What Franklin Graham says about his Christian brothers and sisters...

rotflmao

What Franklin Graham says about his Christian

brothers and sisters...

I usually have made it a policy not to bring up personal names and institutions at this website which I disagree with; rather, I prefer to speak more generally to the problem, or issue, at hand using generalized categories, if I can. But from time to time I will... as is the case today.

"Cynically, I can't imagine what Franklin Graham would say about Post-Evangelical Process Christians if he thinks my Evangelically Progressive Christian brothers and sisters in Christ are going to hell... oh, wait a minute... I really don't care." - re slater

Many of us who are interested in living out our Christian faith in all facets of our lives also realize that to do this will be the great temptation to always judge other people and their passions. As a Process Christian (or as a Progressive Christian for those who are still in the evangelical camp) we prefer to lead with love and forgiveness even though its one of the hardest things to do around those who do not carry this attitude.

One of the major reasons I moved away from my former conservative evangelical faith was because its center was fixated in condemnation and judgment upon everyone around itself. In order to know who we were we learned that our "Christian" identity was bound up around isolation and exclusion rather than around Jesus whom we gave lip service to but unlike Jesus we struggled with reaching out in love without personal bias or condemnation upon others. Or the world around us. Or even those in our church fellowship.

One of the other major distinctives of my former dominionist church (one which wishes to govern government by removing the imaginary barrier between church and state with its own exclusionary church laws of morality led by racism and white supremacy) is that it is centered in division, hate, and perhaps even self-loathing.

Which is why we know conservative evangelicalism today as a Trumpian form of Christianity having chosen to be led by the infamous ex-President, Donald Trump, and his gangster gang of thieves and rogues. An unhealthy popular personage which many progressive/process Christians will recognize as an antichrist than as Christ's representative on earth. A fellow sinful human being who is a very poor, and tragic idol, for any Christian of faith to follow... and yet, they do, vociferously.

At the last, the Church of Jesus must resist, challenge, re-center itself, and recommit itself to Jesus fully... and in repentance. Loving is hard. Loving others different from our church dogmas and self-beliefs can be even harder. And having been taught not to love has to be the hardest learned trait to break.

But, with Spirit-led confession and repentance it's what must be done. To live in love. Lead in love. Reach out in love. And to determine to center all theological beliefs and teachings around the God of Love. A God who does not condemn and consign to hell but who loves through-and-through-and-through despite what idolatrous church leaders teach and preach.

R.E. Slater

August 30, 2022

...how non-Christians see the Christian faith...

* * * * * *

Do Franklin Graham’s accusations

against progressive Christianity

hold up against truth?

article link

PATRICK WILSON  |  AUGUST 25, 2022

i

Franklin Graham was one of six ministers selected to pray at Donald Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017. (Photo/Matt Johnson/Creative Commons)

Back on May 1, 2022, Franklin Graham, CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, posted an article in Decision Magazine titled, “The Eternal Peril of Progressive Christianity.” In this article, Graham expressed many poignant statements about the progressive Christian movement and numerous unsubstantiated allegations, including that it is “no gospel at all.”

This soon was followed by a social media blitz that blasted: “Progressive Christianity is dangerous for your soul.” Subscribers to the post received an email with a free (donation requested) PDF document titled, “Progressive Christianity Can Lead You to Hell.”

The PDF includes Graham’s aforementioned article along with Alisa Childers’ recommendations to counter progressive Christianity, Al Mohler’s remarks about theological liberalism, Michael Brown’s call to spiritual warfare, and Erwin Lutzer’s caution about “making the door wider” to be inclusive.

It is apparent that these authors are creating a straw man to demonize. If you build it, you can certainly tear it down.

This is a common tactic among fundamentalists, who seem to be discontent with merely preaching the gospel and need to have someone to theologically villainize and verbally assault. Graham, and others like him, expend their resources to malign other Christians whom they believe follow “a godless liberal media” and are “bent on casting doubt and undermining the foundational principles of God’s word.”

