DashHouse.com

I'm a certified member of the Tim Keller fan club. I listen to his sermons. I read everything he writes. I even belong to the Facebook fan club. Few thinkers or practitioners have influenced me more than he has. I am not the biggest fan out there, but I'm certainly a member of the club. This is dangerous, because nobody can live up to all that.

But Keller isn't the first to face the challenges of a growing profile and unrealistic expectations, and thankfully, he continues to use his influence wisely. The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism, now on the New York Times bestseller list, is likely to multiply his influence even more, not only within the church but also within a culture with serious doubts about Christianity.

In a sense, there's nothing new in this book. It's all out there in other places, just like all the ingredients of a meal prepared by a chef are there in the grocery store. In The Reason for God, you have presuppositional apologetics in the tradition of Van Til, as well as generous doses of C.S. Lewis, the subtle but strong influence of Jonathan Edwards, as well as engagement with contemporary thinkers and writers.

What is unique is how Keller brings all together; in other words, the way these ingredients are mixed. Keller aptly deals with common doubts and objections to Christianity, such as "There can't be just one true religion" and "How can a loving God send people to hell?" Behind every doubt is an alternate set of beliefs. "The only way to doubt Christianity rightly and fairly," Keller writes, "is to discern the alternate belief under each of your doubts and then to ask yourself what reasons you have for believing it." Keller does this with each of the objections to Christianity, showing that none of the objections make Christianity impossible or even implausible.

Doubting our doubts about Christianity is only part of the journey. In the second half of the book, Keller offers reasons for faith, demonstrating that the Christian faith makes the most sense of the world. "I ask you to put on Christianity like a pair of spectacles and look at the world with it. See what power it has to explain what we know and see."

What really stands out about this book, besides its content, is the way that Keller engages with these issues. He is civil, respectful, winsome, and ironic, but never hostile. He does not belittle those with alternate beliefs, even as he directly examines and challenges those beliefs. Keller models a way of relating to those who disagree, and provides a model for all of us. He shows how one can possess an robust and orthodox Christian faith, and yet winsomely engage with those with completely different and hostile beliefs.

Keller's wife, Kathy, has said that the mark of a good sermon is that people stop taking notes part way through. It starts rationally, like a lesson, but ends with an encounter with Jesus. The Reason for God is full of rational arguments, but it doesn't end there. By the end of the book we encounter beauty, and some of the most profound expressions of the Christian faith I've read.

Last Sunday, somebody thanked me for making this book available to them. They've been looking for a book like this for some time, and they're loving it. I don't think he will be the last one. The Reason for God is a book that deserves to be read not only by Christians, but by those who have doubts - even by those who are hostile. It covers important issues, and shows not only the rationality but the beauty of the Christian faith. Just as importantly, it does so in a way that is genuinely respectful to the reader no matter what their beliefs. I hope it will be read widely.

Book from Amazon.com | at Amazon.ca
Audiobook from Amazon.com | at Amazon.ca
ReasonforGod.com

A couple of years ago, I found myself disappointed with many of the critiques of the emerging church. Some were nasty, and some did a poor job of capturing the movement (or whatever you call it).

But something's changed. For one thing, I have. I can relate to what Trevin Wax has said: "Many who initially intrigued by the Emerging conversation are now distancing themselves from Emerging theology." (See Trevin's entire post.) Something else has changed as well: the quality of the critique. A case in point is Why We're Not Emergent: By Two Guys Who Should Be.

What do I like about this book?

The authors, Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck, don't take themselves too seriously. They write differently: Kevin is the more scholarly pastor, while Ted is the less academic guy who writes shorter, more experiential chapters. You get propositional arguments in this book, but you also get to visualize Ted reading Rob Bell while his wife's family cottage while discussing the contents with his brother-in-law, or sheepishly admitting that he likes Rob Bell's Nooma videos to his mother-in-law, who likes them too. I really enjoyed the voices of the authors in this book. "Emergent leaders have often cried foul when their books have been held up to academic scrutiny. 'We're not professional scholars,' they say, and neither are we. So it's a fair fight - more fair than fight, we hope."

I also like the way they approach the subject. They have read the books, and not just one or two either. They've been to some of the churches, conferences, and classrooms. They admit when they like the authors and speakers, and never forget that they're talking about real people. They like some aspects of the emerging church. They understand the difference between emerging and emergent. They don't think one voice speaks for the entire emerging church, and they speak appreciatively of those who are more theologically conservative. Kevin writes:

We don't think of our emergent sparring partners as "the bad guys." ... Hopefully our writing is of the "faithful wounds of a friend" variety and not the slanderous, mean-spirited kind. Our disagreements are strong and stated strongly, but, we trust, not bitter or cantankerous...We love Jesus and love the church. We believe emergent Christians love the same. The shape and substance of that love is what we disagree on.

Ted adds, "We strove to represent these guys accurately, and hope that if we were to run into each other at a conference, a coffee shop named Ecclesia, or a pub, we could truly enjoy each other's fellowship, cognizant of the fact that we'll be together in the kingdom."

They're also realistic about their goals. "We're not really writing this book to change people's minds because, let's face it, that rarely happens...This is our attempt at joining the 'conversation.'"

So what is their problem with the emerging church? Here they cover a lot of ground. They point out some of the problems with thinking of the journey as more about experience than a destination. They argue that humility is not the same thing as uncertainty. They argue for the value of propositions, which are not a modern phenomenon. They suggest that the emerging view of modernism is often caricatured. They gently poke fun at emergent speak. They present some of their problems with the notion, "Give me Jesus, not doctrine," and the emphasis on orthopraxy at the expense of orthodoxy. They question "whether the emerging church even has the category of theological error," concluding that some do, but also fearing that many do not. They suggest that the emerging church has an over-realized eschatology (too much "now" and not enough "not yet"). They argue for the value of boundaries, argue that preaching should not be thrown out, and highlight some of the contradictions and problems within popular emerging books. They defend the doctrine of penal substitution, which has been dismissed by some, as well as the doctrine of God's wrath. All of this and more. I really appreciated the way they engaged the theological issues within this book.

The epilogue of the book is a reflection on the letters to the churches in Revelation. "Emergent leaders need to celebrate all the strengths and shun the weaknesses of the seven churches in Revelation 2-3 - and admit that Jesus' prescription for health is more than community, authenticity, and inclusion." The letters in Revelation speak to all churches, including, they argue, emerging ones.

In conclusion: I have to admit that I was nervous in picking up this book. The last thing we need is another critique that's well-meaning but sloppy, misguided, or mean. I'm no longer nervous. I'm sure not everyone will agree with or appreciate everything in this book, but we can all appreciate three things:

• It provides greater understanding - This book will help those outside of the emerging church to understand the emerging church better, and vice versa.
• It clarifies the issues - This book is a primer on what the issues are. It goes beyond some of the other critiques I've read that focus only on one or two writers or one or two issues.
• It advances the "conversation" - I've always said that my emerging friends welcome critique when offered in the right way. I think this book qualifies. It may not change too many minds, but it may clarify some points of disagreement, and it may even lead to some discussion and correction.

I highly recommend this book. Still to come: an interview with the authors.

More from Amazon.com | Amazon.ca | NotEmergent.com

When everyone seemed to be blogging their favorite books at the end of 2007, I noticed an old book making a few of the lists: George Whitefield Volumes 1 and 2 by Arnold Dallimore. Dallimore was a pastor in my denomination who pastored a church just a few hours west of here. I've read his biography of Spurgeon before, and had always meant to get around to this one. Michael Haykin's recommendation was all the prompting I needed to finally put this volume at the top of my list.

George Whitefield is a name that is known to many who have dabbled in church history, but he is not as well known as others of his era like the Wesleys and Jonathan Edwards. Whitefield was in many ways the first celebrity preacher of North America. It was said that he could throw his listeners into paroxysms by merely pronouncing "Mesopotamia".

One unlettered man reports what it was like when Whitefield came to town to preach:

Now it pleased God to send mr whitefield into this land & ...i longed to see & hear him...& then one morning all in a Suding there came a messenger & said mr whitefield...is to preach...I dropt my tool that i had in my hand & run home and throu my house and bad my wife to get ready quick to go and hear mr whitefield preach at middletown...

i saw before me a cloud or fog i first thought of from ye great river but as i came nearer ye road i heard a noise something like a low rumbling thunder & i presently found out it was ye rumbling of horses feet coming down ye road & this Cloud was a Cloud of dust made by the running of horses...when we gat down to ye old meeting hous thare was a great multitude it was said to be 3 or 4000..when i see mr whitefield come up upon ye scaffold he looked almost angellical a young slim slender youth before thousands of people and with a bold undainted countenance & my hearing how god was with him everywhere as he came along it solemnized my mind and put me in a trembling fear...my old foundation was broken up & i see my righteousness would not save me.

This type of experience was repeated all over England and America as Whitefield came to preach.

George Whitefield was born in 1714 and lived a rather unremarkable childhood. He was friends with John and Charles Wesley, but little in his early life would lead us to expect how profoundly Whitefield would be used in adulthood.

Ordained in the Church of England, Whitefield began to preach in the open air when churches refused to admit him. He preached to thousands of people without amplification, and with great results. Whitefield eventually moved to America, preached to half of its population, and founded an orphanage in Georgia when it was still in its early days.

As you read Dallimore's book, you get a sense of how greatly God used this man. You also get a sense of the pressures that go along with a high profile ministry: jealousy, criticism, disagreements over theology, and the crushing weight of responsibility. At the end of volume 1, the stresses are still accumulating. Many seek greatness; it's good to be reminded that not many of us could handle it if we had it.

What I appreciate about this biography is that it is not hagiography. Whitefield makes mistakes and shows his immaturity. He pushes himself to extremes and devalues marriage. Yet he is also a man of incredible devotion and giftedness who was greatly used by God.

Biographies like these remind us how God has worked through ordinary people in the past, and remind us of the stress that comes with high-profile ministry. I can't wait to read the second volume.

More from Amazon.com | Amazon.ca