In the 2004 elections, why was the country so closely divided? Why is our culture in the state it’s in? What impact does philosophy have on our lives? If you’re looking for answers to these questions, and many more, Total Truth by Nancy Pearcey is the book for you

The book feels more like three books in one. Throughout it, the central principle is that Christianity is not just true for Sundays, it’s not just a private religious practice, but it is total truth- it applies to every area of life and culture

In the first part Nancy Pearcey lays out the basics of worldview thinking. Every worldview will in some way account for three things: creation, fall, and redemption. This worldview scheme is applied to several popular contemporary worldviews, like Marxism and Buddhism. Part one also deals extensively with the history of the Fact/Value split- that we separate our values from our facts such that facts are objective and knowable and values are subjective and variable

Part two of Total Truth dives into the naturalistic worldview and how it’s shaped certain parts of our culture. Mrs. Pearcey offers several defeaters for the common “examples” of Darwinian evolution, such as the “peppered moths.” She also discusses the Intelligent Design movement and offers three distinct arguments for a designer. The importance of knowing about naturalism is driven home by an example from the Berestain Bears, which teaches our children that “Nature… is all that IS, or WAS, or EVER WILL BE!” (157)

The third part is an evaluation of Evangelicalism. Mrs. Pearcey examines two strands of Evangelicalism- the populist which focused on revivalism and individual conversion, and the scholastic which emphasized theology and rationalism. She shows how these ideologies ended up leaving us with a public/private split. In her chapter “How Women Started the Culture War,” she shows how Feminism has further distorted the total truth of Christianity.

Part four consists of one chapter about how important true spirituality is to the total truth of Christianity. “Ultimately, this experience is the goal of developing a Christian worldview—not just studying and debating ideas, but dying and rising again in union with Christ.” (354)

Total Truth is one of the longest books I’ve read in some time. That said, if it takes you two years to read it, the time would be well spent. Nancy Pearcey is an engaging writer who could probably make anything sound interesting and important. I’m not much into science myself, but even the four chapters of the book strictly on science I found to be enriching. This book should be in the hands of everyone who wants to live a life completely surrendered to Christ. Many people said this was the book to read of 2004. I must agree, and I cannot recommend it more. It is also great for group studies, which will be aided by a study guide edition coming out 9/2005.

During a meeting with some representatives of the Southern Baptist Convention Robert Millet and his LDS colleagues were asked, “’Why don’t you people just admit it: You worship a different Jesus!’ My LDS colleagues and I spent the next half hour or so trying to convince them of our acceptance of Jesus of Nazareth, as set forth in the New Testament.” (xi-xii) This is the goal Dr. Millet has set forth for A Different Jesus?

Robert Millet begins by presenting the beginnings of Mormonism as an introduction to their beliefs. On this foundation he then proceeds to discuss LDS theologies revolving around Jesus Christ in relation to (mostly Protestant) historical Christianity.

Chapter 1 tells briefly about Christ’s pre-existence and the plan of the eternal gospel coming to bear. The second chapter looks at Jesus in light of secular scholarship, namely the Jesus Seminar. In chapter 3 Dr. Millet discusses a list of differences among Christians, the LDS claim to be the “one true church,” and what doctrines Mormonism holds in addition to historical Christianity. In subsequent chapters he goes on to explain the LDS beliefs about Jesus Christ and salvation, and at the end has a chapter answering 21 of the most common questions he’s been asked by non-Mormons.

In his concluding chapter, Robert Millet tells a story about a question asked of him by a theologian: “You are standing before the judgment bar of the Almighty, and God turns to you and asks: ‘Robert Millet, what right do you have to enter heaven? Why should I let you in?’… I would say to God: ‘I claim the right to enter heaven because of my complete trust and reliance upon the merits and mercy and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.’” (175-177) The question that first came to my mind is, “Which Jesus?”

Well, the LDS Jesus that Robert Millet presents does bear some similarity to the Jesus that historical Christians believe in, but also has a number of important differences. “Jesus was the firstborn spirit child of God the Father and thus the recipient of the birthright of the royal family. As such, and in that premortal realm, he was the Elder Brother of all the spirit sons and daughters of the Father.” (20) We are those spirit sons and daughters, literally. “We do not believe that God and man are of a different species.” (117) They do believe in the Trinity, “But they believe they are three distinct personages, three Beings, three separate Gods.” (141)

These important beliefs are at the foundation of the differences between the Jesus of the LDS Church and the Jesus of historic Christianity. Further, such doctrines about Jesus of Nazareth are, we Christians believe, contradictory to the revelation of the Old and New Testaments. Thus, despite Dr. Millet’s insistence otherwise, the LDS do believe in a different Jesus.

On one hand, I found some things to appreciate about this book. Robert Millet emphasizes Jesus Christ more than he does Joseph Smith, which is a move in the right direction. Dr. Millet has interacted with a wide range of popular Protestant authors, which helps him paint a mostly accurate picture of historic Christianity. However, on the other hand, he manages to quote from every prominent open theist and just about all of C.S. Lewis’ most controversial beliefs. He poses some great questions throughout the book, but then occasionally fails to really answer them. For example, after quoting from Matthew 16:16-18 he asks, “Did the Lord not clearly state in this passage that Satan would not prevail over the Christian church?” (52) Unfortunately no clear answer is even offered.

While Robert Millet affirms many things I would agree with, on the most fundamental doctrines of who Jesus Christ is, I cannot. Unfortunately I cannot agree with my Christian brother Richard Mouw, who states in his afterword, “I think that an open-minded Christian reader of this book will sense that Bob Millet is in fact trusting in the Jesus of the Bible for his salvation.” (183) It appears that Dr. Millet is still trusting in a different Jesus; a different God, than the ONE of the Bible.

What comes to mind when you think of Feminism? Is it simply the idea that all men and women are of equal worth, or is it more than that? Over the past 50 years it has been much, much more. The bulk of The Feminist Mistake by Mary Kassian is an historical overview of the feminist movement, in both its secular and religious forms. 

Mrs. Kassian investigates feminism from its postmodern roots to its present day. She begins with the writings of Simone De Beauvoir and Betty Friedan. The initial result of the movement they sparked was an ideology of women naming themselves. “They claimed this role had been determined by men and was oppressive to women.” (80) Naming themselves meant “the freedom of all women to do what ever they wish to do sexually” (57- quote of Shulamith Firestone) and otherwise.

Stage one of Feminism was to re-shape women’s self-image. Stage two was to re-shape the world we live in according to Feminist thought. “Through woman-centered analysis, every area of human existence was examined and redefined. Woman-centered analysis was both a systematic analysis of the past and an attack on the values that shaped the past.”(105)

Even though much of these first two stages were founded on naturalistic assumptions (in their secular forms), the third stage was a religious one- naming God. “Feminists encouraged women to use their imagination in creating new visions of God and new forms of worship and ritual.” (181) What followed was self-worship, the Feminists redefined God as themselves. Many began integrating New Age and Wiccan practices into their ideology.

Religious Feminism followed a similar path. They began by re-envisioning themselves and in order to do so they needed to be liberated. “Feminist theologians believed that the liberation of women would reduce the end of poverty, racial discrimination, ecological destruction, and war. They argued that it would end all dualisms, usher in a new world order of peace, and witness the birth of a new humanity.” (64)

They then began to name more than just themselves; they created woman-centered theology. “According to Ruether, only the biblical texts that spoke to women’s contemporary quest for liberation were valid.”(108) This had a profound impact in all areas of theology: “God’s purpose as to assist humans to realize their liberation… Rather than God incarnate, Jesus represented to them a deicitic humanity—a ‘foretaste of freedom’—promised to all.” (114) “Jesus as not to be viewed as the one who saves, but rather as the primary example of God’s salvation, which is liberation.” Sin was redefined as “a situation in which there is no community, no room to live as a human being.” (115- quote of Letty Russell)

When it came to where both the secular and religious veins of Feminism were heading, Mrs. Kassian argues that they ended up at the same place. “Secular feminists had named themselves outright as gods, and, although it took somewhat longer and was couched in traditional Christian terms, religious feminists began to do the same.” (226)

In response to some criticisms I made of Feminism, a friend of mine told me I didn’t understand it. She was right; it’s far worse then I had figured. Consider a 1993 conference in Minneapolis called “Re-imagining God” which was participated in by PCUSA, ELCA, and several other major denominations. Attendees were led in prayer to “Mother God,” were told that Asian goddesses could represent a new kind of trinity, and were told that “we don’t need a theory of atonement at all… we [don’t] need folks hanging on crosses and blood dripping and weird stuff. We do not need atonement; we just need to listen to the god within.” (237-239- quote of Delores Williams of Union Theological Seminary)

In analysis, Mary Kassian shows how even the most simple of Feminist assumptions, that there should be no restrictions as to what women should do, inevitably leads down a path to a dark place completely contrary to the Christian worldview. “Instead of promoting a healthy self-identity for women or contribution to a greater harmony between the sexes, it has resulted in increased gender confusion, increased conflict, and a profound destruction of morality and family.” (299)