Before I started into the text of The Truth of the Cross I read the three endorsements that came with it, one by Thomas Schreiner, one by Scott Clark and one by Bruce Waltke. It was Waltke’s that caught my eye when he said, “The Truth of the Cross is the best book on the cross I have read.” A man of Waltke’s age, Christian maturity and status must have read more than a few books on the cross, making this no little statement. Having read the book, I know it was no exaggeration. The best book on the cross I’ve ever read is Frederick Leahy’s The Cross He Bore, a book I’d consider a must-read for any Christian. Could this one be as good, as beautiful as that?

The doctrine of penal substitution doesn’t, on the face of it, sound too glorious. It is a doctrine involving curse, punishment, blood and death. It is little wonder that people object to it so strenuously. Indeed, this teaching has been at the very center of a rift within the church—a rift that seems to be growing ever-wider and ever more visible. Once the realm of scholars cloistered away in the ivory towers of academia, the battle against this doctrine has recently reached the popular level and it has come under attack by influential and popular evangelical leaders. Needless to say, controversy has followed, and for good reason.

Steven Lawson’s series called A Long Line of Godly Men has made me awfully excited. I love Reformed theology and am thrilled to see the effort Lawson is expending in proving that this theology, seen as so new and so radical by such a large number of Christians, has been consistently taught by courageous and biblical Christians from the time of the writers of the Bible all the way to today. There truly is a long line of godly men testifying to God’s sovereignty in these doctrines of grace. And someday I look forward to having a long line of these books on my shelf.

Wayne Grudem has written a great deal about biblical manhood and womanhood. Besides articles in periodicals, he has written Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism which he co-authored with John Piper. He has written Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth: An Analysis of More Than 100 Disputed Questions and then two collections of essays he edited, Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood and Pastoral Leadership for Manhood and Womanhood.

The latest addition to this list is Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism?. Grudem describes this book as “an expression of deep concern about a widespread undermining of the authority of Scripture in the arguments that are frequently used to support feminism. It is also a way of posing a question: can a movement that espouses this many ways of undermining the authority of Scripture possible be right?” The book’s argument, then, is that evangelical feminism sets those who affirm it on a slippery slope that will inevitably lead to liberalism.

Guidance and the Voice of God is one of several books I have read that discusses the way God speaks to and guides His children. I initially turned to these books in response to the words I hear all around me in modern Christianity. People continually ask God to speak to us in circumstances and situations. Likewise, I am often asked how God spoke to me during a period of time or perhaps during a specific event. The terms people use would seem to indicate that many of them hear audibly from God on an ongoing basis and that such revelation from God is normative for the Christian life. Yet I have been a Christian for many years and have never knowingly received a “word from the Lord” and have never had a vision, dream or whispering that I can conclusively attribute to God. Is this a matter of theology or a matter of simply not listening?

Phillip Jensen and Tony Payne, authors of Guidance and the Voice of God believe that God has spoken to us fully and finally through the Bible and that this is the only way we should expect for Him to speak to us. They make five propositions about how God guides us:

Those with an interest in the theology of Scripture may be intrigued by a book published this year by New York University Press.

“All religious traditions that ground themselves in texts must grapple with certain questions concerning the texts’ authority. Yet there has been much debate within Christianity concerning the nature of scripture and how it should be understood—a debate that has gone on for centuries. Christian Theologies of Scripture traces what the theological giants, including Origen, Luther, and Barth, have said about scripture from the early days of Christianity until today. It incorporates diverse discussions about the nature of scripture, its authority, and its interpretation, providing a guide to the variety of views about the Bible throughout the Christian tradition.”

Edited by Justin Holcomb, a lecturer in Religious Studies and Sociology at the University of Virginia, and a lecturer in theology at Reformed Theological Seminary, the book includes contributions by eighteen experts. Justin also blogs at Common Grounds Online.

Depending on the perspective of the individual Christian, John Calvin may either be one of the greatest theologians or the worst charlatans who ever lived. For those who feel Calvin’s teachings accurately interpreted the Bible, he is a great teacher and one who rediscovered doctrines of grace that had lay largely dormant for centuries. For those who feel Calvin’s teachings are a gross misrepresentation of God’s sovereignty and human freedom, Calvin is a deceiver and one who has led countless Christians away from biblical truths.

It was an interesting experience reading Suffering and the Sovereignty of God (edited by John Piper and Justin Taylor), for only a year before its release I had been present at the Desiring God National Conference where the contents of the book were first presented as keynote addresses. With only a couple of exceptions, each chapter of this book is drawn from one of those speeches (those exceptions being Dustin Shramek’s chapter and an appendix entitled “Don’t Waste Your Cancer” which was initially written by John Piper when he learned of his prostate cancer and was subsequently added to by David Powlison when he was diagnosed with the same disease). I had, then, some familiarity with the material before I began to read it. I knew which authors would provide a theological framework for suffering and which would focus instead on their first-hand experiences of suffering. I even knew what most of the authors would say. Still, I enjoyed reading the chapters as much as I enjoyed hearing the speeches one year ago. I am sure I learned as much from them the second time around.

As Baptists go, I consider myself quite charitable when it comes to beliefs on baptism. I suppose this is due to my Presbyterian background and my ongoing struggles with fully committing myself to either infant or believer’s baptism. I have studied the arguments made by both camps and see beauty and biblical support in both. Unfortunately, though, they cannot both be true which means that one must be wrong. I have aligned myself with the Baptist camp, a move that was initially as much out of necessity as conviction. I guess at this point I wish I felt conviction that paedo-baptism was biblical, but at this point it is not quite there.

Jim Elliff feels no such confusion. His small book Going Under presents five discussions on baptism. He gives biblical insight into five issues:

I tend to agree with those who believe that liberalism is a mental disorder. I can think of no other explanation for those who hold steadfast to a system of beliefs that are self-contradictory, contrary to reason, and entirely Godless. Nor does Ann Coulter. In her latest book, Godless, she attempts to “throw open the doors of the church of liberalism” to expose the lunacy that exists within. “Liberals love to boast that they are not ‘religious,’” she begins, “which is what one would expect to hear from the state-sanctioned religion. It has its own cosmology, its own miracles, its own beliefs in the supernatural, its own churches, its own high priests, its own saints, its own total worldview, and its own explanation of the existence of the universe. In other words, liberalism contains all the attributes of what is generally known as ‘religion.’”