What do you think?
Rate this book
The Fidelity of Betrayal: Towards a Church Beyond Belief
"In The Fidelity of Betrayal , Peter Rollins has teased out—as Bonhoeffer never had the chance to do—profound possibilities hidden in the phrase. As a huge fan of Peter's first book, I find his second no less thoughtful, stimulating, and at times unsettling—always in a most (de)constructive way. His subversive parables, his clever turns of phrase, and his beguiling clarity all conspire to tempt the reader into that most fertile and terrifying of activities—to think to the very rim of one's understanding, and then to faithfully imagine the Truth that lies far beyond." — Brian McLaren , author/activist (www.brianmclaren.net) What if one of the core demands of a radical Christianity lay in a call for its betrayal, while the ultimate act of affirming God required the forsaking of God? And what if fidelity to the Judeo-Christian Scriptures demanded their renunciation? In short, what would it mean if the only way of finding real faith involved betraying it with a kiss? Employing the insights of mysticism and deconstructive theory, The Fidelity of Betrayal delves into the subversive and revolutionary nature of a Christianity that dwells within the church while simultaneously undermining it.
196 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
44 people are currently reading
444 people want to read
About the author
Peter Rollins
19 books314 followersPeter Rollins is a Northern Irish writer, public speaker, philosopher and theologian who is a prominent figure in Postmodern Christianity.
Drawing largely from various strands of Continental Philosophy, Rollins' early work operated broadly from within the tradition of Apophatic Theology, while his more recent books have signaled a move toward the theory and practice of Radical Theology. In these books Rollins develops a "religionless" interpretation of Christianity called Pyrotheology, an interpretation that views faith as a particular way of engaging with the world rather than a way of believing things about the world.
In contrast to the dominant reading of Christianity, this more existential approach argues that faith has nothing to do with upholding a religious identity, affirming a particular set of beliefs or gaining wholeness through conversion. Instead he has developed an approach that sees Christianity as a critique of these very things. This anti-religious reading stands against the actual existing church and lays the groundwork for an understanding of faith as a type of life in which one is able to celebrate doubt, ambiguity and complexity while deepening ones care and concern for the world. As an outspoken critic of “worldview Christianity” he argues that the event which gave rise to the Christian tradition cannot itself be reduced to a tradition, but is rather a way of challenging traditions, rendering them fluid and opening them up to the new. This event cannot then be understood as a religious, cultural or political system, but is a way of life that operates within such systems.
In order to explore and promote these themes Rollins has founded a number of experimental communities such as ikon and ikonNYC. These groups describe themselves as iconic, apocalyptic, heretical, emerging and failing and engage in the performance of what they call 'transformance art' and the creation of "suspended space." Because of their rejection of "worldview Christianity" and embrace of suspended space these groups purposelessly attempt to attract people with different political perspectives and opposing views concerning the existence of God and the nature of the world.
Although Rollins does not directly identify with the emerging church movement,he has been a significant influence on the movement's development. As a freelance speaker and popular writer, Rollins operates broadly outside the walls of an academic institution, and currently lives in Greenwich, Connecticut. His most influential book to date is How (Not) To Speak Of God (2006).
Drawing largely from various strands of Continental Philosophy, Rollins' early work operated broadly from within the tradition of Apophatic Theology, while his more recent books have signaled a move toward the theory and practice of Radical Theology. In these books Rollins develops a "religionless" interpretation of Christianity called Pyrotheology, an interpretation that views faith as a particular way of engaging with the world rather than a way of believing things about the world.
In contrast to the dominant reading of Christianity, this more existential approach argues that faith has nothing to do with upholding a religious identity, affirming a particular set of beliefs or gaining wholeness through conversion. Instead he has developed an approach that sees Christianity as a critique of these very things. This anti-religious reading stands against the actual existing church and lays the groundwork for an understanding of faith as a type of life in which one is able to celebrate doubt, ambiguity and complexity while deepening ones care and concern for the world. As an outspoken critic of “worldview Christianity” he argues that the event which gave rise to the Christian tradition cannot itself be reduced to a tradition, but is rather a way of challenging traditions, rendering them fluid and opening them up to the new. This event cannot then be understood as a religious, cultural or political system, but is a way of life that operates within such systems.
In order to explore and promote these themes Rollins has founded a number of experimental communities such as ikon and ikonNYC. These groups describe themselves as iconic, apocalyptic, heretical, emerging and failing and engage in the performance of what they call 'transformance art' and the creation of "suspended space." Because of their rejection of "worldview Christianity" and embrace of suspended space these groups purposelessly attempt to attract people with different political perspectives and opposing views concerning the existence of God and the nature of the world.
