<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Solid Writing, Suspect Conclusions
Review: I must admit that I found this book intriguing and valuable, however, only as a sense of somebody else's opinions on two influential apologists. Many of the authors' conclusions and critiques on Lewis and Schaeffer were well presented, except for one thing. One got the sense as the book was read, that the authors were very proficient and setting up straw men to knock down or using statements somewhat out of context to support their own theological views. While I have no problem using other's statements to support your own theological views, I do have a problem with writing a book under the guise of a critique of apologists in order to support and strengthen your own theological slant.I can't say that their theological slant was that much different then my own. There are differences, but I found myself agreeing with the bulk of their presentation theologically. However, I do feel that they may have done Schaeffer and Lewis an injustice by oversimplifying their positions. The book is worth reading, but not for a completely accurate depiction of Lewis and Schaeffer's positions.
Rating: 
Summary: Use this as a Tool to Examine Your Own Faith
Review: I selected this book to read after reading Hugh Hewett's "The Embarassed Believer". I wanted to get a better feel for what apologetics is about. What better place to go than to the two greatest apologists of the 20th century. Burson and Walls certainly have a point of view, but I do not think that it detracts from their comparisons of Lewis and Schaeffer. I found that it pushed me to hold up my own beliefs to the same analyses they used on their subjects. I learned where I have strengths and where there are gaping holes in my understanding of the faith. The territory covered is quite expansive, many of the areas of belief were outside of any regular theological discussions by lay leaders in my church experience. As a Christian called to lay ministry, I have found it important to carefully examine my own beliefs about the nature of the relationship between God and Man before trying to take the "good news" to those outside of the church. As most comparisons of human-beings are, there are flaws. We are all flawed, but we all have something to say about who and what God is and does in the world. This book gives us a framework to build and articulate our own understanding of what faith in Jesus represents in the millenium ahead.
Rating:
Summary: Use this as a Tool to Examine Your Own Faith
Review: I selected this book to read after reading Hugh Hewett's "The Embarassed Believer". I wanted to get a better feel for what apologetics is about. What better place to go than to the two greatest apologists of the 20th century. Burson and Walls certainly have a point of view, but I do not think that it detracts from their comparisons of Lewis and Schaeffer. I found that it pushed me to hold up my own beliefs to the same analyses they used on their subjects. I learned where I have strengths and where there are gaping holes in my understanding of the faith. The territory covered is quite expansive, many of the areas of belief were outside of any regular theological discussions by lay leaders in my church experience. As a Christian called to lay ministry, I have found it important to carefully examine my own beliefs about the nature of the relationship between God and Man before trying to take the "good news" to those outside of the church. As most comparisons of human-beings are, there are flaws. We are all flawed, but we all have something to say about who and what God is and does in the world. This book gives us a framework to build and articulate our own understanding of what faith in Jesus represents in the millenium ahead.
Rating:
Summary: Someone ought to analyze Burson's and Wall's heterodoxy
Review: While presenting a generally concise and accurate summary of much of what Lewis and Schaeffer wrote and taught, the authors (Burson and Walls) seem to have a "hidden agenda" of damning Francis Schaeffer with "faint praise." The authors reject Schaeffer's Reformed views on Predestination (not surprising given that both are professors at a leading theological seminary with a decidedly Arminian tradition). They promote a view of human freedom that is quite consistent with a generally Arminian perspective on such matters. Moreover, the authors seem to leave the door open for the "Openness of God" and other such postmodernist and heterodox viewpoints of God's omniscience... Burson and Walls also question Schaeffer's views on Inerrancy and reject his views affirming the substitutionary atonement. Instead, they seem to embrace a "limited errancy" view on the doctrine of the inspiration of scripture. They also emphatically embrace a view of salvation and eternal damnation that includes Purgatory and postmortem evangelism. Overall, this book is worth reading to see how far the "Great Evangelical Disaster" has progressed since Francis Schaeffer's passing in 1984. These two leading evangelical professors can promote heterodoxy with little fear of confrontation or protest from the evangelical academic community. Schaeffer has long been despised by of the evangelical academic community because he exposed their accommodation to the twin idols of academic freedom and academic respectability. May God raise up a generation of Francis Schaeffer's who can bypass the evangelical academic backwaters for the fresh streams of Kingdom service--unencumbered by accommodation to modern idols...
Rating:
Summary: Solid Writing, Suspect Conclusions
Review: While presenting a generally concise and accurate summary of much of what Lewis and Schaeffer wrote and taught, the authors (Burson and Walls) seem to have a "hidden agenda" of damning Francis Schaeffer with "faint praise." The authors reject Schaeffer's Reformed views on Predestination (not surprising given that both are professors at a leading theological seminary with a decidedly Arminian tradition). They promote a view of human freedom that is quite consistent with a generally Arminian perspective on such matters. Moreover, the authors seem to leave the door open for the "Openness of God" and other such postmodernist and heterodox viewpoints of God's omniscience... Burson and Walls also question Schaeffer's views on Inerrancy and reject his views affirming the substitutionary atonement. Instead, they seem to embrace a "limited errancy" view on the doctrine of the inspiration of scripture. They also emphatically embrace a view of salvation and eternal damnation that includes Purgatory and postmortem evangelism. Overall, this book is worth reading to see how far the "Great Evangelical Disaster" has progressed since Francis Schaeffer's passing in 1984. These two leading evangelical professors can promote heterodoxy with little fear of confrontation or protest from the evangelical academic community. Schaeffer has long been despised by of the evangelical academic community because he exposed their accommodation to the twin idols of academic freedom and academic respectability. May God raise up a generation of Francis Schaeffer's who can bypass the evangelical academic backwaters for the fresh streams of Kingdom service--unencumbered by accommodation to modern idols...
<< 1 >>
| 
