Tried With Fire

I've been juggling a lot of books this summer. I've been making more of an effort to set aside reading time rather than snippets here and there, which has helped me work through the stacks sitting by my bed. I still love audiobooks, and I try to squeeze in listening time whenever I can. So here's what I've been reading: I finished A Fiery Gospel: The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the Road to Righteous War by Richard M. Gamble.  Some of my friends were disappointed to learn of the non-Christian, Unitarian origins of the song. I don't relish being the bearer of bad news. Honestly. I really don't want to be like Mikey in the Life Cereal commercial who hates everything, but to paraphrase Hannah Anderson, we need to pursue the truth no matter who it implicates. And to paraphrase Dr. Gamble, history is not obligated to make us feel good about ourselves. To continue the theme of civil religion in America, I was able to borrow Dr. Gamble's 2nd book, The War for...

I finished A Fiery Gospel and hope to write a review soon. As I posted before, Julia Ward Howe was a Unitarian whose bad hermeneutics and bad theology became the perfect combination to create a vaguely religious and nationalistic poem to claim "God" for our side. There were some who realized the contradiction between Howe's beliefs and Christianity, but they found a way around it. This is an excerpt from Moody Bible Institute's Christian Workers Magazine from 1917. They published The Battle Hymn as part of their "patriotic duty." The editors were fully aware of Howe's theological problems, but they "reassured their readers that "The Battle Hymn" could be made safe for Bible-believing Christians." 1 Mrs. Howe was not an evangelical Christian, her strongest sympathies being with the Unitarians, and yet as one reads the hymn, he is impressed with the fact that the Unitarianism it represents is almost more orthodox than the so-c...

We recently had a short Sunday school class on how to read the Bible. A few principles to consider are: Genre - Is the passage historical narrative, poetry, teaching, or apocalyptic literature? Context - What is the context of the verse in relation to the chapter, the book, and redemptive history? What was the meaning of the author? What would it have meant to the original readers/hearers? Without these guidelines, it is possible to misuse the Bible. Rather than asking what was the intent of the author , the text can become what I want it to mean to me . Authorial intent versus reader response . Instead of the Bible being about God's revelation of himself and his plan of redemption, I can read myself into the text and make the Bible all about me. For example, the story of David and Goliath. This is historical narrative that actually took place. It shows God's faithfulness to preserve his people and the line through which the Messiah would eventually come. The passage d...

I came across this Reformed Forum podcast with Dr. Richard M. Gamble, historian and member of the OPC. Dr. Gamble has just published a book, A Fiery Gospel: The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the Road to Righteous War. This book covers the background of the familiar "hymn," which was eye-opening to me. In a nutshell, a supposedly Christian song was written by a Unitarian who was influenced by German liberalism. The podcast is very interesting and points out how easily we are swayed by Christian-ish lyrics that sound vaguely biblical. Perhaps the vagueness is the reason The Battle Hymn endured and became part of American civil religion. I requested A Fiery Gospel through the public library, which I am hoping to read. In the meantime, I looked up Dr. Gamble's other books. His main area of research is American civil religion, a topic that I find grimly fascinating. I was able to find a copy of this book - In Search of the City on a Hill: The Making and Unmaking of an A...

After many nights of working in the evening, I've had a break. It's been nice to be able to relax after the dishes are done and read "depressing books about where America has gone wrong." That is my daughter's opinion of some of my reading material. It's not that I like reading depressing books. I want to understand the mindsets and fears that led us to where we are today. My current "depressing" book is One Nation Under God by Kevin Kruse. "Grimly fascinating" would be a better descriptor, though. It's fascinating to learn how easily America was satisfied with civil religion. The generic nature of God didn't seem to bother many people as long as "God" was mentioned in some vague way. But this casual appropriation of God is rather grim and led to a syncretistic mishmash of outward practice minus any theological foundation. During Eisenhower's campaign for the presidency, he "vowed to take the vague religion ...

The following are quotes from Surge of Piety: Norman Vincent Peale and the Remaking of American Religious Life by Christopher Lane, Yale University Press, 2016. I had gotten the book after reading this review at The Gospel Coalition. I was hoping it would give me some insight into the mind-meld between conservative Evangelicals and politics. The reviewer suspects there is a connection between Peale's teaching and President Trump. While that may be true, I am more interested in Peale's influence on the average professing Evangelical and the morphing of Christianity into "God, self, and country," which is civil religion in a nut shell. As to who "God" is, I think He is left conveniently vague enough to satisfy anyone's agenda. Amy Mantravadi just wrote a post on The Ascent of Trump and Impact on Evangelical Ethics.   It is spot on. Her post is the main reason, why I finally started reading about Peale.  As the Bible says, there is nothing new under the s...

This is a link to Kim Riddlebarger's article - Civil Religion: The Chief Rival to Biblical Christianity . Given the press about the "evangelical" vote in the last election and that many "evangelical leaders" vie for  political connections for the sake of "Christianity," I think Riddlebarger's warning is worth considering. It is very interesting that in his first paragraph, he argues that those who buy into the "Christian America" myth and those who are uncomfortable with exclusive Christian truth claims are both pursuing a form of civil religion. My first impression would be that the myth crowd would be on opposing sides from the non-exclusive truth claim group, but perhaps they have much more in common. While the myth crowd claims to be under the authority of God's Word (see 2nd paragraph quoted below), does one have to compromise the truth at some level to maintain the myth? Also are both groups looking for affirmation and power wi...