Although Rollins does not directly identify with the emerging church movement,he has been a significant influence on the movement's development. As a freelance speaker and popular writer, Rollins operates broadly outside the walls of an academic institution, and currently lives in Greenwich, Connecticut. His most influential book to date is How (Not) To Speak Of God (2006).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
December 21, 2010
What is Christianity? This is the central question that Peter Rollins seeks to answer in The Fidelity of Betrayal: Towards a Church Beyond Belief.
Drawing on such philosophers and theologians as Pascal, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, and Žižek, Rollins provides his answer, constantly referring to Christianity as a “religion without religion,” which is, of course, reminiscent of Bonhoeffer’s notion of religionless Christianity. (Rollins’s background in poststructuralist thought and continental philosophy, especially the influence of Hegel, is evident throughout this book.)
What, then, is this religion without religion? At its heart is Rollins’s notion of betrayal: to be a Christian, one must continually betray all that one affirms and believes, to doubt everything, especially the objective notion of truth.
Truth is not, for Rollins, some Platonic form that the mind seeks to grasp. If one objectifies truth as something to be known by the mind or affirmed in creeds and doctrines, one has thereby distanced oneself from the truth: truth is somewhere apart from the believer, out there to be sought and known. In objectifying the notion of truth in this manner, truth is stripped of its life; it ceases to be a transformative power and becomes rote dogma. Thus, traditional Christianity has killed truth by objectifying it, and so this objective notion of truth must be betrayed so that real Christianity and authentic truth can live.
Thus, Rollins gives primacy to betrayal of all beliefs, and doubt becomes a virtue in his vision of Christianity. Authentic Christianity is not a system of beliefs and creeds, of adherence to prescribed teachings. In this non-dogmatic vision of Christianity, many of the best Christians are non-Christians in terms of their beliefs (or lack thereof).
But if we are to embrace Christianity as a religion without religion, exactly what, then, is this Christianity? According to Rollins, it is a way of life that questions all systems of power: governmental, religious, cultural, societal. Directly to this point, Rollins writes, “The Christian critique is not then directed at the people in power so much as the place of power itself” (page 170). It is the very idea of power, of subjugation, that Christianity seeks to overthrow, including the power wielded by Christianity itself.
Any institution that says to someone, “You are not one of us,” is to be questioned and undermined, subverted and brought down. No longer can the Christian say to the Jew or Muslim or atheist, “You are cannot be a member of the body of Christ.” No longer can society say to lesbians and gays, to aliens and ethnic minorities, to women, “You cannot have full rights as citizens within our society.” The authentic Christianity speaks rebellion and subversion against all institutions that oppress and exclude, against all expressions of dominance and power.
Where does God fit into Rollins’s paradigm? Although he does not explicitly mention Tillich in this book, he seems to have been influenced by Tillich’s view of God as the ground of being: God is not some being out there (like the idea of objective truth) to be known by the mind; rather, God is that which makes being possible, is being itself. Rollins describes God as the Event that allows the miracle of Christianity to occur, and the miracle is the radical transformation that Christianity as a religion without religion brings into the lives of those who embrace betrayal of all their beliefs and who doubt everything. Rollins speaks of how life is that which conditions, which makes possible, everything that we are, and yet life is not some separate, distinct idea (a Platonic form of Life) that exists objectively; God is, then, like life in that God is that in which we partake when we experience the miracle that brings us to embrace the subversion of power; God is that which gives ground to, gives existence to, our project of the liberation of the oppressed. God is not some being to whom we can point and who is separate from ourselves; God is that which makes it possible for us to betray our religion and to rebel against authority.
Is God then still, for Rollins, a personal God? This question is irrelevant to Christianity, for it is a religious question. Rollins admits that it is an interesting question, but it is not a question with which Christianity is concerned.
So, must traditional Christians abandon their beliefs in a personal God, in the Virgin Birth, in the Incarnation, and in the Resurrection in order to participate in Rollins’s vision of Christianity? No, what is important in the betrayal of one’s religious beliefs is not necessarily to denounce the particular beliefs or to declare them false; rather, what is important is to recognize that religious beliefs have nothing to do with Christianity (at least, to the extent that beliefs do no motivate harmful actions; I’m sure Rollins would agree that some beliefs—i.e. the belief that women are inferior to men—are actually worthy not only of betrayal but of outright destruction). Christianity then becomes a religion without religion wherein in people with all sorts of metaphysical and religious beliefs or none at all can come together to work to bring about the miracle of Christianity: the constant rebellion against and undermining of power and authority, the drive to destroy the institutions of dominance which marginalize and oppress and exclude.
