I have been making my way through The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism by Tim Keller since Saturday. I’m only through part 1 in which he looks at the objections commonly raised against Christianity. Keller utilizes a kindly Van Tillian approach. Greg Bahnsen, for instance, would often use a scorched-earth, win at all costs, type of approach that made many Christians rejoice, but left unbelievers feeling totally minimized and victimized. Keller models a kind hearted manner, one which is willing to acknowledge where those he disagrees with have a valid point. He also models a method of gently showing them their own “defeater beliefs”, beliefs that are just as unproveable as those they criticize (self-defeating) or that borrow intellectual or moral capital from Christianity (or at least theism).
The chapters are relatively brief, but have plenty of footnotes. One interesting thing he often does is bring in the ideas of other unbelievers to undermine the ideas of the most scathing skeptics. Keller’s goal is always engagement to lovingly persuade. He wants people to examine their own beliefs (especially their presuppositions) and see if they measure up the criteria of proof they demand of ours. His goal is not to pummel people into submission.
Toward the end of the section a light bulb went on. I felt like saying, “Steve, you fool.” Tim Keller talks about a Stepford God who will never say anything that upsets your intellectual or moral applecart. It is built on an idea found earlier:
“For sake of argument, let’s imagine that Christianity is not the product of any one culture but is actually the transcultural truth of God. If that were the case we would expect that it would contradict and offend every human culture at some point, because human cultures are ever-changing and imperfect. If Christianity were the truth it would have to be offending and correcting our thinking at some place.”
In thinking about culture and Christianity before, I noticed that our cultural discomfort points to the cultural idols. What I mean is that when a Christian is uncomfortable with an aspect of culture if often points to an idol of that culture. For instance, I am uncomfortable with sexual immorality (I pretty much endorsed it before becoming a Christian), and it points to how our culture has made an idol or savior of sexual immorality. Freedom is said to be found in freedom of sexual expression.
In talking to someone about Christianity, their discomfort with a particular biblical teaching (or their misunderstanding of it) reveals their idols (this was the lightbulb moment). God is not a Stepford God, affirming all their progressive and civilized notions. Rather, He insults them and they are truly offended. Rather than face the fact that they might have wrong notions, they argue that the Bible is wrong, misguide, archaic and out-dated. John Frame, in his more technical Apologetics to the Glory of God, calls this the flight from accountabilty.
These flights from accountability show where that person is seeking life. For example, some people really find complementarianism (male headship) offensive and somehow demeaning to woman (when used to abuse and dehumanize women it is evil). They have revealed that they seek life in the modern notion of ‘equality’ not just of essence but of function. So when God talks about authority figures, which impinges on our functional equality, they become angry.
We should not do battle on that particular issue, but deal with what Keller calls the “deep end of the pool”. We are not trying to convert them to a particular belief of Christianity, but to Christ Himself. Should they be so converted, they may begin to realize that they have been enslaved to falsehood. But we can contextualize our discussion by affirming the fact that God made men & women together in His image. Both have dignity! We have met them halfway as far as truth is concerned. Now let’s look at the Creator and how He seeks to restore what we have destroyed by our rebellion.
Tim Keller consistently models this approach. More Christians need to read this book, perhaps we might more consistently ensure that the Cross is the offense they find, not a peripheral view or how we try to whack them over the heads as verbal opponents. And if we cannot do that (yes, we are sinners) perhaps offering them the book would be helpful.
Update: Joshua Harris also liked the Stepford God idea.
Read Full Post »