Horton endorses Leithart's latest book.. - Page 2

PuritanCovenanter · #41 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 03:00 PM

First off I don't think the topic for us should be, 'Should we read controversial authors so that we can answer or benefit from them?" That is a no brainer. I think the topic should be, "Should we read controversial authors and recommend them to the whole Christian community?". By endorsing a book you are endorsing a person for the most part. And isn't Peter Liethart under scrutiny right now?

Ivanhoe · #42 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

First off I don't think the topic for us should be, 'Should we read controversial authors so that we can answer or benefit from them?" That is a no brainer. I think the topic should be, "Should we read controversial authors and recommend them to the whole Christian community?". By endorsing a book you are endorsing a person for the most part. And isn't Peter Liethart under scrutiny right now?

But a stalwart like Michael Horton--a man who has rightly been a Champion of the Reformed Faith and a hero to many, including myself--recommended this book. And no, recommending a book is not the same as recommending a person. We separate the people from the issues.

PuritanCovenanter · #43 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 03:41 PM

But a non suspecting audience who doesn't know Liethart won't know specifics. And that is where you and I are going to disagree.

I may personally recommend a controversial writer to someone in front of me. But I wouldn't put a blanket endorsement upon a controversial authors book.

We are just going to disagree on this one Jacob.

And I am right btw.

I do think it was a poor decision on Horton's part.

Daniel Ritchie · #44 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

First off I don't think the topic for us should be, 'Should we read controversial authors so that we can answer or benefit from them?" That is a no brainer. I think the topic should be, "Should we read controversial authors and recommend them to the whole Christian community?". By endorsing a book you are endorsing a person for the most part. And isn't Peter Liethart under scrutiny right now?

I think we can say that he should not give it an official endorsement while nonetheless recognizing what is praiseworthy in it.

ChristianTrader · #45 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

But a non suspecting audience who doesn't know Liethart won't know specifics. And that is where you and I are going to disagree.

I may personally recommend a controversial writer to someone in front of me. But I wouldn't put a blanket endorsement upon a controversial authors book.

We are just going to disagree on this one Jacob.

And I am right btw.

I do think it was a poor decision on Horton's part.

What if the work is the best work available on an important issue. Are you going to say to a person, uh well, I'll get back to you at some point after someone that I agree with more writes a book? Until then, just know that such and such position is BAD or GOOD, as the case may be.

CT

PuritanCovenanter · #46 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChristianTrader

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

But a non suspecting audience who doesn't know Liethart won't know specifics. And that is where you and I are going to disagree.

I may personally recommend a controversial writer to someone in front of me. But I wouldn't put a blanket endorsement upon a controversial authors book.

We are just going to disagree on this one Jacob.

And I am right btw.

I do think it was a poor decision on Horton's part.

What if the work is the best work available on an important issue. Are you going to say to a person, uh well, I'll get back to you at some point after someone that I agree with more writes a book? Until then, just know that such and such position is BAD or GOOD, as the case may be.

CT

CT,

Go back and reread what I have said in the last few posts. I think you can tell what my position would be. BTW, you are making a hypothetical situation up that doesn't exist in my opinion. I know Jacob thinks N.T Wright does the best job on some issues but I would personally steer away from him for sure. He has to much baggage and I believe others have written on Topics that he has addressed with sufficiency.

ChristianTrader · #47 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChristianTrader

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

But a non suspecting audience who doesn't know Liethart won't know specifics. And that is where you and I are going to disagree.

I may personally recommend a controversial writer to someone in front of me. But I wouldn't put a blanket endorsement upon a controversial authors book.

We are just going to disagree on this one Jacob.

And I am right btw.

I do think it was a poor decision on Horton's part.

What if the work is the best work available on an important issue. Are you going to say to a person, uh well, I'll get back to you at some point after someone that I agree with more writes a book? Until then, just know that such and such position is BAD or GOOD, as the case may be.

