Summary of God's Undertaker (Has science buried God?) by John C. Lennox

[N.B. I have finally finished the project of summarising this book. My apologies to John Lennox if I have misrepresented his arguments. It is an extremely hard book to digest and chapters don't always build on each other logically. However it contains many gems of logic, reasoning and great quotes from eminent scientists. John Lennox has read widely and has done a great job of being a 'priest' between us and the great minds and ideas of science. My guess is that this book is a response to Richard Dawkin's book 'The God Delusion' and I benefited from reading Dawkins book before this one. Hope the summary helps]

Preface

The question of the book=Which worldview sits comfortably with science – theism or atheism?

Ch 1 – War of the worldviews.

- Dawkins defines scientific belief on publicly checkable evidence and claims that religious faith prides itself on a lack of evidence (blind faith). P.16
- 40% of scientists said in a survey that they believed in a personal God (little change from a similar survey in 1916), another survey though said that among TOP scientists 72% were atheists.
- Some very notable scientists who do believe in God. Eg. Francis Collins (human genome project). p.18.
- also note that statements of scientists are not necessarily statements of science but rather statements of personal belief. P.19.
- naturalist thinkers tell us that science has eliminated God whereas scientists who are theists tell us that science confirms their faith in God. P.20.
- science based on the conviction that the universe is orderly. Comes from the conviction that the universe is governed by a single God and not by the whims of many gods (p.20). Also the medieval insistence on the rationality of God. Many of the fathers of modern science were theists eg. Galileo and Kepler. They expected laws of nature because they believed in a lawgiver. c/c to Chinese thinking. Science freed from Aristotelian method of deducing from fixed principles of how the universe ought to be ie. a priori philosophical principles. Galileo and Kepler went and looked to see what was there. (p.23).
- widespread myth that science has been constantly at war with religion. Eg. Galileo. Many secular philosophers were opposed to Galileo because of his criticism of Aristotle and many religious intellectuals supported him (at least initially). Also politics of catholic v protestant (Catholic church was Aristotelian). P.25.
- the real conflict is not between science and religion but between two diametrically opposed world views: naturalism and theism.
- naturalism c/c super-naturalism. Naturalism says the cosmos is all there is or ever shall be. It is a closed system of cause and effect. Materialists are naturalists but some naturalists hold that mind and consciousness are to be distinguished from matter ie. they are emergent properties. P29-30.

Ch 2 – The scope and limits of science.

- science is international and many desire getting on with discovery away from potential religious division.
- definition of science: that which is repeatable? Doesn’t work in all fields where no repeatable events eg. cosmology or bio-genesis. Better definition: inference to the best explanation. P.32.
- also scientists not all cool, rational and indifferent. They have preconceived ideas and worldviews which they bring to bear on their science. Science inevitably possesses a degree of subjectivity. P.33.
- category mistake made by many because of their apriori philosophical beliefs: natural=rational, supernatural=non-rational. ie. evidence for the supernatural may be rational. Some scientists admit their prior commitment to materialism (blind faith) (p.36).
- most of the time this blind faith doesn’t affect people’s science but sometimes it does eg. bio-genesis.
- can take a long time before an accumulation of evidence favours a new paradigm. Takes a strong person to swim against the tide and risk criticism of peers. P.38.
- scientism=belief that science is the only way to “truth” and can explain everything. But what about philosophy, literature, art, morality. P.40. And how can you tell whether this statement is true?
- Aunt Matilda’s cake. Ie. Science can analyse the ingredients (WHAT) and tell us HOW the cake was made but cannot tell us WHY (purpose). We have to ask her. Ie. personal revelation. P.41.
- Illustration of a Ford motor car engine. Just because an engineer can deduce how the engine works and that Mr Ford is not IN the engine, does not imply that Mr Ford does not exist. P.45.

Ch 3-Reduction, reduction, reduction.

