Carl Raschke, The Next Reformation: Why Evangelicals Must Embrace Postmodernity (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), 235 pages.

Perhaps no other word is feared (or misunderstood) by evangelicals in the current theological vocabulary than postmodernism. Read most any evangelical Christian publication and you will read some article or editorial warning about the dangers of postmodernity. For good measure, the naysayers of postmodernism will throw in names such as “relativists” and “nihilists” when speaking of those who adhere to a postmodern way of thinking. Sadly, though, very few evangelicals have seriously and critically dealt with postmodernism and its consequences for theology and the church. The work of Stanley Grenz, John Franke, and Brian McLaren stand out as examples of evangelicals attempting to deal honestly with what postmodernity means for evangelical Christianity. Carl Raschke is another example, although he is by no means a newcomer to the conversation. His seminal work, The End of Theology, is believed to have started the postmodern debate within evangelicalism.¹ In The Next Reformation he continues his intelligent and thought provoking work in postmodern theology.

Raschke’s critique of evangelical theology is at times biting, but one senses a refreshing honesty and concern. The hypothesis of the entire book is that evangelicalism has bound itself too tightly to the modernist “isms,” including foundationalism, presuppositionalism, and common-sense realism. Raschke believes, and rightly so, that modernism is the spawn of the Enlightenment Project and that the idealism and extreme rationalism of that movement have failed and are passing away. On the horizon, or right here and now—depending on varying dates and definitions, postmodernism looms as the intellectual amniotic fluid of our time. Evangelicals, Raschke argues, have been down right resistant to the postmodern metamorphosis in thought, reacting the same way they did to liberalism and secular humanism. Raschke does believe that postmodernism is congenial with evangelicalism and can help the evangelical church stay true to its Reformation roots.

Carl Raschke (PhD, Harvard University) is professor and chair of the department of religious studies at the University of Denver, where he has taught since 1984. In addition, he serves as an adjunct faculty member at Mars Hill Graduate School and is the author or editor of twenty books.

For Raschke, the Reformation triune theology of sola fide, sola scriptura, and the priesthood of all believers (here worshippers) is best understood from the postmodern perspective. Faith is not based on reason or epistemology, as the post Enlightenment movement would have us believe. To the postmodern, faith “Shatters the idols of the age” (114). Faith is not a presupposition or a foundation, but the foundation. Out of this grows the concept of sola scriptura. Raschke is right to point out that evangelicals have too easily equated inerrancy with the Reformation doctrine of “by scripture alone.” A postmodern reading of this doctrine sees that the authority of scripture lies in the fact that it is promissory speech of the Almighty (135). The bible is true and authoritative because it is the word of God, not because it can be verified factually or historically as modernist liberals and fundamentalists like to think. If this is true—and we as Christians, particularly evangelical Christians, really believe it to be true—we will live it out. Postmodernism also provides the church the chance to actually implement the priesthood of all worshippers. Thinkers such as Michael Foucault tell us that modernism structures things hierarchically or vertically, while postmodernism views things relationally or horizontally (149). It is in this setting that all the church ministers to all the church and the world.

Does Messiah pay taxes? Journey through the Gospel to the Hebrews with Kevin Williams and find out.

The Olivet Discourse can be compared to a fine painting by one of the masters. That might sound odd, but everyone can look at the same piece of artwork from very different perspectives with opinions that range from matters of personal taste to the highly educated evaluation of each individual brush stroke. Eschatology is much the same.

With so many end-time theories and theologies from which to formulate an opinion, this portion of Scripture can be very polarizing. When you consider the views on how the end times will unfold: from pre-tribulation, mid-tribulation, pre-wrath, and post tribulation theories, as well as amillennial doctrines—the palette is loaded with numerous hues and tones. Many love God’s Masterpiece—His picture of the last days—but everyone does not appreciate it equally or from a singular perspective.

This series, The Secret Codes in Matthew, operates on the premise that Matthew’s gospel was written as evidence to the Jewish people that Yeshua (Jesus) was the long-awaited Messiah of Israel. It is with that continuing premise in mind that Matthew 24 is examined, attempting to understand Yeshua’s words as his contemporaries did.