I find Rollins’s vision of and for Christianity refreshing. There have always been liberal, open-minded critics of traditional religion and orthodox Christianity both within (prominently within the last half century, John A.T. Robinson, Don Cupitt, and John Shelby Spong, for example) and without (Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens, for example). Whereas the liberal Christians generally tend to seek to reinterpret Christianity in accord with the ideals of modern Western liberal democracies and classical libertarianism and capitalism, Rollins seeks instead to question even these Western ideals—in fact, all of our political, social, religious, and philosophical ideals; in this and many other ways, his thought is quite reminiscent of that prominent in the liberation theology. Rollins is the most articulate, charismatic person to bring this message of subversion of power and liberation to the masses of the West (particularly those in the UK and the US). And whereas the critics of religion who approach their critiques from outside religion would be happy to see the death of Christianity and of religion, Rollins seeks instead to transform Christianity into a new kind of religion, a religion without religion: a Christianity in which even Nietzsche and Dawkins could find a home and call themselves Christians.
This is a Christianity for rebels and anarchists, for lovers and liberators, for the poor and the oppressed, for those who value compassion and the sister/brotherhood of not only all humanity but of all life. Rollins's vision of Christianity is, in my estimation, far closer to the kingdom of God that Jesus of Nazareth preached than anything taught and preached in the dominant contemporary Christian churches.
Drawing on such philosophers and theologians as Pascal, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, and Žižek, Rollins provides his answer, constantly referring to Christianity as a “religion without religion,” which is, of course, reminiscent of Bonhoeffer’s notion of religionless Christianity. (Rollins’s background in poststructuralist thought and continental philosophy, especially the influence of Hegel, is evident throughout this book.)
What, then, is this religion without religion? At its heart is Rollins’s notion of betrayal: to be a Christian, one must continually betray all that one affirms and believes, to doubt everything, especially the objective notion of truth.
Truth is not, for Rollins, some Platonic form that the mind seeks to grasp. If one objectifies truth as something to be known by the mind or affirmed in creeds and doctrines, one has thereby distanced oneself from the truth: truth is somewhere apart from the believer, out there to be sought and known. In objectifying the notion of truth in this manner, truth is stripped of its life; it ceases to be a transformative power and becomes rote dogma. Thus, traditional Christianity has killed truth by objectifying it, and so this objective notion of truth must be betrayed so that real Christianity and authentic truth can live.
Thus, Rollins gives primacy to betrayal of all beliefs, and doubt becomes a virtue in his vision of Christianity. Authentic Christianity is not a system of beliefs and creeds, of adherence to prescribed teachings. In this non-dogmatic vision of Christianity, many of the best Christians are non-Christians in terms of their beliefs (or lack thereof).
But if we are to embrace Christianity as a religion without religion, exactly what, then, is this Christianity? According to Rollins, it is a way of life that questions all systems of power: governmental, religious, cultural, societal. Directly to this point, Rollins writes, “The Christian critique is not then directed at the people in power so much as the place of power itself” (page 170). It is the very idea of power, of subjugation, that Christianity seeks to overthrow, including the power wielded by Christianity itself.
Any institution that says to someone, “You are not one of us,” is to be questioned and undermined, subverted and brought down. No longer can the Christian say to the Jew or Muslim or atheist, “You are cannot be a member of the body of Christ.” No longer can society say to lesbians and gays, to aliens and ethnic minorities, to women, “You cannot have full rights as citizens within our society.” The authentic Christianity speaks rebellion and subversion against all institutions that oppress and exclude, against all expressions of dominance and power.
Where does God fit into Rollins’s paradigm? Although he does not explicitly mention Tillich in this book, he seems to have been influenced by Tillich’s view of God as the ground of being: God is not some being out there (like the idea of objective truth) to be known by the mind; rather, God is that which makes being possible, is being itself. Rollins describes God as the Event that allows the miracle of Christianity to occur, and the miracle is the radical transformation that Christianity as a religion without religion brings into the lives of those who embrace betrayal of all their beliefs and who doubt everything. Rollins speaks of how life is that which conditions, which makes possible, everything that we are, and yet life is not some separate, distinct idea (a Platonic form of Life) that exists objectively; God is, then, like life in that God is that in which we partake when we experience the miracle that brings us to embrace the subversion of power; God is that which gives ground to, gives existence to, our project of the liberation of the oppressed. God is not some being to whom we can point and who is separate from ourselves; God is that which makes it possible for us to betray our religion and to rebel against authority.