- God of the gaps argument. Eg. God used to explain things that science can’t explain until science comes up with the answer etc. Rather …. God can be used to explain the whole process.
- Ancient Greek thinking of gods controlling the forces of nature. Contrary to Hebrew / biblical thinking of God being outside of creation. But now some naturalists re-deifying nature by endowing matter and energy with creative purposes they cannot be shown to posses (p.51).
- Reductionism (p.52). Split a problem into its separate parts. Till ultimately come up with the Theory of Everything (TOE). But mathematically the whole is always greater than the sum of the parts.
- Epistemological reductionism: higher level phenomena can be explained by processes at a lower level. (p.53). Ultimate goal is to reduce all human behaviour to physics. But doesn’t work in every circumstance. Eg. constructing a building with bricks. The bricks do not self assemble, designing the building. Laws of physics and chemistry govern the raw materials but not the design and building process itself. Ie. higher processes guide lower processes but not vice versa.
- Ontological reductionism: human beings are nothing but atoms and DNA (Dawkins). P56. Love, fear, dreams, ambitions just neural patterns in the brain. But this philosophy gives us no reason to trust our brains that this theory is true (p.57).

Ch 4-Designer Universe

- evidence for design and purpose? =
1. The rational intelligibility of the universe ie. a priori one should expect a chaotic world which cannot be grasped by the mind. The universe is mathematically intelligible, the uniformity in nature.
2. Evidence that the universe had a beginning (Big Bang) which is consistent with the Bible.
3. The fine tuning of the universe .. in order for the earth to be able to sustain life. P.70. eg. Distance from the sun, gravity, temperature, rotation. Atheistic ‘faith’ with no evidence that this is all explained by the multi-verse theory. Ie. there are an infinite number of universes.

Ch 5-Designer biosphere.

- How to explain the amazing complexity in nature. Dawkins: the only watchmaker is the blind watchmaker – the blind forces of physics – an undirected, mindless purposeless process.
- William Paley (18C), theologian and naturalist, Darwin’s boyhood hero with his watchmaker metaphor. P.80.
- evolution does not necessarily lead to atheism. Evolution is just a process which God may have set up and many scientists are theistic evolutionists. P.92.
- P94. Can evolution bear the weight of the claim that it alone accounts for all life’s complexity? There is a taboo in questioning this assertion, a no-go area.
-P.96 Lennox’s view is that natural selection does have an important role in the variations we see in the living world but that it can’t carry all the weight put upon it.
- P.97 the reason why many believe in evolution, is not empirical but metaphysical ie. they want it to prove there is no God. C.S Lewis: The philosophy of evolutionism appeared long before the biological theory of evolution. If we start off with the metaphysical hypothesis that all we have is matter/energy and the forces of physics then evolution is the only option. A rare situation where a scientific theory is closely aligned with a philisophical worldview (p.98). Danger of dismissing or ignoring conflicting evidence because of apriori philisophical pressure (p.99).

Ch 6-The nature and scope of evolution

- Definitions of evolution:

1. Change, development. 
2. Micro-evolution: Change / variation within prescribed limits of complexity. Eg. bacteria, eg. the average length of finch beaks recorded during the drought of 1977 were reversed by the rains of 1983. p.101. 
3. Macro-evolution: large scale innovation. New organs, structures, a marked increase in complexity. Many argue macro-evolution by extrapolating the principles of micro-evolution.
4. Molecular evolution: the emergence of the living cell from non-living materials.- natural selection: Definition: the strain in a population that produces the weaker progeny eventually gets weeded out leaving the stronger to survive. N.B. This process is not creative. Selection is made from already existing entities. Ie. doesn’t describe how those entities got there in the first place. P.104.

- There is an edge to micro-evolution. Paul Wesson: ‘Large evolutionary innovations are not well understood. None has ever been observed, and we have no idea whether any may be in progress. There is no good fossil record of any.’ P.108. Paul Erbrich: ‘..all variations have certainly remained within the confines of basic types.’ (p.109).
- One eminent biologist whose research into fruit fly mutation convinced him that there was a limit to what mutation and natural selection could achieve and led him to reject no-Darwinianism=Pierre Grasse. P.109. Grasse observed that fruit fly remain fruit fly in spite of thousands of generations that have been bred and the mutations that have been induced in them. The capacity for variation in the gene pool seems to run out quite early in the process because of the onset of sterility of the exhaustion of genetic variability. Similar research on E.coli bacteria. P.110.
- Sir Fred Hoyle (astrophysicist and mathematician) did some calculations that led him to doubt the validity of extrapolating from micro to macro evolution (p.112).
- There is no trace of the blind watchmaker.

