Through the first few chapters, Kimball sets up the situation by showing that our culture’s perceptions of Christianity have changed. For example, instead of being view as trusted spiritual leaders, pastors today are often referred to as “creepy.” Kimball argues that for many of us, we haven’t realized the changes because we’re trapped in Christian bubbles. The trend is that the longer we are Christians, the fewer non-Christian friends we have. What we fail to perceive is that while the church, and Christians in general, is not viewed favorable, most people do have a favorable impression of Jesus. Many of their impressions of Jesus’ life and teachings may be inaccurate, but they do provide a place ripe for fruitful conversation.

Much of the book takes a look at specific issues through the experiences of several non-Christian friends Dan interviewed for the book. According to Dan, their sentiments represent general misperceptions about Christians and the church that we must listen and respond to. The six misperceptions are: The church is an organized religion with a political agenda, the church is judgmental and negative, the church is dominated by males and oppresses females, the church is homophobic, the church arrogantly claims all other religions are wrong, and the church is full of fundamentalists who take the whole Bible literally. In each topic Dan explains what his friends have said, what the Bible says about the issue, and how Christians should respond.

In the first of the concluding chapters, Dan explores what his friends wish the church were like. He then revises the old “gap” illustration where man is separated from God by a chasm called sin that can only be bridged by the cross. Dan argues that another chasm exits called Christianity and the Christian subculture that must be bridged by trust before we can effectively speak to the problem of sin and their need for a savior.

There are some things in this book that will make some Christians uncomfortable. For the most part, this is a good thing. While I don’t agree with every single point made, I still recommend the book without reservation. Christians must begin understand how we are perceived in our culture so we can seek to correct our missteps. Dan Kimball is an outstanding guide toward this task. They Like Jesus but Not the Church effectively shows significant problems Christians must address in evangelism and offers practical solutions along the way.

After a brief introduction and biography, Dr. Follis explores the theology of John Calvin and Reformed interpretations since. This lays the groundwork for Schaeffer’s understanding of the dignity of humanity despite its depravity and the role of reason in his apologetic. The second chapter considers the various arguments Schaeffer put forward, including the well-known “taking the roof off,” and places Schaeffer’s love and compassion in proper relation to his apologetics. Francis Schaeffer has been accused of rationalism by some evangelicals, so Dr. Follis seeks to defend him against that charge in the third chapter. He argues that Schaeffer’s argumentation cannot be separated from his spirituality and that critics simply do not consider the full canon of Schaeffer’s work and life.

In the fourth chapter, Dr. Follis explores methodology, noting that Schaeffer was not a presuppositionalist in the tradition of Cornelius Van Til, but more like a verificationist in the tradition of Edward Carnell. He makes the important note, however, that Schaeffer did not believe “there is any one apologetics which meets the needs of all people. The concluding chapter considers the role of love in Schaeffer’s work and life, which Schaeffer called “the final apologetic.” Dr. Follis explains the personal nature of Schaeffer’s evangelism and the importance of community.

Truth with Love by Bryan Follis not only sets the record straight about the beliefs and life of Francis Schaeffer, but also puts forwards an inspirational vision for apologetics in our current postmodern culture. It’s main fault is that some of the points are placed repetitively throughout the book, but with such important points that may be forgiven.

The film is listed as a comedy, but if it’s a comedy then it fails miserably. As a drama, it paints well a melodramatic picture of being a drone in the corporate world. It provides occasional entertainment, such as a talking fish that berates Bob for not killing his co-workers. Against the backdrop of the mediocre film is an excellent performance by Christian Slater and the beautiful presence Elisha Cuthbert (she also gives a good performance but doesn’t need to).

Bob’s problem is one of meaning- he has nothing to live for. His house is a disaster, he watches a TV that doesn’t work, and the most he’s ever “gotten out” is to Sizzler. His emptiness is contrasted with the emptiness of everyone around him, and in the end it seems that no one has a purpose. The difference with Bob is that he’s the only one willing to admit it. He Was a Quiet Man is the result of a worldview that recognizes the depressing plight of humanity but offers no hope. Ultimately, the film is a waste of time and I see no reason to recommend it.

Family notice: movie contains nudity and coarse language

Preterism is the belief that many or most of biblical prophecy has already been fulfilled. Prophecies that haven’t been fulfilled include Christ’s second coming, the resurrection of all peoples and the final judgment at the end of the age. Like many theological doctrines, there is a wide spectrum of beliefs in the preterist camp. Historical (orthodox) preterists are sometimes referred to as partial-preterists. At the far heretical end are the full-preterists, those who contend that all prophecy has been fulfilled.

The opposing view to preterism is futurism (which has its own spectrum). Futurists believe that there are still prophecies to be fulfilled specific to national Israel distinct from the church. They are premillennialists, holding that Christ will come before a millennial reign that is yet to come. In contrast, preterism is often rooted in postmillennialism.

I’m an amillennialist. I believe that the current age is the millennium, that we live in the “already and not yet.” Since the amillennial position holds that some things refer to this age and some to the age yet to come, it seems to me that preterism (to some degree) fits well within the amillenial model. Some people may want to bring up a number of possible conflicts (such as the dating of Revelation), but since the preterism I’m advocating is partial, I need only to defend the fulfillment of one prophecy.

I am a preterist because I interpret Matthew 24 literally in that the prophecies were fulfilled before “this generation” passed away, specifically by A.D. 70 in the destruction of the temple. I don’t believe the events of the first century exhaust the meaning of the text, but I also don’t see any good reason to avoid the common sense reading of the text. Adam Parker at Bring the Books… summed up the passage quite nicely:

These predictions include:
a) False messiahs (v. 4-5)
b) Wars and rumors of war (v. 6-7)
c) Famines and Earthquakes (v. 7)
d) Times of unmatched persecution (v. 9-14)
e) Lawlessness (v. 12)
f) Gospel preached to the whole world (v. 14)
g) The Abomination of Desolation (Predicted in Daniel 9:24-27; Reiterated in v. 15)
h) The Great Tribulation (v. 21-22)
i) Jesus comes with judgement, on the clouds (v. 29-30)

Now, the short version of it is that in verse 34, Jesus says something very important regarding the timetable for the things he is predicting. "I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." This really is the clenching idea; did Jesus' predictions come true within the lifetime of those listening to His words, or not? (The Geneva Institute for Reformed Studies has done a nice little study demonstrating how each of these predictions of Jesus have, historically speaking, been fulfilled.)

If the predictions of Jesus did not occur within the lifetime of His audience, then he was incorrect when He said they would occur before that generation passed away.