Church says and does. This perspective enables us to give due weight to ‘the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth’ (1 Tim. 3:15). IN short, we can accept the existence of errors within the Church’s works and teachings over the centuries, so long as we do not suppose that these (reformable) errors produced a rupture, that is to say a false definitive doctrine about faith or morals in the heart of the transmission of revelation. (27)

I quote this section at length because it is assumed and not supported throughout the remainder of the argument. To my mind, Levering needed to show how this could be so. Instead, he assumes this and shows how he thinks it comes to pass. Hence the book has a great deal of explanatory power, but little chance of convincing those skeptical of this position. This, I think, is the critical weakness of the volume.

Overall, though, this volume is well written and may replace Avery Dulles’ book, Models of Revelation. Having done a fair amount of reading on this topic, it is the best explanation of a Roman Catholic understanding of the doctrine of Revelation I have encountered. I would recommend it to those seeking to meaningfully engage in inter-denominational dialogue on this topic. Levering is an excellent scholar, whose work on Augustine I have benefited from in the past. This book is a helpful addition to the discussion, but it is far from the final word.

Note: A gratis copy of this book was provided by the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.

Every Square Inch Belongs to God

How much of creation is under Christ’s lordship? Bruce Ashford answers that question in Kuyperian fashion in Every Square Inch: An Introduction to Cultural Engagement for Christians.

This small book packs a punch as Ashford translates his understanding of the Church-culture relationship into terms laypeople can understand and appreciate. Having spent several years living outside of the culture of the United States, Ashford gained insight into ways his understanding of Christianity was inappropriately tied up in his perception of American life.

 Ashford sums up his biggest point as he wraps up his discussion of culture,

Absolutely everything in life matters to God. He cared not only about the goings-on within the four walls of a congregational gathering, but also about the goings-on in other corners of society and culture. We must live Christianly not only as the Church gathered on Sunday morning for worship, but also as the Church scattered into the world in our work, leisure, and community life. We must take seriously our interactions in the arts, the sciences, the public square, and the academy.

 Every Square Inch seeks to show what the interface between Christianity and culture should look like.

 Summary

 After a brief introduction, Ashford demonstrates how views on culture vary. Just as a fish can’t describe water, so do we have difficulty understanding our own view on culture until someone points out distinctions between positions. In Chapter Two, Ashford explains his vision for a theology of culture, following the pattern of the biblical narrative through three movements: Creation, Fall, and Redemption/New Creation. These categories provide the rubric for much of Ashford’s academic work.

Dorothy L. Sayers

Dorothy L. Sayers

 In the third chapter, the topic is vocation as it relates to culture. For many, vocation means the work one does to earn wages. However, Ashford’s vision is richer and fuller, encompassing various aspects of life like family, career/work, church, etc. We are called to more than just a career, we are called to honor God in every aspect of our lives. Chapter Four outlines six case studies on engagement with culture, which helps prove Ashford’s position is valid. He uses Augustine of Hippo, Balthasar Hubmaier, Abraham Kuyper, C.S. Lewis, Dorothy L. Sayers, and Francis Schaeffer as examples. Although none of these examples are expounded thoroughly, Ashford gives sufficient information to portray them accurately and to point the readers on to do further investigation for themselves.

Chapters Five through Nine all deal with particular spheres that Christians should seek to influence for Christ. In these five chapters, Ashford discusses engagement with the Arts, Sciences, Politics and the Public Square, Economics and Wealth, and Scholarship and Education. None of these chapters is a final analysis, but they do provide a helpful introduction and a place to begin the process of discovery.

Ashford concludes the book discussion the Christian Mission, which entails living all of life under Christ’s lordship and seeking to help demonstrate his Lordship in all creation. This a grand theme that permeates Scripture and pushes the Church outside her walls and into her communities for the glory of the Lord.

Analysis

In about 130 pages of content, Ashford manages to provide a solid overview of a broad sweep of Christian thought. Besides the question of the relationship between the Law and the Gospel, there are few questions more significant to Christian theology than how Christians should relate to cultures which are, most often throughout history, not distinctly Christian. Ashford’s book is a beginner’s field guide on the topic.

 This is the sort of book I would recommend as a gift as a High School or College graduation gift. It’s the sort of thing I wish I had read earlier in life. It would also be a useful tool for pastors seeking to help expose an inquiring parishioner to meaningful cultural engagement or to help someone break out of a pattern of cultural isolationism.

 As Western culture becomes increasingly post-Christian, learning to be a Christian minority will become more and more significant. Ashford’s book will help someone make a beginning step in that direction.

A New Help for Stylish Writing

Style manuals are both bane and blessing to writers of all types. I like Strunk and White’s classic volume, The Elements of Style. I’ve also benefited from Joseph Williams’ Style and A.P. Martinich’s Philosophical Writing. However, many times I wonder why some rules exist and whether they are always helpful. 

