From what I understand, it's not necessarily written from a Christian perspective, but I wondered if any of the pastors have read it and would be willing to discuss how it relates to WELS' biblical doctrine.

On the cover sleeve Dr. Johnson presents himself as a physician and a journalist. It is in the preface that he indicates he is also a seminary graduate, having been theologically trained in the Evangelical Covenant Church. Dr. Johnson attempts to reflect his version of the Christian perspective on the walk of life.

By his own admission, his most profound theological influence came at the University of Chicago Divinity School. Concerning his short time there Johnson writes, "under the challenge of some very bright and skeptical teachers at the University of Chicago, I began to doubt almost everything I had pretty much taken for granted: that the Bible is the Word of God, that Jesus was the Son of God and that God rules the universe (not to mention the world) and has a plan for it and for me. . . . Ever since that time I have been comfortable with intellectual and spiritual doubt . . . and now welcome it as a companion that stimulates me to think about what I really believe."

As one reads the book you sense that Johnson is trying to relate a "rediscovery" of those things he doubted. This new discovery, however, comes primarily through a series of logical deductions flavored by personal biases (i.e., he often dismisses full acceptance at the candid revelation of Scripture because it doesn't mesh with what he is comfortable with).

His rediscovery of these things appears to evolve from a genuinely altruistic desire to alleviate the sufferings of those less fortunate than himself. Dr. Johnson speaks with great admiration for the humanitarian work of Dr. Albert Schweitzer (p. 195). While he speaks appreciatively of his work as medical editor for ABC News he seems to have changed, or even matured, with the passage of time. In the "early winter" of his life he says he is experiencing "a growing anguish born of being materially privileged in a world of terrible suffering caused by poverty."

Dr. Johnson is to be commended for his increasing concern for the plight of those less-fortunate. Not only is such concern good for society but it correctly reflects the concerns expressed in Scripture (i.e., Matthew 25:31ff, Philippians 2:3-4; 2 John 6). Dr. Johnson finds particular inspiration for sacrificial love in the words of the Sermon on the Mount and its admonitions related to the less fortunate and their special place before God (Chapter 8 - p. 149).

The increasing desire to mediate the disparity between an existence of privilege and one of suffering, unfortunately, creates a bias that has Dr. Johnson often picking and choosing the things of God's Word he chooses to follow and those he chooses to ignore. While those raised in the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod accept the Bible as entirely God's Word, fully inspired by God Himself, Dr. Johnson opts for a more contextualized interpretation. He alludes to this in both his evolution-biased comments of chapter 2 (page 27) and in his explanation of the Bible's origins in chapter 5 (page 75).

Presenting himself as a theistic evolutionist (chapter 2) he finds in evolution evidence for the existence of God because of the improbable results of chance. Life's great complexities are compelling for him as evidence of a supreme being. This thought is not foreign to Scripture. Such passages as Psalm 19:1 and Hebrews 3:4 allude to this.

His evolutionary bias, however, runs contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture. The creation account and numerous references to God's method of creation permeate Scripture. Because Dr. Johnson uses a contexualized method of interpretation he would be inclined to dismiss accounts like the creation as a cultural myth rather than historical fact.

For Dr. Johnson, and others like him, the selective interpretation of Scripture is a convenient tool for getting past troublesome sections of Scripture that do not mesh with contemporary mores. This becomes particularly obvious when he never wrestles with the concept of sin and eternal damnation. He alludes to sin as a failure to take up the plight of the suffering but he attaches no eternal significance or consequence.

Concerning the sacrifices of Christ he misses the entire point. While he intellectualizes the work of Christ, he misses some of the most fundamental and simple teachings of the Bible that "he who knew no sin became sin for us." The supernatural nature of faith as a miracle of the Holy Spirit that g.htmls what otherwise would be rejected (Hebrews 11:1) is completely ignored and replaced with a logical realization that people out there need help and we should be helping them.

Dr. Johnson has very much adopted an intellectual perspective on Christianity. He talks of the sacrifices involved in improving the lot of others. Because it involves sacrifice and a dramatic change in lifestyle for someone like himself, he equates that with the essence of Christian faith. To this end he has seriously erred.

Dr. Johnson has overlooked the consistent theme of Scripture that sin is serious with eternal consequences. His view of Jesus more as an example of sacrificial living than as the sacrifice for sin puts him at odds with much of Scripture.

Reading Dr. Johnson's books causes one to consider the full impact of 1 Corinthians 1:18ff. As a gifted intellect Dr. Johnson seeks out a tangible logic or wisdom in Scripture which he sees manifested in the increasing humanitarian concern for others. As a result he quickly dismisses the "foolishness" of the Gospel which proclaims the only innocent man ever to have lived had to die to save all the guilty ones. Even God makes no bones about the illogic of His plan for salvation, yet it is the reality.

In summary, Dr. Johnson is critical of those who fail to connect faith with action. To that end his criticism would be just. He is critical of those who fail to be concerned about the plight of others. Again, to that end his criticism would be just. What he fails to do, however, is to rightly understand the miracle of faith, and its rightful result of being action (James 2:26). He makes the classic error where the focus is not the salvation we have in Christ but in the works we do for others. To this end he is wrong.

Readers would do well to heed Dr. Johnson's concern for the welfare of others. Take care, however, not to expect accurate theology that reflects the true essence of the Christian faith as it is revealed in the Bible. For that he has substituted his personal feelings and not the revelation of God.