All posts tagged Tim Keller

  • Nightline Face-Off: Does Satan Exist?

    I finished watching the debate over the existence of Satan this morning. I watched half of it yesterday and the other half of it this morning. Apparently the debate was edited when it was aired, but you can watch it in its entirety here: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Nightline/FaceOff/

    Be prepared to endure commercials before and after each clip. A couple of times the online media player started over at the beginning of the first clip. A bit annoying, but well worth it.

    I wish every follower of Christ would watch this. I thought it was a great cultural/philosophical clash. It would be so helpful for Christians to watch and think deeply through the issues presented in this debate. And the greatest issue for me was not the existence of Satan, but the reality of truth.

    The players in the debate formed two teams: Mark Driscoll & Anne Lobert on one side and Deepak Chopra and Carlton Pearson on the other side.

    When I watched the first half, I thought Driscoll was the winner. He did have home field advantage however because the debate was at his church. Thus, the many rounds of applause after Driscoll’s comments. But the TRUE WINNER of the debate was “Red Shirt Guy.”

    As you watch the debate, pay attention to the interaction between the audience and the panel. In particular, pay close attention to two audience members and how they address the Deepak. The two audience members are “Red Shirt Guy” and “Pony Tail Girl.” A please, please understand that if we are going to engage culture we all need to be “Red Shirt Guy;” he got it. He understood the underlying issues and gave the best rebuttal of the night. (See below for my transcription of “Red Shirt Guy’s” comments.) “Pony Tail Girl” took things way to personal and misunderstood the deeper implications of Deepak’s comments. She was right to become angry, because Deepak was saying she was at a “lower level of consciousness.” But for her to say that Deepak was attacking Jesus was the wrong way to respond. Deepak was attacking the nature of truth (which of course we know is Jesus). She would have done better to take a lead from “Red Shirt Guy.”

    So here is my reaction to the debate. At the end I will sum up my thoughts about truth, but here are my random thoughts and observations:

    “All belief is a cover up for insecurity.” — Deepak Chopra

    I did not plan on taking notes, but this is the first thing I wrote down. I am glad “Red Shirt Guy” addresses this later on, because this is an attack on all people of faith.

    “If something is real then you don’t need to believe it. You just experience it.” — Deepak Chopra

    This is THE ISSUE in the debate for me. I know it was supposed to be about Satan and evil, but this is the issue. What is truth? What is reality? How do we know it? Deepak says that reality is that which we can experience. I agree. But what if we experience something inauthentic? What if two people experience the same thing and interpret it different? How we discern right reality and evil reality?

    “The Bible is not the inspired Word of God it is the inspired word of man about God.” – Carlton Pearson

    Oh how the mighty have fallen! Pearson’s descent into heresy began with a denial of hell and eternal punishment and it has led him to reject the authority of Scripture all together. Pearson did make a few (emphasis on “few”) good points, but for the most part his comments were wondering, off-topic, etymological, self-involved rambling. I know it sounds like I am hating on Pearson and really I am not. Often the moderator cut Pearson off, because he was headed off into la-la land. I feel so sorry for Pearson.

    “Perception is the ultimate reality, but it not necessarily the ultimate truth.” – Carlton Pearson

    Yeah, I know where Pearson is coming from. There is a difference between truth and perception. He is wrong to say perception is reality. Perception can be a “perceived” reality, but reality is that which is really real. This goes to the very definition of truth. Truth is that which corresponds with reality. More on truth below.

    “Fairytale-like good god and bad god” – Carlton Pearson

    The Devil is the “bad god” by the way. Oh and earlier Pearson called the Devil “hairy and horny.” I think he was referring to the caricature of the Devil who has horns, but I did laugh out loud when he said “horny.” My, my, the bishop is off his theological rocker.

    Red shirt guy: “My question is for Deepak and the Bishop, You said, ‘All belief is a cover up for insecurity?'”

    Red shirt guy: “Do you believe that?

