Tag: scholar

“Confronting Old Testament Controversies” by Tremper Longman III

~ Bob Hayton ~ Leave a comment

Since at least the time of the Enlightenment, it has been fashionable to subject the Bible to criticism and judge it outdated and inferior to the wisdom of the age. In the last several decades, critics have used an increasingly shrill voice that was rare in previous generations. The Bible is denounced as not only inferior but evil. It runs contrary to the sexual ethics of the day. Science has freed us from a savage need for a deity. “God is not good,” the new atheists declare. And within evangelicalism, the Church is giving ground. Evangelicals are for the first time openly siding with the higher critical views espoused by liberal theologians on such matters as denying the historicity of the Exodus, seeing Genesis 1-11 as myth, and disagreeing with the violence condoned by the Old Testament God (who is claimed to be inferior than the New Testament presentation of Jesus). Some evangelical leaders are even pressing for a reinterpretation of Scripture when it comes to homosexuality.

It is against this backdrop that Dr. Tremper Longman III offers his mature reflections in Confronting Old Testament Controversies: Pressing Questions about Evolution, Sexuality, History, and Violence published by Baker Books (2019). In this important book, Longman helps the reader engage with each controversy as he traces out what the Bible says and weighs that against what both those inside and outside evangelicalism are saying. He deals with each question from a confessional standpoint and yet resists an approach that demonizes “opponents” or sees everything as a simple black-and-white matter. He is not afraid to ruffle feathers and take on the errant views of others (even his friends), but he prizes a charitable and irenic discussion that respects those who conclude differently. Personally, Longman has experienced loss of academic positions over his views (as he recounts in chapter 1) and you can tell from reading this that he has thought long and hard over these very challenging questions facing the Church today.

I will be honest, going into this book I wasn’t sure exactly where Longman was going to conclude. I agreed with him that these are the four most pressing questions surrounding the Old Testament today, yet I knew he was friends with Peter Enns who had been dismissed from Westminster Theological Seminary over his questionable views. I had also read Enns’ eye-brow raising The Evolution of Adam and was concerned with his denial of the historicity of the Exodus and dangerous views about how to understand Adam and Eve and the Fall. So when I picked up Longman, I had some reservations.

In an earlier post about this book I said, “The questions are the right questions: I am hoping Longman will give some solid answers.” I can now say that Longman literally blew me away. I appreciated his candor and forth-right treatment of each issue. Having read a lot on the creation/evolution question, and some on the other topics, I greatly benefited from Longman’s approach of unpacking what other evangelical authors are saying and interacting with them. He distanced himself from Enns on both the Fall and the historicity of the Exodus. He discussed John Walton’s views on divine violence (another friend of Longman’s whom I’ve read extensively with both appreciation and some consternation). Walton’s book The Lost World of the Canaanite Conquest presents some novel approaches to viewing violence in the Old Testament, and Longman interacted gracefully and helpfully with that approach (ultimately rejecting it). Longman’s conclusions in some respects are tentative and there are some areas where I may not completely agree with him (or wish he was perhaps more forceful), but the breadth of scope and the path that is taken in handling each issue is unmatched. I am certain his book will be a benefit to those who are being confronted with these questions. He will help you in your own grappling with these issues.

On the evolution question, Longman sides with the BioLogos position on evolution that the Bible is not directly addressing that subject, and that believers can affirm this as a mechanism used by God in creation. After discussing Genesis 1-2 and other creation accounts (Psalm 74, Proverbs 8:22-31, and Job 38:8-11) he concludes:

[W]e have… seen that the most natural reading recognizes the use of figurative language and the interaction with ancient Near Eastern creation accounts. There is no reason we should expect the Bible to provide us with a factual report of the process of creation, and it is a grave mistake to treat the opening chapters of the Bible as such a report. (p. 48)

He goes on to raise a concern over those “in the Christian community who suggest that the theory of evolution is in crisis”. They are “misleading their audiences” (p. 58). He continues:

To try to deny evolution because one is trying to defend the Bible is unnecessary because the Bible is not at odds with evolution. To do so in light of the overwhelming evidence in favor of evolution is putting an unnecessary obstacle to faith. (p. 59)

The natural questions that evangelicals have concerning original sin, the image of God and the historicity of Adam are carefully addressed and he takes pains to clarify his position:

Interpretations that assert that human beings created in the image of God were never morally innocent, or state that the sinfulness of human beings is an inherent trait of humanity rather than the result of human rebellion against God (thus denying a historical fall), do not take the biblical account seriously, denying an essential theological teaching of the Bible. (p. 64-65 – he sites Enns’ Evolution of Adam as one example of such interpretations).

