<< 1 >>
Rating: Summary: HMMMMMM Review: After reading some of the reviews, I can only grin. I mean, can you ask me to take seriously a reviewer of this book that also gave five stars for a Mel Gibson pseudo-comedic movie?First of all, they need to check their facts. Actually, the biblical writers were way ahead of say....Columbus, in announcing the world was a "sphere"...not flat. Hmmmmm.... Besides, the Bible was not a science book. It is the spiritual history of a God and His creation. So it is futile to give lame arguments about the "scientific" flaws. Spong is an apostate. Period. Why he wears a "collar" that doesn't represent anything he believes reveals his true colors. Power and ego. Peter Moore does a nice job of showing Spong's theological flaws. A decent read.
Rating: Summary: Too Little, Too Late Review: Contemporary "conservative" scholars often accuse the Historial Jesus theologians as operating more on the basis of "agenda" than theology. Could this be a bit of psychological projection on their part? Could they, perhaps, be pointing to the mote in the eye, while ignoring the log in their own? This collection of essays strongly supports that point of view. I can only smile in reply, and point to the original New York Times review of this book. If, indeed, it takes *TEN* theologians to refute Bishop Spong...well, the Bishop's time seems certainly to have arrived!
Rating: Summary: They Read Spong So You Don't Have To Review: I confess-- I have something in common with most of the Rt. Rev. Spong's fans. Like them, I've read very little of what he's written. (For example, "Can A Bishop Be Wrong" has two five-star reviews from Spong fans who are under the impression that Spong wrote this book-- apparently, they feel comfortable praising Spong's work sight-unseen). Don't get me wrong. I've tried to read Spong. But, alas, the Rt. Rev. S. is a ghastly writer. After a while, the charms of Spong's writing-- his relentless self-congratulation, his presenting of hackneyed 19th-century pop-biblical-criticism as his own daring innovation, his use of the passive voice to hide sweeping and questionable assertions ("...there is surprise at how insignificant were the theological issues dividing the two sides [of the Reformation]"), his utter lack of a sense of humor, his unforgivably poor skill with words-- begin to pall. I haven't yet met someone who can read an entire chapter of Spong at one sitting. That's where this book comes in handy. They don't exhaustively categorize the intellectual sins of the Rt. Rev. Spong-- such a task could never be worth the trees killed. But they provide a good survey of his looking-glass kingdom. "Can A Bishop Be Wrong" isn't a work of Christian apologetics, because it doesn't have to be. Spong's main contention-- the foundation of all his work-- is his claim that no intelligent person of the twentieth century can be an orthodox Christian. To respond, one doesn't have to prove Christianity-- one just has to provide a counterexample. This book categorizes his errors and logical lapses with admirable thoroughness. Not an exhaustive thoroughness, to be sure, but sufficient to the silly task at hand. This book has its flaws. As others have noted, it is a collection of essays, and they repeat some of the same points over and over. The authors sometimes let Spong goad them into anger. And they don't argue much against Spong's theological outlook-- but since Spong's outlook is just rehashed nineteenth-century "modernism", you can find plenty of orthodox arguments against heavier intellectual forces than Spong. (Try Chesterton's _The_Everlasting_Man_, for starters.) This book has a limited market. Spong's fans will not be moved by what they read here, if they were inclined to try reading it. But to the traditional theist of whatever religion, who wonders whether he ought to read Spong and find out what all the fuss is about, this book offers a strong and well-reasoned answer: "Nope."
Rating: Summary: Former devotee turns intelligent Review: I use to be a Spong devotee, I was a committed follower and believer in his works. I fed off every word that he put down on paper. I was the ultimate Spong fan. Then unawares I become smart. I realized in the last year of my MDIV that in following Spong I was indeed following a host of others I was unfarmiliar with. I was following the collective images of a host of radical left wingers who wanted to imagine their impotence and cast that on to the christian deity. Creating a toothless, gutless, mindless entity who these people can find their own neurotic feelings validated with. In the process I came to realize that this man known Spong lacks credentials and the intellect to string together 3 consitent sentences. I eventually however found true scholars by the names of N.T. Wright, Ben Wirthington and William Lane Craig. Read these guys, Spong is just slop.
Rating: Summary: An embarrassing, tedious book Review: Let's be clear: I admire John Spong as a bishop, because he says what he believes, says it out loud to your face, is willing to debate and hear criticism, and is able to admit error and change his mind. BUT, this doesn't mean I agree with everything he says, or with all the methods he uses. He frequently writes things I feel are just plain wrong, in fact. I read this book in the hope of getting a balanced, objective critique of Spong's work. This I did not get. This book is an attempt by several clergy and "scholars" to make up for the pathetic, disgraceful "trial of a bishop" the same "orthodox" minds convened against retired Bishop Walter Righter. This first effort against Righter (who ordained an openly gay man in Spong's diocese, with Spong's consent) failed [and left the presenting bishops looking naive and petty], so I must credit the contributors for at least directly attacking their true target this time. The publisher hails this book as "a fascinating read for all Christians," which "strikes a blow for orthodoxy." I tried to read this with a open mind -- I really did -- but it struck me that the arguments and evidence were weak and unconvincing, and the entire book seemed designed to smear Spong personally rather than address the questions he raises. It reminded me of those who attacked Spong's motives as a "liberal Negro sympathizer" during desegregation of the south, rather than addressing the real topic [of race relations and equality]. Much bark, little bite. This book utterly failed to address most of the questions and concerns Spong raises. Agree or disagree with them, but they are valid and they must be answered. I wonder why, if this book "strikes a blow for orthodoxy" (which is ostensibly what "the people" want), this book currently ranks 67,773 in sales at amazon.com, while two of Spong's recent books rank 20 and 40. Certainly, if the "orthodox masses" are clamoring for Spong to be put in his place, this work should be doing a little better. It appears "the people" have as many questions of the "orthodox" keepers of tradition as Spong does. Oddly, even though I think this book is an embarrassment to Anglicans in particular, and Christians in general, I do recommend it. Read it and find out firsthand *why* Spong feels that static, legalistic, Pharisaic "orthodoxy" must change or die.
