Several months ago, I wanted to take the Sunday school class I teach through some systematic theology, so I thought I might want to look into Coffee House Theology, which I had heard about on Homebrewed Christianity. ?Unfortunately, I remembered the title wrong, and I got Coffee Shop Theology instead. ?In my ignorance, I quickly read the first six chapters or so and decided to order it for the class. ?It proved to be a lesson in getting the title right and reading a book from cover to cover before buying a class set.
Frank Moore obviously has spent some time teaching systematic theology–his opening chapters, on the attributes of God, the doctrine of the Trinity, and other such theology-proper questions, are quite good.? As the introduction promises, he explains the concepts without jargon and in a responsible manner.? For the first several weeks, we took on a couple chapters a Sunday, and the teaching was good.
Then we got out of the theology-proper and into questions of human nature, sin, evil, and other such things.? Moore obviously has the best in mind for his readers, but his discussions quickly move from clear explication of difficult concepts in the opening chapters to folksy and often careless treatments of original sin, the implications of the creation narratives, the incarnation of the Son of God, and other major questions.? By the end of the book, I was using pretty much the chapter titles and not much else as I wrote my own lessons on sin and Christology.
I don’t think that Moore was incapable of writing good lessons on such questions; instead, I think he set himself too tough a bar to clear, namely a careful treatment of important questions that never ventures into the technical vocabularies of academic theology.? As I’ve noted before, sometimes intellectual communities do commit needless and intentional acts of obscurity, but in many other cases, the same communities develop specialized vocabularies because the questions at hand demand some more precision than folks can handle without those vocabularies.? Moore managed to do the job without those vocabularies for a while, but by the last chapter, when he was comparing the doctrine of the atonement to disposable batteries, I was longing for some technical language.
The epilogue to the book invited readers to take on the sequel to this one.? I elected instead to start looking into some of N.T. Wright’s Bible for Everyone teaching commentaries.? The first chapters of Paul for Everyone: The Prison Epistles look promising, but this one I’m reading all the way through before we start making plans.
I just want to know at what point in the process did you discover your error?
Joe
Not until I was doing the research to write this review.
The sad thing is that I figured Tripp and Chad (the HBC blokes) had just given this guy a free pass for all of his sloppiness. I quickly repented both of the unspoken accusation and of my own sloppiness.
Wow. Didn’t know that you also listened to HBC regularly. One of my highlights from living in Winston-Salem was hanging out with Tripp and planning joint activities for our respective youth groups. *sigh*
Since I am taking a systematic theology class this semester at VTS, I happen to agree that if a person is trying to convey nuanced and difficult concepts, using the academic jargon (for lack of a better phrase) is usually necessary.
Aye. I’ve been listening to Tripp and Chad for a bit more than a year now, and although I’ve tipped a brew with neither, I have exchanged emails with Tripp, and he occasionally reads and comments here. I’m surprised you didn’t see my Deacon badge in the right margin. (I’m also one of the blogs listed on the HBC links page.)
I am all for trying to use simple language. Orwell, I think has an essay on how intellectuals misuse (the English) language, and I think every person in academia should read it . Systematic theology, however does require a specialized vocabulary because so many of the ideas come out of different languages and are very complicated. I think the folks can and should get into these conversations and to do that they need the words. Again there is a big difference between using big words out of necessity and just using them carelessly.
I would like to recommend my book for your consideration–The Good News According to Jesus: A New Kind of Christianity for a New Kind of Christian (Smyth and Helwys, March, 2009). You can get a preview at http://www.helwys.com (new books). I included reflection and discussion questions after each chapter. I have been leading my congregation to engage in serious theological reflection over the last several years and the book is a product of that journey. I tried to write in a way that would interest the lay Christian or spiritual seeker wanting to go deeper in their faith.
When I’m not so sleep-deprived and can point to some genuine headway on my dissertation, I might check your book out, Chuck.