The God-Shaped Brain: How Changing Your View of God Transforms Your Life

by Timothy R. Jennings

What you believe about God actually changes your brain. Brain research in neuroscience has found that our thoughts and beliefs affect our physical, mental and spiritual health. Mind and body are interrelated, and we are designed for healthy relationships of love and trust. When we understand God as good and loving, we flourish. Unfortunately, many of us have distorted images of God and mostly think of him in fearful, punitive ways. This leads us into unhealthy patterns of self-defeating behaviors and toxic relationships. But our lives can change when God renews our minds with a truer picture of him. Psychiatrist Tim Jennings unveils how our brains and bodies thrive when we have a healthy understanding of who God is. He dispels common misconceptions about God and shows how different God concepts affect the brain differently. Our brains can adapt, change and rewire with redeemed thinking that frees us from unnecessary pain and suffering. Discover how neuroscience and Scripture come together to bring healing and transformation to our lives.

Genres: Christian, Nonfiction, Psychology, Religion, Faith, Christianity, Science

256 pages, Paperback

First published March 6, 2013

About the author

Timothy R. Jennings, MD has been in private practice as a Christian psychiatrist and certified master psychopharmacologist since 1997. Board certified in psychiatry by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, he is a specialist in transcranial magnetic stimulation, a drug-free treatment for depression. Dr. Jennings is a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association, Fellow of the Southern Psychiatric Association, and past president of both the Tennessee and Southern Psychiatric Associations. He has spent more than two decades researching the interface between biblical principles and modern brain science and is a highly sought after lecturer and international speaker and the author of The God-Shaped Brain and The God-Shaped Heart. He is in private practice in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

Reviews

[Seth Pierce · Rating 2 out of 5]

My first experience with Jennings was outside a campmeeting seminar in Lincoln, NE where the conference president was remarking on his theology. The comments weren’t positive. As time went on I heard of a conflict at Southern University where Jennings taught a Sabbath School class.

Allegedly, Jennings was teaching the moral influence theory of atonement and it was creating some division in the faith community.

He did manage to sit down with the religion faculty of Southern University, and the results can be found here: http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%...

Since that time Jennings Sabbath School has become an independent ministry and no longer functions on the campus of Southern University. Now, on to the book.


THE GOOD

Jennings main thesis, an echo of Graham Maxwell’s, is “Can God be trusted?” (p. 63). While the book suggests the main theme is how neuroscience and psychology are impacted by portraits of God—ultimately the issue of God as trustworthy lies at the heart.

Jennings also labors to show how unhealthy “God concepts” can negatively affect the brain. While it doesn’t take a medical degree to deduce this, it is nice having the research present to explain the biological details.

Throughout the work Jennings does his best to dispel the image that somehow Jesus saves us from the Father. This is important as many believers grow up thinking that the Father is some irrationally angry deity and Christ prevents Him from hurting us.

Several other good lines I marked were:

“The freedom to love, the ability to choose to sacrifice self, all altruism is a manifestation of God’s grace working in our hearts…” p. 38

“Real love does what is best for the other, not merely what the other person wants.” P. 101

“Renewed human nature, achieved singly by Christ, that God offers to instill in all who trust him.” P. 170

“By forgiving others, we disseminate the only antidote to evil and sin.” P. 186

“Biblical justice is delivering the oppressed, not punishing the oppressor” p. 188

Jennings also goes on to hammer home the necessity of freedom in love and how God is not an arbitrary, wrathful being, delighting in the destruction of His creation.

All admirable points, however, I have serious issues with the book. It’s not that he is presenting new theology—these ideas are not new with him—its that he does it in a way that nearly makes a mockery of the biblical text and emotionally manipulates readers who have been hurt by “hellfire and brimstone” images of God.

THE BAD

Tim is clear that he will not approach the subject of God’s love and truth like a theologian—but rather as a medical professional. Interesting and valid—we all have different backgrounds and perspectives. However there are basic exegetical tools that, while mastered by religious academics, should be used by anyone working with biblical text. However Tim seems to pass by these due to a need to harmonize everything.

“We must use the Bible and harmonize it with science and our experience to separate the various views of God.” P. 12 “Don’t we need to bring harmony to how we understand all thee passages?” p 150

Harmony is great, but sometimes we face theological tension within the text. We must let it speak and sometimes we must embrace mystery and paradox that lead to worship instead of forcing frameworks that fit our own presuppositions. For Tim, a God who punishes, kills, or imposes anything—even His own law—is unacceptable and unhealthy. This framework is forced on the Bible in several places.

He attempts to make a distinction between “sleep” (as a synonym for death) and “death” in the Bible—saying that “sleep” is just God’s way of suspending someone’s life and that actually “death” doesn’t occur until the end of time when people choose to reject God. He makes the grand claim that when the Bible nowhere puts “sleep” and “death” together. That “sleep” is the temporary suspended state until “death” is experienced when God “lets go” (God is passive in the final destruction of the wicked) and people succumb the flames of God’s loving presence (more on that in a second).

