Orthodox Judaism
This is My God, by Herman Wouk (Doubleday, 1959, 356 pp., $3.95), is reviewed by Edward John Carnell, Professor of Apologetics, Fuller Theological Seminary.
With the publication of this book, Herman Wouk may justly be called the C. S. Lewis of orthodox Judaism. He is a literary craftsman of the first water. Just feel his power as he describes the delights of Palestine: “Best of all I like the city of Haifa, white and busy on green slopes around a saucer of purple Mediterranean; then Jerusalem, the solemn magic of which I cannot write down, but its old hills in the dawn will draw me back year after year; and then the mysterious peaks of Galilee, with vistas down to the far blue sea of Kinneret which give you the illusion that Israel must be the world’s largest land instead of one of the smallest” (p. 268).
Many people picture orthodox Jews as an eccentric society, bearded, with their backs to progress and their faces to the Wailing Wall. Wouk pictures them as a religious aristocracy commissioned by God to bear the torch of piety and learning until the very end of time. The darkest hours of Jewish persecution are turned into the brightness of meridian sunlight. The law of Moses “prophesied that the glories would be temporary, that the people in their prosperity would lose their hold on the law and on their land, and would scatter into exile; and it ordained that the nation should go on observing the festivals wherever they dwelt, to all time. And so we do. Our people have lived for thousands of years in the faith that in God’s good time he will restore the nation to its soil, and that the festivals will take on, in the latter days, their ancient force and beauty” (p. 80). It is striking that Protestant dispensationalism would heartily agree with this interpretation of Israel’s future.
Wouk is really trying to persuade “assimilated Jews” that a dissolution of Jewish distinctives would be a catastrophe. “We are nothing at all, or we are a people apart, marked by history for a fate embracing the heights and the depths of the human experience” (p. 283). It is only by courtesy that Christians are allowed to overhear this solemn conversation.
Christians who listen carefully may be surprised by what they hear. Wouk not only defends the divine authority of the Mosaic law, but he supports his defense by a dexterous use of religious symbolism, logic, moral institution, and the latest discoveries of archaeology. His command of Jewish sources is impressive, but he never overwhelms the mind with a cascade of sheer information. He writes with an authentic sense of dedication.
If Christians think that orthodox Jews are on the verge of a great evangelical awakening, they are indulging in wishful thinking. With the founding of Israel as a state, orthodox Jews are all the more persuaded that God has destined them to remain a distinct people forever. “… I believe the survival of the Jewish people looks like the hand of Providence in history.… I believe it is our lot to live and to serve in our old identity, until the promised day when the Lord will be one and his name one in all the earth” (p. 20). This view of Providence is rather like that of Roman Catholicism.
After Christians manage to catch their breath, they may rightly inquire how orthodox Jews can rest their hope on a law that was designed as an instrument of death, not life. Wouk gives us the answer, though not by design.
Modern Jews take refuge in the same chambers of authority that sheltered the chief priests and Pharisees in the days of Jesus Christ. Judaism credits Moses with supreme authority, but in practice it vests this authority in the common law as set forth in the Talmud and later commentaries on the Torah. “Moses in his wisdom marked off only a few things in life that would endure. The rest he left to change. He did not freeze Jewish manners for all time in the cast of Egypt or of the desert” (p. 234). The elders of Israel may amend the law to meet the needs of the times and the abilities of the people. “The enabling clause for amendment is a passage in Deuteronomy [Wouk does not cite the passage] which instructs Israel to abide by the Torah as taught to them by their sages” (p. 202).
According to the New Testament, the purpose of the law is to reveal man’s wretched estate, that man may turn to God for grace and forgiveness. Wouk gives the impression that keeping the law is really not an unpleasant thing at all. If the Jews were to turn aside from the law, they would forfeit the happy calendar of ceremonies that gives depth to the religious year.
The Gospel is the good news that God put the curse of the law on his Son, Jesus Christ. Orthodox Jews void the Gospel by evacuating the law of its severity. The law is reduced to a manageable code of conduct. This code serves as a status symbol for a people who reject Christ’s Messianic claims, but who suffer no twinges of remorse for doing so.