CT

CT,

Go back and reread what I have said in the last few posts. I think you can tell what my position would be. BTW, you are making a hypothetical situation up that doesn't exist in my opinion. I know Jacob thinks N.T Wright does the best job on some issues but I would personally steer away from him for sure. He has to much baggage and I believe others have written on Topics that he has addressed with sufficiency.

Okay, what is a better book on postmodernism? I am relatively new to the issue (I have some ideas on it though). At the very least, if there were all these other better books, I would assume Baker would have had second thoughts on publishing it.

Also to be fair to Horton, if all these other books existed, he probably would never have endorsed the book. People do not endorse book just to see their name in print.

CT

PuritanCovenanter · #48 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChristianTrader

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChristianTrader

What if the work is the best work available on an important issue. Are you going to say to a person, uh well, I'll get back to you at some point after someone that I agree with more writes a book? Until then, just know that such and such position is BAD or GOOD, as the case may be.

CT

CT,

Go back and reread what I have said in the last few posts. I think you can tell what my position would be. BTW, you are making a hypothetical situation up that doesn't exist in my opinion. I know Jacob thinks N.T Wright does the best job on some issues but I would personally steer away from him for sure. He has to much baggage and I believe others have written on Topics that he has addressed with sufficiency.

Okay, what is a better book on postmodernism? I am relatively new to the issue (I have some ideas on it though). At the very least, if there were all these other better books, I would assume Baker would have had second thoughts on publishing it.

Also to be fair to Horton, if all these other books existed, he probably would never have endorsed the book. People do not endorse book just to see their name in print.

CT

CT,

I am having a hard time believing a man such as yourself is relatively new to the issue of postmodernism. Especially since you have spent a lot of time in the philosophical and apologetical discussions on this forum. You are well read and very intelligent. You have to be pulling my leg on this one. If not I am surprised.

Another thing. I didn't make a judgement on the book. I have no idea what it is like. I don't know why Baker published it. But Postmodernism is not a new subject. David Wells started writing about it years ago. I know D. A. Carson has written on it. Let me make myself clear. I still think Dr. Horton made a poor decision by endorsing the book in front of everyone in general. I didn't say He shouldn't ever recommend the book to a friend. But I would personally rather find another author on the subject.. How about the Gagging of God by Carson for starters.

I also want you to acknowledge that I said....."I may personally recommend a controversial writer to someone in front of me. (meaning a person I am talking to personally) But I wouldn't put a blanket endorsement upon a controversial authors book."

I believe a blanket endorsement of a poor theologians book can be dangerous. Even if the book I am endorsing is very good. As an example, a person may know who Horton is but not who Leithart is? An unsuspecting reader may mistake Horton's endorsement of Leithart's book as saying this guy is okay with me in general, when in fact Leithart's views are very opposed to what I believe is sound biblical teaching in a lot of his federal vision thinking.

Let me make myself clear about another thing. I can not judge the motives of Baker Bookhouse nor of Dr. Horton. You are running me into an uncharted area. I don't know either of them. The book might be good. Leithart is not an ignorant man. But that still doesn't change my thinking concerning a general public book endorsement.

I hope I made myself clearer.

Be Encouraged brother,

Ivanhoe · #49 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

How about the Gagging of God by Carson for starters.

It is good but it was also written 12-ish years ago. Things change. Sometimes the arguments that worked then don't quite address the same issue. And also Carson's book is huge, which would deter (perhaps wrongly, but still...) the man in the pew. Leithart's book isn't even 200 pages.

Quote:

I also want you to acknowledge that I said....."I may personally recommend a controversial writer to someone in front of me. (meaning a person I am talking to personally) But I wouldn't put a blanket endorsement upon a controversial authors book."

Let's be fair to the context, and separate the man from the issues (multiple ones, to make it worse) involved. Would Horton see his comments as a blanket endorsement? Doubtful. Is Horton mature enough to separate men from (other irrelevant) issues? Of course.

