Posted by deangonzales on February 24, 2010
Sometimes Biblical commentary seems more indebted to Sunday school flannelgraphs than to actual exegesis. This phenomenon is especially prevalent when studying the Old Testament historical narratives. Sections of Scripture which fall into the “Bible story” category are too often treated as just that- simple Bible stories. Deprived of Pauline intricacy or Davidic poeticism with which to interact, even some serious commentators tend to fall back onto a simplistic analysis that either misses or mishandles the implications of the text.
Those frustrated by this phenomenon will find Where Sin Abounds by Robert R. Gonzales Jr. to be refreshingly different. Gonzales offers an analysis of the book of Genesis, seeking especially to trace the spread of sin from the Fall through the patriarchal narratives. This brings him to a field of study which has been historically ripe for the sort of mishandling criticized above. A prime example of this shallow commentary is the tendency to minimize or excuse the sins of the patriarchs. Those episodes from Genesis which didn’t tend to make it onto the flannelgraph (the persistent “wife ruses” in Genesis 12:10-20, 20:1-18, 26:1-11; the Dinah episode in Genesis 34) often seem to receive only brief notice, and the justifications offered up to absolve the Patriarchs and their families of some truly despicable acts are often untenable to even the most generous reader. Gonzales appropriately labels this error “the plaster saint syndrome” (p. 4), and his extensive cataloging of the commentaries, papers, and monographs which tend toward this error provides ample proof of the necessity of this project.
Complicit in this exegetical whitewashing of Patriarchal sin is an artificial thematic construct imposed by most exegetes on the text; namely the division of Primeval history with sin as its major theme, and Patriarchal history with grace as its major theme. Gonzales’s purpose is therefore twofold. He seeks both to show that the spread of human sin remains a central theme throughout the entirety of Genesis, and that it is this very truth which emphasizes the depths of God’s grace. This insight into the relation of sin to grace is the same insight offered by Paul in Romans 5:8, “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” Gonzales’s main theme is therefore well summarized on page 57, wherein he writes “As surely as mankind multiplies and fills the earth, so human sin advances in stride. This sad story of human depravity in turn provides the foil against which divine justice and mercy are gloriously displayed.”
The introduction presents the rational for the study and lays out the relevant boundaries. Where Sin Abounds is not an exhaustive commentary (and therein lays my only major criticism- the sections of general commentary were quite well done, leaving this reviewer wishing that Gonzales had written an exhaustive commentary). Rather, Gonzales seeks to use the best tools of Exegetical, Systematic, Historic, and especially Biblical Theology to specifically and exhaustively interact with sin and its spread in the book of Genesis. The remaining chapters are organized into three major parts dealing with sin and the curse in the Fall narrative, the Primeval narratives, and the Patriarchal narratives.
One feature of Gonzales’s analysis which is consistently helpful throughout the book is his willingness to interact with historical critical approaches to the text while retaining a firm stance in conservative orthodoxy. Some conservative exegetes are wary of using this modern scholarship; for fear that it will undermine inerrancy and lead to a liberal view of Scripture. Gonzales is able to use the best elements of this field, all the while upholding inerrancy. For example, in pages 75-77 Gonzales deals with the identity of the “sons of Elohim” and “Giants” of Genesis 6. He presents and evaluates three popular interpretations, and then prescribes the third view: the subjects of these titles were “ancient suzerains who engage in unrestrained polygamy (or even rape!?, 6:2b), build royal harems, and exercise despotic tyranny. Their offspring… perpetuate their evil, filling the earth with corruption and violence (6:11, 13), and thus earn the epithet, “men if fame [infamy!]”… (6:4).” This conclusion is arrived at by utilizing modern scholarship of “divine-kingship ideology of the ancient Near East,” yet without sacrificing Biblical inerrancy. If Gonzales were to write a full Genesis commentary, it would be intriguing to see how he would use this method in other sections of the book, such as the Creation and Flood accounts.
