Book Briefs: July 8, 1977

Machen, Riley, Norris, Et Al

Voices of American Fundamentalism: Seven Biographical Studies, by C. Allyn Russell (Westminster, 1976, 304 pp., $15), is reviewed by Erling Jorstad, professor of history and American studies, St. Olaf College, Northfield, Minnesota.

If we in the mid-1970s are witnessing a resurgence of popular evangelical expression, we can profit by studying its historical parentage, namely, the fundamentalism of the 1920s. In this carefully researched and well-written revisionist study, the veteran church historian C. Allyn Russell adds considerably to our knowledge about those years, the issues, and the leaders. The revisionism rests in his correction of earlier historians such as Furniss, Cole, and Gasper who contended that the movement centered on clearly defined doctrines such as the “Five Fundamentals.” Russell shows that the movement was really several parallel but decidedly different currents more than a single stream.

In a refreshing break from the earlier narrative histories, Russell presents portraits of the seven leaders of fundamentalism in the 1920s he finds the most influential: J. Frank Norris, John Roach Straton, W. B. Riley, J. C. Massee, J. Gresham Machen, William Jennings Bryan, and Clarence Macartney. Each is studied in a chapter that gives a brief biography and a summary of the subject’s theology, ethics, ecclesiology, and influence on public opinion.

By focusing on personalities rather than historical forces, Russell can present far more information about the subjects’ attitudes towards the major social questions of the decade; he has some delightful tidbits and surprising quotations from each, culled from primary sources. He tries harder than previous historians to be fair in his presentations and evaluations. For the most part he succeeds, although it is clear that he personally endorses those spokesmen more inclined toward social outreach, liberal tendencies in theology, and higher criticism. Each chapter, however, contains some discussion of a hitherto neglected trait to praise or to criticize. On balance, this is a far more objective history than any of its predecessors.

The revisionism stands at the heart of Russell’s argument. Following up on Ernest Sandeen’s earlier suggestion that no single list of five or nine or any number of “fundamentalist” doctrines united the movement, the author argues that these seven leaders (among others) agreed only on the inerrancy and verbal inspiration of the Bible and on the supernatural origins and character of Christianity. They disagreed openly on one or more of the other teachings that traditional scholarship has said are their hallmarks. I find Russell’s thesis compelling.

Still, some reservations must be entered. Acknowledging that seven leaders (four Baptists, three Presbyterians) cannot be considered fully representative of the thought of the age, Russell might well have included a chapter of brief portraits of other “fundamentalist” leaders of other denominations. Furthermore, since these seven differed so widely in temperament, social position, and most doctrines, one wonders if the term “fundamentalist” has any useful meaning for further classification. We need a more sophisticated typology of the anti-liberal, politically conservative Protestant spokesman of the 1920s than is presented here.

For the present, however, this study moves far toward correcting earlier misrepresentations and misunderstandings of our evangelicalist forefathers. Then, as now, the cult of leader personality threatened the teachings of the churches; then, as now, the trustworthiness of Scripture served as the lightning rod attracting the strongest debates; then, as now, the extent of social outreach kept conservative Christians arguing among themselves. The outcome of the struggle in the 1920s is clearly recorded in this book. Let’s hope history does not repeat itself.

Church And State And The Courts

The Wall of Separation: The Constitutional Politics of Church and State, by Frank J. Sorauf (Princeton, 1976, 394 pp., $15), is reviewed by Dean Kelley, staff associate for religious and civil liberty, National Council of Churches, New York City.

Frank Sorauf is dean of the college of liberal arts and professor of political science at the University of Minnesota. After a dozen or more years of intermittent research, he has produced a solid work of significant scholarship, reporting on the legal dynamics of church and state in the United States in an era of exceptional judicial attention. He does this by scrutinizing sixty-seven cases decided between 1951 and 1971 by the U.S. Supreme Court and high state and federal appeals courts, sketching their origin, proponents, opponents, appeals, outcomes, and effects, and particularly the significant part played by separation-minded groups.

The three separationist organizations that helped to shape the law of the United States in this area are the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Jewish Congress, and Americans United. The most consistently effective of these is the American Jewish Congress, whose special counsel, Leo Pfeffer, is credited with being the mastermind of the separationist effort (which still continues).

Sorauf tells about the development of the separationist coalition, the uncoordinated “accommodationist” resistance, and the strains and struggles in various communities, states, and regions, and in Congress and the lower courts. He vividly describes the plaintiffs and defendants, the attorneys on both sides, the judges, and other principals. Much of the book is absorbing reading, at least for anyone interested in church-state relations or how the law is shaped and reshaped by political forces. It is even more absorbing to those who participated in the twenty-year struggle, and I can attest that Sorauf’s account is generally accurate. In fact, the whole book is exceptionally well crafted.

