October 16, 2010

Halloween & the Gospel

By David D. Flowers

Is it OK for followers of Christ to celebrate Halloween? Should Christians participate in festivities that seem to do nothing more than glorify evil? Most importantly, can the Gospel win out on this day? How should we respond to this time of year? That’s what I want to address.

Halloween is largely based off old superstitions—right down to the carving of pumpkins. As much as all of that fascinates me, I will spare you the history of Halloween and simply address the issue as it comes to us today. My desire is that this would help us creatively navigate our own culture.

The Options

I have noticed that most Christians feel they have two or three options when it comes to how they handle Halloween:

1.  Embrace all of Halloween (jack-o-lanterns, witches, trick-or-treating, haunted houses, decorate with eerie lights and skeletons, satanic rituals, etc.)  It’s all good fun. Just don’t hurt anyone.

2.  Create alternatives to compete with the culture through “fall festivals” (i.e. Christian carnivals) and “Christian” haunted houses (e.g. “Hell House”).

3.  Reject everything and stay home. Pretend you’re not home when little children come to your door for candy. Try to put it all out of your mind and ignore it, or sit in your living room upset about it.

Let’s briefly think about each of these options with serious consideration of what the Gospel of Jesus means to us. The way you view the Gospel and the person of Christ will steer you in one direction or the other.

Think About It

Option #1 – Can believers embrace all of Halloween? Would the Jesus who casted out devils, dress up like one? Would Jesus pretend to be a devil to scare people? Would Jesus sport symbols of witchcraft for fun?  The early church witnessed the conversion of witches and sorcerers (Acts 19:18-20). I don’t want to be a party pooper, but the Scriptures do not allow for a “fun” Harry Potter version of witchcraft and sorcery (Deut. 18:10; Gal. 5:19-21; Rev. 21:8).  It seems to me that believers could not possibly embrace all aspects of Halloween—not if you’re taking serious the life of Jesus and his Gospel.

Option #2 – What is the motivation to create “alternatives” to rival what is evil? Was Jesus proclaiming an “alternative” message? If churches want to design a carnival for children to enjoy, fine. I see nothing wrong with that. But if it’s done out of anger, fear, and the belief that Christians shouldn’t carve pumpkins and trick-or-treat, I think it sends the wrong message. It gets a little silly when we do “alternative” events for the sole purpose of sticking it to the world. “Christian” haunted houses like “Hell House” just goes to show how confused we are about the Gospel of Jesus. Fear isn’t of the Lord.

Option #3 – Did Jesus have the attitude of a spiritual elitist? Did he retreat into the hills with the Essenes and communicate the attitude that he wanted nothing to do with the rest of the world? We learn a great deal by taking notice of the religious traditions Jesus did reject—like those of the Pharisees, Sadducees, Zealots, and Essenes. Jesus was not afraid of being accused of being a “sinner” or being caught hanging out with them. He was not motivated by fear, anger, or self-righteousness. His zeal led him to be light in the darkest of places.  I can’t see Jesus choosing option #3. So where does that leave us?

Is There Another Option?

Is there a way to participate in Halloween while upholding good over evil? I think so. In our American culture, I think there is another option that allows the Gospel to creatively and intentionally engage Halloween.

Truthfully, I think Halloween can be one of the most memorable childhood experiences! I think it can be real healthy fun.

It is a great opportunity to teach children about good and evil.

I don’t think that means we should make our children dress up like Bible characters (nothing wrong with that of course!), but it would be inconsistent to encourage or to allow them to glorify evil with their actions, costumes, behavior, etc. Surely we all know this to be true.

Evil can be appealing. That’s a great lesson children and adults need to learn. The real appeal of evil is only in the costume, of course. It’s worth remembering that the devil masquerades around as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14).

There are many lessons we can teach our children and be soberly reminded of ourselves. Primarily, there is a cosmic battle of good and evil going on every day we live in this present age. That which is unseen is made visible on Halloween. It’s a perfect time to be reminded that we battle not against flesh and blood (Eph. 6:12).

I’ve been married for almost 16 years. My wife and I have two boys: a 5 year old and a one year old. We have settled it in our hearts that we want to use the culture to teach our children biblical truths, instead of sheltering them from it entirely when and where good can and should triumph. Sooner or later our children must live in the world on their own. Teach them to confront evil, not run from it.

