My Top Ten Most Influential Books

I was asked to list my top ten most influential books and then give a brief discussion of why they are important to me.  I posted it to Facebook earlier but figured I would post it here as well.

1. Mere Christianity (C.S. Lewis): whereas the rest of the list is in "no particular order" this one is mentioned first for a reason. Shortly after reading this book I began to consider C.S. Lewis--whom I affectionately call "Jack" just as his friends did--my mentor. His writings, especially this book, brought about an entire paradigm shift in the way that I think about my relationship with God and others. I read this book, on average, about once every 6 months (hey, Scot MckNight reads a few pages everyday).

2. A Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life (William Law): Sadly, I have only read the abridged version (Dallas Willard recommends the unabridged), but what a glorious day it was when I read this book. I had nothing to read and flopped backwards in my chair in utter dismay when my eyes lit upon the thin cover of this book which had been sitting on my shelf for years, unread. "Well, I have nothing else" I said to myself. Would to God I had read this book earlier. For those of you who are fans of Crazy Love by Francis Chan, drop it and read this. This book is Crazy Love 300 years ago and, in my opinion, much meatier. He was the first writer to bust my chops about pride (I went forward shortly after reading it). C.S Lewis was the second with his chapter The Great Sin in Mere Christianity (see #1). Among the other things that were greatly helpful were his thoughts on prayer (especially fixed hour prayer with his recommended schedule) and his thoughts about the stewardship of our money. To paraphrase, "I would rather help a dishonest man than not help and honest man."

3. The Imitation of Christ (Thomas a Kempis): Again, I paraphrase, "On the last day it will not be demanded of us what we have read, but what we have done; not how well we have spoken, but how holily we have lived." And again, "I had rather feel contrition than be skilled in the definition thereof." Thomas of Kempen was a disciple in the first degree who knew what it was to LIVE like Christ rather than argue about the life of Christ. He begins with a quotation of John 8:12, "He who followeth me shall not walk in darkness" and then proceeds to describe that lighted path. He was a Catholic, so be prepared for that especially in the latter books which discuss the Eucharist. Regardless, this book should be read and treasured by all. There are many editions and translations. Mine sounds like the King James (and I like it that way), but you can purchase others which sound like the NIV (if that your taste).

4. The Intellecutal Life (A.G. Sertillanges): If I ever taught a class on The Preacher and His Work, this would likely be the text. Granted, he does not write for the "pastor" but for the intellectual (hence the title), Regardless, his advice on discipline is invaluable. He helped open my eyes to a holistic view of life and ministry. He has a chapter discussing the care of the body. He says, in essence, that those who live and think about prime reality and the great ideas must have their minds in top shape, but the mind is dependent upon the proper functioning of the brain and the brain is dependent upon the whole of the body. There is a reason that the eye doctor may ask about your diet. Our body is one living organism and it is foolish to think that the neglect of one part will not effect the other part. We need adequate sleep, appropriate diet, exercise, and recreation. To have a sharp mind you must have a keen body. There are many other jewels in the book, I have only mentioned the one. James Schall, who writes the preface, recommends this book to be on the desk of every serious student.

5. Orthodoxy (G.K. Chesterton): I discovered Chesterton through Jack. Chesterton was called The Apostle of Common Sense, and this book reflects that common sense. He was a top shelf intellectual and yet a common man. His writing is interesting and humorous. This book is a record of how he came to faith (hear "Catholicism"). But what grand contribution did he make to my thinking? Namely this: he helped me learn to reason; he sharpened my wits. Included in that is the fact that he validated paradox in my mind as an acceptable manner of speaking and of understanding certain things. Some who are products of Post-Enlightenment reductionist thought reject paradox outright (as I did in the past), but Chesterton has made paradox his bedfellow. This appreciation for paradox is, I think, necessary for every Christian. Our faith is founded upon the greatest paradox, Jesus Christ: the God-Man (I do not think that we take this paradox seriously or realize how "foolish" an idea the God-Man is). To reject paradox is to destroy the underpinning of prime reality.