    Deepak: “Yes”

    Red shirt guy: “Thank you”

    Audience laughter

    This was the best moment in the debate. Pearson laughed and looked at Deepak. Driscoll smiled. Lobert seemed to miss it. And Deepak tried to explain himself, but he never addressed the implication of Red Shirt Guy’s comment. And don’t miss this, but this is the leverage point in the argument of truth between Christians and pluralists.

    Deepak is arguing that “belief” is somehow a more primitive way of knowing. Evolution, he is arguing, has brought us to a higher state of consciousness were we know by experiencing in a way that is consistent with science and philosophy. But here is the deal….DEEPAK’S ARGUMENT IS A BELIEF!

    He is using a belief to devalue beliefs. In other words, he is using a belief system to say belief systems are no good. Tim Keller is right, “Every doubt is based on an alternative belief.” (Read Tim Keller’s Reason for God for a fuller explanation of these issues.)

    As soon as you define god, you limit god. — Deepak

    This is true, but it shouldn’t stop us from exploring God should it? Deepak is no atheist. He contends that there is a high probability of an intelligent being out there. So sure, for finite beings to try to define god we do limit him, but for followers of Christ, we believe Jesus is God and came to reveal to us (in part) who God is.

    At one point in the debate a woman question’s Driscoll on how he reconciles the evil of pride with the exclusivity of his position. I don’t have the exact quote, but Driscoll is right to go to the heart of the matter, “But what if it is true.” This whole debate is about truth.

    “My experience is more consistent with what we know about biology, evolution, and the laws of nature, in my opinion.” — Deepak

    This was his response to “Pony Tail Girl” and it is a sophisticated way of say you are wrong, but in Deepak’s worldview you cannot call anybody wrong, because there is no constant, no fixed point of reality, no frame of reference.

    Pony-tail girl: “Why would you come here tonight if not to attack him [Jesus]?”

    This was the worst thing she could have said. The only thing worse thing for her to say would have been to say that Deepak’s mom is a prostitute. Antagonistic attacks on non-Christian people will never lead them to Christ. This is a good time to love our enemies. Deepak wasn’t attacking Jesus. He was attacking truth. As I stated above, we know that Jesus is the Truth, and so maybe by inference he was attacking Jesus, but in responding to a pluralistic culture we need to respond to people’s statements, and the worldview behind their statements, and not the inferences we draw from those statements, because like Pony Tail Girl we are then arguing against an idea in our minds that may not be in theirs. She had all the best intentions in the world, bless her heart, but she didn’t help our cause.

    “You need these forces [creativity/evolutionary and entropy/destruction] to keep creation going.” — Deepak

    Driscoll needed to push the issue with Deepak over why he would call Anne’s story “evil” and more importantly why are these entropy/destructive forces necessary for creation to go on? Maybe he should have asked “How is it both evil and necessary?” Anne had been brutally gang raped and Deepak agreed that this was evil, but he wanted to brush it off as the fault of cultural psychosis. As he described his worldview he said destructive forces are necessary. So does that imply that evil is necessary? Or that Anne needed to be raped and tortured? I wish Driscoll would have pushed this issue. It would have clearly shown the inconsistencies of Deepak’s worldview.

    “I don’t trust my mind. I trust my spirit which is beyond all this” – Deepak

    Driscoll did a great job in questioning how Deepak believed in the evolutionary process and yet Deepak admits that he doesn’t trust his mind. He trusted his spirit! This was a clear contradiction in Deepak’s form of pluralism. If he doesn’t trust his mind, then why use his mind to study biology, cosmology, and philosophy? Why not just meditate and stop writing books?

    CONCLUDING THOUGHTS: This debate was not about Satan. The existence of Satan is what got the debate started. This was a debate about truth. What is there in the world of philosophy, religion, and theology that is true? What is it in those areas that corresponds with reality? For those of us who follow Jesus, we believe that he is the way, the truth, and the life, the only way to God the Father and eternal life. Jesus did speak these words in Aramaic, but when he spoke of “me” or “God” he was not referring to the “circle within the circle” or the great “spirit” in the sky. Deepak’s interpretation is not consistent with First century Judaic thought. It sounded intellectual, but his interpretation of Jesus is not consistent with what we know theologically or linguistically about the first century. What his followers heard him say is “God” and “me.” When Jesus said nobody comes to the Father except through me, the gospel writers wrote the word eimi in Greek. There only way to interpret that is through the very simple meaning “me.” Jesus was simple at this point. It takes a lot of religious and philosophical wrangling to make it more completed than that. For those of us who are Christ followers it is simple:

    Jesus is the Truth.