“This is a common tactic among fundamentalists, who seem to be discontent with merely preaching the gospel and need to have someone to theologically villainize and verbally assault.”

So, let us examine the actual views espoused by progressive Christians and see if they align with the allegations expressed by Graham and his cohorts. While there is a large spectrum of views held among adherents of progressive Christianity (as in most religious communities), the following are the eight points of progressive Christianity and the comparable statements from Graham’s article. Since progressive Christianity is not a denominational entity, the following statements are not creedal. Thus, proponents of the movement may agree with or vary from the perspectives provided here from progressivechristianity.org:

“By calling ourselves progressive Christians, we mean that we are Christians who:

“Believe that following the path and teaching of Jesus can lead to an awareness and experience of the Sacred and the Oneness and Unity of all life.” 

Graham cites Paul’s description of the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, which identifies the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus as central to the gospel of Christ. Moreover, he applies “the exact same warning” of Galatians 1:6-9 to the advocates of progressive Christianity. He infers that just as Paul called down a curse on those who preach a “different gospel,” so must modern-day preachers (like himself) condemn the false teaching of progressive Christianity.

Even though Paul’s strong rebuke to Christians in Galatia is over an unknown issue, Graham’s hermeneutic emboldens him to weaponize the passage against people who (as stated above) seek to follow the path and teaching of Jesus.

“Graham’s hermeneutic emboldens him to weaponize the passage against people who seek to follow the path and teaching of Jesus.”

Jesus called his followers to a sacrificial life of self-denial and cross-bearing. This true way of living is found in the Jesus whom progressive Christians affirm and seek to follow. The centrality of the atoning death and resurrection life of Jesus is exemplified, not ignored, by progressive Christians, who seek to live in the others-first way modeled and commanded by the Lord.

“Affirm that the teaching of Jesus provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life, and that we can draw from diverse sources of wisdom in our spiritual journey.” 

Graham cites Paul, who certainly gave additional, interpretive explanation on the teachings of Jesus. Paul even suggests that God’s “invisible qualities, eternal power and divine nature” leave us without excuse to relate to and experience God (Romans 1:20). It is not, as Graham claims, “undermining the foundational principles of God’s word” to affirm that the Spirit of the creative God continues to move, direct and use everyday experiences to guide us to the wisdom of God on our spiritual journey.

“Seek community that is inclusive of ALL people, including but not limited to: conventional Christians and questioning skeptics, believers and agnostics, women and men, those of all sexual orientations and gender identities, (and) those of all classes and abilities.”  

Graham, and others like him, accuse “proponents of progressive Christianity (of) twist(ing) and distort(ing) the truth of God’s word on sexuality, focusing on such nonsensical trends as gender identity.” He continues, “They deny God’s distinction of the sexes, and instead invent their own misguided standards, unguided by the word of God.”

While many in the progressive Christian movement may differ in their interpretation of God’s word on passages of the Bible, including but not limited to passages that may refer to sexuality, it is commonly done so with an intentional exegesis of the biblical text and not to distort the Bible with nonsense. Progressive Christianity attempts to understand the historical background and culture, the genre and literature, and the deeper complexities of the Bible, which leads to a greater appreciation, a more contemplative understanding, and a stronger application to the Christian life.

“Know that the way we behave toward one another is the fullest expression of what we believe.” 

Graham says progressive Christianity is not “forward thinking” but regresses into “unbiblical thinking and living.” Yet there is nothing more rooted in the teachings of Jesus than to live out a devotion for God through loving others.

Progressive Christianity is not an attempt to develop a new way of living the Christian life; rather, it is an effort to live out the Christological worldview, steeped in the Jewish teachings in Scripture to care for others, especially those in need (such as the widow, fatherless, poor and foreigner).

“Progressive Christianity emphasizes the importance of putting into practice what we preach and living by the biblical code of ethics Jesus modeled for us.”