The fossil record
- p.113. There is no evidence of macro-evolution in the fossil record.
- in 1859 Darwin could not cite one example of evidence in the fossil record of transitional life forms. Since then nothing has changed.
- Stephen Jay Gould: ‘The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of palaeontology’ (p.114)
- p.114. Species appear (and disappear) in the fossil record fully formed with no transitional change. So theory of punctuated equilibrium forwarded. ie. long periods of statis (no change) followed by a sudden large macro evolutionary jump. This is in contrast to the gradualist approach of ultra Darwinists like Richard Dawkins who simply extrapolate current observations backward.

genetic relatedness?
- p.117. The genetic relatedness of all living things proved through molecular biology is often used by the neo Darwinists. But it is no argument for evolution. i.e. may just be evidence of a common designer.
- p.118. In fact molecular biology has also revealed how ‘astonishing’, ‘astounding’, ‘remarkable’ (words used by naturalists) is life able to navigate through biological space. Evidence points to fact that more than blind chance (and natural selection) is needed.
- p.120. ‘evolution of the gaps’ is at least as widespread as ‘God of the gaps’.

Ch 7 The origin of life (bio-genesis)

- the vast complexity of the living cell. Also little evidence of evolution among cells (cells are exactly the same in all biological life forms). P.122.

irreducible complexity
- a single cell is seethingly complex containing maybe 100 million proteins of 20,000 different types. A factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines. P.123.
- Biochemist Michael Behe studies molecular machines argues that the tiny acid driven motor that powers the bacterial flagellum is irreducible complex (ie. take away any one of the protein parts and it ceases to function). P.124.
- Darwin wrote that if it could be proved that any complex organ existed which could not have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications then his theory would break down. Behe claims there are many irreducibly complex molecular machines.
- Also argues that Darwinian molecular evolution is not based on scientific authority, ie. there is no proof (published experiments) of how complex structures came to be.

The building blocks of life
- Molecular machines are made from proteins which in turn are made from amino acids. - the probability of building even a short protein at random is 1 in 10 to the power of 60. P.127.
- but then to get the Amino acids in the right order is 1 in 20 to the power of 100.
- P.129. Sir Fred Hoyle compared the odds of the spontaneous formation of life with the chance of a tornado sweeping through a junk yard and producing a Boeing 747 jet aircraft.

self organisation scenarios
- p.130. eg. scientists arguing that order and organisation can arise spontaneously out of chaos and disorder. But experiments which are created to prove this theory only prove that it can be done by intelligent design. ie. carefully controlled, externally organised experiments.

the core problem
- p132. Living things are instructed (organised) internally, by genetic software called RNA encoded into their DNA

Ch 8 - The genetic code and its origin

- DNA=an information bearing macro-molecule. Contained in a cells nucleus and needed to build the proteins in a functional organism. Much more complex than a protein. This is what lies at the heart of every living thing. P.135.
- for the DNA to get out of the nucleus past the membrane and onto the ‘factory’ floor it needs a molecule called RNA (also amazingly complex).P.139.
- conundrum: DNA holds the recipe for protein construction, but information on DNA cannot be copied or retrieved without the assistance of proteins. Which came first (chicken or the egg)? (also p.144).
- only 30,000 genes in the human genome. Surprising given they produce 100,000 proteins. However, it’s more complex than just a one gene to one protein ratio. Genes can be switched on or off. And some genes appear to be ‘smarter’, building more complex biological machines in more complex organisms. p.141. Also more complex information is added by alternative splicing. p.143.
- also cells seems to protect themselves from accidental genetic change (on which evolutionary theory depends). p.143.
- Why then has the central dogma of a simplistic explanation of heredity continued? P.144=it is heresy to go against this theory punishable by ostracism.
- also the genetic lexicon seems to be extremely ancient “not an iota seems to have changed in over two billion years.”
- where did the extremely complex genetic software DNA come from? How did the mutating replicator (on which Darwinian natural select depends) form from non living matter? P.147.

Ch 9 - Matters of Information

- Note: much of this chapter cannot be understood by the average reader.
- the basic gist of it seems to be: information can be syntactic (information passed on without any supposed meaning) or semantic (meaning dependant upon context). ie. there’s a big difference between having information and interpreting it correctly. There can be a lot of information but it might be explained simply using an algorithm (eg. fractal pictures). ie. there might be a lot of information but it’s not that complex.
- Paul Davies writes (p.157) “biologically relevant macromolecules simultaneously posses two vital properties: randomness [a lot of information which cannot be simplified] and extreme specificity [the kind of complexity associated with languages]. A chaotic process could possibly achieve the former property but would have a negligible probability of achieving the latter.” Then Davies uses ‘evolution of the gaps’ and asserts “Clearly Darwinian evolution by variation and natural selection has what is needed to generate both randomness (information richness) and tightly specified biological functionality in the same system.” ie. too intellectually lazy to propose where this information input comes from and just attributes it to “evolution”.
- p.162. No molecular device (biological machine) is capable of generating any information that does not either belong to its input or its own informational structure.
= informational input is necessary for the origin of life.

