The editor, Robert W. Graves is a Pentecostal scholar and president of The Foundation for Pentecostal Scholarship. This non-profit encourages Pentecostal/Charismatic authors, with awards for excellent new works. Mr. Graves has had a long-standing passion to defend Charismatic and Pentecostal claims of the present-day activity and gifts of the Holy Spirit.

The topic of the book, a rebuttal of cessationism, is both important and sad. It is sad because many good Christians still dispute the reality of the gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor 12–14) in the life of the contemporary church. This is over a hundred years after the Azusa Street revival and over sixty years after the Charismatic renewal burst among mainline churches. The suspicion and resistance to the operation of these gifts came under renewed attack in recent decades by the popular and influential ministry of the Rev. John MacArthur. His radio ministry and multiple books have lambasted gifts of the Spirit as bogus and their practice as heretical. This reviewer has had the honor of being the object of his critical comments with an entire chapter criticizing my work.[1] In fact Mr. Graves edited an earlier volume of essays dedicated to responding to MacArthur’s cessationist best-seller, Strange Fire.[2]

The Kingdom Case against Cessationism has a forward by Dr. Craig Keener, currently the most well-known and distinguished Charismatic New Testament scholar. The book is made up of 12 chapters by various authors, several of which are widely known and respected, such as Randy Clark and Michael Brown. But all are distinguished scholars in their fields.

The articles are uniformly excellent, and I found Randy Clark’s contribution, “The Inaugurated Kingdom of God–Now and Not Yet,” particularly useful. The same for Mr. Graves’s contribution, “Cessationism and the Struggle for the Promises and Commands of Jesus.”

The Kingdom Case against Cessationism contains three essays by Jon Ruthven, whose death has been a serious loss to Pentecostal scholarship (and to whom this book is dedicated). They were taken from his PhD masterpiece that also produced On the Cessation of the Charismata.[3]

The Kingdom Case against Cessationism has an index of persons as well as an index of biblical citations and ancient church sources. It is especially valuable to pastors and church leaders who have people in their congregations who still hold to the cessationist view. It is a handy source of biblical answers to the folly and “heresy” of cessationism. Mr. Graves is to be commended for his scholarly and useful work for the Charismatic/Pentecostal churches.

Reviewed by William De Arteaga

Notes

[1] John MacArthur, Reckless Faith (Crossway, 1994).

[2] (Nashville Thomas Nelson, 2013) See Strangers to Fire: When Tradition Trumps Scripture (Tulsa: Empowered Life Academic-Harrison House, 2014). [Editor’s note: See the Strange Fire roundup at PneumaReview.com: “Are Pentecostals offering Strange Fire?” See also the PneumaReview.com interview with Strangers To Fire editor Robert Graves and reviews by Tony Richie, John Lathrop, and further reflections by Jon Ruthven.]

[3] Jon Ruthven, On the Cessation of the Charismata (Tulsa: Word and Spirit, 2010). [Editor’s note: See Amos Yong’s review of Jon Ruthven: On the Cessation of the Charismata.]

Pneuma Review speaks with Dean Merrill about his book, 50 Pentecostal and Charismatic Leaders Every Christian Should Know (Chosen, 2021).

PneumaReview.com: Please tell us about your own involvement in the Pentecostal Movement.

Dean Merrill: My parents—good Midwestern Quakers—were drawn toward a fuller experience of the Holy Spirit about the time I was born. My personal infilling came while I was still a boy, a year after my conversion. Sensing a call to ministry, I trained at a Pentecostal school (Chicago Bible College) and was ordained thereafter by Philadelphia Church, Chicago. My convictions have remained the same throughout my life, even though much of my editing and publishing work has been in generically evangelical circles.

PneumaReview.com: Where did the idea for this book come from?

Dean Merrill: Actually, it was the idea of the publisher (Chosen Books, part of the Baker Publishing Group). They had published two similar volumes: 50 People Every Christian Should Know (2009) and 50 Women Every Christian Should Know (2014). They approached me to keep the series going.

PneumaReview.com: Were there specific criteria that were used to determine which Pentecostal and Charismatic leaders would be included in this volume?

PneumaReview.com: In the book you mention that you and at least one other family member received ministry from a couple of the people whose stories are in the book. Please tell our readers a little bit about those encounters.

Dean Merrill: I was about ten years old when, at an Oral Roberts campaign in Des Moines, Iowa, my father guided me into the healing line to receive prayer for my enlarged adenoids. It was the last night of the campaign, so Roberts was moving us through quickly, trying to touch everyone who hadn’t been able to come up previously. He laid his hand on my head and prayed a short prayer. My problem went away thereafter, never requiring surgery.

