Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “Biblical Authority After Babel: Retrieving the Solas in the Spirit of Mere Protestant Christianity” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

Biblical Authority After Babel: Retrieving the Solas in the Spirit of Mere Protestant Christianity

Kevin J. Vanhoozer

4.19 · Rating details · 182 ratings · 40 reviews

How the Five Solas Can Renew Biblical Interpretation

In recent years, notable scholars have argued that the Protestant Reformation unleashed interpretive anarchy on the church. Is it time to consider the Reformation to be a 500-year experiment gone wrong?

World-renowned evangelical theologian Kevin Vanhoozer thinks not. While he sees recent critiques as legitimate, he argues ...more

Get A Copy

Hardcover, 269 pages

Published October 18th 2016 by Brazos Press

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Biblical Authority After Babel, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Biblical Authority After Babel

Lists with This Book

Biblical Authority After Babel by Kevin J. Vanhoozer

Making Sense of God by Timothy J. Keller

Christianity Today’s 2017 Book Awards

13 books — 4 voters

The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Mark A. Noll

Make Christianity Smart Again

107 books — 5 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 4.19 ·

Rating details

· 182 ratings · 40 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of Biblical Authority After Babel: Retrieving the Solas in the Spirit of Mere Protestant Christianity

Jun 10, 2018 Douglas Wilson rated it really liked it

Shelves: theology

Really enjoyed the thesis of this meaty book. And when I say "meaty" I am talking about a thick-cut sirloin, and not talking about any watered down sloppy joes.

The Reformation was not responsible for unleashing interpretive anarchy into the world, and furthermore, on top of that, a "mere Protestant" approach to the issues revolving around the five solas is the only way out. This is a worthwhile book. ...more

flag 25 likes · Like · see review

Jun 22, 2017 David Goetz rated it really liked it

Shelves: dogmatics

4.5 stars.

Another solid effort from KV. See this review for some helpful tables that show the coherence of Vanhoozer's argument. He tries to show, through a "retrieval" of the five solas, that the Protestant Reformation did not cause secularization, skepticism, or schism, at least not necessarily or in a way that undermines the Reformation itself. More specifically, he tries to show that the Reformation did not introduce a necessary and vicious "pervasive interpretive pluralism" (17)

Put positiv ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Aug 11, 2017 Bob O'bannon rated it liked it

Reading the introduction of this book got me very excited about exploring a common and very good question -- hasn't Protestantism unleashed a kind of interpretive chaos when it comes to understanding the Bible? How else do we explain that there are apparently 38,000 Protestant denominations? The phrase that Vanhoozer has coined to describe this phenomenon is "pervasive interpretive pluralism." Problem is, when I got done with the book, I still wasn't sure exactly what is Vanhoozer's proposed sol Reading the introduction of this book got me very excited about exploring a common and very good question -- hasn't Protestantism unleashed a kind of interpretive chaos when it comes to understanding the Bible? How else do we explain that there are apparently 38,000 Protestant denominations? The phrase that Vanhoozer has coined to describe this phenomenon is "pervasive interpretive pluralism." Problem is, when I got done with the book, I still wasn't sure exactly what is Vanhoozer's proposed solution.

Part of the problem undoubtedly is my own inability to keep up with Vanhoozer's intellect (phrases like "unitive interpretive plurality" and "creaturely social coefficient" are generously spread throughout the book). But another problem is a simple lack of clarity – the writing here is wordy, long-winded and repetitive. This book could have been half as long as it is.

Nevertheless, there are plenty of brilliant insights to savor here. Vanhoozer suggests that Protestantism is not an obstacle to Christian unity, but actually the way forward. Just as we have four Gospels that testify to the life of Jesus, so do we need various traditions, humbly working to understand the Bible throughout church history, to express the fullness of the Gospel's meaning. Unity in the church will not come by denying the distinctives of denominations, but only by the "critical appropriation and sharing of them." (203). This requires a certain humility (not being an "extreme epistemic egoist") in order to recognize that the "best Protestants are catholic Protestants – people centered on the Gospel but also alert to how the Gospel has been faithfully received across cultures and centuries." (199)