Sometimes the rules in style manuals seem to be more focused on obtaining polite compliance with convention rather than improving communication.

With that in mind, Steven Pinker sets out on a more helpful quest in his recent book, The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century! This book is neither reference manual nor remedial writing guide. Pinker states, “Like the classic guides, it is designed for people who know how to write and want to write better,” as well as “for readers who seek no help in writing by are interested in letters and literature and curious about the ways in which the sciences of mind can illuminate how language works at its best.”

Contrary to many of those who wring their hands over the prospects of style with each passing generation, Pinker paints a more positive outlook for the English language. He notes that much of the handwringing over grammar is generated when convention has shifted and the norms of an earlier style guide violated. This is much less significant than some grammarians would allow us to believe.

Pinker recognizes convention, but instead of placing grammatical rules as the primary objective for good writing, he offers style as the summum bonum of a solid sentence. 

There are three reasons style matters. (1) It gets the message across. (2) It earns trust by demonstrating the author’s concern for accuracy and clarity. (3) It adds beauty to the world. Thus the most important question is not whether a passive voice is used, but whether the intended meaning is conveyed in a comely and precise manner.

Summary

The book is divided into five chapters. In the first chapter, Pinker reverse engineers several passages of good writing. For each he shows why they convey their message and some critical aspects that readers can appropriate. This is certainly not exhaustive, but here Pinker is training his reader to be a better reader. Chapter two outlines the way classic style, with its conventions, is helpful to communicating meaning. Far from establishing a deconstructive attitude toward language with a cry to abolish syntax, Pinker calls for doing the basic things well. Those fundamentals of style, after all, are conventions that often point toward the way communication occurs.

Pinker’s third chapter treats “the curse of knowledge,” which is the real problem authors have when they know much more about their topic and its back story than the reader. Confusion is often sown instead of clarity because of technical terms and assumed knowledge. The point of this chapter is important, since specialization in disciplines often makes interdisciplinary communication and presentations to popular audiences difficult.

Each of the first three chapters are relatively short and simple. Chapters 4, 5, and 6, however, are much larger and more cumbersome. The fourth chapter moves beyond a basic discussion of style into linguistics. Following his own advice, Pinker does well in explaining terms as he goes along. He proposes an alternative way to diagram sentences than the horizontal arrangement with slanted lines branching off to show parts of speech. Instead, according to Pinker, language functions more like a tree, branching downward from initial concepts into new realms of meaning. He makes two significant points in this discussion. First, visually representing grammatical constructions can be helpful and sometimes improve understandings. Second, the “traditional” sentence diagram is somewhat limited because it misapplies categories at times. The neat rules set up for parts of speech and there function have messy exceptions. Understanding the way the human mind processes the web of meaning in texts can help writers to create more clear prose.

In Chapter 5, Pinker examines how to apply the concept of “arcs of coherence” to ensure writing conveys its meaning. Since these ideas are best represented in the negative, this chapter spends a great deal of time unpacking examples of bad writing, showing how a lack of clarity comes from placing the pieces of language in an irregular order. His discussion here is much like that in Williams’ Style, but he presents the concepts based on cognitive linguistics instead of preference, which give more weight and import to his recommendations.

In the final chapter Pinker goes after the sacred cows of many grammarians and presents some of his own norms. Here is uses historical research to show that many “rules” were merely preferences put into style manuals and grammar books to help establish some standards. In many cases, restrictions that are necessary to assist elementary writers learn the craft were transferred as inviolable truths necessary for communication. Pinker shows how some of these are unnecessary. At other times, language has changed and so the rules should be modified, requiring a redaction to the grammatical gospel according to Strunk and White. Still, in this behemoth chapter, there are a number of clear rules Pinker sets down that writers should follow to ensure clear communication, recognizing that some of the rules are provisional and linked to contemporary English usage. Pinker concludes the volume with an encouragement to lighten up on grammar and not nitpick, the fate of the world does not depend on the use of the Oxford comma. This, perhaps, is the most significant takeaway from the book.

The Sense of Style starts punchy and drags a bit toward the end. There are a dearth of section headings and breaking places in the many pages of careful linguistic explanation. This makes the book tough slogging after the first three chapters. 

Evaluation

Pinker makes significant contributions to the style discussion. First, he presents some of the cognitive linguistics data that help make sense of prose structure. This is done in a clear manner that communicates well and is helpful for contemporary writers. Second, he affirms beginning with basic style manuals, but shows how good writing may and should move beyond. This is helpful as an academic and popular writer. Third, Pinker demonstrates good writing throughout. The prose is punchy and alive. It is interesting, even when the content is heady and a bit dry. This is a demonstration of how to make bland content flavorful without being gimmicky.

