Flame of Love suggests that from the Day of Pentecost the early Christians experienced the tremendous power of the Holy Spirit. They were filled with unexpected sacrificial love, freed from the powers of this world, and given a new kind of ministry of the Spirit (2 Cor. 3:3-9). The works of the Holy Spirit did not simply “disappear” after the apostle died rather the Holy Spirit needs to reappear in the 21st church.

Pinnock compartmentalizes the work of the Holy Spirit in seven sections: Spirit and Trinity, Spirit and Creation, Spirit and Christology, Spirit and Church, Spirit and Union, Spirit and Universality, and Spirit and Truth.

For example, in the Spirit and Church section, Pinnock argues hard for a “recovering and reclaiming” of the sacraments, the Charism, and a mission focused church. He sees the sacraments as a ‘tangible’ sign and symbol. Charisms are located and described in 1 Cor. 12 and 14, Eph 4, and Heb. 2. These gifts are given to fulfill the mission and vocation of the church. The Charisms equip the ministers to orchestrate ministry while giving authority and power. (Eph 4:11-14) The church needs to have a mission of healing, evangelism, and justice. The Spirit is the source of empowerment that paves the way for the Spirit to speak, teach, brake strong-holds, work, heal, and minister.

Pinnock clearly articulates that the Holy Spirit is missing in the 21st church. In a sense, the church has forgotten about the Spirit, which leads Pinnock to argue that there needs to be a re-examination and a furthering reconstruction of the theology of the Holy Spirit (pneumatology). It is imperative that the church finds an understanding on how to practically theologize the Holy Spirit functionality in and out of the halls of the church and academics. He strongly argues that the gifts are the main push for activating the mission and vocation of the church.

Questions I have based off of Flame of Love?

What is the significance of being filled with the ‘Holy Spirit’?
I think there is an experience, often subsequent to conversion, of being ‘filled’ with the Holy Spirit (Eph 5:18). This experience is primarily for the purpose of empowering a believer for ministry (Acts 1:8)

Are the ‘Gifts of the Spirit’ for Today?
I think the gifts of the Spirit are for every believer today, though they are not to be used as ‘criteria’ of one’s spirituality. They are to be used in appropriate contexts and within the New Testament guidelines (I Cor 12-14).

Are ‘Tongues’ the evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?
I deeply value speaking in tongues for those who have the gift. However I deny that it is the single necessary ‘evidence’ of receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.

What about ‘holy laughter’, being ‘slain in the Spirit’, and getting the tingles?
I acknowledge that various extraordinary manifestations of the Holy Spirit are possible. I deny that they should be made into any sort of spiritual criteria. When you invite the Spirit in and watch Him move, who knows what will happen? Maybe power, transformation, and reconciliation?

How Do I Let The Holy Spirit Do His Work Without Getting Weird and Crazy?
It is all about balance. Catholics focus on the Father. Protestants focus on Jesus. Pentecostals focus on the Holy Spirit. Not too much, but not too little, but just enough.

© 2009, Jeremy Zach. All rights reserved.

I just read Reformed and Always Reforming: The Postconservative Approach to Evangelical Theology by Roger Olson. Throughout the whole book I was nodding my head and shouting amen. Roger is a theology professor at Treutt Seminary– Baylor University. Essentially Roger articulated an evangelicalism that may be suited for the 21^st century. I believe that Roger has been involved in conservative Evangelicalism in the past and now in the present he wants a new approach.

Conservative Evangelicalism vs. Postconservative Evangelicalism

Conservative evangelicals love their Doctrine. It is all about Doctrine! Roger alludes to the fact that when conservative Christians attempt to identify whether a person or a group is Christian, they often turn to examination of doctrinal beliefs. (67) Millard Erickson and DA Carson, two big hitters within the conservative Christian scholarly circles, argue “cognitive knowledge and affirmation of correct doctrines are the defining hallmarks of authentic evangelical faith”. I whole heartedly agree, but I think correct doctrine is too subjective and interpretative based. Roger questions this correct doctrine notion by asking: What if a system of doctrine could be constructed this perfectly which reflects biblical revelation in all its its factual assertions, would the Bible no longer be necessary? And yet the Bible does remain necessary. (163)

Postconservative Evangelicalism wants something more than only having “correct” doctrine. Theology is a pilgrimage and a journey rather than a discovery and conquest. (55) Postconservatives want transformation, not information. Postconservative evangelicalism views all doctrines and theological systems as “man made” rather than “God made.” (88) Posteconservatives put doctrines as secondary, while they put the Great Tradition of Christian belief primary. Think about it: Not until the mid 300s do we start to see concrete doctrine/creeds.