Is God then still, for Rollins, a personal God? This question is irrelevant to Christianity, for it is a religious question. Rollins admits that it is an interesting question, but it is not a question with which Christianity is concerned.
So, must traditional Christians abandon their beliefs in a personal God, in the Virgin Birth, in the Incarnation, and in the Resurrection in order to participate in Rollins’s vision of Christianity? No, what is important in the betrayal of one’s religious beliefs is not necessarily to denounce the particular beliefs or to declare them false; rather, what is important is to recognize that religious beliefs have nothing to do with Christianity (at least, to the extent that beliefs do no motivate harmful actions; I’m sure Rollins would agree that some beliefs—i.e. the belief that women are inferior to men—are actually worthy not only of betrayal but of outright destruction). Christianity then becomes a religion without religion wherein in people with all sorts of metaphysical and religious beliefs or none at all can come together to work to bring about the miracle of Christianity: the constant rebellion against and undermining of power and authority, the drive to destroy the institutions of dominance which marginalize and oppress and exclude.
I find Rollins’s vision of and for Christianity refreshing. There have always been liberal, open-minded critics of traditional religion and orthodox Christianity both within (prominently within the last half century, John A.T. Robinson, Don Cupitt, and John Shelby Spong, for example) and without (Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens, for example). Whereas the liberal Christians generally tend to seek to reinterpret Christianity in accord with the ideals of modern Western liberal democracies and classical libertarianism and capitalism, Rollins seeks instead to question even these Western ideals—in fact, all of our political, social, religious, and philosophical ideals; in this and many other ways, his thought is quite reminiscent of that prominent in the liberation theology. Rollins is the most articulate, charismatic person to bring this message of subversion of power and liberation to the masses of the West (particularly those in the UK and the US). And whereas the critics of religion who approach their critiques from outside religion would be happy to see the death of Christianity and of religion, Rollins seeks instead to transform Christianity into a new kind of religion, a religion without religion: a Christianity in which even Nietzsche and Dawkins could find a home and call themselves Christians.
This is a Christianity for rebels and anarchists, for lovers and liberators, for the poor and the oppressed, for those who value compassion and the sister/brotherhood of not only all humanity but of all life. Rollins's vision of Christianity is, in my estimation, far closer to the kingdom of God that Jesus of Nazareth preached than anything taught and preached in the dominant contemporary Christian churches.
September 24, 2020
G O D I S N O W H E R E
Now, just how did you read those letters there above? Did you read them as affirming that God is now here? Or did you see them as a claim that God is nowhere? Most people would contend that it has to be one or the other. But, there is a rising number of people, scholars and laypeople alike, with the desire to get beyond this theism/atheism divide. Instead of seeing the above letters as a Rorschach test showing you what you subconsciously believe about God, whether he is present or not, Rollins would affirm that both are equally true. Much of his work (which he calls Pyrotheology) is based on this idea of Christianity as a religion without religion, an a/theistic religion.
Sounds paradoxical? Well, look at the title of this book: The Fidelity of Betrayal. As many philosophers and theologians have found out, paradoxes can be very fruitful, and sometimes, as when talking about God, they might be the only appropriate language.
There are many beautiful points Rollins makes in this book while engaging with some biblical texts. His different readings of Judas's betrayal of Jesus are very interesting. Jacob's wrestling with God is also interpreted in such a way as to reveal a powerful notion of what it means to believe:
"It is here, in this encounter between Jacob and God, that we discover why the Jewish community is marked out by the name 'Israel.' This title represents the spirit of a people who have 'wrestled with God and with men and have overcome.' This name illuminates the living dynamic of Hebraic faith. It magnifies a radical idea that marks out the Jewish people, describing something almost paradoxical about this faith: that absolute commitment to God involves a deep and sustained wrestling with God. In this story we discover that the Israelites are to be marked out, not as a people who live out their faith through unquestioning submission but as a people who demonstrate their love and commitment to the source of their faith in a radical commitment to fighting with that source. This is a people to be marked out by struggling, by passion, by critical engagement."
And this is the kind of faith Rollins presents to us and invites us into in this book.
The faith he describes is a faith that calls us: "the call of faith is one that is heard only in its transformative effect. It is a still, small voice that is heard only in being heeded."