He ignores texts such as John 11v11-14

“After saying these things, he said to them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep, but I go to awaken him.” The disciples said to him, “Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.” Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that he meant taking rest in sleep. Then Jesus told them plainly, “Lazarus has died…”

He also forgets that scripture repeatedly talks about the first and second “death.”

Jennings claims that God “intervened”/”put to sleep” people to keep the channel open for the birth of the Messiah—but now He no longer operates out of any sort of violent intervention since the resurrection (p. 73). Even if he explains away the account of Ananias and Sapphira lying to the Spirit (Acts 5) how this claim possibly be proven?

Tim says that Jesus/God would never use power for self-interest (p. 75), but frequently (Ps. 50v15, Jn 8v54, 12v8, 13v32, 17v1, 5,) the Bible speaks of God glorying himself through His actions. God not having self-interest also raises questions about creating an anthrocentric theology where salvation is reduces to my personal happiness and ticket to heaven. But as scholars such as N.T. Wright point out, salvation is about all of Creation, not just individuals—and God is concerned with vindicating His own character.

Jennings is also guilty of excessive paraphrasing, something Maxwell did from time to time. In one particular example Jennings offers commentary by stating, “what I believe Paul is saying, inserting some insights regarding brain physiology…” (p. 86). Not only do his insertions say more than Paul ever intended, but they make a short passage nearly a page long.

The crux of Jennings problem is his childhood experience, which he graciously shares: “I remember laying awake at night living afraid of a god who had to be paid in order to be merciful” (127). He shares as much again on page 147. While this will be a point of connection with other readers who had negative images of God beaten into them growing up—and he uses it to provide a major assumption throughout the book:

People who hold to a “punitive” view of God (penal substitution/ransom theory) must be afraid of God, or have a negative God construct that is making them operate out of fear.

This is revealed in an illustration where a client expresses fear of God’s wrath and Jennings muses “I wonder if she held a punitive view of God” (p. 92). The implication is those views other than moral influence theory, or the “healing model” he puts forth (which skims the edges of perfectionism, see p. 170), creates fear.

The problem is for as many who have had a fearful experience with God put forth on the basis of a penal/substitutionary model—there are just as many who don’t.

He goes so far as to say “A desire for vengeance is why people hang onto a wrong picture of God” (p. 185). While this may be true for some, other passages that suggest leaving room for vengeance (not revenge) executed by God (see Rom 12v19). This passage is not dealt with. This also suggests that people holding to a view of atonement other than his own, think that God enjoys killing the wicked—scripture is clear that He doesn’t. Jennings also ignores the fact that his definition of biblical justice (freeing the oppressed) may involve removing the oppressor. What about those, like David, who cry out under oppression? I don’t see the desire for God’s punitive actions as a way to get revenge, so much as removing the source of oppression—a concept our sinful worlds seems especially bad at.

And would a loving God deal passively with evil? Was Jesus, who desired to go as much as the Father wanted to send Him, a passive action? Was the cross passive? Contrary to pop theology anger is not the opposite of love—indifference is.

The idea is that sin burns itself out. Great. So are we waiting for sin to just work its way out of the human race—and once we are sinless—Jesus can come? I mean if it burns itself out lets just let it do what it’s going to do. Or does God intervene and put a stop to it? What’s the point of the Second Coming if sin will just vanish as we get a better picture of God?

This brings up another issue close to Jenning’s heart—God does not impose Himself. God doesn’t even impose His own law. This is an interesting concept as I agree that love cannot be forced. Good point. However, how do we explain the Second Coming when people are confronted with a radically holy God? They (to use Jennings theology) will have their false ideas and delusions burned away by God’s glorious presence—and that radical reality check will destroy them. Seems like they are forced to confront reality at that moment.

And can we ever say God is in control or God intervenes? Wouldn’t that be imposing upon human reality?

And what about Jesus casting Satan out of heaven? What about Jesus casting out devils? The Greek word “ekballow” is a violent term, and there are nuances in the Gospels that suggest Jesus had to ask repeatedly for demons to leave—there was struggle. So did Jesus impose on the will of demons? What about when Saul prophesies against his will? (1 Sam. 19), or Balaam not being able to curse Israel? (Num. 22). These texts aren’t even alluded too—course Jennings is more interest in harmonizing his ideas than dealing with the difficulties of the text.

