Vintage Church

Vintage Church sets up to be the continuation of where Vintage Jesus left off. Vintage Jesus upset some people as they thought that Driscoll took too many liberties in describing who Jesus was. Although I disagree with them, it is hard for me to see where those same people will have issue with this book. This book is set up to be an open an honest discussion of what the church is. At some point, if you are a pastor of a church, you will be challenged by Driscoll and Breshears and even rubbed the wrong way in their description of what a church should look like.

This is not because they are purposely trying to demean churches, but they are taking the modern church and testing them to Scripture. Driscoll himself even shows in some places that he wishes that they were better at, or where they have corrected Mars Hill over the years. Again, this is exactly what makes Driscoll so attractive, he is honest with his mistakes while pointing out others. He hammers on emergent church designs and also the traditional fundamental churches, to make sure they return to the true calling of the church as a whole.

What I believe this book will turn out to be is a handbook for church planters or those who are desiring to test what they are doing within their churches. The book is set up like the others that Driscoll has done in recent years. Meaning, he puts forth a topic through the Scriptures and culture and then Breshears answers commonly asked questions on that topic of the chapter. Vintage Church sets up everything from answering questions on preaching, ordinances and church discipline to how to utilize technology as a church. This book is very practical and reminds me of "The Deliberate Church" by Mark Dever and Paul Alexander. The difference is that Driscoll and Breshears cover more ground and looks more into the culture and missional aspects of the church.

In the end, the readers for this book will be pastors and elders, and not as many congregants will enjoy this book like they did with Vintage Jesus. This doesn't make the book bad, it just makes it targeted. I felt that the book was really a grown up version of Confessions of a Reformissional Rev. That book told the story of the beginning of Mars Hill, and this tells the current story. This is my only "gripe" with this book is that it seems to more of a polemic for the current way that Mars Hill is doing things. So, when you get to topics like "What is a Missional Church" and "What is a Multi Site Church" the descriptions are more of what Mars Hill is doing and less of a general look into these topics. But, should I really expect anything less of a book written by a pastor who believes (as do I for the most part) his church is doing the correct mission of Christ?

I also did enjoy the reminders to big churches that not all churches should be big, and the reminder to small churches, that not all churches should be small. Criticism of each other usually comes from each side of the issue, but Driscoll and Breshears really exhort each one to do the calling that Christ has called them to. But, because Driscoll's church is huge, some of his practical wisdom on how to live out church are going to fly over the head of those pastors in small churches. Some of the things discussed in technology and multi site are just not going to be able to be utilized by small churches. This is fine though, because the book is for all to read, not just big churches or small churches.

Although this book could have been titled, "Vintage Mars Hill" or "Confessions: Part II", the book delivers a very good understanding of the church. My favorite part of the entire book was simply, "What is a Christian Church?" Driscoll puts to shame those who believe that online churches, or coffee shop churches are true churches. Driscoll walks through what a church should include to be a true Vintage, or Scriptural, church. I very much enjoyed this description so that one does not get together with a friend for coffee and call it church, or a church gets off target and loses focus of what a church should encompass.

If you are a church planter, or one that is about to engage in new church plant, pick up this book. If you are a leader in a church that is looking to restructure or desire to test yourself to make sure that you are a biblical church, pick up this book. If you are a dated church that desires to reach today's generation, pick up this book. You will not be disappointed. I would also highly recommend that one pick up The Deliberate Church and The Master's Plan for the Church
alongside Vintage Church for great study and great resources on the Christian church according to Jesus. Highly Recommended.

Link to Buy

Crossway

Westminster Books

Why We're Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should Be

This book was written by two guys who couldn't be more different in their background and writing styles. Kevin DeYoung is the young, Reformed pastor, that takes this subject on a very subjective theological level, exposing carefully the doctrinal errors found in the Emergent church. Ted Kluck is just the opposite. Also, young, but a former athlete (he would love to hear that I said former), former semi professional football player, current sportswriter, and unapologetically sarcastic and whimsical. He takes on the subject much like I would, exposing the errors with witty banter and "low hanging fruit."

The book layout was great. Each author took a subject and then the chapters went back and forth throughout. So, you would get hit with the longer, theological, linear chapters of DeYoung, and then read the shorter stories and witty rebuttals from Kluck. I really enjoyed this as you really got the feel from two totally different perspectives of what is going on in the Emergent church.

