The Value of Books

[JesusFan]

He only thinks his posts are readable. Sinclair Ferguson is respected worldwide and has helped many.
JonC probably has not read anything by him yet he "knows" should not be viewed by Baptists.

Guess those such as a Sproul or a Gill or a Boice were lousy writers, eh?

 

[JesusFan]

Every respected Bible teacher advocates a healthy diet of reading teachers and theologians from the past to supplement our Bible reading.
Never saw any respected theologian to compare them to reading the book of Mormon.

Or the works of an Ellen White or Mary Eddy!

 

[JesusFan]

Ascended masters go beyond all teachers.

I will still put those 2 before any modern day authors for theology!

 

[JesusFan]

Just because a Baptist is unwilling to read non-Baptist authors does not mean he or she has a deficiency.


Let me ask you - God gave Harold Bender as a teacher. What do you think of his books. Have you read enough of them so you are not defficient in your thinking?

What about John Wesley? God gave him as a teacher. Have you read his books?

How about a lewis, or a Tozier?

 

[JesusFan]

This is childish.

I read Joel Berk, John Owen's, Tim Keller, John Macarthur, David Wells, etc.

But I will NEVER declare that a Christian who has not is deficient.

Our sufficiency is Christ and the measure of our faith is God,'s Word.

That is where you and your gang go. And you are wrong.

We should read those other authors if at all available, to supplement bible reading!

 

[JonC]

Every respected Bible teacher advocates a healthy diet of reading teachers and theologians from the past to supplement our Bible reading.
Never saw any respected theologian to compare them to reading the book of Mormon.

I never saw a respected theologian claim that if a Baptist has not read John Owen it is a deficiency either.

 

[JonC]

I never saw a respected theologian claim that if a Baptist has not read John Owen it is a deficiency either.

You, @Martin Marprelate and @canadyjd can argue all day long that a Christian has a deficiency of thought until they have read John Owen's books...but you guys are not technically Baptists anyway (you reject the sufficiency of Scripture by demanding Baptists read Owen to keep from a deficiency in thinking).

 

[AustinC]

Owen is not relevant today insofar as theology goes, but from a historical perspective I enjoy reading his books.

Owen is just is not a teacher God gave to a congregation in our century (he was given to our brothers long gone). I think some gravitate to the archaic because they think it is somehow more spiritual, however it is interesting to consider what people went through and how their faith played a part in their lives.

Let's just be honest here.
Most Christians today are theologically illiterate. To read Owens takes intellectual effort and most are simply incapable of the effort. This is true with other theologians like Jonathan Edwards. Instead, people gravitate to an easy devotional read from Charles Stanley, Chuck Swindoll, or Tony Evans. The devotionals fill an emotional void and are easy to follow.
The problem with such easy reading is that we aren't asked to exercise our theology. In becoming theologically out of shape there comes all these wolves in sheeps clothing and the sheep are too illiterate to even notice. We end up with emergent liberals like Rob Bell or open theist thinkers like Greg Boyd or fluffy nothings like Joel Osteen who simply lull people into a cozy feeling without ever knowing they are drifting toward hell. (Read the sermon to the Hebrews)
As to reading.
Go to the primary source, God's word. Observe it, question it, and interpret it. Then go to the great saints of old and see if they agree with you or if you have some wackadoodle thought that no one ever considered. If no one has that view...then I suggest you abandon it immediately. No one holds it precisely because it's wrong.
This is also where the confessions of faith come in. When we write out what we believe we measure it against the great saints of old and what they confessed. If we are confessing something never confessed before, then stop it. Go back and see what you missed because it's a sure bet you're dumber than the saints of old who wrote the confessions.
Ultimately, lone rangers today are simply arrogant people who imagine they are intellectual superiors to the saints of the past and foolishly pawn off bad theology as though it were valuable thought. A person who reads the great saints of old will recognize the puny thought of todays lone rangers and will call out the foolishness of said thought.

