Second question - What are you reading?
I guess a good question to ask of everyone is what are you reading? You don't have to limit this to in class reading. What book of the Bible have you been reading lately? Are you enjoying any extra-curricular reading? Also, what is the best book you have read in the past year or so and why?
I'll be happy to start. Right now, I'm reading several interesting books. I have just started reading Cur Deus Homo by Anselm. I am also working through Millard Erickson's Systematic Theology (the focus right now is on the natures of Christ). I am really enjoying Jerry Bridges' work, The Gospel for Real Life. My wife and I are working slowly through Paul's epistle to the Ephesians. Also, I am involved in a survey/Bible study on the last four books of the Pentateuch. It is actually a study on the life of Moses, but as we all know that involves a majority of the Book of the Law. However, I must admit that I am lacking greatly in the area of Bible knowledge. There are still substantial sections of Scripture that I have not read and examined. But I guess that something we'll have to remedy, now isn't it (any Braveheart fans out there?).
In the last year, the best book I read was probably J.I. Packer's Knowing God. The reason I enjoyed it so much is because it mixed necessary depth and conviction. It caused me to think about and rethink some of my conceptions. I realized that much of my quest for knowing God actually consisted primarily of "head" knowledge. Unfortunately, I spent most of time trying to acquire this head knowledge in the hopes that it would bring me closer to God, which of course it failed miserably to do. Packer helped me to shift my focus from a head knowledge to a heart knowledge. He nailed me with this: "If we pursue theological knowledge for its own sake, it is bound to go bad on us. It will make us proud and conceited. The very greatness of the subject matter will intoxicate us, and we shall come to think of ourselves as a cut above other Christians..." His point is simply this, that if we approach the study of God and consequently God Himself in this way the experience will be hollow and empty. We will simply miss what we desperately need. He puts it this way, "Our aim in studying the Godhead must be to know God Himself better...As He is the subject of our study, and our helper in it, so he must himself be the end of it. We must seek, in studying God, to be led to God." (p. 21-23) Knowing God forced me to consider this, and therefore, created in me a new heart for my studies. Instead of duty, my studies became worship (a concept and discipline that I am still developing in my life).
As a side note, I would also commend J.C. Ryle's Holiness and Richard Weaver's Ideas Have Consequences to anyone who hasn't read them. Ryle has the ability to convince utterly his listeners and readers of the depth and horror of their sinfulness. I didn't always walk away from the book feeling better about myself, but I think that was the point. I did, however, walk away from it with a greater understanding of God's holiness and a larger Savior. Weaver is commendable because it provides excellent insight into the condition of the modern man. It is a good explanation of how we got to where we are despite the fact that it is somewhat dated.
I'll be happy to start. Right now, I'm reading several interesting books. I have just started reading Cur Deus Homo by Anselm. I am also working through Millard Erickson's Systematic Theology (the focus right now is on the natures of Christ). I am really enjoying Jerry Bridges' work, The Gospel for Real Life. My wife and I are working slowly through Paul's epistle to the Ephesians. Also, I am involved in a survey/Bible study on the last four books of the Pentateuch. It is actually a study on the life of Moses, but as we all know that involves a majority of the Book of the Law. However, I must admit that I am lacking greatly in the area of Bible knowledge. There are still substantial sections of Scripture that I have not read and examined. But I guess that something we'll have to remedy, now isn't it (any Braveheart fans out there?).
In the last year, the best book I read was probably J.I. Packer's Knowing God. The reason I enjoyed it so much is because it mixed necessary depth and conviction. It caused me to think about and rethink some of my conceptions. I realized that much of my quest for knowing God actually consisted primarily of "head" knowledge. Unfortunately, I spent most of time trying to acquire this head knowledge in the hopes that it would bring me closer to God, which of course it failed miserably to do. Packer helped me to shift my focus from a head knowledge to a heart knowledge. He nailed me with this: "If we pursue theological knowledge for its own sake, it is bound to go bad on us. It will make us proud and conceited. The very greatness of the subject matter will intoxicate us, and we shall come to think of ourselves as a cut above other Christians..." His point is simply this, that if we approach the study of God and consequently God Himself in this way the experience will be hollow and empty. We will simply miss what we desperately need. He puts it this way, "Our aim in studying the Godhead must be to know God Himself better...As He is the subject of our study, and our helper in it, so he must himself be the end of it. We must seek, in studying God, to be led to God." (p. 21-23) Knowing God forced me to consider this, and therefore, created in me a new heart for my studies. Instead of duty, my studies became worship (a concept and discipline that I am still developing in my life).
As a side note, I would also commend J.C. Ryle's Holiness and Richard Weaver's Ideas Have Consequences to anyone who hasn't read them. Ryle has the ability to convince utterly his listeners and readers of the depth and horror of their sinfulness. I didn't always walk away from the book feeling better about myself, but I think that was the point. I did, however, walk away from it with a greater understanding of God's holiness and a larger Savior. Weaver is commendable because it provides excellent insight into the condition of the modern man. It is a good explanation of how we got to where we are despite the fact that it is somewhat dated.
posted by Michael D. Estes at 10:12 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home