In the abstract this all sounds good, but I was left wondering – how in the world do we get Christians from different denominations together to dialogue and listen to one another? Vanhoozer wishes for "table fellowship" among different traditions, and suggests "canonical conferences" as a way of getting Christians together to "form consensus about what the Bible means." (231). Again, a good idea, but this book could have been so much more useful if some practical suggestions were offered about how this might work. Perhaps that will fall to someone else concerned about the alleged anarchy among Protestant Bible interpreters. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

May 13, 2017 Alex Stroshine rated it really liked it

Shelves: theology

Approaching and in this, the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation, many books have been released that assess the religious revolution/reclamation ushered in by the monk from Eisleben. Brad S. Gregory speaks of Protestantism's "unintended reformation" that inadvertently secularized Western culture. Sociologist Christian Smith has pointed out the impossibility of biblicism (both Gregory and Smith are converts to Roman Catholicism). Even Protestant scholars such as Hans Boersma and Peter Approaching and in this, the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation, many books have been released that assess the religious revolution/reclamation ushered in by the monk from Eisleben. Brad S. Gregory speaks of Protestantism's "unintended reformation" that inadvertently secularized Western culture. Sociologist Christian Smith has pointed out the impossibility of biblicism (both Gregory and Smith are converts to Roman Catholicism). Even Protestant scholars such as Hans Boersma and Peter Leithart have lamented the negative consequences of the Reformation, such as sacramental disenchantment. Of course, the medieval Church was beset with its own problems, even anarchy, given the Avignon papacy and the fact that many priests were poorly educated for their pastoral office.

Into this disputation, Kevin J. Vanhoozer offers "Biblical Authority After Babel: Retrieving the Solas in the Spirit of Mere Protestant Christianity" (catch your breath!). As other reviewers have noted, while Vanhoozer laces his book with helpful metaphors and clever quips (in the conclusion he speaks of "Evangel Way" which contains a "seven-story mansion" which welcomes neighbours to "come home" - a nod to both Thomas Merton and Scott Hahn?), he is also guilty of including a lot of clunky jargon (I wish theologians would include glossaries in their books that would provide quick references to key terms).

Vanhoozer contends that the "five solas" of the Reformation - grace alone, faith alone, Scripture alone, in Christ alone, and for the glory of God alone - should be recovered as foundational keystones that can provide a basis for unity in diversity, particularly in biblical interpretation and authority and he spends a chapter examining each sola. Vanhoozer admits that biblicism and interpretive pluralism is a problem, but he asserts that there is a substantial difference between "a naive and a critical biblicism, between a pervasive interpretive pluralism, on the one hand, and a unitive interpretive plurality, on the other" (p. 17). Like Henri de Lubac, Yves Congar, and other Catholic theologians associated with the "nouvelle théologie" who sought to return to the Bible and early Church fathers, Vanhoozer wants Protestants to take up a "ressourcement" of the five solas of the Reformation. Vanhoozer states "the main purpose of retrieval is the revitalization of biblical interpretation, theology, and the church today. To retrieve is to look back creatively in order to move forward faithfully. In particular, what needs to be retrieved is the Reformers' vision for catholic unity under canonical authority, and also their strategy for making this vision visible through table talk: conciliar deliberation around not simply a conference table but a Communion table" (Amen!, p. 24). Vanhoozer sees Martin Luther as a prime model for this since he “translated and contextualized the gospel – which is to say, RETRIEVED it – into the vernacular language and cultural situation of his day. Theology is always missiological to the extent that the search for understanding requires us to speak that understanding into new contexts. The Reformation thus appears in this light as a missiological retrieval of the gospel as set forth in the original languages of the Bible” (“Ad fontes!,” p. 24-25).

