Keller has finished his attempt to show how the main 7 “problems” people have with Christianity are all based on some belief. Do you think he accomplished what he was setting out to do?
As I reflect on what he has done in the first part of this book, I am grateful. I think he has done a good a good job and has helped me to think a bit more deeply about doubts and the common objections. My typical response to the questions raised in the first half of this book was to think them foolish. Of course, I would never say that out loud, but that is how I thought about them. I realized that I was not loving the people who might hold these views. Dr. Keller has helped us tremendously to point out that real people hold these views and they deserve well-reasoned answers.
What do you think? Has this section helped you at all?

The Intermission
We are about to change gears here and Keller will now give reasons FOR Christianity. Again, since this is for skeptics, he is very patient to explain what kind of Christianity he is arguing for (which is more broad than I would prefer) and what proof will look like. The most helpful part of this in my opinion, is the explanation of “critical rationality.”

“It assumes that there are some arguments that many or even most rational people will find convincing, even though there is no argument that will be persuasive to everyone regardless of viewpoint.” Page 120

What I like most about this is the recognition that everyone comes at rational thought with a worldview that will necessarily color what they are seeing. Before I was a Christian, I came assuming God was not there or had no right to tell me what to do. The “facts” were going to be interpreted by me in such a way that would head in the direction I already wanted. But, this is not to say that we are against listening to any argumentation, otherwise Christians would have no reason to talk to anyone and give them a reason for the hope within them. (1 Peter 3:15) We just need to realize that everyone has a bias. It will be different for everyone and stronger in some, but everyone has a bias. We will not be able to give “proof” that convinces everyone, but we can give convincing evidence to help at least some.
How does that sound? Do you agree with Keller here? Why or why not?

As Pam and I are trying to talk to our son about God, we have chosen to use a book written for kids that discusses theology called A Faith to Grow On. We started it yesterday and the issue that was being discussed was God being Spirit and so we cannot see Him, but we can see evidence for Him in creation. Two main passages were used to talk about His “evidence,” one being Psalm 19:1 and the other is Romans 1:20. Here are those two passages.

“The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.” Psalm 19:1 ESV

“For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.” Romans 1:20 ESV

There are clues. That is what the next chapter is all about.

Clues
I am not going to talk all about my thoughts on this chapter. I want to turn this one over to you. What did you think about the “clues” that Keller mentions? Were they helpful? Have you ever used them with people who do not believe? Did they help in those cases?
I would love to hear what you thought of this chapter.

Until next time…
Michael

Many of you are probably wondering why I have not been posting as much lately. There have been many different reasons that have contributed, but the latest is because I have been doing a lot of work in trying to focus on the gospel for the church I pastor here in North Carolina, Crossroads Bible Fellowship.
I wanted to point you to the blog of that church on this site because I am starting a series of posts on meditation that I think will spur some conversation even in relation to culture interaction.
One of the questions that is often asked concerning what I do with Discerning Mind is how do I know what to address in movies, books, etc. This is a great question and one that I cannot go too far with right now, but at least one of the answers is to meditate on Scripture more every day. What I have noticed is that the people who are best equipped to engage the culture are those who know their bible and their God very well. The more you know Him and His word, the more you will be thinking about what He says even when you watch a movie.
Anyway, the point is that I would suggest we all get better at meditation on Scripture if we wish to engage the world around us for Jesus Christ. Thinking on Christ more is always going to help me, so check out the posts on this blog and get involved in the conversation.

Hey, there is another connection to Discerning Mind! The material I am using to think more about meditation comes from Tim Keller. Does that name sound familiar? ☺

I will post the first one from that series here so that you know what I have stated already, but check out the blog for more information in the coming days.
Thanks and see you there.
Michael

A Battle and a Plan

As I stated yesterday, I have been having a hard time in Scripture lately. It is not that I lack a desire to be in Scripture, but rather that my time has been rather random. I have jumped around and landed at different places for a short time, but I have not stuck anywhere. This must stop! I have decided that one of the better ways to challenge what I have been doing is to think through meditation, specifically meditation on the word. There is good precedence that we should be meditating on God Himself and even His works in creation, but I think I need to focus on the word for a time. I hope you will join me in this pursuit.

To help me in my study, I have enlisted Dr. Tim Keller. He has written some pdf files that are available here called Gospel Christianity 1, 2 and 3. They are worth the price you must pay (if you are part of Crossroads, contact me before you buy a copy) and I am going to slowly walk through chapter 2 of course 2 called “How do I meet Jesus myself?” This chapter walks through meditation, so it will directly apply to my battle mentioned above.

As we get started, I would love to hear about how you “meditate” or “reflect” on Scripture in your own lives.

Well, if you choose to join me on this journey, I look forward to your helpful comments. Please pray with me that God will work in us so that we treasure Him as we should.
Until tomorrow…

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.