Quote:

I believe a blanket endorsement of a poor theologians book can be dangerous. Even if the book I am endorsing is very good. As an example, a person may know who Horton is but not who Leithart is? An unsuspecting reader may mistake Horton's endorsement of Leithart's book as saying this guy is okay with me in general, when in fact Leithart's views are very opposed to what I believe is sound biblical teaching in a lot of his federal vision thinking.

If someone is as unsuspecting as you say they are, then I doubt they will really understand what Leithart is saying on FV issues. I read his blog occasionally and I consider myself somewhat schooled in philosophy, and I can barely keep up with him.

Quote:

Let me make myself clear about another thing. I can not judge the motives of Baker Bookhouse nor of Dr. Horton. You are running me into an uncharted area. I don't know either of them. The book might be good. Leithart is not an ignorant man. But that still doesn't change my thinking concerning a general public book endorsement.

No, you are walking into an uncharted area. You are considering--and I don't believe this is fair to Messrs Horton and Leithart, not to mention Baker, to read back motives into their actions.. No offense meant.

It also appears that some are assuming that Leithart is going to "sneak a little FV in on the side." I am not convinced.

PuritanCovenanter · #50 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 07:51 PM

Jacob,
I believe you are doing to me what you did to me in the Theonomy thread. You are going beyond what I am saying. Reread what I wrote. Read it more slowly. Don't react emotionally. Just for example... in this quote,...

Quote:

No, you are walking into an uncharted area. You are considering--and I don't believe this is fair to Messrs Horton and Leithart, not to mention Baker, to read back motives into their actions.. No offense meant.

... you seem to be implying that I am reading back motives into their actions. Where have I done this?

One more thing. You know of books that would be comparable and being more updated and contemporary. You read more than I do. You can give some recommendations besides Leithart. My point was that this subject has been written about. CT said he was new to this.

Ivanhoe · #51 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuritanCovenanter

Jacob,
I believe you are doing to me what you did to me in the Theonomy thread. You are going beyond what I am saying. Reread what I wrote. Read it more slowly. Don't react emotionally. Just for example... in this quote,...

I realize that I sounded emotional. I wasn't. I just worked out. I can't get too excited either way at the moment.

Quote:

... you seem to be implying that I am reading back motives into their actions. Where have I done this?

As I understand it, I am seeing people fail to separate the men from the issues. I was understanding you to read Leithart's FV back into this book and then judge this book accordingly. Forgive me if I read it wrongly. Here is how I would handle it: If I knew a better, contemporary response to PM, I would first recommend that (see below). If there wasn't one, I would first summarize said arguments and have coffee with someone and just "talk about it." I think I am good at that with people. But, the above two don't work, and they still want to "read" something, perhaps even Leithart, ok, I might recommend this and say, "Here is what he says is good, bad, whatever."

Quote:

One more thing. You know of books that would be comparable and being more updated and contemporary. You read more than I do. You can give some recommendations besides Leithart. My point was that this subject has been written about. CT said he was new to this.

This is tricky because postmodernism has morphed. First of all, Gene Edward Veith wrote Postmodern Times. It was good 5 years ago. It is probably too basic but it would be the first book I give to the man in the pew.

A Christian defense of postmodernism (don't ask why) would be James KA Smith's Who's Afraid of Postmodernism? I probably wouldn't recommend this one.

I am not dismissing Carson's Gagging of God. He makes good points.

For a more academic read, see Radical Orthodoxy and the Reformed Tradition. This isn't responding to postmodernism, per se, but to its step-cousin.

there are a few others that slip my mind. I used to know the answer to this question. Good question. Sorry if I came across angry.

PuritanCovenanter · #52 (**permalink**) 01-08-2008, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spear Dane

Quote:

... you seem to be implying that I am reading back motives into their actions. Where have I done this?