An area of special value is the analysis of the Fall and its aftermath. Intriguing questions are raised, and fresh insights are offered into a familiar account. Readers may find their current understandings of the garden environment, the identity of the serpent, and Yahweh’s post-Fall theophany/inquest called into question by Gonzales’s exegesis of the text. Another section of note is chapter three, titled The Spread of Sin among Pagan Societies. Although it is not a major feature of the book, Gonzales shows in this chapter that the presence of slavery and polygamy (among other sins) in the covenant community is not proof of God condoning these activities, rather it serves to show how pervasive and systemic the spread of sin had become throughout all mankind. God no more approved of Patriarchal polygamy and slave keeping than he did of Patriarchal murder.
Gonzales is especially concerned with the sins of the Patriarchs, and these chapters make up more than half of the book. As the initial generations of God’s chosen people live and die, theirs sins not only accumulate, but at times even overshadow the sins of their pagan neighbors. Neither Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, nor any other of the classic characters emerge untainted by persistent and grievous transgression against God and His Law. What are we to think of the great bulk of sin laid at the feet of these familiar heroes of the faith? It is of course unacceptable that any Christian would respond by smugly looking down on them, unless he is prepared to claim to be without sins of his own. Even if he did make such a claim, 1 John 1:8 would tell us that he is a liar (and therefore a sinner!). While reading Where Sin Abounds may indeed cause many of the “plaster saints” to lose some of their luster, there is one hero who actually emerges all the more righteous and all the more glorious. That “character” is the LORD God Himself. The more sin and human frailty we see in men, the more our understanding of God’s grace grows and expands. There is a sense in which the greatness of a Redeemer is measured by the depravity of those he chooses to redeem. Or, as Paul put it- where sin abounded, grace abounded much more (Romans 5:20b).
Where Sin Abounds is a book which has a specific and limited goal, and it accomplishes that goal well. Sin does indeed remain a central theme in Genesis, from chapter three all the way to chapter fifty. God did not deal with Abraham and his descendents in a special way because of their lack of sin, he dealt with them in a special way in spite of their sin and because of His grace alone. We who are Abraham’s children according to Galatians 3:29 can take great comfort in this- For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8)!
Where to purchase Where Sin Abounds?
Westminster Bookstore
Amazon.com
Barnes & Noble
Wipf & Stock (the publisher)
Posted by deangonzales on February 2, 2010
Pastoral Theology is appropriately subtitled “The Pastor in the Various Duties of His Office.” In the book, Dr. Thomas Murphy carefully provides the reader a balanced mixture of theological exposition and practical exhortation. Each chapter seeks to address a unique area of focus common to those in pastoral ministry, providing instruction for how a man might faithfully and biblically serve God and His church in that particular area of ministry. Although Murphy deals with a wide spectrum of pastoral duties throughout the book, this review will restrict its focus to the chapters assigned for this course, specifically chapters two and three.
In chapter two, Dr. Murphy’s focus is “The Pastor in His Closet,” addressing the level of personal piety necessary for carrying out a faithful pastoral ministry. Murphy quickly makes it clear that the pastor’s piety is of the utmost importance, opening the chapter with suitably strong words: “Eminent piety is the indispensable qualification for the ministry of the gospel. By this is not meant simply a piety the genuineness of which is unquestionable, but a piety the degree of which is above that of ordinary believers.”
In the section that follows, the author enumerates a multitude of reasons that the pastor is to give great attention to maintaining his personal communion with God. It is clear that a pastor’s consistent, growing walk with the Lord is central to his being qualified to serve in his calling. In addition, this piety provides the spiritual power and godly example that will make his ministry effective. Murphy goes on then to outline how a pastor is to cultivate this increasing level of piety. The reviewer found this to be an immensely practical section, reminding even the most seasoned pastor of the crucial importance of seeking the Lord through His Word and prayer. Murphy bemoans the growing neglect of continual, fervent prayer on the part of pastors in his day. His words are more needed than ever in the face of modern evangelicalism in America:
The old ministers were not much better preachers than we are, and in many respects they were inferior, but there was an unction about their ministry, and success attended upon it now but seldom witnessed. And what was the cause of the difference? They prayed more than we do. If we would prevail and have power with men, we must first prevail and have power with God.
In addition to continual prayer throughout the day, it is essential that a pastor consecrate a time each day specifically for drawing near to God. Murphy suggests “that the pastor set apart the first hour of every day for uninterrupted communion with God”, providing the proper focus for the rest of the day.