Jennings claims to look through a Jesus lens to interpret the themes of scripture—very admirable. But he is selective of the pictured of Jesus. Jesus frequently quotes the OT—citing tragedies like the flood, Sodom and Gomorrah. Jesus also appears quite differently in Revelation than He does in John—yet the picture is still valid. Jesus isn’t some wrathful deity wanting blood—but nor is He a pacific hippie just sort of waiting for conflicts to end on their own so He can then love and nurture people. As C.S. Lewis said, “He is not a tame lion.”

To his credit, Jennings cites Edward Fudge as a great source to read, but even Fudge says, “However, as I read Scriptures, punishment does seem clearly to involve retribution, in the case of temporal judgments involving cities and individuals, and also in the vase of the eschatological judgment yet to come. Deeds have consequences, and consequences have causes. Divine punishment is part of moral symmetry, a divine quid pro quo.” (Fudge, p 283).

I should say that the moral influence theory of atonement raises some good questions, and the penal substitutionary model deserves some hard questions—but how Jennings goes about answering is extremely weak and scripturally negligent. This is a book more about psychology than scripture—to the point where scripture is put into the service of psychiatry.

If you are interested in Jenning’s theology you’d be better off reading Graham Maxwell.

As you can see I am getting a little edgy in my review at this point, but that’s because of the underlying issue driving Jennings. Knowing his turbulent history with Southern University, there are some things in this book that suggest Jennings has ulterior motives other than defending God’s character. Maybe even motives/issues he isn’t aware of—unacceptable for someone singing their own praises in the book as a veteran psychiatrist--and someone who is (no sarcasm here) a well respected professional in the field.

THE UGLY:
The Preface of the book is hard to swallow for anyone knowing Tim’s background with the church, or anyone would formal theological training. It immediately put me on the defensive making it hard to listen to the many positive things Tim has to say.

“I am a psychiatrist. I am not a seminary-trained theologian. My approach is likely to be different from that of a seminary professor, and for good reason. The Bible says we are in a battle, with weapons that demolish arguments and pretensions that are opposed to God, and our thoughts are to be harmonized with Christ. The battlefield on which the war between Christ and Satan is fought is the mind. As a psychiatrist I routinely engage in spiritual warfare—thus in this book I approach the interpretation of scripture as a physician, a mind specialist, and a seasoned battlefield veteran.” 12

Right off the bat he has minimized theological training (“for good reason”), reduced spiritual warfare to a psychiatric practice, and put himself forward as a 5 star general in the battle. He then further plants seeds of doubt for his theological nemeses (pastors, professors, theologians):

“As such, all believers, in union with God, are capable of discerning Scripture correctly without the need of a priest or theologian to do their thinking for them. Naturally this does not mean we cannot benefit from the insights, expertise and experience of pastors or theology professors, but rather, we must not surrender our thinking to other human beings.” p. 13

I firmly believe in the priesthood of all believers—but I also believe scripture teaches that people have special gifts for teaching others (Matt. 28, Acts 8, 1 Corinthians 12).

At this point I freely admit I could just be sensitive—given the fact that I’m a pastor. And if the preface were my only complaint on this issue I would give up my criticism—however as I made my way through the book a disturbing pattern emerged.Every negative example involves a church, pastor, or theologian.

“My pastor told me that I murdered my child and as punishment God won’t ever let me have children.” P. 20

“Is he good, or as my niece and nephew heard at church, hostile and mean?” p. 22

“I had accepted a different version of his love: a common, earthly version I had learned even at my church.” P. 27

“Sadly many parents, the main stream media and even church groups have wrongly concluded…the old adage “garbage in, garbage out” has been used by many a well-meaning preacher…” p. 51

“Why don’t they teach this in church?” asks a client. Jennings offers an answer “Insecure people want to control others” p 104

“Then she told me of the funeral, of sitting on the front pew of the church as the preacher looked straight at her and said, “God took your mommy to be with him.” P 111

Family “revolved around church” “she was taught that when you have faith you don’t need to ask questions, you simply, “believe.” P 113

Commenting on a passage of scripture, “They did “church,” but because they were failing to think, they brought “meaningless offerings” Is. 1v13

“…recently attended at a local church. During the event those with sickness and illness were invited to come forward. Loud and emotional prayers were made, hands were laid on him, and an invocation for healing was delivered.” P. 121, No healing was achieved.

Commenting on pat answers of a client, “She had been educated in private, Christians schools her entire life and was confident…She had been a goo student in her Bible classes and learned these conventional lessons well” which he proceeds to debunk, p 127

“He had gone to a healing ceremony at his church, a ceremony he was anointed with oil while the pastor and elders laid hands on him and asked for God’s miraculous intervention…but Harold was no better” 137,

Jennings freshman year at Christian college, during chapel, quadriplegic brought in for special prayer that didn’t work and, “the speaker suggested there were doubters in the room” 138

“I loved children’s story time [at church], but there was one tale that haunted me for years” 146.