Vanhoozer’s argument is complex, though compelling, warranting (catholic) discussion. Although at the beginning of each chapter he tries to answer critics, there were times it seemed he could have interacted more with Roman Catholic sources, particularly on tradition. I do not think there is a convincing biblical basis for the veneration of Mary or invocation of the saints, but Roman Catholics would insist these tenets are backed up by the Bible. However, in the chapter on grace alone, Vanhoozer does a masterful job of wading into the medieval scholastic debate about grace vs. nature and vindicating the Reformation against charges it led to secularization. Vanhoozer states “Scholastics deployed the concept of pure nature to counter the Protestant teaching about the total depravity of fallen human nature. Late medieval/early modern scholastic commentators on Aquinas tended to follow Cajetan, insisting that fallen human nature retained at least the capacity to receive and cooperate with grace” (p. 47). I need to contemplate this more; I DO believe in total depravity, but at the same time, as an Arminian, I believe God’s prevenient grace prepares us to accept Christ. Vanhoozer points out that de Lubac in fact was the first to call “attention to the trajectory that led from pure self-enclosed nature to modern secularism. This complicates Brad Gregory’s account, discussed above, which pins the blame for secularization on the Reformation…When nature is viewed as pure or autonomous, grace becomes ontologically ‘second order,’ and the result is what Karl Barth rightly described as the ‘secular misery’ of modern theology” (p. 47). In other words, if one can be in right relationship with God via one’s “pure nature,” then one does not need the supernatural infusion of grace and if you don’t need grace then do you even need God or the Cross? Vanhoozer presents the Reformer’s stance as “the gospel is the good news that men and women can be adopted as children of God, not because human nature has by grace been ‘elevated,’ but because human sinners (persons) have by grace been forgiven” (p. 49).

I’ve dwelt a bit on the chapter on grace alone, but others have written excellent reviews already that discuss the chapters on the other solas. Briefly, Vanhoozer insists that “sola Scriptura” does not mean an individualized reading of the Bible but interpretation in the context of the catholic Church. Each local church is “wholly a church” but NOT “the whole Church.”

In order to facilitate genuine catholicity and ecumenical fellowship, Vanhoozer proposes three levels of dogmatic ranking. The first is “formulations of revealed biblical truth that the whole church considers authoritative” such as Jesus’ bodily resurrection and the Trinity (p. 205). It is what is essential for every Christian, everywhere, to believe. The second level also contains important doctrines, but these are more the “how” such as “How does Jesus’ death on the cross save sinners? How are the bread and the wine Jesus’s body and blood?” (p. 206). Lastly, level three doctrines are ones that again, are important, but not as vital to catholicity, such as the precise nature of eschatology. I did wonder as to where Vanhoozer would place important questions of theological anthropology such as women’s ordination and sexual morality?

Vanhoozer makes a particularly powerful, beautiful, and biblical, conclusion. His task throughout the book has been to counter the charge that the Reformation loosed interpretive anarchy upon the Church. Rather than Babel, the Reformation ushered in Pentecost. Vanhoozer explains:

“It is well known that Pentecost reverses Babel. The people who built the tower of Babel sought to make a name, and a unity, for themselves. At Pentecost, God builds his temple, uniting people in Christ. Unity – interpretive agreement and mutual understanding – is, it would appear, something that only God can accomplish. And accomplish it he does, but not in the way we might have expected. Although onlookers thought that the believers who received the Spirit at Pentecost were babbling (Acts 2:13), in fact they were speaking intelligibly in several languages (Acts 2:8-11). Note well: they were all saying the same thing (testifying about Jesus) in different languages. It takes a thousand tongues to say and sing our great Redeemer’s praise.

Protestant evangelicalism evidences a Pentecostal plurality: the various Protestant streams testify to Jesus in their own vocabularies, and it takes many languages (i.e. interpretive traditions) to minister the meaning of God’s Word and the fullness of Christ. As the body is made up of many members, so many interpretations may be needed to do justice to the body of the biblical text. Why else are there four Gospels, but that the one story of Jesus was too rich to be told from one perspective only? Could it be that the various Protestant traditions function similarly as witnesses who testify to the same Jesus from different situations and perspectives?" (p. 223)

In the end, Vanhoozer favours catholicity under the five solas, canonical authority, and conciliarism. One glaring omission (which he admits), is his neglect of Eastern Orthodoxy (which he admits), which IS largely conciliar as opposed to Roman Catholicism under the papacy (though some in the Roman Catholic hierarchy have favoured conciliarism, especially during the late medieval period and the Great Western Schism).

