10 posts tagged “christianity”
Received from: Thomas Nelson.
Rating: 7 out of 10 (might have been higher had I read the first book -- this is the second)
Synopsis: The more than four hundred thousand readers stirred by the story of Ron Hall and Denver Moore will resonate with the all new, stand-alone true stories of hope and healing offered in this intimate, authentic follow-up to the New York Times bestseller Same Kind of Different as Me. With new "Denverisms" and reflections from Denver on his personal dealings with homelessness and disrespect from others, additional insights from Ron on what we can learn from people not like us and from those dealing with a terminal illness, and the stories of readers who have been impacted by the book's central themes, this inspirational reader will generate a host of new fans.
My review: I really wish that I'd read the first book, Same Kind of Different as Me, before I read this one. I have it coming to me from the library, so I'll review it soon. This book says it's standalone, but I really think I would have benefited from reading Same Kind first, just so I could have known the background of the three people What Difference focuses on -- Ron, Denver, and Deborah. Half of the chapters of the book are written by Ron, and half by Denver. Both had a lot of interesting things to say on the subject of homelessness and Christians. There are also stories of people around the country who were inspired by the first book. There was even a woman from West Sacramento mentioned -- her story hit very close to home. Needless to say, I really got a lot out of this book. It shifted my views of homeless people quite a bit, and it challenged me to think differently about the people I pass every day on the street. I don't have enough space to quote all of the different passages that affected me, but this one that really stood out (it was written by Denver, in his own voice):
"Since I been visitin a lotta churches, I hear people talkin 'bout how, after readin our story, they felt "led" to help the homeless, to come alongside the down-and-out. But when it comes to helpin people that ain't got much, God didn't leave no room for feelin led. Jesus said God gon' separate us based on what we did for folks that is hungry and thirsty, fells that is prisoners in jail and folks that ain't got no clothes and no place to live. What you gon' do when you get to heaven and you ain't done none a' that? Stand in front a' God and tell Him, "I didn't feel led"? You know what He gon' say? He gon' say, "You didn't need to feel led 'cause I had done wrote it down in the Instruction Book."
Hello conviction, I'm Cori.
(Finished 10/30/09)
This can't really be qualified as a book review because I haven't come anywhere close to finishing this book. I joined an online community called The Ooze Viral Bloggers. Each month, you can select one book, generally related to the more progressive end of Christianity, and they'll send it to you for free if you blog about it within thirty days. Sounds awesome, right? I thought so, so I signed up.
I chose So Beautiful by Leonard Sweet:
More than 50 years ago scientists made a remarkable discovery, proclaiming, “We have found the secret of life – and it’s so pretty!” The secret? That life’s biological code is helixical, two strands surrounding a single axis-the foundation for DNA. This design, Sweet proposes, points to an even deeper – and more poignant – secret.
Just as DNA’s three strands make life possible, three other elements work in harmony to make life not just pretty, but beautiful. And it’s in the church where we find the greatest expression, and ultimate fulfillment, of these three components to a beautiful life.
The Good Doctor Sweet presents an extraordinary look at life as it was intended to be lived, sharing secrets of God’s design for God’s people in three interwoven elements that form the heart, soul and calling of the apprenticed-to-Jesus life. In the spirit of radical inquiry – from radix, going to the root –So Beautiful unearths God’s deep-rooted dreams for the church after his own heart. Recommended for missional, organic, and house church provocateurs, as well as open-minded emerging church folks.
I've had Sweet's book for a while now, and I've picked it up several times to read it -- I'm about fifty pages in now. The other reviews of it have been fabulous, but I can't seem to get into the meat of it. I think it's because I haven't read a lot about "church theory" so there is a lot of language and structure I'm struggling through. It feels very academic, and I'm not sure I ever learned to speak "church academic." As you can see from my blog, I read a lot, so I'm struggling because I can't make this work in my brain. I find myself reading and rereading sentences to try and get what Sweet is trying to say and wondering if I'm missing something huge. I know that there is some good stuff in there. I come across nuggets like these, and they make me want to understand further:
"And the church that is incarnational prays every day a colonizing prayer: 'Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.' Every Christian is a colonizer: We are colonizing earth with heaven. We are creating 'colonies' of heaven not Christian-coated mirror cities."