The “new” commandment given by Jesus is to love one another as demonstrated by Christ’s love for us. Progressive Christianity emphasizes the importance of putting into practice what we preach and living by the biblical code of ethics Jesus modeled for us.

“Find grace in the search for understanding and believe there is more value in questing than in absolutes.” 

Nine times in his writing, Paul speaks of the truth of God as a “mystery.” To oversimplify the Bible to black-and-white, clear-and-clean truth is to minimize the majesty of God to the finite nature of our limited comprehension.

Graham makes outlandish and unsubstantiated claims that progressive Christianity denies the deity of Christ or the fullness of the Trinity, which “can send a person to hell.”  Progressive Christianity, as a whole, does not deny any such theological doctrine; rather, it embraces the mystery, leaving room for people to doubt, question and search for truth and application.

Loving God with all our mind and seeking to have the same attitude of Christ Jesus necessitate a humble embracing of our limited state and a yearning to grow through being teachable, striving to learn and accepting the divine as greater than what we can fully fathom.

“Strive for peace and justice among all people.” 

Graham takes issue with progressive Christianity’s stance toward social and racial justice (which he admits the Bible addresses) because it “neglects the far more fundamental issue of God’s justice.” His fallacy here is an argument from silence; simply because progressive Christianity emphasizes the importance of social and racial equality does not preclude its adherents from affirming and advocating for divine justice.

For many progressive theologians, it is actually out of a deep recognition that how the marginalized are treated by Christians is a reflection of our devotion to God, the ultimate and only rightful judge of us all.

“Strive to protect and restore the integrity of the earth.” 

Graham does not specifically address environmentalism in this article, but he does incorrectly state that progressive Christianity seeks to earn salvation through good works. Progressive Christianity does not deny the atoning work of Jesus on the Cross as the means of salvation. Instead, progressive Christians seek to live out a fruitful life of faith.

James reminds us that faith without works is dead, which does not mean our good deeds save us but that they should accompany the life of the saved. Hence, progressive Christians affirm the commission in the Garden of Eden in the opening chapters of the Bible to care for creation and all created things.

Graham also states that progressive Christianity “most frequently fails to see the ruinous consequences of mankind’s depraved, sinful state.” This is simply not true. Progressive Christianity identifies human greed as the cause behind climate change, bigotry to lie behind racism, and poverty to be perpetuated by indifference.

“The depravity of humanity is of utmost concern to progressive Christians, who value the care of our world and of people enough to dismantle systems that perpetuate sin.”

The depravity of humanity is of utmost concern to progressive Christians, who value the care of our world and of people enough to dismantle systems that perpetuate sin.

“Commit to a path of life-long learning, compassion, and selfless love.” 

Graham charges, “Progressive Christianity denies the divinely inspired, authoritative truth of the Bible as it intersects every facet of living.” Yet, he gives no explanation to back this claim.

The most prominent progressive theologians and pastors affirm that the Bible is divinely inspired and authoritative. While fundamentalist and progressive theologians have widely debated the form of inspiration or the definition of infallibility of the Scriptures, it is a complete misrepresentation to state that only one side holds to a high view of the Bible. Furthermore, Graham’s claim that a more literal interpretation of the Bible is more “orthodox” denies the 19th century development of biblical literalism as a response to the previous centuries of the Enlightenment.

In sum, Graham’s concluding statement in his article is just as true for progressive Christians as it is for Graham and other conservatives: “Evangelicals need to guard the truth of genuine scriptural preaching and living, remaining true and bold about exactly what the Bible clearly teaches.” Such a statement begs the question raised by Pontius Pilate: “What is truth?”

Graham seems to have a decisively clear understanding of what he believes and thinks everyone else should hold as truth, but such presumption and self-righteousness is the very concern that leads many to a progressive approach.

Franklin Graham’s scare tactic that “progressive Christianity can lead you to hell” further illustrates the aversion many have to his approach to Christianity. Many people are leaving conservative Christianity not because they are dissatisfied with Jesus but rather because of the repulsive approach of people like Graham who are so unkind and degrading to others and who seek to align with the political establishment to gain power to propagate their version of faith.