Tim tells the story of a friend at a bookstore being chastised by a pastor for buying Tim’s book. Pastor says, pointing finger in the air, “God is the Great Policeman in the sky…enforces justly the penalties for disobedience” 147

“Church, the one place Maria had always found comfort and peace, had become empty to her,” p. 184

Kudos via email from someone attending his Sabbath School class “I was previously a Christian pastor for fifteen years”—now learning new truths

“I know many a preacher who would like me to think the wicked will live forever suffering horribly in the eternal, burning hellfire,” p. 212

Now just because these examples are negative doesn’t make them untrue. As a pastor I have legion of my own bad examples of churches and pastors—and doctors too. But certainly there are pastors and communities of faith that do good from time to time? What makes this so appalling is the sheer lack of anyone affiliated with the ministry or church doing something right.

Compounding the issue is that nearly every positive example is of Tim undoing what the nasty pastor/church did, or medical missionary, or God…as a doctor (p.132).

Tim gives advice to his faithful readers who have connected via their own hurtful experiences in church to:

1. Actively seek to share truth about God’s kingdom of love with others. Join organizations focused on taking God’s love to the world, start a ministry…fellowship with likeminded believers” p. 236

2. Ask yourself if someone who rejects you or becomes angry with you for doing what you believe is right could really be your friend. Do you really want their approval? 237

If someone disagrees with your views, or becomes angry (so when an abusive husband tries to justify beating his wife I shouldn’t get angry? Is it a sin to be angry? Did Jesus ever get angry with people’s beliefs?) Then you shouldn’t be their friend.

I challenge readers to ask themselves how their relationship to their local church/clergy is.

It’s also bizarre that Tim only has book endorsements from Medical Doctors and not one theologian or pastor from ANY tradition.

Tim has statements like, “When it comes to our salvation it is not necessary to understand the atonement to benefit from it…likewise sinners don’t have to understand ANYTHING about how Christ achieves our salvation to be saved” (p 164).Really? So the Bible writers just wasted our time then when they discuss it? How do I believe in Christ if I can’t know anything He did for me?

Jennings also embraces “recapitulation theory” (p. 171), historically this doctrine lead to the idea of Apostolic Succession. In other words the absolute power of the pope…not sure Jennings wants to go there. See Gonzales' History of Christian Thought for more.

In short, poor exegesis and understanding of church history and manipulative--unfortunately those elements overshadow some excellent observations/questions that need to be treated more in depth by someone who has the theological tools Jennings says he is glad he doesn't have.

I should end by saying that Tim has helped a great many people overcome negative views of God and that is something I respect him for and hopes he is able to do in the future without marginalizing experts in fields outside his own who would make valuable dialogue partners in the search for truth--even if they disagree.

[Bob · Rating 3 out of 5]

How we think about God shapes everything. Timothy Jennings even argues that this shapes our brains, based on neuroscience research as well as the Bible. His basic argument is that lies and fear trigger parts of the brain that inhibit the reasoning and affectional parts of the pre-frontal cortex. This goes so far as creating or inhibiting the creation of new neural pathways.

What is significant is that this is a book that mixes science, counseling practice and theological insight and this is both what I liked and what I struggled with. Jennings argues that among the lies we believe and responses of fear that we make are ones that concern God. So far so good. We often have troubled consciences because we fail to believe that God really loves us and has unconditionally accepted us as his children and forgiven our sin. Jennings describes numerous cases in which people are helped as they re-align their thinking about God.

Where I struggle is what Jennings denies to get to this all-loving God. He soft peddles or outright denies the substitutionary aspects of Christ's work on the cross, and I think opens the way to denying the necessity of the cross. It seems that what is most important for him is our turning toward God rather than turning away from him. The fire in the wrath of God becomes a fire of love that comforts those who believe but a consuming torment to those who rebel. Wrath is simply the natural outcome of our rebellious acts, not an action on the part of God. His view of hell is a kind of annihilation that occurs to those who cut themselves off from God, and find his pure, fiery love agonizing. These are not views unique to Jennings but he goes so far to argue for a good and loving God, that he explains away or minimizes the wrath and holiness of God. He does not deal with passages that talk about the proper "fear of the Lord." I don't find here the balance I might find with someone like C.S. Lewis, whose Aslan is "dangerous, but good."

To his credit, the book concludes with a critique of eastern meditation techniques that, while having some beneficial effects, cause a suspension of activities in the pre-frontal cortex not characteristic of Christian meditation which is meditation on truth. He also includes some practical steps in an epilogue to a healthier brain. While I agree with Jennings that what we think about God shapes everything, including our brains, and that knowing the truth about the unconditional love of God toward us in Christ is indispensable to our lives, I think he makes unnecessary theological compromises along the way, failing to hold truths in their proper tension which is the distinction between orthodoxy and heresy. Ultimately, that cannot be healthy.

