Science has disproved Christianity is the title of chapter 6 of Keller’s book, A Reason for God. That chapter and the one on taking the Bible literally are the two we are going to discuss this week.

Are there irreconcilable differences between science and Christianity? Most say yes, but Keller says no. I tend to agree with Keller as long as there are some major clarifications. I keep coming back to Keller’s intended audience and therefore the purpose of the book, because technically the book is not for me and it is not intended to give all the guards I would prefer for a discussion of each issue he addresses. Keller rightly keeps the main thing the main thing. He intends to make a case for Christianity by explaining science is not necessarily at odds with it. That is all. On that I agree.

So, if I agree, what could I want to qualify? My big issue is going to be the order in which you trust them-science and the Bible. Should I trust science first? If the two do appear to disagree at any point, do I go with what science says? This is a big issue, because it actually shows what we trust in Of course, when ALL FACTS are known, I believe there will be no differences between the two, but how often can we say all facts are known? It seems to me that we must trust Scripture first. We must turn back and make sure we are interpreting it properly, but we ultimately trust what God has revealed over the wisdom of man in observing what they see. But that is what I believe. What about you?

There has actually been much discussion about Keller’s views on evolution. You can find out more by going here, here and here. It seems that Dr. Keller was not careful as he could have been in his statements about evolution and Christians believing it. He states on page 87,
“Evolutionary science assumes that more complex life-forms evolved from less complex forms through a process of natural selection. Many Christians believe that God brought about life this way.”
Now, what does Dr. Keller mean by this? Is he saying most Christians believe in the same kind of evolution most often taught? I don’t think so, but I am willing to be corrected. I think he is saying that microevolution (changes within a species) is likely and accepted by many, but I think he would at least question macroevolution (the change of one species into another). Unfortunately we do not know this for sure since he has not explained, but it seems likely from other things I have read by Dr. Keller.

Whatever you believe about these issues, you must give Keller credit for seeking to stick to the main point even when other things are very tempting to discuss.

The next chapter simply seeks to cal into question the idea of not being able to trust the Bible because of its historicity or cultural acceptability. I think Keller does a good job of challenging what is often assumed by those who prefer to reject the Bible. What I like about this chapter is that Keller essentially asks if we are to be the determiner of what can be right or must be wrong. The question I appreciated the most comes on page 114,
“If you pick and choose what you want to believe and reject the rest, how will you ever have a God who can contradict you?”
This is a great question and one that must be answered.

Well, enough about my views. What do you think about these chapters? I will be waiting…
Michael

I am back. So sorry for the long delay in this discussion. Some things were out of my control this past month and required much more attention than I anticipated. But now I am back and want to pick up where we left off to discuss this great book.
A minor note as far as plans… I would like to summarize less in this time and reflect/meditate more. That means you should be familiar with the book in order to best benefit from or be involved in the discussion. This is for many reasons, but most notably the fact that I don’t want to put so much of the book online. I think people should buy the book. It is great and would be a good addition to your library. Anyway, that is how we will proceed. Now to the discussion of hell and a loving God.

“We believe so deeply in our personal rights in this realm that the very idea of a divine Judgment Day seems impossible.” Page 72
What an evaluation! I think Keller hits the nail on the head here. The reason we do not like the idea of hell is because we, as western people, think that we have rights that even God cannot ignore. This is not a universally held view, in fact, many around the world would never view things this way. Sometimes we are so arrogant to believe that the western sensibilities are correct and others wrong, but I hope we do not hold that view for long when we see its arrogance. Christianity is going to contradict every sensibility at some point. This just seems to be the one that is most offensive right now.
Are you offended by the idea of hell? Were you when you first heard about it? How did you work through it to come to trust God? We would do well to reflect on this a bit more so that we can honestly walk through it with people who do not believe as we do.
2 Timothy 2:24-25 is challenging to me every time I read it. Paul reminds me that, “And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth…” Am I characterized with gentleness even when people are charging God with being unloving? I tent to want to defend God, as if He needs me to do that. I must seek to be gentle and trust that God will open their eyes in His timing. That is almost never easy.

Another way Keller addresses this issue is by showing that for justice to prevail, God must be a wrathful God as well as a loving God. He must be both or something is really wrong with the world and I could not bear to live here. If I expect to live out Christ’s peaceful commands and to be willing to be wronged for Christ, it means that I am trusting that God will ultimately make everything right. He will either do that by dying for the offender’s sin or by punishing them for that sin. If this is not the case, then passages like Romans 12:14-18 are impossible to withstand. In fact, Paul believes that God must be wrathful for us to pursue this bold standard, because he ends that very passage by stating that you are to leave wrath to God who will take care of it properly. God is the only one that can rightly bring wrath.
What do you think about that? Does that ring true for you? What passages do you think about that might help us to explain this truth?

Lastly, how do you think Keller did in answering the initial questions? Were you convinced? I think we must remember to whom this book was written. Keller does not have Christians in mind in the writing of this book. His primary audience is the average unbeliever. How does that effect your evaluation of the argumentation in the book?
I would love to hear your thoughts and look forward to getting into the next two chapters next week with you. Next Thursday is the day we will cover chapters 6 and 7, so get reading and thinking so we can discuss them then and thanks for your patience. Until next time, enjoy your reading.
Michael.

