The first point the author makes is that our view of the world is skewed because we are fallen. But he takes it one step farther saying that because we are fallen we can not truly know anything. He says, “our knowledge of any absolute is not only partial, it is distorted.” He uses the example of a football game and how everyone had a slightly different experience.
The second point he makes is that there is risk in everything we do as people. He says “Whenever a decision is required there is risk.” Certainty is basses on the fact that there is no risk and since all our relationships have risk why should our relation ship with God be any different?
Not only do I disagree, but he is dead out wrong.
I’m not going to disagree with the fact that every one at a football game has a different experience; however that mater of a game is trivial. Yes people have different experiences in faith but they should be tested against what the bible says to know if they are of God or of satin. Neil Anderson wrote in his book The Bondage Breaker about a man who said that God told him where to go to church each Sunday. This was his view of God. As it turned out he has been going to a Mormon church under the direction of a demon that Neil, after hearing the story, confronted.
A lot of time is spent taking about how we, as humans take risk. Yes, believers have always been risk takers but the threat came from humans. The risk in relationships is there because we are fallen. We hurt each other because we want to or because our flesh gets the better of us. BUT OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD IS NOT AN EARTHLY ONE. To say that, just between us and God, there is risk is saying God does not love us the way the Bible says. What good shepherd harms his sheep? These sounds more like a Greek God then the Biblical one to me. God reigns supreme and he knew when he made us that we would disappoint him. This is not a risk. Risk implies the unseen and unknown. To say that sending Christ here to earth is a risk is saying that God does not know any thing of the future.
He is saying that he can not be truly certain of any thing so why is he writing?