Editorial Reviews. From Publishers Weekly. In this apologia for Christian faith, Keller mines code or Gift Card · Share. Kindle App Ad. Look inside this book. The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism by [Keller, Timothy . The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism to download this book the Description Timothy Keller, the founding pastor of Redeemer. from. The Reason for God. Belief in an Age of Skepticism by. Timothy Keller. The New York Times bestseller that makes. “a tight, accessible case for reasoned.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Indonesian|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
Timothy Keller is different. Not only does he not shy away from the hard questions , he addresses them with the seriousness they deserve. And while The Reason. Timothy Keller is founding pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan (started ). I've been hearing about this man and his remarkable church. terney.info_apologetics-the-reason-for-god-timothy-keller-penguin-reader-guide .pdf - Download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online.
Example: Defending an Evil Bible Keller then tries to show how evil is really good by citing a story from the Bible. But the key point here is that it is abhorrent to claim the only way to make people good, is to torture them with miseries and injustices. That Christianity turns people into monsters like Keller—defenders of torture and evil—is the number one reason it needs to die out.
Since plenty of people come to that same end, of being good people, fighters for justice, without all that suffering, to claim anyone needs it, is simply a non sequitur. So why is a god allowed to use it? You know. The book that narrates that most appalling evil of the flood, where God literally murders millions of people and animals, by the horrible means of drowning them alive, babies and all.
If that is the sort of person your religion requires you to be, your religion is plain evil, and so is your god. As only an evil god would require you to believe such an evil thing—or even think to allow such a fable into His book. You can only escape this condemnation with a plea of lazy ignorance. Shall you then choose to admire, serve, and defend the most horrific villain in the history of human religions?
Or will you finally renounce him? Or at least these evil myths of him? And thereby, renounce the Bible, as a fucked up book. We can define evil any way we want. We decide what its words mean. There is no Cosmic Dictionary authored by God anywhere. That God does those things, makes him awful.
Then we can readily explain why those things happen: because the world was not compassionately designed, nor governed, and the only justice and compassion that ever exists, is what comes from us. There are no gods coming to save us.
Nevertheless, Keller is a conman, so he wants to conceal all this from his readers, and instead try to trick them into thinking stupid things like that only gods can define what evil is. Obvious answer?
The way you would want the universe to be. Your standards come from your own desires, including your own empathy for other persons and animals—which comes from your natural evolution as a social animal.
Keller tries to recruit C. Lewis to help him here, but honestly, Lewis was one of the worst philosophers in human history. His arguments are atrociously bad, hopelessly illogical, and almost always factually inaccurate. You are observing that it is against you and everyone you love, that it does not care.
It is not at all how we would expect a lovingly designed and justly governed universe to behave. Which of those three options does the evidence comport with? At no point do we ever have to appeal to anything extra-natural or supernatural. Gods or the supernatural never enter into it. See my discussion of Divine Command Theory. So he cites his myths as if they were arguments. In this case, he argues the myths told in ancient times about Jesus prove God even tortured Jesus to effect Great Things, so clearly all human horrors, torments, and miseries are totes fine.
Citing a myth to defend that myth, kind of falls off the rails of logical reasoning. But whatever. He evidently forgot to read the Gospel of John.
Where Jesus approaches his death with total aplomb and fearlessness. To the contrary, suffering deities were commonplace in antiquity. Prometheus , most famously. But more importantly, the suffering, forsaken hero was so common in Jewish mythology it became a well-known trope of the time.
But despite failing to get the facts right twice with that single sentence, Keller proceeds to interpret his myth: We cannot fathom, however, what it would be like to lose not just spousal love or parental love that has lasted several years, but the infinite love of the Father that Jesus had from all eternity. Of course, first of all, this is all fiction. Which is possible. Literary analysis and appreciation accomplishes that all the time.
But whether as fiction or fact, Keller is not correctly describing what happens. Jesus knows full well God will abandon him only briefly and then return him to life and glory. Because in that very same myth—in every Gospel—Jesus repeatedly says so, and even curses Peter for not recognizing that fact. His suffering is quite brief, and frankly, rather mild compared to much worse fates many real mortals have had to endure.
