Skip to main content

Jesus Wants to Save Christians


I don't usually post book reviews in the main body of this blog, as I generally post them on Virtual Bookshelf which in turn posts them on facebook and in the sidebar here. But this is a long one (not much shorter than the book itself!), so I thought it best to put it here in a slightly amended form.
In our church we have what we call a "Good Book Group" which meets on an irregular basis on a Sunday night after the evening service in various people's homes, to discuss books that we have read (or more often than not partially read). So far we have looked at:
"Simply Christian" by Tom Wright - a good start...
"Jesus: Safe, Tender Extreme" by Adrian Plass - universally regarded by the group as the waste of too many good trees.
"The Shack" By William Young - the group was interested by some of the issues thrown up but generally appalled by it as a work of literature.
"Living the Resurrection" by Eugene Peterson - not a good introduction to Peterson for most of the group...
"Fuelling the Fire" by Dennis Lennon - a genuinely helpful book on prayer.
"Life with God" by Richard Foster: the first book to really get the group excited...
"Intelligent Church" by Steve Chalke - a good introduction to the church as an incarnational community...
"Finding our Way Again" by Brian McLaren - well received...
"Jesus: The Final Days" by Miller et al - a bit dry...
"The Irresistible Revolution" by Shane Claiborne - divided opinion between those who accepted his theo/political analysis and those who didn't... but left many feeling a little impotent and guilty.
"Total Church" by Tim Chester and Steve Timms - felt a little artificial after Claiborne's book... Covering the same ground but from a theologically more conservative perspective.

Then for this month we chose Rob Bell's "Jesus Wants to Save Christians". As someone in the group pointed out last night, somewhere along the line this idea didn't really compute with whoever was doing the announcements in the church bulletin, as the title became transmogrified to "Jesus Wants to Save Sinners" a much more predictable title.

Not sure what I expected in terms of content when I started this, given the title, but was fairly confident as to what the style would be, having read some of Bell's other stuff and watched a number of his NOOMA pieces... And I certainly wasn't off beam on the latter. In my mind it was a little bit of style over substance, but it was generally well received by our book group, probably because he was doing something that many other Christian writers don't do, which is integrating what he had to say within a cogent picture of the whole Biblical story. Having read other theologians such as Breuggeman myself, it all seemed a little bit watered down (but what do you expect in 180 double spaced pages). Also, some of his exegesis was just plain wrong (eg. his explanation of the context and implications of the encounter between Amos and Amaziah).
But most of the comments on various internet forums and online reviews make no mention of such things, but rather, many there criticise Bell for getting too political, but my only response to them would be wise up and read the Biblical narrative, particularly through the lens of the Prince of Peace who came to bring in an alternative Kingdom, to preach good news to the poor (and don't even think of doing the Houdini-act of spiritualising that!) and died the death of a political subversive.
The sub-text of many of these criticisms is "don't dare criticise America and the so-called American dream" but such a response is exactly what Bell himself preempts in saying that such an approach is actually a defense of an empire that is predicated on keeping people impoverished so that a limited number can enjoy unparalleled comfort. A prophet has to critique his own culture (attend to the plank in his own people's eye) first. Had he been writing in Ireland I trust that his critique would have been on an empire founded on economic idolatry, in Northern Ireland, it would have been based on two competing empires founded on idolatrous nationalisms... as well as the all pervading western myth of consumerist capitalism being a permanent rising tide that can float everyone's boat. Bell was not political with a capital P... he was not endorsing any one particular political party in the US... Many have surmised that he would lean towards the Democrats, although frankly, both parties in the US (and indeed most of those in the UK and Ireland) are so wedded to the model of global capitalism that I wouldn't look to any mainstream party for an alternative to the current "empire".
Indeed one final criticism of this book is that it doesn't really offer any answers. I am left, as so often is the case, with the question "Yes, but how?" How do we, as churches and individual Christians live out those alternative kingdom values in a way that really makes a difference? Answers on a postcard please...

Comments

Anonymous said…
Been thinking about this post on reading last night as ...
at last I have found someone else who agrees with my sentiments on the 'Shack' Book (more aptly named 'Kaa.. Book')which has been raved about to me by many but also thoughts on Rob Bell..
I haven't read the book (or in fact any of his books but since when did that stop me commenting) but his sentiment on the wealthy maintaining the poor in an impoverished state to guarantee their own wealthy status, echoes the thoughts of Robert Tressell in his iconic Socialist book, (which I'm reading at the moment) 'The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists'.
I'm sure great political minds (of which I am definitely not one)have expanded and debated Robert Bell's ideas but what struck me in all of this was your final question...
' How do we as churches and individuals live out alternative Kingdom values in a way that makes a difference?
Yes the philanthropy of the rich existed 100yrs ago when Robert wrote his famous book and way before that...and it still exists today with the middle classes seeking to take the edge of a laissez -faire capitalism by indulging themselves in 'feel good' gifts and charity cards.
I don't profess to be adhering to Christian doctrine but what has always struck me about the significance of Christ's alternative values was evident at his birth - poverty and vulnerability.
'See within the manger lies He who built the starry skies...' says it all.
Christ didn't come to fill shoeboxes or create a Trade Union movement but in his poverty and humility he brought unconditional love that created worldwide revolution not through rhetoric but (as I see it) by walking alongside and loving all equally.
Hippy like as he was that 'Hugh Fearnly' vicar on BBC2 recently attempted to walk in the footsteps of St. Francis of Assisi, existing for a month without money and relying on the charity of others and reports that what he learnt the most from his experience was the importance of allowing ourselves to be vulnerable...
I don't have any answers either but I think it's a great time of year to be asking the question.
Happy Advent!
Thanks... People like Claiborne and John Bell (Iona Community) and others would probably agree wholeheartedly... My only problem is that the huge number of people sitting in the pews of churches with responsibilities to families and wedded to the western capitalist machine, can easily write off such a take as "hippy nonsense". Yet we DO need to get beyond the shoeboxes and buy-a-goat mentality into a real sense of solidarity with the poor and the oppressed of this world, far and near... Not necessarily calling people to give up their jobs in banks etc but actually seeing that as a place they can make a difference... Not just witnessing to their neighbours in words, but through living their lives prophetically... even if it costs... But you're right... this really is the sort of thing we need to be thinking about at advent!

Popular posts from this blog

A Woman of no Distinction

Don't often post other people's stuff here... But I found this so powerful that I thought I should. It's a performance poem based on John 4: 4-30, and I have attached the original YouTube video below. A word for women, and men, everywhere... "to be known is to be loved, and to be loved is to be known." I am a woman of no distinction of little importance. I am a women of no reputation save that which is bad. You whisper as I pass by and cast judgmental glances, Though you don’t really take the time to look at me, Or even get to know me. For to be known is to be loved, And to be loved is to be known. Otherwise what’s the point in doing either one of them in the first place? I WANT TO BE KNOWN. I want someone to look at my face And not just see two eyes, a nose, a mouth and two ears; But to see all that I am, and could be all my hopes, loves and fears. But that’s too much to hope for, to wish for, or pray for So I don’t, not anymore. Now I keep to myself And by that

Psalm for Harvest Sunday

A short responsive psalm for us as a call to worship on Harvest Thanksgiving Sunday, and given that it was pouring with rain as I headed into church this morning the first line is an important remembrance that the rain we moan about is an important component of the fruitfulness of the land we live in: You tend the land and water it And the earth produces its abundance. You crown each year with your bounty, and our storehouses overflow with your goodness. The mountain meadows are covered with flocks and the valleys are filled with corn; Your people celebrate your boundless grace They shout for joy and sing. from Psalm 65

Anointed

There has been a lot of chatter on social media among some of my colleagues and others about the liturgical and socio-political niceties of Saturday's coronation and attendant festivities, especially the shielding of the anointing with the pictured spoon - the oldest and perhaps strangest of the coronation artefacts. Personally I thought that was at least an improvement on the cloth of gold canopy used in the previous coronation, but (pointless) debates are raging as to whether this is an ancient practice or was simply introduced in the previous service to shield the Queen from the TV cameras, not for purposes of sacredness, but understandable coyness, if she actually had to bare her breast bone in puritan 1950s Britain. But as any church leader knows, anything performed twice in a church becomes a tradition. All this goes to show that I did actually watch it, while doing other things - the whole shooting match from the pre-service concert with yer wumman in that lemon-