It seems almost sacrilegious to say this, but I always thought the book was spoken of better than it actually is. The fact that it's a classic in missiology won't change, so anyone serious about missiology has to read it and know it. But that doesn't mean one has to revere it as holy! I feel horrible saying this, especially since Bosch is with the Lord now, but at the end of the day, it's just a book! A good book. But not necessarily the behemoth it has been made to be.
Here are a couple reasons why IMO the book is a classic: 1. Its encyclopedic nature 2. Intellectually deep, way deep (too deep?) 3. Bosch's ability to hold things in "creative tension" 4. Challenges assumptions and sacred cows (esp. for evangelicals) 5. His ability to develop consistent paradigms
I disagreed with him a lot, but he sure is difficult to argue with!
I think he was too postmodern in his approach- I think the NT is more unified on mission than he says, and especially think the nations or unreached aspect of mission wasn't prominent enough in the book.
But yes, anyone serious about missiology has to read the book.
I would have loved Bosch to be around for the Insider debate. He defitiely sees "religion" as an unhealthy construct of the Enlightenment Paradigm, but his work on Luke-Acts totally destroyed the homogeneous principle, and I wonder if the Insider paradigm is the reincarnation of the HUP.
2 comments:
It seems almost sacrilegious to say this, but I always thought the book was spoken of better than it actually is. The fact that it's a classic in missiology won't change, so anyone serious about missiology has to read it and know it. But that doesn't mean one has to revere it as holy! I feel horrible saying this, especially since Bosch is with the Lord now, but at the end of the day, it's just a book! A good book. But not necessarily the behemoth it has been made to be.
Here are a couple reasons why IMO the book is a classic:
1. Its encyclopedic nature
2. Intellectually deep, way deep (too deep?)
3. Bosch's ability to hold things in "creative tension"
4. Challenges assumptions and sacred cows (esp. for evangelicals)
5. His ability to develop consistent paradigms
I disagreed with him a lot, but he sure is difficult to argue with!
I think he was too postmodern in his approach- I think the NT is more unified on mission than he says, and especially think the nations or unreached aspect of mission wasn't prominent enough in the book.
But yes, anyone serious about missiology has to read the book.
I would have loved Bosch to be around for the Insider debate. He defitiely sees "religion" as an unhealthy construct of the Enlightenment Paradigm, but his work on Luke-Acts totally destroyed the homogeneous principle, and I wonder if the Insider paradigm is the reincarnation of the HUP.
Post a Comment