Ch 10 - The monkey machine

Richard Dawkins contends that unguided natural processes can account for the origin of biological information - no external source of information is necessary. In the Blind Watchmaker he compares it to the claim that apes typing randomly would eventually type up one of Shakespears poems, by chance = mathematical nonsense. (p.163). eg. to produce Psalm 23 by chance it would take 101017 years. Dawkins himself realises that it is mathematically impossible and tries to solve the difficulty by breaking the problem up into small manageable parts (“going around the back of Mount Improbable and crawling up the gentle slopes, inch by million year inch.”) = even this is mathematically improbable. Even assuming there is a continuous path leading from the origins of life to man. (p.165)
- So in the blind watchmaker Dawkins tries to reduce the improbability by introducing a law likeness into the process ie. a combination of chance and necessity. He changes the monkey illustration by introducing a target phrase. Each time the monkey hits a letter it is compared to it’s target letter. The comparison of course has to be done by some kind of mechanism and in doing so Dawkins has contradicted himself because he previously stated that evolution is blind and without a goal. The argument is circular. The simulation is front loaded with the very information that it was supposed to generate. The argument is fatally flawed as an argument to prove that unguided natural processes can generate information. In fact it proves the opposite.

Ch 11 - The origin of information

- DNA has some similarities to a software program or to a human language (p.174).
- inferences to intelligent agency are made routinely in archaeology, cryptography, computer science and forensic medicine (p.175). Also used in search for extra terrestial intelligence. So why the inconsistency in observing the overwhelming amount of information contained in even the simplest living system (p.176)?
- this inference persuaded Anthony Flew to convert from Atheism to Theism (p.176).
- Where did the information come from? God?=consistent with the claim of John 1:1 “in the beginning was the Word”. And Genesis 1 “.. and God said ..”
- information is invisible (not material) although the carriers of information may well be visible=Hebrews 11:3 (everything made out of the invisible).
- (p177-182). What of Dawkins argument that explaining the complexity of life using God means you have to then explain something even more complex? =but we often use complex theories to explain simple things eg. an apple falling from a tree. The thing that counts is not the simplicity of an argument but its explanatory power.
- so what is the best explanatory power of the 3.5 billion letter sequence of the human genome? An intelligent source or chance and necessity? Also Dawkins use of the Multiverse theory to explain our universe contradicts his argument.
-p182. Conclusion that a priori materialism can produce a profoundly unscientific attitude and an unwillingness to follow evidence.
- But who created God? (p.182f)=Christians, Muslims and Jews believe that no-one created God. He is eternal. And God is independent of the created order. Dawkins has more of a Greek philosophical view of God and matter ie. that matter is eternal, emanates out of God and in some sense everything is God. Then where did eternal energy and matter come from? (touche)
- p185. Dawkins hopes that physics will discover the final theory of everything (TOE). But logically chains of cause and effect either go back eternally in an infinite regression, or there is some point where we stop at an ultimate reality (p.186).
- It is not wrong to want an answer to the ultimate question bur rather what fact is ultimate: ‘God’ or ‘The Universe’. Did matter come before mind or the other way around?
- NB. Theism is not an argument of the God of the gaps (in science) but rather what is the best explanation for information rich DNA? ‘God’ or ‘Chance and necessity’?
- p191. The detail behind biology points towards a Logos (Word) behind life.

Ch 12 - Violating nature? The legacy of David Hume

- Conclusion (p.206) that there is no scientific, in principle objection to the possibility of miracles. Debunks philosopher David Hume's arguments against miracles (quotes Anthony Flew). Can’t define what is possible from experience coz may have happened outside of our experience. Debunks argument that people in the first century were primitives and therefore credulous (p.199). The fact that the laws of nature have been ‘broken’ simply points to the fact that there might be someone outside of nature who made those laws and can control them (p.201). Even in science the discovery of an exception to the fact is crucial to the discovery of new things. And ironically it only belief in a Creator which gives basis for the ‘laws of nature’ in the first place (p.205). If there is a God, miracles are possible.