    He is our philosophical constant.

    He is our moral framework.

    He is what corresponds with reality.

    He is not our experience of cultural/philosophical influences.

    He is really real.

    He really lived.

    He really died on a Roman cross.

    He really was buried in a borrowed tomb.

    He really rose up from the dead.

    He really sent the Holy Spirit to live in the hearts of those who are his.

    He is really coming back.

    Mark Driscoll did a great job of reading Scripture as his closing remarks. He read 1 John 5:19-20. I am closing this blog with that text:

    We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one. And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life. (ESV)

  • Wrestling with Doubt

    I am ready to wrestle with doubt.

    I don’t think I could have said that ten years ago or even five years ago. I have been serious about faith, specifically Christian faith, for eighteen years. I think I have always had doubts, but I am just starting to wrestle with them. In the earlier days of my Christian journey, I assumed doubt was the enemy of faith. I assumed to acknowledge the presence of doubt was a sign of weakness or Christian immaturity. So I did what any eager young follower of Jesus would do, I faked it. I hid my doubt. I stuffed it down and ignored it. I convinced myself that good Christians don’t have doubt. I quoted Scripture like a Hindu mantra and hoped doubt would just go away. It didn’t.

    I am wrestling with doubt.

    Faking it has to be the most fatal of Christian diseases. While there are a number of bad habits that can shipwreck one’s faith, nothing is more fatal than ignoring doubt, stuffing down questions that seem to contradict Christian belief, and just faking it. Pretending to be self-assured (or God-assured) when you are riddled with nagging doubts undermines authentic faith. Real faith acknowledges doubt, calls it what it is, and wrestles with it in order to understand Christian belief more clearly.

    On Friday, I picked up The Reason for God by Tim Keller. Keller is the pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA) in New York. I read the introduction before I got home.
    Keller got me thinking about wrestling with doubt. He writes:

    “Believers should acknowledge and wrestle with doubts–not only their own but their friends’ and neighbors’. It is no longer sufficient to hold beliefs just because you inherited them. Only if you struggle long and hard with objections to your faith will you be able to provide grounds for your beliefs to skeptics, including yourself, that are plausible rather than ridiculous or offensive. And, just as important for our current situation, such a process will lead you, even after you come to position of strong faith, to respect and understand those who doubt.”

    Brilliant.

    Wrestling with doubt not only strengthens my faith, but it also helps me understand the doubts shared by skeptics and those outside the faith, so I can more effectively lead them to Jesus. I want to teach on this subject soon.

    I want to teach on doubts related to:

    1) The existence of God
    2) The exclusivity of Jesus
    3) The authority of Scripture
    4) The problem of evil

    My doubts are not related to these subjects. I don’t have any doubt in the first three. I do struggle with the problem of evil. I got some doubts there, but honestly my doubts are not in these subjects. Nevertheless, I want to wrestle with the doubts others have with these issues so I can understand.

    fides quaerens intellectum

    faith seeking understand

    faith wrestling with doubt

    This is the Jesus way.

  • Gospel-centered Ministry

    I just finished listening to a lecture given last May by Tim Keller on the “Gospel-centered Ministry.” Keller is the pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA) in New York City.

    They are one of the most successful church planting churches in the country. RPC has planted over 100 churches in the NYC metro area. The lecture has some great thinking on the centrality of the gospel in the ministry of preaching. Good stuff.

    You can listen to the lecture here: http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/resources/video/Gospel-Centered-Ministry1#

    The following are my notes that I adapted from some notes I found on another blog.

    Gospel-Centered Ministry
    Tim Keller
    Gospel Coalition Conference
    May 2007

    Seven ministry insights from the gospel.
    1. The gospel is historical.
    2. The gospel is doxological.
    3. The gospel is christological.
    4. The gospel is personal and individual.
    5. The gospel is cultural.
    6. The gospel is massively transformational.
    7. The gospel is wonderful.