 

[JonC]

Let's just be honest here.
Most Christians today are theologically illiterate. To read Owens takes intellectual effort and most are simply incapable of the effort. This is true with other theologians like Jonathan Edwards. Instead, people gravitate to an easy devotional read from Charles Stanley, Chuck Swindoll, or Tony Evans. The devotionals fill an emotional void and are easy to follow.
The problem with such easy reading is that we aren't asked to exercise our theology. In becoming theologically out of shape there comes all these wolves in sheeps clothing and the sheep are too illiterate to even notice. We end up with emergent liberals like Rob Bell or open theist thinkers like Greg Boyd or fluffy nothings like Joel Osteen who simply lull people into a cozy feeling without ever knowing they are drifting toward hell. (Read the sermon to the Hebrews)
As to reading.
Go to the primary source, God's word. Observe it, question it, and interpret it. Then go to the great saints of old and see if they agree with you or if you have some wackadoodle thought that no one ever considered. If no one has that view...then I suggest you abandon it immediately. No one holds it precisely because it's wrong.
This is also where the confessions of faith come in. When we write out what we believe we measure it against the great saints of old and what they confessed. If we are confessing something never confessed before, then stop it. Go back and see what you missed because it's a sure bet you're dumber than the saints of old who wrote the confessions.
Ultimately, lone rangers today are simply arrogant people who imagine they are intellectual superiors to the saints of the past and foolishly pawn off bad theology as though it were valuable thought. A person who reads the great saints of old will recognize the puny thought of todays lone rangers and will call out the foolishness of said thought.

I agree with a lot of what you offer.

When teaching how to read Scripture I always encouraged people to read, prayerfully, study and form ones own conclusions. Then make sure you are in good company.

If you are a lone wolf theologian then you are most likely very wrong.

I just disagree with the idea that if Baptists have not read John Owen they are deficient of thought. That idea is pretty out there.

 

[Reformed1689]

Owen is not relevant today insofar as theology goes,

Are you suggesting theology and doctrine changes?

 

[Reynolds]

Are you suggesting theology and doctrine changes?

They do change. Should they change is another discussion

 

[JonC]

They do change. Should they change is another discussion

I agree.

The truths may not change but theology itself does as time and situations change. Martin Luther, for example, was very focused on justification by faith in opposition to Roman Catholic doctrine. But since that time justification by faith has become a staple doctrine in our churches and the Roman Catholic Church has Reformed it's own position.

 

[Iconoclast]

I never saw a respected theologian claim that if a Baptist has not read John Owen it is a deficiency either.

I have.Spurgeon said if a man refuses to learn from other mens brains it shows he has no brains of his own.

 

[JonC]

I have.Spurgeon said if a man refuses to learn from other mens brains it shows he has no brains of his own.

A couple of problems with that.

First, Spurgeon was not a theologian.

Second, the statement was pastoral.

Third, I never said we do not learn from others. I said God gives the gift of teaching to our churches.

 

[Reformed1689]

I agree.

The truths may not change but theology itself does as time and situations change. Martin Luther, for example, was very focused on justification by faith in opposition to Roman Catholic doctrine. But since that time justification by faith has become a staple doctrine in our churches and the Roman Catholic Church has Reformed it's own position.

Right, but only one can be true. You stated that John Owen is no longer relevant. So are you saying he was in error? If not, he is definitely still relevant. Truth doesn't change.

 

[kyredneck]

If you could say something in 25 words,
Owen might say it in 150 words (or more!)

Same with Edersheim and Gill.

 

[Deacon]

Are you suggesting theology and doctrine changes?

Are you suggesting theology is static?
…or that our understanding of theology hasn’t changed since Owen or Edwards?

Rob

 

[kyredneck]

Are you suggesting theology is static?
…or that our understanding of theology hasn’t changed since Owen or Edwards?

Rob

4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. Dan 12

9 For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray and make request for you, that ye may be filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding,
10 to walk worthily of the Lord unto all pleasing, bearing fruit in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God; Col 1

I've often thought we should know more now than those long before us but in no way does that discount the value of the truths they espoused.

 

[canadyjd]

You, @Martin Marprelate and @canadyjd can argue all day long that a Christian has a deficiency of thought until they have read John Owen's books...but you guys are not technically Baptists anyway (you reject the sufficiency of Scripture by demanding Baptists read Owen to keep from a deficiency in thinking).

Just to be clear, I haven’t said anything of the sort, so please excuse me from your “you an’t a Baptist slander”.

peace to you

 

[tyndale1946]

Ascended masters go beyond all teachers.

The only Ascended Master I know is sitting on a throne... His name is Jesus Christ!... I put my faith in no man, and no preacher and I do not see ascended masters in scripture... Brother Glen

Ephesians 11:10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:

16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.