Finally, if the pastor is to grow in his knowledge of the Lord he must maintain a regular practice of reading the Scriptures, mediating on them, and applying their truth to himself. Murphy concludes the chapter by providing a concise list of both hindrances and helps in developing the kind of personal piety that the pastorate requires. The author briefly reflects on temptations that are common to those in the ministry. From treating the ministry as simply a career to underestimating the forces of spiritual warfare, pastors must be on guard against these pitfalls. On the other end of the spectrum, Murphy reminds the reader of the great blessings that are afforded to those in pastoral ministry in that their livelihood provides them motivation and opportunity for pursuing godliness that are not available to most laymen.
As Murphy moves on to chapter three, his focus becomes “the pastor in the study.” If chapter two could be summarized as the need to cultivate the heart for communion with God through prayer and devotion, chapter three is dedicated to cultivating the mind for communion with God through regular, ongoing, systematic study. In making his case to the reader for the central role study is to play in the life of a pastor, the author goes as far as to argue: “God will not inspire a man without his own efforts, for the Spirit works through the diligent use of human means.” This is a much needed reminder that our diligent study to know God does not demonstrate a lack of faith in His illuminating grace, but instead avails itself to this very grace in the way in which God has commanded.
Murphy does not simply entreat the reader to devote himself to study, but provides immensely useful advice on how he might structure his time so as to give study the priority it deserves. The author even suggests times for when one might study and gives advice on the attitude and approach the reader should take during these times set aside for growth in knowledge. This down-to-earth, clear instruction was particularly helpful to the reviewer, providing a clear path forward for those ministering in a fast-paced, stressful culture which makes constant demands for one’s time and attention. For study to be effective, there must be a pre-planned system for ensuring it is a priority in the ongoing work of the minister.
Not only should there be an organized system for when and how the pastor studies, but he should also develop a strategy for what he will study. Murphy provides a suggested plan for gaining a broad knowledge of the whole counsel of God so that the pastor is prepared for whatever unique challenges and opportunities are presented to him. This includes a commitment to reading the Bible broadly and narrowly at the same time, diving deeply into particular books and sections of scripture while at the same time being able to place them in their context within the whole cannon. It requires the ongoing memorization of key passages of scripture, as well as a commitment to stay fresh with the original languages. Steadfastness in these areas will keep the pastor’s study from growing cold or dull, ensuring that he is continually equipped to carry out his ministry with competence and zeal.
Pastoral Theology is a tremendously helpful tool for pastors old and new alike. While it is written in a readily accessible style, it’s content is rich and transformative. Murphy lays a biblical foundation for each practice and then proceeds to provide clear direction on how it might be carried out. In a culture when pragmatism tends to win the day, this book stands as a resounding call to pastors to hold fast to what is most important by watching their “life and doctrine closely” (1 Timothy 4:16). Most importantly, Murphy reminds us over and over again that the key to a faithful, thriving ministry is not found in relying confidently in our talent or giftedness, but in being driven to our knees in utter dependence on God’s power and grace. It is as God’s under shepherds take this posture day after day that we live out Murphy’s prayer, found on p. 6 in the introduction to the book, that we might “contribute…to the promotion of the glory of Christ our King.”
Bill Streger
Pastor of Kaleo Church, Houston
Student of Reformed Baptist Seminary
If you’re interested, you may purchase the book at Trinity Book Service or Amazon.com for around $30.
Posted by deangonzales on November 24, 2009
In Recovering the Reformed Confession: Our Theology, Piety, and Practice, R. Scott Clark argues that modern Reformed churches are in the midst of an identity crisis. Like ships that have lost their moorings in the night and becomes aimlessly adrift at sea, they are without course, without compass, and without captain. It is not Clark’s aim, however, to point out problems without offering solutions. Clark not only details what he sees as the modern Reformed malaise, but also lays out his vision of a Reformed recovery. What he champions is a robust, historical and exhaustive return to confessiononalism. Clark’s position is that the Reformed identity is defined by the historic Confession, and by the manner in which the church and her ministers subscribe to those documents.
The first chapter is introductory, and sets the stage for us by defining the terms of the book as Clark will be using them. In using the term “Reformed,” Clark intends to speak of the theology, piety and practice laid out in the six major confessions of the continental and British churches descendent from John Calvin. In this introduction he also begins to level his charges against modern Reformed folk. The essence of his concern is that the theology, piety and practice of the modern Reformed churches include much that would be alien and even antithetical to the theology, piety and practice of their Reformed forefathers.