How the rapture will or will not occur, or in the preterists’ case “already occurred” will not be discussed here, but rather will be left to others. For this author, how things unfold are keenly interesting but minimally important. The crux of the life of a disciple is to “seek first His kingdom and His righteousness,” to “love the lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind” (Matthew 22:37),¹ and to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:39), all of which—of course—are timeless principles established millennia before in the Old Testament. Being occupied means that when the events of Matthew 24 arrive—whatever your theological bent—you will be found faithful.

___

And Jesus answered and said to them, “See to it that no one misleads you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will mislead many” (Matthew 24:4-5).

It is interesting to note that some of our Christian brethren 500 years ago—in the throes of the Reformation—viewed this passage thusly: “The Church will have a continual conflict with infinite miseries and offences, and furthermore, with false prophets, until the day of victory and triumph comes.”² Indeed, with 1,500 years behind them already, these commentators—already in the thick of polarizing change that shook the foundations of Europe—were experiencing the truths of some of Yeshua’s prophecies in Matthew 24 on a daily basis.

I am uncomfortable with Bible teacher Eddie Hyatt’s use of the term “heresy.” However, I did appreciate the message of his article “The Colossian Heresy Revisited: Has the Prophetic Stream Lost Its Focus?” from the Fall 2005 Pneuma Review.
– AI

Response

Thanks for your comment. There certainly are differing opinions today about what “heresy” is and how Christians should use the term. For example, W. Simpson also discussed the term briefly in the same issue. He talked about how many critics of the faith movement call many of their biblically unsupported tenets “heresy” but that this is often an inaccurate use of the term. “Unfortunately, many of the so-called ‘pop-apologists’ of our time seem to know only one word for classifying errors and excesses in their polemics—the singularly divisive and frequently misapplied appellation of ‘heresy’” (see also Note 1).

If heresy is false teaching that blocks or obliterates saving faith in Jesus as Messiah, then this was not how Dr. Hyatt was using the term. He did say, “what some New Testament scholars call ‘The Colossian Heresy,’” and  proceeded to use the term “heresy” through the remainder of the article to describe the unbiblical emphasis on spiritual manifestations.

Thank you again for bringing this to the attention of our other readers.

Raul Mock and the editors

Differing with Walston, classical Pentecostal Robert Graves writes that the doctrine of initial evidence and the subsequence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit are taught by scripture.

 Editor Introduction  

 Part 1 of A Narrative-Critical Response

Rick Walston, The Speaking in Tongues Controversy: The Initial, Physical Evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit (Fairfax, VA: Xulon Press, 2003), 235 pages.

Continued from Pneuma Review Fall 2005

Authorial Intent—the Doom of Pentecostal Theology?

For Walston, “Of all the arguments opposing the initial, physical evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit, that of authorial intent is, without a doubt, the most convincing …” (59). His methodology for proving this entails asking what he calls a “Guiding Question” of each incident where Luke describes someone experiencing salvation, “What importance does Luke give to tongues as evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit?” (pp. 61, 71). He then claims that there are twenty-six references in Acts of people being baptized in the Holy Spirit (126).¹⁷ Walston continues, “If Luke mentions the outward manifestation of tongues on only three of twenty-six soteriological occasions, with the number of people demonstrating this outward manifestation to be around 150 out of well over three thousand people, then the obvious question must follow, How important could it have possibly been to Luke?” (110). Thus, he reasons concerning the Jerusalem Pentecost and Acts 2:41, “It cannot be logically nor exegetically argued that all Christians who are baptized in the Holy Spirit should speak in tongues from a small sampling of only 120 out of 3,120 people” (126). “If it were as important an issue as Classical Pentecostals say it is, Luke would have used this three-thousand-person example to develop the concept. But, he does not” (71).

Throughout his chapter on authorial intent, Walston mentions a number of places where Luke, if he had wished to show that speaking in tongues is the initial, physical evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit, could have done so explicitly, and with great effect (e.g., the three thousand in 2:41, the Samaritans, the priests in 6:7, and Paul), but Luke is silent. Even if all of these believers did speak in tongues, the fact that Luke does not mention it is proof that tongues are not that important to Luke; thus, it was not Luke’s “intent to convey tongues as the initial, physical evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit” (73).

Just as Walston uses Acts 2:38-41 as the locus classicus to prove that to be saved is to be baptized in the Holy Spirit and vice versa, he also uses this passage as the locus classicus to prove that it is not Luke’s intent to teach that tongues are the normative, initial evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. After repeating his Guiding Question, he writes, “The issue is not, ‘Did the three thousand speak in tongues?’ The issue is, ‘Why does Luke not make a point of saying that they did (or did not) speak in tongues?’ He does not mention it because it is not an issue. What Luke does take the time and space to describe is the soteriological outcome on this unique day” (71). Walston calls the incident with the three thousand a “paradigmatic gold mine” had Luke wanted to establish tongues as the evidence of Spirit-baptism (72).

Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Christology: A Global Introduction. An Ecumenical, International, and Contextual Perspective (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004) 300 pages, ISBN 9780801026218.

Christology is one in a series of books published in recent years by Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, a Finnish-born theologian who currently teaches at Fuller Theological Seminary. As the subtitle suggests, the author offers a broad, international and ecumenical approach to the doctrine of Christ. This book is the second of a three-part textbook series on God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, all published by Baker Academic. Pastors, teachers and scholars will benefit from this introductory text which offers a comprehensive survey of biblical, historical and modern reflections on the doctrine of Christ. This lucid presentation of Christian thinking stands out particularly for its unique and comprehensive treatment of contemporary contextual Christologies in non-Western cultures and their multi-faceted theological approaches as, for example, in African, Asian or Latin American thought.

Kärkkäinen offers an exceptional overview of contextual Christologies that have emerged in and beyond the Western world. The reader will be hard-pressed to find another introduction to the subject with a similar spectrum of contemporary Christian thought. This highly relevant part of the book highlights the fact that Christology, like few other fields of study in theology, is intimately connected to culture and worldview. Feminist, black, process and postmodern approaches to the doctrine of Christ are among the images that bring color to this kaleidoscope of theological reflections. The book concludes with an important, if somewhat short, evaluation of the future of Christology.

Kärkkäinen also shines in his presentation of contemporary Western Christology. He introduces ten theologians who have written extensively on the doctrine of Christ, among them Karl Barth, Rudolph Bultmann and Paul Tillich from the first part of the twentieth century, as well as a number of contemporary representatives from the major Christian traditions, such as Karl Rahner (Roman Catholic), John Zizioulas (Eastern Orthodox), Jürgen Moltmann (Reformed), Wolfhart Pannenberg (Lutheran) and Stanley Grenz (Baptist). The only major Christian tradition not represented in this overview is Pentecostalism which, as the author remarks, has not yet offered a comprehensive treatment of the doctrine of Christ. This well-placed observation is sure to spark interest among Pentecostals; it reveals a glimpse of Kärkkäinen’s own Pentecostal origins and should be understood as an invitation to enter into dialogue with the rich and inspiring mosaic of contemporary thought on the person of Jesus Christ.

At a time when the continual publication of new books and articles on the person and work of Christ has created a panorama of opinions in which no one can keep up with all the developments, Kärkkäinen offers a concise introduction to the global situation. Similar to its companion volumes, Christology consists of about 30 chapters of very manageable length. The treatments of individual theologians generally consist of less than 10 pages each and make for a very enjoyable and educational reading experience. These snapshots of important theologians are undoubtedly the highlight of the book.

The Western authors chosen by Kärkkäinen in this volume are similar to those of the other books in the series. This has both positive and negative consequences. Kärkkäinen’s grasp of the various contemporary authors offers a remarkable survey of the Christological landscape that is sure to guide the reader into new territory. On the other hand, some readers may question Kärkkäinen’s principle of selection. For example, not all significant Catholic or Orthodox writers have been included in this survey. The immense Christological project of Edward Schillebeeckx, for example, is missing completely. In addition, a whole section on the growing importance of Spirit-Christology, not only among Roman Catholic theologians, would have been a justifiable and insightful addition to book.

