Veteran Bible teacher Charles Carrin introduces the central doctrines of the Christian faith drawn from the New Testament.

The truth of Scripture can never be reduced to a few theological abstractions. Jesus said, “The words that I speak to you they are spirit and they are life” (John 6:63). Spirit and life can never be examined under our theological microscopes. They totally defy all such attempts. Not only so but they are dangerous and abortive. Dangerous, because of the possibility—as happened frequently in the past—that such documents become tools to interpret Scripture instead of Scripture being used to interpret the documents. Additionally, the Bible speaks to every generation, culture, and circumstance, with truths relevant to each particular age. While Scripture remains unchanging, a specific illumination may appear—or disappear—according to need. As the Holy Spirit’s inspired volume, the Bible is to be revered, loved, believed, and protected. In that understanding, I share my limited understanding of the New Testament’s presentation. Is this conclusive? No. I am open to learn.

The Bible

“Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (II Peter 1:20,21). The Old and New Testaments are Covenants (not mere books); the first, sanctified by Moses “sprinkling the blood of bulls and goats” and the second sanctified by the Messiah sprinkling His own blood (Hebrews 9:11-23;12:24). As such, each Covenant is inalterable, cannot be added to or taken from, and of which no part has lost the Divine Seal (Revelation 22:19). We therefore do not believe that I Corinthians 12 and 14, or similar passages, lost their validity with the death of the Apostles or upon the canon of Scripture being completed. As modern Christians, we believe it is our duty to preach all New Testament Scripture with commitment equal to that of first century Christians. Regarding the unity of the two Covenants, we understand the Old Testament to be the New Testament concealed; the New Testament to be the Old Testament revealed. Holy Scripture is the Divinely inspired Word of God and our only rule of faith and practice (II Timothy 3:16).

The Being and Nature of God

God is One, maintaining His unity while sovereignly manifesting Himself in three personages, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (II Corinthians 13:14; John 1:1-14; Genesis 1:26. 18:1,2). The Father isthe origin and initial cause of all that is. Jesus Christ, eternally pre-existent with the Father, became flesh, was born of a virgin into the earth, is the only sin-bearer for mankind, was crucified, resurrected, ascended, forever satisfied the demands of the Law, and will return again in Glory for the reclamation of the saints. “For he has made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him” (II Corinthians 5:20,21). The Holy Spirit was, is, and forever remains, God with us on the earth as the Divine Presence in creation, salvation, inspiration, continuation, and consummation.

Relationship with God

Jesus Christ is man’s complete and sufficient approach to God. He said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). To receive eternal life, one must be redeemed in Christ, cleansed of sin in His blood, born-again by the Holy Spirit, and presented guilt-free to the Father.

Although John Wesley had spoken about the Holy Spirit prior to 1738, it was not until after Aldersgate that he began to develop a distinct pneumatology. Aldersgate was not Wesley’s conversion-initiation; rather it was largely a pneumatological experience of the “internal witness of the Spirit.”¹ His ‘heart strangely warmed’ marked a theological shift from outward works toward an experiential focus on the Spirit. He continued to develop this focus on the role of the Holy Spirit in Christian experience throughout his life. One can trace the role of the Spirit in the three distinct stages of Wesley’s thinking; early, middle, later.²

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that there is a recognizable development of Wesley’s doctrine of the Holy Spirit, which began to take form at Aldersgate and continued to be developed throughout his lifetime. This article will begin by briefly looking at the role of the Holy Spirit in each of the three stages of Wesley’s life and at the corresponding sermon corpus. This research will lead to an analysis of the various influences on the development of Wesley’s pneumatology. In addition, there will be an evaluation of the various ways in which the Holy Spirit played a role in his overall theology.

The Early Wesley 1725-1738

As mentioned earlier, there are three distinct stages of Wesley’s theological development. The early Wesley refers to the time between his ordination as a deacon on September 19, 1725 to his Aldersgate experience on May 14, 1738. Many scholars believe that 1725 marked the beginning of John Wesley’s religious awakening and the first of three phases in his theological development.³ He began to think seriously about entering the Church and his parents enthusiastically encouraged him. During this time several major things helped shape Wesley’s religious thought. Wesley came into contact with Bishop Jeremy Taylor’s Rules and Exercises of Holy Living and Dying, Thomas a’ Kempis’s Christian’s Pattern, and William Law’s Christian Perfection and serious Call.⁴ These writings made a profound impact upon Wesley’s spirituality. They put him on the path toward inward holiness.

