Embedded Files
( - previous issue - )
Apologia Report 12:11
March 22, 2007
Subject: 'Mere Christianity,' competitors and critics
In this issue:
APOLOGETICS - Do we now have two new peers to Mere Christianity?
LIVING STREAM/LOCAL CHURCH/WITNESS LEE - Christianity Today follows controversy generated by "Open Letter" coalition
-------
APOLOGETICS
You may have noticed more than once in Apologia Report that we've found N.T. Wright's recent book Simply Christian [1] has been favorably compared by different reviewers to the best-sellling apologetics book of all time, Mere Christianity, by C.S. Lewis [2]. A similarly positive appraisal is made by two different reviewers in the current issue of Books & Culture. In one review (Mar/Apr '07, p26-27), Ric Machuga finds that Simply Christian "obviously trades on the popularity of Lewis; worse yet, it's marketed as another Mere Christianity! Is there really room for a sixth gospel [Machuga earlier kiddingly refers to Mere Christianity as the fifth], or is this a covert plot to replace Lewis?"
Machuga feels that Mere Christianity is better suited for people without significant Christian influences in their past. In contrast, Simply Christian is recommended "for those in danger of becoming what Christian Smith calls 'moralistic, therapeutic deists.' These are students who speak 'Christianese' fluently." Wright has produced "a distillation of years of historical research and pastoral care, written for those whose faith is wavering and subjective."
In his conclusion, Machuga repeats: "For the hard-nosed, materialistically minded skeptic, there is still no better introduction to Christianity than C. S. Lewis. But for students in danger of losing their uninformed faith or for those who have already lost their faith in everything but a vague sort of 'tapioca pudding' spirituality, the best introduction to Christianity is a latterday St. Thomas, N.T. Wright." <http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/11.26.html>
In her review of The Language of God, by Francis Collins [3], Catherine H. Crouch makes strong comparisons to both Simply Christian and Mere Christianity (B&C, Mar/Apr '07, p26-28). Crouch starts by describing the organization of Collins' work. "The Language of God begins with a brief description of the author's journey 'from atheism to belief' (the title of Chapter 1). ...
"After telling his story, Collins addresses a series of potential intellectual objections to religious faith. ('Isn't the idea of God just wish fulfillment? What about all the harm done in the name of religion? Why would a loving God allow suffering? How can a rational person believe in miracles?') He then describes current scientific knowledge about the origins of the physical universe, of life, and of humanity. Next he enumerates four possibilities for the intellectual relationship between science and faith, particularly as related to evolutionary biology: materialist atheism, in which science is considered to have shown that religious faith is wrong; Young Earth creationism, in which a literal reading of Genesis is considered to show that science is wrong, at least regarding origins; intelligent design, which contends that the complexity of life found on our planet could not have developed without the explicit direction of an intelligent agent, although evolutionary mechanisms may have contributed somewhat; and theistic evolution, which contends that scientific evidence for evolution is completely compatible with religious faith in general, as well as Christianity. Collins argues vigorously against the first three and for theistic evolution. The final chapter begins with Collins' explanation of why he found Christian faith in particular (rather than another religion) compelling, and then ends with a call for all to see religious faith and science as two complementary ways of seeking truth."
Crouch's analysis is not without criticism. "The primary shortcoming of The Language of God is that it is less theologically sophisticated than one might hope. Consequently, it offers a somewhat simplistic picture of how science and theology are 'complementary.' ...
"Most important, in arguing for theistic evolution, Collins must explain how evolution, which biologists understand to be driven by probabilistic events, is compatible with the Christian understanding of God's sovereignty. ...
"Another limitation of Collins' book, which likely reflects his assumptions about his audience as well as the influence of Mere Christianity in his journey to faith, is his choice of evidence to examine, which is a rather narrow slice of all the evidence that might be considered. ...
"Collins' occasional personal stories reveal the depths of his experience of life in Jesus Christ and show that faith is more than agreement with a series of logical propositions. Unfortunately, these stories do not cohere well with the rest of the book, and thus do not contribute as fully as they might."
Nearing her conclusion, Crouch makes more comparisons. "Collins, far more than Wright, is Lewis' successor.
