Item description for The Secular Squeeze: Reclaiming Christian Depth in a Shallow World by John F. Alexander...
The real problem with secularism? It's boring, says John F. Alexander. In this book he makes a startling diagnosis and offers a remedy: the refilling of everyday life with the excitement and mystery, the pain and love of Jesus' story.
Promise Angels is dedicated to bringing you great books at great prices. Whether you read for entertainment, to learn, or for literacy - you will find what you want at promiseangels.com!
Studio: Wipf & Stock Publishers
Est. Packaging Dimensions: Length: 8.22" Width: 5.6" Height: 0.9" Weight: 0.81 lbs.
Release Date Feb 1, 2005
Publisher Wipf & Stock Publishers
ISBN 1597521043 ISBN13 9781597521048
Reviews - What do customers think about The Secular Squeeze: Reclaiming Christian Depth in a Shallow World?
One of my favorite Non-fictions Dec 31, 2002
I found this book to be really fantastic and inspiring. Not only did it present some ideas that we seem to just be hearing about now (the embodied apologetic?), but it was well written with a lucid and enthusiastic style. Alexander got me all riled up when I read it the first time and I still go back now and then, ecspecially to chapter 8. Fantastic chapter. Occasionaly, I found the first portion of the book to drag, as I as already aware of much of the historical info, but it was necessary for showing part of his argument. And in any case the rest of it was great as a whole and in tiny tidbits. It was terrific. I don't really know what to say. The other person who wrote a review really missed the point of a lot of it, I think. Ecspecially the part about Julia Roberts and Arnold S. (which i won't go into, but it was about the value of stories and the story schemes and characters that are prevelant in today's western culture.) As well, perhaps the only part I didn't like was the title, which i found a little cheesy at first, but with a book like this inside it, who really cares? John! Keeping writing more stuff, it's wonderful, entertaining, and more importantly inspiring and truthful. Read this book. Period. The end.
Critique of The Secular Squeeze Jan 15, 2001
The Secular Squeeze: Reclaiming Christian Depth in a Shallow World. What a fantastic title, I thought to myself as I snatched the book from the bookshelf at my local Christian bookstore and raced hurriedly to the checkout counter. I could hardly wait to get back home to my easy chair and begin reading this tome that seemed to echo my take on modern civilization in These United States. I was anxiously looking forward to partaking of the views, insights and philosophy of a person who would be so moved as to write a book such as this. Sadly, after completing the book, some 307 pages later, I'm still waiting. What a letdown. With such an incredible piece of subject matter, how could a book such as this not be exciting? Well, truth be told, it was as flat and shallow as the secular world it was trying to describe. Yes, modern society has lost its spiritual base and is totally caught up with the acquisition of things and the idea that "it is not enough for me to succeed, you have to fail", but there was little more than cursory reference made to this. Mostly the book was made up of weak analogies and philosophies run wild. If reference was made one more time to Andy Wharhol's paintings of soup cans, or Arnold Schwarzenegger or Julia Roberts as being symbols of what is right and what is wrong with modern civilization, I think I would have screamed. The Schwarzenegger ("Total Recall") and Roberts ("Pretty Woman") references were meant to mean their movies I gather, but the reference was to them as people rather than actors playing roles. Schwarzenegger was depicted as what is wrong with society, when in fact he would be a stellar role model for anyone. He has a good marriage, great kids and is a good citizen. Julia Roberts on the other hand was depicted as what is right. Am I missing something here? She's a good actress, but has had serious problems with relationships. Then again, elsewhere in the book, the references to these two seems to flip flop. But flip flopping seems to be a major problem with the book. Every time I thought I'd caught on to where the book was heading, it doubled back and ran in the opposite direction. The author got so caught up in right-brained/left-brained diatribe that I often lost the point of what he was saying - but maybe that's because I'm just to the left of middle-brained and don't look at any one thing from totally one perspective. The author also needs to understand that many words do not a point make. Over three hundred pages of utter drivel could have been reduced to about twenty pages of possibly meaningful dialog - I think. In short, John F. Alexander, do us all a favor. Please don't write a sequel.