In reference to evangelism: "[stop] thinking of bringing Christ to India . . . but rather [start] thinking about finding Christ already there."
"There is no spiritual life. There is only life. One life where the spiritual is not separate but the whole."
I wanted to post about this before my thirty days was up. I'm going to keep going through it, hoping that God will make Sweet's writing more clear to me, because I can feel there is some real truth in there and I'd like to dig it out. I'll write a complete review when I've finished it up and can take a step back and view it as a whole.
Recommended by: my friend Carolyn
Purchased at: Borders
Rating: 8 out of 10
Synopsis (from Amazon): The heart of Christianity is transformation—a relationship with God that impacts not just our "spiritual lives," but every aspect of living. John Ortberg calls readers back to the dynamic heartbeat of Christianity—God’s power to bring change and growth—and reveals both the how and why of transformation.
My Review: I had so many quotes I wanted to put in this review, but I never have the book near me. So I'll write about why I liked it and perhaps add quotes later.
Actually, there is one quote that I remember because I loved it so much. And of course, it wasn't even Ortberg, but Søren Kierkegaard: "Now, with God's help, I shall become myself." Love it.
The cover of this book is misleading. I thought that the content would make me want to, well, barf. The soaring bird and the beach grass? Gag. Once I got reading, though, I thought the content was much deeper than the cover would suggest. Ortberg covers a bunch of different spiritual disciplines (prayer, Scripture reading, celebration, confession, servanthood, etc.), and lays out different ways to put them into practice. I particularly liked the sections on prayer and servanthood. Ortberg sprinkles his writing with anecdotes that really mean something, and he uses quite a bit of humor as well. He makes the impossible (the discipline of solitude, for example) seem doable. And I got the impression that if I followed his suggestions, there would be no doubt my life and my faith would experience a transformation. Highly recommended to those who want to rethink how they interact with their faith.
If you want to help build wells in Africa, please consider contributing to my Reading For A Cause challenge!
Read for: My small group at church (although, two friends have recommended John Ortberg in the past -- Sheena and Carolyn)
Purchased from: Berean Christian Book Stores
Rating: 8 out of 10
Synopsis (from the back of the book): We often think of doubt as the opposite of faith, but could it actually strengthen our relationship with God? According to John Ortberg, best-selling author and pastor, the very nature of faith requires the presence of uncertainty. In this refreshingly candid look at a life of faith, he traces the line between belief and unbelief: less a dividing line between hostile camps than a razor’s edge that runs through every soul. His findings point us toward the relief of being totally honest. Questions can expand our understanding, uncertainty can lead to trust, and honest faith can produce outrageous hope.