His discussion on this question is the clearest I’ve read, and yet I still have reservations and questions. He points out the absence of the concept of “original sin” (as an inheriting of a sin nature) in the Old Testament (p. 66) and ultimately rejects the Augustinian “‘inheritance’ model (that we inherit sin from Adam like a genetic disease)” noting that “there are other ways to account for our relationship to Adam’s first sin” (p. 71, 72). He maintains that the Fall is a historical reality (p. 69), however, and affirms that “Adam and Eve’s… sin so disrupted the cosmic and social order that it is not possible for those who come after them… not to sin” (p. 72).

On the evolution question, Longman agrees with the evangelicals who are abandoning the once widely-held view of young-earth creationism (I should point out, however, that he looks to B.B. Warfield and other early evangelicals as supporting his own view). On the next three topics, though, Longman speaks for conservatism and resists a call to abandon the historic evangelical position. He holds to the essential historicity of the Bible’s narrative accounts (such as the Exodus), he upholds the Old Testament’s claim that God uses violence in His dealings with humanity, and he defends the universal witness of Christianity that considers homosexual acts as a perversion of God’s good creation design.

On each of the issues above, Longman interacts with real evangelical authors and their actual positions on these matters. He appreciates the motivations (in some cases) behind said positions, but unpacks the Scriptural witness that compels him to stay where he is. His discussion of divine violence as an important theme in both the Old and New Testaments is helpful and yet he ultimately has no satisfying answer but bows to God’s sovereignty. His thoughts on historicity are encouraging, and his charity with respect to the homosexual problem is exemplary. He does think change is needed in how we think of and interact with homosexuals, but ultimately the Bible forbids homosexual practice.

This book is not the be-all-end-all volume with regard to these matters. Nor is it presented as the “final answer” to all your questions. Instead it stands as a model of charitable Christian dialogue on important matters — and it represents an effective and helpful answer to those who take such controversial points as opportunities to abandon Christianity altogether. I cannot recommend the book highly enough. These are the questions worth asking, and better answers will be hard to find.

Learn more about the book by reading the interview of the author included here, or check out this message where Longman addresses the same themes covered in the book. You can also find more in the book detail pages listed at the end of this post.

Blurbs:
“The Old Testament is full of difficult and controversial passages. These are often read without consideration of their original, ancient cultural contexts. Dr. Tremper Longman has tackled four of the most controversial topics: evolution, history, violence, and sexuality. Rather than settling for simplistic explanations that will not hold up under genuine scrutiny, Longman has brought many years of study and scholarship to bear on these problems. In a truly marvelous way, he explains these very complex issues with a clarity that will enhance readers’ comprehension. Far from being a mere Christian apology, this book wrestles with the real issues and sheds light that brings about a full engagement. It is a pleasure to recommend this very significant volume.”
—K. Lawson Younger Jr., professor of Old Testament, Semitic languages, and ancient Near Eastern history, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

“Fools rush in where wise men fear to tread, but Tremper Longman is no fool. This book covers ground on which people can make fools of themselves, but he has been thinking for decades about the questions he discusses here. He has stayed abreast of changing views among evangelicals and knows how to keep reflecting on issues without giving up ground when he knows one needs to stand firm. if you want not-too-conservative and not-too-liberal answers to the questions he raises, you will find them here.”
—John Goldingay, David Allan Hubbard Professor Emeritus of Old Testament, Fuller Theological Seminary

“In this book Tremper Longman III is courageous, clear, charitable, and confessional. He is courageous in tackling subjects that arouse intense controversy as well as baffled distress. Any time I teach the Old Testament, someone will raise one or another of these issues. Longman writes with pleasurable clarity, making his deep scholarship available with lightness and warmth. His disagreements with other scholars, including evangelical friends, are expressed with respect and without vitriol. Above all he writes out of clear evangelical conviction on the inspiration, trustworthiness, and moral authority of the canon of Scripture. This book will be a blessing and resource for those wrestling with these contentious issues in honesty and faith.”
—Christopher J. H. Wright, Langham Partnership; author of Old Testament Ethics for the People of God and Knowing Jesus Through the Old Testament

Where to Buy:
Pick up a copy of this book at any of the following online retailers: ChristianBook.com, Amazon.com, or direct from Baker Books.

