Amazon.com: Customer reviews: Making Sense of God: Finding God in the Modern World
Skip to main content
.us
Hello Select your address
All
Select the department you want to search in
Hello, Sign in
Account & Lists
Returns & Orders
Cart
All
Disability Customer Support Best Sellers Amazon Basics Customer Service New Releases Prime Today's Deals Music Books Amazon Home Registry Fashion Kindle Books Gift Cards Toys & Games Automotive Sell Shopper Toolkit Pet Supplies Computers Pharmacy Coupons Home Improvement Beauty & Personal Care Video Games Luxury Stores Smart Home Health & Household Handmade Audible
Gear up for spring outdoors

  • Making Sense of God: Finding God in the Modern World
  • ›
  • Customer reviews

Customer reviews

4.8 out of 5 stars
4.8 out of 5
731 global ratings
5 star
84%
4 star
12%
3 star
2%
2 star
1%
1 star
1%
Making Sense of God: Finding God in the Modern World

Making Sense of God: Finding God in the Modern World

byTimothy Keller
Write a review
How customer reviews and ratings work

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon
See All Buying Options

Top positive review

All positive reviews›
David George Moore
5.0 out of 5 starsKELLER'S BEST BOOK? PERSONAL RESPONSE BY KELLER
Reviewed in the United States on September 20, 2016
I wrote in a previous interview with Keller, “He has a healthy aversion to sanctimony and platitudes. He has a low tolerance for simplistic answers. Years of pastoral ministry in the hurly-burly of New York have given him a deep desire to articulate the Christian faith with integrity. Keller’s ability to frame old issues in fresh ways is a hallmark of both his teaching and writing. “

I’ve read six other books by Keller, but Making Sense of God may now be my favorite.

All the hallmarks of Keller’s writing appear. There is an integrative approach where wonderful quotes (no, I won’t use the overused “money” quotes!) from various disciplines are used throughout the book. Keller clearly keeps up in his reading, especially when it comes to philosophy, sociology, and cultural analysis. How many pastors do you know who have read Charles Taylor’s big book, A Secular Age not once, but three times? As Keller commonly says, he reads so widely because he is “desperate.” Many of us are beneficiaries due to Keller’s desperation.

Another common feature of Keller’s approach, especially as it relates to skeptics, is what I like to call “incremental apologetics.” This is where the skeptic is moved ever slowly. No big jumps from A to Z. The skeptic is paid the respect he deserves. The skeptic is truly listened to, and maybe most importantly, is confident that Keller is portraying his positions accurately. Given these realities it is not surprising that Keller would realize a “prequel” to The Reason for God was needed.

Related to the former is what I like to call “let’s talk on the bridge.” Keller models this well in both The Reason for God and in Making Sense of God. All sides are invited into a conversation (no bomb throwing allowed) where each participant is reminded that they utilize both faith and reason. This can be a tough sell for Christians and non-Christians alike, but it is crucial if real dialogue is to occur.

Making Sense of God is strong at showcasing the problems of a materialistic worldview. The problems that ensue from the reductionism of believing that the physical world is the totality of existence are a particular strength of Making Sense of God. And Keller does not just use Christians to answer materialists like Stephen Pinker. Rather, he highlights other skeptics like Julian Barnes whose reflections on the beauty of Mozart’s Requiem made him wonder whether physical reality is the sum total of human existence.

I close with one slight disappointment and a comment about source notes.

First, the slight disappointment. Keller writes, “All of us have things we believe—including things we would sacrifice and even die for–that cannot be proven. But since these beliefs cannot be proved, does this mean we ought not to hold them, or that we can’t know them to be true? We should, therefore, stop demanding that belief in God meet a standard of universally acknowledged proof when we don’t apply that to the other commitments on which we base our lives.” Granted there is an important truth there, but believing or not believing in God is far more costly than other matters, so it is understandable why we might “demand” more evidence. There may be sufficient evidence for Christianity, but it is understandable why many of us would like more. I found this a bit too quick of a dismissal of an honest objection, something that is uncharacteristic of Keller.

It may seem rather strange to finish this review with a comment about endnotes, but I must. I regularly scan the footnotes (these days they are almost always endnotes) to see whether the author has interacted with the best literature. Not only do Keller’s endnotes demonstrate his careful reading, but there really is a book within a book. My only concern here is that too many readers will forego reading the endnotes thinking they are unimportant, or simply too academic. For those willing to slow down and read the endnotes, they will find a treasure trove of bibliographic suggestions, further interaction, and fuller quotes.

Tim Keller graciously responded to my "slight disappointment" with this:

My point here was that both belief in a universe without a God (that things exist on their own, that moral obligation exists without God, and so on) and belief in a universe with God-take equal amounts of faith and reason to hold. Both views (I argue in the book) require major steps of faith, and both also have some good logical arguments on their side. Neither can demonstrably prove their position to all rational people. So I don’t think the objection--that belief in a universe with God must meet a higher standard of proof than believe in a materialistic-only universe—really holds true. — Tim Keller
Read more
208 people found this helpful