The remaining chapters of the book are divided into two parts. Part one, which consists of chapters two and three, details the current crisis of Reformed identity. This section of the book is where Clark presents his evidence to support the accusations leveled in his introduction. This evidence is presented as two illegitimate quests. Like David leering at the bathing Bathsheba, it is argued that these two quests have caught the eye of the Reformed churches and have caused them to turn from the good old paths, running headlong toward folly and mischief.
The first element of the crisis is the Quest for Illegitimate Religious Certainty (QIRC). Clark writes, “QIRC is the pursuit to know God in ways he has not revealed himself and to achieve epistemic and moral certainty on questions where such certainty is neither possible nor desirable” (p. 39). In other words, having failed to maintain a robust, historic confessionalism, Reformed Christianity has been truncated. Reformed folk have sought to fill this vacuum with the QIRC, searching for some new sense of security and identity. Clark gives three examples of this QIRC: the desire to make a literal six day/twenty-four hour understanding of creation a test of Reformed orthodoxy, the desire to claim O.T. theocratic law and regulation as binding in exhaustive detail, and the desire to bring new innovations to our understanding of obedience and justification under the heading of covenant moralism. Clark dismisses each of these desires as either misguided and ill informed (creation debates), or contrary to the confession and dangerous (theonomy and covenant moralism). In each case, it is his view that preoccupation with these issues shows how untethered Reformed folk have become from their confession. Clark believes that the confession settles these matters for us, if we would but return to it as our standard and rule.
Clark titles the second half of the crisis, and his third chapter, the Quest for Illegitimate Religious Experience (QIRE). He now turns his critique to the spirit of revivalism as displayed in the Great Awakening and especially as personified by Jonathan Edwards and his modern celebrators. To Clark, revival in any form is incompatible with reformation. Revival seeks the immediate and extraordinary movement of God in the hearts of men, often divorced from the church and her ordinances, and as such is hopelessly infected with pietism. Reformation, conversely, makes due use of ordinary means as prescribed in Scripture and administered weekly in the church, and in these things finds satisfaction and rest.
To Clark, a high view of revival (and the direct, relational communion with God it entails) necessitates a low view of the church (especially of her confession, and of God’s appointed means of grace). This dichotomy runs throughout the book, and is evident in comments like the one found on page 330: “perhaps attendance to the second [worship] service is actually a better indicator of spiritual maturity than are the calluses on our knees and the wear on our Bibles.” Some of Clark’s views will be interacted with critically below, but a word must be said at this point. Clark’s dichotomy between reformation and revival (and thus between the means of grace and private piety) is indicative of the major flaw in his analysis. Why must attendance to the second worship service be set against private prayer and Bible reading? Why must a high view of the means of grace necessitate a low view of private piety? God’s Word, which has the final say in such matters, has a high view of both.
Having diagnosed the crisis, Clark spends the rest of his pages detailing what a healthy recovery should look like. The remaining five chapters form Part Two of the book, titled “The Recovery.” Chapters four and five are essentially a plea for honesty about what the confession says, what the confession means, and what the confession mandates for us in theology, piety, and practice. Chapter six caps this discussion by highlighting the benefits and joys of a robust and full submission to the Reformed confession. The last two chapters of the book offer a very detailed survey of the exegesis, history, and confessional tradition associated with the Lord’s Day and Christian worship. Clark’s vision for rejuvenated Reformed worship revolves around a strict adherence to the Regulative Principle of Worship, a central view of the means of grace, and the reinstitution of a second Lord’s Day worship service.
It is clear that R. Scott Clark is a man of considerable academic ability who has a deep passion for the health and faithfulness of the church. He brings thorough research and a keen mind to nearly all of the topics with which he interacts. There is much value in working through his arguments and considering his conclusions. This does not mean, however, that his conclusions should be agreed with or supported. In fact, he reaches many conclusions that are profoundly misguided and some even dangerous to the theology, piety, and practice of the church.
Before those concerns are addressed, the book’s positive contributions should be acknowledged. Clark effectively calls evangelicals searching for religion with greater substance to take up the banner of being Reformed. His invitation to resist Rome, Constantinople, and the Emergent Village in favor of Geneva is timely and stirring. Reformed folk must strive for the sort of visibility and credibility that will make this a viable option for disillusioned evangelicals.
