Books

[GodfatherPartTwo]

Share any theological books that you've read or are reading.

I've just finished reading A Defense of Calvinism by C.H Spurgeon. I am impressed with his ability to say so much in such short sermons. He certainly earned the title "the Prince of Preachers." Engels and his leech, Marx, hated Spurgeon more than anybody in the world. That alone makes him one of the greats.

I am currently reading The Mystery of Christ, His Covenant & His Kingdom by Samuel Renihan. In it, he applies a consistent hermeneutical approach in outlining how all the covenants of the Bible find their ultimate fulfillment in the New Covenant, as inaugurated by Christ.

 

[An0dyne]

On the Ecclesiastical Mystagogy by St. Maximus the Confessor. It was timely for Reformation as he was sort of a “Here I Stand” martyr in his day (he lost his writing hand and his tongue for it).

The book exposits the deeper meaning of worship beyond function and symbol. Especially in protestantism we get caught up in those modes of thinking rather than the deeper reality of what is taking place. He explains what is going on from the perspective of the sensible verses the intelligible (noetic; i.e., spiritually mindful). Put in simpler terms, what you get out of worship from the perspective of a slave (fear of hell), hireling (hope of reward/heaven), and a son (love). He goes through these different perspectives from the opening of worship through the readings and sermon and then Communion. Really fascinating read, though quite deep and takes a lot of time to get through.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

Finished The Early Church by Henry Chadwick. My Pastor gave me his spare copy. It is not the most expansive book on the topic but it does the job for the general reader. It explores many of the geographical, cultural, political, and theological influences that led to the developments that accrued in the Latin West and the Greek East in the early centuries of the church.

Currently reading Metaphysics: Constructing a Christian Worldview by William Hasker on a recommendation. It is a book they use at Liberty University so I should have known that it was going to be disappointing. If anything, it shows how not to construct a Christian worldview; by starting with non-biblical categories and reading the Bible in light of that philosophy rather than deriving your worldview from the Bible. The author was an open-theist, still more logically consistent than "simple foreknowledge" but consistently denying God's omniscience all the same.

 

[An0dyne]

I recently read Disillusioned: Why I Left the Eastern Orthodox Priesthood and Church by Joshua Schooping.

As someone who has been very sympathetic to EO, and has even considered joining, this book has given much to think about. I appreciate its fairness to classical Protestantism and the thoroughness and thoughtfulness of the research, at least at a first read. It also does not come across to me as “gotcha” towards the EO, but is obviously touching on a sore spot for the author. It’s probably worth a read for guys here who would like to think critically about the tensions between Protestantism and EO and our place in the broader Christian community.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

Sunday school at church has started reading On the Bondage of the Will by Martin Luther. I consider this book to be essential reading and may be the best work by Luther. "Man has a will, but it is not free." As Jesus said, "Whoever commits sin is a slave of sin." The Son must set you free and if He sets you free, then you shall be free indeed.

 

[Wutang]

Started re-reading this book on Augustine since that Augustine thread got created on this forum.

Augustine on the Christian Life

Focusing on Augustine’s personal transformation and dependence on the the Word of God, author Gerald Bray shows us how this ancient theologian can sharpen and encourage Christians today.

www.crossway.org

This book is part of a series published by Crossway where each entry deals with an influential Christian theologian, pastors, or thinker. Crossway is a Protestant publishing house that seems to on the Reform side when it comes to theology so pretty much every figure that is covered in the series is a Protestant with the exception of Augustine. That says quite a bit about how influential he is that he can be placed in a series next to people like Luther, Spurgeon, Warfield, and Jonathan Edwards.

 

[M.Balakirev]

I've been reading The Soul After Death by Fr. Seraphim Rose. An excellent book and it explains clearly why we all need to come to faith and continue with the process of sanctification. The motivation for me personally reading the book was not only out of curiosity, but because of the skeptics I encounter every other day combined with, what seems to be, very few reliable accounts of heaven and hell in the Protestant faith itself.

Whilst Sola Scriptura was satisfactory for centuries and is still absolute, in this day age there perhaps needs to be reliable accounts from Protestant Christians that challenge the after death experiences of the secular, occult and other religions.

The author concludes that secular, occult and even Pentecostal 'after death' experiences are all similar which is in stark contrast to the consistent, reliable accounts of the Saints and other Holy men where the soul was received by angels so that it could make its rigorous route through 'the aerial toll houses' to heaven. Basically at the point of death, you need to be spotless (which the holiest men seemed to achieve) otherwise the demons will pin any sin you have not repented from on you.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

The motivation for me personally reading the book was not only out of curiosity, but because of the skeptics I encounter every other day combined with, what seems to be, very few reliable accounts of heaven and hell in the Protestant faith itself.

