Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

It’s a shame really. What could’ve been an excellent book turned out to be a loose collection of a priori assumptions, unsubstantiated leaps, and ad hominem attacks on those he disagrees with. One of the most striking features is the tone Zahnd uses in his arguments. It’s as if he’s a school yard bully and anyone who disagrees with him or sees scripture from a different perspective is worthy of insult. I find it all so disappointing and frustrating because I actually agree with Zahnd on so many of the issues he addresses. He simply doesn’t do himself justice. There is sadly little to no connective tissue between his assumptions and his conclusions. Beyond that, there are many areas where Zahnd drifts into exegetical sloth and presumption. Theology is hard work. It’s not always an easy black or white, but it requires the gift of seeing in shades of gray that Zahnd is apparently unwilling to abide. He inserts himself and his predilections onto the nature of God and the value of the text and it becomes an unwieldy and gross miscarriage of centuries of faithful Christian belief. Zahnd is embarrassed by what certain parts of the Bible seem to imply about the nature of God so he forces himself to find a way to dismiss them as obviously not implying what Christians have inferred for centuries. In order for his premise to maintain balance Zahnd must resort to using three management tactics with the whole of scripture. First, he prioritizes the words of Jesus over anything else in scripture. On its face that sounds like a compliment to Zahnd but the result is a convenient tactic for dismissing any texts that don’t fit his structure. If Paul says something that would balance out the words of Jesus then Paul is wrong. His prioritization undercuts the Christian belief in the inspiration and sufficiency of the entirety of scripture. Second, he completely ignores, simply doesn’t address or consider, a great deal of relevant passages. And third, he employs the “that doesn’t mean what it says” package of hermeneutics. “Wrath of God? Wrath of the Lamb?” That doesn’t mean what it says! In spite of the scriptures that state explicitly that. Zahnd believes God is love, and He most certainly is. In all fairness, Zahnd is eloquent and beautifully presents this truth. But then He objects to seeing any further facet in the nature of God. How could a God who is fully love possess or expresss wrath? This forces him to explain away how, while God is Love and has revealed Himself as such, God has also characterized Himself in the scriptures as a judge. What kind of a righteous judge would allow injustice to go unamended? Zahnd believes we can’t know anything with certainty about the nature of the afterlife and especially hell. In many portions he dances perilously close to universalism all the while claiming to be shocked and offended that anyone would dare claim him to be anything but orthodox. Also, Christians from America that misunderstand the scriptures are less suited for heaven than Muslims who, through the misfortune of their birth, never hear the gospel but live their life as a “good person”. Zahnd consistently draws the caricature of American Christians as dimwitted, angry, violent, and selfish. These are realities that no doubt exist in some individuals that also in no way define the whole. Western Christianity as a whole is gracious, loving, generous, and in pursuit of peace. Zahnd believes there was no necessity for Jesus to die on the cross. God didn’t require or design that sacrifice. Ignoring entire swaths of scripture that indicate otherwise. And, if you disagree with him, he will accuse you of believing in divine child abuse. Which is an interesting assertion for a self proclaimed monotheist. His objection would posit a tritheistic understanding of the Godhead. All that said, I recommend reading this for the beautiful, thoughtful, and insightful parts. Zahnd really is an eloquent and gifted writer and where he is right he is an artist. It will stretch your mind and theology and force you to study and think critically. It’s unfortunate that he over corrects to the degree that he does and gets so much out of balance. Indeed, there is a ditch on both sides of the road.