Epilogue: Beyond Science but not beyond reason

Science cannot answer Why we are here (only its materials and processes). However the universe is rationally intelligible and provides some clues that there is a Mind behind it. Has this mind ever spoken? Claim of John 1 that “the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us”. = the Bible gives us this information.

Science has not buried God but points towards his existence and the scientific enterprise is itself validated by his existence.

Looking for answers in the London riots

The recent London riots raise the question of how can we motivate young people to do the right thing? We all know that stealing is wrong. We all know that destroying other people’s property is wrong. But given half a chance, thousands of school aged children joined the rioting and the looting. Many were middle class, university educated who couldn’t resist the temptation of getting a new pair of shoes or a plasma TV for free.

The mother of a young woman filmed looting, spoke of her shame and despair at her daughter's lawless actions. The daughter was seen on TV brazenly trying on training shoes taken from a sports shop in Tottenham, North London. She made no attempt to hide her identity as she joined others rifling through stock.

You may be worried about the behaviour of your own teenage children (or future teenage children)? Do you really know what they get up to on Saturday nights? Are they involved in stealing, graffiti or other anti-social behaviour? What can you do?

How can we motivate a young person (or in fact any person) to be a peaceful and productive member of society?

David Cameron the British Prime Minister proposed two solutions “to mend our broken society”. 1. Getting tough 2. Changing government policies.

Getting tough
Cameron said he hoped courts would use exemplary sentences to deter future riots. He praised the sentencing of two people to four years jail for inciting riots on Facebook – riots that never took place. Cameron has backed calls to withdraw welfare benefits from rioters and to evict those who live in government housing. He also floated the idea of restricting the use of services such as Facebook, Twitter and Blackberry Messenger.

Government policies
Cameron also said that “our security fight back must be matched by a social fight back. We must fight against the attitudes and assumptions that have bought parts of our society to this shocking state.” He went on … “it’s about parenting, it’s about discipline in schools, it’s about making sure we have a welfare system that doesn’t reward idleness.” The government plans to review whether current government programs are strong enough to address the underlying problems.

Prince Charles proposed a more simple solution …. “what rioters really needed was to be tired out with extra-curricular activities such as sport at school.”

Do we really think that government policies and school sports are going to motivate our young people to do the right thing? Anyone with teenage children will know that the problem is more complex and deeply rooted.

A better solution
I’m now going to be radical and propose a solution you might laugh at or may never have considered.

Introduce your children to Jesus Christ in the Bible. The Bible makes a big claim which is also testified to by the experience of many. The Bible claims that getting to know Jesus Christ and learning about his grace (generosity to us) will transform even the most obstinate and selfish person. The apostle Paul wrote: "For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,  who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good."(Titus 2:11-14 NIV)

You want to motivate people to be eager to do good? Introduce them to Jesus Christ. There’s only one way to find out whether this will work or not …..

Work Smarter Live Better

I read a book recently called Work Smarter Live Better. I thought I'd share a few things I learnt from the book.

The book is based on the premise: your time is valuable - don't waste it! This can be done by increasing efficiency and effectiveness.

Increase Efficiency
1. Have an effective filing system and time management system. Don't use your desk or your email Inbox as a filing system or task management system. Don't even leave Post-it notes and other bits of work around your desk to remind you of work which needs to be done. This should be handled by your Task Management system.

2. Don't multi handle information. Decide whether you will do something straight away (short tasks), otherwise diarise when you will do it.

3. Avoid interruptions. eg. Don't check your email several times per day. Set aside one or two times in the day when you will answer emails. If you manage people, only allow them to interrupt you for non urgent tasks at certain times of the day. Work outside the office more. Write out three things which are time wasters and work out a strategy to overcome these.

Increase Effectiveness
There's not much point being efficient (having a clean desk) if you are not effective. Every quarter write out what High Impact Activities (HIAs) you want to concentrate on during the next 3 months. Ask your peers to review these. Then at the end of each week set aside two hours to plan the following week. Do this by reading over your HIAs first. Diarise into your week when you are going to concentrate on these HIAs.

127 Hours

Would you cut off your arm to save your life? I recently watched the movie 127 Hours based on the true story of Aron Ralston whose arm is pinned under a boulder while canyoning alone near Moab, Utah. Aron's water has run out (he is forced to drink his urine), he has little chance of being rescued because he is out of sight and he is beginning to hallucinate. His only chance to live is to self amputate (with a blunt pocket knife) and to stay conscious so he doesn't bleed to death. Many people choose not to see the movie because of this scene but it wasn't that bad because it is in the context of .... I'm going to die anyway  ... I'm going to lose my arm anyway ... so I've got nothing to lose.