My Review: Because I started my small group while they were in the middle of this book, I ended up reading it in the weirdest order. Chapters 7 and 8, 1 through 4, 9 through 11, skimmed 7 and 8 again, 5 and 6. Luckily the material wasn't completely new and Ortberg is a very capable writer, so I still got a lot out of it. Ortberg posits that it's really impossible to have faith without doubts. Faith requires that we believe in something that we're not certain of. If we knew everything, we would have knowledge, but no faith. Ortberg is very candid—he talks about times he's struggled when friends have committed suicide, and when babies have drown, and when Christians have run amok, doing everything but living out their faith. But he then notes that we do have to make a choice of whether or not to believe despite our doubts. Hanging in the middle really isn't an option. He says that "Uncertainty is a gift because it gnaws at us to pursue truth." He also does a good job of distilling bigger thoughts into some useful quotes (and every single one of which applies to me, by the way), such as:
"To choose doubt as a philosophy for life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation." (Page 31)
"We all hope, but hope comes in two flavors: hoping for something and hoping in someone." (Page 84)
"But one man, whose son died climbing a mountain when he was twenty-five, said that what he came to see was 'tears, a weeping God, suffering over my suffering. I had not reazlied that if God loves the world, God suffers. I had thoughtlessly supposed God loved without suffering. I knew that divine love was the key. But I had not realized that divine love that is the key is a suffering love.'" (Page 115)
"Underneath the surface of the skeptic is fear—fear of being disappointed. The skeptic says, 'I would rather stand on the sidelines and look like an intelligent observer than risk trusting.'" (Page 123)
"One thing is certain: if there is a God, then many things are not permitted. And if I want to do one of those things, my mind has to find a way to get rid of God, at least for a while. We all are at least temporary atheists, strategic athiests." (Page 145)
Ortberg also has some great quotes from others in his book:
"A true opium of the people is the belief that nothingness after death—a huge solace for thinking that we are not going to be judged for our betrayals, greed, cowardice, murders." (Page 133, Czeslaw Misosz)
"Comfort is the one thing you cannot get by looking for it. If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end: If you look for comfort, yu will not get either comfort or truth—only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin with, and in the end, despair." (Page 148, CS Lewis)
As always, more information about my 2009 Reading Challenge can be found here.
I feel like I write book updates all the time, but somehow I find I've gone a month and a half and all of a sudden I have too many books to talk about. Anyway, here are some short and some long reviews!
When You Are Engulfed In Flames by David Sedaris: The newest book of essays by Sedaris isn't quite as funny as I have found his other books to be. It's darker. It's kind of gross in some places. It wasn't laugh-out-loud funny. I spent the whole book vaguely uncomfortable. The bit about quitting smoking was the best. Rating: 5 out of 10. A big solid "meh."
Persuading Annie by Melissa Nathan: I really like Nathan's books. They are all the things I like about the "chick lit" (still hate that term) genre, and nothing that I don't -- and this one was no exception. Delightful! I only have one book of hers left. A few years ago she died of cancer, which is really quite sad. I love to read what else she might have written. Rating: 9 out of 10, partly because I liked it so much, partly because I wish we could have been friends.
Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert: A summary -- French people acting painfully selfishly. I thought it was really well-written, but I had no one to root for. I can definitely understand why the book was so incredibly scandalous, and a lot of it is extremely applicable to today. Rating: 6 out of 10, for being an education in desire, selfishness, lies, and one's ultimate undoing.
The Faith Club by Ranya Idliby, Suzanne Oliver, and Priscilla Warner: Three women embark on a journey to find out what unites them about their three faiths -- Muslim, Christian, and Jew. I really was hoping for more out of this book. I can really understand how they found so much in common with their three faiths, but they never really took a look at what separates the three religions. They didn't seem to tackle the tough questions nor did they disagree on, well, anything. It turned into one big ecumenical discussion. Rating: 5 out of 10 for being just a glimmer of what it could have been had they actually discussed some serious distinctions between their three religions, instead of just focusing on the easy make-you-feel-good things their three faiths share.
Full Speed by Janet Evanovich: Well that's no fun. Apparently I don't get to have a little thumbnail of the book. *Harrumph* Anyway, I needed a book to read while getting my oil changed the other day, and my mom had gotten this through a book exchange so she let me have it. I've never read Evanovich before. My goodness, it was a quick read with absolutely no literary merit. And for once, I was totally okay with that. My brain needed a break. Rating: 5 out of 10 for probably killing brain cells, but it was a fun little romp nonetheless.
The Year of Living Biblically by AJ Jacobs: Jacobs tries to fully immerse himself in living the Bible as literally as possible: wearing white, stoning adulterers, praying, strapping the word of God to his forehead, etc. It was fun and very insightful. I didn't find it offensive, though some people might. The book was mostly focused on the Old Testament, with a bit of New thrown in at the end. I thought the OT stuff was very strong, but the book sort of petered off at the end, probably because he was preparing for the birth of his twins and the book sort of took a place on the backburner. Rating: 7 out of 10 for being fascinating, really funny, and for making me consider WHY we behave the way we do as religious people.
Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll: Seriously, was there any way that Carroll was not on drugs when he wrote this? Supremely weird. Rating: 6 out of 10 for being just crazy.
unChristian by David Kinneman: This might have been one of my favorite books of the year. It basically reveals the results of three years of research that delved into what non-Christians think about Christians. Basically, we're seen as hypocritical, conversion-focused, antihomosexual, sheltered, too political, and judgemental. Yep. Sounds about right. Sad, isn't it? The book gives hope that Christians can turn this identity around because it's killing the church and not one of those things was preached by Jesus. Focus on relationships and service instead of building membership and cutting ourselves off from the world. The book also had short comments from other authors and I liked this one in particular:
"[In thirty years] I would hope people would look at us and say, "Those Christians are the ones who run in when everyone else is running out. Those Christians are the ones who didn't give up on the crumbling inner cities. Those Christians are the ones who brought peace to Darfur. Those Christians are the ones who put an end to human trafficking. Those Christians are the ones who helped win the war on AIDS around the world. Those Christians are the ones who write those incredible lyrics, pen those unforgettable books, and create artwork that's mesmerizing. Those Christians are the ones who helped my mother when she got Alzheimer's. Those Christians are the ones who were kind to me when I was new to the area. Those Christians are the ones who made me want to believe in God." -- Margaret Feinberg.
Rating: 10 out of 10. Fascinating.
* * *
In other news, check out my new blog devoted to my 2009 reading challenge. I'll update in both places, but the other blog will be solely devoted to the challenge and will have more information that this blog.
So I finally got around to reading That Really Really Popular Christian Book of the Year, William Young's the Shack. I know people who have absolutely loved it, saying it changed the way they viewed God and the Trinity and heaven and forgiveness. And I know people who have absolutely loathed it, saying it was full of blasphemy and false doctrines. I guess I fell somewhere in the middle.
From the publisher's website: Mackenzie Allen Philips’ youngest daughter, Missy, has been abducted during a family vacation and evidence that she may have been brutally murdered is found in an abandoned shack deep in the Oregon wilderness. Four years later in the midst of his Great Sadness, Mack receives a suspicious note, ostensibly from God, inviting him back to that shack for a weekend. Against his better judgment he arrives at the shack on a wintry afternoon and walks back into his darkest nightmare.
Since I'd heard so many positive and negative reviews, I took my reading with a grain of salt. I figured I'd come across things I didn't agree with, but I also wanted to see if I could look at another side of God's character. And I found both. I liked the parts about being in community with Creation and how the rocks and trees and animals cry out that there is a Maker. The way he described relationships using colors was particularly moving. I also liked how Young presented the community of the Trinity as well. The best part of the book was about God and relationships. It really encourages readers to think less legalistically and more relationally, and I think that's it's a message most Christians desparately need to hear.
As a side note, my favorite line from the whole book comes when Mack asks God about why He is portrayed as a father in the Bible when He actually transcends gender. God's response is: "Well," responded Papa, turning away from him and bustling around the kitchen, "there are many reasons for that, and some of them go very deep. Let me say for now that we knew once the Creation was broken, true fathering would be much more lacking than mothering. Don't misunderstand me, both are needed -- but an emphasis on fathering is necessary because of the enormity of its absense." I see the lack of fathering (not in my own life! My dad rocks.) throughout this world and it makes me so very sad.
On the other hand, I didn't agree with some of the ways he portrayed God. Every once in a while God would say things like, "I don't understand why people..." etc. Um, He's God. I'm fairly certian he gets it all. Also, the interaction between God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit got a little weird for my taste. I also didn't think it was particularly well-written (a heavy overdose of adverbs and adjectives!). This is something that always detracts from stories for me, so I tried hard not to think about it. But sometimes it really drove me crazy. I know it was originally self-published, but I think a line editor could have improved the writing by leaps and bounds.