This approach is too pharisaical and self-righteous for many, who are finding community in progressive Christianity. The outcome of such an approach will only continue to widen the chasm among followers of Jesus. Such divisions were the very concern that Jesus had in his priestly prayer, where he centered on praying for unity among his followers (John 17:20-21).

Jesus chose quite an eclectic group of disciples who had different approaches to life and faith. He brought them together amidst their differences to work for the expansion of a kingdom that is not of this world. Jesus continues to do the same today.

I hope and pray that as we leave behind the kind of divisive dichotomy espoused by Graham, we will beat our swords into plowshares, and we will unite together — for the love of God.

Patrick Wilson

Patrick Wilson has served as a pastor for 25 years in Dallas and Austin, Texas, and most recently in in Rolla, Mo., where he currently is starting a new community of faith, CrossRoads. He is a graduate of Baylor University, earned two master’s degrees at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and a doctor of ministry degree from Logsdon Seminary.

 

Related articles:

Franklin Graham says he’s not a preacher of hate, so let’s roll the tape and see | Opinion by Rodney Kennedy

Why is anybody still giving money to Franklin Graham? | Opinion by Mark Wingfield

Reflections on Christianity for 2019

Here are my several reflections on Christianity for 2019.

First, I would like to see an updated form of inaugurated eschatology ala Oscar Cullman focused on Christ's presence in this life and throughout all humanity. But without the need for predicated end time schemes.

More specifically, I would like to write of the relentless Spirit of God reaching into humanity's willful struggle with sin and evil that through a process described in the bible as a process of salvation-history, God's  work of atoning redemption might be extended to its fullest affects into humanity's existence. That is, should it be possible before mankind brings itself to a point of extermination commonly termed by biblicists as Armageddon. Which surely will occur if the church doesn't get its act together and learn to love all sinners, serve all sinners, and include all sinners at the tables of Christ.

In attempting this, I would also like to remove all popular end time schematas which reinforce in the church the furtility of being present in a sinful world as it awaits divine judgment. Surely it will if the Spirit cannot empower His faithful to act and work in the place of Jesus. As such, I would like to recast eschatological pessimism with eschatological hope by building on the more contemporary themes of a truly open and relational theology using process theology as its philosophical basis.

By this I mean to rid the bible of its perceived Calvinistic themes of a dipolar God who is actively judging and controlling all lives to a most dreadful end reserved for all who are not predestined or elected to eternal life. This is the crudest, most heinous interpretation of a loving God who seeks all mankind to be at peace through salvation provided in Christ. Though I do not chose the idea of Universalism, I do chose the idea of spiritual responsibility. And in that responsibility to allow all humanity to come to God's outreaching call on every level possible, made possible by Jesus' atoning sacrifice who brings healing and wholeness to all who come to God in their own way.

Connected to that thought is the healing which comes to all communities and nations of the world should they learn to love one another with Jesus' love that wars and hatreds would cease, oppression and cruelty end, that peace and goodwill to all become the operative ethic of the world. Open and Relational Theology is just such a vehicle to urge both church and mankind more favorably forward towards enacting the love of God brought to this world in Christ. It demands we do not wait to die and go to heaven but to be willfully resolved to bring heaven here on earth across all relations, distinctions, disagreements, divisions, and mistrust.

And with this idea to perceive God as the whisper on the wind; the many-hued spectra of light; the silence which runs underneath the noise of creation. Whose divine sovereignty is both weak and strong and built upon the cornerstones of love, mercy, grace, forgiveness, and sacrificial service to the other.

