Jim Purves, The Triune God and the Charismatic Movement: A Critical Appraisal of Trinitarian Theology and Charismatic Experience from a Scottish Perspective, Paternoster Theological Monographs (Cumbria, UK: Paternoster, 2004), 242 pages, ISBN 9781597527538.

Jim Purves has provided an important contribution not only to Charismatic studies but also to the specific field of Trinitarian theology. A word of caution, however, is in order: this work is not easily accessible to non-specialists. It is a publication of the author’s doctoral dissertation in systematic theology, and thus contains highly technical language and intricate distinctions among already complicated concepts in the history of theological reflection on the Trinity. In addition to this, Purves’ use of a degree of Scottish idiomatic language and coined conceptual phrases make for slow going if one wants to follow the argument carefully without missing anything. The difficulty is, however, relieved to an extent by Purves’ inclusion of a glossary of the more difficult terms (especially those that are original with him) in the back of the book.

Purves’ thesis is that Scottish theology, nurtured almost exclusively by the Reformed tradition, affords little Trinitarian or pneumatological (doctrine of the Holy Spirit) grounding to account for the direct experience of the Spirit had by participants in the Scottish Charismatic renewal. Reformed thought has primarily taken a functional view of the Holy Spirit, focusing on what the Holy Spirit does rather than who the Spirit is. Purves sees this as a fateful and false distinction based on the assumption of the Western view of the Spirit as the bond between the Father and the Son, which has notoriously depersonalized the Spirit in most of Western Christianity since the time of Augustine.

Purves spends the first chapter acquainting the reader with the history of the Charismatic renewal in the Scottish context, noting key figures and events, including tensions with the established Reformed churches. Chapter Two is devoted to an historical overview of the foundations of Trinitarian thought among the Patristics (Church Fathers). Purves notes that the earliest church theologians were primarily concerned with discussing the Trinity in terms of how the Triune God accomplishes our salvation. Historically, the Trinity as perceived in God’s relationship to the world in salvation history is designated the “economic Trinity.” Due to a spate of heresies that led to the great Christological conflicts of the fourth century, orthodox theologians came to focus much more on the “immanent Trinity,” how God exists within God’s own eternal triune self, apart from any considerations of God’s relationship to creation. In the West, with Augustine’s development of the Spirit as the bond of love between the Father and the Son, theology in general, and Trinitarian thought in particular, became much more rationalistic, as the Spirit’s role was seen as informing us of Christ, who in turn revealed the Father. The Spirit, while acknowledged as a Person, was nonetheless almost always discussed in non-personal, functional terms and the Spirit’s mission was virtually always subsumed under that of the Son.

Martin Erdmann, The Millennial Controversy in the Early Church (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2005), 228 pages.

Martin Erdmann’s text is a worthy contribution to the study of biblical and patristic eschatology (doctrine of the Last Things). With an educational background in both church history and New Testament, Erdmann utilizes all of his academic skills in investigating the reasons for and consequences of the shift from premillennialism to amillennialism in the patristic era of the church. His thesis is that this shift, however understandable, had negative consequences and flew in the face of apostolic tradition and proper exegesis of Scripture.

Erdmann begins by assessing the primary source of Christian millenarianism, namely Jewish apocalyptic. He discusses various works and condenses their purpose and message, and their collective bearing and influence upon the biblical book of Revelation. This introduces the second chapter, which begins with a survey of millennial options: postmillennialism, which sees the earthly millennium as preceding the return of Christ; amillennialism, which spiritualizes the millennium and usually designates it as the current time of the church; and premillennialism, which sees the earthly millennium as commencing immediately after the return of Christ to earth. Premillennialism is further sub-divided into historic premillennialism, reflective of the traditional premillennial perspective, and dispensational premillennialism, the more recent (1830’s AD) addition to premillennial thought containing the distinctive doctrine of the secret pretribulational rapture of the church as the first of a two-part second advent of Christ and the sharp exegetical division between national Israel and the church. The second part of this chapter is an exegesis of Revelation 20:1-10, the flagship text of millennialism of any kind. Erdmann argues fairly persuasively for a premillennial position, without designating either the historical or dispensational variety.

Chapter three offers an overview of the hermeneutical principles employed by the early church fathers, those Christian leaders immediately following the apostles. The fathers read the Scriptures through a Christological lens, seeing all of Scripture as pointing to Christ and therefore interpreted rightly only through him. They held to the necessity of the work of the Holy Spirit in interpretation, and they recognized both the literal interpretation and deeper spiritual meanings of the sacred texts, with the latter being reined in from speculation by the former.

Erdmann spends the next several chapters contrasting two different hermeneutical schools in the early church, those of Antioch and Alexandria. The Antiochene school preferred a literal interpretation of Scripture wherever possible while the Alexandrian school opted for the allegorical approach. Erdmann argues for the superiority of the literal approach and shows how the Antiochene school was rigorously premillennial. He cites Justin Martyr and the author of the Epistle of Barnabas, among others, as demonstrating this “Asiatic” premillennial tradition, and defends the view that this is the school of thought which stems from the Apostle John, the traditional author of Revelation. It was the Alexandrians, Erdmann argues, under the leadership of Clement and especially Origen, which allegorized Scripture and thus advocated an amillennial perspective over against the premillennialism of the early church. It was Augustine, Erdmann rightly contends, that solidified this amillennial perspective in the church and, respected teacher that he was, sounded the death knell for premillennial thought in the church for over a thousand years.

Stanley N. Gundry and James Stamoolis, eds., Three Views on Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism, Counterpoints (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), 294 pages.