The amazing thing is that this accident saved Aron's life in more ways than one. Aron admits to being a selfish loner who didn't care much about his family. While trapped in the canyon, he has plenty of time to reflect on his selfishness and to consider what he really wants out of life. If only he can escape and be given a second chance at life. (See video interview). 


Jesus taught a similar thing re: chopping off your hand in order to save your life in Matthew 18:8. If your hand or your foot causes you to sin cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire.


In order to have life we must deal with our sin problem in a radical way.

Most people I know think that I'm crazy

This is the title of a great song by Billy Thorpe and the Aztecs (an Australian band from 1972). I don't know if Billy Thorpe was a Christian or not but the lyrics of his song reflect what it is to be a true Christian.

Most people I know think that I'm crazy and
I know at times I act a little hazy but
if thats my way
and you should know it then
in every way help me to show it.

oooooooo yeah, yeah, yeah

For most of my life I lived a delusion yes
material gain has caused me confusion but
slowly in time I learned that my place is to
tell all that I meet the glory that God is

oooooooo yeah, yeah

and thats why .... Most people I know think that I'm crazy etc.

This song reflects what the apostle Paul says in 2 Corinthians 5:13 "If we are out of our mind, it is for the sake of God." ie. Many people perceive (real) Christians as crazy as they urge all around them to turn back to God and take Jesus seriously. It's just not polite in this post modern world to be urging your beliefs onto other people (people say or think). But the apostle Paul doesn't care what other people think. All he cares about is pleasing God and urging people to be saved while there's still time. 

Click here to read the full text of what drives Paul on to be so counter cultural. What do you think about his reasons? And that's why .........

The Days Fly By

The days fly by like a fast moving train,

each day a familiar pattern in my brain.

The days fly by like a TV ad,

Only yesterday I was little boy, once a young man, now a tired old dad.

The days fly by like a good night sleep,

In this short life, lot's of stuff, but nothing to keep.

Thank God for the living waters of life,

won for me through Jesus' strife.

I rest.

Introverts in the Church by Adam S McHugh

I recently made some notes on this book which I share with you. Please note that I don’t agree with all of the theology or recommendations of Adam S McHugh. I did find the book thought provoking though in recognizing that we need to allow for different personality types in our churches and mission teams (and other community organizations). My notes are not extensive as I have selected random points from each chapter which I think are interesting. I think though I have communicated the gist of each chapter.

Chapter 1. The Extroverted Church.
- 97% of people regard Jesus as an extrovert (p15). Even though he sometimes withdrew to be with his friends. Why? Do people view being extroverted as being better?
- Introverts make up 50.7% of the population (p17).
- his thesis that ‘evangelical churches’ value extraversion coz we value personal relationships=sociability, value ‘the word’=talking a lot, value aggressive personal evangelism. Ie. all of which doesn’t come naturally to introverts (p.20-22).
- p23-28 the historical roots of Evangelicalism (in America) are from ‘The Great Awakening’ (George Whitfield) = characterized by outward expressions of piety and devotion and active service of God. C/C the inward reflection and intellectualism of introverts. Also (in America) the mega church movement with big personality pastors, showy meetings has helped define Christianity as being extroverted.
- p28-31. Believes the modern church needs a combination of Introverts and Extroverts lest Christianity just becomes like a flashy consumer product like the rest of society. Gives examples of the hermit Christians in fourth century who withdrew from the world (maybe to highlight how different today’s church is).

Chapter 2. The Introverted difference.
Freud. Introversion = an unhealthy obsession with self to the exclusion of others.
Carl Jung. Introverts = a healthy and normal trait. Introverts / Extroverts = a continuum within the same person. Jung is the basis of Myer-Briggs.

Introverts. Find primary energy within themselves. ie. energized by solitude or with one or two people. Need time and space for filtering and processing. Learning style centres on observation and contemplation and not as dependant on external feedback. One big mistake extroverts make is to think that if Introverts are not engaged with another person then they are not busy. Introverts are more orientated around ideas than people. Prefer depth in relationships over breadth. Find small talk disagreeable. Prefer to specialize in a few topics than over many. Good self awareness of motivations, feelings and assumptions that drive us.

