I originally posted this review over at my personal blog. I normally don't post reviews like this on the church's blog, but I think I was fair in my assessment. - Asa V.
========================================================================
"The beauty of God's forgiveness is it's not a blanket waiver from our responsibility to react to His unmerited grace, but rather the opportunity to respond to the gift" - Edward F. Mrkvicka, Jr., The Sin of Forgiveness
I
wanted to like this book. The title was very provocative, and that was
OK with me. What was more interesting was the content, and, from the
description, it sounded like Mrkvicka was using the title somewhat
tongue in cheek. Reading the book, however, I discovered he wasn't.
In short, if this book makes it to a second printing, it is in serious need of both a stylistic editor and a theological editor. I really like a book written in a conversational tone, but this one meandered continuously, and it made following the thought process challenging. His use (or maybe misuse) of Scripture screamed loudly for a good, solid, theological editor to review his arguments through the lens and filter of the Bible.
What was Right
Terminology aside, I think Mrkvicka's concept of restoration was accurate. We need to be cautious about too quickly restoring the person who has committed an offense, although I think that varying degrees of wisdom need to be applied.
Also, in the body of Christ, we need to be cautious about ignoring the victim. One particularly pointed quote really struck me, "The sinners, via the squeaky wheel theory, receive all the attention while the target of their sin (innocent spouses and children) are ignored, or at best are made to feel guilty when they don't want to forgive without restitution." Far too often the victims do get pushed aside as the church works to restore the offender, and I think his critique was valid.
What was Wrong
This book was wanting in many ways. Theologically, it was shallow and misleading. Stylistically, it was hard to follow the flow of logic. Overall, his conclusion does violence to the beauty of the Gospel.
I won't spend much time on the stylistic aspects. A good editor could clean up the flow of the narrative, and it would make it much more readable. The grammatical errors and word choices could be easily corrected.
More importantly, this book is very dangerous, as it perverts the Gospel. Mr. Mrkvicka's conclusions, at best, leads to a works-based Gospel. This may sound harsh, and that's why I will take some time to explain my statement.
First, he confuses forgiveness with restoration. These are two very distinct acts. The first is the act by which we release the charge against another. The latter is the act of fully restoring the relationship. The latter is a two-way street; the former can be carried out by one individual.
In his chapter "I'm Sorry" is not Good Enough, Mrkvicka, maybe unintentionally, boils the miracle of the cross down to a moral example. He doesn't expressly state this, but that's what his statements conclude. His statements, in this chapter and other chapters, make the cross a moral example, not the very way by which we are justified before God. He makes statements that lead to a works-based salvation, not a grace-based gospel by which our sins are transferred to Christ, and Christ's righteousness is transferred to us.
The most troubling statement was this one from page 57, "Why would so many of us refuse to learn from Jesus' example? Using the logic of seculars, all Christ had to say was, 'On behalf of mankind, I'm sorry,' and all would have been forgiven." His statement makes the cross nothing more than an example that sacrificial restitution is the only way to be forgiven, where the truth is the cross is the only way by which we can attain salvation.
Another troubling statement Mrkvicka states, on page 78, "The divorced wife is also to be removed from God's eternity for the same reason; i.e., she is now an adulterer, because she remarried." Mrkvicka twists Scripture to fit his view and transfer the husband's sin onto the wife. In the very passage he quotes - Matthew 19:9 - Jesus states that, because of the husband's sin, the wife is freed from her marital covenant because the husband broke the covenant.
Mrkvicka spends considerable space arguing against "once saved, always saved." Where I agree is that this is not a license to sin. Where I disagree is his assertion that human atonement is required for salvation. Resting on Christ's sacrifice for sins committed - past, present and future - isn't enough for salvation; continued repentance is absolutely necessary or salvation may be lost. At any point a person could be saved, the next moment could be lost, and the moment after that, saved again...in total contrast to Hebrews 6:4-7, which clearly states that, once salvation is lost, it's lost forever.
My final critique is Mrkvicka's use of passages for setting aside people for the purpose of discipline. Mrkvicka uses these passages (Matthew 5:22-24, etc.) as "proof" that we are to separate from
non-believers in hopes they are restored. Paul, Peter, John, and other NT writers make it clear that "brothers" are those in the fold walking in deliberate sin, and the separation (not greeting the person, etc.) is a form of church discipline. His arguments make me wonder if he believes at all in evangelism.
By all conclusions, if Mrkvicka is correct, I'm left wondering if we will see Stephen the Martyr in heaven. In Acts 7:60, Stephen prays, "Lord, do not charge them with this sin." Everything in The Sin of Forgiveness would lead a reader to believe the answer would be 'no.'
I could continue, but I won't. My bottom line is this: do not read this book. I took the author's advice, from page 131, where he says, " I pray that all of my Christian writings are rock-solid biblically. If not, please discard anything I say." I will be discarding his writings, as he is preaching a man-centered, works-based gospel, not a gospel where Christ is the author and finisher of the work of salvation.
If you are looking for help on the topics of relationships, guilt, forgiveness, etc., skip this book. Instead, I would recommend the resources of the Christian Counseling and Education Foundation. Ed Welch, Paul Tripp and David Powlison are solid theologically, and these resources will help you in living a more Christ-like life.