What is very important in all of this, is the contrast to the intellectual, affirmation based kind of faith of the Christian Apologists:
"If the truth affirmed by Christianity lay in something that people could intellectually grasp, then the truth of faith would be something that one could hold without ever hearing or following its demand. But Christianity, as a religion without religion, is too elusive to be held in this way. It does not allow for such a divorce between the hearing and the happening, for its saying does not occur in that which is said, but rather in the undergoing of an event. The divine Word, like that spoken of in Genesis, results in life being birthed in the depths of our being."
There are many other beautiful things going on in this book, but you better read it yourself if you want to find out about them.
One last story, written Philip Harrison, I wanna share with you. It grasps much of the content of the book in the form of a parable:
Now, just how did you read those letters there above? Did you read them as affirming that God is now here? Or did you see them as a claim that God is nowhere? Most people would contend that it has to be one or the other. But, there is a rising number of people, scholars and laypeople alike, with the desire to get beyond this theism/atheism divide. Instead of seeing the above letters as a Rorschach test showing you what you subconsciously believe about God, whether he is present or not, Rollins would affirm that both are equally true. Much of his work (which he calls Pyrotheology) is based on this idea of Christianity as a religion without religion, an a/theistic religion.
Sounds paradoxical? Well, look at the title of this book: The Fidelity of Betrayal. As many philosophers and theologians have found out, paradoxes can be very fruitful, and sometimes, as when talking about God, they might be the only appropriate language.
There are many beautiful points Rollins makes in this book while engaging with some biblical texts. His different readings of Judas's betrayal of Jesus are very interesting. Jacob's wrestling with God is also interpreted in such a way as to reveal a powerful notion of what it means to believe:
"It is here, in this encounter between Jacob and God, that we discover why the Jewish community is marked out by the name 'Israel.' This title represents the spirit of a people who have 'wrestled with God and with men and have overcome.' This name illuminates the living dynamic of Hebraic faith. It magnifies a radical idea that marks out the Jewish people, describing something almost paradoxical about this faith: that absolute commitment to God involves a deep and sustained wrestling with God. In this story we discover that the Israelites are to be marked out, not as a people who live out their faith through unquestioning submission but as a people who demonstrate their love and commitment to the source of their faith in a radical commitment to fighting with that source. This is a people to be marked out by struggling, by passion, by critical engagement."
And this is the kind of faith Rollins presents to us and invites us into in this book.
The faith he describes is a faith that calls us: "the call of faith is one that is heard only in its transformative effect. It is a still, small voice that is heard only in being heeded."
What is very important in all of this, is the contrast to the intellectual, affirmation based kind of faith of the Christian Apologists:
"If the truth affirmed by Christianity lay in something that people could intellectually grasp, then the truth of faith would be something that one could hold without ever hearing or following its demand. But Christianity, as a religion without religion, is too elusive to be held in this way. It does not allow for such a divorce between the hearing and the happening, for its saying does not occur in that which is said, but rather in the undergoing of an event. The divine Word, like that spoken of in Genesis, results in life being birthed in the depths of our being."
There are many other beautiful things going on in this book, but you better read it yourself if you want to find out about them.
One last story, written Philip Harrison, I wanna share with you. It grasps much of the content of the book in the form of a parable:
"The other day I had a dream. I dreamed I arrived at the gates of heaven, heavy-shut, pure oak, beveled and crafted, glinting sharp in the sunlight. St. Peter stood to greet me; the big man wore brown, smile set deep against his ruddy cheeks.
'You're here,' he said.
'I am,' I said.
'Great to see you - been expecting you,' he smiled. 'Come on in.'
He pushed gently against the huge door; it swung silently, creakless. I took a couple of steps forward until, at the threshold, one more step up and in, I realized I wasn't alone. My friends had joined me, but they hovered behind, silently, looking on. None spoke. I realized only I could speak. I looked at them; some were Christians, some Hindus, some Buddhists, some Muslims, some Jews, some atheists. Some God knows what. I stopped, paused. A hesitant St. Peter looked at me, patiently, expectantly.
'What about these guys?' I asked him. 'My friends. Can they come?'
'Well, Phil,' he replied, soft still in the air, 'you know the rules. I'm sorry, but that's the way things are. Only the right ones.'
I looked at him. He seemed genuinely pained by his answer. I stood, considering. What should I do? I thought about my reference points, and thought about Jesus, the bastard, the outsider, the unacceptable the drunkard, the fool, the heretic, the criminal, and I knew exactly where I belonged.
'I'll just stay here then too,' I said, taking my one foot out of heaven. And I'll tell you, I'd swear I saw something like a grin break across St. Peter's face, and a voice from inside whispered, 'At last.'"