Working with students as long as we have, we are convinced of this much: Engagement with the culture is inevitable, and frankly, we’ve been called to do it. Halloween shouldn’t be any different than the rest of the year. Every day belongs to God. I seriously question the effectiveness of “alternative” festivities and the creation of “Christian” options in any area of living. And retreating from the world is unthinkable. The Gospel engages the darkness.

Some parents worry that they are going along with the glorification of evil if they let their kids participate. I personally don’t agree with this thinking. I believe we should be more concerned that we are not teaching our children that there is one night of the year (or any night of the year) when evil gets the upper hand. What kind of Gospel is that? It’s not the hopeful message of Christ.

It seems to me that fear is not what you want to teach children, but I do acknowledge that parents may choose to do whatever based off their convictions. I assume each Christian home will do what they think is best for their children. You have this right and responsibility. I would never base a person’s commitment to Christ on this issue.

After working with students for 15 years and observing their parents, I’d say that the only “bad” parents are the ones who are not intentional in leading their children to know and love Christ. Those who are intentional about serving Christ and leading their children in the way of Jesus are good parents in my book. And I think there are many acceptable ways of doing that.

Conclusion—The Gospel of Jesus

If a person has reduced the Gospel to having their sins forgiven and sees us escaping earth for a spiritual existence on the other side of the cosmos, I submit that this will greatly influence that person’s response to this and many other issues. I have actually noticed that this view propagates an attitude of fear, anger, and self-righteousness. Escapism is their gospel.

However, if the Gospel is about heaven coming to earth, that Jesus has defeated evil and plans to transform this world—starting with us in the here and now—then this most certainly comes into play when responding to Halloween.

Understanding the greatness of the Gospel message (i.e. heaven coming to this earth) will free us up to see ourselves as agents of new creation. God is transforming this world now and the fullness of his coming is just around the corner. This worldview changes everything!

We have been called to declare that Christ is Lord of the day and night. We are called to live in this world where “the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining” (1 Jn 2:8).

So, how do you understand the Gospel? How you answer this question will shape your living. I believe that it will make a difference in your response to the culture where it glorifies evil and refuses to acknowledge Christ as Lord.

“You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.” Jesus, Matt. 5:14-16

D.D. Flowers, 2010.

[Updated & Revised – October 2017]

24 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Christianity, Culture, Theology

September 25, 2010

What Saint Paul Really Said

By David D. Flowers

What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997) by N.T. Wright

A Critical Book Review

N.T. Wright is one of the leading voices within New Testament scholarship today. Wright taught New Testament studies for twenty years at Cambridge, McGill, and Oxford Universities. He has recently been appointed a Chair in New Testament and Early Christianity at St. Andrews, Scotland.

Wright, a prolific author, has written over thirty books, including both scholarly and popular works. His major academic series Christian Origins and the Question of God is making no small contribution to New Testament studies.  There are six proposed volumes in this series. The fourth volume is anticipated as being Wright’s magnum opus on Paul.

Along the way in constructing his magisterial work on Paul, Wright has written several books that reflect his long admiration and journey into the mind of the Apostle, and he does so with a commitment and concern for interpreting Paul within his first-century context.

In his book, What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?, the preeminent British scholar gives a devastating but humble critique of the view that Paul is the force at work behind Christianity.[1]

Wright sets out to prove that there is certainly not a parallelism with Jesus and Paul, but there is an “appropriate continuity” between the two (181).

Wright begins his presentation with a brief review of Pauline scholarship in the twentieth century. Although Wright doesn’t agree with all of his views, he especially finds Albert Schweitzer’s four questions concerning Pauline studies a “benchmark for subsequent study” (14). The book is arranged according to the questions that deal with history, theology, exegesis, and application.

Rooting the historical ‘Saul of Tarsus’ within the radical wing of Shammaite Pharisaism, Wright sets the stage for some sort of dramatic encounter that converts Saul the persecutor into Paul the preacher. Wright is concerned to show that Paul never leaves his “home base of Jewish monotheism” (63).

This may be an appropriate summation of how Wright’s so-called “new perspective” is sustained throughout this book and his life’s work on Paul. It is what Wright has in mind as he interprets Paul’s use of “righteousness” and “justification” within his letters, particularly the epistle to the Romans.