PneumaReview.com: As you have studied the lives of the leaders who are included in the book, what would you say are some of the key factors that caused them to be so effective?

Dean Merrill:

• They were incredibly bold, courageous, “gutsy.” Think about Maria Woodworth-Etter facing down a half-drunken mob intent on burning down her tent. Or David Wilkerson reaching out to hostile New York City gangbangers.
• They paid very public, no-apologies attention to the ministry of healing. They were confident that the God who saves us is the God who heals as well.
• If they felt God had told them to do something or had promised to provide, they didn’t flinch. No second-guessing.
• They had a laser focus on Spirit empowerment, not just human flash and flair.
• They prayed like crazy, all the time.

Is there one person in the book that you found to be particularly interesting?

Dean Merrill: Oh, my—that’s like asking a parent which child is their favorite. I’m intrigued with them all!

PneumaReview.com: How can the stories in this book challenge Pentecostals and Charismatics today?

Dean Merrill: They show us that Book-of-Acts Christianity is not just a historical relic. They tell us that it’s not all that important whether we keep our membership in what I call “the evangelical club.” In the book I quote Donald Gee (the British writer/editor), who wrote back in the 1950s, “Revivals are never launched without someone going to an extreme…. There has to be an extremism to move things…. Miracles of healing occur when faith refuses to be logical, and blinds itself to arguments, based on plenty of contrary experience.”

PneumaReview.com: How can the accounts in this book encourage Pentecostals and Charismatics today?

Dean Merrill: They assure us that the wind of the Spirit still blows in our time, if we will only take notice. The Holy Spirit has not gone off, like a grizzly bear, into a long hibernation. He is alive and active wherever given a welcome. Those who listen to him can do remarkable things for God’s cause.

PR

Publisher’s page: http://bakerpublishinggroup.com/books/50-pentecostal-and-charismatic-leaders-every-christian-should-know/404900

What God is doing in the world today? Pastor John Lathrop tells us about a move of the Holy Spirit in Southeast Asia.

A significant Christian conference was held in Indonesia between July 4^th and July 6th, it was called the Kingdom Family Conference. My wife and I had the honor of being present for this gathering. The conference was not put on by a Christian school or denomination. It was birthed out of a movement that began ten years ago called Fire Generation. This movement began as a youth ministry in a local church, grew to become an interdenominational youth movement, and is now an apostolic movement to build up the Body of Christ in Indonesia. And let me assure you the people in this movement are on fire! The spiritual atmosphere in the meetings was highly charged. No speakers are announced in advance, in fact, no big name speakers ministered at the conference. This is a grass roots movement.

One of the leaders, told me that seven hundred people registered for the conference but that they estimate that 1,400 people attended the evening revival services. The theme of the conference was “Time of Fulfillment.” The majority of the people at the conference were Indonesians but there were also people there from Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Thailand, Nagaland, India, and the United States. Fire Generation has grown from its early days. It has reached out and established relationships with other nations. In one of the services I was called on to pray for Indonesia as a representative of the United States. Some things in the services had to be translated for the English speakers who attended the services.

The conference consisted of seven services, one on Wednesday night, three on Thursday, and three on Friday, each service was three hours long! Prayer, worship, and ministry were the dominant features of most of the meetings. There were only two services that had a significant amount of preaching. The services were characterized by great joy, including dancing, as well as weeping, and indeed in some cases, wailing. Spiritual intensity marked the services. In a day when it seems like many young people in the West are indifferent or cold about spiritual things it was refreshing to see the spiritual zeal of these young people. They are zealous in worship, prayer, and service. They are also very open to the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Dreams and visions are welcomed in this ministry. The people in attendance love God and they love Indonesia. They are also willing to invest their lives in helping to bring improvement to their country through Christian witness and service. Their eyes are also focused on other nations as well. There is no way to describe the power and impact of these services, you would have to be there to understand. I have never seen anything like it in my life.

Author of The Third Force in Missions, Missionary-scholar Paul Pomerville speaks with PneumaReview.com about theologies and attitudes he believes have hindered the effectiveness of the church, particularly the church in the West. He urges Pentecostals to throw off the poisonous ideas of colonialism and the Enlightenment and instead be filled with the Holy Spirit of justice and peace.

PneumaReview.com: Please tell us about your experience in missions.