"Part 1 (the first four chapters) of Simply Christian is Wright's equivalent of 'examining the evidence for belief,' but his choice of evidence is quite different from Collins'. Each chapter describes one of four 'echoes of a voice': human beings' longing for justice, spirituality, relationship, and beauty, which Wright argues are longings because they reflect the character of God. ...
"Wright's approach means that the opening chapters of Simply Christian are far more eloquent and passionate than Lewis or Collins....
"As I read Part 2, I felt a little uneasy at the idea of giving Simply Christian to a nonbeliever, fearing that he or she would find it too dense or difficult; as I read Part 3, I felt it would be a distinct mistake to burden anyone outside the faith with so many in-house arguments." <http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/10.26.html>
Apologia Report consulting editor Mark Hartwig offers the following counterpoint to Collins:
"I am continually frustrated with Collins and other 'Old-School' theistic evolutionists. It's always the same: God did it, but his tinkering behind the scenes looks just like the natural processes of random change and natural selection. Or God did it, but worked *through* the processes of incremental evolution. Or God did it by gifting nature with the ability to bring forth life and then commanding it to do so.
"What these all have in common is the denial that God's 'fingerprints' can be empirically detected in his creation. To the contrary, they say, God's handiwork can only be discerned through the eyes of faith.
"This effectively removes all possibility of their views being empirically falsified. And as for the eyes of faith, that seems to be mostly an additional hedge against empirical scrutiny.
"Moreover, for all the pious talk, old-school theistic evolution simply doesn't square with the Bible. In Scripture we see God continually intervening in human history and the natural order - precisely to display his glory, to show Israel and the nations that there is indeed a God in Zion. Given the ubiquity of such interventions, why should he suddenly turn shy, hiding all empirical traces of his creative activity?
"In fact, he didn't. The Bible is very blunt in saying that the evidence is so obvious that you don't even have to look for it. Just two examples: Psalm 19 and Romans 1.
"Intelligent design, which also has theistic evolutionists among its ranks, differs in that it states that the effects of intelligent agents (including God) are, in fact, empirically detectable. Unlike old-school theistic evolutionists, ID theorists (including intelligent-design theistic evolutionists), are willing to put their theory on the empirical line. It's this willingness to take this risk that gets old-school theistic evolutionists wrapped around the axle. But it's the reason I myself respect ID, and have little patience with old-school theistic evolutionists."
Mark recommends the following resources: For a quick overview of ID and its implications for contemporary Western Christianity, see:
* - "The Meaning of Intelligent Design"
<http://www.boundless.org/2000/features/a0000455.html>
* - For an authoritative volume on ID (which also touches briefly on theistic evolution) by William Dembski, ID's leading theoretician, see Intelligent Design: The Bridge between Science and Theology [4].
* - Finally, you can find a veritable trove of ID-related resources on Access Research Network's web site: <arn.org>.
After acknowledging his substantial debt to Lewis as the "great master" of apologetics, Wright offers significant criticism of Mere Christianity in his article "Simply Lewis" (Touchstone, Mar '07, pp28-33). First, he sees an irony in "the way in which Lewis has been lionized by Evangelicals when he clearly didn't believe in several classic Evangelical shibboleths. He was wary of penal substitution, not bothered by infallibility or inerrancy, and decidedly dodgy on justification by faith (though who am I to talk, considering what some in America say about me?). ...
"So to the four different sections of the book. I rate the third ('Christian Behaviour') as the finest; the first and last ("Right and Wrong as a Clue to the Meaning of the Universe" with its moral argument for God, and "Beyond Personality," the closing pieces on the Trinity and on regeneration) as fascinating though in some ways problematic; and the second ("What Christians Believe") as, worryingly, the most deeply flawed. ...
"I find the final section of the book, "Beyond Personality: Or first steps in the doctrine of the Trinity," brave and intelligent though not entirely convincing. ...
"I find Lewis frustratingly fuzzy on heaven and immortality. ...
"So to the first section, where Lewis, as often elsewhere, uses a kind of the moral argument for the existence of God. ...
"Lewis was trying to argue step by step, but I think he succeeds in engaging and interesting people sufficiently to move them forwards despite the fact that the logic doesn't quite work. I would be interested to hear what other apologists say about this.