This raises a very disconcerting point. The apostle Paul says that “salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous” (Rom. 11:11). Now, just how jealous are orthodox Jews? If Wouk represents their attitudes correctly, they are not jealous at all. In fact, their cup is full and running over. Thunders Wouk: “What is absurd in Judaism? The Torah is there. Its heroes are human. Its history is accurate. Its religious imagery is immortal. Its disciplines are understandable. Moses is as persuasive a lawgiver as any that ever lived. The Prophets are apostles of the social justice that the whole world seeks today. Is it absurd to look for God? It is just as absurd not to look for him, life today being what it is” (p. 337).
Another thing: orthodox Jews have a long memory. They recall the dreadful anti-Semitic movements which have grown on Christian soil. These movements persuade pious Jews that Christianity is a sect which has lost the true glory of God by separating from the traditions of the elders.
Nor is this the end of the matter. When a student of church history compares the sweet fellowship of the primitive church with later religious wars and institutional struggles for primacy, he does not need a great deal of discernment to understand why orthodox Jews are not jealous of the Christian church.
Gentiles are all too quick to charge Jews with clannish mannerisms, compromising business practices, and odd religious ceremonies. These charges root the Jews all the more deeply in their own traditions.
The issue remains the same today as it did in the time of the apostles. Did Moses look to the coming of Jesus Christ, or did he not? Christians say he did. “Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; it is Moses who accuses you, on whom you set your hope. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me” (John 5:45–46).
Wouk adds some very nice touches to his book. He not only provides a working bibliography and glossary of terms, but he jots down interesting notes for friends who want to linger for coffee and fellowship.
The title of Wouk’s book is taken from Exodus 15:2. All royalties are being given to charity.
This book has humbled my own heart, for I must confess that Wouk has done a remarkable job in defending orthodox Judaism. I wish I knew Wouk personally. He must be a pleasant man to be around.
I guess this leaves only one thing to be said. When orthodox Jews manage to outlive and outthink orthodox Christians, we need not be surprised if Israel continues to set her hope on the traditions of the elders and not on Jesus Christ.
EDWARD JOHN CARNELL
Historical Background
The Mind of St. Paul, by William Barclay (Harper, 1958, 256 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by W. Boyd Hunt, Professor of Theology, Southwestern Baptist Seminary.
Barclay’s reputation as a gifted interpreter of the New Testament has already been clearly established by his earlier volumes, such as: A New Testament Wordbook, More New Testament Words, and Letters to the Seven Churches. His writing reflects his competence in the dual roles of scholar and preacher. On the one hand his work is marked by his ability to illumine profoundly the very heart of complex issues. He skillfully utilizes his keen knowledge of such background matters as gnosticism, Marcionism, neoplatonism, docetism, rabbinics, Greek philosophy, Roman custom, and Greek lexicography to clarify the meaning of the Pauline writings. This appreciation of historical context is really his forte, and so it is strange to read his claim: “I have simply gone direct to the Pauline letters.” On the contrary, and to the reader’s immeasurable gain, Barclay goes direct to the historical background of the topic under discussion.
One half of the chapter on “The Second Coming in the Thought of Paul,” for instance, is taken up by an invaluable treatment of Old Testament and Jewish eschatology. But Barclay’s discussion always moves along swiftly. He makes no painful attempts to impress his readers with his scholarship. Nor does he need to. It is evident that the price of his depth of insight and facility of expression is the high cost of his many years of disciplined investigation of materials.
On the other hand, Barclay strives for popular appeal. He indicates that “these chapters originally appeared as a series of weekly articles in the pages of The British Weekly.” As a result there is a certain unevenness and lack of total perspective. There are unnecessary repetitions. There is a tendency to approach each successive topic as though it were the central idea in the thought of Paul. The three chapters on God suffer no little by comparison with the scintillating chapter on faith. After suggesting that Paul uses six great metaphors to describe the work of Christ, only five are mentioned in the immediate context. And because a popular readership is in view, when sources are cited, which is seldom (although the book is replete with freshly worked citations of Scriptures), the reference is enclosed in parentheses, without the luxury of full footnoting. The book is also very brief, when one considers the size and number of the pages. The publisher’s blurb on the dust jacket claims that this is a “complete guide to the beliefs of Christ’s greatest witness,” but this is denied by Barclay who says that “these chapters do not in any way claim to be an exhaustive and complete Theology of Paul.” There are no indexes and no bibliography.