Top critical review

All critical reviews›
JVib
1.0 out of 5 starsGod Claims Make No Sense
Reviewed in the United States on June 28, 2019
Preface: Tim: “Believers and nonbelievers in god alike arrive at their positions through a combination of experience, faith, reasoning, and intuition.” I disagree that non-believers coming to their position using faith and intuition. (Faith: 1. Complete trust or confidence in someone or something; 2. Strong believe in god or the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.) Based on these definitions I do not have either. What I do have is reasonable level of confidence based on the information and evidence to which I have access. (Intuition: The ability to acquire knowledge without proof, evidence, or conscious reason, or without understanding how the knowledge was acquired.) Based on this definition I would not rely on intuition to determine the truth because intuition is not a reliable pathway to determine if a proposition is true (factually accurate). As for experience; we receive all of our information through experience (input to your brain through your five senses) and use reasoning to make sense of that information. These two elements are what I use. Tim goes on to redefine a word to fit his agenda. Secularism: 1. Separation of church and state. 2. In describing individuals: A secular person is one who does not know if there is a god or any supernatural realm beyond the natural world. Everything, in this view, has a scientific explanation. (I agree with not knowing if a god, or anything supernatural exists; or it could be better stated as not knowing if the claims humans make that a god exists are factually accurate. However, not everything has a scientific explanation currently. 3. In describing a kind of culture with its themes and narratives. A secular age is one in which all the emphasis is on the saeculum, on the here-and-now, without any concept of the eternal. Meaning in life, guidance, and happiness are understood and sought in present-time economic prosperity, material comfort, and emotional fulfillment. (I disagree with the “here-and-now comment.” We do look to the future and future generations and work to ensure the future of humans and our planet are better. We humans can understand the concept of the eternal however we have no means to demonstrate anything is eternal exists. Yes, humans strive to have more wellbeing. A life with less suffering is generally better than a life with more suffering.)
C1: Isn’t religion going away? According to recent research religious belief is declining in countries where greater access to higher education is available. In countries with low levels of higher education the religious population is growing (in some part due to birth rates). So, is religion going away any time soon? Probably not. However, it may decline over time as our education, technology and scientific discoveries improve. Tim goes on to state “Another explanation is that great numbers of people intuitively sense a transcendent realm beyond this natural world.” I agree that some people “feel” that there may be something transcendent but that does not demonstrate that something transcendent exists. Tim then goes on to say that reason & science cannot adjudicate morality. Tim appeals to emotion by referring to all of the violence which occurred in the 20th century. Human have always been violent to other humans. In the 20th century we had greater capability to do so because of improved technology. This has NOTHING to do with secularism. The bible (god) advocates violence in many ways. I don’t see how it is any better. Tim moves on and states, “But if we assert, which virtually everyone does, that love, meaning, and morals do not merely feel real but actually are so - science cannot support that.” Love, meaning and morals exist in human minds and are part of the functions of our physical brains. They do NOT exist outside of human brains. Tim states: “Secular reason, all by itself, cannot give us a basis for sacrifice, redemption, and forgiveness.” Yes, it can. We are social animals. We desire being with other people because it is in our best interest to be part of the group. If we do something of which the group disapproves, we may be ostracized. Seeking redemption and forgiveness for our bad behavior can bring us back into the group. We understand pain and, as part of the group, want to prevent the pain of others for whom we care. None of this requires a supernatural explanation. Tim moves on to the beginning of the universe and provides a quote; “How can it be that this world is the result of an accidental big band?” First, using the word accidental is unfair because we don’t know the cause at this time; and this applies to every human who has ever lived. If someone want to posit an explanation of how the universe came into existence, that person must demonstrate their explanation is factually accurate. Just stating or implying a god did it is not enough. Tim moves on to the argument from beauty. He uses the example that some people are moved by Mozart’s Requiem. Yes, it does move some people emotionally and others are not move at all. But this is a completely natural emotional reaction. What one person finds beautiful others may not. This is completely subjective. It seems Tim is implying that these emotional reactions are being provided on a supernatural level. If these emotions somehow exist external to a physical brain it must be demonstrated. Next, Tim appeals to stories of people’s personal experiences. Personal experience is not a reliable pathway to truth because it is not possible to determine if someone’s personal experience is, factually, what they thought it was. Ask yourself, will you believe every claim anyone makes if they appeal to their personal experience? Could they be mistaken? Tim then states: “Strick secularism holds that people are only physical entities without souls, that when love ones die they simply cease to exist, that sensation of love and beauty are just neurological-chemical events, that there is no right or wrong outside of what we in our minds determine and choose.” As far as we humans can determine most of this statement is true. There is no evidence to demonstrate we are anything but physical entities, nor evidence to demonstrate a soul exists, nor evidence of an afterlife. We can demonstrate our brain reaction to feelings of love and beauty which indicates they are, in fact, neurological-chemical events.
C2: Isn’t religion based on faith and secularism on evidence? In this section Tim is trying to push that nonbelievers have just as much faith as the religious. As Tim mention above, the religious rely on faith and intuition along with experience and reasoning. Whereas I do not rely on faith nor intuition. I do use experience and the evidence it provides. At one point, Tim states that we cannot determine if our reality is “real.” This is accurate. We can never know for certain that our senses are accurately assessing our reality; however, we can verify what we are experiencing with other humans. Ultimately this is the only reality we have, so we must accept it and live as if it is real. Tim goes on to state that secular people cannot believe in ethical behavior because it can’t be proven in a laboratory. This is ridiculous. We can demonstrate that human ethical behavior exists and that it is beneficial to overall human wellbeing. Tim states, “..reason depends on the faith that our cognitive sense…are not tricking us.” No, there is no faith involved. We can demonstrate and verify that our cognitive sense is accurate in our shared reality. Ultimately, this entire chapter is an attempt to push faith-based belief onto nonbelievers in order to move the burden of proof away from the religious. But it fails. Not being able to accept a claim as being factually accurate due to lack of evidence is not faith. Later in the chapter Tim makes this statement: “However, if we are just a decaying piece of matter in a decaying universe and nothing more significant than that, how does it follow that we should live a life of love toward others? It doesn’t. Why shouldn’t we live as selfishly as we can get away with? How do beliefs in individual freedom, human rights, and equality arise from or align with the ideal that human beings came to be what they are through survival of the fittest?” We humans survive because of our social and cooperative nature. We all work together to make a better life for all. Evolution makes sense here as the more cooperative we were the more successful we were which allowed us to survive and thrive. Christianity did not invent these natural human qualities. These qualities predate Christianity and all other religions.
C3: In this chapter Tim speaks of the meaning of life. Then Tim speaks of “created meaning” vs “discovered meaning.” He claims that “inherent” and “assigned” meanings exist and these are provide by a god and we can discover them. Whereas secular people have not discovered, but rather created their meaning in life. So, what mechanism can we use to differentiate between a person who claims to have discovered her meaning in life and a person who has a created her meaning in life? The only difference between the two is how the person feels emotionally about what they perceive to be their meaning. Tim goes on to speak of moral authority. Simply put, human wellbeing is how we determine our shared morals. Human morals evolve over time. We can use the bible to demonstrate this fact. The bible, and thereby god, sanctions owning other people as property and never renounces it. Yet, over time humans arrived at the conclusion that humans owning other humans as property was not conducive (and it was often detrimental) to human wellbeing. If god has placed morals in us this claim must be demonstrated to be true.
C4: A Satisfaction That Is Not Based on Circumstances. In this chapter Tim uses many quotes from other people to support his claim that our current society is somehow less happy than ancient societies. There is no way for Tim to demonstrate this claim to be true, as no statistics were kept regarding happiness in ancient societies. He is simply speculating. What we do know is the ancient world was far more primitive and dangerous to humans than today. Tim goes on and on about how unhappy our current global society is in our current age. Yet, he doesn’t provide any statistics to back up this claim. Then he spends the majority of this chapter attempting to convince his readers how horribly unhappy (discontent) we all are. I have seen this tactic before. He is first trying to convince us that we all have some problem (not being happy). He then tells us that other philosophical & religious beliefs won’t help us. Then, at the end of the chapter, he pushed his cure for the problem. He tells us that accepting and following his very specific religious doctrines (Christianity) will cure us. Yet, he does not demonstrate this is true. As a matter of fact, many Christians do suffer from depression and many do commit suicide. Also, some surveys show that Hindus and Buddhists are happier than Christians. So, Tim is demonstrably wrong. I am not a religious person and yet I am extremely content with my life and find happiness in so many things. If you find happiness in your religious beliefs, I am glad for you. However, Tim should not be pushing religion as a solution because it is not a magical fix.
C5: In this chapter Tim discusses how we, as humans, are tied to other humans. I have covered much of this elsewhere in this review. Tim goes on to say that whatever you love the most becomes your ultimate master. This is a ridiculous claim! Then Tim states that “…whatever is the source of your meaning and satisfaction in life is what you are worshipping, though you may not acknowledge it as such.” (Worship: [noun] The feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity. [verb] Show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites.) Why does Tim find it necessary to claim that every human has some form or religion like he does? I am NOT worshiping anything! I have things I must do to survive and thrive in this reality. Tim goes on to exaggerate his claims by stating, “If anything threatens them, you get uncontrollably anxious or angry. If anything takes them away, you can lose the very will to live.” Yes, if something threatens the safety and security of me or others I will get anxious and angry. That is completely natural, and it would drive me to prevent these bad things from happening. However, if they were taken away I would find a way to move on with my life over time. Tim states, “If there is no god, you will have to turn some created thing into a god to worship…” NO! This is simply wrong. There is a huge difference between worshiping something and requiring something (a job), or enjoying something (a hobby), or seeking something (long term good health). If someone takes these things to an unhealthy level it will ultimately have a negative impact to his life and that person will have to deal with the consequences his actions here in the real world.
C6: In this chapter Tim covers identity or “Who am I?” Tim attempt to separate our attitude toward a group and the individual. However, most people can fall into both categories depending on circumstances. He implies that the individual one is somehow selfish and wrong. We need to be good or ourselves just as much as we should be good to others. Tim states, “Secular thinkers, however, attack the very idea of a cosmic, normative moral order, and this created major problems…” I would question how Tim could demonstrate this cosmic, normative moral order exists. This implies that this moral order exists outside of the minds of humans. Yet again Tim is painting a bleak picture of how humans feel in this chapter. Does Tim realize that this happens to everyone? Sometimes we must give up on something we want to get something else? Tim states that we all focus only on internal validation when this is not true. We need to appreciate ourselves and we need social acceptance. We all receive a combination of both. If we don’t like ourselves this is a problem we need to address because it can have a negative impact to our lives. If others criticize us we may want to examine why and if those criticisms are valid we should consider making some changes. Tim is greatly oversimplifying our identity. It is far more complex than the simple examples he provides. Take all the aspects of a person as a whole and you would have a much better idea of who she is. Yet, people change aspects of themselves all the time. We grow and develop over time. So, who a person was in the past, who a person is right now, and who a person is in the future can all be different based on voluntary and/or involuntary changes. Tim states: “Ironically, the apparent freedom of secular identity brings crushing burdens with it.” Really? How so? Again, Tim is pushing his tactic of trying to convince us we have a problem and he has the solution (Christianity).
C7: This chapter is a continuation of the last chapter. Tim goes on and on about how being a Christian is the only way someone can have “identity” where you feel good. Tim states: “but there is a third option – there are people who, as it were, look neither outward nor inward but upward.” How can anyone differentiate between looking upward (to a belief in a god) and looking inward (what exists in your mind)? These are the same thing. Tim continues to paint an overly bleak picture of anything other than Christian belief, “The modern self is crushing. It must base itself on success or achievement or some human love relationship, and if any of these things is jeopardized or lost, you lose your very identity.” This is ridiculously overstated. We humans are resilient both physically and emotionally. If we don’t get what we had hoped for, we mourn and move on! People can lead fulfilling lives and have a positive view of their identity without religion. Then Tim states, “Only love of the immutable can bring tranquility. Only the unconditional love of a god will do.” Again, Tim is demonstrably wrong. How can we differentiate between this love and our own feelings?
C8: Tim speaks of suicide rates going up. Yes, suicide rates tend to go up under certain circumstances. However, Christians suffer from depression issues and Christians commit suicide. Tim states: “We cannot live without at least an implicit set of beliefs that our lives are building toward some end, some hope, to which our actions are contributing.” I can somewhat agree with this statement. We all have goals, desires, and needs. Hope is an emotional desire for something. We all hope for things we want. Again, Tim claims that without Jesus our hope is futile. He claims, to have a “better life” we must be a Christian. This formula is getting tedious. We all have goals. But these goals evolve over time. We achieve some and do not achieve others. We all deal with this on an emotional level and most people deal with this just fine. This book should have been titled “The Only Way Your Life Won’t Suck is If You Convert to Christianity.”
C9: Tim is going to cover morality, which in his opinion exists outside of human minds. The argument boils down to the standard apologist moral argument: 1. If there are objectively binding moral obligations, then God exists. 2. There are objectively binding moral obligations. 3. Therefore, God exists. Ultimately there are no objectively binding moral obligations. All morals are subjective. We humans do have shared moral values because we are human. We understand how it feels to be human. We understand what feels good and what feels bad. We understand that other humans (for the most part) feel as we do. We understand the potential benefits of making others feel good and the potential consequences of making others feel bad. This is call empathy. The basis of our morality is human wellbeing.. Human morality has evolved over time which demonstrates that is not objective and provided to us by an external source. Is owning another person as property morally wrong? It was in the past (Exodus 21 & Leviticus 25) but it no longer is in most countries of the world. Is killing someone because they had consensual sexual contact with someone of the same gender? It was in the past (Leviticus 18 & 20). If there were moral absolutes which exist outside of human minds our morals would not have evolved over time, yet they did.
C10: Tim rehashes the moral argument in this chapter and then tries to demonstrate that the Christian form of morality is really the only one that works because it is based on commands. Yet he only focuses on the “Love thy neighbor” command and ignores all of the other commands in the bible (parents killing disrespectful children, killing homosexuals, slavery being morally acceptable, etc)
C11: In this section he again claims that Christians do not have the burden of proof to demonstrate their god exists because non-believers have a belief. He finally adds that this is for people who claim there is no god. I do NOT claim there is no god. I simply do not have enough evidence to be convinced by the claims people make that a god exists. So, in this case the burden of proof does belong to the Christian to prove their claim is true. Then Tim moves to some standard Christian apologetics arguments which I don’t have space to cover, but some have already been covered in earlier chapters.
C12: In this section Tim uses the bible to attempt to prove the bible to be true which is a text book example of circular reasoning. The bible is the claim which must be demonstrated to be true. He does nothing to demonstrate the factual accuracy of anything stated in the bible. He is simply appealing to emotion.
Read more
7 people found this helpful