Clark is correct, as well, when he argues for the inevitability and general benefits of being confessional. Under his relentless logic, the maxim “no creed but Scripture” is exposed as a fallacy. Furthermore, this book contains considerable amounts of very sound and helpful exegetical and historical research. Of special note is the logical and convincing exegesis of John 4:23-24, and the excellent survey of the Christian Sabbath from Biblical, confessional, and historical perspectives.
However, as previously noted, these positive elements are found in the midst of some troubling material. There are issues that Clark deals with which deserve a response beyond the scope of this review. Many of these issues, such as his extreme application of the Regulative Principle of Worship and his strict dichotomy between objective and subjective religious experiences are urgent in that they bear directly on church practice. In addition to the criticism of his views on the QIRE offered above, only one area of concern will be highlighted here for criticism.
Even as he criticizes the QIRC and the QIRE, there is a quest which Clark himself undertakes in Recovering the Reformed Confession. We can call this the Quest for Illegitimate Religious Traditionalism (QIRT). The QIRT is the desire to settle all questions of theology, piety and practice by total submission to the historic Reformed confession, as interpreted by the animus imponentis. This is an illegitimate quest and ought not be pursued for three reasons.
First, it is an illegitimate quest because it muddles the theological method. Confessions, like any work that systematizes the truths of Scripture, are always to be derived from sound exegesis. It is exegesis, with subordinate input from historical theology, which must always be the foundation of the church’s theology.
Unfortunately, this does not seem to be the operative method for R. Scott Clark. It seems that for Clark, the confession is authoritative. It is the confession, interpreted by history, which drives exegesis. The reader begins to get a flavor of this muddled method when Clark remarks, “Not every appeal to Scripture is Reformed or reforming. Any appeal to Scripture that fundamentally overturns what it is to be Reformed cannot itself be a Reformed appeal to Scripture” (p. 25). If this were the only such statement in the book, it might be forgiven as slightly misguided zeal for one’s heritage, but this is not an isolated sentiment.
A more direct example of this muddled method occurs when Clark sets out to build exegetical evidence for his strict interpretation of the Regulative Principle of Worship. Clark argues that the Regulative Principle requires instruments and uninspired songs to be abandoned; while at the same time he insists on a mandatory second worship service. On pages 337-338, he surveys texts from Genesis, Exodus, Ezra, 1 Chronicles, and the Psalms as they relate to these issues. His reading of these texts is clearly shaped and submitted to confessional and historical concerns. He is able in just a few sentences to dismiss any exegetical content that does not support his agenda as merely typological, while insisting that any exegetical material that does support his agenda has abiding validity. The following passage is typical: “Psalm 141:2 is attributed to King David, and he speaks of ‘lifting up’ his hands ‘as the evening sacrifice.’ Of course, these passages were given during the church’s typological period so they apply to us only figuratively. Christ is our sacrifice, our priest, and our temple. Nevertheless, they do give evidence that the ‘morning and evening’ pattern of creation has some continuing place in our re-creation” (pp. 337-338). In other words, any material from the Old Testament that does not support the agenda (clear use of instruments, composing new songs) is typological and any material that does support the agenda (morning and evening pattern of worship) establishes a compelling pattern. Clark’s exegesis is the servant of his systematic and historical theology, thus confusing the proper theological method.
Second, this QIRT is illegitimate because Clark crosses the line into a dangerous confessionalism. “Dangerous” is a strong word, but it is appropriate when the living Word of God is made to share its throne as our supreme authority with a man-made document. “Is not my word like a fire?” says the LORD, “and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?” Confessions are valuable, and they may even be precious to us. But they are not like fire. They are not a discerner of the heart. They are not God-breathed.
The opponents of the use of a confession of faith usually accuse its proponents of confessionalism, which is the tendency to give a confession of faith equal or higher authority than the Scriptures. This is generally a false charge, but in the case of R. Scott Clark, it seems sadly appropriate.