The result is a book which, though a valuable contribution to wider understanding of Pauline thought, is of limited usefulness. There are incisive analyses and careful definitions to excite the technician. But Barclay repeatedly plays his appeal to the heart as against an appeal to the mind. He seems overanxious “to put it simply.”
Some quotations will illustrate Barclay’s oversimplification and lack of precision. He solves the difficulty of interpreting biblical apocalyptic with the suggestion: “When we confess our ignorance, an ignorance which even Jesus shared, of dates and times; when we abandon all the Jewish imagery and pictures, which by this time have become only fantastic; when we strip the doctrine of the Second Coming down to its bare essentials, we are left with this tremendous truth—the Doctrine of the Second Coming is the final guarantee that life can never be a road that leads to nowhere, it is a road which leads to Christ” (pp. 229–30). Surely he sometimes confuses theology with philosophy (pp. 54 and 139). He writes off the Old Testament doctrine of God with the statement that “the fact is that until Jesus came into the world men had a wrong idea of God” (p. 74). Sometimes Jewish means Old Testament (pp. 208 ff.) and sometimes it means Rabbinic (p. 214). Nowhere is there evidence that Barclay has been significantly influenced by the recent rediscovery of the validity of Old Testament theology. Whatever his view of the Trinity may be, his stress is always on the unity of God: “Never at any time did Paul identify Jesus Christ and God. He never equated Jesus Christ and God” (p. 56). Again we read: “We believe that Jesus is so closely identified with God, if you like to put it so, that Jesus knows God so well, that we can only call Him the Son of God” (p. 142). He believes that it does not matter whether we interpret the Cross as the paying of penalty or as the demonstration of love (p. 89).
But it would be wrong to end a review of this volume on a negative note. The chapters on “The Work of Christ,” “In Christ,” and “The Mind of Paul Concerning the Church,” are surpassingly rich. Barclay sees clearly that justification is a right relationship to God (p. 79), that to justify means not to make a person something but to account a man as being something (p. 76). He carefully guards the interpretation of the phrase “in Christ” against mystical reductions. Nor will he allow the identification of the church with the risen Christ.
Despite its structural and theological weaknesses, no preacher planning a series of sermons on Paul can afford to neglect this volume.
W. BOYD HUNT
Political Convert
The Evolution of a Conservative, by William Henry Chamberlin (Henry Regnery Co., Chicago, 1959, 295 pp., $4.50), is reviewed by Irving E. Howard, Assistant Editor of Christian Economics.
“I had gone to Russia expecting to witness the evolution of a great act of revolutionary liberation. When I left Russia twelve years later, I was convinced that the absolutist Soviet state is a power of darkness and evil, with a few parallels in history,” writes William Henry Chamberlin in his autobiographical book, The Evolution of a Conservative. Chamberlin’s reaction against communism carried him from radicalism to conservatism. He identifies political conservatism with the thought of Edmund Burke, John Adams, John C. Calhoun, Alexis de Tocqueville, and The Federalist.
For some time evangelicals have contended that religious liberalism is intellectually bankrupt, but Chamberlin declares the same to be true of political liberalism. He points out that in England political liberalism has become confused and irrelevant. Once it dominated British politics, but now that field is ruled by the Conservatives and Laborites. In America, Chamberlin finds a worse situation. Here political liberalism has changed its coat. Instead of championing the free individual, as it did in the nineteenth century, modern American liberalism espouses government intervention and statism which inevitably destroys individual rights.
It is strange that this author and journalist of exceptional educational advantages had to live half a life and travel around the world and back again to discover the wisdom of “The American Idea” which he elaborates upon in a chapter by that title. Explaining his own belated appreciation of the political philosophy that came out of the American Revolution, he laments the omission of the insights of The Federalist and the founding fathers from our public school system.