Search
Sort by
Top reviews
Filter by
All reviewers
All stars
Text, image, video
731 global ratings | 234 global reviews

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

From the United States

David George Moore
5.0 out of 5 stars KELLER'S BEST BOOK? PERSONAL RESPONSE BY KELLER
Reviewed in the United States on September 20, 2016
I wrote in a previous interview with Keller, “He has a healthy aversion to sanctimony and platitudes. He has a low tolerance for simplistic answers. Years of pastoral ministry in the hurly-burly of New York have given him a deep desire to articulate the Christian faith with integrity. Keller’s ability to frame old issues in fresh ways is a hallmark of both his teaching and writing. “

I’ve read six other books by Keller, but Making Sense of God may now be my favorite.

All the hallmarks of Keller’s writing appear. There is an integrative approach where wonderful quotes (no, I won’t use the overused “money” quotes!) from various disciplines are used throughout the book. Keller clearly keeps up in his reading, especially when it comes to philosophy, sociology, and cultural analysis. How many pastors do you know who have read Charles Taylor’s big book, A Secular Age not once, but three times? As Keller commonly says, he reads so widely because he is “desperate.” Many of us are beneficiaries due to Keller’s desperation.

Another common feature of Keller’s approach, especially as it relates to skeptics, is what I like to call “incremental apologetics.” This is where the skeptic is moved ever slowly. No big jumps from A to Z. The skeptic is paid the respect he deserves. The skeptic is truly listened to, and maybe most importantly, is confident that Keller is portraying his positions accurately. Given these realities it is not surprising that Keller would realize a “prequel” to The Reason for God was needed.

Related to the former is what I like to call “let’s talk on the bridge.” Keller models this well in both The Reason for God and in Making Sense of God. All sides are invited into a conversation (no bomb throwing allowed) where each participant is reminded that they utilize both faith and reason. This can be a tough sell for Christians and non-Christians alike, but it is crucial if real dialogue is to occur.

Making Sense of God is strong at showcasing the problems of a materialistic worldview. The problems that ensue from the reductionism of believing that the physical world is the totality of existence are a particular strength of Making Sense of God. And Keller does not just use Christians to answer materialists like Stephen Pinker. Rather, he highlights other skeptics like Julian Barnes whose reflections on the beauty of Mozart’s Requiem made him wonder whether physical reality is the sum total of human existence.

I close with one slight disappointment and a comment about source notes.

First, the slight disappointment. Keller writes, “All of us have things we believe—including things we would sacrifice and even die for–that cannot be proven. But since these beliefs cannot be proved, does this mean we ought not to hold them, or that we can’t know them to be true? We should, therefore, stop demanding that belief in God meet a standard of universally acknowledged proof when we don’t apply that to the other commitments on which we base our lives.” Granted there is an important truth there, but believing or not believing in God is far more costly than other matters, so it is understandable why we might “demand” more evidence. There may be sufficient evidence for Christianity, but it is understandable why many of us would like more. I found this a bit too quick of a dismissal of an honest objection, something that is uncharacteristic of Keller.

It may seem rather strange to finish this review with a comment about endnotes, but I must. I regularly scan the footnotes (these days they are almost always endnotes) to see whether the author has interacted with the best literature. Not only do Keller’s endnotes demonstrate his careful reading, but there really is a book within a book. My only concern here is that too many readers will forego reading the endnotes thinking they are unimportant, or simply too academic. For those willing to slow down and read the endnotes, they will find a treasure trove of bibliographic suggestions, further interaction, and fuller quotes.

Tim Keller graciously responded to my "slight disappointment" with this:

My point here was that both belief in a universe without a God (that things exist on their own, that moral obligation exists without God, and so on) and belief in a universe with God-take equal amounts of faith and reason to hold. Both views (I argue in the book) require major steps of faith, and both also have some good logical arguments on their side. Neither can demonstrably prove their position to all rational people. So I don’t think the objection--that belief in a universe with God must meet a higher standard of proof than believe in a materialistic-only universe—really holds true. — Tim Keller
208 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


