Adam Shields
Summary: An exploration of God’s mercy and the ways that God seems to change.
One of the reasons that I like to read widely is that I learn things in one area that has relevance to another area. That always means that I am potentially drawing inappropriate conclusions because I don’t know enough about multiple things to be an expert, and that if I knew more, I might not draw the same conclusion.
One of the areas that I have been fairly interested in recently is law, especially Supreme Court legal theory. Part of what interests me about that is that in some ways it is the study of Hermeneutics, but through a secular lens. I am a very avid listener of Advisory Opinions, a legal podcast. They primarily cover high level legal theory, more than working out individual cases. One of the things that is emphasized in legal theory is the limiting principle. Because so many concepts in law are not universally true at all times, the concept of the limiting principle tries to map out what the limits of the use of that concept is.
Right now, there is a discussion about the Unitary Executive. There are different versions of this concept, but overly simplistically, the Unitary Executive theory is that all of the power of the Executive Branch is vested in the single figure of the President. So there can’t be independent areas within the executive branch because there is only one president at a time. But that idea runs up against the concept of the limiting principle. Even in earlier generations, no one can really operate in all areas of the executive. There are some areas of expertise where we want career experts not just political appointments. There are other areas, like corruption investigations, where without some level of independence, the executive branch cannot do the job it has been tasked with.
My main complaint about The Widening of God’s Mercy is that there are no limiting principles. Broadly, that idea that God’s mercy seems to widen throughout scripture to include more people and more areas of grace, which I think is broadly true. I don’t love how they handle God changing God’s mind, which is a little more process theology oriented than I like. But the father and son team, with the son Christopher mostly writing about the Old Testament, and Richard, the father, mostly writing about the New Testament, are trying to limit themselves to biblical theology and there are limits to that approach.
I am solidly a lay person here. I don’t have enough language skills to ever be a biblical theologian. What training I do have is more theology than bible. But I do think that the method of orienting toward a lay readership and making the book fairly short and accessible, is part of the problem of the book. It is odd to complain that the book is not harder to read. But what I mean is that if I (as a lay person) know of critiques of ideas in the book, and I know there are critiques of the methods (and those were not dealt with in the text) then so did the authors. A more academic book would have had to been longer, but also would have had to grapple with their critics more robustly. Richard was dying as this book was being written. He passed away not long after the book was published. So it may be that they simply didn’t have time to write a more academic book.
One of the areas I would have like them to grapple with is William Webb’s Slaves, Women and Homosexuals. Webb was trying to work out a theological/hermeneutical system that took into account limiting principles. I don't love where Webb came out in the end either, but I think his point was trying to work out a system, more than trying to build evidence for a case.
Again, there is always more than can be said, so I don't want to complain too much about what wasn't said, but Webb grappled with ways that slavery was not explicitly condemned in the bible, but today Christianity largely condemns slavery. And there are explicit prohibitions around women in leadership in Paul, but also in Paul, he advocates women acting within leadership of the church and the church service, so Webb can draw conclusions from the trajectory of scripture that led toward a more inclusive positions (Webb is a soft complementarian). But Webb takes the main six passages on homosexuality and thinks that all six come down on one side and thinks that scripture speaks clearly. That is overly simplistic of his argument, but briefly it is a rough sketch. There isn't an equivalent in The Widening of God's Mercy.
There are several complaints in other reviews that the authors explicitly avoid the main "clobber passages" and are trying to draw evidence from the whole scope of scripture, not isolated passages. I appreciate this approach because so many other books concentrate on those passages. But it makes this book feel a bit tentative, because if your focus is on the broad, but the very narrow explicitly prohibits, then the case is still incomplete.
I am a couple of chapters into Biblical Critical Theory, and some of the tools of evaluation from that book I think would have helped, even if Watkins I think would come down on the opposite side as the Hays would. Similarly, I think Tom Holland's Dominion (which I have read, but I haven't finished writing about) is using history, not social theory or biblical theology, to trace how there is an ongoing tension within christianity toward mercy and individual rights which played an essential role in the development of western culture. Holland's main thesis I think is part of this discussion, even if it was outside of the scope of this book.
Generally, I think almost no one will change their mind as a result of reading The Widening of God's Mercy. I think it is a good meditation on mercy, but not a great defense of LGBTQ inclusion in the church. And honestly, of the books that I have read about this subject, on multiple sides, most have the same problem. I think David Gushee's book is the best at trying to present an argument that is accessible to people who disagree with his conclusions, but most books seem to be preaching to the choir, not addressing those who disagree with them.
This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/the-widening-of-god...
Originally posted at bookwi.se.