Disclaimer:
This book was provided by the publisher. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a positive review.

Book Briefs: “Still Protesting: Why the Reformation Matters” by D. G. Hart

~ Bob Hayton ~ Leave a comment

500 years ago the Reformation was transforming Europe. Politics and nation-states would be affected, but the relationship of the average Christian to the Church was forever altered. Protestant Evangelical Christians look back on the Reformation with gratitude. The Reformation recovered the Christian Gospel of grace after all. But the contemporary Church has wandered far from the faith of its fathers, and more than ever before calls for denominational unity and even ecumenical togetherness with Rome are hitting home. Secularism is a threat to Catholic and confessing Protestant alike, so why not band together? How big, after all, are the points that separate us? Didn’t the Roman Catholic Church reform in the wake of the Reformation too?

It is these questions and this concern that D. G. Hart addresses head on in his recent book Still Protesting: Why the Reformation Matters (Reformation Heritage, 2018). Hart expertly unfolds the history of the Reformation and evaluates key evangelical truths (including the important “5 Solas”) as compared to the historical Roman Catholicism of that day. He goes on to examine whether the Roman Catholic Church has truly changed in its stance on these points over time. In his case against Rome, Hart also finds liberal Protestantism and lackadaisical evangelicalism at fault as well. He argues that the Reformation is still needed and a return to the faith of our fathers may well help American Christianity as it faces its own cross-roads.

An intriguing feature of the book is his examination of conservative political theory in America in relation to “anti-Catholic” sentiment. Historically, Protestants looked at the “golden age” of America as an advance in the history of the West (almost a postmillennial viewpoint) and lauded the rise of democracy and liberty. However “Roman Catholics saw those same developments negatively, as declension from an ideal time when church, government, society, and culture coexisted harmoniously under the sacred canopy of Christian influence” (p. 152). As progressive politics moved on to promote social change and “progress” in general – Catholicism’s opposition to unfettered equality and freedom became more in-step with conservatism’s resistance to progressive politics. For those who have wanted to “dissent from the logic and momentum of progressive politics” more help is found “for political conservatism in Roman Catholic sources” (p. 159). This leads to the pain-point that Hart is addressing: many political conservatives today claim that to be a true conservative, you must become a Roman Catholic. In response, Hart points to Abraham Kuyper (an evangelical leader and Prime Minister of The Netherlands) and J. Gresham Machen (founder of Westminster Theological Seminary) as examples of Protestant contributions to conservatism.

What sparked my interest in that section of the book was his point that American Protestantism had developed a “form of patriotism that unhealthily equated the faith with democracy and liberty” (p. 159). Protestantism’s fight against Catholicism mirrored democracy’s fight against the Monarchy. The founders of our country very much fit in with this patriotic version of faith. Indeed, this patriotism must have enabled the onset of the “social gospel.” Today’s patriotic, “God and Country” version of evangelical “faith,” which is “unhealthy” and unbiblical, has a long history indeed.

Those well-versed in the Reformation are sure to find new insights and connections in the pages of this book. Readers less familiar with the Reformation will also be helped. Anyone interested in what really separates Protestants from Catholics will find this book useful. I highly recommend it.

Pick up a copy of this book at any of the following online retailers:
Westminster Bookstore, Amazon, ChristianBook.com, or direct from Reformation Heritage.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by the publisher. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a positive review.

About Book Briefs: Book Briefs are book notes, or short-form book reviews. They are my informed evaluation of a book, but stop short of being a full-length book review.

Echoes of Mark in the Gospel of John

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

Many people have wondered why the New Testament includes four different Gospels. The differences can be confusing, and critics argue that they betray a difference of opinion among early Christians about Jesus and His message. Evangelical Christians respond by stressing that each of the Gospels is a separate, unique witness to the authenticity of the account of Jesus Christ’s life and ministry. The very fact that they are written from different perspectives and have different points of emphasis, strengthens their ability to independently testify to the truth of the Christian message.