Extroverts. Finds primary energy outside themselves in the outside world. Solitude and inactivity drains them.
People have a tendency to one or the other. It’s a preference. Ie. Myers-Briggs lists 8 different types of introverts (Rely on senses, Rely on intuition, From the Heart, From the Head, some prefer Structure, some prefer Spontaneity.)

Summary of Introvert characteristics (p.42)
- Prefer to relax alone or with a few close friends.
- consider only deep relationships as friends.
- Need rest after outside activities, even ones we enjoy.
- Often listen but talk a lot about topics of importance to us.
- Appear calm, self contained and like to observe.
- Tend to think before we speak or act.
- May prefer a quiet atmosphere.
- Experience our minds going blank in groups or under pressure.
- Don’t like feeling rushed.
- Have great powers of concentration.
- Dislike small talk.
- Are territorial – desire private time and space.
- May treat their homes as their sanctuaries.
- Prefer to work on own rather than with a group.
- May prefer written communication.
- Do not share private thoughts with many people.

Evidence that Extrovert and Introvert brain’s work differently (p.43-45)
Introverts get chemical satisfaction in reflection and a slower calmer life. Have busier and more active brains than Extroverts. ie. Introverts look calm on the surface but bubbling with activity below it. Blood flows greater to parts of brain for remembering, problem solving planning. But slower at speaking or accessing memories. Slow to react in stressful situations. Ie. some Introverts think they are not as smart as Extroverts but not a matter of intelligence but of different mental processes. (p.45).

Extroverts brains require greater amounts of dopamine which is produced by movement and action. Think and speak faster in an ‘act and react’ response. They thrive under pressure. More expressive with their bodies.

In the Bible. Peter was an Extrovert. Moses was an Introvert. ie. God uses both in his purposes.

Chapter 3. Finding Healing.
Introverts feel like the world doesn’t understand. eg. Quietness=arrogance=condescension. Pushes people further into isolation.

Introvert’s problems started in childhood. Eg. Parents, teachers expecting extroverted behaviour as normal. Eg. Have more friends or something wrong with you. Unable to answer questions quickly so stupid.

Issue: when is withdrawing healthy and wise and when is it unhealthy pre-occupation?

People need to learn to embrace their Introverted identity. It’s OK to talk less and spend less time with people. Withdrawing to energize will help take risks and be resilient when the time comes. Self image grounded in God (inward). Finding joy and healing in relationships (outward). Gospel and love should mean taking risks for others.

Chapter 4. Introverted Spirituality
Ours is an over stimulated culture (technology) at the expense of the inward. Introverts can teach Extroverts something here. P.70-71 seems to be promoting mysticism “sensing God on a different level that transcends words and rational thoughts.” P.74-75 Spiritual exercises: ‘the examen’ to survey the events of the day (from St Ignatius). “Invoke the Holy Spirit to guide our reflections on the day.” P.76 Way of God speaking to us.

Introverted Rules of Life (p.80)

Use these questions to work out disciplines and patterns.
1. What are the times of day I feel most energized?
2. When do I feel the most tired?
3. How much sleep do I need?
4. What physical habits energize me? Drain me?
5. When do I most feel the need for solitude?
6. What Spiritual disciplines restore me Spiritually? (my words)
7. What are the relationships I feel most energized or drained?

Eg. To plan time for reading, writing and reflection. Sabbath rest. Quiet places.

“In contemplations and solitude, we often find the impetus to act.” (p.84)

Chapter 5. Introverted Community and Relationships.

Churches define spiritual maturity as attendance at an increasing number of activities or being vulnerable in groups.

Sometimes introverts feel the need to step out of a community for a period of time.

Gifts Introverts have to offer: Compassion, Insight, Listening and giving space, Creativity, Service, Calming presence.

P102-106. Tips to help Introverts get involved in community.

Relational Challenges: Enmeshment with dependant people. One directional relationships. Conflict avoidant.

Chapter 6. The ability to lead.

Americans want their leaders to be extroverts. They value: Charisma, Dominance (sheer force of their will), Gregariousness, Superstardom (excel in everything). NB. The damage to even extroverts of these expectations.

Jim Collins’s book Good to Great. Ie. Leaders of great companies were more likely to be self effacing, understated, workmanlike diligence, set-up the next generation.
Ie. characteristics of Introverts.