One more thing. Pretty much everyone I've talked to who has read the book is sure it's a true story; that Mack is a real guy and he really had a vision of/visitation with God. The author, however, says it's fiction. Not that there aren't truths in the book, but you can't hunt down Mack and ask him about his story. Just thought I'd clear that up.
My Rating: 6 out of 10 for offering some beautiful insights. I wish the writing hadn't detracted from those moments for me.
I told myself that I had to finish up the three half-read books sitting on my nightstand before I could start my book club book, Devil in the White City, by Erik Larson. Unfortunately, one of those books is due back to the library today, so I jotted down my page number of First Among Sequels by Jasper Fforde and will contiunue it when it's published in paperback and I can buy it to add to my nice little Fforde collection (which has created, along with the Bridget Jones books, a very obvious neon orange square of Penguin spines on my shelf. So orange!).
But I did finish the other two books, plus I finished a DailyLit.com book (one that comes in short snippets to my email every day). So, I'm counting that as my three books so I can get started on Devil in the White City tonight.
Here's what I read:
My Man Jeeves by PG Wodehouse was my DailyLit book. I love PG Wodehouse this much: *stretches arms out as far as they will go*. I think this was one of his earliest books, and it's compilation of short stories. Half or so involve the incomperable Jeeves and Wooster, and the other star Reggie Pepper -- who is similar to Wooster without Jeeves. I definitely prefer the J&W stories, mostly because I'm familiar with the characters. I am fairly certain some of the Reggie Pepper stories were reworked later to be J&W stories. Perhaps whenever I run across that book, I'll know for sure. I must also mention that the new Overlook Press editions of Wodehouse's books are fabulous. The cover art, the feel of the pages, the dustjacket -- everything feels so high-end. I'm slowly collecting the whole set, but it's slow going. Wodehouse has A LOT of books.
My Rating: 6 out of 10 for being my least favorite Wodehouse effort so far (although, still a series of fun little romps), but an excellent book for DailyLit. Short stories lend themselves really well to email format.
I've been meaning to read Traveling Mercies by Anne Lamott for a while now. I got it from the library a few years ago, but returned it without ever reading it (yeah, it's an ongoing problem). It's been recommended to me a bunch of times, especially because I found Donald Miller's Blue Like Jazz to be very interesting. And enjoy it I did. Lamott is in no way a "traditional" Christian. She tells it like it is, doesn't apologize, and doesn't gloss over pain and suffering with a "Jesus loves you." She emphasizes community and support and love above everything else. She cusses and refers to God as He/She. I'm sure the 700 Club loooooves her. *sarcasm* My favorite quote:
"Grace is the light or electricity or juice or breeze that takes you from that isolated place and puts you with others who are as startled and embarrassed and eventually grateful as you are to be there."
My Rating: 7 out of 10 since I tend to be more traditional but I loved being smacked upside the head with something different and refreshing. Like Blue Like Jazz, it made me want to just love on people and be there to support people.
Well, I'm on a Bill Bryson kick. What a fun guy! His books are so entertaining. After I wrote a blog about the Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid, quite a few of my lovely neighbors told me to read a Walk in the Woods. So I did. Because I do everything that you guys tell me to do.
The book was great! My friend Josh hiked the whole(ish) Appalachian Trail last summer and it was cool to read about someone else's view of the same trip. Poor Bill, too. That guy had some tough days out there in the wilderness! He and his foolhardy friend, Katz, were unprepared but quickly got into a groove. He wrote about the hike with a great sense of humor. It actually made me want to go hiking some more (well, not 2000 miles, but maybe 5 or 10 miles). My favorite quote:
"When guys in camouflage pants and hunting hats sat around in the Four
Aces Diner talking about fearsome things done out-of-doors, I would no
longer have to feel like such a cupcake. I wanted a little of that
swagger that comes with being able to gaze at a far horizon through
eyes of chipped granite and say with a slow, manly sniff, 'Yeah, I’ve
shit in the woods.'"
