Friday, May 22, 2009

Sermon: Tim Keller on Idolatry

I have just finished Tim Keller's sermon on The Gospel and Idolatry which he gave at the recent 2009 Gospel Coalition conference, and it was indeed a good sermon. Keller exegeted the text well and expounded it for our benefits, and it would do us good to examine our lives to see if there are indeed any idols we still harbour in our hearts.

[As it can be seen, I give credit when credit is due. Just because Keller compromised the Gospel in the area of Creation and Apologetics does not mean he is the Devil incarnate. I also respect him more than the other prominent New Calvinist pastor, Mark Driscoll. At least Keller is biblical here and exegeted the text he based his sermon on.]


doubt said...

What is our understanding of Scripture and biblical authority? To quote Mark Jordan,

"Texts do not interpret themselves. They also don’t apply themselves to moral problems. Even detailed legal codes require judicial application, because there is a conflict of rules, or a dispute over interpretation, or a set of facts that do not fit neatly within any of those the code provides. The diverse scriptural texts require greater feats of interpretation before they can be applied to the moral difficulties of daily life."

Likewise, Dale Martin too states, “The text cannot interpret itself” and “the Bible doesn’t actually talk”, but meaning is derived through the process of interpretation. “Human beings are necessary for meaning to take place, and we can experience no interpretation without human agency.” We need to understand that no process of interpretation can be devoid of biases. Who we are, our personal histories, our social contexts, our religious upbringing all shape how we interpret the bible. In other words, the three other “legs” of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral - tradition, experience and reason - affects our understanding of Scripture itself.

Daniel C said...

> but meaning is derived through the process of interpretation.

So are we denying the existance of an objective meaning dictated by the text, and propogating reader response theory? Of course, it is is human beings that do the interpretation, but since when has procedures dictate intent and meaning?

Speaking of which, if "texts do not interpret themselves", then upon what basis can you intend your comment to convey the same meaning to me as you wish to express it?

With regards to Scripture and biblical authority, Scripture IS the final authority, and is perspicuous

And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:19-21. Bold added)

Thy Word Is Truth said...

For the benefits of the uninformed (like me) what is Tim Keller's compromise of the Gospel on the area of creation and apologetic ? Thanks


Daniel C said...

Thy Word is Truth:

Keller believes in Theistic Evolution and denies that the issue of Creation/Evolution is of any major importance with regards to the Faith.

With regards to Apologetics, Keller's book The Reason for God is a classical apologetics book along the lines of CS Lewis. The book is logically fallacious and the proofs at the most can only prove the existance of a god or gods/goddesses. At the worst, it is a book riddled with so many logical non sequiturs that semi-professional atheists can rip it to shreds.