6. The Spirit of the Disciplines (Dallas Willard): At this point I am glad that this list is my top 10 and not my top 5. I have often felt that this book belonged on my top 5 but I could not bring myself to "dethrone" a single book from the list, and so this book is relegated to #6. Do not expect a "How-To Manual" from this book. This is not "The Spiritual Disciplines" but "The SPIRIT of the Disciplines." This is more like a defense of their necessity and relevance. I use an example common to all within my tradition: "What about fasting?" And someone will inevitably object, "Well, it's a fine idea I suppose, but we have no command to fast." Willard's defense of fasting and indeed all of the disciplines is unrivaled (in my opinion). After reading this book I became convinced that the spiritual disciplines are not an option for the Christian (as many suggest in regard to fasting) but an absolute necessity. They are the thing which places us in the path of God's grace by which He changes us. To borrow from Richard Foster and his book on the disciples, we cannot make a seed grow, but we can prepare the soil. The disciplines prepare the soil of our hearts, God gives the increase. NOTE: I feel bound to mention Foster's book on disciplines, Celebration of Discipline. I have not included his book on my list (as no doubt Evan Kirby will--shout out), only for this reason: this book was not the game changer. In general one will not,practice the disciplines unless they are first convinced of their necessity, and that's what Willard's work does. However, having been convinced of their vital nature, one will then want to know how to practice them. This is not provided by Willard's work; it is by Foster. If one needs guidance through the disciplines and the how-to's, Celebration of Discipline is the book to read. Indeed. Celebration of Discipline is on Christianity Today's Top 100 Books of the Century (it's #8, along with Mere Christianity #1 and Orthodoxy #6), and Spirit of the Disciplines is not. However, for me, my choice still stands.

7. The Mission of God (Christopher Wright): I have been searching for The Thing, the one thing that ties the whole Bible together. I had intimations early on, and I was helped by N.T. Wright, but it was Christopher Wright (no relation) that gave it to me in The Mission of God. The subtitle of the book is even "Unlocking the Bible's Grand Narrative." I am still in the process of reading the book, but it has already delivered (for me) on its promise. It is a weighty book and, at times, technical, but it will benefit those who are manly enough to tackle it. It discusses "mission" and what it means. Most often when we speak of "mission" or "missions" we have in mind what we do; Wright says that mission is what God is doing; we are swept up in His story. NOTE: I think that N.T. Wright probably could have provided me with a framework for understanding the whole Bible as well, but since I have not read his Christian Origins series yet I cannot say for sure.

8. The Practice of the Presence of God (Brother Lawrence): I never thought I would hear anyone say "I do not care whether I am saved or lost," but Brother Lawrence did. His point was not that eternal destiny is unimportant, but that it was not his motivation. Lawrence served God for God's sake, not for his own sake. He was motivated by love for God, not by the pursuit of blessing. He "sought God' face and not His hand." For me this was revolutionary. Though the idea is present in many of Lewis' writings (see #1, as well as The Great Divorce) and Thomas a Kempis (see #3) has a great section about "mercenary Christians," what Dallas Willard calls "Vampire Christians" (see The Divine Conspiracy), it was brother Lawrence who somehow brought this idea home. Ever since reading this book I have tried to forget about blessing and to think more about God; I have tried to serve Him and be like Him because He is worth it, not because I'm afraid of what will happen if I don't.

9. Who Is My Brother? (F. LaGard Smith): I struggle to know what to say about this book, perhaps because what it means to me now and in the past 2 years of my life is intensely personal. Simply put, and in the most literal way possible, I would not be where I am today if it were not for this book. This should be required reading for everyone within the Restoration tradition (incidentally, it is required at the Sunset International Bible Institute). Where I come from in the south east the circles of fellowship are scarily narrow. Christ will not be won for the world so long as He has no place in the church, and I am afraid there are many churches who have so little of the spirit of Christ in them that I would prefer they not name themselves "churches of Christ." So what do I say about this book? Only that I wish it enjoyed a wider audience and even more adherents.

10. How to Read a Book (Mortimer J. Adler): if you need a book on hermeneutics, put down Virkler (though he's worth it) and pick up Adler (I also highly recommend Fee [How to Read the Bible for All It's Worth] and F. LaGard Smith [Cultural Church]). This book changed the way I read forever. Once I was afraid to mark in my books, even my Bible, now every book I read is annotated (thanks to Adler). He helped me understand, not only how to read a book, but how to determine which books are worth reading (an indispensable skill for bibliophiles who know how expensive books an be). All of this considered, his most important contribution was that he helped me learn to read the Bible. Previously I had approached the whole of it as Law and therefore I constantly searched for rules; Adler helped me learn to read the Bible as Story (on this I also recommend Leland Ryken's Word's of Delight).

A Hellish Story

                The stories of Jesus are often misunderstood and reduced to mere “earthly stories with a heavenly meaning.”  Not the least of these is the Rich Man and Lazarus.  This, however, is decidedly not an “earthly story with a heavenly meaning.”  It is not even, as N.T. Wright describes some of Jesus’ stories in his book Simply Jesus, “a heavenly story with an earthly meaning.”  It is indeed a “hellish story.”  Each one should take care lest he miss what the Son of Man has to say to our generation.