"The weakest part of the book, beyond doubt, is its heart: the treatment of God, and especially of Jesus, in the second section, 'What Christians Believe.' He simply does not know that Jesus wasn't born in A.D. 1, and I have already mentioned the astonishing absence of the Resurrection. ...
"But of course the real problem is the argument for Jesus' divinity. And this problem actually begins further back: There is virtually no mention, and certainly no treatment, of Israel and the Old Testament, and consequently no attempt to place Jesus in his historical or theological context. ...
"What Lewis totally failed to see - as have, of course, many scholars in the field - was that Judaism already had a strong incarnational principle....
"Someone who converted to the Christian faith through reading Mere Christianity, and who never moved on or grew up theologically or historically, would be in a dangerous position when faced even with proper, non-skeptical historical investigation, let alone the regular improper, skeptical sort."
<http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=20-02-028-f>
---
LIVING STREAM/LOCAL CHURCH/WITNESS LEE
"Witness Lee in the Dock: Evangelical leaders prod Local Church on founder's teachings" by Mark A. Kellner -- begins: "An ad hoc group of 60 evangelical leaders published an open letter [open-letter.org] in January challenging Living Stream Ministry (LSM) to disavow controversial statements from founder Witness Lee....
"LSM leaders declined to disavow the statements but offered to meet with critics. 'The open letter of evangelical leaders presents Witness Lee's statements without the biblical texts on which they are based, without the exposition of those texts, and without any balancing context found in his writings,' an LSM statement said. 'Therefore, they do not fairly present his teaching on these important points of truth.'
"One Lee statement criticized in the open letter comes from his 1989 Life Messages. 'The traditional explanation of the Trinity is grossly inadequate and borders on tritheism,' Lee said. 'When the Spirit of God is joined with us, God is not left behind, nor does Christ remain on the throne. This is the impression Christianity gives.' In another volume published by LSM, Lee said, 'The denominational organizations have been utilized by Satan to set up his satanic system to destroy God's economy of the proper church life.'
"Dallas Seminary's [Darrell] Bock, who told CT he had signed on as an 'expert witness' for Ankerberg and Weldon in the Texas libel case, said the open letter was 'really an appeal to the movement to be clear about where they stand on the doctrinal [issues]' raised by some of Lee's quotes." (Curiously, CT neglects to mention some of the best-known apologists among the letter's signers, including Norman Geisler, Ron Rhodes, Calvin Beisner, and John Warwick Montgomery.)
Some might question the article's characterization of the movement's most important legal battle to date, in which it states that in response to a Harvest House Publishers suit against them, LSM/Local Churches sued the publishing house and authors John Ankerberg and John Weldon over the Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions, a 1999 volume that included them. Worth reading is the publisher's response to the accusation, that it sued first, here: <http://www.harvesthousepublishers.com/about_cstatementfaq.cfm#respond>. Christianity Today, Mar '07, pp23, 25-27. <http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/march/12.23.html>
The CT online article cited above includes related links. One of them connects the reader to CT's initial coverage on the subject: "Local Church fights for evangelical ID card: Witness Lee group sues for $136 million over Harvest House cults article (February 1, 2003)." Above, (Kellner notes that "In recent years, LSM and the Local Churches have sought a closer alignment with evangelicals." Given its recent setbacks in court, the movement's continued use of lawsuits in their "fight" only seems to win LSM an increasingly negative reputation.) Especially significant are the links to the Great Lakes Brothers (aka Concerned Brothers), a group of dissident Witness Lee followers who are having their own legal and doctrinal battles with the Anaheim-based church hierarchy. See
<http://www.concernedbrothers.com/Evangelical%20Scholars/60ScholarsResponse.pdf>
--------
Sources, Monographs:
1 - Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense, by N.T. Wright (HarperSanFrancisco, 2006, hardcover, 256 pages)
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060507152/apologiareport>
2 - Mere Christianity, by C.S. Lewis (HarperSanFrancisco, 2001, paperback, 227 pages)
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060652926/apologiareport>
3 - The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief by Francis Collins (Free Press, 2006, hardcover, 304 pages)
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0743286391/apologiareport>
4 - Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science & Theology by William A. Dembski (IVP, 2002, paperback, 312 pages)
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/083082314X/apologiareport>
-------
( - next issue - )
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse