I recently received a new copy of Volume One of the Zondervan Old Testament Illustrated Background Commentary, the following is my review of that book.

When I first heard that Zondervan was planning to release a new illustrated background commentary, I thought to myself, “great, another run-of-the-mill resource that will be pumped out because it will have some cool photos and graphics.” Wow! Was I ever wrong. I must wholeheartedly recommend this product for the following three reasons.

First, the quality of the binding, pages, and overall design of the commentary is quite good. I was pleasantly surprised to see such a well produced product arrive at my door. The cover is solid and has sophisticated yet eye-catching graphics and images. The pages of the book are filled with helpful graphics, charts, illustrations and photographs. To say that the “illustrated” portion of this text is MORE than a gimmick is an understatement. More than any other illustrated background text I have seen, these illustrations prove helpful and unobtrusive.

Second, the scholars assembled for this volume are all experts in Bible background studies and are exceptional in their understanding of the Biblical text in each of their respective sections.  Further, Dr. John Walton acts as editor of this series ensuring a high level of academic value. Dr. Walton is second to none in the world of background studies pertaining especially to the book of Genesis but also to the Ancient Near East in general. The commentary provided throughout is thorough, helpful, and yet concise enough to be of value to the lay reader. This will prove valuable to pastors, professors, and Sunday school teachers alike!

Third, the price of this book makes it a must have. At just $49.99 a volume, one would be hard pressed to find a better or more useful background commentary for such a reasonable price. Zondervan is offering the entire commentary set in a nicely packaged boxed collection.

For more information please go to www.zondervan.com

I hope to post further reviews of additional volumes in this series in the near future!

Calvinism, a Resurgence of Heresy or a Resurgence of Truth?

© 2009 K. Dayton Hartman II

In recent years, a controversial, theological, resurgence has taken place in the evangelical world. This resurgence is the rapid and recent growth of those who identify themselves as Calvinists. In my own evangelical faith community, the Southern Baptist Convention, Calvinism has taken center stage in recent years.  In fact, one-third of those graduating from SBC seminaries identify themselves as five-point Calvinists.  Sadly, this reclaiming of Reformation theology has ignited a theological war of words.  Some of those proclaiming human autonomy in salvation have compared Calvinists to Muslims.  Likewise, those affirming the sovereignty of God in salvific matters frequently accuse free-will proponents of falling prey to the wiles of Roman Catholicism. So, what can be done to bring about peace? How can both sides of the debate over Calvinism come to a truce? I firmly believe that by dispelling the gross mischaracterizations of Calvinism is one step that can be taken to ease the ever growing tensions. Therefore, I will attempt to address some of the key texts at the center of the debate and offer a fair appraisal of what many self-professed Calvinists actually believe.

John 6

At the heart of the Calvinist system lays the belief that it is God who saves, not because of mans response to God, but rather in spite of mans rejection of God. One key passage regarding this belief is John 6:37-40, “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” Notice that everyone who the Father gives the Son will come. This is not a possibility or probability but rather a guarantee. Further, Christ Himself makes a guarantee, that everyone given unto Him will be saved. They shall not be lost but will remain in Christ (See John 15). It is also clear that Christ does the work and will of the Father. The will of the Father is that Christ keeps and does not lose any of those given to Him (which He won’t) but that Christ will raise them up. This is a promise of resurrection. Further, it is the Father’s will that everyone who believes on Christ take part in the resurrection. However, please note that ONLY those given to the Son by the Father are promised resurrection.

This fact finds further confirmation in John 6:44 when Christ says, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.” The reality relayed here is that ONLY those given to the Son by the Father will be saved and the Father ONLY draws those He intends to save. If this “drawing” were general or universal the text states that salvation would be general or universal, but it isn’t. Its limited to those who the Father gives to the Son, which all evangelicals will readily admit will be a select group.