The book's purpose is to really help people just better understand what the Emergent church is and what it does, or maybe better put, doesn't stand for. The main people that are refuted would be the same if you looked on any blog, namely, Brian McLaren, Rob Bell and Tony Jones. What seemed to be the main focus of the entirety of the book would be the Emergent's focus on Kingdom living, instead of the totality of the work of Christ. In other words, more focused on morality, than understanding what is the first importance: the gospel.

DeYoung and Kluck came to the same conclusion that I have with the Emergent church and others that think just like them, which would be the fact that they are reacting to the more fundamental, legalistic churches, but doing so in the wrong manner. DeYoung and Kluck show that some of the questions that the Emergents bring to light are true and helpful to/against the mainstream church in America, but the way that they answer those questions are not only wrong, but actually harmful, and in some cases, flat out heretical.

The authors did much research for the material, so much so that they went to the different churches and events of this movement to "get their hands dirty". I found this book very helpful and know that those who are in the Emergent church will just see this as another "conversation" not worth having. But, for those who are on the fence or are starting to understand the Emergent problems, will find this a very helpful book on understanding the things that are going on with the Emergent leaders.

Actually, the best part of the book was in the epilogue, when DeYoung went through the churches in Revelation with special focus on Ephesus, Pergamum and Thyratira. This part was very balanced and showed how every church should try to take the good out of each of these churches and learn from them and also learn from the admonishment that Christ gives each as well. Of course, in the end, the idea was for the Emergent church to take a look at what is missing in their movement, which would be the very strongest part in the Ephesian church: defense of doctrine.

I would highly recommend this book to anyone wanting to understand the Emergent church in more detail. I just hope that people are able to learn from this book from within the movement and it isn't just used as ammunition to debate with. Link to Buy

Blue Like Jazz

I entered into reading this book with a lot of opinions thrown to me from those who have read it. What I learned before I even opened the book is it seemed as though people either loved it or hated it. I have some really close friends who loved the book and thought it was a breath of fresh air, and I also knew some of my friends thought that it's only good was to start a fire with it.

So, because I trusted on both sides, I felt like I could come with no preconceived notions. It was like I heard each debater by themselves but couldn't make a decision until I heard them both at the same time. So, the only way to do this was to read the book. What kind of irritates me is that I landed right in the middle. I can see why people love the book, but I can also see why people hate the book. There are some great discussions in the book but some very bad views on some theology that I feel could hurt those not driven by the word of God for discernment.

Donald Miller is a writer and a poet first, you can see that from the title of the book and in the opening pages. I like poetry when I am reading a poem but find poetry to be distracting when I am trying to read a book. What Mr. Miller does in this writing, in my estimation (although I am no expert) is try and use his poetry skills too much at times as one navigates through his story of redemption. It just isn't for me, that is, his way of writing. But I can get through that, not enough for me to put it down.

The book is really Donald Miller's testimony. It is his writings of how he came to know Christ and how he has grown in Christ, for this it is hard to say, "it is good" or "it is bad." At times, Mr. Miller seems to be scattered in thought and goes from one topic to another without leading the reader to where he is going. But, it is a testimony of what Christ has done for him, and that is much to sing praises about. Miller's book also punches some evangelicals right in the face with some realities of what is going on in today's conservative circles and it sickens not only Mr. Miller, but also myself. I have to say I felt it was worth the read to get a fresh perspective of contemporary Christendom. Mr. Miller brings up a lot of good points, like feeding the homeless, caring for the homosexual and liberals, and loving people yet still telling them the truth of the Gospel. This love, Mr. Miller finds to be happening more in the "pagan" circles than inside the church of the living God and I have to agree. Mr. Miller though does not point fingers but he actually comes to the conclusion that it is HIS fault for this not happening and then asks all who read to understand that it is also their fault for this contemporary slide of hate instead of love for those outside of the body of Christ. I have to say, I like that perspective. Mr. Miller is very honest with his afflictions as a non-believer and a new-believer and I know this makes many people very uncomfortable. But for me, I enjoy when I can be honest with someone and they can be honest with me. It actually helps in prayer to know specifics of someone so that you can be praying for them. This is what Mr. Miller gives us in this novel of his life: An honest testimony of what Christ has done.

What I found to be dangerous are his thoughts on depravity and the atonement of Jesus Christ. He simply says that since he sees people doing good, then he doesn't believe that people are completely evil like some (one of them being me) say. I would have to ask Mr. Miller to trust in the Living Word instead of his eyes. I would ask him to interpret many Scriptures that would point him in the opposite direction, such as: Isaiah 64:6; Jeremiah 17:9; Genesis 6:5;8:21; Romans 3:10-18; Psalm 14; Jeremiah 13:23; Psalm 58:3.

He carries this thought though and it becomes disconnected as he then states the issues of us, including himself, being evil. So his description throughout the book of Christ's atonement and death on the cross becomes one that is to make evil people good. It is a moralistic redemption. This is not the reason Jesus died for our sins, He died to make dead people alive to God. He died to bring His children to His side for God's glory not ours. One of the fruits of a Christian is definitely to do good works and so this is definitely one of the benefits, but is not the primary reason for the atonement. So, this, in my estimation, is a very large error that Mr. Miller makes.

It seems as though Mr. Miller also relies much more on his experience than the unchanging word of God. I don't know this to be true, but this is the way it comes off in my reading of his book. This can be very dangerous, especially in light of knowing our heart is desperately sick, who can discern it...Jeremiah 17:9.

Also, his last chapter on "How to Love Yourself" is a little strong in parts. I do understand that his intent is to understand that God loves us and we need to accept that. I will be careful to say that this is probably a very good chapter, in parts, for those who have had terrible parents or disastrous intamacy issues for whatever horrific reasons, that I cannot empathize with since I myself have never had these kinds of experiences. But there are times in this chapter that go too far in my estimation. The Bible tells us to "die to self" "to deny self" and for what reason? So that we can "live to Christ" and to "follow Christ." So the author would have done better, in my estimation, to balance these understandings.

My recommendation to any who are thinking of picking up this book is to be discerning. I compare it with someone telling their testimony before they are baptized. The story of conversion is wonderful to hear. But, they say those two or three things that make you wince and say, "oohhh...wouldn't have said it that way..." But, that does not ruin the testimony of Christ in their life, and I don't think the errors in this book will ruin Mr. Miller's testimony either. I would recommend it for church leaders needing to understand what errors are creaping in the church as Mr. Miller points out. For the others, if you do read it, please be sure to be discerning when Mr. Miller brings theology and his experiences into the discussion, because I find it to be lacking in many ways. But, be challenged by his words when he calls us to be more loving to those who aren't like us and to understand that the issue is US not THEM. Link to buy

MIssion Minded

This little guide book is one that should be of good help to any pastors and/or elders looking to see some different ways to think about our "mission" as churches. I didn't really know what to expect as I started the book and the author seems to think a lot like people like Driscoll and Chandler, which for me, is a good thing.

Peter Bolt describes what we should not be: a church so stuck in our traditional ways of doing "church" that we don't think of other ways for the members to reach the community. I know what your thinking, "is this another seeker mentality?" I would say, yes, but in a good way. The author is not telling us ways to change the Lord's Day service, but asking us to think on how we use our members to reach our community throughout the week. The author even makes a case for expositional preaching instead of topical.

This is a very practical book where the author even lays out worksheets to provide helps for the pastor to take a look at the people and programs of the church to find the holes that need to be filled, and the places where we spend way too much of our time. Showing even how to find the people that are appropriate for different ministries within and outside the church.

I was pleasantly surprised and would tell readers to at least pick up this little guide book so that we can at least think more about what we are doing in and out each week as we seek to serve our living God. Link to Buy

Listening to the Beliefs of Emerging Churches

I was pretty apprehensive about reading this book. I really didn't know what to expect and didn't know really what the approach was going to be with this book. To be honest, the only reason that I picked up the book is because I went to the Resurgence Conference and Mark Driscoll was one of the contributors. I am glad I didn't "judge" Driscoll for being a part of this book before I read this, because I thought he was distancing himself from the people that contributed to this book. After reading, let's just say that Driscoll is definitely NOT a part of what is commonly known as the Emergent church and he is really a lot different than those a part of the wider used term, "emerging church."

The only thing that I got from this book, besides Driscoll admonishing the other contributors (Burke, Kimball, Pagitt, Ward), is to make sure that our theology is put into practice. I can say that it did make me think from that perspective. Outside of that, this book was very shallow and far from, and I mean FAR FROM, biblical ecclesiology. Mark Driscoll had to continually "exhort sound doctrine" to these other "pastors" and return them to the Scriptures. Driscoll was the only pastor that truly held to Sola Scriptura, while the others look more to our culture and those around them to form their ecclesiology, orthopraxy, and most dangerous: orthodoxy.

The two "pastors" that people need to really be warned of is Doug Pagitt and Karen Ward. They are far from Christendom (which they would admit and happily accept) and should not be given an ear to listen to. Burke and Kimball were on the edge but still held to the complete authority of Scripture, although I would definitely not adhere to a lot of the ways that they practice their theology and more specifically, their ecclesiology.

Again, Driscoll was the lone bright spot and because of the far reaching post-modern ideas of the other contributors, Driscoll sounded like John MacArthur more than an emerging pastor. Througout the discussion, just when you thought Driscoll was getting "soft" he "brought it" again.

As far as the frame of the book, it is set up to give each "pastor" a chapter with the other four being able to respond to that pasor's contribution. The original intent was for each author to show their thoughts on the Trinity, the atonement and Scripture. I found only Driscoll's chapter to be the only one who "followed the rules." But, what else should we expect from these emerging leaders? The sad thing is that since the authors were so shallow, Driscoll was forced to defend basic orthodoxy and wasn't able to give a great in depth study or defense of the above said topics.

If you would like to read about these different views on the emerging church, I guess it is okay to read, but it is just so messed up as far as their thinking on how church should be run that it is hard for me to recommend. I am glad I read it so that I could see that Driscoll is NOT Emergent in any way. He is far from Pagitt and McLaren and should be seen as the lone bright spot out of these that contributed to the book.

Please be discerning if you pick this book up and like a Berean, test all teachings to Scripture.

Link to Buy.

Confessions of a Reformission Rev.

This book was one that I was pretty excited to read. Not because of me wanting to be emerging or anything of the sort, but I just wanted to know more of the man who has been instrumental in turning many young people to Christ up here in the Seattle area. Although, I used to go to his church for a little while back in the early 2000's I still knew very little of Mark Driscoll or the history of Mars Hill.

Much has been written about him, mostly against him in conservative circles for his association with the emergent movement. I will tell you that this book does clear up anybody's thinking that he is still involved with the emergent movement, for he is far from that movement and mindset, which I was surprised of. The reason I say this is that he calls out Brian McClaren, and those in his circle, with their wrong views of Scripture

This book is the story of not just Driscoll, actually very little about the man Driscoll and more about the church Mars Hill, from beginning, up to the time of the book (2006) and even included some things they were hoping to implement. I actually came to this book very skeptical of his tactics and not knowing at all his "goals" in ministry. What I came out believing about Driscoll is a high respect for his love of the lost. This is evident: Mark Driscoll loves the Lord Jesus Christ with all his heart, soul and mind, and truly loves his neighbor as himself. I would hope no one would deny this.

As far as his "tactics" or "strategies" in place, I find them a bit edgy, and I think Driscoll would take that as a compliment. Driscoll talks much of having a certain number of attendees as his goal and he seek(ed)(s) how the best way to achieve these numbers are possible. He admits in the book that he spoke to many people on this subject, from pastors like Rick Warrren to people who study secular organizations. This part of the book is what discouraged me in that the numbers were so very important to him. What did not discourage me is that his goal was not to have "fluffy" Christians, but truly Christ following, missionary minded Christians. Which again makes me separate him from the seeker movement and people like Finney, from the Second Great Awakening.

Although I disagree with his thoughts on how to reach the lost, and even calls my method of handing out tracts "silly," I will say that I respect him that he truly wants to see true repentance from the lost city around him.

If you pick up this book you will be challenged to love the lost around you, but what I fear is the method that is taking place at Mars Hill. Some of his theology I have a hard time with (prophetic dreams) and also his courseness, not only in his jokes but also his speaking to those that he serves with and is called to shepherd.

If you are truly interested in understanding Mars Hill and Mark Driscoll, this is a must read that will allow you to understand him from his mouth not others. But, that does not mean that I agree with his implement strategies. Link to buy