Keller was recommended to me by Brent Gudgel and if Brent recommends something, by God, you should listen to him. Here are my thoughts on what Keller says:
1. I appreciate his willingness to believe and think. This is a rare combination to find today.
2. I appreciated his take on the societal birth of religion argument, that is, that if religion is born out of society, so is atheism, essentially negating the strength of the argument. Doesn't necessarily negate the argument itself, but what are you gonna do?
3. He polarizes too much ("Either Jesus did this, or he didn't...") which doesn't allow for my favorite area: the gray. (What if Jesus did do that, but not that way?)
4. He's incredibly self-deprecating, which is disarming. Love it.
5. He doesn't engage in most of the undergrad doublespeak which academia loves. He ignores it (see 1:11 - 1:19)
6. He cites Lewis several times, which irks me, because it Lewis has fallen out of favor with most thinkers. Sure, Lewis had a time and place, but I can't canonize him the way a lot of people can.
7. I don't see him addressing the applicability of "the grace narrative" as he puts it. Sure, it works out a nifty way to not just have the same old religion but in my mind there is a huge discrepancy between his interpretation of the text and life in the 21st century.
To quote Blackstreet: "That's just me. And that's how a player's got to be."
Posts