Task of Postconservative Theology

Postconservative evangelical theology seeks to develop a progressive orthodoxy that is dynamic; the vision of truth changes as new light is discovered in God’s word by faithful, Spirit led interpreters. (200) The postconservative theology is always reworking itself while putting the Holy Spirit in the driver seat. The Words of the Bible are not simply carriers of information, but means of transformation. We need to realize that the Bible is the instrument of the Holy Spirit within the community of God’s people to lead and guide them in their discernment of the meaning of their common spiritual experience. (83)

A Bad Habit of Conservative Evangelicalism

At times it seems like conservative Christians are too closed minded and too closed on their doctrinal systems. Why do conservatives assume that the received doctrinal paradigms created by human beings like ourselves are incapable of improvement? What if we as human beings are weak, get our interpretations wrong from time to time, and need correction in how we construct our doctrine? Alister McGrath reminds conservatives, the Bible is God’s word written, but our interpretations of it are not. Also Roger agrees by saying, all interpretations are at best “approximations of God’s truth that do not call for “automatic conformity” but critical investigation to see if they are true. (161)

To say that one has a correct doctrine is a bit authoritative and judgmental. Essentially since one has the correct doctrine, then this implies a done deal with no room for improvement or correction. In order to be correct, one needs to be always corrected. Postconservative theology is a reconsidering and reconstructing of our doctrine and theologies in light of God’s revelation in Jesus Christ and in Scripture is required by our own finite and fallenness and not by culture or any defect in any given revelation. We tend to forget that there was authentic Christianity before there was orthodoxy and tradition. (94).

Dialoguing in the midst of Diversity

We as Christians regardless of our doctrines or theology need to stand together in unity while acknowledging our diversity. We are all trying to become Christ like, so therefore we need be able to get along. Roger argues that people who are locked into the old paradigm like to map theologies on a rightward-leftward spectrum based on responses to the Enlightenment and modernity. (235) Unfortunately, there is way too many gray aspects of this black and white spectrum. Even how we define a “conservative or a moderate evangelical” is very difficult.

Therefore we must be okay functioning in a church body where everyone may not agree with our doctrine/theology, but agree that we all love Jesus. We are all different: in who we are, our life experiences, and our interpretations of the text. However God created us with differences and we all have a commonality: We love Jesus. I am suggesting, with the massive help of Roger’s book, is that (1) we as Christian need to continue to keep dialoguing, in a healthy and non-hostile way, with each other and (2) we need to be okay living in some ambiguity when trying to figure God out.

Right now, go to Amazon.com and buy this book.

© 2009, Jeremy Zach. All rights reserved.

JP Moreland is a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology. He is nationally known for being an American philosopher, theologian, and Christian apologist. Moreland has wrote:  Kingdom Triangle: Recover the Christian Mind, Renovate the Soul, Restore the Spirit’s Power.

However in the past few years Moreland has been wanting a bigger Kingdom perspective and he accidentally got introduced to the power of the Holy Spirit. Now, JP Moreland is a member at Anaheim Vineyard who strongly believes we are co-labors with God who have the power of the Holy Spirit do arrange signs and wonders.

I am not a philosopher, and I tried my best to hang with the philosophical jargon.

Moreland’s Thesis in Kingdom Triangle:
The triangular kingdom perspective includes: 1) Christians who are thinkers, 2) Christians who care about the soul, and 3) Christians who are spirit lead and empowered.

We need to be intentional in our soul care. Our souls are made up of the: heart, head, and Spirit. Our souls require spiritual attention while genetics require scientific attention. Our souls contain the DNA to understanding humanity, not genetics. Essentially science does not necessary overwrite the spiritual. As pastors we need a balanced perspective of science and soul. Moreland argues that we need to put soul talk in public discourse. It is essential we see the world through both science and soul.

In our postmodern context scientists carry the authority and determine what is true/fact. Although a scientist cannot really tell you how to live a right and moral life. They can really tell you what they are finding in their laboratories. Truth is relative to community. Truth is defined in a context of believers. Relativism is not individually, but communally based. The community needs to express the knowledge on how to live in that particular context.

Moreland advocates for three world views:
1) Naturalism- This is the physical world. Scientists are the card carrying people, not theologians or philosophers. Scientist provide us with hard and concrete evidence. They are more concern with the implications of germs, rather than the direct impact of demons. The problem is that the scientific reality is not a spiritual reality. Apparently, the natural world cannot play a role into the supernatural. There is no belief or facts outside of physics and chemistry.

2) PostModernism– needs a truth/reality that is relative to community. Moreland labels this as “community relativism”. Naturalism and postmodernism have created culture anxiety. This anxiety is a direct effect from the fast pace of life, moral relativism, and isolation community. We are always going from one thing to the next. We are attached to our cell phones. Our morality is based off of our self gratification. If it feels good now, then this may be true for me right now. But at the end of the day, no one will really know what is true. So I will develop a moral system based off of self satisfying behaviors. Morality is relative to one’s experience.

Postmodernism themes are communicated through the arts and entertainment. Naturalism themes are communicated through the university and media.