Less impressive are the forty-nine tables interspersed through the text and the rather limited generalizations derived from them (e.g., “[church-state cases] are more common in the metropolitan areas and the least Protestant states, [and] … there is a marked tendency for one church-state case to spawn another”). Some of these findings support what one would suppose to be the case; others may be artifacts of the relatively random play of many complex causes. They are not nearly so informative as the author’s summary of a sequence of events, and they give the work a pseudo-scientific air. Why do political scientists feel obliged to bulwark themselves with tables when their simple factual narration is informative enough?

Despite the author’s propensity to tell us more than we want to know about the sixty-seven cases in his ken, he does tell us a great deal about how the current American understanding of church-state relations emerged under the persistent pressure of the separationist consortium. That is no small achievement.

Popular Apologetics

No Room For Doubt, by Herbert Lee Williams (Broadman, 1976, 163 pp., $2.95 pb), and The Defense Rests Its Case, by Donald Gutteridge, Jr. (Broadman, 1975, 96 pp., n.p., pb), are reviewed by Robert death, professor of speech communication, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo.

Christian advance occurs when believers boldly proclaim that the self-disclosing God of love is also the God of truth. The persuasive advocacy of the truth of Christianity in view of perennial questions of human existence and particular issues in a given culture is necessary in every generation. Two new popularly written paperbacks in defense of the Gospel by two clear-thinking, evangelical, non-professional theologians provide compelling arguments that will help to ground today’s Christians in their faith and help them assert its valid truth claims. Williams, a journalism professor at Memphis State, attacks doubts of God’s Word and God’s Son head on in No Room For Doubt. Attorney Gutteridge seeks to answer “tough questions” that challenge the Christian faith in The Defense Rests Its Case.

Williams recognizes that doubt—as differentiated from healthy inquiry—is a proud, negative, decisive attitude that demands answers on the doubter’s own terms. Faith, in contrast, is a free and positive search that follows the data wherever they lead—even where verification reaches beyond the limits of logic. He writes, “The doubter can’t find God for the same reason a thief can’t find a policeman.”

He asks people to give a fair hearing to the Bible, God’s communication that reveals the Lord’s redemptive acts in nature, in the heart of man, and in history, and points us to the supreme revelation, Jesus Christ. He offers limited but sound evidences for the inspiration of the Bible based on its ideals, its efficacy, its integrity, its composition, its indestructibility, and its foreknowledge. His discussion of the establishment of the biblical canon and the remarkable means by which its manuscripts have survived for centuries with only minor variant readings will build confidence in the Christian reader. Williams’s thumbnail sketches of the sixty-six books of the biblical “library” show their diversity of information and style and their unity of message.

On the topic of the Bible and science, Williams emphasizes that no conflict exists between them; the conflict is between pseudo-science and pseudo-religion. Their methods differ, but both point to the ultimate source of power, the one true God. His comparison of the geological ages of earth and the biblical days of creation is thought provoking. His discussion whets the reader’s appetite for more detailed works on science and the Bible.

Williams challenges people to read the Bible with eyes of faith, open to the Holy Spirit, who will make understandable its message of redemption in Christ. Its miracles will not strain credulity when one recognizes God’s omnipotence and the corroborative external evidence. He recommends that the Bible be taken literally unless its obvious intention is symbolic or metaphorical. He tells of how the Bible has met his own deepest needs as he has discarded doubt and surrendered to Christ. The book has a strong evangelistic appeal for the honest searcher and instruction for those who want to strengthen their Christian witness.

Gutteridge too uses “apologetic evangelism” to motivate Christians to contend for the faith. He deals with common questions asked by non-Christians: Is the Bible the Word of God? Who is Jesus Christ? Did Christ really rise from the dead? What about God and evolution? His answers are brief forms of the traditional answers found in more extensive apologetic works. His evidences for Christ’s bodily resurrection make up his strongest section. He argues for Christ’s resurrection on the basis of biblically recorded testimony of witnesses, the burial of the body and the subsequent empty tomb, and Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances, and refutes common contrary theories. He makes a strong case worthy of an attorney’s skills of advocacy.

He also considers questions that are often used to evade the critical question of Jesus Christ. These include: Won’t a good person get to heaven? What about the heathen? Why does God allow suffering? Are miracles possible? What about all those hypocrites? His answers suggest even the language a witnessing Christian may use in reply. Their substance is, regrettably, somewhat superficial.

