Skip to main content

The Existence & Attributes of God: A Review

Finishing a long book can be so bittersweet.  If you're like me, you feel accomplished and edified, but you also feel a little sad.  If it was a good book, you may have grown accustomed to the sight and smell of its pages, and closing it for the final time feels like saying goodbye to an old friend.  This is particularly true when the book is as powerful as Stephen Charnock's classic work, The Existence & Attributes of God.  Today I am going to tell you why you, and every Christian, should read this book.

I remember being a young boy and seeing this book sitting on my father's bookshelf.  It seemed so daunting, so out of reach.  I wasn't much of a reader until I reached my 20s, so a book of 1130 pages seemed unattainable, especially a book of such depth and archaic language.  When my father recently discovered that he had an extra, unopened copy, I was quick to claim it.  I started working my way through it sometime last year.  I typically read at least two books at a time, so it can take me a year or more to read a book of this length, but it was a year well-spent.

Charnock's Attributes belies the common caricature of Puritan writings.  Sure, it is sometimes tedious and occasionally verbose, but this is typical of the Puritans, who strove for accuracy and thoroughness, both of which are vital when speaking about the nature of God.  Sure, it is replete with technical, theological discussions, but this does not keep Charnock from practical application, which should be the ultimate goal of all theological study.  Sure, some sections are more difficult to read than others, but, far from being dry or boring, Charnock's prose is poetic and celebrates the glory of our Creator and Redeemer.

So, here are three reasons why every Christian should read this book:

1) Charnock focuses his reader on God first, and man second.  So much of modern theology is really anthropology--it talks more about man than God.  Modern theological literature is dominated by self-help and inspirational works.  Many sermons are moral TED talks that tell us how valuable we are and what God can do for our lives.  In contrast to this pervasive anthro-centrism, we need to read more about God and less about ourselves.  In the Attributes practical application comes only after a thorough evaluation of the nature and works of God.  The reader is humbled and amazed and then told what his response should be as a result of who God is and what He has done.  This is, of course, the pattern found in the majority of the New Testament Epistles.

2) Charnock faithfully presents the God of the Bible.  Since the Fall mankind has been creating gods in his own image.  Unfortunately, this tendency is common in the modern Church and modern theological writings.  Instead of accepting, or simply rejecting, the God described in the Bible, we force God to conform to modern sensibilities, to modern notions of what a deity should be.  Charnock acquaints his readers with the God revealed in the Old and New Testaments, and then calls us to repent, believe, and worship.   

3) Charnock will expand your vocabulary and comprehension.  Many people are apprehensive about reading archaic language because they think they won't "get anything out of it."  The truth is quite the opposite, however.  Reading the Attributes will not only expand your soul, but also your mind and vocabulary.  It will teach you to think logically and methodically, and you may pick up a big word along the way.  I am not ashamed to admit that I read this work with my phone in hand, ready to look up unfamiliar words.  In a culture enslaved to TV and video games, we need to read literature that will challenge and expand our minds.

What I have said about this book holds true for many of the Puritans' writings.  If you don't read the Attributes, I would encourage you to seek out other classic works from the 16th and 17th centuries.  Our inability to read such literature is reflects more upon us than it does the Puritans.  We like to think that everyone was a simple rube before public education became normative, but Charnock was not writing for theologians; he was writing for the common man.  

If you feel like you couldn't possibly survive 1130 pages, I encourage you to read a section or two at a time over the next 10 or 20 years.  Each section reads like a mini book (or a full-sized book, depending a what kind of books you read).  Once you begin to uncover the depth that the Attributes has to offer, you may find it easier reading than you imagined.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, let me clarify what I mean when

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repent and be baptized...&quo

Why do you go to church on Sunday?

Why do you go to church on Sunday?  I would assume there are many reasons, but what is the primary reason that you get up on a cold, snowy Sunday morning and get your butt to church?  Further, why has the Church of Jesus Christ consistently gathered together on Sundays (among other days) for the last 2000 years? Throughout my 34 years of church attendance I would have proffered a variety of answers to that question.  As a child I'm sure I went to church because I had to, to see my cousins (who happened to be my best friends), to get bread and wine (weekly communion for the win), etc.  As my faith matured in adulthood these reasons remained, hopefully deepening, but to them were added concepts like rest and theological training. As I moved into Anglicanism I was struck by the deliberate focus on worship .  Why do Christians gather on Sunday morning?  To worship God!  Are teaching and fellowship important?  Absolutely!  Are they aspects of worship?  Certainly!  Is either the primary