March 8, 2018
I just finished reading this book for the second time. It's by far one of my top five favourite books, and deserves pride of place on the shelf next to my desk at all times. When I read it for the first time, it set me on a journey; and now, reading it again with a friend, I am reminded of just why I loved it. I'm currently working to finish my MA dissertation in Biblical Hermeneutics, and it's mainly this book that inspired me to work with poststructuralist hermeneutics.
I hope to go through this book alongside others in my ministry. If you haven't read it yet and are considering it, I strongly recommend giving it a go!
I hope to go through this book alongside others in my ministry. If you haven't read it yet and are considering it, I strongly recommend giving it a go!
August 16, 2016
After reading this book, I’m now, and probably forevermore, a huge Peter Rollins fan. This book was both comforting and incredibly disruptive. Rollins turns fundamental ideology on its head by asserting that God cannot be understood by gaining mastery of the biblical text, rather the text conceals the nature of God. He believes that we should continually betray our attempt at naming God, because we can only point towards experience. Any attempt to contain and systematize God is simply a reduction to idolatry. Rollins also briefly outlines what a non-hierarchical church community might look like in the context of these thoughts, referencing the structure of AA meetings. This book provokes more feeling in me than words to put to it, so I know that I’ll be reading this many more times to continue grasping the complex and freeing nature of this work.
February 23, 2018
An essential read for all spiritual folks.
September 15, 2011
I read this straight after 'How (Not) To Speak of God'. As in that book, Rollins delves deliberately into paradoxes here - not as someone who wants to engage in apologetics and 'explain' the difficulties of faith (in either the slightly embarrased or slightly bombastic manner of some apologists). Unashamedly postmodern, Rollins delights in paradox - he shouts paradox from the rooftops - he sets paradox on fire and waves it from the treetops.
Central to this book is the (yes, paradoxical) assertion that in order to be faithful to God, we will sometimes need to betray God. In fact, if I understand him right, Rollins is actually saying we need to betray our idolotrous human certainties about God in order to continually stay alive to the possibility of encountering God more authentically (which is a subtly different point though I think I understand why Rollins puts his case more provocatively).
The worst parts of this book were those where the opaque prose forced me to read a paragrapah several times in vain for understanding (usually before giving up and moving on); conversely, the best parts were some of the stories and parables Rollins used to illumine my way through his arguments.
Stimulating read and it will go on affecting me. I will certainly be reading Rollins' next book 'Insurrection' due out in October.
Central to this book is the (yes, paradoxical) assertion that in order to be faithful to God, we will sometimes need to betray God. In fact, if I understand him right, Rollins is actually saying we need to betray our idolotrous human certainties about God in order to continually stay alive to the possibility of encountering God more authentically (which is a subtly different point though I think I understand why Rollins puts his case more provocatively).
The worst parts of this book were those where the opaque prose forced me to read a paragrapah several times in vain for understanding (usually before giving up and moving on); conversely, the best parts were some of the stories and parables Rollins used to illumine my way through his arguments.
Stimulating read and it will go on affecting me. I will certainly be reading Rollins' next book 'Insurrection' due out in October.
October 4, 2017
Controversial, deeply unsettling, profoundly comforting, and passionately argued. This is what I'm coming to expect from every Peter Rollins book now, and I'm loving it. He masterfully uses parables to draw you into philosophical reflection, sometimes in surprisingly funny and affecting ways. But he is, above all, fearless in pushing the reader into deep paradox so as to strip away conventions that prevent us from experiencing real faith.
Rollins really is a gift to our culture, but I also know that he may be too unsettling for some. If you, like me, walk a fine line of jaded/discouraged/hopeful/convinced regarding Christianity in America, Rollins is a shot in the arm. But if you want clean, positive, 5-point apologetics, then look elsewhere.
Rollins really is a gift to our culture, but I also know that he may be too unsettling for some. If you, like me, walk a fine line of jaded/discouraged/hopeful/convinced regarding Christianity in America, Rollins is a shot in the arm. But if you want clean, positive, 5-point apologetics, then look elsewhere.
October 21, 2017
It was truly a pleasure to read How (Not) to Speak of God and The Fidelity of Betrayal back to back. They were published 2 years apart, and I can't help but admire how deeply Peter Rollins worked out his faith during this timeframe. This second book seems to be the result of a very natural progression in his thought. In comparison to his debut work, Rollins is in a somewhat new and different place theologically, while simultaneously continuing along the same raw, authentic, mysterious, subversive, and love-centered trajectory.