Gutteridge asserts principles of evangelism that all Christians should take to heart: (1) pray constantly and expect results; (2) let God open doors and then move in; (3) keep the message simple; (4) be alert and flexible in methodology; (5) be honest and straightforward and not clever; (6) preach Jesus Christ.

Both Williams and Gutteridge have written brief, readable, and biblically and logically sound books that advance the cause of Christian evangelism. They are not in the same scholarly league with apologetic works by Carnell, Lewis, Pinnock, or Ramn. Yet if No Room For Doubt and The Defense Rests Its Case are absorbed and used by witnessing laymen, the results will be the winning of many people to faith and life in the God of truth and redemption.

Who Are The Palestinians?

The Palestinians: Portrait of a People in Conflict, by Frank H. Epp (Herald Press, 1976, 229 pp., $10), is reviewed by Robert Smith, associate, Cornerstone Community, College Park, Maryland.

Palestinian: the word itself evokes images with strong emotional connections. Who are these people and what are they saying?

As a Mennonite and a deeply committed Christian, Frank Epp empathizes with the victims of injustice and communicates a concern for the unheard minority. From his perspective, the Palestinians are this minority in the Middle East.

It is not my purpose to refute or affirm what Epp says. The importance of the book is that it allows us to hear one side clearly. We are asked to listen actively to what the Palestinians are saying.

To hear their words merely as those of terrorists or refugees is to fall prey to a misconception. Whether in or out of refugee camps, living in the west or the east, educated or Bedouin, the majority of these people are ordinary citizens caught in an international conflict. To find out what Palestinians are saying, the author interviewed 172 persons. His findings are supported with 32 pages of photographs and numerous tables of data. Here are some of the things Palestinians say:

1. They have been forcibly thrown out of their homeland. “Our problem is very simple. A foreigner came and took our land, took our farms and our homes, and kicked us out.” Or if they stayed they have been relegated to a second-class citizenship. “All Jews have a card, a type A card. Why does the Arab living in Israel twenty-two years still have identity card type B?”

2. The people have been denied their basic human rights. “The word ‘refugee’ evokes a humanitarian response that includes blankets and food, but not the main requirement—justice,” says Epp.

3. They are frustrated by their lack of any means short of violence to bring about a change. “If there is not any hope, we have to fight, and we are ready to fight.”

4. They cannot accept the West or Christianity. “The people here cannot believe what the Western people are saying or declaring. There is mistrust. They mistrust the whole Christian church,” said a Catholic bishop from Nazareth. Historically they have felt that the Jews influenced British policy while the Palestinians had no influence and that the trend has continued in the United Nations and the United States. This has led to a mistrust of the West.

5. They want to live in their own homeland. “We will go back. It may take a hundred years, maybe a thousand years. But we will return.”

The background for these feelings stems from biblical times. Palestinians, like all Arabs, are Semitic brothers with the Jews. Many trace their lineage back to Abraham. In modern history, the Palestinians lived in Palestine (biblical Canaan) until the United Nations mandate partitioned this area in 1948. The people were further dispersed after the Arab-Israeli War in 1967. The United Nations decision flowed from the British policy outlined in the Balfour Declaration of 1917. The visionary was Theodor Herzl of the World Zionist Congress movement, which first met in Europe in 1897. Before Britain, the Turks occupied this area.

Westerners have a short history compared to that of the people of the Middle East, who have the “longest memory on earth.” If the Palestinians deny their rights to their homes, they are left without dignity. They are forced to respond—violently if necessary. Arab Christians see a difference between religious Zionism and the nationalistic, political Zionism that is backed by Western military technology. Some believe that a democratic co-existence of Arabs and Jews is an option.

In the United States there was considerable debate over whether we should absorb a few thousand Vietnamese refugees. The Arab countries have somewhat reluctantly been forced to absorb more than a million Palestinians. To consider the case of the Palestinians as a minority while one recalls the recent struggle involving minority rights in our own country is most disturbing.

Frank Epp encourages us to re-examine our position by stripping away the trappings of foreign relations, balance of power, and extreme nationalism. He gives an “unheard minority” a chance to be heard. As one Palestinian said, “We want you to hear us and know us, hear both sides and then decide for yourself. God has given you all the wisdom to see and think and find the truth. That is all.”

What Jesus Did

The Life of Christ, by Robert Duncan Culver (Baker, 1976, 304 pp., $8.95), is reviewed by Charles C. Anderson, professor of religion, Ottawa University, Ottawa, Kansas.

Although the life of Jesus continues to attract the attention of biblical scholars, the production of “lives of Jesus” has markedly declined. One of the few recent attempts is this volume by the pastor of the First Evangelical Free Church of Lincoln, Nebraska, who formerly taught at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.