In analyzing the Gospels, scholars have often claimed that John’s Gospel was written by someone who had no clear knowledge of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke). The theology in John is more advanced, and must come from a later date in the “evolution” of Christian doctrine. From this scholarly debate has come a fresh look at the literary evidence in the Gospels themselves, and the results have been startling (or encouraging, depending on your perspective). NT scholarship is starting to change its tune on this point, in fact. Even for those of us who aren’t scholars (I include myself here for sure), there are meaty takeaways that can improve our grasp of the interplay between the Gospels – and heighten our appreciation of the revelation of Jesus we find there.

In this post, I want to highlight that the author of the Gospel of John (who I hold is John the Apostle), is not only familiar with the Gospel of Mark, but that he also assumes that many of his readers have read Mark. He even structures His Gospel (John) so that it fills out and explains much that Mark does not include in his Gospel. In short, there are echoes of Mark in John’s Gospel, and John intends His Gospel to differ from Mark’s. As Richard Bauckham puts it, “John is explicitly incomplete in aspects which… the Synoptic Gospels supply.”[1]

Puzzling Statements (John 3:24; 11:2)

What follows here is drawn from a chapter titled “John for Readers of Mark” by Richard Bauckham[2]. In reading Jonathan Pennington’s book Reading the Gospels Wisely, I came across a summary of Bauckham’s thoughts on this, and I have dug up more on the topic from simply following the helpful footnotes for more info.[3]

Two small and seemingly insignificant verses reveal John’s knowledge of Mark. And following their lead, a few other verses throw open the door to how John and Mark dovetail together.

John 3:24 “(For John had not yet been put in prison).”

John 3:24 is an aside, a parenthetical expression that is quite odd. Bauckham himself explains this quite clearly:

To understand the reason for the explanation, we are obliged to postulate implied readers/hearers who know more than the Gospel itself has told them. They seem to be expected already to know that John’s ministry came to an end when he was imprisoned, but even this knowledge is not sufficient to account for the explanation. Whether or not readers/hearers already know that John was imprisoned, they do not need to be told the obvious: that he was not yet imprisoned when he was still baptizing.[4]

Of the few references to John the Baptist’s imprisonment in the Synoptics, the one most likely referred to here is Mark 1:14. The comment in John 3:24 is there to let the reader know that this portion of Jesus’ ministry is taking place in between Mark 1:9-13 (which details Jesus’ baptism and subsequent temptation in the wilderness) and Mark 1:14 (which has Jesus going to Galilee to start his ministry there — right after John is imprisoned). This section in John’s Gospel, begins right after Jesus’ baptism (as hinted at in John 1:30) and continues through John 4:43 (where Jesus goes into Galilee for formal ministry — his time at Cana in John 2 was before his public ministry). So John wants his readers to know that John 1:19-4:43 fits between Mark 1:13 and 1:14.

John 11:2 “It was Mary who anointed the Lord with ointment and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was ill.”

This statement in John 11:2 is similarly puzzling. Why name Mary of Bethany as the one who anointed Jesus one chapter before the story of Jesus’ anointing (by Mary) is told in John (chapter 12)? Readers of Mark (and the other Synoptics) would have known of a woman who anointed Jesus in Bethany. John connects their knowledge of that story with his account by naming the woman here. (She is not named in Mark 14:3-9.) John will go on in chapter 12 to use a different chronology than Mark, putting the anointing before the triumphal entry, rather than after it.

Filling Out, Re-Ordering, and Summarizing Mark

From these two examples, you can almost imagine John as he is writing his account of Jesus’ ministry. He feels the need to re-order a story here or there from Mark, and add a name or highlight a detail. He moves the clearing of the Temple (Mark 11:11-25) to the beginning of Jesus’ Judean ministry (John 2:13-22), and gives a new account of Jesus’ trial before Annas (John 18:13-23) not mentioned in Mark, just prior to the trial before Caiaphas (John 18:24). John’s briefer mention of Caiaphas’ trial is due to it already being discussed in detail by Mark (Mark 14:53-65).

At other points John quickly passes over long sections already mentioned by Mark, and fills out what Mark only hints at. John skips the sending of the 12 (which Mark includes), but gives a fuller account of the feeding of the 5,000 – explaining why Jesus and the disciples have to leave in such a hurry (Mark 6:45 compared to John 6:14-16). John also includes the longer discourse about the Bread of Life (John 6:22-71) which follows the miracle. And this is the closest John gets to mentioning the Lord’s Supper (this omission may serve to interpret/stress the significance of the Lord’s Supper).

