I have no idea how long ago I received my review copy of Abide by Jared C. Wilson, but it has had me on a guilt trip every since it came in the mail box.
See: Jared and I sort of met because we both started blogging at Evangel, and I think we weren’t supposed to like each other. He’s a Boar’s Head Tavern guy; I’m obviously a PyroManiac. He’s not really one of the “YRR” crowd even though he has some friends there, and somehow I am – even though I prolly don’t really have any friends there except Zach Bartels and Tad Thompson, may a blessing be upon them. And my guilt trip has come from the fact that Jared’s book deserves a good review, and I haven;t had time to make one. Until now.
I think Jared actually “gets” it. He’s not a theology wonk, and he doesn’t memorize the Puritans or anything like that, but as a pastor he gets it that people need Jesus, only Jesus, and what Jesus has done because that’s the only real hope in the world.
You could do a lot worse than to wake up one day and find out that Jared was your pastor.
So in that context, Jared’s people at LifeWay sent me Abide, and I was supposed to review it. It comes in a box, and in the box is a workbook and two discs. To be totally forthright in this review, I could not get the video DVD to work, so maybe there’s some content on there that ought to make me rend Jared limb from limb. I’ll leave that to someone else to discover; you can feel free to put your content-substantiated criticism of the DVD in the comments.
Abide is not a Bible study. Sorry LifeWay – there’s no way to frame this as a book which is first and foremost, as someone someplace has said, what God hath said. This is a book which is a lot about what Jared says. I’m not sure that Jared would say that exactly about this work, but here’s what he does say about it in his one-page intro:
I hope you’ll find this book not just practicval helps for your spiritual disciplines, but the games-changing proclamation of the good news. That good news is even that in your setbacks and struggles, God is at work in you according to his good pleasure.
So in Jared’s view, somehow this book is about the Gospel. And that’s what you gotta like about him: Jared is a guy who thinks the Gospel is the main thing – but take note: he doesn’t think it’s the only thing.
Some people will take this (wrongly) to mean that Jared is off the island; he’s some kind of syncretist or synergist or some other kind of bad man – but they would be wrong. The Gospel has consequences, and those consequences are necessary. For example, the people who might start the war drums up against Jared would all agree, univocally, that one necessary consequence of the Gospel is that it must be proclaimed. It does not make one a papist or a pelagian to admit that because of the facts inherent in 1 Cor 15:1-4, people must be told that Christ died for our sins, etc. Proclamation is a necessary consequence of the Gospel – it is something we must do, or we are not actually what we might otherwise say we are.
Now, what one would think one ought to do is start with the Bible, quote Jesus in some sense about the necessary stuff which are consequences of the Gospel, and viola – Bible Study. That’s how every right-minded reformed writer goes about it: Bible, therefore us.
That’s not what Jared has done here. Instead, Jared has written a series of reflections on the Christian life, and he has asked his readers to think about these things with him – including some relevant small passages of the Bible on these subjects. In that respect, this is a study which is far more devotional than it it strictly didactic.
Now, this is where most people head off the reservation: in their attempts to think about the Christian life, they mostly lecture the reader using their own private biases, and pose questions about the Christian life which take for granted that the Christian life is itself a sort of error-fest.
In contrast, Jared takes the culture we live in and contrasts it with the necessary consequences of the Gospel. Now, in doing this, Jared doesn’t set to prove or defend his short list of Gospel consequences (scripture, prayer, fasting, service, community) – and that will undoubted also draw the ire of some. I also admit that I was very much underwhelmed by the conceit of “rhythms” to describe these things. It smacks of some sort of feng shui, as if these things are not actually necessary but are helpful. To that I say “eh”.
But along side that are statements like, “we read the bible asking ourselves how we might use it rather than how it might use us,” which should convict any good man; regarding prayer, “As busy as we think we are, none of us have as large a burden placed on us as Jesus did;” regarding the church as a community, the plain statement, “suburban churches often reflect and emulate their cultures rather than challenge them.” And Jared’s challenge to you is that you think about this problem seriously – which is to say, as if you really had to do something about it.
A friend of mine has said that too many books talk too much about “ought” and not enough about “is”. I think if Jared’s book has anything to offer at all, it should how the “is” must migrate to the “ought” – not just by the force of a systematic theological view, but because this is who Jesus calls us to be.
It would be wrong of me to say that I think everyone will benefit from this book. I think in fact most people will not benefit from this book – because they don’t know to read well, and they really don’t know how to think through practical theological issues from a pastoral standpoint – that is, from the standpoint that you must speak to people and not just at them.