[Claire Foster · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5⭐️I went into this hoping for a more neurological perspective on this but honestly 75% of the book was just experiences of his patients coming in and how he helped them overcome it. I appreciate the first few and then last 45 examples got really repetitive and boring. I think picking this up you imagine you’ll dive more into the science aspect and for the first few chapters you really do, and then it just kind of trails off from there. this book could’ve been 100 pages shorter. Great message just didn’t love it in this context.

[Linnea Jane · Rating 2 out of 5]

Disappointing.

The subject of neurology and theology and how they intersect is fascinating but I wish Dr Jennings had spent less time on the theology and more on the neuroscience since he is a psychiatrist not a theologian and I didn't appreciate the sweeping theological claims he felt the need to argue. I could not recommend this book in good conscience.

[Russ Jarvis · Rating 5 out of 5]

A provocative treatment of the subject of God using scientific and textual research. The author is a certified psychiatrist as well as a thorough exegete of the Biblical text. As a non-scientist I appreciate the level of his explanation of the brain's operation and how what we think triggers neural responses that either help or hinder. I am a professional healthcare chaplain and I appreciate the evidence-based approach. As a student of the Bible I enjoyed his cogent arguments that offer an valid alternative to some traditional images of God. The author draws on his counseling experience and uses real life examples of people whom he has help move toward a more holistic and fulfilling religious/spiritual life. The mix of exposition and narrative make it a fairly easy read. He is unabashedly Christian and this may turn some non-Christian or non-religious readers off, but I hope not because he answers the very criticisms leveled upon Christianity by those who claim to be "spiritual, but not religious."

[PennsyLady (Bev) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Case studies, illustrations, Scripture and a layman's look at brain physiology are a few of the tools Dr Jennings uses to help us understand that "changing your view of God transforms your life."
----
A few thoughts from the text:

"What you believe about God actually changes your brain."

"Brain research has found that our thoughts and beliefs affect our physical, mental and spiritual health."

"While we have power over what we believe, what we believe holds power over us too---power to heal and power to destroy."

"When we finally remove the distortions of God from our mind....when we finally return to the truth of God's template of love, and enter into that unity of trust with Him,
he will not only cleanse our characters but will also come again and cleanse His universe from fear and selfishness."
-------
The addendum is putting it all together---simple steps to a healthy brain.

In the action plan, we take responsibility for our lives, rewire with "redeemed thinking" and" take our relationship with God to the next level."

★ ★ ★ ★

[Josephine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book describing the transformative power of GOD's law of love in the mind, body, & spirit. As a physician, I treat many people who suffer from depression or anxiety because they believe a lie about the Christian GOD that traps them in their sins of selfishness, fear, guilt, & shame. I pray GOD will use this book to save & set many hearts & minds free!

[Peggy House]

I really needed to read this book. I am making way too many decisions out of the emotional portion of my brain instead of forcing the logical side to reason out the situation. This was an important book for me to read.

[Sharon Cate · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was disappointed by the repetition throughout the book and the emergent theology.

[Benjamin Stahl · Rating 4 out of 5]

A surprisingly smart and complex book - which I hope doesn't sound like I was expecting the opposite due to it simply being a Christian one. I mean it more in the sense that, given its secondary title at least, I was prepared for something a bit more superficial, unchallenging and banal - in other words, more of a breezy "Christian lifestyle" kind of book, instead of the examination of how faith, theology and neuroscience interact, that it was.

Now, I'm sure many a sceptic would say Jennings - if he's anything worth acknowledging at all - is a Christian writer well before he is any kind of authoritative voice on brain science. Yes, he's also a practicing psychiatrist, but so can any halfwit be who thinks they know what life is all about and that they are some kind of genius for making it this far without blowing their brains out.

And if I'm being completely honest I did find some of the diversions into the brain - "Johnny Boy thinks God's waiting to smite him once he steps outside, his such-and-such lobe is obviously swollen due to this or that imbalance" - at best comical and random, at worst just a little silly.

I also did not so much appreciate the liberal number of glimpses given into Jennings' real-life patients and their cases (presumably with pseudonyms employed, though I don't recall him stating so: "Doctor, how could you? My life, my career, it's all ruined cause of what you wrote!"). Although some of these were insightful and served well to demonstrate one point or another, some of them were just baffling to the point that you had to wonder if they were entirely truthful. I mean, what was going on with the guy who wanted his fortieth birthday present to be for his wife to go and fetch some young, sexy girl for him to sleep with? Who the hell is this guy? What kind of Christian is that?

