Category Archives: Biblical theology

G. K. Beale. We Become What We Worship.

G. K. Beale. We Become What We Worship: A Biblical Theology of Idolatry. InterVarsity Press, 2008.

I read this book because it is one of the few I know of that addresses what I see as a hugely important and interesting theme in the Bible–idolatry. While I like Beale’s basic argument, that we become like the things we give our highest loyalty to, I found the book quite a disappointment. I would not recommend it except for those with a strong research-kind of interest in biblical teaching on idolatry.

My main criticisms have to do with Beale’s very narrow sense of what idolatry is about–he minimizes the social dynamics of idolatry linked with nationalism, ethno-centrism, religious exclusivism, and various other ways idolatry and violence and injustice connect. He approaches the Bible with great reverence, but seems oblivious to many of the core elements of the Bible’s critical stance towards imperialistic social institutions and the role these institutions play in turning people and their religiosity against the true God.

Book Review Index

Is Pacifism Ever an Idol?

Critics of pacifism, especially (ironically) some from within the broader peace church community, often warn that too much of an emphasis on pacifism can become idolatrous. This sermon, “Is Pacifism Ever an Idol?”  presents a biblically-based argument that, when properly understood, pacifism is one commitment that can never be idolatrous.

The Prophetic Faith: Amos and Hosea

Here is the fourteenth in a series of Bible studies that present the Bible as being in the side of pacifism. This essay, “The Prophetic Faith: Amos and Hosea,” reflects on the challenge Israel’s 8th century prophets brought to the injustices and idolatries that characterized the community of God’s covenant people.

Amos focuses on a critique of Israel’s injustice that incongruously co-existed with thriving religious practices. Such injustice, though, turns the religious practices into the worst kinds of blasphemy. Amos warns of inevitable consequences to such a departure from the intentions of Torah, but he concludes with a vision of healing that points to an over-arching concern on his part not simply to point to judgment but to point to the possibility of restoration should genuine justice be practiced.

Hosea goes even further in pointing to the possibilities of healing should Israel turn from its violence and idolatries. Hosea grounds this hope in an understanding that God’s “holiness” moves God to turn from punishment and toward healing.

Tom Wright. Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision

Tom Wright. Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision. SPCK, 2009.

N.T. Wright has achieved that stature among theologians that he can whip off a long, wordy direct response to a critique of his thought and have it become a major publishing event–which I think is mostly a good thing. I do find his switching back and forth between “N.T. Wright” and “Tom Wright” as the author of his various books to be irritating. And this book is being rushed out, seemingly in order to utilize the buzz among evangelicals concerning the debate between Wright and the super-Calvinist pastor/theologian John Piper while it lasts. The British edition has come out in paperback and can be purchased on line in the States.  The American edition, to be published by InterVarsity this month will start out in hardback–another indicator of the effort to exploit Wright’s popularity.

Nonetheless, this is an important and helpful book. As with all of Wright’s work, we have an engagingly written, theologically oriented, and exegetically careful treatment of central issues of the interpretation and application of New Testament writings. In this case, Wright focuses on the issue of “justification” in Paul’s writings–especially Galatians and Romans.

For the more general reader who is not particularly interested in the extremist views of someone like John Piper, chunks of Wright’s book will lend themselves to skimming. However, when he focuses on his constructive interpretation of Paul’s thought (which is, happily, for most of the book), Wright gives us a great deal to chew on. Basically, Wright understands “justification” in the context of the salvation narrative of the entire Bible–and makes what seems to me to be a quite persuasive case for this kind of reading. Linking with the argument of his fine recent book, Surprised By Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church (to be reviewed on this website soon), Wright interprets Paul as presenting justification as a world-transforming impetus from God in the present world–not as a matter of an individual believer finding one’s way to an otherworldly heaven after death.

He sees Paul articulating a “covenant” theology: “the belief that the creator God called Abraham’s family into covenant with him so that through his family all the world might escape from the curse of sin and death and enjoy the blessing and life of new creation” (page 222).  Well said!

So, all things considered, I highly recommend this book and anticipate the publication of Wright’s promised big, big book on Paul’s theology–which will, no doubt, be published under the name “N.T. Wright.”