Romans 9

The previous passage inevitably causes one to think of the words of Paul in Romans 9. In Romans 9, Paul writes regarding God’s sovereignty in the act of election. Romans 9:11-13 says, “Though they (Jacob and Esau) were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad–in order that God’s purpose for election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—she was told, ‘The older shall serve the younger.’ As it is written, ‘Jacob have I loved, but Esau I hated.’” Notice in this passage that the election of Jacob and Esau occurred not because of any foreknowledge of their actions or choices but rather the electing took place regardless of their actions. Further, this was NOT a single event of election but the text states that this was simply part of God’s continuing purpose for election. Some attempt to circumvent this fact by stating that Paul is referring to the election of Israel. However, the context of Romans chapters 8-11 would negate such a notion. This entire block of Scripture deals with the position of each individual member of the human race and their relationship to God’s plan of salvation. The context demands such an in interpretation. To make the leap from Paul clearly addressing individuals to people groups requires a theological presupposition that defies the context and flow of the text.

II Peter 3

An oft-repeated text in the free-will versus divine sovereignty debate is II Peter 3:9, the Apostle Peter wrote “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.” Those in support of human autonomy believe this text demonstrates that God would not elect some to salvation while leaving others in their sins, instead, we are all equally called and drawn to Christ (a belief which is incompatible with John 6). However, the context of II Peter entirely refutes this notion. The greeting at the opening of the letter states that Peter is specifically writing to Christians: “Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.” (II Peter 1:1-3).  Further, the third chapter of II Peter begins with a reiteration that the subject of this letter is believers: “This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved.” Then again in verse eight Peter wrote, “But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” Verse eight is without question directed toward the subject of the letter, believers awaiting the return of Christ. In the next verse Peter clarifies for his Christian readers that Christ has not forgotten them but is waiting to return until all those whom are to believe do in fact come to belief. Notice verse nine again, “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.” The “you” in the text can only (under all known rules of grammar) refer to the elect. Therefore, following all known rules of grammar (and remaining in accord with John 6), the “all” in the text must be and can only be the elect of God.  Rather than affirming anything resembling human autonomy or universalism in salvation, II Peter 3:9 (when taken in context) affirms the divine sovereignty in salvific matters.

Theology and Philosophy

Another consideration one must make when proposing human autonomy is the nature of God. All orthodox Christians affirm that God is free to do as He pleases. All affirm that He knows the future. Some attempt resolve the issue of human responsibility and divine sovereignty by proposing that God foreknew the choice humans would freely make and then based up the future choices of humans, He predestined those who He knew would accept Him to salvation. One issue could be raised theologically (along with Scripture) to object to such a proposition. In order for God to predestine people based upon their own future choices, God must be, to some degree, “contingent” because His plans are dictated by the actions of a finite being. This means that the unmovable God is acted upon by something outside of Himself. This creates an entire series of issues that erode Christian orthodoxy and the understanding of God that has been held among Christians for nearly two thousand years. If God’s act of predestining is contingent upon the actions of others then one must believe that an infinite being is moved by a finite being. Such a belief removes from God’s nature the attribute of necessity. Once necessity has been removed God becomes contingent. Once God becomes contingent, theism collapses.

The Message Behind the Movie by Doug Beaumont (Moody Publishers, 2009).

http://www.messagebehindthemovie.com/

http://www.dougbeaumont.org/

Allow me to preface my review of Doug Beaumont’s latest title, The Message Behind the Movie, by first providing some background as to my own evolution of perspectives regarding Christians and Hollywood. I grew up in a vehemently separatist, fundamentalist branch of Christianity. As I grew in age and interests I would often times find my desire to see the latest summer blockbuster running in opposition to the wishes of and teaching and warnings of my pastors. The mantra “Nothing good can come from Hollywood” reverberated throughout their sermons as they would wax eloquent on the evils of motion pictures.  So, needless to say, this anti-cinema conditioning caused a great deal of confusion in my life and especially my newfound life in ministry. I would be told that if a Christian attends a film he/she has disqualified themselves from spiritual leadership and service to the church.