    TEXT: 1 Peter 1:1-12; 1:22-2:12

    1. The gospel is historical.
    The gospel is good news, not good advice. From Martin Lloyd-Jones:
    Advice is counsel about something you can do regarding something that hasn’t happened yet.
    News is about something that has already happened and there is nothing you can do but respond.

    Ministry implication:
    From C. S. Lewis’s Studies in Words–You don’t use words to tell someone how to tie a tie; you show them. Words are required to explain a historical event.

    Proclamation/declarative preaching will be irreplaceably central to the gospel ministry. If we are merely invited people to live like Jesus, then we can just show them, but the gospel is a historical event that must be proclaimed.

    “Preach the gospel–and if necessary, use words.” That’s a misunderstanding of the gospel.

    2. The gospel is doxological.
    Doxology (worship; literally “right praise”) is the basis of the entire Christian life.

    Thoughts from Luther’s Larger Catechism: The first commandment summarizes all the rest. Underneath every sin is idolatry in general, and underneath that is some form of works righteous. When a person breaks other commandments, it is because they have broken the first commandment prohibiting idolatry.

    If a person is not generous, their sin is not only greed—it is also idolatry, because they have made money, material things, security, etc. a functional savior. All sins from eating disorders to racism is the sin of idolatry – the breaking of the first command. It is the worship of a functional savior –the heart’s imagination dotes on something more than God (my thinness, my race, etc.). The only way to change is to worship.

    Ministry implication:
    From Jonathan Edwards– the purpose of preaching is not just to make things clear, but to make them real. We need to make things vivid. The heart is one’s core commitments, capturing our imaginations. Edwards was rational, persuasive, logical–but he uses images. We must teach Christ vividly and practically, from a change life. We must avoid the ruts of pure narrative preaching which shows, but doesn’t tell AND the pure expository-sermon-as-Bible-commentary preaching which tells, but doesn’t show.

    The first and primary object of preaching is not only to give information. It is, as Edwards says, to produce an impression. It is the impression at the time that matters, even more than what you can remember subsequently . . . It is not primarily to impart information; and while you are writing your notes you may be missing something of the impact of the Spirit.

    3. The gospel is christological.
    Jesus gave an advanced hermeneutics seminar in Luke 24 on the road to Emmaus. He told them that they missed the Jesus, because they did not realize that the law and the prophets spoke of him.

    Ministry implication:
    The ultimate subject of every sermon should be Jesus.
    Questions to consider: “What are you looking for when you go to the text? Are you looking for yourself and your congregation or are you looking for Jesus.”

    The Scripture ultimately points to Jesus. As an interpreter and preacher of the text, you have to follow the trajectory of the text from people to Jesus.

    Examples:

    Jesus is the true and better Adam who passed the test in the garden and whose obedience is imputed to us.

    Jesus is the true and better Abel who, though innocently slain, has blood now that cries out, not for our condemnation, but for acquittal.

    Jesus is the true and better Abraham who answered the call of God to leave all the comfortable and familiar and go out into the void not knowing wither he went to create a new people of God.

    Jesus is the true and better Isaac who was not just offered up by his father on the mount but was truly sacrificed for us.

    Jesus is the true and better Jacob who wrestled and took the blow of justice we deserved.

    Jesus is the true and better Joseph who, at the right hand of the king, forgives those who betrayed and sold him and uses his new power to save them.

    Jesus is the true and better Moses who stands in the gap between the people and the Lord and who mediates a new covenant.

    Jesus is the true and better Rock of Moses who, struck with the rod of God’s justice, now gives us water in the desert.

    Jesus is the true and better Job, the truly innocent sufferer, who then intercedes for and saves his stupid friends. (This one came across funny.)

    Jesus is the true and better David whose victory becomes his people’s victory, though they never lifted a stone to accomplish it themselves.

    Jesus is the true and better Esther who didn’t just risk leaving an earthly palace but lost the ultimate and heavenly one, who didn’t just risk his life, but gave his life to save his people.