I received this book for free through Cross-Focused Reviews (a service of Cross Focused Media, LLC) for this review.
========================================================================
"The beauty of God's forgiveness is it's not a blanket waiver from our responsibility to react to His unmerited grace, but rather the opportunity to respond to the gift" - Edward F. Mrkvicka, Jr., The Sin of Forgiveness
I
wanted to like this book. The title was very provocative, and that was
OK with me. What was more interesting was the content, and, from the
description, it sounded like Mrkvicka was using the title somewhat
tongue in cheek. Reading the book, however, I discovered he wasn't.In short, if this book makes it to a second printing, it is in serious need of both a stylistic editor and a theological editor. I really like a book written in a conversational tone, but this one meandered continuously, and it made following the thought process challenging. His use (or maybe misuse) of Scripture screamed loudly for a good, solid, theological editor to review his arguments through the lens and filter of the Bible.
What was Right
Terminology aside, I think Mrkvicka's concept of restoration was accurate. We need to be cautious about too quickly restoring the person who has committed an offense, although I think that varying degrees of wisdom need to be applied.
Also, in the body of Christ, we need to be cautious about ignoring the victim. One particularly pointed quote really struck me, "The sinners, via the squeaky wheel theory, receive all the attention while the target of their sin (innocent spouses and children) are ignored, or at best are made to feel guilty when they don't want to forgive without restitution." Far too often the victims do get pushed aside as the church works to restore the offender, and I think his critique was valid.
What was Wrong
This book was wanting in many ways. Theologically, it was shallow and misleading. Stylistically, it was hard to follow the flow of logic. Overall, his conclusion does violence to the beauty of the Gospel.
I won't spend much time on the stylistic aspects. A good editor could clean up the flow of the narrative, and it would make it much more readable. The grammatical errors and word choices could be easily corrected.
More importantly, this book is very dangerous, as it perverts the Gospel. Mr. Mrkvicka's conclusions, at best, leads to a works-based Gospel. This may sound harsh, and that's why I will take some time to explain my statement.
First, he confuses forgiveness with restoration. These are two very distinct acts. The first is the act by which we release the charge against another. The latter is the act of fully restoring the relationship. The latter is a two-way street; the former can be carried out by one individual.
In his chapter "I'm Sorry" is not Good Enough, Mrkvicka, maybe unintentionally, boils the miracle of the cross down to a moral example. He doesn't expressly state this, but that's what his statements conclude. His statements, in this chapter and other chapters, make the cross a moral example, not the very way by which we are justified before God. He makes statements that lead to a works-based salvation, not a grace-based gospel by which our sins are transferred to Christ, and Christ's righteousness is transferred to us.
The most troubling statement was this one from page 57, "Why would so many of us refuse to learn from Jesus' example? Using the logic of seculars, all Christ had to say was, 'On behalf of mankind, I'm sorry,' and all would have been forgiven." His statement makes the cross nothing more than an example that sacrificial restitution is the only way to be forgiven, where the truth is the cross is the only way by which we can attain salvation.
Another troubling statement Mrkvicka states, on page 78, "The divorced wife is also to be removed from God's eternity for the same reason; i.e., she is now an adulterer, because she remarried." Mrkvicka twists Scripture to fit his view and transfer the husband's sin onto the wife. In the very passage he quotes - Matthew 19:9 - Jesus states that, because of the husband's sin, the wife is freed from her marital covenant because the husband broke the covenant.
Mrkvicka spends considerable space arguing against "once saved, always saved." Where I agree is that this is not a license to sin. Where I disagree is his assertion that human atonement is required for salvation. Resting on Christ's sacrifice for sins committed - past, present and future - isn't enough for salvation; continued repentance is absolutely necessary or salvation may be lost. At any point a person could be saved, the next moment could be lost, and the moment after that, saved again...in total contrast to Hebrews 6:4-7, which clearly states that, once salvation is lost, it's lost forever.
My final critique is Mrkvicka's use of passages for setting aside people for the purpose of discipline. Mrkvicka uses these passages (Matthew 5:22-24, etc.) as "proof" that we are to separate from
non-believers in hopes they are restored. Paul, Peter, John, and other NT writers make it clear that "brothers" are those in the fold walking in deliberate sin, and the separation (not greeting the person, etc.) is a form of church discipline. His arguments make me wonder if he believes at all in evangelism.
By all conclusions, if Mrkvicka is correct, I'm left wondering if we will see Stephen the Martyr in heaven. In Acts 7:60, Stephen prays, "Lord, do not charge them with this sin." Everything in The Sin of Forgiveness would lead a reader to believe the answer would be 'no.'
I could continue, but I won't. My bottom line is this: do not read this book. I took the author's advice, from page 131, where he says, " I pray that all of my Christian writings are rock-solid biblically. If not, please discard anything I say." I will be discarding his writings, as he is preaching a man-centered, works-based gospel, not a gospel where Christ is the author and finisher of the work of salvation.
If you are looking for help on the topics of relationships, guilt, forgiveness, etc., skip this book. Instead, I would recommend the resources of the Christian Counseling and Education Foundation. Ed Welch, Paul Tripp and David Powlison are solid theologically, and these resources will help you in living a more Christ-like life.
I received this book for free through Cross-Focused Reviews (a service of Cross Focused Media, LLC) for this review.
Comments
Post a Comment