In a sense, many articles housed within this website move along these lines of thought but they all could be written again with a stronger voice underlaid with the foundation of process theology and then across all systematic doctrines, creeds, and traditions of church beliefs. For me, this perception cries out to me that God is there. He is with us. He never will abandon us. That His love is the healing balm we all need in every aspect of our life despite the distracting, if not deceptive, noise of many other beliefs, creeds, and doctrines shouting hate, judgment, oppression, malice, and injustice. This god I do not recognize and will not follow. It is a god made in man's image. An image fallen and depraved. But the God of love is the one I chose best to follow, to re-imagine, and share with those around me.

R.E. Slater

November 12, 2019
Edited March 30,2020

Addendum

Below are several of my old seminary books that served among many others as a basis when looking at The Relationship Between the Testaments. To the 200 page treatise I wrote on systematic theology I also wrote a 17 page summary of the major themes found across the bible. At the time I decided there were twelve such themes under the following subheadings:

• Two Testaments: One Bible, by D.L. Baker 
• The Christ of the Covenants, by O. Palmer Robertson 
• Millennialism, by Charles Feinberg 
• Remnant Theology, by Gerhard F. Hasel
• The Presence of the Future by George Eldon Ladd
• Toward an OT Theology, by Walter C. Kaiser
• The Messianic Hope, by Charles Augustus Briggs
• Gospel and Law: Contrast or Continuum, by Daniel P. Fuller
• Israel and the Church, by Carl B. Hoch
• Christ and Time, by Oscar Cullmann
• God's Design: A Focus on OT Theology, by Elmer A. Martens
• OT and NT Theology: Basic Issues in Current Debate, by Gerhard F. Hasel

These subheadings I might today re-structure into the more general categories:

Subject                Description                                                          Theology               

Revelation           One God: Different Cultural Meanings                Hermenuetics

Salvation              The God of Redemption                                       Redemption

Eschatology         The God of Healing & Wholeness                       Promise

Missional             God's People Who Speak & Act                          Message/Ethics

Relational            The Presence of God                                            Presence

Knowledge          Themes of Continuity & Discontinuity                   Meaning

Christology          The God of Hope                                                   Hope

Holy Spirit           The God of Grace & Mercy                                    Love

Community          The Fellowship of the People of God                    Fellowship

Process               God in Creation's Re-Creation                             Assurance

Teleology            God in Process                                                     Means, Methods & Mode

Apology              God in Discussion                                                 Examination

Overall God has placed creation in relationship with humanity and vice versa. Through this medium of timeful existence the bible shares God's promises through covenant, Messianic event, narrative themes related to sin and salvation, various salvific motifs of salvation-history, and revelatory word.

At the time it seemed all so clear to this young theolog but move forward nearly 35 years hence and I have more questions than answers, criticisms than solutions, reflections than assurances, and urgency than indifference.

For now I have but one simple thought which drives both my faith and my faithfulness and that is "Christ and Christ alone" centered absolutely, positively, 100%, in the "Love of God". When I read the bible, write, preach, teach, act, behave, whatever... all must reflect Jesus as God's mid-point of salvific history and its meaning for us today.

It is Jesus who will deliver this world back to God whole and at peace. And it is our responsibility to obey. Whether we destroy ourselves in the process or whether we repent to work together to make Jesus' gift at once and at one with God, this alone is our mission. Christ, and Christ alone.

R.E. Slater
November 13, 2019
Edited March 20, 2020

Oscar Cullmann

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

Oscar Cullmann
Born	25 February 1902 Strasbourg
Died	16 January 1999 (aged 96) Chamonix
Known for	Christian theologian
Academic background
Alma mater	Strasbourg seminary
Academic work
Discipline	Christian eschatology and Christology
Institutions	Basel Reformed Seminary, Sorbonne - Paris
Influenced	John Howard Yoder[1]

Oscar Cullmann (25 February 1902, Strasbourg – 16 January 1999, Chamonix) was a Lutheran theologian. He is best known for his work in the ecumenical movement and was partly responsible for the establishment of dialogue between the Lutheran and Roman Catholic traditions. Because of his intense ecumenical work, Cullmann's Basel colleague Karl Barth joked with him that his tombstone would bear the inscription "advisor to three popes."^[2]

Contents

• 1Biography
• 2Theology
• 3Selected works
• 4References
• 5External links

Biography[edit]

Cullmann was born in Strasbourg (then in Germany) and studied classical philology and theology at the seminary there. In 1926, he accepted an assistant professorship, a position previously held by Albert Schweitzer.