                I can only speak for my tradition, but most often this story is seen as nothing more than a proof text carried around in our back pockets like a familiar hanky which we believe gives “Jesus’ answer” to the question, “Where do we go when we die?”  But I’m getting ahead of myself.  First we usually concern ourselves with whether or not this story “actually happened” or whether it is “just a parable.”  For our present discussion, let us set both of these things aside.  Where we go when we die is a much more difficult topic than many care to admit, and whether the story is a parable or not is irrelevant.  Jesus’ point remains the same.  We must ask ourselves, “What did Jesus mean?”  and “Why did he tell the story in the first place?”

                Of the many difficulties reading Jesus stories, we will name only two.  First, many of us misunderstand how Jesus used them. After the style of Nathan (cf. 2 Samuel 12:1-14), they were often prophetic judgments against the wicked.  A few examples will suffice.  After telling his Parable of the Tenants the audience knew very well about whom he spoke.  “When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them” (Matthew 21:45; cf. Mark 12:12).  Even on occasions where it is not explicitly stated that the parable was directed against his audience the fact remains too obvious to miss.  After his Parable of the Two Sons in the same chapter (Matthew 21:28-32) Jesus speaks directly to his audience.  The you is emphatic.  “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you.  For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him.  And even when you saw it, you did not afterward change your minds and believe him” (vv. 31, 32).  And who can doubt whether or not the Pharisees felt condemned by Jesus’ image of the elder brother in Luke 15?  This was Jesus’ way.  Therefore, when we arrive at the following chapter we should not think that he sets aside this habit to tell an unrelated and esoteric story about “where we go when we die.” 

                Second, we have a habit, not only with Jesus’ stories but with all of scripture, of ignoring context.  This is perhaps most evident in our treatment of the gospels.  The gospel accounts’ anachronistic order presents difficulties, but it also presents us with it a very important point which should not be overlooked.  If the gospels are not in chronological order then the writers are not merely penning history “as it happened”; they are making conscious decisions about when they will record which stories and where.  In this way the gospels are more like art than history.  The gospels are carefully crafted compendiums of events in the life of Christ.  Accepting this, attention should be paid to the order of the things even though they are out of order.  It is no coincidence that just verses before a story about a rich man Luke adds this editorial aside, “The Pharisees (who were lovers of money) heard all these things, and they ridiculed him” (16:14).  Nor is the placement of Jesus’ response an accident.  “You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts.  For what is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of God” (16:15).  What is more exalted among men than riches?  Still yet, what is more abominable in the sight of God than the love of money (Luke 18:24, 25)?  Then, with seemingly no connection at all, Luke turns to the Law and the Prophets, John, the gospel, and in an even more abrupt change of topic, divorce and remarriage.  This rapid change is startling to readers, but we must remember that Luke is an artist at work.  Like an impressionist painting, it can only be appreciated if we take a step back and look at the whole picture.  Otherwise we see oddly placed globs of paint; otherwise we turn these sections into pithy sayings out of context.  But these rapidly shifting colors are from the same palette the Master uses to paint what we call The Rich Man and Lazarus. 

                Once again, here are the colors: the Law and the Prophets, John, the gospel, divorce and remarriage.  First: the Law and the Prophets and John.  Both pointed beyond themselves to something else; both of these also found themselves in opposition to Jesus’ target audience, the Pharisees (Luke 3:1-9; Matthew 3:1-10).  Incidentally, John’s preaching also had something to say about the love of money.  “Soldiers also asked him, ‘And we, what shall we do?’  And he said to them, ‘Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.’” (Luke 3:14).  Tellingly, Luke, who alone records The Rich Man and Lazarus, is also the only writer who includes this detail of John’s preaching or that the Pharisees were, in so many words, lovers of money.

Second:  the gospel.  The gospel is the announcement that the thing, or the person, to which the Law and the Prophets, indeed John himself, pointed has actually arrived (cf. Luke 4:21).  All that they said comes to a head in Jesus (cf. Luke 24:27, 44), and the Law is a faithful guide.  Indeed, “it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void” (Luke 16:17). 

Third: divorce and remarriage (16:18).  This seems to us an abrupt change but really Jesus is continuing the thought from verse 17.  Jesus’ coming, which was prophesied by the Law and the Prophets, preached by John, and proclaimed in the gospel, was not to “abolish the Law” but to “fulfill” it, “not a dot” will pass away (Matthew 5:17, 18).  This is parallel to Luke 16:17.  There, as here, the statement is very shortly followed by talk of divorce (Matthew 5:27-32).  His point in both places is the same: the Law of Moses is brought to fulfillment/perfection in Jesus’ ministry and teaching, including the laws for divorce and remarriage.  Jesus’ kingdom is not just about inner piety, forgiveness, or a new sense of God’s presence.  His kingdom encompasses everything, things like politics and ethics, even mundane things like a meal with the family, games, and sex.  And, as we are about to see, money.