My Rating: 9 out of 10 because really, it was hilarious and really very interesting and educational. Especially the bit about moose.
Marathon post warning!
We're talking about our passions at church (not those kind of passions, people). A guest speaker a few weeks ago told us that if we're unsure what we're passionate about, we can ask ourselves three questions: What makes you sad? What makes you mad? What makes you glad? Then we can use the answers to find out how we can use our passions to serve others. So...
Mad:
Judgmental Christians make me angrier than anything. Shush Now had a fantastic post about this a few days ago. We are NOT called to judge. We are called to LOVE. That's it. Love the Lord God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. I have no idea where in the Bible it says to castigate people for their actions, beliefs, or ideas. The closest I can find is that as Christians we are called to speak with other Christians (not those outside the faith) who we see acting in a way contrary to what we believe. And we're supposed to do that IN LOVE. So, Mr. Phelps, let's talk.
The complete lack of charity by people who can afford it (this definitely includes myself at times) makes me mad. It makes me more than mad -- it makes me sick -- to see the distribution of wealth around the world. I'm not saying we should sell everything and give all our money to the poor, but does Paris Hilton's dog really need a freaking diamond collar when thousands of people die daily because they can't afford a meal? Do I really need 30 pairs of shoes when there are millions who have no shoes at all?
People who believe themselves to be entitled to something for reasons A, B, or C make me mad. These are the people who think respect should just be doled out in handfuls instead of earned. People who cheat and think it's okay because other people cheat. People who sponge up welfare without trying to earn their own way. People who refuse to merge properly on the freeway because they drive a nicer, faster car, and they deserve to go first. People who expect others to be at their beck and call. Basically, people who think the rules don't apply to them make me mad.
Sad:
The situation in Africa (and anywhere else this might happen) where children are kidnapped in the middle of the night and are forced into being soldiers. Just thinking of being ripped out of my home and being forced to kill the people for reasons I can't understand because I'm ten years old makes me tear up. I don't understand how the world can allow this to happen. Why is this okay? Isn't there something we can do?
The rate of illiteracy around the world, especially here in the US. My parents read to me from the day I was born until the day I grabbed the book out of their hands and read it for myself. I've been a reader ever since. I love books because they give me insight, they take me on adventures, and I learn incredible things from them. The thought of not being able to read and experience books (not to mention all the other things we read on a daily basis -- signs, applications, etc.) makes my heart ache.
It makes me mad when women think of themselves as worth nothing. This includes women who have been battered and abused, girls who find their worth only in how they look and what guys think about them, women who have been told lies about who they are, and pretty much any girl at the wrong end of the foster system. I want to take all of these women and teach them that they are worth everything to God. And that there are people out there who find them worthwhile, too.
Glad:
People doing noble things make me glad. Anyone who runs a good charity falls in this category. Seeing people who find all the satisfaction in the world from seeing a kid with cancer smile, or spending some quality time with an elderly person, or seeing the look on a mom's face when she's finally free from an abusive relationship. These people tend to sacrifice a lot of things that the rest of us take for granted. These people make me glad.
Being outside in God's creation makes me glad. I've never considered myself an environmentalist by any stretch (I recycle. I use CFLs. That's about it.). But I'm coming to the realization that God entrusted us with this world, and it's a good thing to be good to the earth. So maybe that's a passion that's slowly developing, although not in this alternative-to-religion way that environmentalism seems to be lately. I just want it to be beautiful when I go to the beach, or for a hike, or even just for a walk in my own neighborhood.
Being in communion with people makes me glad. Just being around people and loving them and having a good time makes me very happy. Learning new things about people I've known for years makes me glad. Meeting new people and expanding the circle of people I know brings me joy. I used to be a total homebody, never getting out and meeting new people. But it's becoming a lot easier these days (thank you WGA strike), and I find that I like having people around; people to talk to, to discuss issues with, to enjoy activies with. These things are making me happy these days.
My thoughts about what makes me mad, sad, and glad:
I think that I'm scratching the surface of my passions. Financially, I try and give as much as possible because I've been blessed with a lot, and I'm giving to charities that align with what make me mad, sad, and glad. I'm taking time to enjoy the things that make me glad, and to try and become like the people who make me glad. I'd like to start doing a little volunteer work outside the church. I'm still working with the youth group girls to try and instill in them a sense of worth and respect. I'm not afraid to (in love) knock some of my youth group kids down off their little entitlement pedestals. Mostly I'm trying my best to love everyone around me, especially the people who aren't as easy to love. Like that guy on the freeway who can't merge.
Another book to check of my list this month is Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell. The book, told in a very conversational style, is about reinventing the church and the way we live as Christians. I've heard a lot about this book, mostly from my youth group kids, who all really liked it. We've also watched a couple of his Nooma videos in youth group, which are designed to take one aspect of the Christian faith and expand on it in an easy-to-understand way that is very applicable to teenagers.
I'm not sure if I was disappointed in Velvet Elvis, or if I've just heard it all before. I think it was presented to me as something new and radical, but our church is already ahead of the game when it comes to a lot of the things that Bell posits in this book. For example, he talks about the need to get out into the community without an agenda, but instead just to serve the people out there. Every week our church becomes more involved with the community, collecting food for families that can't don't have enough, delivering dontated furniture to the poor, making blankets for cancer patients, and giving our money to a home for street boys in Africa.
My favorite parts of the book are when Bell delves into the historical context of Jesus, and why the things he said were directly related to the Old Testament and to what Jewish people were studying. A lot of it makes the Bible seem even more alive when it is given context. This stuff was fascinating and I could have probably read a book twice as long on this subject. The other stuff was "eh," mostly because I'm already doing most of what he talks about. Had I read this book five years ago I probably would have thought it was better.
My rating: 6 out of 10, for enlightening me...a little.
I know I have both Christians and scientists who read my blog (as well as people who would not attribute either label to themselves). I hope this post inspires some (friendly) discussion about science and faith (and not necessarily the Christian faith, at least in this post, but the faith of a higher, all-powerful Being). I am very interested in hearing what you all have to say! This is most likely going to be a long post, but I encourage you to read and respond to it, because I think it's an important issue that deserves discussion.
As someone who's gone to a Christian church for years, I've sort of always pushed the questions and theories of science to the wayside to make room for my faith. The church believes one thing; science believes another, and they definitely don't agree and they can't seem to get along, so I'm just going to ignore it. But darn it, I'm the inquisitive type. So I've undertaken a journey to learn more about science and faith, and to see if the two are reconcilable. Surely if God is the God of the universe, He can hardly be threatened by my lowly efforts to find out the workings of His natural world, right? Galileo, who found himself lodged squarely between science and the church when he posited that the earth went around the sun and not vice versa, said, "I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." And so it is with this mentality I begin.
Please note that I am NOT a scientist. I was an English major, and now I'm an editor by trade and I remember only odds and ends from biology and chemistry and other science classes in college and high school. My personal knowledge is extremely limited in this area and that's why I'm undertaking this search. I am also not a theologian, although I would say I know more about theology than I do about science.
My search has stared with the Language of God, by Francis Collins. Collins is a nationally recognized scientist, one who was instrumental in the mapping of the human genome, which is apparently really important to medical advances, as well as other areas of science (I think Steve Betz has mentioned it on occasion). He is also a Christian. The Language of God was his attempt to explain to the general public how he has reconciled what he believes about science -- including the ever-so-debatable theory of evolution -- with what he believes in his heart to be true about God. I'm not sure if I agree with everything said in this book, and I'm still trying to discover how his theories might mesh with my own, but I think he has a lot of good things to think about.
