John Mark Hicks

I always love reading John Mark Hicks because its like he's in my head, sharing that same Bible-centered church of Christ background. Whether I agree with his conclusions or not, he's always speaking in my language and helping me think through the issues in a God-honoring, Scripture-honoring way. As far as conclusions go, Hicks has embraced the "full participation" view of women is worship and seems to also nod toward women in the eldership, and we ultimately differed on interpretation of 1 show more Tim 2, though he made some great points. I appreciated his walk through CoC history and the suggestion that our current position is a reactionary position formed in the early 20th century. I appreciated his walk through the "balance of the Bible," and the idea that our treatment of women ought to line up with the ideal of New Creation, which is now breaking in through the Church. I wasn't crazy about his first two responses from women, but Lauren Smelser White was fire; I'd like to hear more from her. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if I find myself revisiting his arguments over the next decade or so, but for now, I'm just not sold on the sitz im leben he's suggested for Timothy's Ephesian church, and I don't think his suggestion is well-founded that God created no authority specifically for males in the beginning. Regardless, I think this is a solid contribution to a growing conversation, offered in the right attitude, and it won't be the last we talk about it. show less

A historical-theological treatise attempting to reclaim the "Nashville Bible School Tradition" in churches of Christ.

The authors explore the theology of David Lipscomb and James Harding as exemplars of this "Nashville Bible School Tradition," along with some of the next generation descendants (primarily Anderson and Boll). They compare and contrast their theologies with what they deem the "Texas Tradition" in the "Firm Foundation" and manifest in Austin M'Gary, R. L. Whiteside, and others. show more They recognize the historical reality that the "Texas Tradition" would "win" inasmuch that their stances on these theological issues would become normative in churches of Christ in the 20th century whereas the views of Lipscomb and Harding were marginalized. In their estimation, this result was less than ideal.

The authors examine various issues chapter by chapter: Kingdom living as resident aliens, God's continued providential work, the continuing work of the Holy Spirit, reading of Scripture, fellowship and assistance of the oppressed, the Lord's table, prayer, pacifism, willingness to countenance different views about "non salvation issues" (particularly eschatology), and the hope of resurrection and renewal.

In each chapter the authors first set forth a coherent view of the NBST based on Lipscomb, Harding, or their later descendants, speak some about the contentions that arose regarding those views (when present), and then their own theological assessment in light of the tradition. It would have been better if the transition from primary sources to the authors' own theological assessment were more clear. The book ends with an assessment of what happened and a way forward.

It is highly likely that the story is a bit more complicated than it has been set forth in this narrative; the authors are attempting to schematize and analyze trends and relationships. The authors are aware of the shortcomings of those regarding whom they write and how their context shaped them.

On the whole, however, the work is compelling in showing that many of the difficulties and challenges that many members of churches of Christ have encountered regarding the "predominant view" on a series of issues is rooted in disputes that have existed within the movement/tradition since its beginnings. Many who may have felt that they were alone and odd in their concerns regarding God's working in His creation, the role and work of the Spirit, the relationship between the Christian and the state, and the final eschaton can find some solace in the recognition that some of their spiritual ancestors held views close to theirs and that the discussion, although presumed to have been settled in the early 20th century, perhaps should be re-opened.

I found the discussion of why the "NBST" fell out of favor a bit lacking. Many more reasons could be adduced. First and foremost, since the "NBST" persons "lost" on certain fronts, especially regarding baptism, their other views would have been seen as suspect. I am not old, but I know how the name of Boll was viewed among many in churches of Christ, and the strong desire to remain quite distant from anything to which he would adhere. The authors seem to primarily lament the aggressive demonization of premillennial views in the early part of the 20th century; while I am sure that many handled the issue in less than godly ways, the shift from historic to dispensational premillennialism at that time was highly problematic, and it is a credit to many in churches of Christ that they resisted falling in line with the rest of Evangelicalism in this matter. In terms of the work of God and the Spirit one can hardly overestimate the impact of the explosion of Pentecostalism right at the end of the lives of Harding and Lipscomb; in polemic it becomes far easier to defend a lack of spiritual gifts and little expectation of God's working in the creation and to condemn even moderate views as pentecostal lite. One could also say that many had to drink Enlightenment rationalism down to its dregs before one could see its ultimate bankruptcy; not a few Christians are seeking re-enchantment on account of it.

Nevertheless, whether you generally doctrinally/theologically agree with Lipscomb, Harding et al or not, this work is worth exploring so as to understand part of the Restoration Movement tradition as it attempts to faithfully serve God despite human innovations in a doctrinally confused world. show less

Like most of us who grew up in churches of Christ (though it was not specific to our fellowship), John Mark inherited a way of reading the Bible that has often been referred to as "pattern theology" - reading the Bible in search of a pattern or blueprint by which we might replicate the original apostolic Church in our day. In pattern theology, we ask, "What is the pattern that a faithful, sound, obedient church should follow?", and, "What does God require of us in regards to the pattern of show more church that we follow?"

These are honest and good questions that have arisen out of sincere and faithful hearts, and yet, these questions have not proven easy. Originally raised as the path to unity, these questions have often been found at the center of bitter divisions. Regarding the church treasury, communion cups, church music, women's roles, and many other issues, our experience with commands, examples, and inferences has not produced the clear and consistent answers that we have sought after.

Did God establish a pattern for His Church? Is there any way that we might identify and unify around such a pattern? To that, John Mark would say yes, there is such a pattern, and it is a pattern more central to the gospel and to the story of Scripture than we may have even realized. Particularly for those of us who have grown up in the world of pattern theology, I would highly recommend you follow along with John Mark as he describes his journey in seeking out God's pattern for the Church. show less

The author speaks of his journey in Biblical hermeneutics, moving from a standard mid-20th century American interpretive matrix manifest in churches of Christ to a more theologically rooted interpretive matrix in Christ.

The story he tells is compelling, although I found the catalyst for thought interesting. I have been on a similar journey, although on the other side of the fence on the issue of church support for institutions and non-saints. One can come to an appreciation of the show more theological premises and a theological framework for interpretation and maintain a non-institutional view relative to the work of the church.

The author's theological interpretive framework, recognizing Scripture as the story of God's working with His people, the primacy of understanding everything we think, feel, and do in terms of Christ and God's purposes as accomplished in Him, and to maintain a theological framework throughout. The author ultimately has no issue with the premise of commands, examples, and necessary inferences, but well recognizes that there is more to it than CENI and that the CENI found in Scripture must itself be understood in the framework of what God has accomplished in Jesus.

I may not agree with every conclusion the author reaches in application, but I can certainly commend the framework advanced. We participate as the people of God in Christ according to what God has made known in Scripture, but always in service to God in Christ. show less