Julia C. Loren, “Healers of the Wounded Soul” Charisma (Sept. 2005), pages 55-62.

Julia Loren presents to the reader of Charisma an insightful and charming article about one of the most important couples of the Pentecostal/charismatic persuasion, John and Paula Sandford. Their works on healing, deliverance, inner healing and the prophetic office are destined to be classics until the Lord returns. Mrs. Loren wisely chooses to highlight two aspects of the Sanford’s many faceted ministry, their development of inner healing prayer, and John’s understanding of the work of the prophet.

Inner healing was originally discovered by Mrs. Agnes Sanford through her ministry to heal and disciple Jewish refugees who had experienced the trauma of Nazi persecution. This ministry became popular with the publication of Ruth Carter Stapleton’s best selling book, The Gift of Inner Healing (1976). Unfortunately, this work reduced inner healing prayer to merely “directed visualization.” John Sandford, who had spent several years as Mrs. Sanford’s assistant at Christian teaching missions, immediately saw that this book was dangerous to the inner healing movement. He set about writing a work that would explain this type of prayer in biblical terms and bring it further to become a ministry of transformation. Two books came out of this correction of the Stapleton book, The Transformation of Inner Man (1982) and Healing the Wounded Spirit (1985).

Unfortunately, these books did not head off a great evangelical assault on the inner healing ministry led by Dave Hunt’s infamous work The Seduction of Christianity (1985). Hunts arguments, based on cessationist theology, dealt a severe blow to the inner healing movement, and it mostly stopped as healing prayer within evangelical and charismatic churches.

Julia Loren in 2007.

Loren’s article points out that it was largely the work of the Sandfords to reintroduce inner healing as an orthodox ministry— extending the ministry of forgiveness of sins to enable true transformation in the life of the believer. That battle took two decades, and it is now mostly won, with the ministry of inner healing regaining wide acceptance. This was gained not only through the consistently good teaching courses, books and videos that the Sandfords have produced, but by the undeniably good fruit evident in hundreds of thousands of people ministered to and healed through inner healing.

The other part of the Sandfords’ ministry outlined in Mrs. Loren’s article is John’s expansion of our understanding of the office and function of the prophet in the contemporary church. Prophetic ministry is now considered a staple of many charismatic churches, yet this was not so at the start of the charismatic renewal. John Sandford’s book The Elijah Task (1977) first gave the Church a clear biblical theology on the present and continued need for prophetic ministry. Loren points out that many of today’s more established prophets such as James Goll and John Paul Jackson were deeply influenced and motivated by the Sandford’s work.

Loren mentions throughout her article how the Sandfords suffered various waves of persecution for their pioneering work. Unfortunately she is overly polite and omits specific names and controversies. This is common to many Christian writers, and it is, I believe, a misunderstanding of the biblical pattern of historical writing modeled in both testaments, where we see frank descriptions of sin (as in David’s adultery) and controversies such as Paul’s dispute with Peter in Antioch (Galatians 2:11-14). Loren’s article gives the reader no information as to precisely who opposed the Sandfords, and very little on the specific issues that stirred controversies against them. No mention is made, for instance, of The Seduction of Christianity.

James M. Hamilton, Jr., “God With Men in the Torah” The Westminster Theological Journal 65:1 (Spring 2003), pages 113-133.

“The contention of this study is that God’s self-disclosure and his favorable presence with the people constitute the Pentateuch’s description of how the Old Covenant faithful became and remained believers” (p. 144), writes James M. Hamilton, Jr. Using John 7:39, “But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified,” as a base from which to build, Hamilton traces the indwelling of the Holy Spirit—or lack thereof—through the Books of Moses.

There is never a question in the author’s mind about whether or not the saints of the Old Testament were regenerated—as noted by the “great cloud of witnesses” from the Old Testament in Hebrews 12:1 (please note that not everyone in Israel was a “saint”).