Next, the second half of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee (Mark 6:54-9:50) “is summarized by John in a single sentence” (in John 7:1a)[5]. Mark 10:1 mentions a ministry in Judah followed by time beyond the Jordan (where Mark 10:1-31 takes place). John follows along by giving us a long description of Jesus’ Judean ministry (John 7:10-10:39) understood as occurring in the gap implied in Mark 10:1, and then devotes just a few verses (John 10:40-42) to describe the beyond-Jordan ministry that Mark already described more fully (Mark 10:1-31).

One more puzzling reference in John may allude to Mark. John 14:31, ends with the curious words “Rise, let us go from here.” But John 15 continues the conversation from John 14. The words “rise, let us go” or literally “get up, let us be going”, are also found in Mark 14:42, “Rise, let us be going; see, my betrayer is at hand.” Bauckham interprets this echo from Mark as a way John emphasizes that Jesus is voluntarily facing his death (mentioned in the verses just prior to 14:31)[6]. John uses these familiar words (to readers of Mark) as a way to call to mind Jesus’ decision to embrace his suffering.

For a fuller look at the arrangement of John in relation to Mark, the following two articles take Bauckham’s argument, expand on it, and provide tables comparing the two accounts side by side:

Historical Corroboration?

There may even be evidence from Church history that supports the treatment above. We have the following testimony of Eusebius, writing in the fourth century, of what Papias wrote (in the early second century) concerning Mark’s Gospel.

Papias gives also in his own work other accounts of the words of the Lord on the authority of Aristion who was mentioned above, and traditions as handed down by the presbyter John; to which we refer those who are fond of learning. But now we must add to the words of his which we have already quoted the tradition which he gives in regard to Mark, the author of the Gospel.

“This also the presbyter said: Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teaching to the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord’s discourses, so that Mark committed no error while he thus wrote some things as he remembered them. For he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely.” These things are related by Papias concerning Mark.[7]

Concerning this passage (and the brief quote evidently from Papias on Matthew), Richard Bauckham draws this conclusion:

The only reason Papias could have had for thinking that the Gospels of Matthew and Mark both lacked the kind of order to be expected in a work deriving from an eyewitness is that he knew another Gospel, also of eyewitness origin, whose chronological sequence differed significantly from Mark’s and Matthew’s and whose ‘order’ Papias preferred.[8]

The presbyter (or elder) John, that Papias mentions, is sometimes understood as John the Apostle and author of John. In any case, a good argument can be made that Papias prefers the chronological order of John’s Gospel to that of Mark. Bauckham points out how the Muratorian Canon (late second century list of New Testament books with brief commentary) betrays influence by Papias, and so it’s statement that John wrote his Gospel “in order” suggests that Papias indeed did prefer John’s order to the lack of order in Mark and Matthew.[9] Here is the quote from the Muratorian Canon:

For so [John] confesses (himself) not merely an eye and ear witness, but also a writer of all the marvels of the Lord in order.[10]

Even More (Interlocking/Transposing Mark’s Theology)

Beyond the literary dovetailing described above and the historical pointers that John intended to re-order the Gospel accounts of Mark and Matthew, other testimony to Mark’s presence can be found through observing John’s own theology and points of emphasis. Pennington pointed out what he calls “the interlocking relationship of John and the Synoptics.”[11] This is a broader look at the question, and examines how in John’s theology and inclusion of material he is aware of Mark (and the Synoptics). Pennington draws from D.A. Carson on this point. Carson points out that in “many places… John and the Synoptics represent an interlocking tradition… they mutually reinforce or explain each other, without betraying overt literary dependence…”[12] Carson goes on to list many ways where the Synoptics and John overlap and interlock when it comes to theology and message. Andreas Köstenberger goes further and calls John’s approach a “theological transposition” of the Synoptics. For further study on this, see the resources listed in this note.[13]

Conclusion

I have rambled on and on, but I hope you can now appreciate even more how closely intertwined the Gospels are with one another. A lot of literary crafting is going on here! Readers of John who are unaware of Mark, can still find a coherent account of Jesus’ life and ministry in John. But the pointers are included for those aware of Mark to see how and where John is adding to Mark’s account and providing a fuller picture of the life of Jesus Christ.