Though an important clarion call at the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, one also wonders how realistic such “mere Protestant Christianity” is? Protestants do enjoy a great deal of fellowship (besides the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, most denominations allow Protestants of different denominations to feast at the Lord’s Table), evidenced by parachurch organizations and ministries such as InterVarsity, but at the same time, there are sharp divisions when it comes to issues such as baptism, women’s ordination, church polity, and spiritual gifts. Will the Gospel Coalition ever publish articles affirming women's ordination (I'd consider this a third-level doctrine) or Arminianism? One suggestion Vanhoozer makes, recovered from 16th century Geneva, would be for pastors to meet weekly at Scripture conferences in order to dialogue and share with one another (p. 208). While not diluting denominational distinctives, I think there is great wealth in this ecclesial coming together. I think Vanhoozer would agree with John G. Stackhouse’s reflection:

“Beyond the family or particular Christian tradition, how much effort do we make to consider what the Mennonites or the Episcopalians, the Baptists or the Pentecostals, the Methodists or the Presbyterians have to say to the rest of us out of their DIFFERENCES, as well as out of the affirmation in common with other Christians? As I suggested earlier, our patterns of ecumenicity tend to bracket out our differences rather than to celebrate and capitalize upon them. Finding common ground has been the necessary first step in ecumenical relations and activity. But the next step is to acknowledge and enjoy what God has done elsewhere in the Body of Christ. And if at the congregational level we are willing to say, 'I can't do everything myself, for I am an ear: I must consult with a hand or an eye on this matter,' I suggest that we do the same among whole traditions. If we do not regularly and programmatically consult with each other, we are tacitly claiming that we have no need of each other, and that all the truth, beauty, and goodness we need has been vouchsafed to us by God already. Not only is such an attitude problematic in terms of our flourishing, as I have asserted, but in this context now we must recognize how useless a picture this presents to the rest of society. Baptists, Presbyterians, and Roman Catholics failing to celebrate diversity provide no positive examples to societies trying to understand how to celebrate diversity on larger scales.” ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

May 26, 2019 Jean-Mikhaël rated it it was amazing

How the solas of the reformation explain the real authority and unity of the church instead of being the foundations of a schismatic and subjective church (even world). That’s the question Vanhoozer brilliantly answers.
This is a great book ! Well written, with an excellent interaction with his sources.

I’m proud te be protestant.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Feb 22, 2017 Drew rated it liked it

Shelves: bible

Impressively researched but unconvincing. Like Leithart, Vanhoozer pretends at offering a generic Protestant view but in reality it is only inclusive of those directly descended from Luther and Calvin. Full review here: http://drewbmcintyre.com/2017/02/22/b... ...more

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Jan 12, 2017 Scott rated it it was amazing

Vanhoozer doing the solas in his own creative, idiosyncratic way. Review forthcoming.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Mar 06, 2017 Bob rated it really liked it

Shelves: christian-theology

Summary: A proposal that the five Solas of "mere Protestant Christianity" provide a framework to check the interpretive anarchy for which Protestant Christianity is criticized.

One of the most serious criticisms of post-Reformation Protestant Christianity is that it unleashed a kind of interpretive anarchy, a confusing of the languages similar to what happened after the tower of Babel incident in scripture. In fact, one of the major appeals of Roman Catholic Christianity is that in the Pope and t ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Aug 29, 2016 Hobart rated it really liked it

Shelves: 2016-reads

With the 500th Anniversary of the Protestant Reformation's accidental start coming up next year, we'll be seeing a lot of books celebrating and/or critiquing the movement (more than usual, that is). This is one of the former, but done mostly in the way of a defense against some of the most common critiques. There's a very real sense in which I'm not qualified to discuss this book -- and I'm really looking forward to reading reviews from those who are. But, there's another sense in which I am -- ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jan 01, 2017 Wesley rated it liked it

Shelves: bibliology

I had high expectations for this book. Indeed, some of its parts were excellent. However, I disappointed at the overall argument Dr. Vanhoozer was attempting to defend. His arguments defending the 35,000+ Protestant denominations include pointing out at one historical moment, there were three competing claims to the papacy. When he severely downplays the problem with fissiparousness that has become Protestant Christianity, his following points ring hollow. For instance, by invoking the spiritual ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Feb 10, 2018 Eric rated it it was amazing

