| Book Review: The Reason for God (part 5) |
Buy The Reason for God by Tim Keller at amazon.com!
This is the 5th part of a lengthy interaction with Tim Keller’s recent book, The Reason for God. To start at the beginning, click here.
Christianity is a Straightjacket
a couple of quick comments:
(a) you might actually find the book shorter than this review when all is said and done; and,
(b) what i’m doing is more personal reflection and thinking than simply a review of the book. i suppose that the very fact that i am interacting with the book in this manner gives weight to Keller’s writings – not because it’s me doing the interacting, but because the book warrants my interaction. yours, too.
and, no – i’m not getting paid for this endorsement. and i did not approve this ad. and you can take that to the bank.
but i can’t.
so – on to chapter three.
Keller starts each chapter with a quote or two from individuals who may or may not be real – nonetheless, they represent, i’m certain, typical comments he’s heard while serving as a pastor in manhattan. at the beginning of this chapter is the following quote: “The Christians I know don’t seem to have freedom to think for themselves. I believe each individual must determine truth for him- or herself.”
now, my reaction to this quote is, “yup – that’s right.”
which, i’m also certain, puts me at odds with where Keller will be heading in this chapter…
but, in short, to the first sentence, i say: this is exactly what i see around the web, particularly where the owners want to be seen as ‘thinking’ and/or ‘reason-centered’ christians. while i give most the benefit of the doubt, there are some that just like to shotgun verses at you, expecting you to be wowed by their ability to quote what others have thought through and said. (i call this “recitation theology.”) to the second sentence, i say: while there may be a handful of ‘truths’ that apply for all people for all time, most validation comes from our own personal experience.
so, anyway, to what Keller has to say – i mean, that’s why you’re reading this review, right?…
Keller quotes social activist Emma Goldman, who calls Christianity “the leveler of the human race, the breaker of man’s will to dare and to do … an iron net, a straightjacket which does not let him expand or grow.” it would be hard to argue that we aren’t seeing this today, especially in evangelical America. there is a strong anti-science vein coursing through today’s right-wing fundamentalists, as well as a growing nationalism and isolationism that uses fear to stifle progress. now, to be fair, this isn’t Christianity’s fault per se – rather, it is the fault of people who claim to be Christians. still, Christians are where we see Christianity, no matter how poorly it is represented.
Keller argues several points, the first being that truth is unavoidable – i.e., no matter how much we might want to think truth is colored by culture and times, even stating that becomes a truth of sorts. like i mentioned previously, there are a lot of logic arguments Keller makes that essentially turn objector’s statements back on themselves. this is a good debating tactic, but it seems kind of hollow in the end. still, his quoting of G. K. Chesterson is encouraging: “[The] thought that stops thought … is the only thought that should be stopped.” and choosing to let everyone define ‘truth’ certainly makes us avoid the hard thought around the, uh, truth of it all.
he goes on to argue against those deriding Christianity’s exclusivity by saying that ‘community’ can never really be fully inclusive. this, upon reflection, is obvious: whatever unites a group of individuals by necessity excludes those outside of it. so, unless the universe is “humans”, every group to some extent is exclusive. he writes, “We cannot consider a group exclusive simply because it has standards for its members.” this is a good point, and one i’ve wrestled with a lot in thinking about church, and church attendance, and church membership. Keller’s summation point is worth noting: “We should criticize Christians when they are condemning and ungracious to unbelievers. But we should not criticize churches when they maintain standards for membership in accord with their beliefs. Every community must do the same [italics mine].”
Keller then argues that Christianity actually is less culturally rigid than most faiths. while evangelism has a few wish-we-hadn’t-done-it-that-way moments – e.g., trying to American-ize deep Africa – in truth Christianity is a very culturally malleable faith. Keller argues that different parts of the Christian story will have appeal to different cultures, just as different parts will give trouble. the solution, as with other issues, starts with “gentle, self-deprecating irony, [and holding beliefs] in charity and with humility.” he references Isaiah 60 and Revelation 21-22 to say that cultural differences will be retained even in the millenial kingdom and on into eternity – i guess i read that as saying, ‘…so you better attend your diversity classes now.’
here’s a quote i liked a lot: “The popular concept – that we should each determine our own morality – is based on the belief that the spiritual realm is nothing at all like the rest of the world. Does anyone really believe that?” in other words, laws govern nature – we don’t get to determine how much gravity we need, for example, or how much force is generated by a fist hitting a wall (like the ones i’ve found myself talking to around the web…). we should expect similar “laws” in the spiritual realm, shouldn’t we? but discussing these concepts of morality and truth is all well and good, except that the challenge is really down at the brass tacks level, issue by issue. what is needed, then, is some kind of guiding principle instead of a list of shoulds and shouldn’ts. and Keller says this is “Love. Love is the more liberating freedom-loss of all.” further, he adds, “To experience the joy and freedom of love, you must give up your personal autonomy. Freedom is not the absence of limitations and constraints but it is finding the right ones, those that fit us and liberate us.”
but here’s the difficulty: Keller offers restraints in relationships in order to encourage freedom, but he does not do this when it comes to other faiths. in other words, partners in a relationship find freedom and growth by adjusting to one another; why can’t we do the same with our religions?
Continue on to The Church is Responsible for So Much Injustice.
Leave a Reply