There will no doubt be some scholars, pastors, and teachers that will find it most offensive that Wright admonishes his readers to “repent of the ways we have mishandled” Paul down through the years. He declares that it is time to “study Paul in his own terms” (23).

Wright definitely does not mince with words. His passion for his subject and his conviction born out of his in-depth study of Paul is commendable. For the most part, Wright’s exegetical honesty and his refreshing humility come through in his writing and potentially make allowances for his bold rhetoric.

However, it could be said that he rushes to conclude that he is the only scholar concerned with interpreting Paul within Second-Temple Judaism. Wright accuses Wayne Meeks and Hans-Dieter Betz as being secretive about an agenda that has Paul deriving his central concepts from the pagan world (77).

The reader could hear Wright say that any sort of interaction with first-century paganism in Paul’s thinking is headed for trouble.  Yet, a few pages later, Wright allows for Paul to adopt pagan concepts to express gospel truth (81). A little clarity might resolve what appears to be a touch of contradiction.

The real firestorm of current debate seems to be between those who resonate with Wright’s interpretations and those who have committed themselves to the sixteenth century reformed view of Paul and his theology. The center of the controversy, and what many reformed scholars take issue with, is articulated in chapters 6 and 7 in this book.

Wright says the Reformers were reading their personal problems with the medieval church into Paul—instead of reading Paul through the lens of Second-Temple Judaism. This has those committed to reformed theology gagging at Wright’s Pauline-pudding.

Wright redefines Paul’s use of “righteousness” and “justification.” Wright has been most outspoken that “righteousness” in Paul has little to nothing to do with “moral quality” and everything to do with God’s covenant faithfulness and the “status” of those who stand before the Maker of that covenant in the heavenly law court.

Wright says it has always been about faithfulness to the covenant, not about imputing moral goodness. Faithfulness to the law and covenant was never about achieving salvation through ethical living—it was about identifying with God’s divine program. The cosmic judge does not give his goodness to the accused, he pronounces the status of “righteous” (i.e. covenant faithfulness) to those whom he has set free.

Wright doesn’t deny some sort of imputation of moral goodness, just that Paul isn’t thinking of it with his employment of the biblical law court metaphor.

Paul’s use of “justification” follows in this covenantal reading to mark off those who are already included in the covenant of God. Wright says that “justification” is not how someone becomes a Christian, it is a declaration that they have already become a Christian (125). He says that there is so much to be said on what Paul meant by justification that it could easily occupy another book.[2]

It is rather difficult to criticize Wright’s re-interpretations of Paul when it appears to be consistent with recent scholarship on Paul within Second-Temple Judaism.

For Wright, a covenantal reading of Paul accentuates his entire message as it brings all elements of his thought together. Wright convincingly presents Paul as the zealous Pharisee who met Jesus on the road to Damascus, interpreted Jesus within Second-Temple Judaism, and still has a message for the world today.

In the last two chapters of the book, Wright attempts to make application to the church today. It is at this point where his conclusions are less than satisfying. He draws clear lines of distinctions between the factions within pagan life and the agape community that is to be found within the church (147).

Wright even points out the problems between Christian denominations and the task that lay ahead as believers bridge denominational divides (158), but he doesn’t seem willing to remove those glaring divisions called ‘denominations’ within the Body of Christ.

It begs the question: “Is there a respected scholar that is willing to consider that celebrating our differences by congregating with those like us does not allow for true ecumenism?”

Finally, Wright rightfully states that it is a “matter of urgency” (157) for the gospel to confront the realm of worldly politics.  Wright says part of the mission of the church is to proclaim Christ’s rule over Caesar. Tom, what does that look like in the age of presidents and prime ministers that have yet to deify themselves?

There is a diametric difference in proclaiming the gospel to politics and proclaiming the gospel through politics. Maybe Christ’s claims over us and his world speak the loudest when Caesar is truly seen as a parody not to be reckoned with in every age.

Overall, this book is so far the most readable of Wright’s books on Paul. If you have been wondering what all the fuss is about with Wright and his controversial views of the historical Paul of Tarsus who lived and died within Second-Temple Judaism, I highly recommend reading What Saint Paul Really Said.

The serious student of Paul should consider the claims that N.T. Wright makes in this wonderful treatment of the biblical text.

Is Paul of Tarsus the founder of Christianity? Did Paul invent Christianity? Wright says that Jesus went to his death clearly believing he was the culmination of Israel’s history. The resurrection vindicates Jesus and substantiates Christ’s claims.

