Waterstones Not in God's Name

Author: Reverend D. C. Macdonald

Rating: 5

Review: Ever since listening to his Reith Lectures (The Persistence of Faith, BBC Radio 4, 14th November 1990) and subsequently reading his book The Great Partnership, Science, Religion and the Search for Meaning, (Hodder & Stoughton, 2011) I have been an enthusiast for the work of the former Chief Rabbi, Jonathan Sacks. So when I saw a notice for his latest book, Not in God’s Name, I promptly purchased a copy and am keen to encourage people to beg, borrow or even buy it! The book is a masterpiece of concision, accessible explanation, and an embarrass de richesses which went further than anything I have ever read to assuage my discomfort and distress about the violence to be found particularly, in the Old Testament and in some of the Atonement theories allegedly derived from the New Testament. The reader must discover the countless gems of wisdom and insight for themselves but, for example, I learnt that computer simulations have confirmed the principle of the Golden Rule: ‘it pays to act to others as you would wish them to act to you’. But there are nuggets of ‘gold’ on virtually every page. The Dualism that has its roots in Zoroastrianism and which makes the Nag Hammadi texts (the Gnostic Gospels) like the Gospel of Thomas suspect is clearly explained, and, consequently, why Marcion of Sinope’s rejection of the Old Testament was not accepted by Christian orthodoxy. Ironically, Sacks asserts with some conviction, Marcionism still rears its ugly head in the separation of the God of the ‘Old Testament’ and the God of the Hebrew Bible, only the latter representing the essence of Christianity articulated by Paul and the Gospels as the God of both Testaments being the same God. In every example he cites, Sacks gives us clear and straightforward answers to our questions about difficult Biblical texts but also invites us to explore further. He argues that ‘monotheism asks of its followers: to think of God as both a father and a judge’, taking his cue from the way Neils Bohr, The Nobel prize-winning physicist, resolved the dilemma of how to deal with his son’s act of theft from a shop. He had to think as a father and as a judge but could not do both simultaneously. Whether or not you agree with Sacks analysis, I think it is a brilliantly clear insight into the nature of God. From it flows an understanding of monotheism as a humanising, civilising influence, holding together good and evil in a way that Dualism fails to do, with the concomitant consequences of the Holocaust and other genocides. I will offer one other example from Sack’s eloquent and life-affirming book in the hope that I may whet your appetite for more because I really do believe the world will be a better place the more people read this book. My dear mother used to say to me, ‘There is a little bad in the best of people and a little good in the worst’. Sacks reiterates that philosophy when he says the Bible is honest in presenting ‘the unique mixture of light and shade in all the main characters of the Hebrew Bible. Abraham and Isaac pass off their wives as sisters. Jacob deceives his blind father and takes his brother’s blessing. Moses loses his temper. David commits adultery. Solomon, wisest of men, is led astray. The Bible hides none of this from us, and for a deeply consequential reason: to teach us that even the best are not perfect and even the worst are not devoid of merits. That is the best protection of our humanity’. It seems to me that thinkers of the calibre of Jonathan Sacks, like Jacob Bronowski before him, stand in a long line of Jewish prophets that reaches right back to the Bible. They are insightful in the very best sense of the word, and we should humbly sit at their feet and learn from them and grow, spiritually, socially and humanely, as a result. I warmly commend this superb book unequivocally.

Author: Rowland Nelken

Rating: 2

Review: My principal reaction to this book is pity for the author. His whole identity and career as a rabbi has had, as one of its central features, veneration of the Torah. It is clear that Sacks is a humane sort of guy and regards himself as but one member of the whole human family, as opposed to a retired local leader of the world's one true religion. Indeed, a central theme of this work is an examination of the tragedies that ensue when the dominant philosophy of a community is dualist, i.e. divided into us and them. Proletarian and Capitalist, True believer and heretic, Master Race and Parasite, Muslim and Infidel are the ugly features of just some systems which, over human history, have led to monstrous cruelty. Sacks tries, and fails, in this book, to demonstrate how the Hebrew scriptures embody an acknowlegement that we are all equal as God's creatures and that mutual respect, and an acknowledgement of our idiosyncrasies and weaknesses, the principal lessons of those writings, are the key to human harmony, happiness and fulfilment. Of course, there are a few scattered Bible quotes that can support this claim, but there are also some stories and commands which, to most readers, scream the opposite. The way Sacks deals with them is utterly lamentable. He either ignores them, or engages in semantic contortions to try and convince himself, if nobody else, that, say, the glorification of genocide in the Book of Joshua, Noah's Flood and the genocide of the Amalekites are all features of a universally loving God. The funny little primitive stories of women being granted as wives by their dads, of divine promises to become founders of a great nation, Sacks desperately tries to make seem relevant and inspiring with with a liberal use of hyperbole. Every Biblical folk tale is presented as 'profound', 'remarkable', 'significant', 'stunning' or 'genius'. It does not work. Adjectives do not turn base metal into gold. And when the commands and stories are truly barbaric or horrific Sacks goes the way of peace loving, Jihad hating Islamic scholars and Christian theologians who shrink from the Biblical notion of eternal hellfire. He takes shelter in exegesis and hermeneutics. These are often nothing more than elaborate helpings of dense verbiage whereby a commentator can try and convince themselves that a piece of text means, not what it transparently does mean, but what they would like it to mean. He actually uses the phrase 'elaborate hermeneutic and jurisprudential systems'. He writes quite openly that ' Hard texts need interpreting - without it they lead to violence'. Presumably Sacks has spent so much of his adult life playing these 'elaborate hermeneutical and jurisprudential' games with fellow exegesists, that he has no idea how transparently ridiculous this reads to the outsider. A further running theme in the book is the lament of a 'good old days' merchant. He imagines that the decline of religious observance in Europe, and to a lesser extent in America, is a sign of societal breakdown and individualistic self indulgence. He is wrong. Our identities are no longer constrained so much by our places of birth and dominant culture. Communities of those with like interests can span the globe. The internet is many things, but it is great for breaking down so many barriers and a tool for making new bonds. Despite Sacks' assertion, dualism has been a dominant feature of the Abrahamic religions. It is there in the foundational 'holy' books, however much the author and others try to 'interpret' it away. There are other and better ways of building human harmony, than gathering with others who share a particular set of unevidenced beliefs about a god, or in the case of Sacks' Orthodox Jewry, matrilineal Hebrew ancestry.