Paul Pomerville: After study in the national language of Indonesia, I started my service as an Assemblies of God missionary educating Indonesian ministers on the Island of Sumatra. I established a “theological education by extension” program that provided theological education for candidates for the ministry and active pastors in ten different areas of the island by way of independent study materials, a traveling faculty and weekly seminar-type training sessions. It was the first program of its kind in Southeast Asia; it was modeled after a similar program by missionary Dr. Ralph Winter in South America. When I was on furlough in the United States I started graduate education in missions. The next missionary service was in Brussels Belgium at the International Correspondence Institute, an arm of the Foreign Missions Division of the Assemblies of God. The Institute was preparing ministerial training materials and printing them on site for pastors and Christian educators via correspondence both in Western countries and also in the countries of the Southern Hemisphere. I wrote several courses and prepared an audience profile model of the developing countries for course writers for that part of the world, and also gave writers an orientation to that very different cultural audience. I also served as managing editor. On the next furlough in the United States I finished a Ph.D. in Intercultural Studies at Fuller Theological Seminary’s School of World Mission. I then served as professor and Department Chairman of the Missions and Cross-cultural Communications Department at the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary in Springfield Missouri.

PneumaReview.com: In your book you state that there are certain theologies that hinder the cause of missions. Please tell us what those theologies are and how they impede the missionary cause.

Paul A. Pomerville, The Third Force in Missions: A Pentecostal Contribution to Contemporary Mission Theology (Hendrickson Publishers, 2016).
Read the review by Anna M. Droll.

Paul Pomerville: The central thesis of The Third Force in Missions concerned the Pentecostal contribution to mission theology. At the time the first edition was written (1983) there were doubts as to whether there even was a Pentecostal contribution to mission theology. My contention at that time was that Pentecostal-charismatic Christians made up one-third of the world’s evangelical Christians and their growth was evidence of a potential Pentecostal contribution. However, the unprecedented Pentecostal-charismatic movement in the Southern Hemisphere today, the “third wave” of Pentecostal-charismatic renewal has proven the question of a Pentecostal contribution to be a “moot point.” Today, 800 million-plus Pentecostal-charismatic Christians are now a “first force” in Christian missions. It is clear that this unprecedented rapidly growing movement south of the equator was not due to “theology,” but rather the Pentecostal-charismatic experience with the Holy Spirit. Obviously, there is a “Pentecostal theology” undergirding the Pentecostal-charismatic movement that emphasizes the role of the Holy Spirit that two of the most influential theologies in the Northern hemisphere have not emphasized, but rather have neglected and outright denied—1) Western rationalistic scholastic theology of the post-Reformation period and 2) dispensational theology.

The Kingdom of God as Liturgical Empire is Dr. Hahn’s finest work. This reviewer has read some of Hahn’s other works and has some of them in his personal library. He is a professor of Scripture and Theology at Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio, and holds the Pope Benedict XVI Chair of Theology at St. Vincent Seminary. Dr. Hahn has occasionally been part of the Evangelical Theological Society, where this reviewer has met him at a national gathering.

What Dr. Hahn maintains in this commentary is that First and Second Chronicles comprise not an history of Israel between the reigns of Saul, David, Solomon, and their successors up to the Babylonian Exile, but a liturgical recall of those events in order to evoke repentance and renewal of both the Kingdom and of the people of God. “The writing of Chronicles is an act of what the Hebrews called zakkor, an act of remembrance that aims to bring one into the living and vital contact with events recalled” (p. 2). The “why” of Israel’s history is the reason for Chronicles. The why lies in the well-known and often recited passage in 2 Chronicles 7:14, “if My people who are called by My name will humble themselves and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

Scott W. Hahn

Hahn makes a very strong case for treating First and Second Chronicles as a liturgical recalling and retelling of Israel’s story. “For the Chronicler, the key to is the Kingdom of David, established by divine covenant and embodied in the temple at Zion at its liturgy (p. 13). The Hebrew terms zakkor (remembrance), seper toledat (assembly/congregation), ma’al (unfaithful), and bekor (first born) appear frequently within Chronicles.

This reviewer had never before thought of Chronicles as a liturgical retelling of the story of Israel, within a rebuilt temple, to remind the people of God of what it takes for God once more to restore, heal and bless them. Yet the retelling of incident after incident was meant to prick consciences, encourage, and renew both people and the Kingdom of God. They were to represent the Lord of the covenant who had delivered them time after time.