Paul meets the resurrected Jesus while on his zealous way to opposing those who are unfaithful to the covenant. After meeting the resurrected Jesus, Paul believes his vocation is to announce the gospel to the whole world. Paul’s gospel is that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised Messiah and Lord of the cosmos!

Paul believes that in Jesus… the new age has already begun.

[1] A.N. Wilson, Paul: The Mind of the Apostle, New York: Norton, 1997.

[2] N.T. Wright, Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision, Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2009.

4 Comments   |  tags: , , , , | posted in Christianity, Religion & Spirituality, Reviews, Theology

July 19, 2010

Ephesians: The Eternal Purpose of God

By David D. Flowers

Ephesians: The Eternal Purpose of God—–A Brief Overview of The Epistle to the Ephesians

The Epistle to the Ephesians has been one of the most influential and earliest attested documents in the history of the Christian church.[1] Despite the letter’s early attestation, it is not among the indisputable writings of Paul.

Authorship & Recipients

Within the last few hundred years there have been a growing number of scholars that contend that the letter was written pseudonymously from a later follower of Paul because of its striking similarity to Colossians and its dissimilarity to other letters of the apostle.

Andrew T. Lincoln is convinced that the terminology used in Ephesians is unlike anything in the Pauline corpus.  He also argues that the theology contained in the epistle is far more developed than in previous letters.  Lincoln finds the letter impersonal “having no intimate connection” with the intended audience.[2]

Is it possible that readers have been a bit hasty in their decision to credit Ephesians to a later admirer of Paul?  Can the student or scholar be so quick to overlook the claims the letter makes concerning authorship (1:1; 3:1)?

H.J. Cadbury asked: “Which is more likely—that an imitator of Paul in the first century composed a writing ninety or ninety-five per cent in accordance with Paul’s style or that Paul himself wrote a letter diverging five or ten per cent from his usual style?”[3] D.A. Carson mentions that the letter was viewed as Pauline by numerous apostolic fathers and it was not even questioned until the modern era.

Furthermore, writing under the name of someone else was not a wide practice within the early Christian church.[4] A closer examination of the epistle within the Pauline corpus, and an allowance for theological expansion upon earlier material, may enable the reader to accept Paul as the author and learn from his revelation.

The next matter of debate comes in the later part of the first verse:  “to the saints who are [in Ephesus] and the faithful in Christ Jesus.” Bruce Metzger writes that the words “in Ephesus” are absent from several important manuscripts.

Clinton Arnold believes there is still “strong manuscript support” for keeping the original reading.[5] It could be that the phrase “in Ephesus” was omitted in later manuscripts in order to universalize the letter and pass its message along to other churches in need.  This is a reasonable explanation.

The absence of “in Ephesus” has led many scholars to conclude that the letter was definitely intended to be circulated.[6] Scholars have weighed in on this problem and offered several other solutions. Conservative scholarship believes that the author intended the letter to be circulated among the churches in the city of Ephesus, a city with a first-century population of one-quarter million, and possibly in the entire west coast region of Asia Minor.[7]

Historical Setting and Purpose

The ancient city of Ephesus was first excavated in 1863.[8] The partially reconstructed ruins are some of the largest and most visited of all ancient cities. Today the city is located a few miles inland from the Aegean Sea along the west coast of Turkey.

In the first-century, Ephesus was a metropolitan port city with a thriving harbor. Like the city of Corinth, Ephesus, the capital of the Roman province of Asia, was filled with temples and theaters. The temple to Artemis, the Greek god of fertility and hunting, was four times the size of the Parthenon in Athens. In Acts 19, Paul’s preaching conflicted with the religious practices that existed in Ephesus.[9]

Many scholars struggle to see any specific Sitz im Leben (setting in life) addressed in Ephesus. In fact, the epistle does not reflect the standard Pauline address directed to saints in a particular location. Ben Witherington writes: “Ephesians is a circular homily included in a document… it does not deal with any particular problems… this document should not be compared to letters, as it really is not one.”[10]

It is likewise acknowledged by other scholars that the epistle is styled much differently from the rest of the Pauline corpus, however, there is not sufficient evidence to remove the writing from the realm of letter (e.g. 4:17-6:9).

