Saving the Bible From Ourselves: Learning to Live and Read the Bible Well - By Glenn R. Pauuw

Saving the Bible From Ourselves by Glenn R. Pauuw is a book about people's misuse of the Bible, how it has come to be used as a book that is a collection of isolated propositional statements that are written specifically for me and for my special encouragement.  Overall this book is argument against those views of the Bible (it critiques  other views as well) and I believe it is a rather good argument.  I mainly listed those two things because they are the things that captivated me most in this book. Then I will give my critique.

First, Pauuw does an excellent job at attacking the rather modern approach to the Bible that takes the form of hunting for individual verses that seem relevant to us, "…find the fragments you need at the moment.  If you are looking for your daily inspiration, then find a devotional fragment.  If you are arguing with the local heretic, find a doctrinal fragment.  If you are facing an ethical question, find a moral fragment.  They're all in there, already neatly numbered for you.  You just have to find the good ones." He makes a good case that part of what instigated this fragmentary approach was the addition of verse numbers and chapters to the text of the Bible. 

Second, and very much related to the first, is Pauuw's critique of our use of the Bible as though it were written directly to us personally (or at least the comforting parts and the parts that we like, the curses…not so much).  Pauuw demolishes the perspective that we can make ourselves the authority in discerning what we need from the Bible, and he demonstrates that we should trust the wisdom and sovereignty of God in His design of His own Word, and that means the WHOLE Word of God.  To use the author's own words: "How can the Bible possibly lead and direct our lives if we are the ones who predetermine which parts of it speak to us?  Fragmentary patters of reading entail a fragmented sense of authority."  Perhaps my favorite part in the whole book is where Pauuw presents the "Parallel -Universe Bible" where he demonstrates what would happen if we used verses that we do not find so applicable to ourselves in the same way that we use our favorite verses, that are often taken out of context, to apply directly to ourselves (for instance: everyone likes Jeremiah 29:11 but what about Deut. 28:29?).  I found that part absolutely hilarious (I was almost crying I was laughing so hard) but very clear in the point that is being made. 

So why did I only rate this book at 3 stars (out of 5)? Well, for one thing there were a bunch of statements and descriptions of things that were too…I don't know…"mystical" might be the right term.  Perhaps it was just me, but some of the way things were phrased seemed just plain weird to me (and I didn't necessarily understand it all).  He talked about things like "Story" or "Chaos". Another thing was that Pauuw approached (in my opinion) irreverence in how he spoke of God, in statements like: "God was willing to take a great risk with the Bible: He left it in our hands…"    and, ""To  enter history really is to give it a go in the rough-and tumble.  Even for God."  Those were just some of the things that bothered me about this book. There was a lot to be gleaned in it but was interspersed throughout the bothersome thing, and so ironically (having in mind Pauuw's excellent critique of the 'snacking Bible), if I ever read this book again I would read it in a 'snacking' sort of way.  That is why I only gave it three stars.  But on the other hand Paauw made a good (and convicting) case for reading the whole Bible rather than just fragments of it.  I'll end with quoting an excerpt that I really liked (there were several that I liked):

"Snacking (on isolated Bible fragments) hides things to be sure, but it also distorts the things it does show us.  For example, ,the Snacking Bible is not great news. It has gospel verses, but no gospel, because the gospel is the announcement of a particular turn of events within an ongoing story.  The gospel is not a sentence about justification by faith or a verse reference on the forgiveness of my sins.  The gospel is not the Romans Road.  The gospel is not John 3:16.  What the apostles Paul and John wrote - what God's Spirit enkindled in them - was something entirely different than these boiled-down reductions.  Evangelist D. L. Moody said he could write the gospel on a dime.  Well, Paul and John couldn't, and didn't."

Many thanks to the folks at InterVarsity Press for sending me a free review copy of this book to review (My review did not have to be favorable)

This book may be purchased (among other places) at Amazon and Christian Book Distributors

Fool's Talk: Recovering the Art of Christian Persuasion - Os Guinness

Fool's Talk:  Recovering the Art of Christian Persuasion by Os Guinness is quite a convicting book, a book that really makes you  think about how serious we really are about evangelism/apologetics.  It provokes the question:  how much thought do we really put in our conversations (or even our small-talk) with unbelievers?  Do we hold back on saying anything related to the Gospel because we are ashamed of being considered foolish because of our belief in God's Word?  Or if we do evangelize, are we just sticking with simple pre-contrived evangelization questions like, "If you were to die today and stood before God and He asked you why He should let you into Heaven, what would you say?"  Are we willing to truly put thought into persuading someone of the truth of Christianity, giving answers to their questions, and asking thought-provoking questions ourselves, rather than merely turning to someone else's pre-designed method of evangelism.  Do we not seriously think of persuasion outside of some other persons pre-written evangelization answers/questions (though not outside the word of God)?  And are we loving when we talk to others, truly more concerned about winning the person rather than just winning an argument?  

