The Good and Beautiful Life: Putting on the Character of Christ (The Good and Beautiful Series)

This book was disappointing to me in several respects. First because Smith's ideas were often lacking in scriptural support. This doesn't mean that his ideas were against scripture, but that he often didn't lead the reader back to scripture to support was he was arguing for. Whenever I read a Christian book, I expect the author to lead me to a greater appreciation for the adequacy of scripture and to grow my dependency on scripture's sufficiency. This book inadvertently grows one's dependency on Smith and his opinions. I believe in assuming the best of people so I'll assume this was not the author's intention, but it was the effect nonetheless.Secondly, I was disappointed with the therapist slant this book took on. The church at large can be sadly influenced by the world's trends when it does not saturate itself in scripture. This often happens by stealth. One of the most prevalent influences the world has on the church of late is to view Jesus not primarily as my savior, but as my therapist. Of course, few would say it in those words, but the practical outworking of their teaching on scripture takes on a therapeutic slant.One such example of this is Smith's teaching on the beatitudes in chapter 3. He names the chapter "The Grand Invitation," and goes on to write that the main point of the beatitudes is to teach us that everyone is invited into the kingdom: what he calls the inclusivity of the gospel. Quite frankly, this is a grievous misuse of what the beatitudes are actually teaching! I was at a complete loss at to how one even comes to such a conclusion until I thought of it through the therapist's lens. Of course it is true that anyone from any nationality and any sin background may come into the kingdom, but what the beatitudes is teaching us is what we must become to receive the kingdom. We must be poor in spirit, we must hunger and thirst for righteousness, we must mourn for our sin, we must be meek, we must become peacemakers and pure in heart--for to such belongs the kingdom. As long as we cling to our pride, love of sin, love of impurity, love of dissension instead of peace, the kingdom cannot be ours. That is what the beatitudes are plainly teaching. Smith writes: "The beatitudes are radical because they teach that these people (poor, meek) have the same access to the kingdom as the rich and happy." The poor, the weak can come to God as well as the rich and strong. Of course that's true, but I'm sorry, it's not at all what the beatitudes are teaching.Furthermore, piggy backing on the last paragraph, this book is full of sloppy thinking, which is so prevalent in Evangelical writing today. I'll just cite a couple of examples to give a flavor for what I'm talking about. On chapter 4 about lust, Smith gives a blanket criticism of couples who decide they are going to save their first kiss for marriage. He argues that this comes from a negative worldview that teaches that all sexual sin is inherently evil. He then states that they won't know how to enjoy sex in marriage because they have been so repressed. I wouldn't have been as upset if he would have stated that couples who save their first kiss for marriage should make sure they are not abstaining because sexual desire is inherently wrong but out of a love of purity and devotion for Christ. But he doesn't even allow for that option. This is so sloppy. I know of several couples who have saved their first kiss for marriage because they believe sex to be such a good thing. They did not struggle with intimacy once they were married.In another example, he completely undermined Jesus' statement that if your hand causes you to sin, chop it off. A plain reading makes it abundantly obvious that Jesus is calling his followers to go to all lengths in their battle with lust, because their souls are at stake. They should do anything it takes to win: gouge out your eye, or even not kiss your fiance till your wedding day, (gasp) imagine that! Nothing is too far. Smith instead interprets this passage thus: "Jesus was not speaking literally but was using a rhetorical device called reductio ad absurdum, meaning to reduce the argument to its logical absurdity. He was attacking the commonly held notion that sin resides in the offending part of the body." Yes, Jesus was using a rhetorical device, obviously, but the device that Smith wants to claim he was using brings us to exact opposite of what Jesus intended. Instead of Smith encouraging us to go to all lengths in all battle with lust, we are encouraged to be "properly connected with God and his kingdom [so we] find that the void is filled."To be charitable, there is truth in Smith's statement, that lust is often trying to fill a void that was meant to be filled by God. If I were to be uncharitable, I would have to say that this a bunch of cliched, sappy, therapist-speak, but that might be taking it a bit far. However, Jesus is calling us to decisive action in our battle with lust. If our computer causes us to sin, we should launch it on a 20-foot trajectory to the nearest dumpster--or at least put Covenant Eyes software on it. If your TV causes you to sin, take it outside and sledgehammer it, or at least cancel cable. If your friends are all flocking to see Fifty Shades of Perversion, and if you don't have the gall to refuse to see one of the most perverse blockbusters of our time, at least feign a headache. Better yet, poke yourself in the eye and then you can truthfully tell your friends that you can't go because your eye hurts. These are the steps Jesus begs us to take, with heaven and hell at stake. Smith's wisdom is to "stay connected to the kingdom," whatever that means. A lot Christianese, not a lot of sound, biblical advice. I will give Smith this though: his advice sure tickles the ears in a much more pleasant way.Even though Smith's vague statement about lust may have some truth, that simply was not the specific point that Jesus was trying to make when he spoke to us on lust. I'd like to read a book where the author respects scripture enough to uphold it and not undermine it at every turn, even if the points he's using to undermine scripture are actually true. It's still undermining Jesus' words. There are many more examples of sloppy thinking that I could give!I don't want to come across as nitpicky, but I believe it's wrong for writers to abandon the language of scripture in order to promote their own categories and terms. Smith loves to speak of the hip and oh-so-urbane topic of narrative. The biblical term is actually belief, as in what we believe determines our actions. But Smith loves to harp on "false narratives." Although the significance of this change in terms may not be immediately apparent, it is yet another example of failing to point the readers back to scripture, and therefore pointing them to Smith and his "valuable insights on kingdoms narratives." He even comes up with acronym. Trendy!Lastly, I was completely blown away by a sloppy and irresponsible analogy in the chapter on lust. When Smith's 12 year old son asked him if it was okay to kiss a girl, he told him to envision a triangle with the point on top. The bottom two corners were to represent commitment and physical intimacy. The higher up you go on the commitment side, the higher you can go in the physical intimacy. Finally, the point at the top represents sex in marriage. I sincerely hope that Smith does not believe that right before you get to marriage it is fine to go right up to the point of sex, but that is what the triangle is saying. It's a really bad analogy, an unhelpful visual, and another example of extremely sloppy and unwise thinking.Although this review is negative, I hope that it can be seen not as a rant, but as a desire to see better things for the church and to hope better things for Christian writers. Although there are true things that are said in this book, I believe that one's time would be much better spent picking up your Bible itself and writing down your thoughts on what you read. There are many Christian books that would help one to understand scripture better but this is not one of them. This runs much deeper than me not agreeing with a few things he said, for there are practically no authors where I agree 100% with everything they teach. Instead, it is that I fundamentally disagree with the way the book is written, its hermeneutic, and its handling of scripture. Any book that does not increase my reliance on scripture will necessarily foster immaturity.I find myself increasingly disillusioned with Christians' abilities to discern good and helpful writing. I'm almost tempted to run in the other direction from any best-selling book that has 66 5-star reviews of Amazon.

I have gone through many different discipleship small group material over the last 50 years and this by far is the best I have seen. Thankful for the way Smith approaches our faith in Christ from a Biblically sound approach as well as what we know about adult learning.

My friend and I are doing this together via the phone, weekly! We have been excited to get from one chapter to the next!!! EXCELLENT

I have been slowly reviewing the Apprentice Series by James Bryan Smith of the Aprentis Institute and Friends College in conjunction with Intervarsity Press. This is the second book in the series. I was able to read this book in the Audiobook format, which I found extremely helpful and well-done.The Apprentice Series has three parts to the series. The first book in the series is about God, and our beliefs and ideas about who he is and what kind of relationship he wants with us. The second book in the series which we are reviewing here, in the Good and Beautiful Life. The final book in the series is The Good and Beautiful Community. These books, although I did not read it anywhere, loosely correspond to Reuben Job's three simple questions, which I believe stem from Wesley: "Who am I? Who is God? Who are we together?"This book, following the model of books such as Cost of Discipleship and the Divine Conspiracy, uses the Sermon on the Mount as a blueprint for the life of discipleship. Each chapter in The Good and Beautiful Life teaches on a different part of the Sermon on the Mount. At the end of each chapter their is a "soul training" section designed to allow the readers of the book to be able to try on a practice of spiritual discipline for a short period of time to reinforce the living of the truth they have just come to understand.Particularly meaningful for me was the chapter on living the day devotionally, the chapter on anger, and the chapter on living without judgment. I thought it was profoundly insightful that the author paired the goal of living without anger with the practice of the Sabbath. Sometimes just slowing down can make us a lot less angry. Also, I liked how the author paired judgment with practicing a day without gossip. The soul practice of living the day devotionally borrowed from Madame Guyon, which I thought was just wonderful in both its presentation and its explanation.The book has a study guide. This is good because it is best if one uses this book in community, with either the resources provided by the Aprentis Institute or the study questions in the book. I can't wait to find a group in my church willing to go through this process.

This is a great insight into Jesus' teachings from the Sermon on the Mount, and how the Kingdom of God makes a practical difference to our everyday life as Christians. I really recommend that you also buy the first book in the series, 'Good and Beautiful God', although it's not essential to have read that one first.

Very practical and engaging study with challenging and thought provoking questions. Working with a group through it we have all gained from it.

This is a perfect book to read with others and discuss. It is full of helpful and practical application exercises.

Brilliant book. Am reading second time. It is changing my life.

Excellent book to help understand the Beatitudes in the 21st century culture. Giving insight into the culture of Jesus' day and the importance of His message to all of us, no boundaries as to race, sex or age.