As I struggled with these issues I began to see examples throughout the Scriptures in which Paul quoted from popular media (I realize I am using this term anachronistically) in his presentation of the Gospel to a pagan world.  As I wrestled with the methodology of Paul in contrast to the teaching I was so indoctrinated with I stumbled across www.DougBeaumont.org.  There I found that Doug’s blog provided clear and coherent answers to the claim that “Nothing good can come from Hollywood.” Rather than abandoning the popular media, Doug provided a Biblical framework in which a believer could evaluate a film, digest the good elements and use various points in communicating the Gospel. Finding someone so balanced on the Scriptures and with such a positive outlook on a Christian’s ability to be “in the world” but not “of the world” was quite refreshing and encouraging. That was a number of years ago now and yet I remember even then thinking, “This guy REALLY needs to write a book about this stuff!” Well, finally Doug has and I Am excited to be one of the reviewers selected by Moody Publishers to give my take on this excellent text.

First, Doug opens The Message Behind the Movie by spending six chapters (ACT ONE) discussing how to understand various elements of movies. I particularly enjoyed the chapter entitled “Can Anything Good Come Out of Hollywood.” During these first six chapters Doug lays a solid framework around the nature of storytelling through the media of film. This is quite significant because, as odd as it sounds, many people simply do not understand how to watch a film. Viewers routinely sit back and watch the images stream by as one would watch a car passing them on the interstate. There is no introspection, there is no evaluation, and certainly there is no worldview consideration taking place. The Message Behind the Movie appeals for Christians to first understand how to watch a film before laying down principles regarding how to use and discuss a film.

The Second section of the book (ACT TWO) delves deeper into how one goes about evaluating various elements of the story being presented in a given film. In his chapter on “Discussing Movies Religiously” Doug points out something that I believe to be a key element in movie evaluation. Doug notes that while Hollywood as a whole disdains the notion that human beings are “sinners” there is still a steady stream of films that resonate the theme of salvation (pg. 86). Such themes provide an excellent spring board upon which one can engage non-believers in a dialogue regarding the Biblical theme of salvation. Doug then moves his focus to how one discusses a film both philosophically and theologically. He does an excellent job pointing out that practically all films make assertions regarding the nature of truth, reality, and the existence of God. It would serve the Christian well to know how to understand and to interact with these assertions. As the educational culture in our nation becomes less text driven and more technology driven it becomes imperative that Christians understand how to use the assertions being made in popular film to engage in a dialogue regarding one’s worldview.

Doug provides a fitting conclusion to his book (ACT THREE) by reminding believers of the Biblical imperative to avoid evil and to honor God in all that we do. However, in his classic fashion, Doug attempts to correct popular misunderstandings of texts such as I Thessalonians 5:22. He points out that many Christians take this to mean that anything that appears to have evil elements must be avoided, however, the text actually encourages the believer to abstain from every form of genuine evil, not things that simply appear evil on the surface.  In his concluding remarks Doug leaves his readers with a sobering reminder, one I believe provides a fitting conclusion regarding any debate about what a believer should or should not consume from popular media. The text he quotes from Scripture that most resonates with me was I Thessalonians 5:21 “examine everything carefully and hold fast to that which is good.”

In conclusion, I am very grateful for The Message Behind the Movie. The nascent form of this book found in Doug’s blog impacted my life at a critical point and I believe this text will impact many believers struggling with the same issues I had to face. Now, as an instructor of Apologetics and Theology I plan to use this text as an example of how one can critically engage the culture and remain relevant without losing one’s faith.  This is a MUST read!

I have recently been reading on a wide array of issues. I am prepping some lectures for an apologetics course to be taught in the late spring/early summer. Because this research has led me to read even more books in recent weeks than I normally do, I thought I would provide brief reviews for some of these texts. If time allows I plan to start providing these brief reviews on a routine basis.