Paying close attention to how each Gospel develops vertically (through its own account of Christ’s ministry) and horizontally (through its parallel passages and interlocking/dovetailing with the other Gospel accounts) is important for fully understanding each author’s intent. I also trust that you are better equipped for responding to criticisms directed at the discrepancies between the Gospels. Most of all I hope you can see how the life of Christ and the significance and message of the Gospel transcends any single telling. None of the Gospels alone can contain or explain it, and all four together only scratch the surface, as John himself says:

John 21:25 “Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.”

Footnotes

[1] Richard Bauckham, “The Johannine Jesus and the Synoptic Jesus,” online essay, p. 3 (This essay matches the name of a chapter from Gospel of Glory: Major Themes in Johannine Theology [Baker Academic, 2015]).

[2] Richard Bauckham (editor), “John for Readers of Mark”, The Gospel for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences [Eerdmans, 1997], p.  147-172. [Preview available online here].

[3] Jonathan T. Pennington, Reading the Gospels Wisely: A Narrative and Theological Introduction, p. 64-66; also p. 59 note 16 and p. 194 note 12.

[4] Bauckham, “John for Readers of Mark”, 153. This quote is taken from Amazon’s “look inside” preview of the book. I had not yet purchased the book at the time this post was first published.

[5] Ibid, 156.

[6] Bauckham, “The Johannine Jesus and the Synoptic Jesus”, p. 8.

[7] “Eusebius of Caesarea – On Papias – original Greek Text with English translation“, [from Historia Ecclesiastica, 3. 39], paragraphs 14 and 15 accessed 11/13/18.

[8] Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony [Eerdmans, 2006], p. 226. My attention was brought to this by Kyle R. Hughes, “Papias and the Gospels: Analysis and Evaluation of his Testimony in Eusebius’ H.E. 3.39“, accessed 11/13/18.

[9] Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, p. 425, ff. Note also that Bauckham holds that “presbyter John” is a disciple who was an eyewitness follower of Christ and the author of the Gospel of John, but he does not believe he is the Apostle John (son of Zebedee).

[10] The Muratorian Canon, lines 35-37, accessed 11/13/18.

[11] Pennington, Reading the Gospels Wisely, p. 64-65.

[12] D.A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Pillar New Testament Commentary), [Apollos/Eerdmans: 1991], p. 52, ff.

[13] Andreas Köstenberger, A Theology of John’s Gospel and Letters [Zondervan, 2009], p. 555-563. Also see a fuller treatment (but without the handy tables) in “John’s Transposition Theology:
Retelling the Story of Jesus in a Different Key”, available online here (this is a chapter in Earliest Christian History: History, Literature, and Theology [Mohr/Siebeck: 2012]).

Image created from icons available here and here.

“The Christian World of the Hobbit” by Devin Brown

~ Bob Hayton ~ 1 Comment

The Christian World of The Hobbit by Devin BrownBook Details:
  • Author: Devon Brown
  • Category: Literature
  • Publisher: Abingdon Press (2012)
  • Format: softcover
  • Page Count: 208
  • ISBN#: 9781426749490
  • List Price: $14.99
  • Rating: Highly Recommended

Review:
I remember the first time I entered the world of Middle-earth. I was twelve or thirteen and noticed an interesting little yellow book on my mother’s shelf. I’m not entirely sure if she ever read it or not — as that kind of book was not what I remember her reading. But I asked if I could read it and eagerly dove in. At that age I don’t believe I was even aware there was a sequel to the book. But from the first few moments I was hooked.

Fantasy literature isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, and all books in the genre of fantasy are not created equal. Few rise to the level of art achieved by J.R.R. Tolkien. His books, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, are among the most widely read in the English language. And like countless readers of Tolkien before me, I found the world he crafted to be enchanting and alluring.

Tolkien’s world, the land of Middle-earth, is a place readers long to return to. Yet spending time in Middle-earth is not an exercise in futility or a way to check out of the here and now. In an ironic fashion, Tolkien’s world inspires noble efforts in the real world, and calls us all to live better and nobler lives.

Tolkien scholar Devon Brown, elaborates on this quality of Tolkien’s works:

…it might also be argued that the biggest reason his works have been so deeply loved, both in the previous century and the present one, is because they not only entertain readers — they also enrich their readers’ lives and make them more meaningful. (p. 11)

A Christian world?