Another important development was that Wesley became acquainted with ancient Christian literature through the assistance of fellow John Clayton, who was a competent patristics scholar.⁵ Wesley’s love for the Eastern Fathers can be seen throughout his Works, particularly “Macarius the Egyptian” and Ephrem Syrus.⁶ He became convinced that their pattern of holy living was true and authentic Christianity. More importantly for this study, was the ancient Christian’s emphasis on the person and experiential work of the Spirit, which no doubt had an impact on Wesley’s thinking.⁷ These various influences made Wesley’s time at Oxford an important season of religious and theological development and no doubt sowed impressionable seeds, which would later develop into Wesley’s mature pneumatology.

“The Circumcision of the Heart” 1733

On January 1, 1733, at Saint Mary’s Oxford, Wesley preached “The Circumcision of the Heart”, which contains the basic elements of his soteriology. This sermon also says more about the Holy Spirit than any of his other sermons prior this time. However, it appears that he was still working out his understanding of the relationship of the Holy Spirit and his overall theology. He said that, “without the Spirit we can do nothing but add sin to sin,” and “that it is impossible for us even to think a good thought without the supernatural assistance of his Spirit as to create ourselves, or to renew our whole souls in righteousness and true holiness.”⁸ Wesley recognized early on that Spirit played a vital role in overcoming sin and living a holy life. He was also developing his doctrine of Christian assurance. It is important to mention that Wesley sought assurance long before Aldersgate. He said:

This is the next thing which the ‘circumcision of the heart’ implies-even the testimony of their own spirit with the Spirit which witnesses in their hearts, that they are the children of God. Indeed it is the same Spirit who works in them that clear and cheerful confidence that their heart is upright toward God; that good assurance that they now do, through his grace, the things which are acceptable in his sight; that they are now in the path which leadeth to life, and shall, by the mercy of God, endure to the end.⁹

Bruce McCormack, the Frederick and Margaret L. Weyerhaeuser Professor of Theology at Princeton, is the most interesting and helpful Barthian working today. He has made his mark working to correct a certain North American distortion of Karl Barth’s thought. His contributions now include a number of edited works, including this one, which gathers the essays presented at the 2005 Edinburgh Dogmatics Conference.

As always with an edited work, the articles collected here are of uneven quality. They are also of varying atmosphere. Most of the essays breathe the air of British evangelicalism (which theologically has a lot of variation within it), while others are academic versions of something one might find in Christianity Today. Now and again, the staler air of the World Council of Churches wafts through the volume. The contributors vary from biblical scholars, to historical theologians, to systematic theologians. McCormack classifies some of the contributors as holding to a form of “classical theism”, and others as being more “‘progressive’ … in their willingness to pose questions to concepts of divine timelessness, impassibility, and so forth” (pp. 9-10). The decision to include biblical scholars was perhaps a move toward a broader outlook, but as everyone’s topic appears to have been assigned, the gain of including biblical scholars in the program has been minimized. The program as a whole has a systematic-theological stamp through and through. Topics like “divine simplicity” and “divine aseity” are not on the radar screen of biblical scholars, and for a good reason: they’re not on the radar screen of the Bible.

McCormack’s own contribution consists of a suit against Open Theism. Although McCormack’s admirers have already applauded this essay (on the internet), it ultimately fails to convince. He tries to show that Barth’s dissolution of metaphysics (as if that were conceptually possible!) presents a better solution to the problems that Open Theism has adduced. (McCormack prefers to think that God’s election “stands at the root of God’s being” [p. 210], but I think that is as nonsensical as it sounds. I much preferred Paul Helm’s case against the McCormack-Barth dissolution of metaphysics, found earlier in the same volume.) Much depends on one’s starting point. McCormack really only shows that Open Theism is incompatible with Reformed presuppositions, but he in no way shows that it is a poor fit for Christian theology in general. (Throughout many of these essays, this reader was constantly reminded that, for the Reformed tradition, the word “Protestant” basically means “Reformed”.)

This volume packs a lot of food for thought, and should be rewarding reading for those interested in a somewhat safe entry into the speculative side of modern theology. Those interested in biblical theology, however, will find considerably less of a reward.

