tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3767755611010523671.post388722606957841636..comments2023-04-10T04:06:30.195-06:00Comments on Think and Wonder. Wonder and Think...: Review of "The Reason for God" Chapter 4 on InjusticeDoOrDoNothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15775977854913362396noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3767755611010523671.post-59900315754643343152010-08-02T17:15:21.409-06:002010-08-02T17:15:21.409-06:00atimetorend, I'll check out that book review y...atimetorend, I'll check out that book review you referenced, thanks. I've been trying to maintain balance in the perspectives I read. I don't read as many conservative authors since I've already read so many, but I throw them in intermittantly to prevent myself from becoming indoctrinated in any one way of thinking. I try to be a reasonably critical thinker.DoOrDoNothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15775977854913362396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3767755611010523671.post-49605770953092941332010-08-01T05:54:35.904-06:002010-08-01T05:54:35.904-06:00"Keller responds to the charge that Christian..."Keller responds to the charge that Christians are no better than non-Christians by pointing out that broken people are often the ones drawn to Christianity. "<br /><br />That argument always makes me feel like someone is opportunistically using whatever argument will work. If surrounded by a bunch of exceptionally honorable Christians, the debater would point to that as evidence that Christianity is true.<br /><br />"<i>The NT no longer improves the lot of women in our modern culture.</i><br /><br />I saw you have Enns' "Inspiration and Incarnation in your book list. One think I learned from it was what Keller mentions here, that the NT may have improved the lot of women in that day, even if it seems oppressive today, that the biblical writers' message was shaped for the time they lived in. Fundamentalism/conservative evangelicalism have a big problem there, because they ignore that and try to fit the literal message of the bible into today's world. So I agree with Keller there, and I think if making a theistic argument, it promotes something more consistent with liberal Christianity.<br /><br />At the same time, it can come across as another convenient argument to defend the divine nature of the bible. If the bible sounds like it was written by men, speaking to the people of their time, saying things people of their time would say, how is God evident in its authorship?<br /><br />I always wanted to blog about this book but never did, I'm enjoying your observations. It was the first book I read to, hmmm, maybe not to try to bolster my crumbling faith, but rather to be able to say I did due diligence in reading what people in my church would respect as fine apologetics. So I would be able to say I gave it a shot and didn't just throw in the towel based on evil, deluded, Satanic sources, you know, those who don't endorse a fundamentalist reading of the bible. :^)<br /><br />One other review I read and appreciated for the book is here:<br />http://saganist.blogspot.com/2009/08/crappy-review-of-reason-for-god.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com