They will be on a 1-5 scale with 5 being a must read.

- “The God Who is Triune” by Allan Coppedge: An interesting work by a devout social Trinitarian. He provides a thorough overview of the major biblical texts that underpin the doctrine of the Trinity. He provides a solid philosophical discussion of the Trinity and its doctrinal development throughout church history. However, the final few chapters of the book fade out of theology, history, and philosophy and become more and more sermonic in tone. While I would agree with many of his statements in these sermonic episodes I must say they do little to further his goal of exploring the Trinity. 

Summary: A solid Trinitarian text.
Rating: 3.5

- “The Trinity in a Pluralistic Age”Edited by Kevin Vanhoozer: It is fitting that Vanhoozer is the general editor (as well as a contributor to this collection of essays) because he is no stranger to theological controversy.  Vanhoozer has amassed a collection of essays that span the wide spectrum of modern Trinitarian interests.  From the necessity of the Trinity to the reformulations of the doctrine proposed by modern theologians, this book provides quite a great deal of  thought provoking material.

Summary: A must read for anyone interested in the current trends of Trinitarian theology.
Rating: 4.0

- “The Jesus Legend” by Paul Eddy & Gregory Boyd: This new addition to the ever growing evangelical  arsenal against revisionist Jesus studies is a welcome addition indeed. The authors lay out an ever building case for the historical reliability of the New Testament text and its claims regarding Jesus Christ. This book is a must read.

Summary: A must have for any and every apologist.
Rating: 5.0

It is has been a while since I have been able to post an update; for that I am sorry!

The holiday season has been a busy one. My workload increased and I have been travelling a great deal.

I have a number of irons in the fire and after I have completed those tasks I hope to resume posting regularly.

As of late I have been in discussions with bethinking.org about writing articles for their ministry. Also, I will begin a new article for Answering-Islam.org in the near future that continues my defense of the Trinity. Further, I will be updating and revising some articles already posted for Answering-Islam.org.

It would appear that my wife and I are on the verge of a rather large relocation. It would provide us with new ministry opporutnities as well as educational possibilites.

After we have made a decision regarding relocation, and after I have completed my promised articles, things on the jude3project will resume as normal.

Please keep reading, there is a great deal of material on the site that many readers have yet to review.

I will return soon!

I recently had another article published by Answering Islam regarding the Trinity. I present a case for Trinitarian conviction in the early church. The material would also be valuable in discussing the Trinity with Mormons and JW’s.

The artcile can be accessed here: The Historical Case for the Trinity

PURE LAND BUDDHISM AFTER LIFE TEACHING

The following essay will first familiarize the reader with the religious context into which Muhammad was born. It will be demonstrated that this context undoubtedly influenced His conception of Allah and the Trinity.

Arabia Prior to Islam

Prior to the introduction of Islam, the people of the Arabian Peninsula were largely nomadic and principally polytheistic. In the midst of this polytheism, however, there existed a monotheistic people know as the Hanifs.[1] Extant for nearly a century prior to the birth of Muhammad, the Hanifs viewed themselves as a neo-Abrahamic movement entirely independent of Judaism.[2] Despite their presence in the Arabian Peninsula, there is little evidence that this group had a direct influence upon Muhammad or his family.

A great deal of difficulty exists in concretely describing the indigenous religions of the Arab people during Muhammad‘s time. While it is known that the Arabs indulged in a mixture of polytheism and animism, their exact level of adherence to these deities is uncertain.[3] According to Winfried Corduan, “The first thing that greeted a pilgrim entering Mecca was a statue of God‘s (Allah‘s) three sensuous-appearing daughters (al-Lat, al-Manat and al-Uzza).”[4] This statue conveyed the idea of a supreme god (Allah), who initiated in sexual activity with lower beings, thereby siring three goddess daughters.[5] Furthermore, the central shrine in Mecca, the Ka‟bah, was ruled by the supreme god, Allah; however, it also contained a number of idols dedicated to various other deities.[6] While some during this period recognized Allah as the supreme god, there was an overall tendency to view other deities as intercessory beings.[7] This fact is implied by the Qur‘an in Surah 29:61-65. The text states that, while many acknowledge Allah as supreme in times of need, they would ultimately return to their polytheism during times of peace.[8] Thus, in the face of paganism a supreme deity, Allah, was recognized.[9]