JVib
1.0 out of 5 stars God Claims Make No Sense
Reviewed in the United States on June 28, 2019
Verified Purchase
Preface: Tim: “Believers and nonbelievers in god alike arrive at their positions through a combination of experience, faith, reasoning, and intuition.” I disagree that non-believers coming to their position using faith and intuition. (Faith: 1. Complete trust or confidence in someone or something; 2. Strong believe in god or the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.) Based on these definitions I do not have either. What I do have is reasonable level of confidence based on the information and evidence to which I have access. (Intuition: The ability to acquire knowledge without proof, evidence, or conscious reason, or without understanding how the knowledge was acquired.) Based on this definition I would not rely on intuition to determine the truth because intuition is not a reliable pathway to determine if a proposition is true (factually accurate). As for experience; we receive all of our information through experience (input to your brain through your five senses) and use reasoning to make sense of that information. These two elements are what I use. Tim goes on to redefine a word to fit his agenda. Secularism: 1. Separation of church and state. 2. In describing individuals: A secular person is one who does not know if there is a god or any supernatural realm beyond the natural world. Everything, in this view, has a scientific explanation. (I agree with not knowing if a god, or anything supernatural exists; or it could be better stated as not knowing if the claims humans make that a god exists are factually accurate. However, not everything has a scientific explanation currently. 3. In describing a kind of culture with its themes and narratives. A secular age is one in which all the emphasis is on the saeculum, on the here-and-now, without any concept of the eternal. Meaning in life, guidance, and happiness are understood and sought in present-time economic prosperity, material comfort, and emotional fulfillment. (I disagree with the “here-and-now comment.” We do look to the future and future generations and work to ensure the future of humans and our planet are better. We humans can understand the concept of the eternal however we have no means to demonstrate anything is eternal exists. Yes, humans strive to have more wellbeing. A life with less suffering is generally better than a life with more suffering.)
C1: Isn’t religion going away? According to recent research religious belief is declining in countries where greater access to higher education is available. In countries with low levels of higher education the religious population is growing (in some part due to birth rates). So, is religion going away any time soon? Probably not. However, it may decline over time as our education, technology and scientific discoveries improve. Tim goes on to state “Another explanation is that great numbers of people intuitively sense a transcendent realm beyond this natural world.” I agree that some people “feel” that there may be something transcendent but that does not demonstrate that something transcendent exists. Tim then goes on to say that reason & science cannot adjudicate morality. Tim appeals to emotion by referring to all of the violence which occurred in the 20th century. Human have always been violent to other humans. In the 20th century we had greater capability to do so because of improved technology. This has NOTHING to do with secularism. The bible (god) advocates violence in many ways. I don’t see how it is any better. Tim moves on and states, “But if we assert, which virtually everyone does, that love, meaning, and morals do not merely feel real but actually are so - science cannot support that.” Love, meaning and morals exist in human minds and are part of the functions of our physical brains. They do NOT exist outside of human brains. Tim states: “Secular reason, all by itself, cannot give us a basis for sacrifice, redemption, and forgiveness.” Yes, it can. We are social animals. We desire being with other people because it is in our best interest to be part of the group. If we do something of which the group disapproves, we may be ostracized. Seeking redemption and forgiveness for our bad behavior can bring us back into the group. We understand pain and, as part of the group, want to prevent the pain of others for whom we care. None of this requires a supernatural explanation. Tim moves on to the beginning of the universe and provides a quote; “How can it be that this world is the result of an accidental big band?” First, using the word accidental is unfair because we don’t know the cause at this time; and this applies to every human who has ever lived. If someone want to posit an explanation of how the universe came into existence, that person must demonstrate their explanation is factually accurate. Just stating or implying a god did it is not enough. Tim moves on to the argument from beauty. He uses the example that some people are moved by Mozart’s Requiem. Yes, it does move some people emotionally and others are not move at all. But this is a completely natural emotional reaction. What one person finds beautiful others may not. This is completely subjective. It seems Tim is implying that these emotional reactions are being provided on a supernatural level. If these emotions somehow exist external to a physical brain it must be demonstrated. Next, Tim appeals to stories of people’s personal experiences. Personal experience is not a reliable pathway to truth because it is not possible to determine if someone’s personal experience is, factually, what they thought it was. Ask yourself, will you believe every claim anyone makes if they appeal to their personal experience? Could they be mistaken? Tim then states: “Strick secularism holds that people are only physical entities without souls, that when love ones die they simply cease to exist, that sensation of love and beauty are just neurological-chemical events, that there is no right or wrong outside of what we in our minds determine and choose.” As far as we humans can determine most of this statement is true. There is no evidence to demonstrate we are anything but physical entities, nor evidence to demonstrate a soul exists, nor evidence of an afterlife. We can demonstrate our brain reaction to feelings of love and beauty which indicates they are, in fact, neurological-chemical events.
C2: Isn’t religion based on faith and secularism on evidence? In this section Tim is trying to push that nonbelievers have just as much faith as the religious. As Tim mention above, the religious rely on faith and intuition along with experience and reasoning. Whereas I do not rely on faith nor intuition. I do use experience and the evidence it provides. At one point, Tim states that we cannot determine if our reality is “real.” This is accurate. We can never know for certain that our senses are accurately assessing our reality; however, we can verify what we are experiencing with other humans. Ultimately this is the only reality we have, so we must accept it and live as if it is real. Tim goes on to state that secular people cannot believe in ethical behavior because it can’t be proven in a laboratory. This is ridiculous. We can demonstrate that human ethical behavior exists and that it is beneficial to overall human wellbeing. Tim states, “..reason depends on the faith that our cognitive sense…are not tricking us.” No, there is no faith involved. We can demonstrate and verify that our cognitive sense is accurate in our shared reality. Ultimately, this entire chapter is an attempt to push faith-based belief onto nonbelievers in order to move the burden of proof away from the religious. But it fails. Not being able to accept a claim as being factually accurate due to lack of evidence is not faith. Later in the chapter Tim makes this statement: “However, if we are just a decaying piece of matter in a decaying universe and nothing more significant than that, how does it follow that we should live a life of love toward others? It doesn’t. Why shouldn’t we live as selfishly as we can get away with? How do beliefs in individual freedom, human rights, and equality arise from or align with the ideal that human beings came to be what they are through survival of the fittest?” We humans survive because of our social and cooperative nature. We all work together to make a better life for all. Evolution makes sense here as the more cooperative we were the more successful we were which allowed us to survive and thrive. Christianity did not invent these natural human qualities. These qualities predate Christianity and all other religions.
C3: In this chapter Tim speaks of the meaning of life. Then Tim speaks of “created meaning” vs “discovered meaning.” He claims that “inherent” and “assigned” meanings exist and these are provide by a god and we can discover them. Whereas secular people have not discovered, but rather created their meaning in life. So, what mechanism can we use to differentiate between a person who claims to have discovered her meaning in life and a person who has a created her meaning in life? The only difference between the two is how the person feels emotionally about what they perceive to be their meaning. Tim goes on to speak of moral authority. Simply put, human wellbeing is how we determine our shared morals. Human morals evolve over time. We can use the bible to demonstrate this fact. The bible, and thereby god, sanctions owning other people as property and never renounces it. Yet, over time humans arrived at the conclusion that humans owning other humans as property was not conducive (and it was often detrimental) to human wellbeing. If god has placed morals in us this claim must be demonstrated to be true.