February 2, 2018
There’s certainly some wisdom here, especially in Rollins’ ideas about the fusion of faith and actions, but underneath the re-packaging of language there isn’t much new. This book offers plenty of what I’ve come to expect from Rollins—almost every chapter mixes huge leaps in logic and straw man arguments with moments of profound insight into humanity and our relationship with God. I’m glad I read it but can only think of a small handful of friends I’d recommend it to.
September 19, 2017
A must-read for anyone for whom Christianity has become too small.
I found this to be a very enjoyable and accessible exploration of the paradox of faith. Mr. Rollins has a gift for balancing a rich intellectualism with humility, humor, and vibrant sorry-telling. I very much appreciated the parables too!
I found this to be a very enjoyable and accessible exploration of the paradox of faith. Mr. Rollins has a gift for balancing a rich intellectualism with humility, humor, and vibrant sorry-telling. I very much appreciated the parables too!
January 10, 2018
I really wanted to love this book, because I really want to love Rollins. Having began with a bang, it just kind of fizzled out into a long and meaningless rant about unknowing and angst. Tries too hard to be clever.
June 15, 2020
Peter Rollins' takes are healthy for the soul.
March 15, 2022
Interesting take on struggling with truths of Christianity
July 10, 2024
This was fantastic. Onward, toward a religionless religion.
May 22, 2025
"...God is not a problem to be solved but rather a mystery to participate in."
January 13, 2020
Inscrutable. I thoroughly loved it.
June 11, 2013
I really enjoyed Rollins' Fidelity of Betrayal. It is very philosophical in nature, and challenges us on how we approach our "Christian" faith. The book rests on the idea that the nature of Christianity is betraying out perception of faith. In layman's terms, sometimes we need to go against the Church in order to keep with the nature of the Church. Our faith is not a solid, objective truth to be defended at all costs, but rather a perceived, subjective truth that ought to be reflected on and challenged, so that new understanding of God can come into our life and continue to transform us and allow us to grow.
In the last chapter, he tried to show a way a Christian community could thrive by limiting its structure. After all, it is structure that keeps stale ideas trapped in tradition, which may need to be betrayed to live in Jesus' teachings. However, structure also is efficient. I like his ideals, and would be interested in seeing a community thrive with these values, but I don't know how realistic it is.
I especially liked his chapter on the Word of God. He challenges the modern biblical literalist by pointing out the ancients did not interpret the bible like this, and by trying to mesh the books into one canon we are clouding the author's intent with the canon's overall intent. He also shows that the search for historicity of the bible in our faith is fruitless. While important for scholarly work, no one is transformed by pure, objective truth. It's the message behind the words, despite the errors or unlikelihoods, that hold the essence of God.
Overall a really good book, but may not be appreciated by fundamentalist Christians.
In the last chapter, he tried to show a way a Christian community could thrive by limiting its structure. After all, it is structure that keeps stale ideas trapped in tradition, which may need to be betrayed to live in Jesus' teachings. However, structure also is efficient. I like his ideals, and would be interested in seeing a community thrive with these values, but I don't know how realistic it is.
I especially liked his chapter on the Word of God. He challenges the modern biblical literalist by pointing out the ancients did not interpret the bible like this, and by trying to mesh the books into one canon we are clouding the author's intent with the canon's overall intent. He also shows that the search for historicity of the bible in our faith is fruitless. While important for scholarly work, no one is transformed by pure, objective truth. It's the message behind the words, despite the errors or unlikelihoods, that hold the essence of God.
Overall a really good book, but may not be appreciated by fundamentalist Christians.
March 24, 2011
This is an important book. Don't be put off by the somewhat revisionist readings of Judas Iscariot in the first section of the book. Even if you disagree with his exegesis here, the author's subsequent sections on the nature of Christian truth, God, the Word, and church (although he avoids that term) are extremely good. And to illustrate his points the author sprinkles in a few parables, some old and some new, which is a nice touch. I will almost certainly have to re-read this book again, since the author's prose is quite philosophically heavy at times. But I would still recommend this to anyone who wants to approach their faith in God without turning off their brain. This book really helped me to see that Christianity is a critique of all religion, including itself. I will be thinking about this stuff for a long time to come! Well done, Peter Rollins.
December 27, 2012
So many conclusions that I agree with, come at from completely different angles than I have ever thought of (or sometimes just told in a more modern way than I have every heard), and combined beautifully in a way to challenge most anyone who can read it. I'm part way through another of Rollins' books, and in comparison this is less accessible to those without at least an introductory background to theology and philosophy. But worth reading for the critiques it brings to theology (reminded me of George Fox), and the updated description of one of my favorite stories from the Babylonian Talmud (when I share that, students stare in confusion; this they may get on the first pass), and the idea that it doesn't matter if God exists, it only matters what God said.