Son of God: Their Empire, His Kingdom (20th Century Fox). Actors: Darwin Shaw, Sebastian Knapp, Paul Knops, and Darcie Lincoln. Directors: Christopher Spencer. Music by Hans Zimmer.

From producers, Roma Downy and Mark Burnett comes the movie Son of God. Directed by Christopher Spencer (with additional scenes directed by Tony Mitchell and Crispin Reece), Son of God depicts the life of Jesus based on the Gospel of John. This is made apparent to the watcher as John as an old man narrates the beginning and end of the movie. If you are familiar with the mini-­‐series The Bible by the same producers, then one will realize that there is not much new material in Son of God. It is clear and encouraging, however, that the release and editing of this film was a strategic move to gain national and international cinema exposure to the Gospel story.

The film does well in covering the essential and compelling aspects of the Gospel narratives. Beginning with Jesus’ birth and visitation by the magi, our first image of Jesus the man, is as a solitary figure walking the mountaintops of Judea as he gazes down on the Sea of Galilee. This leads to Jesus’ encounter with Peter as Peter laments the lack of fish he able to catch. Peter’s initial skepticism towards Jesus is placated by Jesus asking, “Just give me an hour and I will give you a whole new life.” Peter’s response is, “Who says I want one?” While this exchange is not found in any of the Gospel narratives it unquestionably addresses a modern day dilemma many of us face. After Peter pulls in a miraculous catch of fish, he becomes aware that there is something different about Jesus, something worth following.

Familiar scenes to many such as Jesus preaching to the crowds, the healing of the paralytic who comes through the roof, the feeding of the five thousand and the resurrection of Lazarus, are skillfully and artistically conveyed. Two scenes in particular though, stand out as especially powerful and moving. These are the calling of Matthew the tax collector as he realizes his sinful nature and sees the hope that following Jesus offers, and Peter walking out on the water to meet Jesus. Both scenes help to depict the power of humility in acknowledging our sinfulness but also our faith in reaching out and walking towards Jesus.

Also well conveyed and communicated is the tension between Roman rule and the Jewish population. Roman brutality is displayed in several scenes and the scheming and politics that was so rife between the Romans and the Sanhedrin in a bid to retain power, underlies much of the film. This is an important subtly that is not to be underestimated throughout the film. While the resurrection of Lazarus, the cleansing of the Temple and Jesus’ reading of Isaiah 61 are portrayed as the acts that seal Jesus’ execution, ultimately it is both Pilate and Caiaphas’ paranoia of losing power, that leads to Jesus’ death.

Son of God: Their Empire, His Kingdom (20th Century Fox). Actors: Darwin Shaw, Sebastian Knapp, Paul Knops, and Darcie Lincoln. Directors: Christopher Spencer. Music by Hans Zimmer.

Son of God is a dramatization, taken from the memoirs of John the Apostle, played by Sebastian Knapp, that starts with the Savior’s brief ministry on His way to Calvary’s Cross and finishes with our Lord’s Resurrection and promised return.

Richard Bedser, one of its 4 writers, was also a writer for the History Channel’s 2011 documentary, Gettysburg—which should speak well of his talent and that of the team of writers, directors, actors and actresses and all who were chosen for this monumental endeavor.

The difficult task before them was to recreate the picture of betrayal and rejection that would lead to Jesus’ death. This biblical story line with the time constraint movies must honor, in 138 minutes, had to feature a selected few of Jesus’ many miracles and sayings. The first half of the movie then features Jesus crisscrossing the holy land under the observation of a Jewish religious leadership that represents a hostility growing more visceral with each word or act of mercy He shares.

Christopher Spencer, the director, correctly understood that the narrative to have any historical relevance needed more than the suspenseful music that now drapes the backdrop of every modern film. Spencer needed a story line that could integrate the miracles of Christ into a single culminating event—his crucifixion. As scholarship knows, one part of the story was inevitable in this regard: the resurrection of Lazarus. This alone would seal the Savior’s fate.

One Sadducee in the movie betrays the general attitude about Jesus among the religious leaders, “There is nothing unusual about Him aside from His ability to cause havoc!”

Jesus’ choice of a tax-collector, Matthew, is featured and appears to be the beginning of his troubles with the religious authorities of the day. Jesus’ notoriety as a potential problem takes off with children flocking about Him by the hundreds and disrupting a Pharisee holding Yeshiva under a tent. Jesus frees a woman taken in adultery and then pronounces an invalid forgiven before helping him to his feet, healed. He cleanses the temple court while crowds of would-be followers surround Him.