Summary: An exploration of God’s mercy and the ways that God seems to change.
One of the reasons that I like to read widely is that I learn things in one area that has relevance to another area. That always means that I am potentially drawing inappropriate conclusions because I don’t know enough about multiple things to be an expert, and that if I knew more, I might not draw the same conclusion.
One of the areas that I have been fairly interested in recently is law, especially Supreme Court legal theory. Part of what interests me about that is that in some ways it is the study of Hermeneutics, but through a secular lens. I am a very avid listener of Advisory Opinions, a legal podcast. They primarily cover high level legal theory, more than working out individual cases. One of the things that is emphasized in legal theory is the limiting principle. Because so many concepts in law are not universally true at all times, the concept of the limiting principle tries to map out what the limits of the use of that concept is.
Right now, there is a discussion about the Unitary Executive. There are different versions of this concept, but overly simplistically, the Unitary Executive theory is that all of the power of the Executive Branch is vested in the single figure of the President. So there can’t be independent areas within the executive branch because there is only one president at a time. But that idea runs up against the concept of the limiting principle. Even in earlier generations, no one can really operate in all areas of the executive. There are some areas of expertise where we want career experts not just political appointments. There are other areas, like corruption investigations, where without some level of independence, the executive branch cannot do the job it has been tasked with.
My main complaint about The Widening of God’s Mercy is that there are no limiting principles. Broadly, that idea that God’s mercy seems to widen throughout scripture to include more people and more areas of grace, which I think is broadly true. I don’t love how they handle God changing God’s mind, which is a little more process theology oriented than I like. But the father and son team, with the son Christopher mostly writing about the Old Testament, and Richard, the father, mostly writing about the New Testament, are trying to limit themselves to biblical theology and there are limits to that approach.
I am solidly a lay person here. I don’t have enough language skills to ever be a biblical theologian. What training I do have is more theology than bible. But I do think that the method of orienting toward a lay readership and making the book fairly short and accessible, is part of the problem of the book. It is odd to complain that the book is not harder to read. But what I mean is that if I (as a lay person) know of critiques of ideas in the book, and I know there are critiques of the methods (and those were not dealt with in the text) then so did the authors. A more academic book would have had to been longer, but also would have had to grapple with their critics more robustly. Richard was dying as this book was being written. He passed away not long after the book was published. So it may be that they simply didn’t have time to write a more academic book.
One of the areas I would have like them to grapple with is William Webb’s Slaves, Women and Homosexuals. Webb was trying to work out a theological/hermeneutical system that took into account limiting principles. I don't love where Webb came out in the end either, but I think his point was trying to work out a system, more than trying to build evidence for a case.
Again, there is always more than can be said, so I don't want to complain too much about what wasn't said, but Webb grappled with ways that slavery was not explicitly condemned in the bible, but today Christianity largely condemns slavery. And there are explicit prohibitions around women in leadership in Paul, but also in Paul, he advocates women acting within leadership of the church and the church service, so Webb can draw conclusions from the trajectory of scripture that led toward a more inclusive positions (Webb is a soft complementarian). But Webb takes the main six passages on homosexuality and thinks that all six come down on one side and thinks that scripture speaks clearly. That is overly simplistic of his argument, but briefly it is a rough sketch. There isn't an equivalent in The Widening of God's Mercy.
There are several complaints in other reviews that the authors explicitly avoid the main "clobber passages" and are trying to draw evidence from the whole scope of scripture, not isolated passages. I appreciate this approach because so many other books concentrate on those passages. But it makes this book feel a bit tentative, because if your focus is on the broad, but the very narrow explicitly prohibits, then the case is still incomplete.
I am a couple of chapters into Biblical Critical Theory, and some of the tools of evaluation from that book I think would have helped, even if Watkins I think would come down on the opposite side as the Hays would. Similarly, I think Tom Holland's Dominion (which I have read, but I haven't finished writing about) is using history, not social theory or biblical theology, to trace how there is an ongoing tension within christianity toward mercy and individual rights which played an essential role in the development of western culture. Holland's main thesis I think is part of this discussion, even if it was outside of the scope of this book.
Generally, I think almost no one will change their mind as a result of reading The Widening of God's Mercy. I think it is a good meditation on mercy, but not a great defense of LGBTQ inclusion in the church. And honestly, of the books that I have read about this subject, on multiple sides, most have the same problem. I think David Gushee's book is the best at trying to present an argument that is accessible to people who disagree with his conclusions, but most books seem to be preaching to the choir, not addressing those who disagree with them.
This was originally posted on my blog at https://bookwi.se/the-widening-of-god...
Originally posted at bookwi.se.