Reading Challenge, Book 3

The third book of Tim Challies’ reading challenge for 2019 is an historical book. I chose Michael Kruger’s Christianity at the Crossroads: How the Second Century Shaped the Future of the Church (IVP Academic, 2018). I’ve read his Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books (Crossway, 2012); I really appreciated his thought process on the issue of the history of the canon. I also enjoy reading his blog, got my post-grad from the seminary where he’s president, etc. You get it: I’m a fan.

That being said, there’s something about either his writing style or the flow of his writing that makes engaging it feel like work. It did get easier as the book went along, which tells me the problem’s probably in my head and I needed to adapt. Also, there seemed to be a lot of repetition of facts and assertions; almost makes me wonder if there’s a scarcity of data but there was a certain expectation concerning the length of the book.

There were two major areas of the book that really interested me: the second-century Church’s alienation from Greco-Roman (and Jewish) culture, and their practice of reading Scripture aloud in gathered worship.

In the introduction, Kruger points the reader toward his conviction concerning the relevance of studying the second-century Church: “…we need to learn (again) what it means to be the Church when we lack social or political standing. And that is something that, sadly, has been largely forgotten” (pg. viii). He’ll say this again at the end of the book. There, Kruger summarizes the most relevant observations in three key points. I won’t give away all three points, but will offer one: “…modern Christians need to learn again how to be a prophetic voice in the midst of a hostile world where the Church lacks substantial cultural influence or power” (pg. 230). As I was reading about the opposition the Church faced in the second-century culture, I felt like I was reading Revelation. In U.S. society, we’ve fooled ourselves into thinking we’re being persecuted when Starbucks doesn’t print “Merry Christmas” on its cups, but we’ll cheer when a celebrity or politician throws us a bone and gives lip-service to a Gospel-lite (or Gospel-less) “Christianity.” We’ve put our trust in being culturally dominant and having power and influence according to the world’s standards. The tide has shifted. We need to know how to be a Church that has only Jesus on its side.

The oddness of Christians compared to the greater Greco-Roman culture was continually highlighted throughout the book

• “…Christianity’s commitment to exclusive monotheistic worship of Jesus was viewed as not only culturally peculiar and intellectually wanting, but also as politically subversive and a threat to the stability of the Roman state…it is worth noting that this particular feature of second-century Christianity makes it especially relevant for the modern reader of this volume” (pg. 6).

• “…the members of the early Jesus movement were, to some extent, cultural misfits. Even though Christians, as a whole, led quite ordinary lives, their distinctive religious commitments and ethical practices rapidly alienated them from the surrounding Jewish and Greco-Roman worlds…followers of Christ were viewed by the state as subversive and dangerous” (pg. 40).

• “…it was Christianity’s exclusivism that was at the heart of the Roman objection to its existence” (pg. 43).

• “…the exclusiveness of Christian worship in the second century is precisely the feature of early Christianity that led the Romans to perceive the new movement as a threat to the social-political stability of the Roman Empire. Since religious devotion to the gods was woven into almost every aspect of Roman life, it was impossible for Christians to avoid participating in such activity without drawing (negative) attention to themselves. Christian monotheism was therefore perceived as anti-social, anti-religious, and downright hostile to the Roman Empire” (pg. 95).

• “…for second-century Roman citizens, Christianity’s refusal to participate in the public cults meant (at least in their eyes) that Christianity was anti-religious” (pg. 45). As we read in the Martyrdom of Polycarp, Christians were labelled “atheists” (9.2,3).

Of course, the question of how much we are to be “in the world” is one that will never be answered to everyone’s satisfaction (I can’t even answer it to my own satisfaction). The path of least resistance is the one that conforms to the world as much as possible. Sometimes we use the excuse of evangelism and being “winsome” to the culture, but let’s be honest: often we just don’t want to appear different because of our obedience to Christ.

The sections on the reading of Scripture in gathered worship were interesting. I’ve always felt that a wide variety of Scripture should be read in worship services. Seeing this practice in the second-century Church underscored this for me. Yes, the Lord’s Supper was the most prominent part of Christian worship then (I wish it were more prominent now), but the reading aloud of Scripture was the meat of the worship meal.

Irenaeus regarded “mistakes in public reading as a potential path to heresy” (pg. 170). I remember watching a preacher on television several years ago. In his tradition, he would call on people to read text throughout the progress of his sermon. He would simply say, “read,” and the assigned person would do just that. I noticed something curious about the way the person was reading. The emphases were really odd. Finally, looking at the words as they were displayed on the screen, I realized: the reader was emphasizing the italicized portions of the text as she read! In English Bibles, words are italicized by translators to indicate that the English words are implied or supplied from the original language, but are not in the original. The reader thought they were for emphasis, not a tool used to help readers understand the translation process. In this case, a misunderstanding led to a strange-sounding reading of Scripture. I learned this early on as a parent who has read a lot to his children: how you read aloud makes all the difference. Reading aloud is a lost art, even for seasoned preachers, it seems. Sometimes I’m halfway through a text and realize I’m not giving it my all. The public reading of Scripture is worship, and it shows forth the heart-attitude and care of the reader concerning the Bible. It matters. I'm not saying I expect perfection in readers; I really love to hear many different church members reading Scripture (it was one of my favorite parts of this last Lord's Day). I just need to remind myself to work at how I read it aloud so that I'm offering my best to the Lord.

“Congregations did not listen to the reading of Scripture merely to learn new things, but rather to be reminded of what they already knew and had heard read many, many times. The Christians in North Africa had, in essence, memorized the text through public reading and were therefore sufficiently bothered when a single word was changed” (pg. 171). Augustine tells the story of a bishop switching from an old Latin translation to Jerome’s newer Latin translation of Jonah. When the congregation noticed a single word had been changed, the service was disrupted by protest. I’ve wondered this about electronic Bible apps…this is going to sound conspiratorial, but bear with me. How far are we from people doing the vast majority of Bible reading from an electronic device? If the Bible were changed, would the next generations know it? Would my generation catch a change of a single word in the reading of a biblical text? A few years ago, I was in the middle of my 100-mile commute between churches one Sunday afternoon. I was listening to a reading of 1 Peter in the New Living Translation. The reader got to 1 Peter 2:5, and I heard, “And you are living stones that God is building into his spiritual temple. What’s more, you are his holy priests. Through the meditation of Jesus Christ, you offer spiritual sacrifices that please God.” That got my attention. It didn’t sound right. So, I pulled over and opened a Bible app (yes, I’m aware of the irony given my concerns). It doesn’t say, “meditation.” It says, “mediation.” This recording was made with background music to encourage younger people to listen to it. How many of them had listened and not noticed that this single word had been changed? One word here, one word there…that moment got me to thinking. The account of this church in an uproar because they noticed a single-word deviation in the text should be a reminder of the vital importance of all of us knowing the text of the Bible well.

There were other interesting and very relevant themes, like Christianity’s uniqueness in being separated from a specific ethnic-cultural group, and orthodoxy in the midst of diversity (as far as doctrine goes). Kruger’s book struck me as a subtle history-as-wake-up-call sort of book. My repeated reaction while reading it was, “we have a lot to re-learn.” Perhaps that was Dr. Kruger’s point. I suspect it will take more than a history book to get us there as the Church.