Whether the average American knows it or not, and evidence seems to indicate that he does not know it, there is an intellectually respectable political philosophy behind the structure of our Constitution. It was fashioned by men (like John Adams) who believed in the depravity of human nature, and men (like James Madison) who also believed in man’s capacity for self-government. The tension between these two ideas produced a system of checks and balances designed to limit a government which could not be trusted with too much power, but yet must have the power to act. Consequently, it is not an exaggeration to say that the United States Constitution is the most marvelously constructed and delicately balanced political document in history. It has been belittled by a president of the United States, ignored by the Supreme Court, and forgotten by the common people, but it remains the bulwark of American liberty.
The increasing number of books like this which have appeared in recent months give grounds for hope that Americans will rediscover their birthright.
IRVING E. HOWARD
World Brotherhood
The Spirit is Willing, by David Soper (Westminster Press, 1958, 142 pp., $2.50), is reviewed by Edwin H. Palmer, Editor of The Encyclopedia of Christianity.
The author, who is chairman of the Department of Religion at Beloit College, sets forth his thoughts in a lively fashion. The book abounds in delightful epigrams, wit, and puns.
Ostensibly the book is about the “Holy Spirit,” and aims to give “a concrete definition of the elusive doctrine of the Holy Spirit.” In reality, however, any similarity to the classical Christian definition of the Holy Spirit is coincidental. The main theme of this book is not the Holy Spirit but the desirability of the formation of an ethical world community that transcends all languages, nationalisms, and religions. This world brotherhood, according to Dr. Soper, would be the result of the “forward thrust” of love or what he calls the “Holy Spirit.”
In his pursuit of world brotherhood, however, the author loses sight of the distinctiveness of Christianity. Thus he calls the whole of humanity “the body of God” (p. 117). The church, he writes, “is the world of our churches, our fragments of the future, whether Greek, Russian, Roman, Lutheran, Calvinist, or Anglican (whether Hindu, Buddhist, Moslem, or Jew)” (p. 127). Through all our fragments “God is now creating one church, one fellowship, one brotherhood including all religions, all races, all philosophies, all sciences, all governments—a universal fellowship of love, a classless society, the image of God” (p. 126). In this respect Soper has missed the “forward thrust” of the Bible. For the Bible teaches the uniqueness of Christianity when, for example, Jesus says: “No man cometh unto the Father but by me.”
The author, however, would call such a statement “dogmatic” and “the rigor mortis of the mind” (p. 107). Those under the forward thrust, he asserts, are intellectually humble and recognize that “no knowledge, now in hand, is absolute” (p. 107) and that our truth and “God’s truth are not, and cannot be, exactly identical” (p. 105). Orthodoxy should recognize that “its partial truth” is not “total, final, and infallible” (p. 101). Thus, on the author’s premise, it is impossible to assert that the Bible is verbally inerrant, for that would mean that we have final and infallible truth. It is intolerance, he holds, to say as Paul did: “Charge some that they teach no other doctrine.… If any man teach otherwise … he is proud, knowing nothing.” “Fortunately for us,” says Professor Soper, “James, Peter, and John taught differently” and even “Paul, like the rest of us, had his better moments” (p. 105).
Abstractly, it may seem commendable that the author advocates intellectual humility. Yet the most fundamental humility that a man can show is not the assertion that “no knowledge, now in hand, is absolute,” but rather the confession that biblical truths are identical with God’s truths. Refusal to accept the Bible as God’s infallible revelation is not humility but instead a proud exaltation of the mind over God.
When one denies the absoluteness and uniqueness of the Bible, consistency will eventually lead one to deny the absoluteness and uniqueness of Christianity too, just as is evidenced in this book.
EDWIN H. PALMER
Apologetic
By What Standard?, by Rousas J. Rushdoony (Presbyterian and Reformed, 1959, 209 pp., $3.95), is reviewed by William Young, Minister of Bloor East Presbyterian Church, Toronto.
The significance of the title is explained by the author in an appendix, also entitled, “By What Standard?”, in which he tells how the book of Job made clear to him that the whole of life must be measured in terms of the purpose of the sovereign God. The content of the book is described in a sub-title as “An Analysis of the Philosophy of Cornelius Van Til.” In Rushdoony’s judgment, Van Til’s thought represents “a consistent Christianity which significantly and effectively challenges not only the non-Christian philosophies of our time, but lays bare the failure of all ostensibly Christian thought which attempts to gain Christian fruit out of alien roots, which begins with any pre-supposition other than the self-contained and triune God of Scripture …” (pp. 6 f.).
