Welcome to the online home of Tim Challies, blogger, author and web designer. My first book, "The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment," is now available everywhere.

Read about the blog or about the author.

Saturday October 24, 2009

The Case for God

This is a review I wrote a couple of weeks ago for another site. But I thought it might be worth posting here as well.

The Case for GodIt is a rare occasion that I find it difficult to point out any redeeming features in a book-when I struggle to find a single positive to write in a review. Unfortunately Karen Armstrong’s The Case for God is one of those books-one that is so monstrously bad, so hopelessly awful, so wretchedly miserable, that it took concerted effort just to finish it. Heck, even the cover stinks-a pile of religiously-significant books hovering at a strange angle over a plain background. I tell you what: I will concede the font. The book is set in Granjon, a very nice, classical font that is very consistent with the earliest Garamond type faces. It is classy and classical but without being antique. But that is as good as the book gets.

I can save you thirty-five bucks and many hours of your life by telling you that 99% of what Armstrong has to say about God and religion she squeezes into the Introduction and the Epilogue, which together take up just 23 of the 340 pages of this book. There she spews forth what she really believes about God and those who seek to follow him. Though she writes about all faiths, she focuses almost exclusively on Christianity. The reader will learn, among other things: that nobody before modern times was foolish enough to believe that the Bible should be read as fact, as if the Creation account has any value beyond a mythological attempt to describe the world’s beginning; that the doctrine of the infallibility of Scripture was unknown until the 1870’s when Hodge and Warfield dreamed it up; that Socratic dialogue with atheists would help us understand how we can be more faithful believers in God; that truth is found not by understanding or believing, but by doing; that the purpose of religion is to discover new capacities of mind and heart; that the danger to religion and the danger to the world is not religious adherents, but fundamentalist believers-those who believe in the exclusivity of their faith and who fall into old beliefs such as the infallibility of their scriptures. And that is just a sampling of a mere 23 pages.

The rest of the book is an extended revisionist look at the history of religion in general and the Christian faith in particular. Armstrong seeks to show that the modern Christian God (I hesitate to capitalize God in the way she uses the name) is vastly different from the “unknown” God of pre-modern times. God was once mysterious and unknown, so transcendent, so other that people could not hope to really know who he is or how he acted. But then modernism had to come along and ruin a perfectly good deity by insisting that God could be known, that he even desired to be known. What the author believes we need to do, of course, is return to God as a mystery, to God as an unknowable force who combines the best of all the world religions. Along the way she pauses to offer a few words about nearly every religious leader and every philosopher who ever uttered God’s name. It is absolutely exhausting and, for simplistic old-school fundie Christians like myself, utterly exasperating. With her facts on the basics of the Christian faith so far from the truth and with her obvious bias, I actually found myself reading deliberately trying not to comprehend, not to retain, what she said. After all, having proven herself utterly untrustworthy in the basics, how could I trust her in anything else?

The Case for God, then, is in no way a case for the God of the Bible or, really, for the God of most other faiths. Rather, it is a defense of making the idea of God respectable again, even if it means radically changing what we mean by that name. It is an absolute mess and easily one of the most boring, most obnoxious books I’ve ever read.

Comments (19) »


1. mark
October 24, 2009
2:44 PM

i am in the midst of reading this book right now. at first glance i thought maybe Armstrong was headed in a clear direction - that she would offer a solid argument to the new athiests. but she does more harm than good. she posits that God is the great “Nothing.”

So I am trying to figure out - is He the great Something that is nothing or is He the great Nothing that is something?

My conclusion is that the Bible itself makes a better case for God than The Case for God.


2. Carlo Provencio
October 24, 2009
3:24 PM

Sounds pretty Satanic to me!


3. Todd Pruitt
October 24, 2009
4:34 PM

Thanks for the review Tim. You are brave man to have read it. I gave up reading Armstrong a long time ago. Nevertheless I am happy you have posted this review because less suspecting readers will surely pick it up thinking they are getting a helpful resource on apologetics.