Reviewed by John C. Poirier

Read an excerpt from Westminster Theological Seminary: www.wtsbooks.com/common/pdf_links/Excerpt_McCormack_Engaging.pdf [available as of June 6, 2014]

And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine … (Acts 2:42)

Apostolic doctrine, therefore, is not the new and novel teachings of someone who calls himself/herself an apostle. Apostolic doctrine is the message of Jesus, His redemptive work, and His call to selfless discipleship that is found in the 27 books of the New Testament.

The “apostles’ doctrine” of Acts 2:42 is a reference to the original eyewitness accounts of Jesus by the 12 apostles. This “doctrine” consisted of their first-hand reports of His life, teachings, death, and resurrection. This was, at first, an oral message spread by the Twelve and those that heard them. It was later written down in what we know as the four gospels. Paul’s writings were later added to this original testimony and, with the addition of James, Jude, Hebrews, 1 & 2 Peter , 1, 2, & 3 John , and Revelation there came into existence what we know as the New Testament canon.

Canon, of course, refers to a measure or rule. As such, the twenty-seven books of the New Testament became the standard or rule against which all other teachings and revelations must be measured. Why? Because the New Testament canon contains the original, apostolic testimony and teaching. Hans Kung, the well-known Roman Catholic theologian and reformer, says,

The preaching of the apostles, as it has come down to us in the writings of the New Testament, is the original, fundamental testimony of Jesus Christ, valid for all time; being unique, it cannot be replaced or made void by any later testimony. Later generations of the Church are dependent on the words, witness and ministry of the first “apostolic” generation. The apostles are and remain the original witnesses, their testimony is the original testimony and their mission the original mission.

The Significance of the Twelve & Paul

Although there are other apostles in the New Testament, it is obvious that the Twelve chosen by Jesus are a select company and occupy a unique place in God’s purposes for the Church. This is borne out by the fact that throughout Scripture they are referred to as “the Twelve”, a set number neither to be added to nor subtracted from (See, for example, Matt. 10:2; 26:14; Mark 9:35; Luke 18:31; Acts 6:2; 1Cor. 15:5). Their uniqueness is clarified by the fact that Jesus tells them that, in the age to come, they will sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28).

Mark Driscoll and Gerry Breshears, Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 464 pages, ISBN 9781433506253.

Mark Driscoll, founding pastor of Mars Hill Church, and Gerry Breshears, professor of theology at Western Seminary, describe the foundational doctrines and therein the membership requirements of the Mars Hill Church. They divide the book into thirteen theological subjects and chapters and they provide small-group study guides at the end of the book. Each chapter defines their doctrinal viewpoint in order to provide prospective church members with a catechetical foundation of their church’s beliefs. Doctrine covers elementary conservative Evangelical Christian doctrines of Trinity, humanity, sin, atonement, and salvation.

Mark Driscoll is the founding pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle.

Gerry Breshears is professor of theology at Western Seminary.

Its strengths are in its simplified language and conceptual presentations. These are supported by the Mars Hill website (relit.org), where the contents of the book are given in full sermon and sermon summary videos, as well as in summary teaching documents. The content of the book is available on the church webpage and it serves to communicate the same message through podcasts, audio files, videos, and documents. Together, these serve to make their conservative Evangelical Christian message abundantly clear.

Its weaknesses are also its strengths. Driscoll and Breshears plainly define their positions of exclusive male senior leadership in the church and of conservative views of charismata. They defend the “complementarian” perspective of gender at the expense of egalitarianism. Likewise, even though the book begins with robust Trinitarian and Christological chapters, it subsequently leaves us looking for an expanded chapter on the person of the Holy Spirit, the baptism in the Holy Spirit, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Thus, it seems that the role of women in the church and the role of the Holy Spirit in soteriology are subordinated.

Mark Driscoll is not a stranger to controversy because he is not afraid to state his theological opinions in a straightforward, even blunt, or unpretentious manner. We can admire any person for this. He has the courage to place in print confrontational statements like, “there are incredibly powerful demons—with names such as… Allah” (14). Driscoll refutes the error of Jesus being only an inferior prophet compared to Muhammad (221). He confronts the Muslim doctrine of Jesus’ supposed swoon on the cross (298) and of another person taking the place of Jesus on the cross (300).

Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, The Doctrine of God: A Global Introduction. A Biblical, Historical, and Contemporary Survey (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), 315 pages.

The Doctrine of God 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 book intends to offers a survey of biblical, historical and contemporary approaches to the doctrine of God. This book brings to completion a three-part textbook series on God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, all published by Baker Academic. Similar to the preceding volumes, this book is destined to become a standard textbook in many schools and seminaries. Teachers and scholars alike will benefit from this introductory text.

The book has two major purposes. First, to survey interpretations of God throughout Christian history and, second, to allow for a conversation between the classical theological tradition (“classical theism”) and its contemporary challengers. In order achieve this purpose, Kärkkäinen begins with an assessment of biblical texts concerning the doctrine of God. Following the biblical survey, he traces the development of classical theism from the early Church fathers to the beginning of the twentieth century. This main section of the book treats both European and North American theologians who significantly influenced the theological landscape. The final part of the book offers a condensed overview of contemporary interpretations of God outside the Western context, particularly African, Asian and Latin American voices.

Many readers will likely be most interested in the survey of contemporary theology. Kärkkäinen offers concise chapters on the work of Karl Barth, Paul Tillich, Karl Rahner, Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jürgen Moltmann and others. The section on North American texts addresses such challenging themes as process theology, the Death-of-God debate and open theism as well as African American, Native American and feminist theologies. Each chapter highlights the distinctive elements of these respective areas and introduces major theological voices. At the end of each section follows a short summary.

The Doctrine of God is a first-class introduction to the material every theology student should have in their library and an excellent overview of the texts for anyone who cannot afford to purchase those books. The overview of contemporary theologians represents the strongest part of the book. The chapters are concise, manageable and informative and offer a fine addition to many popular classroom collections.

Critique of the book will likely focus on the biblical and patristic sections. Kärkkäinen’s heavy and, at times, uncritical reliance on some authors, such as Walter Brueggeman and John Goldingay in the biblical section, as well as J. N. D. Kelly and Justo Gonzáles in the historical part, does not always offer the balanced view the author proposes. For example, the biblical section does not address aspects of Old Testament theology that speak of God as the one who destroys or the one who judges. Similarly, the patristic section speaks little about the often “unorthodox” view of some theologians even after the Council of Nicaea. Kärkkäinen seems more at home in contemporary European theologies, although treatment of Catholic authors could have included a number of other important theologians such as Yves Congar and Hans Urs von Balthasar.

Editor note: Readers are encouraged to join this conversation about strategic-level spiritual warfare, spiritual mapping, and living the Spirit-filled life. Please add your comments under the article.

Worldviews in Conflict (Part 1) with Editor Introduction

Satan in the Bible

When dealing with the related doctrines of Satan and demons, it has become almost customary to cite the warning from C.S. Lewis that two equal excesses persist.³² One is to dismiss the reality of Satan altogether, which is difficult to do if one interprets the New Testament literally. The other, I believe, is to become perilously indulgent with “devil-talk.” It seems fair to say that early twentieth century Pentecostals, in general, were preoccupied with talk of Spirit-baptism. Similarly today, some church leaders may be guilty of over-emphasizing Satan’s power to the point that the devil has grown larger than life—certainly larger than Scripture presents him.

Whether or not Satan once held a prominent position in heaven before he rebelled is a moot point. Popular interpretations of Isaiah 14:12-15 (reputed to be the account of Satan’s fall) in the U.S. were once fueled by American fundamentalist scholars such as M.F. Unger and L.S. Chafer.³³ More recent scholarship reveals a much sharper division over the assumption that Isaiah had Satan in mind when he wrote 14:12-15.³⁴ In fact, in view of the scant references to the devil or demons between Genesis and Malachi, and the complicated use of the name, “Satan,” it may be impossible to identify and organize a biblical demonology based solely on the Old Testament. As Page remarks:

Satan is a very minor figure in the Old Testament, where he is mentioned explicitly in only three passages. Even in these, he plays a secondary, not a major role. … It appears that the concept of Satan was not well developed in the Old Testament period and that it did not exercise the sort of influence on the faith of ancient Israel that it would on late Judaism and early Christianity.³⁵

Satan’s prominence in Jewish literature more likely arose at the time of the worst persecutions of Israel’s history, under the ruthless Antiochus IV during the late second century B.C. As the Jewish people suffered unimaginable oppression and suffering,³⁶ they searched for answers of cosmic proportions. They longed for a Messianic visitation to deliver them from hellish conditions, and they found their answers to the problem of evil in the cosmic struggle between angels and Satan.³⁷ Thus, extra-canonical literature was reared out of a background of Hellenistic and Persian Dualism and the desperate hope of an anguished nation.