Recommends it for: Bible study teachers

Recommended to Eric by: Brandon Wolfram

This is the Kevin J. Vanhoozer book people should read. In a defense of the five solas, and the right of private interpretation even in the face of interpretive chaos, Vanhoozer puts forth a cogent, sustained argument that the Church, by and through its Spirit appointed prophets, pastors and teachers has been lead into all truth and has the authority and duty to interpret scripture, over time, for the Church universal. Is There a Meaning in This Text?: the Bible, the Reader, and the Morality of This is the Kevin J. Vanhoozer book people should read. In a defense of the five solas, and the right of private interpretation even in the face of interpretive chaos, Vanhoozer puts forth a cogent, sustained argument that the Church, by and through its Spirit appointed prophets, pastors and teachers has been lead into all truth and has the authority and duty to interpret scripture, over time, for the Church universal. Is There a Meaning in This Text?: the Bible, the Reader, and the Morality of Literary Knowledge is a deeper book, but aimed at linguists and language philosophers. Missing are the tropes within tropes of Vanhoozer's writing style elsewhere. Biblical Authority after Babel is not polemical as such, but is focused on making a series of concrete points, some of which are deemed so central to the Christian faith and confession as to be above reexamination (such as the doctrines espoused in the Nicene Creed).
The Church has delegated authority from Christ to proclaim the gospel and interpret the Word. Each believer is obligated to measure what is taught against the scriptures (as did the Bereans), but each believer is not free to autonomously decide for themselves that the Word means. All interpretation and understanding must be done inside the magisterium of the Word (Jesus) by and through the Spirit (not the Church in the Roman sense, for which see Magisterium), conveyed to the Church, over time and place (that is, white guys in the West, no matter how smart and trained, do not have the final say, but likewise, being white and Western does not mean they are wrong; same for any body of Christians over time and in different places and local cultures). Churches, councils, fathers, teachers, academics may all contribute to the correct understanding of the Word, but all are fallible and subject to correction over time. Also, the Word must be interpreted for new cultural realities, but since at base nothing is new, interpretation should in fact just rearticulated to address the surface particulars as they present themselves.
Vanhoozer proposes a stronger (more traditional) ecclesiology to reign in, so to speak, unbridled Biblical interpretation. Authority to interpret is not a Diktat from any one Church, local or denominational, but arises from a pattern of authority of prior Church interpretations, councils, fathers of the Church, all measured against the Word, under the guidance and power of the Spirit. But, in today's environment in the West, that proposal will create stress.
A final interesting point (at least to this reader) is Vanhoozer's position that their are only two Churches recognized in the New Testament. One is the Church universal (my term), consisting of all believers over all time, to be redeemed in the Second Coming as the bride of Christ. The other is the stand alone local church, under its own pastoral/elder/teacher leadership. Denominations are not prohibited by the New Testament and may be useful, but they are not mandated or recognized either. If Vanhoozer is correct, then any local church, under leadership selected by the Spirit, and recognized (ordained) by the local church can carry out the Great Commission, or at least its part of it. Having lived through the self-immolation of the Southern Baptists, accepting the stand alone local church as the correct expression of "Church" sees less farfetched than it would have in 1980. Philip Schaff made a parallel point when he said the New Testament description of the "Church" was vague enough to support either congregational or hierarchical organization ( denominationalism was not claimed to be in the New Testament), so long as believers followed the goals of the Church set forth in the New Testament, under leadership comporting with guidelines set out in the New Testament. ...more

flag Like · see review

Sep 10, 2018 Aaron Cheng rated it really liked it

In summary, Vanhoozer did a great job in casting a vision of unity – churches coming together in faith, to dialogue, to share, holding fast to the gospel and to one another. The BAAB is indeed a timely book for today schismatic church. He sheds light to this depressing situation not by offering us something new that we have to learn, but he is redirecting us to look back to the Reformation – the supposedly culprit to today’s gloomy situation, and to rediscover again the good old gems of the Refo ...more

flag Like · see review

Dec 08, 2018 Brian Thatcher rated it really liked it

It was good. I think all people who self-identify as Protestants or evangelicals should read this. The most important aspect was how biblical authority isn’t just individuals running wild with their own ideas. Tradition matters. Scholarship matters. History matters. Teachers and pastors matter. Interpretive communities matter.