In 1930, he was awarded a full professorship of New Testament. From 1936, he also taught the history of the early church. In 1938, he began teaching both subjects at Basel Reformed Seminary. In 1948 Cullmann accepted a position teaching theology in Paris at the Sorbonne while he continued at Basel. He retired from both in 1972.

He was elected a foreign member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1960.^[3]

He was invited to be an observer at the Second Vatican Council.^[2]

Upon his death at 96, the World Council of Churches issued a special tribute to Cullmann to honour his ecumenical work.

Theology[edit]

Cullmann's studies on Christian eschatology and Christology drove him to propose a third position over against the popular positions of C. H. Dodd and Albert Schweitzer, known as "redemptive history" or "inaugurated eschatology". He wrote that Jesus Christ was the midpoint of sacred history, which informs general history and runs linearly from creation to consummation.^[2] He stressed the objective reality of sacred history against the existentialist interpretation of Rudolf Bultmann, a fellow German theologian. Cullmann suggested the analogy of D-Day and VE-Day to illustrate the relationship between Jesus' death and resurrection on the one hand, and his parousia on the other.^[4]

Selected works[edit]

Among Cullmann's important works are:

• Cullmann, Oscar (1950). Baptism in the New Testament (trans. of Die Tauflehre des Neuen Testaments: Erwachsenen- und Kindertaufe). Studies in Biblical Theology. 1. London: SCM Press. ISBN 9780334000686. OCLC 13521948. - (trans from the Zürich: Zwingli-Verlag, 1948 1st edition).
• ——— (1951). Christ and Time: the primitive Christian conception of time and history (trans. of Christus und die Zeit: die urchristliche Zeit- und Geschichtsauffassung. London: SCM Press. OCLC 603792847. - (trans from the Zollikon-Zürich: Evangelischer Verlag a. g., 1946 1st edition).
• ——— (1953). Early Christian Worship (trans. for Urchristentum und Gottesdienst). Studies in Biblical Theology. 10. London: SCM Press. ISBN 9780334003533. OCLC 391942. - (trans from the Basel & Zürich, 1944 1st edition).
• ——— (1953). Peter: Disciple, Apostle and Martyr (trans. of Petrus, Jünger, Apostel, Martyrer: das historische und das theologische Petrus-problem. London: SCM Press. OCLC 603801281. - (trans from the Zürich : Zwingli, 1952 1st edition).
• ——— (1958). Immortality of the Soul; or, Resurrection of the dead?: the witness of the New Testament. Ingersoll Lecture, 1955. London: Epworth. OCLC 9538428.^[5]
• ——— (1959). The Christology of the New Testament (trans. of Die Christologie des Neuen Testaments). London: SCM Press. OCLC 301386195. - (trans from the Kampen: Kok, 1911 1st edition).
• ——— (1965). Salvation in History (trans. of Heil als Geschichte: heilsgeschichtliche Existenz im Neuen Testament. New Testament Library. London: SCM Press. ISBN 9780334015598. OCLC 17518219. - (trans from the Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1965 1st edition).

Moving at a Snail's Pace - Reformed Theology's State of Affairs

Dr. Roger Olson has done a little fact-check comparing "what was said then" vs. "what is being said now" to discover several movements in today's Reformed circles:

1) Reformed Theology has loosened up a bit... but not nearly enough; its still buttoned-down and pigeoned-holed by doctrinal presuppositions;

2) Curiously, Reformed churches in general hold to a stricter Reformed theology than its principle heads steeped in doctrinal knowledge; that is to say, the congregant is less forgiving, less imaginative, and less reconciling than their leading theological architects; and,

3) Religious criticism never seems to change. What is "good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander" depending on which governing body grants theological approval. Denominational authority is famous for pushing up their credentials and approvals while pushing down all those they disagree with. Unless, of course, they later say the same thing themselves - then, it is acceptable. Otherwise, all non-approved sanctioning bodies and publications are deemed unworthy.