Abide is not perfect by a long shot. Why Jared lists “fasting” instead of “worship” in his list of spiritual disciplines I cannot guess; why he calls these activities and the means by which we ought to practice them “rhythms” seems either intentionally antagonistic toward the people who might benefit from this book most (that is: those locked up in their properly-systematic boxes), or perhaps ignorant of the baggage that word would have in this use.
But! Jared has done something here you need to try to come to grips with. Even if you read it and disagree with it, it offers the right challenge to your Christian life and offers the right answers. It doesn’t steer you away from the right-minded view of the Gospel and its consequences: it makes you think about why you didn’t do anything about it today.
And any book that will do that is worth reading.
May 3rd, 2010 | 5:29 pm | #1
Frank,
I read the review here, but after doing so I’m not exactly sure what this book is about; what’s it about?
May 3rd, 2010 | 5:47 pm | #2
best blog post comment I have read in a long time – thanks Bobby
May 3rd, 2010 | 6:51 pm | #3
I got to the end of the review and had the exact same thought as Bobby Grow…
May 3rd, 2010 | 7:33 pm | #4
Frank, thanks for the kind words and critical appraisal.
—
Bobby, et.al.: The book is positioned as a gospel-driven approach to the spiritual disciplines of Bible study, prayer, fasting, generosity/service, and community. The premise is that these are the marks (“rhythms”) of the kingdom of God, and that they subvert the way of our consumeristic, materialistic, idolatrous culture.
May 3rd, 2010 | 7:47 pm | #5
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Jared Wilson, Frank Turk. Frank Turk said: review of @jaredcwilson 's latest from lifeway http://bit.ly/9GTaLp [...]
May 3rd, 2010 | 8:02 pm | #6
Thank you, Jared; sounds good, I’ll have to check it out!
Have you read “The Heavenly Man,” the story of Brother Christian Yun (underground church leader in China)? This book ought to provide perspective for folks, within evangelicalism, who have imbibed our “culture of materialism.” It’s an amazing story, and provides the eternal perspective that it sounds like your book is trying to provide concrete ‘rhythms’ for.
May 3rd, 2010 | 8:44 pm | #7
I did say this right up front:
And I did say this:
It seems to me these statements do say what this book is about.
May 3rd, 2010 | 9:01 pm | #8
I thought and thought about whether or not to post a comment; really, I did. And after a rocky start, I actually have gotten to like Frank Turk–a lot, actually. I admire his convictions and sincerity above many other writers. However, if something isn’t challenged, it might after a while come to be overlooked or accepted as the norm.
So:
“Papist”?
Good Lord, people.
Even if being critical, couldn’t you just say “Catholic”?
May 3rd, 2010 | 9:28 pm | #9
Craig,
What do you mean?
Frank,
I did read what you highlight here; I guess I just didn’t exactly understand what you meant by what you said, it seemed like it could apply to any array of “Christian books” — in general. Or that what you said in your review would only make sense after I had already read the book for myself.
May 3rd, 2010 | 10:12 pm | #10
What? A review is not a book report?
What a novel idea …
May 3rd, 2010 | 11:24 pm | #11
Frank, your “review” was an amusing conversation (with yourself) just chock full of witty repartee and all, but it was not a book review.
A book review typically will contain a description of the theme and thesis of the book. I perused a number of the NYT book reviews and all of them did so. Feel free to disagree, but it doesn’t make you any less wrong
May 4th, 2010 | 12:36 am | #12
Bobby Grow: “I read the review here, but after doing so I’m not exactly sure what this book is about; what’s it about?”
David Carlson: “best blog post comment I have read in a long time – thanks Bobby”
I wouldn’t call it the best post comment I have read in a long time, but I think it was rather funny. Although perhaps Mr. Grow did not intend to be funny. Which makes it even more funny.
;-)
May 4th, 2010 | 12:57 am | #13
I wasn’t trying to be funny; I used to grade book reviews in seminary (as a TA), and Frank’s review didn’t fit the format of a review — more of a reflection.
David is right. First there needs to be a synopsis of the book (usually chapter by chapter) — just a rough but accurate overview; then provide the strengths and weaknesses, that you see; then a conclusion.
Frank didn’t really provide a clear overview of the book. Like I said, it would require that I read the book first; before I could actually appreciate Frank’s critique.
Truth Unites . . .
Why the snarkiness?
May 4th, 2010 | 5:53 am | #14
Ah — the joy of telling Frank Turk he is wrong. It is an internet sport.
There are 5 theses in Jared’s book — 5 disciplines which he wants the reader to practice. Can you tell me what they are from the review?