Vanhoozer admitted he might be betraying people with his last chapter where he calls for evangelicals to be the main interpretive community when it combines powers with Pr ...more

flag Like · see review

Sep 03, 2018 Christopher Hall rated it did not like it

This is a book that should not be tossed aside lightly — instead, it should be hurled with great force! In fairness, I am tempted to give it 2 stars because the introduction raised some great questions. However, the rest of the book gave terrible answers, some were not even answered at all. E.g., it was never answered how to decide truth when different denominations contradicted each other. Instead, he seemed to relate as if it were all various facets of truth, different emphases. Also, this boo ...more

flag Like · see review

Jan 22, 2018 Matt Crawford rated it it was amazing

I cannot say enough good things about this book. My only issue with the book is that I had not read it sooner. Have a pen and highlighter handy. I take notes in the margin but if you don't then have a notepad handy as well. There is something to highlight or mark up on every single page. Vanhoozer takes the solas as they relate to one another, expounding on Sola Scriptura. He sees a parallel between the escape from Roman selfishness of the text and the pluralism of today's society. Sola Scriputr ...more

flag Like · see review

May 15, 2019 Samuel Kassing rated it it was amazing

This is not a lay level book. I thought it was going in but was quickly disillusioned of that notion.

Now, with that said this was an excellent work. Vanhoozer shows how the Solas together form a robust catholicity that Protestants shouldn’t be ashamed of and should rejoice in! The evangelical gospel is beautiful.

He ably demonstrates how Protestant and Evangelical go hand in hand, and why the reformation didn’t loose interpretive chaos on the church.

If you’re a Protestant thinking about swimming ...more

flag Like · see review

Jan 08, 2018 Douglas Fyfe rated it really liked it

Shelves: theology-scholarly

I quite enjoyed this book. I also attended the lectures which were a precursor to this book and was pleasantly surprised to see a lot of humour come through into the book, making it an enjoyable read despite being quite thorough in places.
Ultimately the question is do Protestants have any authority to interpret the Bible without a Magesterium?, and the five solas are used to answer that.
So a good read, good length chapters, and very engaging.

flag Like · see review

Jul 11, 2018 Ryan rated it really liked it

Love this book! Dr. Vanhoozer provides an engaging analysis of Protestantism and shows that it is not the cause of a Babel of biblical interpretations by arguing that the five solas of the Reformations—and a robust affirmation of the doctrine of the Church—serve as guard posts for mere Protestantism. I hope all Protestants will read this book and deal with the suggestions that Dr. Vanhoozer has humbly offered.

flag Like · see review

May 10, 2017 John Newton rated it liked it

I think I agree with the author’s basic argument: that true Protestantism was never intended to be individualistic (as it so often is today) but conciliar in nature. That being said, I found the title somewhat opaque, and the content of the chapters did not seem to match their headings. Also, I had never been aware previously of five “solas”.

flag Like · see review

Oct 17, 2017 Matt Pitts rated it really liked it

Shelves: theology, reformation

This is not your typical book on the solas. It will require your full attention (and a fair amount of imagination), but will richly repay the effort. Vanhoozer has given a resounding answer to the accusation that the Reformation has condemned us to radical interpretive individualism that needs to be heard by any who think Protestant unity is nothing more than a wish upon a star.

flag Like · see review

May 11, 2019 Ian Howard rated it it was amazing

Superb - I love the way Vanhoozer approaches theology, I don't agree with everything he proposes, but he writes in a way that forces me to rethink many of my own assumptions and conclusions in ways I find helpful - he also has a sense of humour that helps to lighten even the most dense of theological arguments. ...more

flag Like · see review

Sep 11, 2020 Liam Marsh rated it it was amazing

Shelves: favorites

A must read for all Protestants. Kevin Vanhoozer summarizes the doctrine of the five solas, the logic behind the solas, and how they do not lead to secularization or interpretative anarchy. Instead, the Protestant Church can apply the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church as taught in the Nicene Creed consistently.

flag Like · see review

Feb 26, 2018 Noah Nevils rated it it was ok

Not a big fan. I agree with what Vanhoozer is saying
for the most part, but it seems rather poorly said.
Perhaps I was expecting more specific answers to the question
of interpretive authority. I also don't think that his rubric of
the five solas helped him make his points. ...more

flag Like · see review

May 25, 2018 Nathan Douthit rated it really liked it

An excellent read, one I would recommend to any student of hermeneutics. Understanding the authors point was quite difficult at times, but the last chapter and conclusion make things much more clear. Worth s read.

flag Like · see review

Jul 23, 2018 Kris Lundgaard rated it really liked it

I loved the vision he presented of mere Protestantism and thought he argued it well; but, even though I'm not from Missouri, my reaction was "Show me." I'd really like to see what he described. ...more

flag Like · see review

Aug 27, 2018 Lucas Bradburn rated it really liked it

Very insightful.

flag Like · see review

Jan 06, 2019 Karl rated it really liked it

good reflections on the 5 solas, although I only give it 5 stars because his writing is often difficult to understand

flag Like · see review

Jan 24, 2019 Brandon Wilkins rated it liked it

Good study of the 5 solas and Protestant identity, with emphasis on contemporary issues.