C4: A Satisfaction That Is Not Based on Circumstances. In this chapter Tim uses many quotes from other people to support his claim that our current society is somehow less happy than ancient societies. There is no way for Tim to demonstrate this claim to be true, as no statistics were kept regarding happiness in ancient societies. He is simply speculating. What we do know is the ancient world was far more primitive and dangerous to humans than today. Tim goes on and on about how unhappy our current global society is in our current age. Yet, he doesn’t provide any statistics to back up this claim. Then he spends the majority of this chapter attempting to convince his readers how horribly unhappy (discontent) we all are. I have seen this tactic before. He is first trying to convince us that we all have some problem (not being happy). He then tells us that other philosophical & religious beliefs won’t help us. Then, at the end of the chapter, he pushed his cure for the problem. He tells us that accepting and following his very specific religious doctrines (Christianity) will cure us. Yet, he does not demonstrate this is true. As a matter of fact, many Christians do suffer from depression and many do commit suicide. Also, some surveys show that Hindus and Buddhists are happier than Christians. So, Tim is demonstrably wrong. I am not a religious person and yet I am extremely content with my life and find happiness in so many things. If you find happiness in your religious beliefs, I am glad for you. However, Tim should not be pushing religion as a solution because it is not a magical fix.
C5: In this chapter Tim discusses how we, as humans, are tied to other humans. I have covered much of this elsewhere in this review. Tim goes on to say that whatever you love the most becomes your ultimate master. This is a ridiculous claim! Then Tim states that “…whatever is the source of your meaning and satisfaction in life is what you are worshipping, though you may not acknowledge it as such.” (Worship: [noun] The feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity. [verb] Show reverence and adoration for (a deity); honor with religious rites.) Why does Tim find it necessary to claim that every human has some form or religion like he does? I am NOT worshiping anything! I have things I must do to survive and thrive in this reality. Tim goes on to exaggerate his claims by stating, “If anything threatens them, you get uncontrollably anxious or angry. If anything takes them away, you can lose the very will to live.” Yes, if something threatens the safety and security of me or others I will get anxious and angry. That is completely natural, and it would drive me to prevent these bad things from happening. However, if they were taken away I would find a way to move on with my life over time. Tim states, “If there is no god, you will have to turn some created thing into a god to worship…” NO! This is simply wrong. There is a huge difference between worshiping something and requiring something (a job), or enjoying something (a hobby), or seeking something (long term good health). If someone takes these things to an unhealthy level it will ultimately have a negative impact to his life and that person will have to deal with the consequences his actions here in the real world.
C6: In this chapter Tim covers identity or “Who am I?” Tim attempt to separate our attitude toward a group and the individual. However, most people can fall into both categories depending on circumstances. He implies that the individual one is somehow selfish and wrong. We need to be good or ourselves just as much as we should be good to others. Tim states, “Secular thinkers, however, attack the very idea of a cosmic, normative moral order, and this created major problems…” I would question how Tim could demonstrate this cosmic, normative moral order exists. This implies that this moral order exists outside of the minds of humans. Yet again Tim is painting a bleak picture of how humans feel in this chapter. Does Tim realize that this happens to everyone? Sometimes we must give up on something we want to get something else? Tim states that we all focus only on internal validation when this is not true. We need to appreciate ourselves and we need social acceptance. We all receive a combination of both. If we don’t like ourselves this is a problem we need to address because it can have a negative impact to our lives. If others criticize us we may want to examine why and if those criticisms are valid we should consider making some changes. Tim is greatly oversimplifying our identity. It is far more complex than the simple examples he provides. Take all the aspects of a person as a whole and you would have a much better idea of who she is. Yet, people change aspects of themselves all the time. We grow and develop over time. So, who a person was in the past, who a person is right now, and who a person is in the future can all be different based on voluntary and/or involuntary changes. Tim states: “Ironically, the apparent freedom of secular identity brings crushing burdens with it.” Really? How so? Again, Tim is pushing his tactic of trying to convince us we have a problem and he has the solution (Christianity).
C7: This chapter is a continuation of the last chapter. Tim goes on and on about how being a Christian is the only way someone can have “identity” where you feel good. Tim states: “but there is a third option – there are people who, as it were, look neither outward nor inward but upward.” How can anyone differentiate between looking upward (to a belief in a god) and looking inward (what exists in your mind)? These are the same thing. Tim continues to paint an overly bleak picture of anything other than Christian belief, “The modern self is crushing. It must base itself on success or achievement or some human love relationship, and if any of these things is jeopardized or lost, you lose your very identity.” This is ridiculously overstated. We humans are resilient both physically and emotionally. If we don’t get what we had hoped for, we mourn and move on! People can lead fulfilling lives and have a positive view of their identity without religion. Then Tim states, “Only love of the immutable can bring tranquility. Only the unconditional love of a god will do.” Again, Tim is demonstrably wrong. How can we differentiate between this love and our own feelings?
C8: Tim speaks of suicide rates going up. Yes, suicide rates tend to go up under certain circumstances. However, Christians suffer from depression issues and Christians commit suicide. Tim states: “We cannot live without at least an implicit set of beliefs that our lives are building toward some end, some hope, to which our actions are contributing.” I can somewhat agree with this statement. We all have goals, desires, and needs. Hope is an emotional desire for something. We all hope for things we want. Again, Tim claims that without Jesus our hope is futile. He claims, to have a “better life” we must be a Christian. This formula is getting tedious. We all have goals. But these goals evolve over time. We achieve some and do not achieve others. We all deal with this on an emotional level and most people deal with this just fine. This book should have been titled “The Only Way Your Life Won’t Suck is If You Convert to Christianity.”
C9: Tim is going to cover morality, which in his opinion exists outside of human minds. The argument boils down to the standard apologist moral argument: 1. If there are objectively binding moral obligations, then God exists. 2. There are objectively binding moral obligations. 3. Therefore, God exists. Ultimately there are no objectively binding moral obligations. All morals are subjective. We humans do have shared moral values because we are human. We understand how it feels to be human. We understand what feels good and what feels bad. We understand that other humans (for the most part) feel as we do. We understand the potential benefits of making others feel good and the potential consequences of making others feel bad. This is call empathy. The basis of our morality is human wellbeing.. Human morality has evolved over time which demonstrates that is not objective and provided to us by an external source. Is owning another person as property morally wrong? It was in the past (Exodus 21 & Leviticus 25) but it no longer is in most countries of the world. Is killing someone because they had consensual sexual contact with someone of the same gender? It was in the past (Leviticus 18 & 20). If there were moral absolutes which exist outside of human minds our morals would not have evolved over time, yet they did.
C10: Tim rehashes the moral argument in this chapter and then tries to demonstrate that the Christian form of morality is really the only one that works because it is based on commands. Yet he only focuses on the “Love thy neighbor” command and ignores all of the other commands in the bible (parents killing disrespectful children, killing homosexuals, slavery being morally acceptable, etc)
C11: In this section he again claims that Christians do not have the burden of proof to demonstrate their god exists because non-believers have a belief. He finally adds that this is for people who claim there is no god. I do NOT claim there is no god. I simply do not have enough evidence to be convinced by the claims people make that a god exists. So, in this case the burden of proof does belong to the Christian to prove their claim is true. Then Tim moves to some standard Christian apologetics arguments which I don’t have space to cover, but some have already been covered in earlier chapters.
C12: In this section Tim uses the bible to attempt to prove the bible to be true which is a text book example of circular reasoning. The bible is the claim which must be demonstrated to be true. He does nothing to demonstrate the factual accuracy of anything stated in the bible. He is simply appealing to emotion.
7 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