The reader begins to get uncomfortable early on, when Clark remarks that “…sola scriptura [does] not teach that the Bible means what one says it does, but that the Scriptures, being God’s Word, form the church, and the church in subjection to the Scriptures is able to interpret them well enough to decide controversies”(pp. 25-6). While Clark’s zeal for ecclesiastical authority may make some uncomfortable, this passage could be taken as nothing more than a proper condemnation of the widespread distortion of sola scriptura into solo scriptura. If Clark simply set out to critique the “Tradition 0” zeitgeist, and to build a better understanding of “Tradition I,” there would no reason for alarm. Although this healthy return to Tradition 1 is Clark’s stated goal, he seems to have overshot that mark. A statement such as the one made brazenly and with only weak qualification on page 178, that “the authority of the confession is…tantamount to that of Scripture, assuming that a given confession is biblical,” leaves no doubt as to whether R. Scott Clark has crossed a line that ought not to be crossed.
This quote is taken from the context of Clark’s interaction with the writings of R. B. Kuiper. Writing in 1926, Kuiper objected to the practice of the ecclesiastical courts in appealing to the confession as authoritative, without feeling the need to check the confession against Scripture. It was Kuiper’s concern that this practice might give the impression that the church had adopted a dangerous confessionalism, wherein the confession was nearly “tantamount” to Scripture. Clark’s reply, by way of the animus imponentis, is that the confession is indeed tantamount to Scripture in authority.
Clark can make this assertion with a straight face (one assumes) because he qualifies it by saying that the confession must, of course, be Biblical (quia subscription). Even ignoring the monstrous problem of getting any two Christians to agree that a given confession is utterly Biblical in the sort of exhaustive detail required to make such a view tenable, equating the authority of the confession with that of the Bible evidences a profound misunderstanding of why the Bible is authoritative. The Bible is not authoritative simply because it is true and accurate in the sort of strict forensic way that can be reproduced in a confession, but because it is the living Word of God Almighty. The Word’s authority is derived from its God breathed, self-attesting character. A man can and should faithfully confess the truths he learns from God’s Word, but he cannot replicate its authority. The authority of the confession is authoritative only in so far (quatenus subscription) as it states what can be clearly shown in the Scriptures. Thus, even if it is completely Biblical, the authority of the confession is never tantamount to that of God’s Word. The cleanest mirror in all the world is still just a reflection; it is never on equal footing with reality.
Third, the QIRT is illegitimate because it simply cannot be consistently maintained. Clark paints a romantic picture of quia subscription and heady conformity to the animus imponentis which simply does not match reality. Consistency cannot even be maintained within the pages of Recovering the Reformed Confession. On page 318 he addresses the diversity in how the Reformed churches have understood the Sabbath. If there is diversity on an issue as central to our theology, piety, and practice as the Sabbath, can we really speak of the Reformed Confession in the singular tense? Exactly which understanding of the Sabbath is to be recovered? Clark is aware of this inconsistency and seeks to alleviate it by appealing to the substantive agreement on the main points of the Sabbath in the Reformed confession. This is a fine tactic for one holding to quatenus subscription, but Clark has already overplayed his hand at this point.
Clark has painted himself into a corner by way of his own strident confessionalism. It is not consistent to state that “…the Scriptures, being God’s Word, form the church, and the church in subjection to the Scriptures is able to interpret them well enough to decide controversies” (p. 26), yet on page 270 suggest that the disagreements between the a capella Psalter crowd and the more mainstream Reformed worshipers be settled by a compromise. Again, this may be a fine and equatable way for a church to settle a dispute, but why does Clark get to break his own rules at this point?
These three concerns make up the Quest for Illegitimate Religious Traditionalism. Clark’s zeal in these matters is beyond question, and his earnest pursuit of what he believes would be a more healthy and faithful Church is admirable. However, his muddled theological approach, his dangerous confessionalism, and his inconsistency expose this quest as illegitimate. It should be repeated again that this quest is not isolated. Clark pushes too far in several directions, though none of them as directly inappropriate as in this QIRT. Even with these major concerns, this is a book which ought to be read by any who attach the adjective Reformed to their denominational identity. Iron sharpens iron, and R. Scott Clark has issued a challenge to seriously consider the foundations of our theology, piety and practice. May all God’s people be sharper for it, and may they faithfully confess the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ until He gathers them home.
Nicolas Alford, Student
Reformed Baptist Seminary