Culver organizes his book around John 16:28 and divides his analysis into four parts: Jesus’ birth, public ministry, passion, and post-passion experience. He accepts the first three Gospels as “both truthful and actually ‘synoptic’ ” and “the Fourth Gospel as a genuine first-century document, probably Johannine, and consciously supplemental to the three Synoptics.” He also ties his study closely to the Old Testament.

It is surprising that he makes no mention of either form or redaction criticism. He doubtless has no sympathy with either, since he compares, for example, “learned negative criticism” with “devout scholarship.” However, it would have been well for him to deal more openly with these disciplines. The fact that much of the book has very old documentation is apt to raise suspicions on the part of those not inclined toward his theological position.

Culver concentrates on the life of Jesus rather than on his teachings; he makes no pretense of treating the teachings thoroughly and gives extended consideration to only a small number of examples. His knowledge of Palestinian geography, topography, and local color contributes significantly to his discussion. In eleven excurses he handles subjects that do not fit naturally into the narrative. Maps, diagrams, photographs, and marginal notes of biblical references also enhance the value of the book.

The book is written in a very readable style in which the flow of the narrative sometimes takes precedence over historical certainty, in the depiction of emotions, the production of dramatic effects, and the like. Overall, the jacket claim that the book is designed for students at Bible colleges and for first-year seminarians seems a bit expansive. The book would be more suitable for laypeople.

Briefly Noted

The following recent books offer helpful, biblical insights into divine guidance. How to Know the Will of God by Knofel Station (Standard. 112 pp., n.p., pb) clearly distinguishes between the universal and specific wills of God. Station pictures God’s will as “freedom with boundaries,” meaning that, within limits, such specifics as marriage, vocation, and location are left up to us. But are God’s desires for his children no more specific than a human parent’s desires for a child? The reference to Jesus in support of this view can be challenged. However, the author gives very helpful discussions of the problems of evil, suffering, and illness. Provocative for group discussion. Live Confidently: How to Know God’s Will by Michael R. Tucker (Tyndale, 138 pp., $2.95 pb) presents an overview of God’s will in specific areas. Good discussions on carnal Christians, the costs of doing God’s will, marriage, divorce, and, notably, television. Questions for group discussion included. God Holds Your Tomorrows by Roger C. Palms (Augsburg, 104 pp., $2.95 pb) contains many accounts of God’s leading in the author’s and others’ lives, not least in vocation and marriage (God has his “best” in marriages, and he carefully prepares each of us for the specific ministry to which he calls us). Knowing God’s Will and Doing It! by J. Grant Howard (Zondervan, 116 pp., $4.95) clearly presents the theological distinctions between the decretive and preceptive wills of God, with many biblical references. Citing the written Word as the complete but not comprehensive revelation of the will of God, Howard emphasizes the Holy Spirit’s role as Teacher and Helper. Excellent sections on receiving counsel and on the role of the human conscience (the stronger conscience is not necessarily the stricter). Living God’s Will by Dwight L. Carlson (Revell, 157 pp., $2.95 pb) is an examination of God’s will in all its facets—perfect and permissive, decretive and preceptive, and universal and specific—with excellent discussions of personal responsibility vs. faith and trust, the place for human initiative, the alterability of God’s will on the human level, and the Christian’s need for a “game plan.” Deep, spiritual wisdom and biblical insight and illustrations characterize this very comprehensive work. On the basis of John 10:3–9, God’s will is seen as very personal for each Christian, and this similarly characterizes Carlson’s view of the Christian’s walk with God. Excellent questions for group study and discussion.

A hospital chaplain, Vernon Bittner, in Make Your Illness Count (Augsburg. 126 pp., $3.50 pb) affirms that illness can be a direct result of our wrong responses toward God’s molding of our lives. His deep insight into helping a patient find meaning in illness makes this book very valuable to both the afflicted and those who seek to comfort them.

Dallas Seminary professor Roy Zuck in Barb, Please Wake Up! (Victor, 127 pp., $1.75 pb) exhibits deep trust in God’s perfect will in the wake of his daughter’s nearly fatal accident and long recovery. Woven throughout are references to Scripture that sustained the Zucks and suggestions for helping (and not hurting) people in similar situations.

Ronald and Myra Sue Pruet describe their struggles with his multiple sclerosis in Run From the Pale Pony (Baker, 159 pp., $4.95). They deal with the various levels of coping with chronic illness and how her struggle to do so brought on her own “pale pony” of emotional disturbance. The Pruets are very frank about their continuing problems and the resources God makes available to them as they ask him.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.