The movie does not follow the biblical text without a bit of drama added, a timeline rearranged, and a few details missing. Jesus does not shed tears at Lazarus’ grave, for example. Instead He enters the tomb and kisses His deceased friend on the head.

But I didn’t find this change of narrative offensive because the purpose behind the scene—behind the entire movie—was to help me live the inspiration behind a Divine idea that led to my own salvation. Also, it is safe to say that the words spoken by Jesus here are a reasonable translation of some of our Lord’s actual sayings.

Son of God: Their Empire, His Kingdom (20th Century Fox). Actors: Darwin Shaw, Sebastian Knapp, Paul Knops, and Darcie Lincoln. Directors: Christopher Spencer. Music by Hans Zimmer.

Son of God begins with John’s gospel, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” and ends with Jesus before John on the Isle of Patmos, in Revelation 1:17 “Fear not; I am the first and the last.” What falls between is a cinematic, 138-minute encapsulation of the life of Christ.

For the unchurched, this will undoubtedly present a Jesus that is within the boundaries of creative license and tells the story of Christ with great production value, first rate acting, believable costumes and sets, a remarkable soundtrack by Hans Zimmer (Pirates of the Caribbean, Batman Begins), and some very well-executed directing. It is rated PG-13, but that can only be attributed to the violence of the crucifixion, which spares little of Rome’s brutality.

We get a glimpse into Peter, John, Judas, a hint of Thomas, and short but wonderfully poignant episode with Matthew, but nothing of the other disciples. Mary Magdalene is there as well, almost always with Jesus and the twelve, but solitary woman traveling with a rabbi and 12 men across the Israeli countryside simply is not probable.

Eight minutes is given to carry us from Adam and Eve to the wise men standing before Mary and Joseph with the newborn Jesus. It happens quickly, but anyone with even a passing familiarity with the Scripture can keep up. The film truly begins as Jesus walks toward the Sea of Galilee.

On the one hand, the film is very conscientious of the Jewish people. For instance, “Jewish” is routinely the word of choice over “Jews,” the latter considered derogatory within modern Jewish society. The details: from daily life, customs, and dress are followed, but not always. For instance, the tzit-tzit fringes of the prayer shawls of the Pharisees would most certainly have had the Torah-required tekhelet (blue) threads, but few will catch the omission.

For the churched and biblically literate, let us simply say, you will like the book better than the movie. There were few scenes I did not find some problem with its non-adherence to the Bible. There are many liberties taken from Peter fishing to almost no one there to hear the Sermon on the Mount, to name two quick examples. There are many, many more.

The Pharisees are immediately set up as Jesus’ adversaries, but curiously, it is always the same Pharisee, which hardly makes the case for the cause of all Pharisees as antagonists. That is until Nicodemus comes along. He seems to be a willing cohort or even snitch of the High Priest, Caiaphas. Granted, Nicodemus was in the Sanhedrin and Scripture refers to him as “the” teacher of Israel (John 3:10), but that he might be a co-conspirator with Caiaphas is certainly extra-biblical.

Scot McKnight responds to the review essays by Kevin Williams and Tony Richie that appeared in the Summer 2011 issue of The Pneuma Review regarding his article, “Jesus vs. Paul” that appeared in the December 2010 issue of Christianity Today.

Scot McKnight, “Jesus vs. Paul” Christianity Today (December, 2010), pages 24-29.
The text appearing on the December 2010 cover encapsulates the discussion: “Jesus preached almost exclusively about the kingdom of heaven. Paul highlighted justification by faith. Some say they preached different gospels. Others say Jesus and Paul both preached justification. Still others claim both focused on the kingdom. What gives?”

I want to thank The Pneuma Review for its response to the piece I wrote in Christianity Today. I believe the gospel issue is the biggest issue we are facing in the church today. Serious discussions need to take place. I believe that what we think the “gospel” is would not have been understood as the gospel in the 1st Century—by Jesus, by Peter or by Paul. Or by anyone else near them. That may sound surprising, but I’m dead serious. We tend to think the gospel is the good news of how we can be saved, and we have constructed a way of presenting this gospel by cobbling together pieces scattered throughout the New Testament. What we mean by “gospel” is the plan of salvation, and it goes something like this: God made each one of us but we chose the path of sin. This same God loves us but God is supremely and fearsomely holy. But because God loves us he has found a way to get us back together: he sent his Son, Jesus, to die for our sins so we can be restored in our relation to God and spend eternity with God in heaven up in the sky somewhere. If we respond to this offer of redemption, our lives will almost certainly be better, and if they don’t God will give us the grace to sustain our faith. By and large I also believe these things, but I’m convinced no one in the 1st Century would hear this and assert, “Yes, that’s the gospel.” They may have agreed with the statement, but they would not have called it the gospel. And because we think this is the gospel, we are missing out on what it is and what it is all about.