And I'm not playing the purity card here, believe me. I can absolutely buy - even, God help me, sympathise - that he was sexually unsatisfied and felt like a little celebratory, extra-marital sex might temporarily sate his sinful urges. I'm not condoning this, or saying it's something I myself would consider lightly. But I know what men are like. I know what I am like, in the darkest and most pitiable recesses of my own infected soul. But, for God's sake, go and be a shit husband and then beat yourself up over it when it's done with and hasn't brought the expected fulfilment without having to torment and humiliate your wife by making her an accomplice. It wasn't the sin of the matter that annoyed and shocked me, so much as it was the cartoonish villainy of the husband.

Thus, it's hard to sympathise with the wife in her tearfully self-deprecating confession to Dr Jennings - "Oh, I know the Bible says a wife must submit to her husband, and I am a sinner if I don't follow his command and fetch some teenage concubine for him. But something in my conscience tells me it's just wrong in some way. I cannot - I will not - honour my husband's wishes this time. Even if it makes me a despicable sinner for disobeying Ephesians 5:22-33".

Huckleberry Finn, this woman ain't. Tell your husband to go fuck himself - literally, if he's so goddamned horny. (Sorry about the language, by the way. I usually wouldn't swear in a review for a Christian book, but this time I just feel like it is necessary to truly express myself. I never said I was a perfect Christian).

But if we put aside this little rant, and the other, smaller ones unsaid about similarly dumb or condescending moments where Jennings goes all Lee Strobel and shows what an amazing shrink he is, this book really is a very good one, with many powerful and fairly original insights into how false conceptions of God can often harm our personal relationship with him, not to mention our fellow travellers. I thought it was just going to be some feel-good dance around the fact that people are naturally predisposed to believe in some form of higher power (or, say, concept), whether that is God, some awkward sense of relativistic Goodness, some blood-stained ism or another, or some hotshot politician/celebrity/philosopher who apparently cannot do wrong. I'm going - always have and always will - wholeheartedly with the first one.

[Brittany · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wish I read this book in my teens/ early college years. Offers great perspectives on the big question “why do bad things happen to good people”. The author does an amazing job at explaining the brain and taking on God’s character through a psychology perspective. Great book if you grew up in the “fear based” Christian perspective.

[Madeline Mace · Rating 5 out of 5]

Healing, informative, and very well researched. The author is very balanced in how he approaches the reader with scientific study, psychology, and testimony. I would recommend this book to anyone struggling with their view of God.

[Alana Reeder · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was eye opening and transformative. I would definitely recommend it

[Lisa Tangen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Loved this enough to buy my own copy.

[Dustin · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book started out great! This book ended horribly! It started as a great book about the love of God and how thinking of Him this way changes who we are, a great tool for counseling, evangelism and discipleship! Then he showed a view of atonement that was kinda skewed but I took it as showing another side of the same coin. Then in the 3rd to last chapter he really blew it when he explained away the existence of a literal Hell in exchange for annihilation of sinners by the all consuming fire that is God. He took apples and oranges text and pieces together a flawed fallacy that lends to a real mess theologically. This book is what happens when a good Christian counsellor shares his bad theological views! His overarching theme I love! We need to show people love, acceptance and their person in Christ! We don’t need to show people a mean God but a loving God! But the truth in the Bible still stands on atonement and Hell so eat the fish and spit out the massive bones in this one but know his theology is flawed.

[Brad · Rating 1 out of 5]

Not disappointing because my hopes were low from the outset. What hope I had was rooted in a desire to learn more about brain science from a Christian perspective--but there isn't much new here and there are plenty of options that don't come with the concerns this one elicits.

Really don't recommend anyone waste their time or risk the confusion of what amounts--in my opinion--to a theological eisegesis (reading into the Bible what one has predetermined).

Of course it's not all wrong and there are some things to be gleaned from the book. They just aren't worth the effort of the kind of careful and cautious reading required here.

[Stan Shelley · Rating 2 out of 5]

I think the premise is true and the author proves it. Positive views of God lead to better mental health. The problem is his bad theology. He is convinced that God could not create a world where people reap the consequences of their bad behavior. Thus Christianity does not need an atonement because God could never let bad things happen to people he created. This is why the author was kicked out of his denomination (Seventh Day Adventist.) I think CS Lewis was right. Hell exists, but primarily because people choose it, but nonetheless God allows hell to exist.

[Noel · Rating 4 out of 5]

I felt very comfortable with the neuroscience outlined in the study and completely familiar with the evidence. I was a man who, not too long ago, lived in ways that were completely self serving and dark, if not destructive. I did not come to the faith to leave behind my old life, but when the faith came to me, I experienced the tremendous empowerment described in the science. I guess God really does know what he's doing ;)

[Luke Miller · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some good insights and premises but when engaging the theology and faith side of the coin I found it frustrating. He sets out in his introduction, his hermeneutics and way of doing theology but I find there is no need to reinvent our understanding of things to the extent he does at points. I also felt some of the negative theology was overly straw maned. While I know there is very hurtful adaptations of conservative theology out there, that is not the sum total.