What can be known? What is the occasion and purpose for the epistle?

In the letter we learn that Paul is writing from prison (3:1; 4:1). Scholars insist that this places the epistle during the time of his house arrest in Rome toward the end of his life in the early 60’s. This would certainly allow for a theological development—a grand view of the eternal purpose—set forth in the letter.

Paul preached among the Ephesians and remained with them for some time (Acts 19:8, 10; 20:31). His love and affection for them can be seen in his farewell address (Acts 20:17-38). Scholars that doubt Pauline authorship find the letter lacking in emotion and thus affirming their suspicions. However, the argument for a letter lacking in emotion is contestable (1:15-16; 3:14-21).

Overview of Epistle

A simple reading of the epistle reveals that Paul is addressing a predominantly Gentile audience (2:11-22). It could be that the church has grown significantly since Paul’s last visit, for there seems to be some distance between them (3:1-6). His message to his audience is that the “mystery” hidden in Christ has now been disclosed to all saints, to bring all things in the cosmos under the headship of Christ Jesus (1:9-10), and to form one new humanity from Jew and Gentile (2:14-16; 3:5-6). Flowing from the glorious revelation of the “eternal purpose” of God in Christ (3:7-13), comes a “unity of the Spirit” in the building up of believers through the church—the dwelling of God (4:1-16). For the wisdom of God to be made known, the saints are called to live intentionally (i.e. put off/put on) as “children of the light” (4:17-5:21). This life “in Christ” permeates all relationships (5:22-6:9). Therefore, the saints must “stand firm” and be on guard against spiritual evil that works against God’s eternal purpose in Christ (6:10-18).

It has been said that Paul presents a cosmic Christ, a realized eschatology, and an advanced ecclesiology in this magnificent Epistle to the Ephesians.[11] As Paul pours out his divine revelation after years of service as Christ’s bond-slave, listen and be moved to join the triumphant Lord and his bride whom he has seated in the heavenlies.

The following overview of Ephesians may help you to capture the flow of the epistle before or as you read it:

1:1-2 Greetings—salutation to saints in Ephesus

1:3-3:21 God’s Eternal Purpose in Christ

1:3-14   Prayer of praise and thanksgiving—inclusion into promised Holy Spirit and guaranteed inheritance.

1:15-23   Continued prayer of thanksgiving and supplication—full knowledge of the hope and glorious riches in Christ.

2:1-10   God’s mercy and kindness in Christ—created to walk in goodness as a proper response to grace.

2:11-19   Remembrance of exclusion from promise—now included in Christ as a new creation.

2:19-23   New creation is set in motion by Christ, apostles, and prophets; manifested through the dwelling of God together with the saints.

3:1-13   Paul called to Gentiles—mystery of Christ made known through apostles and prophets—Gentiles are included in the mystery and the promise.

3:14-21   Paul’s ecumenical prayer for the experience of Christ’s riches with encouragement to discover love over knowledge (gnosis).

4:1-6:20  Living in Christ

4:1-16   Knowing the eternal purpose calls for living worthy of it—unity in the Spirit—obtain a full knowledge of Christ through the building up of the body—corporately grow up into Christ.

4:17-6:9  Living intentionally in Christ

4:17-5:2   put off former conduct of the flesh—put on Christ.

5:3-14      call to purity—be on guard.

5:15-6:9    live not as unwise, but as the wise—relationships.

6:10-20    Stand firm against spiritual warfare—put on the armor of God.

6:21-24  Final Comments—Tychicus sent to encourage saints

Conclusion–Applying the Text

If you have followed this brief overview of Ephesians, I think you should be able to see the aged apostle Paul used up for Christ in Rome.  The gospel has reached the heart of the empire, and the story that began ages ago has been fulfilled in Jesus.  Paul had previously described an astounding revelation of the cosmic Christ in his Letter to the Colossians.  He was so fond and familiar with his language to those saints—even having hidden it away in his heart—that it spills over into his Epistle to the Ephesians.

As Paul grew older, his vision of Christ matured.  This seasoned revelation is evident in his presentation of the “mystery” of God in Christ, which is the central message to the saints in Ephesus and all those who have believed on the Lord Jesus (Eph. 1:9-12).

The eternal purpose of God in Christ is that through the church God’s glorious grace might be known in all the earth; that all things would be gathered up into Christ.