In the two pieces in Pneuma Review, the big pushback for me is why I choose to begin with Paul, and the oddity of that move (which goes against the grain of my own career of writing and teaching) will be clear when my book, The King Jesus Gospel, comes out the end of next month [August 2011]. First, only Paul really defines gospel (1 Cor 15), and those who define gospel as I did above are really imposing some things from Paul on Jesus and on the pages of the NT and as a result are providing a meta-hermeneutic of how to read everything in the Bible. That meta-hermeneutic is to read the entire Bible through the lens of Paul’s justification by faith as the personal plan of salvation. But I think this is imposing Paul on the whole Bible in a way that the Bible does not want us to do. (Let me back down just briefly: I believe in personal faith and one dimension of justification is that you and I can be made right with God by trusting in what Christ has done for us.)

I began with Paul because my goal is to beat the Paul imposers at their own game. How? By beginning with Paul, showing that Paul is not saying what they think he is (namely that the gospel is simply justification) and, only then, by showing that in the end Paul’s gospel is the same gospel as Jesus’ gospel.

I see two advantages here: first, by not beginning with Jesus, which I could have done quite easily, it does not look like I’m setting up Jesus in order to impose Jesus on Paul. Second, once I’ve cleared the deck by showing what Paul really means I can show what Jesus really means by “gospel.” I don’t think Paul means simply justification, and I don’t think Jesus means simply social justice or even kingdom—but the story of Israel coming to completion in Jesus himself. Had I begun with that, I don’t think my case would have been as compelling—we’ll see if my case is clear when the book comes out.

Scot McKnight
July 18, 2011

Must Re-centralizing Jesus Mean Displacing the Spirit? A Review Essay of Scot McKnight’s “Jesus vs. Paul”

In this review essay, Tony Richie responds to Scot McKnight’s article that introduces a conversation among theologians.

Scot McKnight, “Jesus vs. Paul” Christianity Today (December, 2010), pages 24-29.

The December 2010 cover encapsulates the discussion:

Jesus preached almost exclusively about the kingdom of heaven. Paul highlighted justification by faith. Some say they preached different gospels. Others say Jesus and Paul both preached justification. Still others claim both focused on the kingdom. What gives?

Scot McKnight is an accomplished New Testament scholar and award-winning author whose work often has an innovative tone and, sometimes, a controversial twist. In “Jesus vs. Paul,” McKnight tackles a disturbing disjunction within Evangelicalism.¹ An older generation of evangelicals tended to follow the Reformation tradition quite tightly, making Paul’s doctrine of justification the essential doctrinal rubric for individual salvation; but, a new generation of evangelicals has become entirely enamored with Christ’s kingdom teaching applying its social implications. Devotees of each approach tend be exclusive or dismissive of the other. A troubling dichotomy between gospels and epistles develops. McKnight considers this a serious crisis threatening the theological stability of church and academy. He thinks both approaches risk reductionism. However, he resists facile attempts at superficial harmonization. For McKnight, the solution resides rather in the concept of gospel itself, particularly as delineated by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-8. The category of gospel, he argues, is broad enough to include both Jesus and kingdom with Paul and justification in a complementary, or perhaps better, in a comprehensive, manner.

Scot McKnight is Professor of New Testament at Northern Baptist Theological Seminary.

McKnight defines “gospel” summarily as the “saving story of Jesus that completes Israel’s story.” A prime benefit for McKnight is it’s re-centralizing of Jesus. He thinks that an overemphasis, that is to say, for all practical purposes, a sole emphasis, either on kingdom or justification tends to displace the person of Jesus, while the category of gospel places Jesus back at the center of what Scripture says, and of what Christianity is all about—faith in the person of Jesus Christ. McKnight has no problem producing multiple texts indicating that the New Testament calls for faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior rather than in his kingdom teaching or Paul’s views on justification. Accordingly, he argues against beginning either with kingdom or justification. Instead, McKnight says, “The gospel is the core of the Bible, and the gospel is the story of Jesus.” Therefore, he urges us to begin our hermeneutical and theological tasks with gospel.