Dottie Parish
5.0 out of 5 stars This is an outstanding book!
Reviewed in the United States on January 9, 2017
Verified Purchase
Making Sense of God is an excellent exploration and comparison of the beliefs of the secular culture versus faith in God. Timothy Keller invites skeptics to read and follow his logic. Keller has thoroughly researched the in and outs of philosophy, history and religion as it applies to faith and he carefully explains the reasons we can make sense of God. He suggests that we can’t live without meaning, satisfaction, freedom, identity, hope and justice.

Part One of the book is titled Why Does Anyone Need Religion? Many skeptics believe religion will eventually go away. Keller cites many facts to show the opposite is true; religion is growing. Skeptics also believe religion is based on faith and secularism is based on evidence. Keller shows that both faith and secularism are based on faith as well as evidence.

Part Two, Religion is More than You Think It Is, covers eight meaty chapters. In Chapter Six, The Problem of Self, I particularly liked his comparison of an Anglo-Saxon warrior in Britain in AD 800 who examines his heart and sees two strong inner impulses or feelings. One is aggression which fits his culture so he says “That’s me.” The other impulse he sees in himself is same sex attraction. He suppresses that and says “That’s not me.” Keller compares this to a man today walking around New York who has the same two inward impulses. Sensing an impulse to aggression he says, “This is not me.” Sensing same sex desire he says “That’s me.” Keller shows that identity is not just an expression of inward desires and feelings. We use a set of beliefs and values to sort through and decide what we will incorporate into our identity. “Identity is determined not by our feelings and desires but rather by our beliefs about our varied, contradictory, changing feelings and desires.” Pg127

In Part Three, Christianity Makes Sense, Keller shows that Christianity offers “a meaning that suffering cannot remove, a satisfaction not based on circumstances, a freedom that does not hurt but rather enhances love, an identity that does not crush you or exclude others, a moral compass that does not turn you into an oppressor, and a hope that can face anything, even death.” Pg 216 This section includes information on the historical evidence about Jesus, his life, death and resurrection. The qualities of Jesus and his claims are detailed beautifully. The Epilogue offers an illustration that vividly demonstrates how God makes sense.

This is an outstanding book.
14 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


Joy S. Frady
5.0 out of 5 stars Compassionate and Compelling Case for Christianity
Reviewed in the United States on January 3, 2017
Verified Purchase
Tim Keller, Pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan, is a prolific writer and influential leader in the evangelical world. There is none of the bluster with him which is commonly associated with evangelical preachers, in his speaking or his writing. Keller is a calm, measured voice committed to what he sees as biblical truth.

Keller’s book, Making Sense of God, is something of a follow-up to his book The Reason for God. Keller went with a more conventional apologetic approach in The Reason for God but in this latest book he acknowledges that while this approach has its place, for many people today it is necessary to establish why considering the truth of Christianity is something that is even worthwhile to do. Many people in today’s world consider Christianity irrelevant, outmoded, unnecessary in an age of science, reason and technology. Keller’s aim in Making Sense of God is to gently undermine this view of Christianity and to show the superior value of a Christian worldview.

Keller begins by challenging the notion that the world is becoming more secular. He also challenges the idea that non-religious people live by reason while religious people live by faith. Keller contends that a variety of factors lead us to embrace our worldview. In these first two chapters Keller leans on the work of Charles Taylor to understand contemporary Western culture. The goal of these first two chapters seems to be to cause the disinterested or the skeptical to question their assumptions and crack open the door to the Christian worldview.