I affirm this book and recommend it for good writers that want to get better. This will not be the first manual I pull off my shelf, but I hope I am a better writer for having read it and will likely read it again in the future.

Note: I received a gratis copy of this volume from the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.

A Defense of Nuclear Power

In the decade or so that I worked in nuclear power, I never found a comprehensive apologetic for nuclear power that was published in the marketplace. All of the arguments were available piecemeal or in a more unified manner from people inside the nuclear power guild, but none from someone who didn’t have a clearly vested interest in keeping nuclear plants running.

 Michael H. Fox is an emeritus professor in the Department of Environmental and Radiological and Health Sciences at Colorado State University. Here is an individual who is outside of the commercial and nuclear power world who has access to the best science about the most concerning aspects of the risk of nuclear––radiation and cancer.

 Fox’s conclusion is that compared to imminent risk of climate changes, the risks of nuclear power are worth it. He spends nearly three hundred pages making his case by considering the basic arguments for and against nuclear power, as well as the case for and against other forms of non-fossil energy.

 The beauty of this volume is that it is written at a level that can serve as an introduction, but it also ramps quickly into the explanations for the more technologically adept. With the clear structure of each chapter, I was able to skim past those explanations that I am familiar with based on my experience as an operator and instructor. By the end of each chapter, however, the progressive development of each explanation had me reading carefully to follow his explanations. Even regarding the topics that I am less familiar with––such as the mechanism of cancer development in cells––Fox’s explanations were sufficient for me to understand the more complex aspects based on his earlier explanations.

 This volume is, therefore, both a suitable introduction and a valuable reference on the topic of nuclear power.

Summary 

The book is divided into three nearly equal parts. The first part deals with Fox’s explanation of the global warming and the contribution of Carbon Dioxide from coal and natural gas. He also explains the limitations of solar power and wind power. Fox is positive toward the benefits of renewable sources of energy. However, unlike many of the rabid proponents, he is realistic about the limitations in terms of capacity and footprint required, and he recognizes the ongoing need for baseline energy generation that fossil or nuclear will provide. Thus the future is in nuclear power, if real changes are to be made to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

 The second part is a discussion of radiation and its biological effects. This is the section that plays to Fox’s strength, as he explains some basic physics, then digs quickly in to a realistic analysis of the dangers of radiation. He doesn’t hide the real risk, but he also doesn’t overplay it. The reality, as Fox explains, is that any radiation exposure increases the risk of cancer, but the amount of additional exposure due to nuclear power is negligible compared with naturally occurring background.

 This is the most significant argument against nuclear power and Fox handles it well. However, the scientifically ignorant will continue to persist in their argument that any risk is unacceptable. For some reason this argument is powerful against nuclear power when it isn’t for other concerns. The miniscule risk increase of cancer from living near a nuclear plant, even using the conservative (i.e., inflated) estimates required by law, pales in comparison to having a speed limit over 15 MPH.

 The third part focuses on the risks of nuclear power. Fox deals with concerns about nuclear waste, which have been overblown by opponents. He deals with the real and tragic history of the three significant accidents in the history of nuclear power. He is fair about the consequences, but also notes the real learning that has taken place and points toward the attempts by anti-nuclear groups to grossly misrepresent the consequences. Then he deals with the issue of Uranium mining, also dealing with the failings in early nuclear power to deal appropriately with the risks of pollution. That damage was avoidable and is being avoided in properly conducted mining enterprises now. Finally, Fox concludes with a chapter debunking in summary the five most significant myths used to argue against nuclear power. He does this by accepting the truth in the claims and then showing why the arguments aren’t realistic or persuasive.

Conclusion

 Fox writes well and he is honest in his assessment of risks. In other words, he presents the reality of risks on all sides, without overstating his case. I would have thoroughly enjoyed this book simply because of the robust integrity Fox demonstrates, without having to agree with him. As it turns out, I agreed with the substance of Fox’s arguments, as well. He is realistic and helpful in how he argues. He is looking for solutions to problems instead of trying to manipulate emotions and control people’s lives through excessive regulation. There are points that I disagree with Fox, typically on the political implications of his arguments, but overall the case is well made and reasonable.

 If the modus operandi of environmentalists is followed, where only people that have PhD’s in climatology have a right to speak about climate change, then Fox’s  book will have amazing convincing power. Notably, the majority of anti-nuclear advocates speak from outside of the pool of people that have expertise in the area.  Unfortunately, well-reasoned arguments like that of Fox are much less likely to gain headlines than “Fukushima is leaking, we’re all going to die and the government doesn’t care.” Indeed, that is largely the nature of a recent book which includes the Union of Concerned Scientists among its authors.

 If you have questions about nuclear power, buy this book and read it. If you are a proponent of nuclear power, buy this book and cite it in your arguments. This is, hands down, the best one stop reference on the subject I have encountered.

Note: A gratis copy of this book was provided by the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.