Although this statement didn't appear until well into the book, I thought it was a good observation to start out with: "Science alone is not enough to answer all the important questions... The meaning of human existence, the reality of God, the posibility of an afterlife, and many other spiritual questions lay outside of the reach of the scientific method. While an athiest may claim that those questions are therefore unanswerable and irrelevant, that does not resonate with most individual's human experience." This is why searching is worth it at all, I think. Later he says, "Science is not the only way of knowing. The spiritual worldview provides another way of finding truth."
This book probably could have been a thousand pages long, but Collins decides to focus on what he calls BioLogos (from the Greek word for life bios and the Greek word for word -- or Word, in a higher sense -- logos), which has the more widespread (but still relatively unknown) title of "theistic evolution." He sees the scientific evidence for evolution (especially in reference to DNA) as compelling, yet he also sees evidence for God -- namely in what CS Lewis dubbed Moral Law. Collins believes that because we, as humans, have this innate sense of right and wrong that doesn't seem to fit with evolution. Atheists would say that there is evidence for how this sense would have evolved, Christians say that God wrote it on our hearts. Moral Law is one of my own personal evidences for the existence of God as well.
BioLogos looks like this (to Collins -- there are other variations):
- The universe came into being out of nothingness approximately 14 billion years ago.
- Despite massive improbabilities, the properties of the universe appear to have been precisely tuned for life.
- While the precise mechanism of the origin of life on earth remains unknown, once life arose, the process of evolution and natural selection permitted the development of biological diversity and complexity over very long periods of time.
- Once evolution got underway, no special supernatural intervention was required.
- Humans are a part of this process, sharing a common ancestor with the great apes.
- But humans are also unique in ways that defy evolutionary explanation and point to our spiritual nature. This includes the existence of Moral Law (the knowledge of right and wrong) and the search for God that characterizes all human cultures throughout history.
Wow. That's not something that you'll hear at most churches on a Sunday morning. The American Association of Lutheran Church, the group to which my church belongs, professes a literal six-day Creationist view. Collins deems this as incompatible with modern science, but is held onto by "sincere, well-meaning, God-fearing Christians who are driven by deep concerns that naturalism is threatening to drive God out of the human experience." This makes sense -- most believe that if there's evolution, there's no need for God. Instead, Collins posits that the creation account in Genesis is not a literal translation, but does have a more lyrical and allegorical flavor, like the Song of Solomon or the Psalms. Collins believes that "the intention of the Bible was (and is) to reveal the true nature of God to humankind. Would it have served God's puposes thirty-four hundred years ago to lecture to His people about radioactive decay, geological strata, and DNA?" Of course, there is always a concern with liberal translations of the Bible -- people can read into anything. But Collins feels there is a difference between these more allegorical books and books with eyewitness testimony and historical accounts, such as the Gospels and the rest of the New Testament. Collins finds that BioLogos to be both scientifically consistent and spiritually satisfying.
I think my biggest concern with all of this is how many times in history things have been attributed to God when, in fact, they have had a very logical scientific reasons -- solar eclipses, the movement of the planets, etc. If evolution is true (I'm not saying that it is, but go with me on this), then sticking by our standard Creation story is actually doing a disservice to faith. For when a person who has grown up in the church goes out into the world and finds a lot of contradictory information, there's a good chance that the person will walk away from the faith completely. It's like the God of the Gaps theory. God fills in where science has no explanation. Problem is, if science does find a solution, God is squeezed out. Instead, perhaps we should, as people of faith, be looking to God as the Author and Perfector of all things, even if all things were done a little bit differently than we have been taught to believe.
I know this is a basic basic basic overview of what this books is about, and it doesn't really cover the few reasons Collins gives about why he chose Christianity over other faiths, but this post was getting long enough that I thought most people might start skipping over this post if I kept going. I'm interested in knowing what you all think. I'm still not sure what I think about it all!