The Biblical model of servant leadership. Character over charisma. Titus 1:5-8. 1 Timothy 3:2-7. 1 Peter 5:1-3 (ie. modeling godliness to others). P127. God’s power made perfect in weakness (2 Cor 12:9).

Also Peter Senge’s book The Fifth Discipline contends that success in an organization depends on processes of reflection and evaluation. Ie. qualities of Introversion.

P.128. While extroverts might be perceived as ideal leaders, 4/10 top executives and 25% of protestant senior pastors defined themselves as Introverts. Ie. so doesn’t match the reality.

(gives egs. of quiet introverts who were successful leaders Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King Jr and Jonathan Edwards..

Chapter 7. Leading as Ourselves.

Church leadership is not for every introvert. Pastoral ministry is a people business (p137). P140. Introverts tend to internalize everything eg. Disappointment. Also compassion fatigue.

But just coz ppl find a task draining doesn’t mean they are not good at it.

Labour in the power of God and the Holy Spirit.

Eg. Moses. Inarticulate. Didn’t want to do the job.

P142. Need to find strength in internal solitude as well as external confidants. Ie. there is a clarity that comes from speaking out loud. Keep discipline of self care schedule and boundaries.

P145. One unexpected finding was that Introverted pastors felt very comfortable preaching. Many considered it part of their biggest strength. Because it is a controlled setting where can speak without interruption and prepare thoroughly. Not good at debates though. Challenge is to connect with people not just speak at them.

p.147 preaching tips for Introverts (many are just preaching tips for anyone). Tip 8=Use preaching as an opportunity for self revelation.

p.148. Having a genuine, caring relationship with the congregation at other times can help the audience listen to the preacher. (1 Thessalonians 2:8)

p151-155. Helping people listen to God by being a good Spiritual director??? What is the Holy Spirit saying???

Recognise that Introverted pastors will affect fewer people than extroverted pastors but will affect people more deeply. Eg. Jesus and ‘the twelve’ or ‘the three’.

Introverted leaders can be tempted to lead from ‘above’ ie. be directive and unilateral because it requires less social energy than getting beside people. P162.

Strong partnerships between Introvert and Extrovert leaders can be a strength. It’s also validating for cong. members to being lead by someone of their own personality type. P162.

P164. Surprisingly found many senior pastors of large churches to be introverts coz members don’t expect them to be as accessible of involved in everything and they can get on with training and coaching.

P165. Things for Introvert leaders to work on.
- work at depending on others and seeking their input. C/c being independent.
- work at over communicating. Give more feedback and affirmation than we think is necessary.
- educate others about personality types.
- give other Introverts space to speak. Send meeting agendas out early so people have time to think. Give people some quiet time to think in a meeting.


Chapter 8. Introverted Evangelism.

Misconceptions. Only gregarious people who are naturally relational can be an effective witness. Eg. Have to be a good salesman to sell our product and extract a decision. p172.

But people value the humanity of Christians (p174). Eg. Our weaknesses, doubts and questions.

Sees his role not in initiating Spiritual conversations but responding to the ways God is already at work in people. (Initiating exhausts introverts). P.175.

For Introverts the most natural setting for sharing the gospel will be one to one friendships. (p.179). Our strength in fortitude, acts of service, compassion and listening ability (p.180). The slower more contemplative lifestyle of the Introvert might also be a more appealing model of Christianity (Jesus said “come to me and I will give you rest…”). Build relationships around your interests – more natural (p.181).

Introverted seekers need introverted evangelists (p.184).

Chapter 9. Introverts in the church.

Informality of some evangelical churches can sometimes exclude introverts because they are more awkward socially. (p.188-189). Introverts may feel more comfortable in traditional worship services that don’t require outward emotional responses (say of charismatic churches) (p.190). Introverts are looking for meaningful sanctuary (p.191). Most introverts prefer churches that move more slowly and thoughtfully. (p.195).

Welcoming Introverts
Acknowledge different types of personalities there. Eg. If there is a greeting time recognize that not everyone is comfortable with this practice and it may be a little awkward for some. (p.197).

Classes to help people recognize their gifts.

Recalibrate your leadership gauges to include Introverts and see the strength of this.

Use silences in worship. Different formats for prayer meetings (other than spontaneous and praying out loud). Have groups that are more task orientated than relationship focused (p.201). Insert personal refection times in meetings, give people homework and reading assignments, written agendas in advance of meetings.