In the heart of the book, Keller takes eight chapters to show how Christianity presents us with an integrated worldview, which gives meaning that suffering can’t take away, satisfaction not based on circumstances, a life of self-giving love, an identity that doesn’t crush the individual or cause her to exclude others, a hope that can face anything, true morality and a justice that does not create oppressors. This section of the book presents a compelling case for the value of Christianity. Throughout this section Keller also consistently contrasts the Christian worldview with the secular/humanist worldview and shows the secular view lacking in providing us with a holistic path forward in the world.

Keller concludes the book with two chapters and an epilogue on the issue of believing. Keller says at the outset of this section that he can not demonstrably prove that religion is true. Nor, he says, can the secularist demonstrably prove his view. Keller’s view is that we need to weigh the evidence of the worldviews. Which makes the most sense emotionally, culturally and rationally? Keller made the argument in the second section of the book that Christianity is the most compelling worldview and therefore is worthy of our allegiance. Keller concludes the book with a more traditional apologetic for the existence of God and the reality of Jesus as a way to address the nagging doubts of those who may have cracked open the door in the first section and opened it in the second section of the book but are still hesitant to cross the threshold to faith in Christ. In chapter 11, Keller marshals the most common arguments for God’s existence, being careful to note that while none of these arguments is conclusive in itself, taken together they form a rational basis for belief in God. But Keller goes on in chapter 12 to the person of Jesus Christ, the heart of Christian faith. He says we could come away from chapter 11 convinced of the existence of God but this would not make us distinctively Christian. So Keller takes time for a defense of the reasonableness of faith in Jesus, using the common arguments for the authenticity of His life and ministry. The Epilogue fittingly concludes the book with the story of Langdon Gilkey, a humanist who was imprisoned in China during the Japanese invasion. Gilkey’s worldview crumbled under the increasingly difficult circumstances he found in the prison camp. At the same time, Gilkey saw a living example of the Christian worldview in the person of Eric Liddell, the former Olympic champion who was working in China as a missionary when he was captured and imprisoned. The process of change in worldview that happened in Gilkey’s life is the same change Keller hopes to see in others who take up and read his book.
6 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


S. Grotzke
5.0 out of 5 stars Top Shelf Book
Reviewed in the United States on August 21, 2017
Verified Purchase
Point: Every single individual lives a life based on a complex tangle of “experiences, faith, reasoning, and intuition.” Although the materialist or secularist can claim that belief in a God outside of space and time is unreasonable, that position is only tenable if the presupposition “God cannot exist” is there prior.

Path: In three main parts, Keller patiently and systematically guides the reader through the reasonability of faith in God, and not just any God, but the God of the Bible. Those parts are titled “Why does anyone need religion?”; “Religion is more than you think it is”; and “Christianity makes sense”. The middle part is by far the largest and most comprehensive, dealing with meaning, satisfaction, freedom, self, identity, hope, morals, and justice. His purpose is not to give a definitive argument for God, but demonstrate that arguments against a God are unfounded and fail repeatedly.

Sources: Keller does his normal deep digging and provides the reader with a lifetime of supplementary reading ranging from early church fathers to reformers, philosophers to militant atheists.

Agreement: This is the absolute best book I have read regarding the holes in the modern and postmodern worldview and how Christianity addresses them. After reading nearly every chapter I thought, “I just had this conversation last week!” This book both opened my eyes to a greater understanding of the problems and a greater appreciation to how Jesus solves them.

Personal App: The greatest compliment one of my unbelieving friends can pay me is “you understand and state my belief better than I could!” I feel as though this book helps me do this.

Favorite Quote: There is no way to pick a favorite, but one which points to a strength of the book is this one: “The point is rather that science alone cannot serve as a guide for human society.”

It would be worth another read and I would recommend it to someone who:

Believes science has all the answers.
Is struggling to believe in the God of the Bible while surrounded by “real life”.
Wants to better understand their neighbor, coworker, or family member who thinks “faith” is a crutch.
Anyone trying to engage the modern and postmodern man.

Other books along this theme would be:
Anderson, James N. What’s Your Worldview?: An Interactive Approach to Life’s Big Questions. Crossway Books, 2014.
Craig, William Lane. On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision. New. David C. Cook, 2010.
Keller, Timothy J. The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism. New York: Riverhead Books, 2009.
Koukl, Gregory. Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions. Zondervan, 2009.
Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: HarperCollins, 2001.
Strobel, Lee. The Case for the Real Jesus: A Journalist Investigates Current Attacks on the Identity of Christ. 1st ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009.
8 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


Stephan Davis
5.0 out of 5 stars Well done -- clear and well-researched Mere theology
Reviewed in the United States on August 2, 2017
Verified Purchase
I just adopted this as a textbook for a theology course in a Catholic liberal arts college. I hesitated because of Rev. Keller's theological and educational background (on paper) but I cannot disregard how good this work is.

I have read some people likening Keller to CS Lewis. I teach courses on Lewis and bristle when I read such things about recent authors (e.g. N.T. Wright), but it is true that I think of him when I read Keller because they share the ability to communicate the ideas of others without the jargon.

Yet I do not think the comparison works beyond that. Lewis was a scholar's scholar who was able to write for the educated masses and children. Keller is a pastor who writes as a scholar; his Making Sense and the Reason for God are more like ideal textbooks because they clearly communicate the best of what others are writing. In addition, they come from the perspective of a pastor who knows people.

Perhaps Lewis and Keller are alike in that their theological biases are not apparent. From my brief acquaintance this summer, this pastor passes the "mere Christianity" test. I have a hard time reading Protestant theology sympathetically at this point in life, but not once was I distracted by it in Making Sense.

Last point: I found Reason for God at a reduced rate, liked it, then checked Scribd and found the audiobook for Making Sense there. I have since bought the Kindle version of Making Sense for $14 and adopted for class, which means 25 students will be purchasing it as well.
5 people found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


Phill Howell
5.0 out of 5 stars Keller Levels the Playing Field and Provides An Alternative Path
Reviewed in the United States on May 27, 2020
Verified Purchase
The best way I can summarize and commend this book is by saying that Keller levels the playing field and then provides an alternative, and I would argue better narrative of the world. I just finished reading a couple books about Charles Taylor’s “A Secular Age.” In the early chapters Keller draws off of Taylor and several others to point out the similar ground that we are all standing upon. Whether we are atheist or religious we have faith not just in a set of beliefs, but in a way of imagining the world. We all have a faith in something to give us meaning, so the question is what is your faith in and how well does it make sense of your world. Once the playing field is leveled, Keller present a case for the Christian faith that is quite compelling. If I had one complaint or request of this book, it would be that a shorter booklet could be written to serve as a tool to share with those I am ministering. This is a great book.
One person found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


gwilbur
5.0 out of 5 stars If you don't believe in God, or if he is unknown, this book is for you
Reviewed in the United States on July 5, 2021
Verified Purchase
Many of today's younger generation have no knowledge of God; they look around and see the hardships of peoples and think that God couldn't exist or that He doesn't care about them or anyone else. This book addresses that skepticism and points you to logic that shows that God does exist, that He does care about everyone. There are sections in the book that were easy to understand, but similarly, there are chapters that were difficult to understand; these chapters challenged my thinking about God and who He is. If you have any doubts about God and who He is, this book will help you understand as you grapple with those thoughts.
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


Tsutomu Yonashiro
5.0 out of 5 stars The "direct" continuation of his early book, "The Reason for God"
Reviewed in the United States on January 11, 2017
Verified Purchase
Timothy Keller's latest book, "Making Sense of God", is expectedly one of the "direct" continuations of his early book, "The Reason for God".