As a rule, Reformed theology makes an end of speaking where the Bible does, and since the Bible does not give us a tour of heaven or hell, it is not something you will hear from the Reformed either. Protestant, though not Reformed, groups such as Pentecostals or Charismatics have plenty of stories like these, as well as the more mystical sides of Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

Whilst Sola Scriptura was satisfactory for centuries and is still absolute, in this day age there perhaps needs to be reliable accounts from Protestant Christians that challenge the after death experiences of the secular, occult and other religions.

I find the Bible is sufficient to deny any claims of the afterlife made by secularists and occultists. It is appointed once for men to die, and after that, comes judgement.

The author concludes that secular, occult and even Pentecostal 'after death' experiences are all similar which is in stark contrast to the consistent, reliable accounts of the Saints and other Holy men where the soul was received by angels so that it could make its rigorous route through 'the aerial toll houses' to heaven.

Paul, who was holier than all of these holy men, could not and would not describe his experience on being caught up to the third heaven. The toll houses are a superstition, not an artifact of divine revelation.

Basically at the point of death, you need to be spotless (which the holiest men seemed to achieve) otherwise the demons will pin any sin you have not repented from on you.

Thanks be to God that He sent His Son to make all His Church spotless.

 

[M.Balakirev]

I find the Bible is sufficient to deny any claims of the afterlife made by secularists and occultists. It is appointed once for men to die, and after that, comes judgement.

Thanks be to God that He sent His Son to make all His Church spotless.

I was having a conversation with a gentleman today about this, and you either believe Jesus died for our sins and was raised from the dead, or not. So yes, I think people have either decided they want to believe or have decided they don't want to believe, so miracles and other contemporary experiences probably won't convince those that have decided not to believe anyway. I have relayed the incredible healing experience of a man I know well to non-believers and it's received with a mixture of laughter and some thought for a few seconds which is as far as it goes.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

I was having a conversation with a gentleman today about this, and you either believe Jesus died for our sins and was raised from the dead, or not. So yes, I think people have either decided they want to believe or have decided they don't want to believe, so miracles and other contemporary experiences probably won't convince those that have decided not to believe anyway.

It is a wicked generation that seeks after a sign. Jesus says the testimony of the Prophets is sufficient for someone to believe in Him, even a miracle as great as resurrection wouldn't convince someone to believe in Him. The heart of unbelief is not due to God providing insufficient reason but it is one of active rebellion.

 

[Wutang]

It is a wicked generation that seeks after a sign. Jesus says the testimony of the Prophets is sufficient for someone to believe in Him, even a miracle as great as resurrection wouldn't convince someone to believe in Him. The heart of unbelief is not due to God providing insufficient reason but it is one of active rebellion.

Something I mentioned on another thread was that I actually have seen some examples of people saying that would continue to rebel and oppose God even if they could be shown undisputable proof of His existence. On the old Roosh forums way back when it was purely a game forum but still had an off-topic subforum for non-game discussion, there was this prominent poster would sometime jump into these debates on religion and I remember he wrote a post that sticks out in mind even after over a decade since it was such a clear expression of a common anti-God attitude. He said that even Good could be proved to exist he would still continue to hate Him (I remember him specifically using the word 'hate') because in his view, God brought suffering.

If you read the Scriptures, you can see this happen through out it. Even people would were shown sign and miracles still would rebel. The best example of this is what happened with the Golden Calf. The Israelites had just be saved from slavery in Egypt and had personally seen God's powers at work but that still wasn't enough to dissuade them from making an idol and bowing before it. Reading this story we might think "How could people who had saw God's powers first hands behave like this" but given what we see with people and how they react to the Gospel message, the behavior of the Israelites in Exodus is in actuality totally believable.

 

[M.Balakirev]

Something I mentioned on another thread was that I actually have seen some examples of people saying that would continue to rebel and oppose God even if they could be shown undisputable proof of His existence. On the old Roosh forums way back when it was purely a game forum but still had an off-topic subforum for non-game discussion, there was this prominent poster would sometime jump into these debates on religion and I remember he wrote a post that sticks out in mind even after over a decade since it was such a clear expression of a common anti-God attitude. He said that even Good could be proved to exist he would still continue to hate Him (I remember him specifically using the word 'hate') because in his view, God brought suffering.

William Lane Craig called a man's bluff in a debate once, in that if The Lord actually appeared to him, he would assume it to be a hallucination! I've listened to many of the atheists' arguments and it's funny how they seem to be 'cousins' of Satanists in that they tend to wear dark clothing (not out of style), have tattoos, listen to similar music and and are always angry, so they are possibly predisposed to be atheists by virtue of personality.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

The Didache: Teachings of the Twelve Apostles as translated by Philip Schaff. One of the earliest known Christian sources outside of the New Testament, probably written in the early second century. Schaff's notes are helpful in underscoring what is and what isn't in the text. I find the lack of Infant Baptism, Baptismal Regeneration, Icons, Sacerdotal Priesthood, Apostolic Succession, the Papacy, and the affirmation of only two offices in the Church, that of Bishop/Elder and Deacon (the same as the New Testament) to be most noteworthy.