In sum, Reformed Theology must become un-Reformed if it is to become better conversant with contemporary postmodern and progressive theologies running circles around its doctrinally bound  creeds and confessions. Until that day comes, other church and academic groups will be doing the hard work of comprehending God's Word so that Jesus may be preached to the nations, His gospel sowed, and souls reaped.

As a postmodern/progressive theologian I leave you with this great quote summarizing all theologies past and present - including mine own. It would be wise to remember when defending our faiths that not all knowledge is certain but must always leave room for movement, openness, and discussion:

“Our little systems have their day; they have their day and cease to be. They are but broken lights of Thee, and Thou, O God, art more than they.” - Alfred Lord Tennyson

R.E. Slater
July 17, 2017

* * * * * * * * * * *

A New Christian Dogmatics from Eerdmans

article link

by Roger Olson
July 16, 2017
Comments

I recently received from publisher Wm. B. Eerdmans a complimentary copy of Christian Dogmatics: An Introduction by two Dutch theologians Cornelis van der Kooi and Gijsbert van den Brink (2012/2017). It’s a beautifully hard cover volume encompassing 806 pages (including indexes). On the back cover and inside are glowing endorsements by Richard J. Mouw, Michael S. Horton, Charles Van Engen, and John Bolt—all well-known Reformed theologians with evangelical credentials. I have not read the whole volume yet, but have glanced through it and read portions. It is very contemporary, moderate, irenic, broadly Reformed in posture and orientation, and accessible in language. The authors quote a broad range of theologians and philosophers but the influences of certain 20th century Dutch Reformed theologians such as G. C. Berkouwer and Hendrikus Berkhof are notable.

One of the first things I noticed as I scanned the table of contents is that the doctrine of Scripture appears as Chapter 13—on the heels of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit (Chapter 12). That is not to say, of course, that the Bible is not mentioned or used as an authority for theology before that; it is only to note that a complete account of a doctrine of Scripture follows that of the Holy Spirit—which is ironic (at least to me).

Years ago my good, late friend Stanley J. Grenz published his similar one volume “dogmatics” entitled Theology for the Community of God (also published by Eerdmans) and included the full discussion of a doctrine of Scripture after the doctrine of the Holy Spirit—late in the order of chapters. For that he was pummeled and vilified by certain conservative evangelical theologians. I am waiting to hear from them now about van der Kooi and van den Brink who do the same.

Of course, as an evangelical Arminian, I am especially interested in these Dutch Reformed theologians’ treatment of the doctrines of God’s sovereignty—especially providence and election/predestination. I found them to be very moderate—following closely Berkouwer and Berkhof (Hendrikus, not Louis!). There is no hint here of the aggressive “five point Calvinism” of many American Calvinists.

In sum, if someone asked me to recommend to him or her a moderately evangelical, one volume systematic theology from a broadly Reformed perspective I would recommend this one while cautioning that I have not yet read every page. What I have read pleases me even though, naturally, as an Arminian, I would have trouble using it as my own textbook in a course in systematic theology.

We evangelical Arminians need a good, broadly evangelical (not only Wesleyan), contemporary, one volume systematic theology from an Arminian perspective. I have heard rumors of such—that it is “in the works”—from a British Nazarene theologian, but he has cautioned me not to expect it anytime soon. I hope that it may yet appear in publication during my lifetime. I will not write one; I’m not a systematician but a historical theologian. I will leave it to others to risk systematizing revelation and Christian belief; I’m not at all convinced it can be successfully done. I agree with Alfred Lord Tennyson who famously wrote “Our little systems have their day; they have their day and cease to be. They are but broken lights of Thee and Thou, O God, art more than they.”