4. David Kjos
October 24, 2009
4:51 PM

That’s the most entertaining review I’ve read in a long time.


5. rebecca
October 24, 2009
5:09 PM

Yep, Tim even knows how to make a review for “one of the most boring” books he’s read interesting.


6. Aaron
October 24, 2009
6:25 PM

Excellent review - I attempted to read one of Armstrong’s books once on the history of the Bible; it was one of the few books that I found so incredibly stupid that I couldn’t even finish.


7. Rachael Starke
October 24, 2009
7:56 PM

So what you’re saying is-you didn’t like it?

:)


8. Alex Philip
October 24, 2009
11:17 PM

If Armstrong is making the Case for God then it only seems right that William Lane Craig should put out a book entitled the Case for Atheism.


9. Tim Irvin
October 25, 2009
12:39 AM

So, by page 23 you had determined that the book was worthless and the author was a kook. My question is serious and I would really like to know what compelled you to read the other 317 pages?


10. Gayle Brown
October 25, 2009
8:36 AM

I happened to catch the author doing a radio interview on NPR about her new book a couple of weeks ago. If you think reading her stuff is difficult to handle, you should try listening to her talk about it. What a bunch of hooey.


11. Daryl Little
October 25, 2009
2:10 PM

Come on Tim. Don’t tease us like that!

Did you like the book or not?


12. James
October 25, 2009
2:34 PM

If I ever write a book, it will be set in Granjon type face.


13. DR
October 25, 2009
4:13 PM

There’s a weight of opinion against Tim… did he get it right?

“Karen Armstrong, in writing The Case for God, provides the reader with one of the very best theological works of our time. It brings a new understanding to the complex relationship between human existence and the transcendent nature of God. This is a book that is so well researched and so deep with insight and soaring scholarship that only Karen Armstrong could have written it. The Case for God should be required reading for anyone who claims to be a believer, an agnostic or an atheist.”
—The Right Reverend John Bryson Chane, D.D., Episcopal Bishop of the Diocese of Washington, D.C.

“No one is better qualified or more needed than Karen Armstrong to enter the hot public debate between believers and non-believers over the existence of God. Her latest book, eagerly awaited and received, rings out with the qualities she brings to all of her work—The Case for God is lucid, learned, provocative, and illuminating. Indeed, Armstrong once again does what she always does best by shining a clear light on the deepest mysteries of the religious imagination.”
—Jonathan Kirsch, author of The Harlot by the Side of the Road

“Challenging, intelligent, and illuminating—especially for anyone reflecting on current discussions of atheism, often characterized as conflict between religion and science.”
—Elaine Pagels, co-author of Reading Judas: The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity

“With characteristic command of subject and crispness, the prolific and redoubtable independent British scholar and former nun takes yet another run at the world’s religious history… . She’s conceptual, humanistic and exceedingly well-read… . [An] articulate and accessible sweep through intellectual history. The “unknowing” of the mystics has its virtues and its place, but being well-read and knowledgeable makes one powerful and persuasive book.
—Publishers Weekly (starred review)

“Celebrated religion scholar Armstrong creates more than a history of religion; she effectively demonstrates how the West (broadly speaking) has grappled with the existence of deity and captured the concept in words, art and ideas… . A brilliant examination… . [An] accessible, intriguing study of how we see God.”
—Kirkus Reviews (starred review)

“The new book by premier contemporary historian of religion is a history of God… . Presenting difficult ideas with utter lucidity, this registers at once as a classic of religious and world history.”
—Ray Olson, Booklist (starred review)

“Armstrong offers a tour de force… . Highly recommended for readers willing to grapple with difficult but clearly articulated concepts and challenges to the ‘received’ ways of perceiving religion. A classic.”
—Carolyn M. Craft, Library Journal

“One of our best living writers on religion… . Prodigiously sourced, passionately written.”
—John Cornwell, Financial Times

“Karen Armstrong is one of [a] handful of wise and supremely intelligent commentators on religion… . As in so much of the rest of her hugely impressive body of work, Karen Armstrong invites us on a journey through religion that helps us to rescue what remains wise from so much that to so many … no longer seems true.”
—Alain de Botton, The Observer


14. Nord
October 25, 2009
4:48 PM

Come on, Tim, don’t hold back! what do you really think? Thanks for the review!