The lack of historical and cultural issues in this epistle makes application fairly easy.  For the message is transferred to the reader with little to stumble over.

The God who existed before time, placed man in the Garden, traveling through the wilderness to Canaan, and sent the Son up a hill to Calvary, has been vindicated by the resurrection of Jesus.  He has revealed his eternal purpose in Christ.

Out of Adam… God brought forth Eve.  Out of Jesus… he called out a Bride.  The Trinitarian God, who is heavenly community, looks for a dwelling in his children upon the earth.  By the power of his Spirit and the fullness of his grace we are included in his plan.

Are you participating in the eternal purpose of God in Christ?

The overwhelming glory of God invites us to join him in the building of a spiritual house.

[1] Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 1-2.

[2] Andrew T. Lincoln, Ephesians. Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word Books, 1990), lix-lxi.

[3] H.J. Cadbury, “The Dilemma of Ephesians,” NTS 5 (1958-59): 101.

[4] D.A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 480.

[5] Clinton E. Arnold, “Letter to the Ephesians.” The IVP Dictionary of the New Testament. ed. Daniel G. Reid (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 324.

[6] Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2d ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994), 532.

[7] Clinton E. Arnold, “Introducing Ephesians: Establishing Believers In Christ.” SWJT 39, no. 1 (September 1, 1996): 9.

[8] Hoehner, Ephesians, 79.

[9] Michael J. Gorman, Apostle of the Crucified Lord: A Theological Introduction to Paul and His Letters (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2004), 499-500.

[10] Ben Witherington III, The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on the Captivity Epistles (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2007), 217-218.  [Witherington says: “The profound theological and ethical reflections found in Ephesians would have sounded more like  a philosophical oration to Gentile ears.” p. 219]

[11] Charles B. Cousar, The Letters of Paul (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996), 174-175.

7 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Christianity, Church, Theology

June 1, 2010

Jesus Manifesto

By David D. Flowers

Moving Forward in Exploration of Christ

A Book Review of “Jesus Manifesto: Restoring the Supremacy and Sovereignty of Jesus Christ” by Leonard Sweet & Frank Viola

I can hear it now, “Do we really need another book about Jesus?” Apparently so, considering that as we entered the twenty-first century only 4 books out of the top 100 were about Jesus (Christian Book Association).

In Jesus Manifesto, Leonard Sweet and Frank Viola combine their voices to trumpet a resounding reminder that we never “graduate beyond Christ” in the Christian faith. And Christ isn’t found only in the center of things, but along the “corners and on the edges” as well.

Sweet and Viola believe we have created a “narcissistic” and a “best-seller” Christianity which is “self-centeredness wrapped up as ‘spirituality,’ which has become the latest fashion accessory for the person who has everything” (p. 100).

There is indeed much to be disheartened with in Christianity today. Yet, there is a growing number of evangelicals that are discovering that pop-culture Christianity is leaving them high and dry. “Whether they realize it or not,” says Sweet and Viola, “people are looking for a fresh alternative—a third way” (p. xiii).

As I look across the present post-modern landscape of Christianity, I see several camps of believers pushing their way through the crowd to stand on the rooftop of evangelicalism with their megaphone in hand (i.e. books, magazines, blogs, etc.) proclaiming the “real” gospel.

There are several current groups and “movements” that are all trying to highlight the neglected sides of historic Christianity. We have the reformed “defenders of orthodoxy,” the emerging brand, the missional-minded, and the organic house church folk, just to name a few.

I do believe that most of the people in these groups truly love the Lord and his church, but many of them are in danger of becoming preoccupied with some thing else other than Christ.

Sweet and Viola believe there are three features present in every spiritual awakening in the Christian church: (1) a rediscovery of the “living Word,” or the Scriptures and its authority; (2) a rediscovery of the living Christ and His supremacy; and (3) a rediscovery of the living Spirit and the Spirit’s gifts and power to manifest Christ in the context of that culture.  (p. xvii)

We’re living in some hot times economically, politically, and socially. Christians are engaging in an exchange of ideas (not without some name-calling and finger-pointing). It’s evident that even those who have been the most outspoken for the “supremacy of Christ” and right “doctrine” have succumbed to rhetorically burning people at the stake in the name of Jesus.

Where is Christ in word and deed? Sweet and Viola write, “Whatever you are occupied with comes out of your mouth. It’s what you talk about most of the time” (p.19). And we should not just be hearers of Jesus only, but doers of Him.

