Half-Way Point

Intermission Keller pauses at the midpoint of his book to muse on what he is seeking to accomplish. He has spent seven chapters handling the most common objections he hears against Christianity. He recognizes that dismantling opposition is not the same as building positive commitment, so he is preparing the reader for seven chapters that point toward reasons for the adoption of Christianity. But before those good reasons he addresses two pertinent questions. The first comes from the common observation that there are many flavors of Christianity. Which one is he talking about? The second deals with a philosophical thorn—rationalism or relativism? Historic Christianity Recognizing both major and minor differences, Keller focuses on that which all Christians tend to agree—the great creeds of the first thousand years. “All Christians believe all this—but no Christians believe just this.” This sentence places the book at the place nonChristians can deal with the most central issues. It also places it in the point that almost every Christian wishes he would say more (like why “my position” is right!). Reasonable Faith Many modern opponents of religion (let alone Christianity) argue for a strong rationalism, or the verification principle. By that they mean that no proposition should be accepted or believed unless the argument is so strong that no normal person could have any reason for not believing it. Some Christians see their faith as that clear and so claim that people who reject/don’t accept Christ ‘simply close their minds to the truth out of fear or stubbornness.’ Keller reminds us that the majority of scholars think such strong rationalism is impossible to defend. He notes that most people agree that every view of the truth contains a subjective viewpoint. It’s impossible not to have one. Keller offers a view that says, examine the arguments for belief, evaluate the claims, and recognize that what you settle on will be what seems most reasonable to you. (Note: Keller does not enter into the spiritual dynamics of why a person believes or not. This is not his arena for that discussion. Rather, he talks as people regularly talk about ideas. What sounds best? Why? Etc.)