It's good, but it was more than I was looking to get into.

More for specialists than laity. ...more

flag Like · see review

Sep 18, 2016 Lew Button rated it liked it

This is not a good book. It is a great book and by the time I sat down to review the book it had been selected as one of the best books of the year by Christianity Today. I did not read that review I already had formed my opinion.

Except for what seemed a strange title the book is a reminder of what evangelical protestants are about. I use that term intentionally because that is a term used by the author and because it reminds the reader there are other kinds of Protestants.

The author begins by This is not a good book. It is a great book and by the time I sat down to review the book it had been selected as one of the best books of the year by Christianity Today. I did not read that review I already had formed my opinion.

Except for what seemed a strange title the book is a reminder of what evangelical protestants are about. I use that term intentionally because that is a term used by the author and because it reminds the reader there are other kinds of Protestants.

The author begins by asking if the church should repent or retrieve the reformation. There are those who do not see the legitimacy of the whole reformation and would call for repentance and ask that we rejoin the flock. (Full Disclosure: I am an evangelical protestant). As a matter of fact while I was reading this book I was listening to the radio on a long trip at night and the speaker referred to Martin Luther as a hesiarch, the founder of the Lutheran heresy. So there are still those who do deny the legitimacy and authority of all things Protestant.

While acknowledging there are reasons for concern in movement that came after Babel after the reformation) the author seeks to provide balance, grounding and unity among all those who align with Protestantism. To do this he urges us to retrieve the 5 Reformation solas (Latin for sole, alone)

The five solas of the reformation are Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Sola Scriptura, Sola Christus and Sola Deo Gratia. Kevin Van Hoozer develops each one of the Solas in detail and gives the implications for Christians. Quoting David Wells he asserts that "fidelity to the church must be measured by the degree of the church's fidelity to the gospel" and he believes the retrieving all the solas will restore what balance has been lost.

The book ends with an extensive bibliography and 762 footnotes.

I have attended Protestant churches in four countries and I grew up in Protestant Churches as a pastor's kid then I became a pastor. I may not be free of bias. However, I have to admit that all that passes for protestant is not necessarily biblical or true to the solas. Kevin Van Hoozer's book may provide a good place to look for the continuing reformation.

I received a copy of this book from netgalley.com with the understanding I would read it and write a review. ...more

flag Like · see review

Jan 12, 2017 E rated it it was amazing

I've read a lot of Vanhoozer here and there, and this is probably my favorite. The work is up to his usual intellectual rigor, but written more clearly than some of this other writings. In this book he is responding to those who blame the Protestant Reformation for the disintegration of church unity and interpretative authority.

In fact, Vanhoozer argues, today's evangelicals (and yes, he defends this term, and this movement, explicitly, although not until the conclusion) have a better claim on t I've read a lot of Vanhoozer here and there, and this is probably my favorite. The work is up to his usual intellectual rigor, but written more clearly than some of this other writings. In this book he is responding to those who blame the Protestant Reformation for the disintegration of church unity and interpretative authority.

In fact, Vanhoozer argues, today's evangelicals (and yes, he defends this term, and this movement, explicitly, although not until the conclusion) have a better claim on those things than does the Church of Rome. He makes this claim through the prism of the five "solas" of the Reformation. He does not claim that the solas are all addressed primarily toward biblical interpretation. Rather, he shows how the underlying principles should affect how we view hermeneutics.

