Douglas S. Huffman

If you were lucky enough to attend a Christian college (or Homeschool High) you probably are familiar with the importance of”the Biblical Worldview.” Basically, a worldview is a conceptual framework which includes all the beliefs we hold as true (our view of the world). In Christian Contours: How a Biblical Worldview Shapes the Mind and Heart, the faculty of Northwestern College in St. Paul, Minnesota (a Christian college), under the editorial direction of former colleague, Douglas Huffman (now at Biola University, another Christian college), flesh out what the Biblical worldview is, its importance and how we may live faithfully, formed by our Christian convictions. This book provides an accessible guide to major issues and they do an admirable job of presenting a unified argument (no small feat, as there are ten authors in total). Bellow I will offer a brief summary of the book’s contents followed by my comments.

Christian Contours is divided into two parts. In part one, Randy Nelson, Douglas Huffman, Walter Schultz and Paul Kjoss Helseth present an overview of worldview thinking and their conceptual framework for defining and addressing the Biblical worldview. In chapter one, Randy Nelson articulates the beliefs that he sees as forming the essential core of a worldview: Theology, Anthropology, Ethics, Soteriology, Epistemology (29-30). It is through these beliefs that we perceive and process reality, which in turn affect how we live. To be a Christian means we embrace the Biblical worldview (that is, the Bible informs and shapes beliefs in any of these areas).In chapter two, Huffman argues that there is one single unified biblical worldview, despite the plethora of denominations and theological viewpoints (from a standpoint of metaphysical realism). In chapter three, Schultz relates the concept of truth to God’s Knowledge of himself and creation and argues that worldviews are only true insofar as they agree with God’s knowledge. In chapter four, Huffman and Helseth present the Biblical worldview under the rubric of core beliefs that Nelson articulated in chapter one (they acknowledge that a biblical worldview can also be presented in a narrative form, or a creedal way).

Part two focuses on contemporary challenges to living from a Biblical worldview. In chapter five Daryl Aaron talks about the need for intellectual humility when two or more Christians striving to live out the biblical worldview come into inevitable conflict. Mark Muska talks about maintaining a personal Biblical worldview despite our inconsistencies (stemming from submerged beliefs). Ardel
Caneday addresses the challenge of pluralism (chapter 7) while James Raymo and Dale Hutchcraft challenge readers to Evangelize and invite others into the Christian worldview (chapter 8).

Besides these parts, Huffman writes a brief conclusion and there are two appendices and an annotated bibliography for thinking through the Biblical worldview as it relates to various academic disciplines. I particularly enjoy good bibliographies and found this one to be helpfully constructed.

As someone passionate about faith and learning and wanting to see people embrace a meaty faith, I think this book makes a valuable contribution to the literature on the Christian worldview. It challenges Christians to not compartmentalize their faith, but to think Christianly (biblically) about all of life. To this end, I think this book will prove a valuable resource for Christian academics (Christian colleges), apologetic minded organizations, and for theological minded Christians who are eager to connect faith to life.

However, I am also suspicious of the worldview project for ways in which it privileges the intellectual and cognitive side of Christianity demoting behavior and desires to a secondary status, easily brought inline by right thinking. James A. K. Smith of Calvin College (a Christian College) offers a critique of worldview thinking which I think is apt here:

First, this focus on a Christian worldview as a system of beliefs and doctrines marginalizes or ignores the centrality of distinctly Christian practices that constitute worship–arguably the single most important thing that Christians do. From most expositions of “the Christian worldview,” you would never guess that Christians worship! From the pictures of Christians implied in worldview-talk, one would never guess that we become disciples by engaging in communal practices of baptism, communion, prayer, singing and dancing. Second, this focus on beliefs is inattentive to the pedagogical significance of material practices. The cognitive-centric approach exhibits a fixation on the cognitive region, a kind of tunnel vision that is narrowly focused on the mind. Because of this, the body–and all the things associated with the body, like the imagination–don’t really show up on the radar. (Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview and Cultural Formation, 64).

As unfair the authors of Christian Contours may find this, I don’t think they really escape Smith’s critique. Huffman et al. claim that the Biblical Worldview shapes mind AND heart(notice the order), but there is almost no discussion of the affections, except as a secondary consideration. Similarly they fail to account for the ways our practice opens us up to new beliefs (rather than just worldview controlling practices) Sometimes truth is in the bones before it is in the brain.

This doesn’t invalidate many of their fine and helpful observations and arguments. Instead I think that a book like this which addresses Christian beliefs is best read by practicing Christians well-formed by worship, liturgy and practices.

Thank you to Kregel Publications for providing me a copy of this book in exchange for this review.… (plus d'informations)

It goes without saying that learning Greek can be daunting. And the only thing that gives ministerial students more nightmares than Greek is Biblical Hebrew! Whether one is currently immersed in the world of Koine (NT) Greek or if they are years removed from their time spent buried in Greek grammars and syntax books, they are sure to find this new book from Douglas Huffman a true God-send.

"The Handy Guide to New Testament Greek: Grammar, Syntax, and Diagramming" (Kregel, 2012) is an accessible yet fairly comprehensive resource for the Greek student. And everything from its size and shape (designed to fit nicely next to a UBS4 or NA27/28 Greek NT) to its detailed discussion of phrase diagramming is geared to provide practical help for the average pastor as well as the up and coming Greek student.

I was impressed that it didn’t skip the basics — even covering the Greek alphabet for those of us who occasionally hit a mental block when we try to think Greek again! It provides declensions and grammatical rules, and a helpful listing of syntactical options for the various noun cases, verb qualities (tense, aspect, mood, etc.) and participles. It covers purpose clauses and conditional statements; reviews the prepositions and conjunctions; and it does all this in an incredibly useful format — making this the go-to resource for orienting yourself to the Greek text before eventually giving up and consulting the technical commentary or larger grammatical reference tool.

I most enjoyed the phrase diagramming how-to section, which discusses arcing and sentence diagramming before focusing on phrase diagramming and illustrating how helpful it can be for sermon and lesson preparation. The section on diagramming is worth the price of the book all on its own! The charts and diagrams which fill almost every page of this manual, are clear and crisp; and the explanations stay succinct enough to keep the handbook small and convenient in size.

You won’t be disappointed in picking up this reference tool. Even if you aren’t well versed in Greek, this tool can help you understand the options and make sense of some of the linguistic discussions in critical commentaries. This tool will find a place next to my reader’s Greek NT and will be my first place to turn when trying to work my way through the Greek text on my own.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by Kregel Academic. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.… (plus d'informations)