Hamilton repeatedly uses the phrase “God’s self-disclosure” pointing out that if the Almighty had not taken the initiative; none could have “conjured” or summoned him into forming a personal relationship. With that said, I think Hamilton does a very good job of presenting the Holy Spirit in the tradition of progressive revelation, which is thoroughly consistent with all that God was doing in the Torah, as well as the later books of the Old Testament. While he never uses the word “progressive revelation,” this reader clearly saw that inference.

The article makes it definitively clear that the Holy Spirit was active, resting upon individuals from time to time to accomplish His will, but with the rarest exceptions, He did not appear to permanently inhabit individuals. This too, however, seems to form an outline for the progressive revelation of God as He moves all creation, step by step, back toward complete regeneration within His perfect design.

If I were to be critical of anything in the article, it was Hamilton’s supposition that through John 7:39 we are to assume that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is the only vehicle by which believers are able to maintain their faith. It would seem, according to Hamilton, that the Holy Spirit is some manifest “guarantee” for holding on to faith, a guarantee the men and women of the Torah did not have. Yet at the same time, he acknowledges that in the Old Testament, God being in their presence communally—that is to say, dwelling in the community—was the only means the Israelites had to hold onto their faith. Either way, the result was the same: with God in their midst—either through the indwelling or the Shekinah Glory radiating from the tabernacle—faith was evident at least among a remnant from generation to generation. These things being true, many of the personalities we read about in the Torah did not have a permanent “presence” to gaze upon, and therefore, their faith was driven by something more, something deeper, than a constant reminder.

Reviewed by Kevin M. Williams

David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing: How Christianity is Transforming China and Changing the Global Balance of Power (Washington, DC: Regenery, 2003), 344 pages.

Remarkably, this book is simultaneously profoundly spiritual and provocatively political. Its main thesis is that Christianity is slowly but surely changing China and a changed China may change the world. In readable journalistic style Aikman overviews the history of Christianity in China, analyzes its diversity, introduces us to many of its exciting personalities, and outlines political and cultural complexities in the story of Christianity in China. Hands-on experience and research enhance Aikman’s effectiveness. The suffering and strength of many persecuted Christians pervade the whole work. An inexorable forward march of the Christian faith in China against incredible opposition builds throughout to a climactic finish with an optimistic future. Balanced, objective discussions of distinctive Christian groups and their differences are insightful and helpful.

Four assertions of this work call for more detailed dialogue: an inseparable interconnectedness of Christianity, culture, politics, and economics in China; Christianity in the Chinese context is most effective when it assumes an indigenous and inclusivist air; Evangelicals and Pentecostals are at the heart and forefront of Chinese Christianity; and, the story of Christianity in China has national and global consequences.

Dynamic relationships between religion, culture, politics, and economics certainly exist (cf. Dan. 2:46-49). Aikman notes that changing fortunes of the Christian faith in China reflect simultaneous fluctuations of socio-political-economic factors. From the beginnings of Christianity in China until contemporary times the vicissitudes of frequent and often contradictory cultural changes have affected Christianity’s status almost as much as it’s own spiritual qualities (pp. 19-45). Not a new idea (Max Weber explored relations between religion and economics), it nevertheless needs acknowledging that Christianity is part of a complex of components, secular and sacred, that cannot be adequately understood in isolation. Religion is not only an attempt to relate well to the eternal world beyond but also to this temporal world below.

Cover from the 2006 edition.

Paul employed intentionally indigenous (original culture) and inclusivist (openness to others) approaches to witnessing relations with non-Christians (1 Co. 9:19-23; Acts 17:16-34). According to Aikman, historically missionaries who appreciated and appropriated China’s native dress, customs, and language were consistently more effective than those who did not, in spite of attendant controversy (pp. 30-41). Furthermore, contemporary Chinese Christians able to connect their message and mission with China’s non-Christian religious heritage are making headway with thoughtful moderns (pp. 245-49). In a time of increasing awareness of religious diversity and plurality Christian witness that refuses to compromise its own convictions but yet affirms and embraces the cultural history and spiritual heritage of others (in the tradition of C. S. Lewis) may be the most effective way to evangelize.
 