Edit: Chapter 16 also speaks of the Antichrist and tribulation, something that postmillenialists would have to reconcile with their understanding of the eschaton.

 

[Wutang]

^ I actually read the Diadache for the first time this year in a very unlikely source: a book that about Christian heavy metal. It consisted mostly of interviews but in the beginning of the book it also had the Nicene Creed, the Our Father prayer, and the Diache. I'm surprised that I never heard of it until now and also that it seems like a lot of the Christians I know whatever their denomination don't seem to know about it either since it's a pretty good summary of basics of the faith. It seems like it would be a good thing to hand out as a handbook to new believers or to sum up the essentials for people who have been believers for a while.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

It seems like it would be a good thing to hand out as a handbook to new believers or to sum up the essentials for people who have been believers for a while.

The genre could be considered disciplinary, like James. The opening borrows from a Jewish tract: The Two Ways, the Way of Life and the Way of Death. The Didache would be useful in catechizing former pagans into the Monotheistic religion. Matthew is quoted the most (makes you wonder how they knew to believe in Matthew before any "infallible" councils) and there are other sections that sound right out of Paul's letters. It's a good, short read.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

The Epistle of Barnabas as translated by Philip Schaff. There is a set that bundles both this and the Didache together, and they both can be read in under an hour. It is another early writing from the age of the Apostolic Fathers. The author gives many typological arguments that point to Christ from the Old Testament, some better than others. I think it wise to restrict your typology to that which the Apostles themselves use in the New Testament, as our typologies can run astray. Examples of these would be viewing the Virgin Mary as the New Eve (whereas Paul only speaks of Christ as the New Adam) or Steven Anderson's belief that Jesus not only descended to Hell, but was actually burning in Hell, based on a strange typology of the Paschal Lamb.

The one of most interest to me was that the author gave an argument for the world only ever reaching 6,000 years old, followed by the millennial kingdom, which is another 1,000 years, then the eternal state of the New Jerusalem (which serves as the eighth day, the day of the new beginning).

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

Started re-reading this book on Augustine since that Augustine thread got created on this forum.

Augustine on the Christian Life

Focusing on Augustine’s personal transformation and dependence on the the Word of God, author Gerald Bray shows us how this ancient theologian can sharpen and encourage Christians today.

www.crossway.org

This book is part of a series published by Crossway where each entry deals with an influential Christian theologian, pastors, or thinker. Crossway is a Protestant publishing house that seems to on the Reform side when it comes to theology so pretty much every figure that is covered in the series is a Protestant with the exception of Augustine. That says quite a bit about how influential he is that he can be placed in a series next to people like Luther, Spurgeon, Warfield, and Jonathan Edwards.

Can't believe I didn't mention this but Crossway is the publishing house behind the ESV translation of the Bible, which is one of the best translations available, though I remain on team NASB.

 

[The Berean]

Can't believe I didn't mention this but Crossway is the publishing house behind the ESV translation of the Bible, which is one of the best translations available, though I remain on team NASB.

The NASB is what I usually read well. I've only read the ESV on occasion. Recently, I've also started occasionally reading "The Scriptures" which uses the original Hebrew words for names of God, people, and places. I started reading this translation because I was curious about a good friend because a Messianic Christian and I wanted to understand his views better.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

Recently, I've also started occasionally reading "The Scriptures" which uses the original Hebrew words for names of God, people, and places. I started reading this translation because I was curious about a good friend because a Messianic Christian and I wanted to understand his views better.

I have a similar Messianic Christian Bible that someone gifted to me. It isn't a good translation but it orders the Old Testament books in the order that the Jews always believed them to be.

The Tanakh is made up of 3 sections. Torah (Law)-Nevi'im (Prophets)-Ketuvim (Writings). Jesus appeals to this canon in Matthew 23 and Luke 11: "So that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar."

Literally A to Z. From Abel (Genesis) to Zechariah (2 Chronicles, the last book in the Hebrew canon). This is part of why the Apocryphal books are not considered inspired, as they simply don't fit in this framework, nor were they written by Prophets, some weren't even written in Hebrew.

 

[GodfatherPartTwo]

The History of the Church by Eusebius. Philip Schaff is considered the gold standard of Church History. If you've ever read any of the Church Fathers in English, you can thank men like Schaff. But long before him was a man named Eusebius of Caesarea who took it upon himself to write a historical account of the Christian faith, beginning with the person of Jesus Christ, up to his day (4th century). As the Church faced intense persecution from its inception up to the Nicene Council, many of its early sources were destroyed and have been lost to time, but we still can see glimpses of them in Eusebius' work. It is very ahead of it's time in terms of scholarship.