15. Tom Hardy
October 25, 2009
5:15 PM

Kathleen said:“……I actually found myself reading deliberately trying not to comprehend, not to retain, what she said.”

That’s the most credible line in Challies’ entire review. He may have read a book, but it certainly was not Armstrong’s book. Readers who are interested in a real review would do well to Google any of the number of serious reviewers who have given this thought-provoking book its due. “

Tim can certainly defend himself, but it is obvious that you have either misunderstood what Tim was referring to in that comment; or perhaps you understood him properly, but deliberately decided to take him out of context.
I don’t know you, but it appears that you support a liberal kind of Theology.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding you and you actually believe that Tim has given an unfair review of the book.
If so, perhaps you think you could give a more accurate review?

Here is a question from you. Does Karen Armstrong hold to a Liberal or a Conservative form of Christianity?

One quote from Tim’s review (if it is correct) tells me that she comes from a liberal perspective.
“The reader will learn, among other things: that nobody before modern times was foolish enough to believe that the Bible should be read as fact, as if the Creation account has any value beyond a mythological attempt to describe the world’s beginning; …”
That being the case, why would Tim being how he is a Conservative Christian, give a good review of the book.
My guess is that the only good reviews one will find are by Liberals, such as Karen herself.


16. David Kjos
October 25, 2009
5:58 PM

Folks, Kathleen is a troll. She hasn’t bothered us in almost a year, but then, you know what they say about a bad penny. Just ignore, and I’ll delete. Thanks.


17. Frugal Dougal
October 26, 2009
1:27 PM

Big respect - I haven’t got the staying power in the face of rubbish to start anything by Karen Armstrong, let alone finish it!


18. Renee
October 27, 2009
1:29 AM

DR and Tom,

If Armstrong teaches that our ability to reach God is through repetitive acts; and if she teaches that God is a mystery, then I’d say Tim’s review is right and Armstrong and the list of reviewers who gave her a great review are wrong when it comes to the Christian God at least.

Karen Armstrong is not a Christian by any sense of that definition (and maybe she’s not claiming to be). Jesus Christ did not give believers the option to pick and choose what He said was the Truth. “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.” Matthew 7:13,14

No one has to “be” a Christian if they choose not to be - but certainly no one can claim to be a Christian and teach others that there are many paths to the same God.

..and God is not a mystery…

“Philip said to Jesus, “Lord, show us the Father. That is all we need.”
Jesus answered, “Philip, I have been with you for a long time. So you should know me. The person that has seen me has seen the Father too. So why do you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you truly believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The things I have told you don’t come from me. The Father lives in me, and he is doing his own work. Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me. Or believe because of the miracles I have done.” John 14:8-11


19. mikelioso
October 29, 2009
1:59 PM

Haven’t read it, probably wont read it, but it’s nice to know people are working on it. I’m currently reading John Spong’s, New Christianity for a New World. I appreciate the work of those trying to rescue God from the dust bin of history, though the works currently aren’t that good.

It demands the question of whether God is still a valid idea or if these folks are just nostalgic romantics. I’m in favor of God since it seems to relate to the question of whether life has meaning. That and existence was created so I would argue that whatever caused that would be, by definition, the Supreme Being. So I’m all in favor of folks continuing the search for a better idea of God. Just as Moses took God from being a guy who creates by sleeping with goddesses and wrestling dragons and turned God to a invisible force above all creation, we new need to take it up another notch beyond what is the popular concept of God as a kind of genie who arbitrarily interacts with humanity.