The beginnings of the CRC church in Wollongong were soaked in prayer. As the pastoral team ministered to God, they sensed the need to call the congregation to all-night prayer gatherings. Beginning around 8 p.m. on Saturday nights, intercessors persevered until daybreak. In those times of prayer, praise and proclamation, the Spirit often spoke through prophecy indicating the needs of the city. On Sunday, people would be drawn to the services by the Holy Spirit, many times without fully comprehending why they were there. This church implemented the model of prayer depicted by Christ in the book of Luke.

Lukan mission emphasizes the importance of the relationship between the Holy Spirit and prayer. In the work of Jesus and the early church, a strong correlation between prayer and mission exists. Luke sees Jesus praying where other Gospel writers do not: the baptism of Jesus (3:21), the selection of the Twelve (6:12), Peter’s confession (9:18); the Transfiguration (9:28); before the teaching of the Lord’s prayer (11:1); and at the crucifixion (23:34, 46). Independently, Luke relates two special parables about prayer: the friend at midnight (11:5-8); and the unjust judge (18:1-8). He alone presents the story of the Pharisee and the Publican at prayer in the Temple (18:9-14), and states that Jesus exhorted his disciples to pray during his agony in Gethsemane (22:40).

Why does Luke include the prayer motif at key junctions in his story? It seems that for Luke it is the means whereby God directs his mission of salvation to lost humanity. Through prayer, God guides the mission of the church and apprehends the dynamic power of the Spirit for salvation history (Ac. 2:42; 4:31; 6:4; 13:3; 14:23). In other words, Luke conceives of prayer as an important means by which God guides the course of redemptive history and prayer serves as an important way in which the divine plan of salvation is made known.

In this chapter from the Rightly Understanding God’s Word series, Craig S. Keener concludes Context of Genre with Part 4, the book of Revelation. What can we learn from this book that so many Christians have disagreed about?

As appearing in Pneuma Review Winter 2006.

Take a course on biblical interpretation with New Testament scholar, Professor Craig S. Keener.

For an introduction to the Context of Genre, see the Spring 2005 edition of the Pneuma Review.

Revelation

Revelation is a particular kind of prophecy; because of its special importance and the interest it generates, I have devoted an entire section to its discussion. Revelation is a mixture of prophecy and apocalyptic (a special kind of prophecy that appears in Daniel, parts of Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah), delivered in a letter format.

On any book like Revelation, there will be serious differences of opinion, and we must be charitable in our disagreements. Nevertheless, it is worth exploring to see what the methods introduced previously can teach us, and how they can take us beyond many of the views that have circulated widely. Reading Revelation as a whole (paying attention to whole-book context) and in light of its background (Old Testament and other background) will help us avoid or correct many of the common mistakes we have often inherited from others.

Revelation is not meant to be an obscure book. It may not be meant to satisfy our curiosity regarding all end-time details, but it certainly is a very practical book that presents God’s demands on our lives. Thus it opens by promising a blessing to those who heed and obey its message (Rev 1:3)—which presumes that we can at least understand enough of it to obey it! An angel told Daniel that the book of Daniel would be sealed up and understood only in the end-time (Dan 12:9); by contrast, the angel told John not to seal up his book, because the end-time was near (Rev 22:10). Revelation may be “hidden” to those who think they need a special key in someone’s teaching to unlock it. It is certainly unclear to those who interpret it only in light of current newspaper headlines—which require us to readjust our interpretations every year or two. But it is not as hidden to those of us who read Revelation straight through and understand it in its whole-book context. All Scripture should be profitable for teaching and instruction in righteousness from the time it was written (2 Tim 3:16-17)—so whatever else it might mean, at least Revelation must mean something relevant for our lives today.

A History of Misinterpretations

Too often people in the past two centuries have used “newspaper hermeneutics” to understand Revelation—that is, they have interpreted it in light of current events. This is why many prophecy teachers have to change their interpretations of the book so often. That they recognize that Jesus could be coming soon, hence that prophecy is being fulfilled now, is commendable, but assertions that some current event definitely fulfills a biblical passage only leads to disillusionment when today’s headlines end up in tomorrow’s trash bin.