During this period, there were also various Jewish, Zoroastrian, and heretical Christian settlements within Arabia.[10] The Christian settlements of the period were mostly comprised of Nestorians and Monophysites.[11] The Nestorians taught that “…two persons as well as two natures in [dwelled within] Christ.”[12] This would mean that “…when Christ sacrificed His life on the cross, it was not the person who is also divine, the Son of God, who died for us.”[13] The Monophysites, on the other hand, denied that Christ possessed a fully human and a fully divine nature. This belief went against the orthodox teaching that the two natures existed alongside one another, undiminished and unmixed. According to some sources, these settlements held positions of influence, albeit to a small degree, over a large area of the Arabian Peninsula. As a result, their theological positions were known throughout the region.[14] The existence of such groups most likely had significant impact upon the development of Islamic theology, as well as Muhammad‘s understanding of Christianity.[15]

In addition to these Christian settlements, there were a number of Christian slaves living on the Arabian Peninsula.[16] According to those who opposed Muhammad‘s monotheism, the prophet received his information concerning Allah from these Christian slaves; however, this assertion cannot be confirmed or denied.[17] Regardless, The Islamic tradition does preserve accounts, not inherently improbable, concerning several Meccan Arabs who possessed knowledge of Jewish and Christian scriptures, and these figures are generally accepted by Muslim opinion as having had close relations with Muhammad and even affected his spiritual development.[18] Whether directly influenced by “Christian” heretics or by Muslims who received secondhand information pertaining to the biblical text, it is clear that Muhammad‘s conception was likely influenced by those acquainted with heretical Christian doctrines.

The Prophet a member of the Quraish tribe, Muhammad was born near Mecca in A.D. 570. After being orphaned as a child, Muhammad‘s merchant uncle, Abu Talib, became the young boy‘s guardian. By the time Muhammad began his career as a prophet in A.D. 610, he had spent nearly fifteen years in the caravan trade. It is quite probable that during his travels, Muhammad encountered various monotheistic movements, including the aforementioned heretical schools of Christianity. In his biography of Muhammad‘s life, Ibn Ishaq records an encounter between the prophet and a Monophysite monk in Syria.[19] In addition, Ibn Ishaq proposes that Muhammad was briefly under the influence of an Ethiopian Christian while living in Mecca.[20] According to Douglas Pratt, some within these heretical groups even espoused the notion that Christ was the physical offspring of God.[21] These various influences likely contributed to Muhammad‘s concept of what Christians called the Trinity.

Muhammad was very dissatisfied with the polytheistic beliefs of his day. Never partaking of the pagan activities of Mecca, it would seem as if the deeply religious Muhammad developed one guiding conviction: a single transcendent God must exist. As a result, the prophet believed that his calling was to restore mankind to the original monotheism of Scripture, a monotheism he understood to be transgressed by many, including Jews and Christians.[22] According to F.E. Peters: “…what distinguished Muhammad from his Meccan contemporaries was (1) his belief in the reality of the Resurrection and the Judgment in both flesh and spirit, and (2) his unswerving conviction that the ‘High God’ was not only unique but absolute; that the other gods, goddesses, jinn and demons were subject and subservient to Him…”[23] Through his reflection on the oneness of Allah, and through the reported recitations he received from the angel Gabriel, Muhammad formulated his theology about the divine being. This eventually led to the development of Islam‘s central doctrine, tawhid. The question now becomes did Muhammad attempt to correct the “pagan” notion of a trinity of the actual, orthodox doctrine of the Trinity? This will be addressed in a future post!