Although the book contains one reference to Wittgenstein (p. 16), it does not contain one sentence of philosophical analysis in the style of the contemporary linguistic school. The idealistic type of metaphysical language that dominates the argument will have no appeal to the advanced philosophers of our generation. Rushdoony has not provided an analysis of Van Til’s philosophy in the sense of a restatement of what is truly important and challenging in it, but he has given rather a glowing exposition of Van Til’s remarkable attempt to develop an apologetic for the doctrine of sovereign grace which will not be in conflict with the faith it professes to defend. This is theology in a philosophical idiom rather than philosophy.
A fuller account of Van Til’s original work on the subject of common grace would be desirable. The same observation may be made in relation to the topic of the incomprehensibility of God, where the unclear notion of “content of knowledge” is introduced without explanation (p. 162).
In view of the obscure nature of the subject matter, Rushdoony is to be congratulated for having produced a highly readable book on a topic of vital interest for intelligent evangelicals.
WILLIAM YOUNG
Serving The Lord
Light in the Jungle, by Leo B. Halliwell (McKay, New York, 1959, 269 pp., $4.50), is reviewed by Horace L. Fenton, Jr., Associate Director, Latin America Mission.
One of the chapters of Adventurers for God, Clarence W. Hall’s recent book of missionary biographies, is devoted to the story of Leo and Jessie Halliwell, a Seventh-day Adventist couple who spent 30 years in the jungles of Brazil. In Light in the Jungle, that story receives book-length, first-person-singular treatment, as Halliwell himself recounts the trials and the triumphs of those years.
The author, an electrical engineer, and his wife, a nurse, have devoted their lives to a medical ministry, and have brought to the “green hell” of the Amazon a warm-hearted, self-sacrificing witness and love for needy people. Those of us who disagree with their theological position may nonetheless learn much from this well-told story of 30 years given to the healing of men’s bodies, and to the establishment of Seventh-day Adventist groups and churches in regions that apparently had long been neglected by other churches and mission boards.
Mr. Halliwell tells his story in a lively way and crams it full with incidents, sometimes pathetic in their revelation of human need, sometimes humorous in the picture they give of the reaction of the native people to missionaries. The author makes little of the hardships which his wife and he have endured; his stress is rather on the great privileges they have enjoyed in this ministry. When the Halliwells retired recently, they had the satisfaction of seeing their work recognized by the Brazilian government which honored them and also contributed generously toward an increased medical work in these areas. But it is evident that the greater satisfaction came to this missionary couple from the knowledge that their message had been received in many places, and that their work would be carried on by many others—both missionaries and nationals.
HORACE L. FENTON, JR.
Rich Diet
The Christian in Complete Armour, by William Gurnall (The Sovereign Grace Book Club, 1958, 603 pp., $6.95), is reviewed by John K. Mickelsen, Minister of Canoga Presbyterian Church, Seneca Falls, N.Y.
This reprint is an abridgment of the author’s 877-page treatment of Ephesians 6:10–17.
The exposition derives its wealth from the written Word. William Gurnall treats the topics suggested by each phrase of the passage in the light of the whole counsel of God. He draws richly on the teaching of Scripture to give content and depth to his comments.
The value of Gurnall’s exposition is enhanced by its practical emphasis, for he continually guides his reader into a deeper understanding and experience of God’s grace in the Christian’s warfare. Like the apostle, he both sets forth and applies his teachings. This book will reward the study required to master it.
The teachings concerning spiritual sins (pp. 142–162), perseverance (pp. 186–200), peace (pp. 343–396) and the Word of God (pp. 525–603) will serve as rich morsels to introduce the reader to the spiritual meat of this commentary.
The table of contents mars this otherwise invaluable reprint in two ways. It contains a somewhat arbitrary selection of the topics which Gurnall treats. This fails to acquaint the reader with the basic structure of Gurnall’s analysis of Scripture. (I believe topics deserve inclusion, but in an index.) And secondly, through some oversight, all the page numbers have been omitted from the table of contents.
JOHN K. MICKELSEN