[Jason Leonard · Rating 2 out of 5]

Few books have jostled so many disparate and tense emotions and thoughts during a read, but another reviewer states all of these so well... you should just read their review instead of anything I could write:
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

[C. Aamold · Rating 5 out of 5]

After 20 years of dealing with church hurt...but still believing in God, Timothy R. Jennings brought me back into searching for just Him alone. Thought this was just why people think the way they do about God or religion...God got me good hehe.

[Rachel · Rating 3 out of 5]

I wanted more science, data, brain scans, but I believe his tenets.

[Daniel Newberry · Rating 3 out of 5]

Jennings does an incredible job highlighting and explaining the literal impact which our beliefs about God have on our brains. The evidence of this impact is insurmountable, and the implications are undeniable. My perspectives and opinions were stretched. I was challenged to reconsider what thoughts about God dominated my mind, and to ask myself if those thoughts truly honored God for Who He is. It also helped me in counseling those I pastor, since I was able to have a basic understanding of what might be going on inside their heads as they opened up to me about their faith struggles.

However, I could only give Jennings’ book 3 stars due to some theological failings which ran throughout the book. While his scientific data and conclusions thereof were both convincing and helpful, his process of doing theology was questionable. Many times, Jennings allowed personal experience to color his understanding of Scripture (which has its place, but not in the way I observed in his book). He seemed to cherry-pick verses to support his ideas (which, again, can have its place…. But also again, not in the manner which he does in this book). Ultimately, his own ideas on doctrine — such as the “law of love,” which runs as a foundational idea through his book — seemed to take precedence over and color his understanding of the Bible, even though these ideas don’t seem to be backed up by any published theologians. In short, his method of doing theology put me on edge. His conclusions also put me on edge, but I would have had an easier time digesting them if his method of theology had been done in a healthier manner.

Granted, this book is posed more as a psychological work than a theological one. But that even furthers my point… he dives way too deep into his theological opinions and beliefs, all of which are definitely influenced by his psychological studies. I think his book would have done better if he had stayed within the realm of psychological analysis.

With that said, not all of his theological applications were bad. His basic ideas of reframing God’s view of us as children in need (rather than enemies to vanquish) helped me in my own life. Those lighter, surface level applications will serve as tools in my own faith and ministry. But his deeper doctrines attempting to essentially erase the wrath of God will have to be dismissed.

[Tom Law · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jennings uses his background in psychiatry to give us an intimate look into the brain, its function, and how it affects who we are. He says, “Although we have power over what we believe, what we believe holds real power over us – power to heal and power to destroy. Our beliefs change us mentally, physically and spiritually. Incredibly, our beliefs, thoughts, behaviors and even our diets, change our brain structure, ultimately changing who we are.”

The book is replete with stories, some incredible, of how the way people think has altered their reality. Although he draws us into the world of the mind and helps us understand its function, his real aim is to show how lies have changed humanity and how love can change that reality. He points out, “The only power in the universe that can heal our hearts and free us from fear is the power of love. Our fear-ridden hearts cannot produce this love, we can only receive this love from God and let it flow through us to others.”

Ultimately, it boils down to one fact. We have and continue to believe falsehoods about ourselves, others, our world, and God. This affects out brain. Until we change our perspective and look at the world through God’s lens of love, we will be constantly tossed about, struggling to make sense of a world transformed by deception.

Jennings shows us the path by saying, “The law of love is the design template for all God’s creation because all life flows from him and God is love.” He goes on to say, “at its root, love comes down to focusing more on others than self, giving rather than taking. In every act of life, these two principles – love others or seek self – fight for control of our hearts.”

He concludes by saying, “Christian conversion is the surrender of self – not seeking to save self but dying to self, love replaces selfishness. The Christianity of Jesus Christ is a modality of selfishness and beneficence, in which all things live to love others more than self.”

[Andy]

Some interesting insights and a helpful emphasis on the healing power of the love of God and God's love breaking fear and other holds in people's lives. It touches on how can we all live in the goodness of God's love and treat others in this way? Plus some good challenges including on how do we view justice and are we doing so as God sees it? A more specific example, what is the prison system for - to solely punish or is rehabilitation the greater aim where possible?
There was something with the book though that I cannot quite put my finger on that says 'nah, I would not lend this to someone'. ,
Part of my reservation is my reacting as a pastor perhaps - stories of individuals seem to be often referred to, in order to make a point but are not completed in anyway. Various situations of injustice and wrong are referenced but no sense of any resolution for the individuals referred to. Personally this was very frustrating to read and to a degree seemed to detract from the points being made and at times felt a bit like 'continuity' mistakes.
Some of my reservation perhaps is the mix of Bible interpretation and brain science - not that I don't think the two can inform each other. And of course, the 'brain' is not a topic I know much about. Yet I think the Bible and brain science were being 'forced together' at times in ways that seemed lacking substance or consistency.
I am glad to have read the book and there are insights from it that will impact me - for that I am grateful. But possibly it may not be a book I refer back to much - we shall see, I am fine to be wrong on that!