Rating: Summary: A long awaited step, but only a step Review: Peter C. Moore should be applauded for taking the initiative to finally put a book on the market that offers a rebuttal to Spong's New Age 'psuedo Christianity'. However, I have to whole heartedly agree with the other reviewers who comment on the repetition and inconsistent flow. In the beginning the editor does make clear that "Each Chapter stands on it's own, although together they amount to a remarkably unified and weighty challenge to the bishop's thought and an effective rebuttal of his conclusions." (Introduction). While each Chapter as an individual essay on one aspect of Spong's theology do stand alone, the way they are sort of bundled together seem to dampen it's effectiveness and lighten the weight of it's challenge. Despite the editors claims to the contrary, this book seems to try to cater more towards the `scholarly' in it's language and writing style of many of its' scholarly contributors. In fact it rings most vigorously pointing out the flaws in Spong's logic and scholarship which they show most convincingly. However they fail to realize that this flaws of Spong's are self evident to any educated reader who picks up a copy of one of his works. Spong's appeal, and in turn his true danger, is his effect on people who are not as educated in Christian teachings and scholarship. Spong appeals to the 'modern' man and woman who was raised in an age of New Age philosophy. Things like absolute truth and logic are relegated to old stuffy text books hidden in the annals of Academia. Spong's audience wants to know what Christianity can do for them today and now. How can it fit their fixed world view and agenda. A niche that Spong's fills admirably by putting forth distinctively non-Christian thoughts and propaganda decorated nicely under his 'authority' as a Bishop. To that extent only a few Chapters works to answer the true questions that Spong's theology brings to the church without soundly like they `just want to win a debate'. Stephen M. Smith's `Inside the Whirlwind' shows quite effectively that Spong's philosophy is just New Age monism draped in Christian terminology in a fain attempt to be labeled `Christian'. Though relegated to the back of the book, it is actually the first Chapter I would recommend be read. `The Essential Spong' by James M. Stanton does waver from tedious read to engaging and thought provoking writing. One is taken back by the statement `The fundamentalist has no better friend then John Shelby Spong." but Stanton proves his point quite well in his essay. `The Sin of Faith' by Russell R. Reno left me wanting more. He does well in pinpointing the roots of Spong's interpretation of the bible through his work but he seems to go off on one tangent after another and never unifies his points. This `lull' point appears smack in the middle of his chapter and doesn't lighten up till near the end. In conclusion, I feel this book is a stepping stone towards presenting Orthodox Christianity in contrast to Spong's New Age Christianity. It fails in the area of trying to do so much in so little space. Bishop Spong has spent a life time advocating and writing prolifically on his views. Each book he writes has a subject matter that accomplishes some point in his theology. To get the church to accept things that the modern world accepts in light of scripture, Spong must show that Salvation is attained through `living fully', i.e. in this world. To show salvation is attained in this world, Spong must show that it is not through Christ that he only exhibited how it can be done. To show this he must deny Christ's divinity. To deny the divinity of Christ he must deny the resurrection and miraculous accounts. To deny the miraculous he must deny the authority of the bible and so forth. With each Book, Spong pointedly lays down a plank that is the foundation for his theology. Each plank must be examined and answered in it's own right. To that extent, I would like to see more books dealing solely with one of Spong's books. A clear and concise orthodox answer to the flaws logic and errant theology in each of his book. It is a hope that this book will show the need in the Christian community for good theology and teaching in spite of a Bishop Spong.
Rating: Summary: Lack of Insight Review: Spong has the courage to review the Bible and find areas that need to be discussed . The Bible was written by a society who stoned women , thought the world wes flat, thought the earth was the center of the universe . Anyone who would say the earth was round could be put to death by the Pope of ancient times . Left handed or people who had an original idea were burned by puritans in the name of God . The same christians who hate and I men hate Spong are of that same school. If you know people so shallow do not drink the coolaide as this is the same people Jim Jones would have as friends . Jerry Farwell and his crowd have become millionaires tickling your ears and I don't think people want to know . The truth that the bible gives you the right to kill your first child , remove any woman's right to even speak in a house of worship as well as give a man the right to kill his wife if he becomes jealous should . People who think it is OK to kill and danm in the name of a god should move to Pakistan and never read Spong as it take 3 digits in your IQ to understand his work . Stupid people should read books written for their level of thinking and enjoy it as entertainment . Rev. John Evers
Rating: Summary: Yes, A Bishop can be wrong! Review: The book, a collection of essays from many different Episcopal Bishops, takes on the task of refuting some of the wild and unscholarly writings of Retired Bishop John Shelby Spong. The book receives an average rating because the writing styles from so many different writers (10) doesn't flow naturally. Further, while some authors do a good job refurting Spong's theology, others are not as good at communicating their position. The book does a good enough job in refuting "Spong theology", but lacks a coherent focus because of the many different authors. The book would have been better if only two of the Bishops wrote this book seeking editing and assistence from the others.
<< 1 >>
|