Well, I did not finish my assignment for today. I only finished and wrote on one chapter instead of two. Hope you will forgive me. I didn’t want to rush through a chapter just to have something to write. I am enjoying the book too much for that. That being said, hereare my thoughts on chapter 4.

Chapter Four The Church is Responsible for So Much Injustice!
This one is hard. I want to scream, “No it isn’t!!!!!” Keller made me step back and think more clearly about how to address such concerns. The fact is, this book and the issues it raises are constantly forcing me to recognize my tendency to respond rather than reason, mostly because I think I have the right answer and the questioner doesn’t. How humble, right? It is sometimes sad to see how prideful I can be in “standing up for Jesus.” Enough about my own sin, let’s get to some real answers. Read the rest of this entry »

Too Much Suffering and Too Much Control
Refreshing! That is my view on this book. In the past I have read books that pointed out the obvious and actually cultivated my arrogance, being bothered that I had to “answer” questions that unbelievers had as if they were wrong to even ask. I see that now and have been challenged to rethink my involvement with “unbelievers.” Unbelievers are people too! They struggle and fight and don’t always think properly: just like me! The fact is there is one crucial difference between me and the average unbeliever-Christ! He has grabbed me and will not let me go. That is all the difference. This simple fact helps me to be reminded that the difference is not something that can be attributed to me and my abilities. That gives me increasing humility and compassion, because Jesus must do it to them too. He must grab them and open their eyes.
What does all this have to do with the book we are reading together? Read the rest of this entry »

Welcome to the next book discussion. We will be reading and then discussing two chapters each week on Thursday. Please join us in talking about this book so that we can all learn together. Today we will discuss the introduction and first chapter.

Introduction
I loved the “which one is the victim” discussion. I thought Keller did a good job of explaining that our culture is becoming both more secular and more religious at the same time. I particularly liked the challenge Read the rest of this entry »

I find your lack of faith-disturbing.
–Darth Vader

So begins our next book choice for Discerning Reader and I am hooked immediately. Please join me in reading this book and discussing it on this blog, looking for ways that we can think through major issues, but also so that we can see how we must apply what Dr. Keller is presenting. Truth is never meant to be something you only agree with, you must embrace it and live it! That is the challenge we have before us. What can we learn and what must we be willing to change? Great questions to ponder as we begin, but as always, we must make sure we test what is being said in the book. We should be willing to change if God wants us to change, but we are not required to change simply because Dr. Keller says so.

I am going to recommend that we take a couple of chapters at a time. For some of you, this will be exceedingly slow. If that is you, please consider the fact that we must process what we read. This is not a novel that we can read quickly to get the overall story. You might even consider reading the same chapters a couple of times in the week as we discuss it or meditating on a few pages each day. For others of you, you would like to take a chapter a week to really digest it. If that is the case for you, please feel free to do so. It might limit your ability to contribute to this discussion, but it will be worth it if you need to take more time to process. The point of reading the book together is to be able to think through what the book is saying. Whatever you need to do to accomplish that is right for you.

We will officially begin this book discussion on Thursday, so be looking for it and pick up the book if you have not already.
Michael

OK everyone, the next book has been chosen and it is The Reason for God by Timothy Keller. This should be an interesting read and we will take it a bit slower so that we can discuss the issues that are raised. I am looking forward to the discussion as I plan to use some of this book in ministry on the local college campus.

We will start the discussion on June 12th, so order the book using the link above or at your local bookstore. If you order it off this site, I will get credit at Amazon, so you would also be supporting the ministry here. If you choose to do this, go to the picture of the book on the sidebar and follow the links to Amazon to purchase the book. Either way, please get the book and read the introduction and chapter one. This is what I will be commenting on on the 12th.

Thanks for being patient with me. Let’s dive into this book together and learn more about the God we love.

Michael

Many in the Christian community had particularly high hopes and expectations for Mike Huckabee during this year’s Republican nomination process. Personally, I supported Fred Thompson, and then Mitt Romney until the concession of each. None of those people are going to be elected President in 2008. John McCain, whose name was spoken with something just shy of disgust by many among the conservative faithful, has secured the nomination and will be running against either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. This being the case, I’d like to take a minute to point out to every one that Senator McCain ain’t really all that bad. Read the rest of this entry »

As we are finished with  Ender’s Game for the reading group, I am planning the next book we will choose to discuss. I have two recommendations and I would like to hear which you would like to read next.

The first is a book called The Reason for God by Timothy Keller. It is a book that seeks to answer real questions and doubts about God (the first part of the book) and then turns to a positive presentation of how to think about God. Check it out. While there are aspects that we will probably disagree with in his presentation, the author is a strong Christian that will give us much to chew on as we read it.

The second book suggestion is called The Film Club by David Gilmour. This book is not from a Christian perspective from what I can tell. The main idea here is that the author’s son was flunking out of school and the author decided a new approach was necessary. He decided that the best way to instruct his son was to have the two of them watch films together and discuss them. The author let his son drop out of school as long as he obeyed a couple simple rules. The biggest of which was that he would watch three movies each week that his father would choose and they would discuss those films.

I think both of these books could be great to discuss for radically different reasons. Which would you prefer and why? Obviously which ever we choose, we must order the books before we start the discussion. This means we need to make a decision quickly. What do you think?

Michael