Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
LEARNING TO LIVE WITH THE TIME TO END ALL TIMES, 12 Mar 2007
A friend of mine once claimed, with a straight enough face, not to know the difference between eschatology (the logic of ultimate matters) and scatology (chatter of dirty matters). What, then, might be the significant difference (and the hidden similarity)? At least two more immediate answers suggest themselves. Eschatology anticipates the end of shame in the last times; scatology anticipates the end of shame in our pastimes. Alternatively: if we cannot tell the difference, then we seem well fitted for carrying on as professional god-squad insiders - or outsiders.
Douglas Knight does not fool around with such low riddles and puns, so far as I can see. I start this way, I hope, to show that I have not been utterly swept off my feet by Knight's torrents of perceptive narrative, scholarship, argument and contemplation. The seven academic reviewers quoted on the back cover are, I can believe, not swept away in their eloquent and fully-justified praise, at least to the extent of losing their critical distance. My less academic note of critical distance is a vote of confidence in Knight's work and vision. He is far from needing, or leaving us needing, the all-too-familiar would-be ingratiating grin, chuckle and shuffle with which some of us perform a pre-emptive apology for shared embarrassment.
Right from the days of Jesus' mission between the Jordan, Galilee and Jerusalem, some have been embarrassed by the eschatology articulated in his message of the approach of God's final reign. Some have not been able to avoid asking whether there is something shamefully mistaken or wrong hereabouts. Such embarrassment has persisted to this day. For about the last 100 years such concerns have become especially strong amongst some academic circles including theologians, historians, anthropologists and others. Complementing this, we are familiar with a recurrent cluster of embarrassments in encountering death or the dying, and the topics of guilt, sin, judgement, the worth and meaning of human life, authority, tradition, and related matters, in a wide range of contexts. The anthropologist Mary Douglas, most famously in her book Purity and Danger, explored insights concerning how we (as human beings) tend to find dangerous or dirty (impure) matters which we do not know how to make sense of, in terms of our conventional and established ways of trying to sort out our experience into various kinds and schemas. For example, is blood more to do with life or death, and how can we, how should we, keep these apart, or connect them, or both?
If Knight is right, then he offers us a powerful paradigm, new yet with ancient roots, for living and working face-to-face with such matters, so as to make better sense of them and of our shared, shareable humanity, in the company of Israel, Jesus Christ and the Christian community. His account of the triune God articulates the grammar which guides this approach. Knight helps us, here and now, towards appreciating better the riches of the vision of Irenaeus of Lyons: the glory of God is a living human being: human life is the vision of the glory of God. This is a book to buy and re-read, to argue and struggle and live with. (And, if you have not yet done so, do look at the extracts provided by Amazon's "Search Inside" facility).
|
|
|
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Hope for humanity, 24 May 2006
Douglas Knight must have read much and thought hard to come up with such an energetic and bold account of Christian faith and hope. It contains a real feast of ideas. Following the constructive and philosophically informed approach of great contemporary theologians like Colin Gunton, Robert Jenson and N.T. Wright, Knight develops a remarkably fresh and exciting account of who we are and why we are here.
Anyone interested in thinking about the purpose of human existence and how the sacrifice of Jesus Christ is good news for our modern world would do well to read this book. I recommend it unreservedly.
|
|
|
|