Kevin continues his thoughtful, chapter-by-chapter analysis of my book, and I’m very thankful.  He’s onto Chapter 4, “The Theology, Stupid.”  He concurs with me at some point, and dissents at others.  Among his agreements are those having to do with epistemological humility.  Among his dissents, that I seem reluctant to grant that the statement, “God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself,” the status of an objective proposition that is either true or not true, metaphysically speaking.  Indeed, he may have me on that one.  And I am, I hope, epistemologically humble enough to know that I very well could be wrong about anything.

Along those lines, I’ve gotten several emails in the last week and had a conversation at the Princeton cohort along the same lines: Is the eternal deferral of Derrida and Caputo really resonant with the Christian narrative?  That question causes me to wonder, What is it about Derridean deferral that so attracts me (as a Christian)?  I guess it’s just that Caputo has convinced me, again and again, how deeply Christian it is to keep questing after truth and justice.  To never settle.  I fundamentally disagree with Chesterton that the purpose of having an open mind is to eventually close it.