Jared has a method for approaching the 5 disciplines. What is it, according to the book review?
It seems to me I covered that — I just didn’t read the book to anyone. You should read the book if you’re going to read the book. Thank God the point of blogging is not to suit some TA’s view of what ought to be said.
May 4th, 2010 | 6:17 am | #15
facts are facts Frank. Sorry if that disturbs you
May 4th, 2010 | 7:03 am | #16
I have changed my mind – this was not a review, but a polemic against the unfortunate tendency of the truly reformed to refuse to read and consider the writings of someone (not dead) who is “off the reservation”
Thus his point is to get the tr to consider reading the book, which Frank considers useful, even if it comes from a suspect source (although not a papist source – one assumes Frank is unwilling to consider anything from that level to be worthwhile).
So his review of the book has less to do with the content of the book and more of justifying it to the TR.
although I think from the comments it is clear that this was the wrong blog for the review if his intent was to expand the horizons of the tr.
May 4th, 2010 | 7:07 am | #17
so, to continue #16, if I could delete my earlier comments I would – I fundamentally misunderstood the purpose of Franks arguments in his review.
He may be tilting at windmills, but it is at least an endeavor I can fully support.
May 4th, 2010 | 7:07 am | #18
What disturbs me is that lack of reflection on the actual facts. For example, what’s at the end of the link I posted in the first sentence of the post? Isn’t there a video, an overview, and a sample chapter?
This is the internet, after all — I think it has a different scope of reference than a typed sheet of paper. If you don’t type something on a sheet of paper, it doesn’t exist — but if you link to something on a blog post, I think it’s utterly fair to expect that the reader (who is complaining that he doesn’t understand) might in fact follow the link to the item in question to see if he’s missing something.
It’s tough when facts are facts. Let’s reference them to see if we’re talking about the same thing.
May 4th, 2010 | 10:15 am | #19
Wow. This is the weirdest discussion of a book review I’ve ever seen. Bobby, just give Frank his grade already so he can give his report card to his dad.
Now, let’s talk about Jared’s book some more!
May 4th, 2010 | 10:54 am | #20
It’s a review of a review!
Seriously, though, even with a re-read, It seems to me that whatever review was in there…it got buried in a lot of side-thoughts.
May 4th, 2010 | 11:16 am | #21
Bobby Grow: “I used to grade book reviews in seminary (as a TA), and Frank’s review didn’t fit the format of a review — more of a reflection.”
Frank Turk: “Thank God the point of blogging is not to suit some TA’s view of what ought to be said.”
Frank, was that a snarky comment?
May 4th, 2010 | 11:51 am | #22
TUaD:
Of course.
May 4th, 2010 | 12:09 pm | #23
@18
Frank – your point is well taken. In defense of myself, I assumed that link would take me to amazon.com or some other link where you get a cut of sales on a referral basis – not an unwarranted opinion, based on how most people link to a book they are reviewing, but clearly I was incorrect in my assumption. That link indeed has some very good information about the book that places your comments in more context
May I suggest that if you intend your reader to go to a link for some other purpose than purchase, you might say why – for example – “For a better, more concise summary of the book than I am willing to put the effort into, I recommend this link by the author.”
May 4th, 2010 | 12:18 pm | #24
So…per Brad’s comment…is ANYONE going to comment on what Frank actually said about the book? Or we all just going to continue on telling Frank how he didn’t write a technically perfect “book review”?
I don’t know if I’ll buy the book or not..I have enough on my plate right now. But still, a book that will point people to the right and necessary consequences of the gospel and make you ask whether or not the gospel is having those effects on them…well that’s gotta be a good thing, and probably something I need.
May 4th, 2010 | 12:47 pm | #25
David –
I want to appreciate your willingness to encounter the post from better than just a skeptical position as I know you and I aren’t always well-aligned. That’s classy, and I appreciate it.
May 4th, 2010 | 6:33 pm | #26
Bobby Grow: “I used to grade book reviews in seminary (as a TA), and Frank’s review didn’t fit the format of a review — more of a reflection.”
Frank Turk: “Thank God the point of blogging is not to suit some TA’s view of what ought to be said.”
TUaD: “Frank, was that a snarky comment?”
Frank Turk: “TUaD: Of course.”
Okay, thanks. I thought it was, but I thought I should check with you anyways.
May 4th, 2010 | 6:49 pm | #27
Ah…so it was really more of a blog post than a book review…
May 11th, 2010 | 12:03 pm | #28
It was more of a pineapple head than a blog post. So it was really a pineapple head about Jared’s book and DVD.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact