The Hammer of God - a Book Review

The Hammer of God by Bo Giertz
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

2 Corinthians 2:16 – “Who is sufficient for these things?”

Have you ever wondered what a pastor thinks and feels, what his relationship with God is like, as he ministers at church or visits you in the hospital?

This unique novel offers three stories of three young ministers, each faced with a spiritual crisis. Each is spiritually zealous and equally misguided. The main message is that pietism has no answers for the basic questions of the real spiritual life. What do you say when an otherwise Christian man raves on his deathbed, speaking profanely of his many sinful experiences? How do you help a woman who prays and seeks for a pure heart, but knows all the time she doesn’t have it?

Without a foundation of God’s grace to us in Christ, the Christian life is a shaky and brittle endeavor. The genius of The Hammer of God is to show us the truth of this in the minister’s own spiritual life, and his public ministry as well. Pursuing revivals and calling people to obedience and purity can be done in a way that focuses everyone on themselves or on the pastor. Such will pass as a wind-driven leaf. But to ground all we think, feel, and do in reliance on God’s grace, not finding our righteousness in our thoughts, emotions, or deeds, looking to Jesus only, brings sturdy, Gospel hope.

I was a pastor for many years, and this book ably gets inside the pastor’s mind and heart, in many ways.

The author is Lutheran, and baptismal regeneration is assumed at various points. But this is not overdone, and the main theme of the book is one every Christian needs to hear.

A strange omission: none of the clergy were married. Marriage as a minister wasn’t even a passing thought. Probably because the perpetual theme was the pietism-fighting pastor.

“If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— 21 “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” 22 (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? 23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh” – Colossians 2:20-23.

Highly recommended, especially for pastors.

View all my reviews

Last Minute Palm Sunday Thought - Habakkuk 2

Most people and preachers catch the contextual point the Gospels make at Palm Sunday, when Jesus rides a donkey, from Zechariah 9.  It's right there on the surface: Jesus is the King of verse 9.

It's common to say those shouting "Hosanna" were expecting a military Messiah to drive out Rome, and I believe it.  It's an important warning to those who trust in earthly rulers to save, in every time.

But it's very UNcommon to hear an explanation of why they shouldn't expect Jesus to drive out Rome, given Zechariah 9:11-17.  Note all the military victory references, there!  (I think the answer lies in the multiple time-horizons of prophecy - the text doesn't always refer to the same event in the same epoch, even in the same chapter or verse, something the post- and pre-mil positions can't often grasp, and don't deal well with.)

Less obvious than Zechariah 9, but just as important, is Jesus' response to the Pharisees, when they demand He silence His shouting followers: "If these were silent, the very stones would cry out."  Often we think Jesus means all creation will praise Him, even if the Pharisees won't.  This is true, but not the point of the text.

Jesus here alludes to Habakkuk 2:11, "the stone will cry out from the wall," and its context.  "Woe to him who gets evil gain for his house.... Woe to him who builds a town with blood and founds a city on iniquity!"  This is exactly what the temple leaders Jesus confronted were doing.  It's fascinating the context of the chapter includes the famous verse, the just shall live by faith," contrasted with the wicked's greed, indulgence, and oppression.  Instead of indulging themselves by politically allying with the pagan Roman oppressors (the Sadducees), the faithful were called to wait on the Lord and live by faith (Hab. 2:4), not taking up arms.

So Palm Sunday is

 - acclaiming the coming King

 - accepting the right Lamb for your Passover atonement (another post)

Yes.  

But it is also prophetic confrontation of governmental/national sin as a nation.

Jesus unleashes a veritable flood of Scripture, rich in context, at this event (not only King, but Prophet and Priest).

 - My house shall be called a house of prayer - read all of Isaiah 56.

 - A den of robbers! - read all of Jeremiah 7.

 - Hosanna! (Save, please!) - read Psalm 118:19-27.

This Prophetic breakout continues during holy week in Jesus' teachings...

The Moscow Mood - basic differences, and Moscow's take

So Douglas Wilson and Kevin DeYoung are two of my most influential contemporary theological writers.

A few months ago, Kevin critiqued Doug.
Here is Doug Wilson’s response to Kevin.

Some basic disagreements between them seem to be:

What is the right level of political engagement?  
Should we stay a bit distant, focused on more directly spiritual matters (Kevin)?  
Or go full-boar into the fray, since politics IS a spiritual matter (Doug)?

To what extent should we instigate conflict in culture and politics?  
Not much, since it draws attention to the wrong thing (Kevin)?  
As much as possible, since people’s focus needs to be here in this moment (Doug)?

Doug would say, we need to try to set the world right, and not retreat to only our churches and homes.
Kevin would say, to focus less on politics and provocative rhetoric, and more on our churches and homes is not retreat, but a proper biblical focus.

What is the “Moscow Mood”?
Moscow would define it thusly:
You can’t fight a culture without a culture.  The mainstream Reformed Evangelical movement (of which Kevin is coming to be a major leader) does not HAVE a meaningful culture of its own.  Moscow does, and it’s getting attention.  Build Christendom and fight the ungodly culture out there.  We want Christ as Lord over everything.  Not just Sunday morning.  Not just church and family time.

Many think fighting a la Moscow-style means scowling or indulging anger.  It doesn’t.
Fighting well means living a corporate, embodied Christianity with a purpose.

Lots of young people hear what they are supposed to be doing, but know they are not doing it, b/c they aren’t plugged into a community.  Faith is in the upper story only, to use Francis Schaeffer’s categories.  How do we live it out down here, in the lower story?  Or do we only escape to the upper story to live out our godliness and piety?  Christians don’t know how to build a robust Christian life here on earth.  God is bringing the Kingdom of God to earth, not only by the direct work of His Son apart from us, but also through our work here, building families, churches, communities and nations.

The mainstream Reformed Evangelical movement has forsaken this for either a carnal political solution (joining the Trump train, or going Sojourner/liberal mainline).  Or, rejecting that, an escapist pietism that ignores politics as much as possible.

Next time I’ll respond to Kevin’s critiques of this “mood.”
A hint: some of it is off base.  Some of it hits the mark.

The Moscow Mood - Introduction and Piety

It seems that since Kevin DeYoung critiqued the Moscow Mood a few months ago, Moscow likes to talk about their mood.

I’ve been around the Moscow Mood for over 15 years, and recently have attended other Reformed churches, which have very different “moods” from Moscow.  I think I have something to add, here.

Let me start with a question that exposes the important and differing assumptions everyone makes in debates like this:

What is piety supposed to look like?

A. In some Reformed churches, it is assumed that godliness – especially in worship – should be slow, somber, reverent, cerebral, formal and deliberate.  This is the Ligonier Ministries mentality - the bowed head, furrowed brow, and concerned tone.  Generally, this view assumes piety will look and feel OPPOSITE of the world.

B. In others, piety should look more easy-going, winsome, warm-hearted on your sleeve, emotionally expressive and sensitive.  This is the Tim Keller approach - the upbeat, always smiling, love-everyone-warmly tone.  This view more adopts the inter-relational customs and fads of how the world acts.

C. In stark contrast, the Moscow Mood thinks of piety primarily as a fight.  A recent CREC’s Council’s slogan was “Fight the Good Fight.”  Fight, Laugh, Feast!  “Nice” borders on being a swear word.  There is a battle going on for your country, family, church, and soul.  To not fight is compromise.  Of course, this is coming mainly from Doug Wilson: a combative, provocative tone meant to stir you to action in the battle, and usually to feel hostile to the world so you'll fight more effectively.

None of these are totally off base, but there are pros and cons to each.

A. Reverence is essential to piety.  Much of the evangelical world has lost it and churches aren’t encouraging it much.  Group A is right to react against that.  Believe it or not, some churches have almost total silence in the meeting room before the service, as an expression of this.  You can argue if that specific practice is ideal, but we must recover reverence.  

B. Love for neighbor should be integral to piety.  We are not hostile to anyone, but see the image of God in everyone we meet.

C. Fighting the spiritual war is also essential to piety.  We are hostile to a spirit of anti-Christian malevolence, wherever it appears.

I wish there were churches that blended all three of these together better, but alas, that seems beyond the reach of the current church.  We need reverent, warm-hearted, happy warriors.

There is much more to say about the "Moscow mood.”  In future posts I’ll interact with DeYoung and Wilson's response, consider "the mood" theologically (VanTil’s “no neutrality,” v. common grace), politically, and culturally (what is Christian culture?).

Until then, the question I leave you with is this: what is your standard for godliness?  We all have shorthand markers: things we think, feel, or do, that reassure us we are being godly.  What are yours?  Are those correct, in the light of Scripture?