And Jesus well knows that. Because he is repeatedly depicted as very clearly knowing that. So Keller is even making shit up about what his own myths can plausibly signify.
Full on lying.
The myth never says that Jesus bore anything endlessly. So claiming that the mythical Jesus shared that with us, or even the fear of it, is just false. But that gets to the even more absurd and primitive myths Keller is downloading from the Old Testament, based on haughty angry storm god logic, which make even less sense, and even more pervert justice, than the human-sacrifice blood-magic sold by the Gospels.
Even apart from it being stupid, there is exactly zero evidence any of that OT nonsense is true, either. It fully describes God as batshit insane.
Worse, it would mean I am more powerful than God. At least, without mystically splashing them with magic godblood from an ancient ritual human sacrifice. Keller concludes his second chapter with a bunch more superstitious mythical unproven bullshit about redemption theory, and hope and consolation as a reason to believe, that requires no reply.
It just reminds us that Christianity was invented by primitive weirdos who actually believed all that crazy sorcery shit. Because if it were true, God would be even more evil than the facts already entail! Summary Here we have the clearest proof that Keller is a liar. Because his fabrication of the Alston quote can have no credible excuse.
He full well lies to his readers with that, knowingly and intentionally. The logic of evidence is nowhere to be found here. No document has been so thoroughly studied, criticized, dissected over the last two thousand years.
Evidence that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are historically reliable. The timing is far too early for the gospels to be legends. Gospels written at most 40 to 60 years after Jesus' death.
Paul's letters written 15 to 25 years after the death of Jesus and they outline the events of Jesus' life found in the gospels. The Biblical accounts of Jesus life were written down within the lifetimes of hundreds who had been present at the events of his ministry. Luke got his material from eyewitnesses who were still alive.
Mark says the man who helped Jesus carry his cross "was the father of Alexander and Rufus", inviting contemporary corroboration.
Perhaps even more powerful as an indication of authenticity is the fact that officials, opponents, bystanders were still alive and would be anxious to contradict falsehoods.
The content is far to counterproductive for the gospels to be legends. Challengers suggest that the gospels were written by leaders of the early church to promote their policies, consolidate their power, and build their movement. The fact that this is not true of the gospels is powerful evidence for their historical authenticity. Circumcision was an intense conflict in the early church, yet nowhere in the gospels does Jesus say anything about circumcision. Having a leader who was crucified is hardly a way to get a movement going.
And a Gethsemane account where Jesus asks God if he could get out of his mission? Why invent women as the first witnesses of the resurrection in a society where women were assigned such low status that their testimony was not admissible evidence in court?
Why constantly depict the apostles as petty and jealous? And the denial of Peter?
Why would anyone in the early church want to play up the terrible failures of their most prominent leader? The literary form of the gospels is too detailed to be legend. Lewis: "I have been reading poems, romances, vision literature, legends and myths all my life. I know what they are like. I know none of them are like this. Modern fiction is realistic, and it didn't appear until about years ago. Mark reports that Jesus was asleep on a cushion in the stern of a boat.
Peter was yds out in the water when he saw Jesus on the beach. Peter jumped in the water and together they caught fish. Such details were not in any ancient literature, and the only explanation of them is as recollections of eyewitnesses.
It seems to support slavery and the subjugation of women. These positions appear so outrageous to contemporary people that they have trouble accepting any other parts of the Bible's message. Ephesians "Slaves, obey your earthly masters But consider the cultural and historical era in which it is written.
Not the African slave trade of the eighteenth and ninetheenth century. Not chattel slavery, not life-long, not ownership of the person. Worked their way to freedom in years. Enslavers among those condemned in 1 Timothy Kidnapping and slavery is a capital offense in Deuteronomy Matthew gives the basis for Christians working to abolish slavery. But if you dive into the center of the Biblical pool, where there is consensus - about the deity of Christ, his death and resurrection - you will be safe.
It is therefore important to consider the Bible's core claims about who Jesus is and whether he rose from the dead before you reject it for its less central and more controversial teachings. In any truly personal relationship, the other person has to be able to contradict you.
For example, if a wife is not allowed to contradict her husband, they won't have an intimate relationship.