The Battle with Baal: King Ahab vs. Elijah

Here is the thirteenth in a series of Bible studies that present the Bible as being in the side of pacifism. This essay, “The Battle with Baal: King Ahab vs. Elijah” focuses on a story that highlights the evolution of human kingship in ancient Israel away from loyalty to Torah and toward self-aggrandizement and power politics. King Ahab expropriates an Israeli’s land (his “inheritance”) in defiance of the message of Torah and has the man killed. He doesn’t quite get away with it and the great prophet Elijah embodies the loyalty of true prophets to Torah and challenges the King.

King Solomon and Temple Politics

Here is the twelfth in a series of Bible studies that present the Bible as being in the side of pacifism. This essay, “King Solomon and Temple Politics,” interprets the story of King Solomon as, when read in the context of the larger story of politics in the Old Testament, ultimately as a story of Israel’s return to the ways of Egypt. Solomon’s exercise of power politics, seen in a paradigmatic way in his construction of the Temple as a means of domesticating the faith practices of his people, pushes Israel strongly in the direction of domination.

As the story continues, Solomon’s efforts at centralizing power and gaining control over religious practices leads away from the message of Torah–and toward destruction.  In many ways, Solomon represents what will be rejected when the promise to Abraham comes to be seen as continuing apart from (in spite of) the nation state and its violent ways.

King David and the Ambiguities of Power

Here is the eleventh in a series of Bible studies that present the Bible as being in the side of pacifism. In this essay, “King David and the Ambiguities of Power,” looks at the story of King David’s rise and fall. Even though Samuel had spoken sharply in opposition to the elders of Israel asking God for a human king (to be “like the other nations”), with David’s emergence, we get the sense that the institution of kingship might indeed follow the pattern of Deuteronomy 17. However, over time David succumbs to the allures of excessive power and ends up fulfilling Samuel’s warnings by taking–most overtly, Bathsheba, the beautiful wife of his loyal soldier Uriah. David’s fall marks the long descent of kingship to a pretty complete fulfillment of the worst of Samuel’s warnings. As we will see, in the end to linking of God’s promise with the nation state ends in the rubble of Judah’s king’s palace and the temple.  But the promise does not end….

Israel, Kingship, and Violence—1 Samuel 8; Deuteronomy 17

Here is the tenth in a series of Bible studies that present the Bible as being in the side of pacifism. In this essay, “Israel, Kingship, and Violence,”  I look at the emergence of the institution of kingship in ancient Israel and its consequences. When we take into account the conclusion to the book of Judges and the early chapters of 1 Samuel, it is understandable how this move toward kingship would have been attractive to Israel’s elders. However, Samuel challenges this move, predicting dire consequences centering on the likely transformation of Israel toward social injustices characteristic of the nations. Deuteronomy gives us a glimpse at a theologically acceptable form of kingship–however, as the story makes clear, the guidelines in Deuteronomy primarily serve as criteria for judging Israel’s kings as failures.

Chaos and Order—Judges 19–21

Here is the ninth in a series of Bible studies that present the Bible as being in the side of pacifism. In this essay, “Chaos and Order,” I look at the book of Judges, a challenging book to understand in relation to peace theology. I suggest that Judges helps us understand the context for Israel’s disastrous choice to turn toward human kingship with its picture of how, when “there was no king in Israel,” everyone did “that which was right in their own eyes” (Judges 21:25). The story told in Judges is important for peace theology primarily in its account of the struggles of Israel to live in the land–struggles that only grew in the years to come until, finally, the entire idea of God’s promise being channeled through a nation-state had to be abandoned.

Jerome Segal. Joseph’s Bones

Jerome M. Segal. Joseph’s Bones: Understanding the Struggle Between God and Mankind in the Bible. Riverhead Books, 2007.

This is one of those books that probably makes a better contribution in how it stimulates the reader’s own thinking than in the particular argument it makes or information it conveys. Segal is a professional philosopher and (in the best sense of the term) an amateur biblical scholar.  This book mainly operates in the latter of these arenas, though its strongest suit (being its questions and testing of speculative hypotheses) surely reflects Segal’s own active philosophical mind.

That is, Segal obviously loves the Bible and draws on his long experience of teaching the Bible to young people in his Jewish community–but he writes as an outsider to the biblical studies guild. This “outsider” stance works mostly to Segal’s advantage. He is free to ask fresh questions and not bound to the distracting kind of scholarly apparatus that dooms so much biblical scholarship to irrelevance due to its thousands of qualifications, its “objectivity,” its arcane debates and butt-coverings, and its focus on minutia. Continue reading