3) Christianity has the Bible. The Bible gives us a source to knowledge. So we can take the Bible as a knowledge of reality. Moreland makes clear that knowledge and truth are two different entities and therefore we handle them differently. We can have knowledge with certainty, while being uncertain. We can know without knowing. We as Christian apologist should not play the prove it game. However we can play the game of I have the knowledge to make your life, a freedom based life. Moreland has really moved away from what is true and move to what is reality and what is knowledge in that reality. He is convinced that postmodern people want knowledge in how to rightly live in this real world–day to day.

Moreland strongly believes that a broader Kingdom perspective means we as co-workers with God help restore humanity through the power and authority of the Holy Spirit. The American church needs to demonstrate what the Acts church accomplished without wanting money or a television network or looking phony. Yes, it is true that when the Spirit manifest itself comes weirdness. But through that weirdness comes healing, restoration, redemption, and freedom. Instead of saying: Thus Sayth it The Lord, say I am sensing that the Lord may be doing this ___________.

© 2008 – 2010, Jeremy Zach. All rights reserved.

In The New Christian, Tony Jones (a specialists in the emerging front)acts as a Christian weather reporter who is reporting the US Evangelical forecast. Tony’s forecast was seasoned with academia, research, and personalized experiences. Tony puts language and articulation to the emergent “conversation”. He dispatches 20 themes that the emerging front exhibits. These 20 dispatches are not doctrine/dogma of the emerging movement, but rather emphasized theologies. Tony argues that theology reasoned discourse about God, religion, and spirituality. Literally, “words about God,” from the Greek logos (word) and theos (God) (47).

What I could not get enough of:
1) Tony described the idea of eschatological hope. We are living in a “not yet”, but “already” posture. We are excitedly and patiently awaiting Jesus’ 2nd coming while presently participating in the work of Jesus here on earth as it is in heaven. Tony suggested that we interpret the Bible in such a way that Jesus brought good news and there’s more good news to come; even on Judgment Day. The goal is to see through the “Left Behind Series” rhetoric and to see Jesus coming through the clouds to finally reconcile the world.

2) Tony had a real personalized touch throughout the book. He wrote in a warm and welcoming tone. I felt as though I was literally talking with Tony throughout the book (No I am not a psycho). Tony used a variety of personal stories. Also at the end of each chapter he devoted a few pages to a relative situation applying to the chapter’s themes. The section is called: Dispatches from……

3) I loved that Tony communicates the Gospel as a big and contextual task. To try to freeze one particular articulation of the gospel, to make it timeless and universally applicable, actually does an injustice to the gospel (98). Jesus’ message and ministry are ultimately about reconciliation (78).

4) I enjoyed how Jones in a warm friendly tone sticks it to John Piper. I can tell Tony had fun with critiquing Piper’s movement. In a sense, Piper is the antagonist character in The New Christian. One of the best lines in the book was when Piper directly told Tony that he should not preach.

5) Tony illustrations were remarkable. I had three favorites.

First, in dispatch 14 Tony talked about embracing paradox and he went on to say: I just think, if there are paradoxes in physics, then why shouldn’t there be paradoxes in theology, too?

Second, Tony told a story about his baseball umpire career. In his opinion, umpires who are legalistic and memorize the rules are not great umpires. Umpires who interpret the rules and live into the rules have an experience and wisdom that make a great empire. To be a great umpire you need experience (151). Essentially, we as Christians need to become better interpreters of God’s word and who God is. Tony is asking: what is your theological experience? Are your theological theories T’s crossed with experience?

Third, was the story about the small group member Carrie. Carrie was participating in a Bible study group of eighteen-year-olds and they were reading the story of Joshua and Jericho. Carrie said during one of the meetings: “At this point in the story, God seems a lot like Hitler.” “He’s just going around killing anyone who’s not from the race of people that he likes best. Isn’t that what Hitler did? (122) I never thought about the perception of God being like Hitler. It makes complete sense. God killed thousands and so did Hitler.

What I needed more of:
1) I really wanted more content in the truth dispatch. Tony argues that emergent’s believe that truth, like God, cannot be definitively articulated by finite human beings. (151) Tony’s opposing audience members think the emerging movement is layered not in absolute truth, but relative truth. Truth is such a difficult task and volumes upon volumes have been written about truth. However I liked how Tony painted the paradigm of truth. Some take faith over reason and others take reason over faith.

2) I needed more cool graphics on the pages. To truly be a “postmodern” book there needs to be many distractions on the pages. But seriously I thought the book cover jacket is the coolest jacket ever. Tony nice job hiring a great graphic designer!! I tried not to judge the book by the cover.
; )

Bottom line: I really enjoyed this book. It was a fast and easy read. Tony has dropped a ticking bomb on Evangelical America and I am not sure some Evangelicals will know how to handle the blows. We may need another book from Tony in the next couple of years to do the cleanup work.

Other youth ministry book reviews:

Marko.  Youth Ministry 3.0

Chap Clark. Hurt: Inside the World of Today’s Teenagers

Mike King. Presence-Centered Youth Ministry

Chris Folmsbee. A New Kind of Youth Ministry

Mike Yaconelli.  Getting Fired For the Glory of God

© 2008 – 2010, Jeremy Zach. All rights reserved.