    Jesus is the true and better Jonah who was cast out into the storm so that we could be brought in.

    Jesus is the real Rock of Moses, the real Passover Lamb, innocent, perfect, helpless, slain so the angel of death will pass over us.

    He’s the true temple, the true prophet, the true priest, the true king, the true sacrifice, the true lamb, the true light, the true bread.

    The Bible is a book about Jesus not me.

    4. The gospel is personal and individual.
    1 Peter 1 &2 There are references to the new birth. From Martin Lloyd-Jones– You cannot make yourself a Christian. You must be converted. Passive. You must be made new.

    Jesus has stood in our place and received through his suffering the wrath of God (substitution atonement).

    J.I. Packer in Knowing God — to understand grace, you have to understand both (1) how lost your are; how bad your sin is; how great your debt is; (2) the magnitude of the provision; the size of the payment; the sufficiency and fullness of the provision.

    [I have often worded this concept this way – You cannot see the beauty of his grace without looking at the ugliness of my sin.]

    Some people may only believe that Jesus died the death I should have died—the death for sin – and not realize that he also lived the life we should have lived – the life free from sin. Without the second part, people think that they need to live a pretty good life to make up for their short fall. The part of the provision is that his life of purity is imputed to us and I would add that transformation into his life is made available by the Holy Spirit.

    Two groups of people in evangelicalism: Easy-believism and legalists/moralists. These groups do not see both side of grace.

    There are those who in evangelicalism who are actively teaching that the gospel is the kingdom and all you have to do is join the kingdom and become a disciple. Such teaching by-passes substitutionary atonement and short-circuits the gospel

    The gospel is individualistic: individual sinners are saved from the wrath of a personal God.

    5. The gospel is cultural.
    The gospel creates a culture called the church.

    All other religions motivate you through fear and pride. Only the gospel of Jesus motivates you through joy in what Christ has done.

    We are not merely saved individuals. The gospel is massively transformational and creates a counter-culture, and also makes us as people relate to the people around us. Those of us who believe in an individual gospel often miss the communal implications.

    1 Peter 2:11 ESV Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul. [12] Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation.

    Sojourners is not just passing through AND is not a citizen. It is someone who stays in a geographical location for a good amount of time, but his values come from some other place.

    The gospel is radical.
    The gospel says there are dangers of both cultural accommodation and cultural withdrawal.

    We think all the danger is on one side, but there is danger on both sides.

    These verses lead us to a balanced approach. We need to live separate as an exile, but also live in culture so that evildoers can see your good deeds. No one sees your good deeds of those who withdraw from the world. On the other hand, people who accommodate the culture are never persecuted. We are called to live in a counter-culture that shows the world that we love our enemies.

    This balance is hard to maintain. Think about the exiles in Babylon. God told them in Jeremiah 29: Don’t stay out and be different. Don’t go in and be like them.
    Go in deeply in and stay very different. Seek the well-fare of the city.

    Those who want to be prophetic tend not to be priestly. Those who are servant-hearted tend not to talk about hell and wrath. If we live this gospel life you will get both approval and persecution.

    6. The gospel is massively transformational.
    The gospel creates a worldview that touches every area of life…business, art, family…
    Keller was running out of time and didn’t elaborate on this point.

    7. The gospel is wonderful.
    1 Peter 1:12, “It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.”

    Angels are probably very smart people! Think about elves and humans in Tolkien mythology. They are a lot alike, but the elves don’t die. In the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Aragorn (a human) and Arwen (an elf) have a conversation on who will ride Frodo to safety. Arwen says that she is the better rider and you think “Yeah, you are 4,000 years old – of course you are a better rider, you have had a lot more practice!

    Angels never die. Angels know a lot. They have been looking into the gospel for a long time.

    They “long” (Greek word: epithumaio often translated “lust”) to look into the gospel. Gospel ministry is endlessly creative, ever new, never boring.

    The gospel is not the ABCs of Christianity; it’s the A-Z. The gospel drives everything we do. It’s the solution to every problem. It should be what every theological category is expounding.

    It is at the heart of everything we do.