Editor’s Introduction to Worldviews in Conflict

Welcome to the Dialogue

It is my privilege to introduce this paper by Larry Taylor and a dialogue about a practice many have embraced without first weighing the theological consequences.

Our subject is the teaching of spiritual mapping, identifying and expelling territorial demonic forces. This teaching has not been extensively challenged in Pentecostal/charismatic writings. In fact, the opposite appears to be true, the practice of spiritual mapping has been readily accepted.

Not just to rock the boat, Professor Taylor of Portland Bible College is asking us to consider on what basis this teaching has been accepted. Is spiritual mapping biblical doctrine, or is it derived from another source?

If spiritual mapping is a biblical teaching, we perhaps should all be involved in identifying and systematically removing the forces of evil from our neighborhoods and nations. If spiritual mapping cannot stand on scriptural grounds, its validity and our participation should be evaluated in that light.

Brother Taylor has invited response and interaction with himself on this subject. The Pneuma Review’s editorial committee has been endeavoring to locate a participant to respond to this paper. If all goes as planned, Taylor’s paper will be presented in two parts, followed by a rejoinder by someone offering another view of spiritual mapping, then followed by a response by Taylor. You are invited to write in and interact with this subject, whether you have an insight or a disagreement.

As with all articles, and especially controversial ones, the views expressed in this dialogue are not necessarily the views of all of the editors or the membership of the Pneuma Foundation. It is our privilege to present differing viewpoints that encourage the free exchange of ideas among disciples of Jesus. I hope that you will participate in this discussion. Please add your comments below.

— Raul Mock, Executive Editor

“The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to the texts of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear scorn.”
– Martin Luther

In recent years it has become increasingly clear that the devil is not going to go away, either in reality or as a topic of immense importance. In the past four decades he has gained attention at the box office and, more recently, at various church leadership conferences under the billing of “spiritual warfare.” Hollywood has enjoyed a disturbing love affair with the devil, dating back to Rosemary’s Baby in the late 60’s, which was soon followed by the smashing success of The Exorcist in 1973. Thanks (in no small part) to the computer industry, patrons today are offered a steady diet of scurrilous gore involving pools of blood, projectile vomiting, super-powered demons, twisted witches and candle-lit satanic rituals set in Gothic style.

On the other hand, the entertainment industry is not alone in its interest in and fascination with the macabre. In at least one segment of the church, there is a renewed militancy aimed at escalating the arms race against the devil and his horde. The most innovative aspect of this aggressive strategy involves “spiritual mapping.”¹ This is the practice of strategically locating and identifying the distinct demonic forces that lay behind a city or region, naming the demons, and driving them out. Although the practice is not limited to Pentecostal-type churches, the theological ideas that support it fit comfortably in many Pentecostal and Charismatic churches today.

In this particular paper I will explore the biblical and theological problems that I believe are associated with spiritual mapping, while focusing much of my attention on assessing the distinct cosmology that appears to serve as the basis for the practice. It is my theory that a weak, unbiblical cosmology has served to promote the doctrine of spiritual mapping. I open the subject by explaining the practical importance of cosmology. Secondly, I examine the biblical doctrine of creation, searching for a valid Christian cosmology. Turning briefly to the area of demonology, I examine Scripture’s view of Satan, particularly his power in relation to believers. Fourthly, I offer a biblical assessment of the practice of spiritual mapping. Finally, I conclude with a practical observation of the current state of Pentecostal-type churches and offer a pastoral call to return to basic-life teaching.

Due to the limited objectives of this particular study, I will not be assessing every aspect of the practice of spiritual mapping. There may be spiritual, psychological, and ecclesiastical rewards from the practice that lie outside the scope of this study. Moreover, I do not intend to present a thorough doctrine of Satan and demons. There are numerous books on the subject, some recent, that superbly handle the doctrine of Satan and demons. I have noted several for the benefit of the reader at the conclusion of the article.