Brown explores the world Tolkien made in a new book The Christian World of the Hobbit (Abingdon Press, 2012). In this work, he demonstrates how Tolkien’s Christian worldview bleeds through his written works and permeates the world he made. This aspect of Tolkien’s work is puzzling to many. His books have almost no references to God or anything remotely similar to church or religion, and yet they are hailed by many as Christian novels advocating a Christian worldview. Sure there is a fight between right and wrong, and right wins — but is that enough to classify the book as Christian?

Brown’s analysis uncovers abundant clues from the author himself, both inside the covers of his books, as well as from his own reflections and letters about them, which put this question to rest. Tolkien’s use of the term “luck” and “good fortune” is an ironic way to point the reader toward the conclusion that it wasn’t just luck or fortune, but Someone behind it all. Gandalf’s statement to Bilbo on the final page of The Hobbit makes this clear: “You don’t really suppose, do you, that all your adventure and escapes were managed by mere luck, just for your sole benefit?” Brown points out that Tolkien as much as acknowledges this in one of his letters:

In a letter, Tolkien offers this additional statement about the veiled power at work in both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings: “The story and its sequel are… about the achievements of specially graced and gifted individuals. I would say… ‘by ordained individuals, inspired and guided by an Emissary to ends beyond their individual education and enlargement.’ This is clear in The Lord of the Rings; but it is present, if veiled, in The Hobbit from the beginning, and is alluded to in Gandalf’s last words. (Letters 365)” (pp. 49-50)

Additional evidence is found in Tolkien’s statements about his work being “fundamentally Christian” in nature:

“The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision” (Letters 172). [p. 24]

“I am a Christian” and then adds in parentheses “which can be deduced from my stories” (Letters 288). [p. 26]

Tolkien’s work is Christian at its core, but not in a superficial manner. Tolkien despised allegory, and would frown on much of what passes as Christian fantasy today. Brown considers works of this type as merely “Christianized.” In contrast, Tolkien’s thoroughly Christian worldview shapes the very fabric of his stories in a subtle yet profound way. And Tolkien did desire his readers to entertain that worldview for themselves after encountering it in his stories.

Brown also explores the morality inherent in Tolkien’s view of Middle-earth. The struggle to better one’s self plays a prominent role throughout the story. Bilbo Baggins is no ordinary hero, conquering by his skill with the sword and enduring thanks to his bravado and courage. Instead Bilbo takes on himself and wins. He faces the darker parts of his heart head on: he steps out of his cottage to begin the adventure, he resists the greed and selfishness that entice him to abandon his companions, and ultimately he finds a life spent in service of others is the only truly satisfying way to live.

Evaluation

This book is well-written, lucid and clear. And the artistic touches throughout make it a pleasure to interact with – even in the Kindle version. It abounds with quotations from Tolkien’s work and letters, and includes pertinent quotes from other Tolkien scholars. The life of Tolkien, and his own Christian journey are recounted, as well as his famous literary society and its influence on his career. C.S. Lewis features prominently in the book – as he both knew Tolkien as a friend and appreciated his literary output (Brown is also a Lewis scholar). Throughout the book, Brown’s first-rate grasp of Tolkien scholarship is apparent and yet he manages to keep the book very accessible.

For those who have read The Hobbit more than once, Brown’s work will be a joy to read. Even if you are familiar with Tolkien’s work only through the films by Peter Jackson, reading The Christian World of the Hobbit may spur you on to read the books that have endeared themselves to generations of readers. J.R.R. Tolkien was a Catholic Christian, but his view of morality and Divine providence as conveyed through his stories, is something evangelical Christians will appreciate. Brown allows us to enter Tolkien’s universe with a well trained eye, ready to see the glimmers of the Christian worldview that permeates it all. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book and highly recommend it.

Author Info:
Devin Brown is a Lilly Scholar and a Professor of English at Asbury University where he teaches a class on Lewis and Tolkien. He is the author of Inside Narnia (2005), Inside Prince Caspian (2008), and Inside the Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010). He has spoken at Lewis and Tolkien conferences in the UK and the U.S. Devin has published numerous essays on Lewis and Tolkien, including those written for CSLewis.com, ChristianityToday.com, SamaritansPurse.org, and BeliefNet.com. Devin earned a PhD at the University of South Carolina and currently lives in Lexington, Kentucky.

Book Trailer:

Where to Buy:
  • Christianbook.com
  • Amazon
  • direct from Abingdon Press

Disclaimer:
Disclaimer: This book was provided by Abingdon Press. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.