In his early book, the author acted much like "contemporary" C.S. Lewis providing the best articulation for those believers with "moderate" faith in the age of skepticism. In this latest work his effort looks wider, even bolder, with his best articulation provoking us in the age of secularism.

If not C.S. Lewis, the key thinker (Keller repeatedly mentioned) is Charles Tayler, the author of "A Secular Age", one of the most important works in the century. Keller's effort is to distill how our Christian faith could be understood in this context of secularization.

Many philosophers and sociologists thought that our world would become more secular and less religious. In our secular age, religious faith is no longer the matter of fate in the rigid socio-cultural immobility, but rather our individual, free choice; moreover, what to be "marketed" and "consumed".

Even as Kierkegaard pointed out, in such flat secular age the matter of life and death had lost its depth and reality, but has become "dramatic entertainment" we consume in various media.

Once such depth and reality has diminished, we can no longer distinguish what is religious faith, ethics, self-help, psychology, politics, social criticism, etc. As the result, we love other things more than God like ideology, ego, career, family, mom, son, daughter or apple pie... Have we totally lost our real faith with such secularism movement?

Here is another twist.

Keller does not totally agree with this secular age. In the twenty first century actually we are now (better or worse) facing the movement of "de-secularization".

Secularism is compatible with liberalism. Both dislike fundamentalism, extremism, and fanaticism. Both try to embrace diversity, tolerance, and multiculturalism. But now, such "generous" mindset is at risk. It seems we're getting more intolerant within our own value. In Christianity, the traditional mainline, "generous", liberal churches are losing their members; whereas, the emerging new churches are growing rapidly - especially among the emerging countries.

I'm not sure whether or not this de-secularization can be part of anti-intellectualism or revivalism. But what is certain is that religious faith seemingly regain its real power it used to have. But again, we know a lot of bloody pasts where religious faith was misused and abused. Regaining them is of course NOT right de-secularization at all, though sadly we've seen them among extremists.

Secularized faith does not have its true power. That's obvious. And yet, it also has many achievements. Therefore, there must be the "truly de-secularized faith" only when we rightly transcend secularism. Pastor Keller tells us that still in Christianity we could see the Light for it.
One person found this helpful
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


Ryan B.
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent modern apologetics work.
Reviewed in the United States on August 29, 2019
Verified Purchase
Having read the Reason for God years ago it was very interesting to see the differences of this book. The first section of Reason for God deals mostly with “defeaters,” challenges to the Christian worldview. This book deals mainly with “narratival apologetics” the idea that every story and human longing ultimately finds it’s happy ending in Christ.

Keller looks at themes like hope, meaning, satisfaction, identity, justice, etc. Over the last decade or two apologetics has changed significantly. Postmodernism (or late modernism) has worn away the potential impact of classical evidential apologetics (scientific “proofs” for the existence of God etc.). But late modernism has also paved the way for narratival/experiential apologetics to be more effective. This is because in the same way relativism “relativizes” itself, deconstructionism deconstructs itself. Postmodernism is defined as “incredulity towards meta narrative,” but why shouldn’t we be skeptical of THAT truth claim and the belief system that it encompasses? This leaves a society that is void of truth, meaning, purpose and hope. Keller shows that the most rational place to find the deepest longings of our hearts is in the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Helpful
Report abuse
    Showing 0 comments

There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.


  • ←Previous page
  • Next page→

Need customer service? Click here
‹ See all details for Making Sense of God: Finding God in the Modern World

Your recently viewed items and featured recommendations
›
View or edit your browsing history
After viewing product detail pages, look here to find an easy way to navigate back to pages you are interested in.

Back to top
Get to Know Us
  • Careers
  • Blog
  • About Amazon
  • Sustainability
  • Press Center
  • Investor Relations
  • Amazon Devices
  • Amazon Science
Make Money with Us
  • Sell products on Amazon
  • Sell apps on Amazon
  • Become an Affiliate
  • Become a Delivery Driver
  • Start a package delivery business
  • Advertise Your Products
  • Self-Publish with Us
  • Host an Amazon Hub
  • ›See More Ways to Make Money
Amazon Payment Products
  • Amazon Rewards Visa Signature Cards
  • Amazon Store Card
  • Amazon Secured Card
  • Amazon Business Card
  • Shop with Points
  • Credit Card Marketplace
  • Reload Your Balance
  • Amazon Currency Converter
Let Us Help You
  • Amazon and COVID-19
  • Your Account
  • Your Orders
  • Shipping Rates & Policies
  • Amazon Prime
  • Returns & Replacements
  • Manage Your Content and Devices
  • Amazon Assistant
  • Help
EnglishChoose a language for shopping.
United StatesChoose a country/region for shopping.
Amazon Music
Stream millions
of songs
Amazon Advertising
Find, attract, and
engage customers
Amazon Drive
Cloud storage
from Amazon
6pm
Score deals
on fashion brands
AbeBooks
Books, art
& collectibles
ACX
Audiobook Publishing
Made Easy
Alexa
Actionable Analytics
for the Web
 
Sell on Amazon
Start a Selling Account
Amazon Business
Everything For
Your Business
Amazon Fresh
Groceries & More
Right To Your Door
AmazonGlobal
Ship Orders
Internationally
Home Services
Experienced Pros
Happiness Guarantee
Amazon Ignite
Sell your original
Digital Educational
Resources
Amazon Web Services
Scalable Cloud
Computing Services
 
Audible
Listen to Books & Original
Audio Performances
Book Depository
Books With Free
Delivery Worldwide
Box Office Mojo
Find Movie
Box Office Data
ComiXology
Thousands of
Digital Comics
DPReview
Digital
Photography
Fabric
Sewing, Quilting
& Knitting
Goodreads
Book reviews
& recommendations
 
IMDb
Movies, TV
& Celebrities
IMDbPro
Get Info Entertainment
Professionals Need
Kindle Direct Publishing
Indie Digital & Print Publishing
Made Easy
Amazon Photos
Unlimited Photo Storage
Free With Prime
Prime Video Direct
Video Distribution
Made Easy
Shopbop
Designer
Fashion Brands
Amazon Warehouse
Great Deals on
Quality Used Products
 
Whole Foods Market
America’s Healthiest
Grocery Store
Woot!
Deals and
Shenanigans
Zappos
Shoes &
Clothing
Ring
Smart Home
Security Systems
eero WiFi
Stream 4K Video
in Every Room
Blink
Smart Security
for Every Home
Neighbors App
Real-Time Crime
& Safety Alerts
 
    Amazon Subscription Boxes
Top subscription boxes – right to your door
PillPack
Pharmacy Simplified
Amazon Renewed
Like-new products
you can trust
   
  • Conditions of Use
  • Privacy Notice
  • Interest-Based Ads
© 1996-2022, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates