The topical foci of some of our 'secondary' books lends them to specific assignments. If one of your books is on this list, you may consider this as a possible written assignment. I hope you come away having unlocked more of your book's potential to shape your life, faith, and work, as well as a deeper appreciation of the book itself.
Matt Mikalatos, My Imaginary Jesus:
The book presents a dizzying array of 'christologies' or perceptions of Jesus Christ, with the clear implication that all fall short of the real Jesus, and that some fall shorter than others. It also describes a narrative progression or succession as the author's faith changes.
(a) What Jesuses would you say you have embraced and abandoned in your past? How good were your reasons for doing both? (b) The author describes other persons in his life (including biblical characters) who were instrumental in that process. Who has been instrumental in yours, and in whose lives are you instrumental in similar ways? (c) How does 'your Jesus' (Mikalatos might say 'your Imaginary Jesus') contrast with Jesus as displayed in scripture and in the church's most agreed-upon theology? In other words, where do characterizations of Jesus in the Bible and in the church's tradition bump up against Jesus as you intuitively understand him? What do you think accounts for these differences? What are you doing in response as you have become aware of them?
Both believers and nonbelievers can do this assignment with integrity.
Vincent Donovan, Christianity Rediscovered:
Donovan paid careful attention to the Masai and contextualized the gospel for them in a way that his tradition's missionaries had largely failed to do, then observed and reported what that fresh encounter produced. His treatment addresses many of our course's theological topics. He says in his introduction,
A parish priest in the United States remarked that even though Christianity Rediscovered was written in an African context, out of African experience, it was clear to him the book was really written about the church in Europe and America. I was gratified it was that clear. ... I had hoped [readers] would be able to take that basic thought and apply it to the church in America and elsewhere in a way that I could never do.
Your assignment is to do that. Describe some potential, or actual, fresh encounters between the gospel and our contemporary American context (or some other context with which you are more familiar). Where can the two communicate fairly clearly? Where does the gospel fundamentally challenge American life and thought in ways that might produce (or have produced) confusion, perplexity, rejection, reformation, and transformation? Draw comparisons/contrasts with episodes from Donovan's interactions with the Masai, and use course concepts from lectures and readings the way Donovan's analysis addresses many of our course's theological topics (God, Christ, office, sin, atonement, church, salvation, sacraments, etc.).
Michael S. Heiser, Supernatural: What the Bible Teaches About the Unseen World–and Why It Matters
Heiser thinks the meaning of New Testament and especially Old Testament passages is bound up with their cosmology (understanding of the world's structure) in ways that are foreign to readers like us who have different cosmologies. We need to read those passages in their original cosmological contexts in order to understand them. We may then need to adjust our message in order to communicate those passages to audiences with different cosmologies.
(a) Choose at least three of Heiser's findings that inform topics in our course (e.g., sin, creation, atonement), and discuss the doctrinal difference it makes to interpret the passage in its cosmological context rather than ours. (b) For each of those passages, do we need to affirm its biblical cosmology (for instance, a heavenly council of something like 'gods') in order to affirm the biblical text, or can we 'translate' its point(s) adequately in contexts that might not share that cosmology? (c) Jordan Peterson exemplifies an approach that pays close attention to the Bible's cosmological contexts, but tends to 'demythologize' in his interpretations, lifting the point of a passage out of that context and narrative world so it flows more smoothly in ours. Which elements of the Bible's cosmology are essential and not to be 'translated away'? Angels and demons, for instance?
Thaddeus Williams, Confronting Injustice without Compromising Truth:
'Justice' has been a key term in Christian life and theology from its beginning: it is nearly synonymous with 'righteousness' (hesed or dikaiosyne), which is at the center of the good news as articulated by Paul, the other New Testament writers, and of course Jesus. In the last few decades it has been characterized somewhat more narrowly in the terms of the so-called 'new left,' in particular its embrace of critical race theory (CRT). This characterization is controversial: While black Americans on balance view CRT favorably, even there a minority do not. (A good recent survey characterizing black Christians in the USA is here.) Williams' work reflects some of the voices left out from this characterization.
This assignment offers an opportunity to draw connections between Williams' critique and the course concepts from lectures and your other reading. You do not need to agree or disagree with Williams to do this.
Develop a theological analysis of Williams' argument. Where are specific claims supported by the course concepts? Where are they unsupported (or not clearly supported enough), or even contradicted?
Then examine the broader shape of his vision of Christian reconciliation and flourishing ("social justice A"). Where is it buttressed and/or weakened by course concepts? Is Williams right that CRT is fundamentally incompatible with the gospel? Why or why not?
N.T. Wright, Surprised by Hope:
How the world ends, and how my world ends, are matters about which the church has invested much attention. However, both lectures and readings have sought to improve upon evangelical eschatology.
Write an imaginary letter to someone in your life who needs to hear the Christian message of future hope. (You may choose to write to a group of people.) Tailor your message to specific needs, and frame it in terms of course concepts. Include explicit citations in parentheses from lectures and readings and/or any other relevant materials from throughout the course. Among sources you draw on must be Surprised by Hope. You do not need to adopt the positions that lectures and readings have advocated, but you should indicate that you understand them. (You might want to oppose them, or oppose other ideas that would kindle false hope.) Interacting with readings explicitly will tend to make your letter read awkwardly or artificially; in that case, make your critical points in footnotes for me that could be stripped. While hope's social and personal dimensions are of course intertwined, you may concentrate on whatever dimension(s) pertain to your reader's particular needs. In deference to issues of privacy and confidentiality, you may change name(s) if you wish.
I promise confidentiality. Prayerfully consider sending that letter.
Robert Barron, And Now I See: A Theology of Transformation
How does Barron's treatment of doctrinal topics in each part demonstrate, add to, or perhaps contrast with the other course material? And do his treatments in each part shed light on your own life or others' near you, or do those personal stories shed light on the topics? Topics you could consider could include, for example,
Part I: doctrines of humanity and sin
Part II: doctrine of God: attributes and relations
Part III: atonement, Christ's anointed officesI don't expect you to take up all of these, just the topics that are most salient, interesting, or applicable to you.
TBA
Remember, I want to see proper style, clear writing, a thorough answer to the question, and explicit citations of course materials. I hope you come away with a deeper appreciation of these books, making the hours you spent reading them even more worthwhile.