Because I cannot resist a book meme, and because responding to the meme gives me occasion to link to Faith and Theology - which is a great site and the location of many others’ responses to this meme, (because of all of that) here is my response:
1. One book that changed your life:
-
Jesus and the Victory of God, N.T. Wright
2. One book you’ve read more than once:
-
The Iliad, Homer
3. One book you’d want on a desert island:
-
In Search of Lost Time, Marcel Proust (its really long!)
4. One book that made you laugh:
-
The River Why, David James Duncan
5. One book that made you cry:
-
Silence, Shusaku Endo
6. One book you wish had been written:
-
The Matrix of Christian Theology, Volume 3(-6), Stanley Grenz
7. One book you wish had never been written:
-
Millard Erickson, Christian Theology
8. One book your currently reading:
-
Exclusion and Embrace, Miroslav Volf
9. One book you’ve been meaning to read:
-
Theopolitical Imagination, William T. Cavanaugh
10. Now tag five people:
-
No. If you’ve been meaning to update your blog, here is your opportunity. If you don’t have a blog, and want to respond, leave a comment
Entries (RSS)
June 11th, 2007 at 10:12 pm
[...] No. If you’ve been meaning to update your blog, here is your opportunity. If you don’t have a blog, and want to respond, leave a comment (Yes I ripped this last one off from Chris). [...]
June 14th, 2007 at 11:21 am
ta da: http://flyingfarther.wordpress.com/2007/06/12/do-memes-ever-stop/
June 14th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
What’s wrong with Erickson?
June 14th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
well, nothing is wrong with Millard Erickson the person. I’m not fond of his systematic theology. To be fair, there are other systematic theology texts that could just as well been in Erickson’s place, but his is the text I happened to suffer under. The problem I have with it is it’s portrayal of theology as a static and mostly decided affair: which is to say, he uses textbook language. I have seen too many Bible college students, who come to college excited about theology, have their excitement extinguished by the dullness of this book. In reality, theology is an unsettled, contentious, and vibrant conversation.
June 19th, 2007 at 9:57 am
Hey Chriss,
I appreciate your appreciation for Jesus and the Victory of God. That book also had a large impact on me and how I view Jesus and how I view and do theology. I understand your angst about Erickson (having studied under that same text) but in some sense I think systematic theologies can be helpful as references. There is a sense that they can help navigate the waters, so to speak. If nothing else, they are a useful collection of ‘proof-texts’ (and I’m not happy with that word) under systematic/thematic headings, which can be examined and explored in a more helpful and dialogic manner. But I’m not willing to chuck them completely because of their useful survey of the material. Does that make sense? That’s my thought anyway.
Ben (from church)
June 19th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
Ben,
To my ears, it sounds like you’re using the systematic theologies (Erickson’s happens to be in focus) as if they were Dictionaries of Theology. Now, I have no problem with theological dictionaries, like Elwell’s - they are tremendously useful in aiding in just the sort of activity you describe. It seems, however, that while dictionaries are written for the purpose of setting the reader off in the right direction (the better ones include a small bibliography at the end of each entry), and while a systematic theology may be used for that purpose (although, I think, not as well), a systematic theology is not written for that purpose. No, systematic theologies (the book, not necessarily the discipline) are written as an argument for what constitutes “right theology.” When used educationally students are being introduced to theology as a discipline so much as to what Millard Erickson thinks should be considered right theology - which I find disturbing (I would be equally disturbed if we were to merely substitute Erickson’s text with another’s). When we are beginning to shape our own views about theological topics we need a plurality of voices; that so we don’t ‘learn’ by parroting, but by wrestling.
I am also suspicious of texts which purport to emcompass the discipline of theology: I am close to claiming that all theology is, or should be, ad hoc - occasional in nature. But thats for another post.
To be fair:I actually do own Erickson’s book, which means I haven’t “chucked” it either. His text remains interesting for me insofar as it sheds light on the logic behind a particular (historical) theological movement - a movement in which I find my own roots also.