[SOVEYM · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a good read! I think the author did a great job in explaining how our view of God affect our brains. And his views are backed by some interesting brain research in neuroscience. In a nutshell our thoughts and beliefs affect our physical, mental and spiritual health. When people understand God in ways that are good and know that God is love we thrive. But many people understand God in twisted ways that drive them into toxic patterns and unhealthy behaviors.

This passage from the book sums it up for me..."Imagine a patient is dying with a terminal condition. If there is a cure for his condition, the only requirement that the patient must meet in order to be healed is that he "trust" the doctor by following the treatment protocol. The patient does not have to understand how the treatment works. He does not have to understand how the treatment was developed. All the patient has to do is trust the doctor, take the prescription, and if the doctor has a remedy that cures, the patient will be healed. Likewise, sinners don't have to understand anything about how Christ achieves our salvation in order to be saved, but we do have to trust God and accept his treatment in order to benefit from all that Christ has done."

[Tim Baird · Rating 1 out of 5]

As we say in Australia, “Yeah, nah”.

Started out strong and then took a sharp nosedive trying to shoehorn some dodgy theology into the mix to support his viewpoint.

I liked his idea of viewing God primarily as a loving God rather than a punitive God and the way it shapes your life. But he should have taken a bit of a closer look at his Bible.

God didn’t kill people, He put them to sleep? You’ve got to be kidding me. After that point I struggled as Jennings’ credibility took a massive hit.

The fact is that God does get angry and that anger can be fatal to people on the wrong side of it. Even Peter describes God as long suffering (meaning one day He will call time and send His Son back to judge the world). This is inescapably on the text and there’s no amount of fluff that can minimize this for the average reader.

Has some good points but I wouldn’t recommend it. I think he probably needs to do a bit more of the theological work he bagged in the introduction. I’m not seminary trained either, but I’d like to think I read my Bible with a lot less of the bias present in Jennings’ musing.

[Squire Whitney: Hufflepuff Book Reviwer · Rating 3 out of 5]

In The God-Shaped Brain, Christian psychologist Timothy Jennings sets out to illustrate how positive and inspiring views of God help to strengthen our brain structures, thereby confirming their validity—whereas overly judicial and wrath-oriented views of God damage our brain structures, confirming that they are mistaken. As such, he argues that we ought to see the atonement through a lens of recapitulation rather than through penal substitution, and he argues that we ought to embrace annihilation over views of eternal torment. Jennings’s psychological approach to his theology is unique and fascinating, and I so appreciated hearing stories of interactions that he had with his clients. However, I found some aspects of his theological approach lacking—even while I could hardly agree with him more that some aspects of current mainstream Christian doctrine cause nothing but mental distress. For instance, when nuanced in the right ways and stripped of some other problematic doctrines (which Jennings does not explicitly reject), I do not think that the psychological effects of penal substitution are nearly as damaging as he posits. On the whole, though, The God-Shaped Brain is certainly worth a read.

[Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overall, a good book. Maybe not the best along these lines, but he make a good case that our beliefs about impact our mental health. This book, in the main, read more theological than psychology, with the author emphasizing 'God is love' throughout. The problem with this is that he rejects penal substitutionary atonement or really a caricature of it, i.e., Jesus had to die so God could love us; which is contrary to John 3:16, a text no PSA advocate rejects. Also, he strongly affirms annihilation in light of his understanding of God as love, rejecting eternal conscious torment. Though these two theological moves are understandable, they are also controversial and, as such, may detract from the overall usefulness of the book for some readers. Though his reasoning for annihilationism is sound and even insightful (despite what I take to be an unsound conclusion), his continued repetition of a straw-man version of PSA was distracting at best and didn't help his overall discussion hence the four-star review.

[Steve · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.25/5

This book was a mixed bag for me.

I loved his emphasis on the law of love and it's connection to life. Brilliant and his fidelity to view everything through that lens was enriching throughout. That alone was worth reading the book.

However, I think he took it too far at times and tried to wish away difficult things in the Bible. I don't understand why fear is so prominent in scripture given how destructive it seems it can be but it's there, especially in the Old Testament and Paul's writings. So he came to several strange conclusions that I don't find compelling. I also didn't like his view on the limbic system, which seemed like a problem from his perspective rather than a gift that simply cannot be given free course. Finally, his anecdotes were far too neat based on my experience sitting with clients.

So a mixed bag to be sure from my perspective. But I do appreciate the book and I'll definitely continue to wrestle with his provocative views.