This book's author does an excellent job at making one think about the answers to questions like the above.  For instance, as evinced above, he critiques modern-day evangelism, and makes the case that the 'method' used to evangelize actually does matter, "Recent forms of evangelism are modeled on handbooks for effective sales technique…After all, if all truth is God's truth, it is surely legitimate to use the best tricks of the trade, but this time use them in the service of the truth." "Not so…" Guinness answers. "…The Lord's work must always be done in the Lord's way.  The method must serve the message.  Technique is never neutral.  It can be positive and useful, and it can also be harmful.  Sometimes it an even be so brilliantly effective that its danger lies in its weaning us away from needing God at all.  True apologetics is the art of truth, and its art must be shaped by the distinctiveness of the truth it proclaims." 

He also does an excellent job at keeping one's perspective straight, because, though we do want to persuade others as best we can, and as Scripturally as we can,  we are not to have the posture of winning discussions with non-believers at all-costs, the truth is true even if we do not defend it well, or even if we don't have answer to a certain question.   Not matter how good are argument is, God is ultimately the only One who can change a person's heart and give them faith, though we do hope to have the opportunity to be used of God in helping others see the truth of the Gospel, "Faith's certainty lies elsewhere than in the rapier sharp logic or the sledgehammer power of the apologist.  At the end of the day, full certainty comes from the conviction of the Holy Spirit."

There were some things in the book that had I had trouble with though.  At one point the author says, "The next time you see Auguste Rodin's Thinker look at it closely"  Ummm…. Sorry but if that work of 'art' is what I think it is (an unclothed statue of a man…who is in the process of thinking…probably trying to figure out what he forgot to do that day, he forgot to put on clothes!) I think that then next time I see it I'll look away quickly!  I don't care if it doesn't show anything really inappropriate, it's the implication of nakedness that bothers me.  Naked statues don't fit the list of  attributes the Apostle Paul gives as to what we should think on/meditate on in Philippians 4:8,  "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honorable, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure…(ASV)"etc.

Also, I really have trouble with some of Guinness's statements…I was really shocked by some in particular, "Just so did God shame the world's folly, subvert the world's pride and put death to death through the death of his Son.  And the sober truth is surely that this was the way, the only way that it had to be done.  There was no other way.  God is always able to respond to sin and defiance with power….Power, however, usually overcomes by destroying what defies it.  Thus, as Reinhold Niebuhr insisted, there is a limit to what even the power of God can do as power alone, for 'such power does not reach the heart of the rebel.'  Power can fence us in, but only sacrificial love can find us out.  Power can win when we are ranged against it, but it cannot win us."  That REALLY takes away the miracle of Christians being made by God into New Creations, their hearts of stone that couldn't love God being made, by God, into hearts of flesh that love Him and His ways.  That's power, being used because of God's love yes, but it's His transforming power just the same! If God didn't use power to change our hearts to love Him,  and give us faith, we would not believe in Him, nor would we wish to follow His ways! See  Colossians 2:8-16, that's not just love, that's God's power!  He acts with His power because of His love for us!  Just as God will do with the nation of Israel in the future (see Ezek. 36)

Some parts of the book get a bit tedious as you get more into it, but overall, I liked the book, and think that it is a good resource for helping us give thought about the answer we should always be ready to give when asked about the hope that we have (1 Pet. 3:15).  I'll end with one of my favorite quotes from the book: 

"To follow Jesus is to pay the cost of discipleship, and then to die to ourselves, to our own interests, our own agendas and reputations.  It is to pick up our crosses and count the cost of losing all that contradicts his will and way - including our reputations before the world and our standing with the people and communities we once held dear.  It is to live before one audience, the audience of One, and therefore to die to all other conflicting opinions and assessments.  There is no room here for such contemporary ideas as the looking-glass self; and no consideration here for trivial contemporary obsessions such as one's legacy…" 

Many thanks to the folks at InterVarsity Press for sending me a free review copy of this book! (My review did not have to be favorable)

One of the places where this book may be purchased is Amazon.com