Is “mission” our center?  Is it community? Some say it’s preaching and others… ministry. If we say that Christ is central and supreme, what does that mean concerning justice? What does His universe look like when we are first seeking Christ and His Kingdom?

When Christ is not central and supreme in our lives, everything about life shifts out of orbit and moves out of kilter. So for Christians, our first task is to know Jesus. And out of that knowing, we will come to love Him, adore Him, proclaim Him, and manifest Him. (p. 2)

That’s why this book has been written. It addresses the present challenges we face as many “things” compete for the centrality and supremacy of the person Jesus Christ. We are called to be “living epistles” or “Jesus Manifestos” in our world. It’s about being true to Christianity.

So what is Christianity? It is Christ. Nothing more. Nothing less. Christianity is not an ideology or a philosophy. Neither is it a new type of morality, social ethic, or worldview. Christianity is the ‘good news’ that beauty, truth, and goodness are found in a person. And true humanity and community are founded on and experienced by connection to that person. (p. xvi)

Finally, Jesus Manifesto has been purposely written in an “ancient devotional tone” of writing. In the spirit of Watchman Nee, Jeanne Guyon, Andrew Murray, and T. Austin-Sparks, this book is a fresh call to the post-modern church: “Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith…” (Heb. 12:2).

And let us move forward in exploration of Christ Jesus our Lord.

“So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live in him, rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness.”   Paul, Colossians 2:6,7

Can we, as the Christian church, agree upon the person of Christ? “Receiving Christ also means receiving all who belong to Him” (p. 147).

Will you sign the Jesus Manifesto?

Others who have signed

“One more sign of a Christianity that is beginning to look like Jesus again. Our great challenge over the past few decades has not been one of right believing but of right living. Viola and Sweet create a harmony here that invites you to give the world a Christianity worth believing in … after all they will know we are Christians, not by our bumper stickers and t-shirts — but by our love.” 
Shane Claiborne—author, activist, and recovering sinner    http://www.simpleway.org

“From beginning to end, authentic Christianity is all about Jesus and, ultimately, nothing but Jesus. No one has proclaimed this more clearly and persuasively than Viola and Sweet. Jesus Manifesto is an important and powerful prophetic call for the Martha-like Church to get back to doing “the one thing that is needful.” 
Gregory A. Boyd—Senior Pastor, Woodland Hills Church, Maplewood, MN; Author, Present Perfect, The Myth of a Christian Nation, and The Jesus Legend.

“This is a really exhilarating reintroduction to a Jesus who seems sometimes to have become a stranger to the Church; a passionate and joyful celebration of God with us, which cuts right through churchy quarrelling and brings us back to wonder, love and praise – and the urgent desire to make Him known to all.”  Rowan Williams—Archbishop of Canterbury

“I look for books that call us to love Jesus and make His name more widely known. In Jesus Manifesto, Sweet and Viola ask us to step away out of the “Youniverse” (their word) of narcissistic religion and away from the pop-culture Jesus who is just a nice man. Throughout the book, they exalt Jesus as the divine Savior and ask the church to do the same. I believe this book will spark a renewed love for Christ by pointing us to the deep mystery of His person. You will be motivated to love and serve more deeply as your life is focused on Jesus the Messiah.”
 Ed Stetzer—President of LifeWay Research http://www.edstetzer.com

Read more endorsements at:  www.thejesusmanifesto.org

Buy Jesus Manifesto: Restoring the Supremacy & Sovereignty of Jesus Christ (Thomas Nelson Publishing, 2010) on discount today (6/1/10) at: www.amazon.com

And please take a few seconds to give this review a helpful vote at amazon.  Thanks!

Len Sweet & Frank Viola

Leonard Sweet occupies the Chair of Evangelism at Drew University in New Jersey and contributes weekly to sermons.com and a podcast, “Napkin Scribbles.” He has authored numerous articles, sermons, and forty books.   www.LeonardSweet.com

Frank Viola is a best-selling author, international conference speaker, and a personal friend. His books include Finding Organic Church, Reimagining Church, The Untold Story of the New Testament Church, and the best-selling From Eternity to Here.   www.FrankViola.com

6 Comments   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Christianity, Christology, Church, Deeper Christian Life, Religion & Spirituality, Reviews