I need to read it again in a year.
I need to read it again in a year.
August 19, 2015
I bought and read this book under the assumption it would be focused predominantly on betrayal. I specifically assumed it would be focused on Judas and other, similar, circumstances. Sadly, only a select few passages involved what I was hoping for. Instead I was met by a long diatribe arguing for certain tenets of the Christian faith to be accepted as fact. The author, not only assumed Christian theology to be fact, but expected the reader to assume the same.
It's also clear he's never taken a historically critical class or perspective on scripture, seeing as he thinks all the writings attributed to Paul were actually written by him. I was disappointed, and found this just to be apologetics written for an audience that already accepts Christianity as fact.
It's also clear he's never taken a historically critical class or perspective on scripture, seeing as he thinks all the writings attributed to Paul were actually written by him. I was disappointed, and found this just to be apologetics written for an audience that already accepts Christianity as fact.
May 12, 2014
Rollins continues to turn the western elevation of intellection on its head. The dignity of man is not found in our artistic or intellectual potential, but in out ability to be transformed. For in the midst of that transfiguration we encounter God, in a way that transcends knowledge or belief. Here we are able, through faith, to supersede the wisdom of the world-- to become ignorant and unreasonable in the eyes of the world by living lives which have been infused with love, hope, and forgiveness which are manifested in what would seem irrational, self-deprecating ways.
Here beliefs die... God dies... We kill him... And in our act of betrayal, we find faith... We find God.
Here beliefs die... God dies... We kill him... And in our act of betrayal, we find faith... We find God.
January 14, 2009
Any practitioner-theologian who openly describes their community as ‘heretical’ and ‘failing’ will have my attention. This is the sophomore effort from a guy who is completely changing the game of theology. In line with the mystics from whom he draws, he is messing with categories, and people aren’t quite sure what to do with him. I know what to do with Pete—invite him to Birmingham for some conversation. He’ll be coming ’round the mountain in February, and after connecting at TGE event (see below), I can’t wait.
July 6, 2008
another great book from rollins. the first two chapters seemed a little disjointed, but I guess that was just because he was trying to be subversive.? the word-play and cleverness-for-the-sake-of-cleverness did get a bit annoying at times. He was all over the map, but he succeeded in pushing the envelope for me on lots of things like scripture, belief, the nature of God, you name it... can't wait for the next one...
December 5, 2012
I think people that like philosophy or kierkegaard should just read this. There are some really interesting things going on in "postmodern" theology right now and you don't necessarily have to be very interested in religion to appreciate them. My only complaint is this is really hand-holding if you have a philosophy background. But the good news is it is easily understandable if you don't! Some great parables and thought experiments in here. Peter Rollins is so cool and entertaining, the end.
May 29, 2010
ILL The paperback I got has the subtitle "Towards a Church Beyond Belief"
I read a little.... sort of like Heschel on the life of Jesus....
a reasonable summary of Descartes, stories of the origins of GOD from the Midrash, from other mythology's and stories of the garden of Eden and Lillith...
not particularly Gnostic
I read a little.... sort of like Heschel on the life of Jesus....
a reasonable summary of Descartes, stories of the origins of GOD from the Midrash, from other mythology's and stories of the garden of Eden and Lillith...
not particularly Gnostic
February 9, 2012
Once again, Peter introduces new ways of looking at things that provide a fresh way to embrace a form of faith that at first seems contrary to what seems reasonable and right, but will provoke thoughts to embrace a much deeper and richer encounter with God as we are able to understand Him in our limited capacities.
September 29, 2008
So far so good. Rollins plays with the idea, that innate in our relationship with God is a sense of betrayal. And that to truly be faithful to our relationship with God, sometimes it means betraying our religion. Interesting concept... Definitely a thinker...
August 4, 2010
What a joy to read this book. Carefully written, and filled with challenging thoughts. It helped me feel less alone, though this has much to do with my background. (Results may vary.)
I've already purchased another book by Rollins.
I've already purchased another book by Rollins.
August 6, 2011
I want to recommend this book to serious and thoughtful Christians everywhere. It is a uniquely fantastic book of fresh theology, Bible study technique and practical Christianity. I loved it! I will be using it in dialogue with my preaching for a long time to come!
October 25, 2013
I can't say enough about this book as a return to mystical Christianity at its finest, the encounter with a God who is so much more than the product of our own projections and desire for power and control over others. This is authentic and powerful Christianity at its finest.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews