Keller, Timothy - The Reason For God (Belief in an Age of Scepticism)

[Hans Deventer]

Let's start off by saying this is a good book, definitely worth reading. Keller first deals with several objections to Christianity:

- There can't be just ONE true religion
- How could a good God allow suffering?
- Christianity is a straitjacket
- The church is responsible for so much injustice
- How can a loving God send people to hell?
- Science has disproved Christianity
- You can't take the Bible literally

and then moves on to several arguments in favour of Christianity:

- The clues of God
- The knowledge of God
- The problem of sin
- Religion and the gospel
- The (true) story of the Cross
- The reality of the resurrection
- The dance of God

and finishes with a short chapter on what to do when you feel yourself drawn to Christ.

All in all a worthwhile book, in which Keller tries to defend and argue for what Lewis would have called "Mere Christianity". With his background as a pastor in New York City, Keller is quite familiar with the questions raised in such an environment and answers them quite thoroughly.

What was an eye opener to me was the idea that the resurrection wasn't expected by the Jews either, because they could only connect the resurrection to the complete renewal God promised. Without the latter, the former made no sense to them.

No points of criticism? Actually, yes. And funny enough, it starts where I completely agree with him: the problem of sin, which he says "is not primarily the violation of laws but a wrecked relationship with God" (p 160). And following Kierkegaard, he writes that "Sin is the despairing refusal to find your deepest identity in your relationship and service to God" (p 162). Amen! But I miss the logic of this in the chapter on The Cross. That's still too much of the old penal substitution theory, and too little of a Christ Victor or sacrificial/convenantial or reconcilliational view to my liking. The "refusal to find your deepest identity in your relationship and service to God" isn't overcome by a price being paid.

Still, I would heartily recommend the book. And as always, "Test everything. Hold on to the good." There's lots of "good" here to be found.

[Gene Tatsch]

... But I miss the logic of this in the chapter on The Cross. That's still too much of the old penal substitution theory, and too little of a Christ Victor or sacrificial/convenantial or reconcilliational view to my liking. The "refusal to find your deepest identity in your relationship and service to God" isn't overcome by a price being paid. ...Recently I has a friend point out that the New Testament church focused on the resurrection as the validation of Jesus as Messiah, as the clinching argument.
[Only in later (Paul's?) epistles does the crucifixion take center stage]
gene --

[Rich Schmidt]

Recently I has a friend point out that the New Testament church focused on the resurrection as the validation of Jesus as Messiah, as the clinching argument.
[Only in later (Paul's?) epistles does the crucifixion take center stage]
gene --

Hmm... That's odd. Because when I read your sentence about the resurrection as validation, the first passage that popped into my head was what Paul says in Romans 1:4 - "and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord."

And while looking for that verse, I stumbled across this one from Acts 17:31, where Paul tells the Athenians, "For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead."

I'm not sure how helpful it is to set Paul up in opposition to the rest of the NT church on this issue.

BTW, to get back to the book being reviewed: Thanks, Hans, for the review! That book has been sitting on my shelf waiting to be read for quite a while. Sounds like it's worth taking down and reading! :)

[Ian Gentles]

Sounds like a book to buy. :)

[Benjamin Burch]

Hmm... That's odd. Because when I read your sentence about the resurrection as validation, the first passage that popped into my head was what Paul says in Romans 1:4 - "and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord."

And while looking for that verse, I stumbled across this one from Acts 17:31, where Paul tells the Athenians, "For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead."

I'm not sure how helpful it is to set Paul up in opposition to the rest of the NT church on this issue.

BTW, to get back to the book being reviewed: Thanks, Hans, for the review! That book has been sitting on my shelf waiting to be read for quite a while. Sounds like it's worth taking down and reading! :)

Many scholars are also looking at Romans 1:17 as a statement of the resurrection as validation. I personally think it's the best reading, and flows most naturally from 1:4.