I’ve enjoyed Philip Yancey’s books. I found What’s so Amazing About Grace to be his
best work. Reaching for the Invisible God poorly
compares - impacted of its poor presentation and editing.
The use of poor grammar,
poor word choice and poor illustration and poor analogy make Reaching
for the Invisible God difficult to read. The gist is understandable by
the reader, yet thoughtful editing would enhance the reader’s experience.
I have recorded some
examples of poor word choice, poor grammar, poor illustration and poor analogy.
For the ease of a reader’s reference, I found that I could draw all my concerns
from a single chapter, Chapter Two. I've also included some other comments on
the book:
Grammar/poor
illustration/poor analogy (Chapter 2)
1.Poor link to subject
In the opening sentence of
Chapter Two, the subject of the sentence is the author’s visit to Russia. The
sentence then introduces a second subject; an Orthodox church service. One is
then left pondering whether the latter part of the sentence is to the first
subject, or the second subject :
“On a visit
to Russia in 1991 I attended my first Orthodox church service, which is
designed to express sensually the mystery and majesty of worship.”
The sentence is best
re-written as two sentences:
On a visit to Russia in 1991
I attended my first Orthodox church service. Such services are designed to
express sensually the mystery and majesty of worship.
2.Poor word choice
A mystic is a person who
claims to have gained spirituality by some means other than through a religious
path. The word mystic is therefore poorly chosen in:
“Every
encounter is unique and individual, just like any meeting between two persons,
so a fifth-century mystic or an illiterate immigrant may have a deeper
knowledge of God than a twentieth-century theologian”.
If the reader takes the
choice of the word mystic literally then this sentence serves a different
purpose than the author intended. By such reading the sentence suggests that
the twentieth-century theologian may have an impoverished knowledge of God. Presumably,
that impoverished knowledge of God comes from improper or incompetent
application of religious teaching.
 |
| From amazon.com.au |
3.Poor illustration
A quote from Carl Sagan is compared to an illustration
selected from Sagan's novel Contact. The comparison falls flat in
that Sagan’s quote is to matters other than matters covered within the
illustration. The quote is to that which is within the creation, whereas the
illustration is to that which is creation.
Firstly, the quote from
Sagan: it is offered by Yancey to the context of indicating that Sagan reckons
that there is no God: “The cosmos is all
there is and all there ever will be”.
Secondly, the illustration
from the novel Contact: the discovery by the novel’s
protagonist of extra-terrestrial life.
The protagonist’s discovery
is intra-cosmos, whereas God is extra-cosmos. The illustration falls flat in
that the discovery within the novel is incomparable to a discovery of God.
4.Poor analogy
In Chapter Two, the Turing test is described. In discussion of a
worldly novel series; Conversation with God, Yancey suggests
that “God would never pass the Turing
test.” This is flappable as the Turing test’s binary selection
of protagonist; a person or a machine, is fair removed from placing God into
such a test as either a person or a machine. It is unfathomable to consider God
– who is incomparable to both person and machine - as a protagonist in such a
test.
Yancey in making the analogy
has confused his subjects. Of God and the worldly-written Conversation
with God, it is Conversation with God, not God, that
would never pass the Turing test.
Other comments
5."Disadvantages"
of Incarnation
While I respect Yancey for
giving 'disadvantages' air quotes, I cannot welcome the notion that there are
any disadvantages of the Incarnation. Yancey simply does not make the case
(Chapter 11). Ironically, Yancey is dismissive of the most powerful aspect of
the Incarnation - that of God interceding into the world in the flesh. That
which the section indicates is powerlessness is powerful. It was frustrating to
see the suggestion that Jesus "risked going unrecognized" when his
mission cleverly crafted the moment to best reveal himself.
The frustration continues
with this statement (comparing Christ to God in the Old Testament):
"Jesus orchestrated no lightning displays and no cloud of
smoke
surrounded him when he addressed the crowd"
Yet, Christ fulfilled prophesies
of his mission perfectly (e.g. raised the dead, walked on water, multiplied
food). It was the blindness of the people that caused them to look for "lightning
displays and no cloud of smoke" when fulfilment of prophesy was on offer.
See, for instance Jesus' response to John's disciples (John 7:22)
6.Mis-charactering
C.S.Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
Screwtape is not
"devil" but instead "Senior demon".
It is not a "mischievous
fantasy" but a "Christian apologetic novel" (Chapter 15)
7.No, just no, absolutely
not
I don't care to read:
"Jesus himself had a loose reputation" (Chapter 17)
8.Factual error
No-on "rounded up
witnesses to try to convince a once-blind man that he could not possibly
see" (a reference to John 9 in Chapter 17).
Instead, the evidence gathering was towards understanding how the man came to
see. Indeed, the once-blind man is the one who does the convincing (see in
particular John 9:27b)
This links from my Goodreads review of the book.
Shalom,
Ozhamada
Note 1: Yancey bothers his reader in respect
to Contact in that Yancey shares from both Sagan's book and
the 1997 movie Contact staring Jodie Foster. The discussion of the movie adds
nothing to Reaching for the Invisible God.
Note 2: Nit-picky is an observation that Yancey
has Turing writing his paper on the Turing test in 1950. The fairer comment is
that Turing published the paper in 1950.