                With these things taken together—Jesus’ prophetic use of parables, the Law as a faithful guide, and the context set against “lovers of money”—it is evident that The Rich Man and Lazarus had a target audience and Christ has impeccable aim.  “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day.  At his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table.  Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores” (16:19-21).  Here’s the picture: a rich man eats all he wants every day.  Lazarus, a poor man, has no food.  All he wants are the crumbs from the rich man’s table but that man despises the poor and will not share his excess.  Got it?  Good. 
               Now comes the great reversal (as is typical of Jesus’ stories).  The poor man gets all he wants to eat and the rich man does not even have a drop of water.  “The poor man died and was carried by angels to Abraham’s bosom.  The rich man also died and was buried” (16:22).  The idea of being in Abraham’s bosom is lost on some Westerner’s.  Here it indicates two things: 1. eating a meal and 2. eating that meal at the place of honor, the right hand of the host, in his very bosom (cf. Matthew 8:11; John 13:23).  The fate of the rich man was not so.  “And in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.  And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame’” (16: 23, 24).  The rich man ironically calls Abraham “Father.”  Shouldn’t a son of Abraham be at Abraham’s banquet?  Do not miss this.  It was the Pharisees which were so quick to remind Jesus, as well as John, that they were sons of Abraham (cf. Matthew 3:9; John 8:33).  Jesus’ aim is right on target.  He continues his story.  Abraham informs the rich man that the state of things cannot be changed (16:25, 26).  The rich man has chosen his way; he has made his bed and now he must lie in it.  “Fair enough,” so the rich man thinks, “there may still be hope for my brothers.”  “And he said, Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house—for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.  But Abraham said, They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’  And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.  He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead” (16:27-31). 
               Here is where our globs of paint come together.  We can imagine what Lazarus might say if he were to go to the rich man’s brothers.  “I sat at your brother’s gate every day and begged for his scraps, yet he would not hear.  Now he is tormented without so much as a drop to drink and I am feasting with Abraham.  Beware lest you see the same fate.”  But Abraham says, “They have Moses and the Prophets for that.”  The prophets had carried Lazarus’ message ahead of him (Deuteronomy 15; Amos 4).  “You misunderstand me,” says the rich man, “I know they, like me, have ignored the Law but if someone rises from the dead surely they will listen to him.”  “No,” says Abraham, “they won’t.”  Jesus prefaced this parable by saying that the Law and the prophets which John preached pointed to him (Luke 24:44-46).  That Law is a trustworthy guide which shall not pass away.  Not even a dot.  Marriage, money, Jesus, resurrection, and all besides.  It’s in there.  Jesus now puts this message in the mouth of Abraham.  It is a message that the Pharisees would hear loud and clear.  They would have known what Jesus was saying and why.  They were lovers of money and had rejected the poor.  They were warned by the Law and the Prophets that mistreating the poor would have disastrous consequences, but they would not hear.  One greater than Moses brought the same message.  Still they would not hear.  But surely, if that one were to die and be resurrected (as Jesus certainly would be), surely then they would listen to the message?  But they would not.  If they will not trust Moses, they will not believe in Christ though he be raised from the dead.  Jesus says as much on other occasions.  “If you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me.  But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?” (John 5:46, 47).  The Pharisees justified their love of money before men (Luke 16:15a; cf. also Matthew 15:3-6), and though they stood condemned by Moses, nothing, not even resurrection, could change their minds.  But God knows their hearts.  They are abominable in his sight (Luke 16:15b). 

`               The Pharisees, we can be sure, did not miss what Jesus was saying and neither should we.  The poor are everywhere and everywhere ignored.  We may not be able to give clean drinking water to the hundreds of thousands who live without it, but why can we not spare a bottle for the fellow on the corner?  We may have mouths to feed already, but why neglect the many who have no parents to feed them?  We should remember that pure religion cares for these who cannot care for themselves (cf. James 1:27).  Hopefully, Christians have begun to nod their heads.  But we must be careful.  We may be in the company of the Pharisees, nodding our heads in agreement while “justifying ourselves before men” as to why we needed that $20 more than the man on the street.  The Pharisees claimed to accept the Law, but they rejected the Christ.  Many of us claim to accept Christ, and yet we reject the Law.  “How dare you, sir!” someone may say, “I am a Christian!”  Yes, I know.  And sadly, nothing, not even the resurrection of Christ has convinced us to take the Law seriously.  “Whoever oppresses a poor man insults his Maker” (Proverbs 14:31).