So, under sola gratia, he argues that God's grace aids the process of interpretation performed by all believers, not just the interpretation of the Catholic magisterium. Under sola fide, he argues that we must interpret in faith, knowing that the Spirit testifies through Word as it presents Christ to the reader. Under sola scriptura, he argues that the interpretations of tradition and other branches of the church are useful as the contribute to our understanding of the Word (this is, after all, sola scriptura, not solo scriptura). Under solus Christus, he argues that Christ has authorized the local church to be an authoritative interpretive community of the Word of God, as Christ has delegated his authority to those who "hold the keys," which he argues is the church worldwide. Under soli Deo gloria, he argues that the wealth of the church glorifies the Lord, and this wealth is found in our role as a royal priesthood, who must read and interpret the Bible in community. Thus denominations are not necessarily bad, and can in fact increase our understanding of the Word as we approach it from various angles.

I'm not sure I've done a great job of summarizing his argument, and there is a lot more to it that I haven't even tried to summarize, but suffice it to say that this is a wonderful book that ably combats the claims of those who argue that the Reformation unleashed doctrinal uncertainty and interpretative autonomy. It did no such thing. Rather, it freed the people of God to be the church and to receive God's Word in the manner in which it was intended. Praise God. ...more

flag Like · see review

« previous 1 2 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend It | Stats | Recent Status Updates

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

Religion > Theology

29 users

Religion

6 users

History

4 users

Church > Church History

3 users

Christian

3 users

Religion > Faith

2 users

Religion > Scripture

2 users

Nonfiction

2 users

See top shelves…

About Kevin J. Vanhoozer

Kevin J. Vanhoozer

114 followers

Kevin J. Vanhoozer is currently Research Professor of Systematic Theology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. From 1990-98 he was Senior Lecturer in Theology and Religious Studies at New College, University of Edinburgh. Vanhoozer received a BA from Westmont College, an M.Div from Westminster Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Cambridge University, England having studied under Nicholas Las ...more

Books by Kevin J. Vanhoozer

The Pastor as Public Theologian: Reclaiming a Lost Vision

Is There a Meaning in This Text?: The Bible, the Reader, and the Morality of Literary Knowledge

The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology

Hearers and Doers: A Pastor's Guide to Growing Disciples Through Scripture and Doctrine

Everyday Theology: How to Read Cultural Texts and Interpret Trends

More…

Lauren Hough on Leaving Cults, the Military, and Bad Jobs

“I'm in a weird place because the book is about to come out. So I'm basically just walking around like a raw nerve and I'm not sure that I...

Trivia About Biblical Authorit...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from Biblical Authorit...

“It is well known that Pentecost reverses Babel. The people who built the tower of Babel sought to make a name, and a unity, for themselves. At Pentecost, God builds his temple, uniting people in Christ. Unity – interpretive agreement and mutual understanding – is, it would appear, something that only God can accomplish. And accomplish it he does, but not in the way we might have expected. Although onlookers thought that the believers who received the Spirit at Pentecost were babbling (Acts 2:13), in fact they were speaking intelligibly in several languages (Acts 2:8-11). Note well: they were all saying the same thing (testifying about Jesus) in different languages. It takes a thousand tongues to say and sing our great Redeemer’s praise.

Protestant evangelicalism evidences a Pentecostal plurality: the various Protestant streams testify to Jesus in their own vocabularies, and it takes many languages (i.e. interpretive traditions) to minister the meaning of God’s Word and the fullness of Christ. As the body is made up of many members, so many interpretations may be needed to do justice to the body of the biblical text. Why else are there four Gospels, but that the one story of Jesus was too rich to be told from one perspective only? Could it be that the various Protestant traditions function similarly as witnesses who testify to the same Jesus from different situations and perspectives?” — 1 likes

“For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God” (Rom. 13:1). God” — 0 likes

More quotes…

See a Problem?

Preview — Biblical Authority After Babel by Kevin J. Vanhoozer

Biblical Authority After Babel: Retrieving the Solas in the Spirit of Mere Protestant Christianity

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Kevin J. Vanhoozer

Books by Kevin J. Vanhoozer

Related Articles

Trivia About Biblical Authorit...

Quotes from Biblical Authorit...

See a Problem?

Preview — Biblical Authority After Babel by Kevin J. Vanhoozer

Biblical Authority After Babel: Retrieving the Solas in the Spirit of Mere Protestant Christianity

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About Kevin J. Vanhoozer

Books by Kevin J. Vanhoozer

Related Articles

Trivia About Biblical Authorit...

Quotes from Biblical Authorit...

new topic
Discuss This Book