As I understand it, I am seeing people fail to separate the men from the issues. I was understanding you to read Leithart's FV back into this book and then judge this book accordingly. Forgive me if I read it wrongly. Here is how I would handle it: If I knew a better, contemporary response to PM, I would first recommend that (see below). If there wasn't one, I would first summarize said arguments and have coffee with someone and just "talk about it." I think I am good at that with people. But, the above two don't work, and they still want to "read" something, perhaps even Leithart, ok, I might recommend this and say, "Here is what he says is good, bad, whatever."

Go back and read me again. I forgive you. Just slow down a bit. Watch the accusations also. You accused me of judging motives and I wasn't judging anyone's motives.

You are tired. I can tell.

py3ak · #53 (**permalink**) 01-09-2008, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spear Dane

Quote:

why should we read them?

Simply from reading the Confessions very few of us have the intellectual acumen to already know how to refute the entire system en toto.

Little Sally at church has been reading _____________. She asks you questions about them. You suspect they are wrong, but not quite sure how to refute them. Since you are intellectually honest, you know that facile, simplistic answers along the lines of, "Our tradition teaches x, so he's obviously wrong" will not give her cognitive rest.

Personal anecdote: I had a dear friend of mine (who was a member of this board at one time) become infatuated with NT Wright. She asked probing questions of conservative reformed folk, and they dismissed her by saying "He's stupid. Heretic. Go read the Confession." While that may be true in the long run, that is insulting the intelligence of our bright, young minds. (She is now at Harvard Law School, fwiw).

Now, I saw the trainwreck coming. I began to discuss, calmly and without invective, the Reformed view of salvation, Wright's view, where they converge and where they diverge. She did not go over to NPP.

Now, I could have insulted her intelligence and told her to read Reformation21 Blog and not worry about stupid heretics. She would have become NPP by the end of the week (and probably rightly so). Fortunately, that didn't happen.

Sure: the present reality is that people will often read undesirables (of course, another present reality is that there are far too many undesirables to be familiar with all of them). But my point is that I think the evangelicals have often fostered a culture of reading and supporting (by buying in order to refute, and so forth) what is pretty much worthless. And we kowtow to their academic credentials --we act as if so and so must have something worthwhile to say just because he got his Ph.D. under Sanders, or whatever. I'm questioning our long term strategy. And I say that as someone who has at least sampled Wright, Sanders, Dodd and Schweitzer.

Poimen · #54 (**permalink**) 01-09-2008, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spear Dane

Personal anecdote: I had a dear friend of mine (who was a member of this board at one time) become infatuated with NT Wright. She asked probing questions of conservative reformed folk, and they dismissed her by saying "He's stupid. Heretic. Go read the Confession." While that may be true in the long run, that is insulting the intelligence of our bright, young minds. (She is now at Harvard Law School, fwiw).

Now, I saw the trainwreck coming. I began to discuss, calmly and without invective, the Reformed view of salvation, Wright's view, where they converge and where they diverge. She did not go over to NPP.

Now, I could have insulted her intelligence and told her to read Reformation21 Blog and not worry about stupid heretics. She would have become NPP by the end of the week (and probably rightly so). Fortunately, that didn't happen.

You are probably right. Steve Schlissel said as much when he was on one of his tirades against Reformed theology. And, as much as I have a problem with Mr. Schlissel, I tend to agree. Instead of getting angry at him there needs to be an intelligent and loving response to some of these off the cuff answers to the genuine 'inquiring minds want to know' sort.

I love our confessions but we also need to engage the spirit of the age. This can be done (and should!) with our confessions in hand but not in the manner which your friend experienced.

timmopussycat · #55 (**permalink**) 01-09-2008, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prespastor

In conclusion, is it wrong for Horton to endorse Leithart's book? I will let God judge the matter. If I were Horton, would I have endorsed the book? Not on your life!

If I were Horton and asked for an endorsement, I would write the endorsement, but include a strong disclaimer of Leithart's other books and insist that I would allow publication of my endorsement only if the disclaimer was included!

Pilgrim · #56 (**permalink**) 01-09-2008, 01:40 AM

For a while it seemed that J.I. Packer endorsed every book that came out.