This book is a fine addition to Zondervan’s Counterpoint series, in which controversial theological issues are examined from a variety of stances by reputable scholars and/or denominational leaders. This particular book offers a variety of perspectives on the relationship between the evangelical movement and the oldest Christian community, the Eastern Orthodox Church. Respected evangelical scholar J. I. Packer writes the forward and five pastors and theologians, some evangelical and some Orthodox, offer answers to the question of whether Eastern Orthodoxy and evangelicalism are compatible. All five present their answers (yes, no and maybe) and the other four are given the opportunity to respond to the presenter. The presenting writer is then allowed to respond to the respondents.

Bradley Nassif, an Orthodox theologian with an extensive background in evangelical higher education and ecumenical activity offers the sole affirmative response for the compatibility of these two Christian traditions. Nassif demonstrates not only a thorough grasp of his own tradition but an impressive comprehension and positive assessment of evangelicalism. His primary thesis is that Orthodoxy and evangelicalism are compatible because Orthodox theology is evangelical, whether or not Orthodox adherents and church leadership care to identify it as such. Nassif uses David Bebbington’s fourfold definition of evangelicalism to show Orthodox and evangelical compatibility. First, both groups emphasize “crucicentrism” (centrality of the life, death and resurrection of Christ), “biblicism” (commitment to the inspiration and authority of Scripture), “conversionism” (personal commitment of one’s life to Christ) and “activism” (witness and holy living). Nassif grants that both Orthodoxy and evangelicalism do not often emphasize specific doctrinal elements contained in these basic agreements to the satisfaction of each group, but the agreement is nonetheless there in principle.

Michael Horton, a Reformed evangelical theologian, writes next, denying the compatibility of the two traditions. Horton begins by appreciating the areas of commonality between the two, such as a high view of Scripture and conservative Christology (doctrine of Christ’s person and work). He finds problems, however, with the high view of church tradition espoused by Orthodoxy in relation to Scripture, finding there the same problem he perceives with the Roman Catholic view. Even more fundamentally, however, Horton alleges that Orthodoxy does not possess an adequate view on issues of sin, free will and salvation, particularly with regard to justification and sanctification. He contends that, due to Orthodoxy’s stress on sanctification, it promotes a salvation by works that fundamentally denies justification by faith alone. He claims that the evangelical view denies any role of the human in salvation and that this, in contrast to the Orthodox view, is the true Gospel message.

Howard M. Ervin, Healing: Sign of the Kingdom (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2002), 116 pages.

This is a wonderful little book on the significance of healing in the earthly ministry of Jesus. Howard Ervin rightly notes that the focal point of Jesus’ ministry was the Kingdom of God that is coming and was already made present in him. Healing, according to Ervin, played a pivotal role in emphasizing the reality of the Kingdom. “His preaching announced the advent of the kingdom. His teaching described the nature of the Kingdom. His healing miracles made present the powers of the Kingdom” (p. 1). The miracles of physical healing served to authenticate Jesus and demonstrate the reality he brought.

As the book’s subtitle indicates, healing is a sign of the substance of the message, the message of the Kingdom. The reciprocal relationship between the message and the sign is the crucial point Ervin makes throughout his work. The sign demonstrates the message, the message authenticates the sign. Ervin says that healing in the church, the community centered around faith in the Christ, is no longer properly called a sign. Rather, it is a gift given by the Spirit of God to the faithful. These manifestations of the Spirit’s gift remain a sign to those outside the faith in Christ required by the new covenant.

Ervin makes clear that the gifts of healing, as well as other manifestations of the Spirit’s action in and through the church, are not the proprietary gifts of the spiritually arrogant. No one’s spirituality is to be judged according to quantity or quality of spiritual gifts operating through them. This is a very important message for Pentecostal/charismatics to hear, for in their worst moments, they are among all Christians most likely to fall into this error. Ervin points out that the true measure of one’s spirituality is the fruit of the Spirit, manifestations of a transformed life. “Fruitbearing is a testimony to the life that is in the root. Hence, the ‘fruits of the Spirit’ are attributes of divine life received from the root. They are, therefore, evidence of the new birth” (p. 71). The fruit of the Spirit arises from the faithful response to God that we all have the opportunity to make, while the manifestations of the Spirit’s power in our lives, including gifts of healing, are not for our cultivation, only our openness to the Spirit’s use.

Demonstrating the difference between the gifts and the fruit of the Spirit is just one of many theological sidebars Ervin offers throughout this exercise in New Testament exegesis. Other topics broached include the nature of saving faith , how the pneumatologies of Luke and John compliment each other instead of being opposed, the nature of the relationship between Jesus and the Spirit, and a biblical defense of miracles. This defense of the miraculous is complete with a critique of the methods used by those who seek to discredit miracles on scientific grounds.

This excellent book is written in such a way that it will challenge the casual reader but is readily accessible to those looking for a good exegetical resource of this topic. Ervin is to be commended for his service to the church in carefully investigating and explicating an area so often fraught with difficulties in real-life practice.

Reviewed by Matthew Thompson

Amos Yong, Beyond the Impasse: Toward a Pneumatological Theology of Religions (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 192 pages, ISBN 9780801026126.

The goal of this thorough and erudite book by Amos Yong is explicit in the title, Beyond the Impasse, the impasse in question being the Christological question that throws up immediate blockades to inter-faith dialogue among the world’s varied religious traditions. Yong notes the reality that every attempt by Christians of any stripe over the years to engage in dialogue with representatives of other religions runs almost immediately headlong into the Christian conviction of the finality of Jesus Christ for revelation and salvation. The book is far too comprehensive and conceptually rich to visit every facet of the argument in a short review. Thus, I will briefly comment on a few elements of Yong’s method for approaching theology of religions.

Amos Yong