Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ What do you think?

[Grandfather]

In true Reformed theological form, the quote from Tim Keller tries to maintain the Reformation doctrine of "Simul Justus Et Peccator" (saint and sinner at the same time). Alas, that is the theology of Luther but not of the apostle Paul. In contrast, Paul would forget the things which were behind him, and press forward as a new man, created anew by the power of the Spirit and no longer wallowing in the sense of sin and despair he once felt as an unbelieving Jew.

Titus,
I'll ask you the same question I asked Bibleman, perhaps you will dare a direct answer:

Do you sin?

[titus213]

Yes, I do sin.

But that is not the point Keller is making, as I suspect you are aware. His point is that of the Reformation leaders like Luther and Calvin, who insisted that the Christian is by nature simultaneously still a sinful creature while also being a saint. Such a teaching is not found in the New Testament. The Christian is born again, and is no longer still a sinful man "in himself", for the simple reason that he is no longer "in himself", he is "in Christ".

[Grandfather]

Yes, I do sin.

But that is not the point Keller is making, as I suspect you are aware. His point is that of the Reformation leaders like Luther and Calvin, who insisted that the Christian is by nature simultaneously still a sinful creature while also being a saint. Such a teaching is not found in the New Testament. The Christian is born again, and is no longer still a sinful man "in himself", for the simple reason that he is no longer "in himself", he is "in Christ".

I don't believe that was the point Keller was making. Have you read the book or are making that assumption based only on this quote and what you've heard from others about Keller?

I'll tear apart what Keller wrote and how I heard it, you tell me where and why I'm wrong.

The gospel of justifying faith means that while Christians are, in themselves still sinful and sinning,

Well, since you've been brave enough to admit you still sin I believe you will agree with this.

yet in Christ, in God’s sight, they are accepted and righteous.

When I read this I see what you were attempting to explain above. In ourselves we still sin, but in Christ we are accepted

So we can say that we are more wicked than we ever dared believe, but more loved and accepted in Christ than we ever dared hope — at the very same time.

Now, I enjoy this statement, because to me it speaks to the issue of knowing the acceptance true love not performance oriented love. When I know I'm loved and accepted, then I am, or at least should be, willing to drop the pretence of having any "value" in and of myself. I quit lying to myself about how good I am, I quit being that tax-collector in Luke 18 and start being the publican and realize that even our best work is far beneath His holiness

This creates a radical new dynamic for personal growth. It means that the more you see your own flaws and sins, the more precious, electrifying, and amazing God’s grace appears to you.

What I read here is a brief summary of what I read in Romans 6. The more I realize the grace and love of God, the more I realize what a wicked sinner I was/am without Him and why I am thankful for being "in Him"

But on the other hand, the more aware you are of God’s grace and acceptance in Christ, the more able you are to drop your denials and self-defenses and admit the true dimensions and character of your sin.”

And here is where I see it becoming cyclical. The more I see my flaws and sin, the more I realize His grace and the more I realize His grace the more I see my flaws and the more I see my flaws, the more I realize His grace. It's like turning on a light in a darkened room, the more light there is, the more you see that needs to be cleaned.

Okay, now that you know what I see, please tell me why my perception of this is flawed.

[titus213]

"I don't believe that was the point Keller was making. Have you read the book or are making that assumption based only on this quote and what you've heard from others about Keller?"

I know Tim Keller, and know that he is a champion of the "young, radical, Reformed" movement. He always writes and speaks from the perspective of Reformed theology, and makes no bones about it. I have not read that particular book, but am quite familiar with his work.

"The gospel of justifying faith means that while Christians are, in themselves still sinful and sinning,"

I don't agree with that. The reason is as I said -- by definition a Christian cannot be viewed as the same person (ie. "in themselves"). The Bible does not portray the believer as "still sinful and sinning", but as someone set free from sin and no longer sinning as an unavoidable pattern of his life.

"yet in Christ, in God’s sight, they are accepted and righteous"

True enough, but not the whole story. This is not merely in God's sight, as though it was just the way He chooses to see things but not the reality. It should also be the way we see ourselves, righteous and accepted -- of course, due only to what Christ has done at Calvary and continues to do in us, but nevertheless a reality in our day-to-day living.

"So we can say that we are more wicked than we ever dared believe, but more loved and accepted in Christ than we ever dared hope — at the very same time".

That little present tense verb is a problem: we ARE more wicked? Really? Where is that taught in the New Testament. Paul (for example) recognized what he once HAD BEEN, and the wickedness of it . . . but he also hastened to add that he was that no longer! He was not yet all he hoped to be, but for sure he also was no longer what he once had been.

"Now, I enjoy this statement, because to me it speaks to the issue of knowing the acceptance true love not performance oriented love. When I know I'm loved and accepted, then I am, or at least should be, willing to drop the pretence of having any "value" in and of myself. I quit lying to myself about how good I am, I quit being that tax-collector in Luke 18 and start being the publican and realize that even our best work is far beneath His holiness"

There is some confusion here, I think, between what the unbeliever feels when coming to Christ (I don't come in my own value or works or goodness) and what the believer who has come to Christ should feel: in Jesus and by the Spirit the works I do are the works of the Spirit and as such are holy works. After all, we are called to holiness, without which we will not see the Lord.

"It's like turning on a light in a darkened room, the more light there is, the more you see that needs to be cleaned."

Actually, the more light there is, the more all you can see is the light.

[Grandfather]

Actually, the more light there is, the more all you can see is the light.

Hmmm, so you still SIN but are in Christ? But you say: "The Bible does not portray the believer as "still sinful and sinning", but as someone set free from sin and no longer sinning as an unavoidable pattern of his life." So you deliberately, purposefully and premeditatedly SIN? Interesting?!?! Because as someone pointed out: ""In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother." (1 John 3:10)"

So now you have a dilemma, either you are in Christ and righteous, or a child of the devil. OR you got out of "in Christ" and when into "in yourself" to sin. So we are back to the first point. In myself I am a sinner, but in Christ I am accepted and righteous. And as you pointed out, and I think is a very good point, where to we find ourselves, to whom do we look for our identity and that should be "in Christ"

BTW -- the more light there is the more you see stuff, until there is so much light that light is all you see. But, I don't believe any of us are there yet.

[Rocky]

Hi Grandfather I have refrained form commenting to see if anyone actually brought up who Keller is and no one did. Well Keller is Presbyterian theologian, so yes I see a lot of OSAS type of statements, so I understand why you are getting a lot of opposition here.. Keller is also part of the new Calvinist movement along with Mark Driscoll and John piper, the more I study on this man the more I am leery of anything he would state or say. Keller's theology is a combination of Calvinism and OSAS type of doctrine. Grandfather like Ed you get mad when you are accused of Calvinism or adhering to Calvinistic influenced theology, But the both of quote Calvinists. Now as much as I hate Lordship salvation(MacArthur's Salvation theology) Keller's is worse I believe.. How ever both Keller and MacdaddyArthur are both Calvinist, They just have a little different views on sin. Keller's take in a nutshell is if you are chosen to be saved all the sinning in the world can't keep you out of heaven. MacArthur believes you know if you are chosen and meant to be saved if you can make Jesus lord. But both do not believe in backsliding because of the irresistible grace and the underlined predestination agendas. A lot of people don't seem to know or discern people agendas when they teach their theologies, Kellers whole agenda is to spread Calvinism.

[Justaned]

Hi Grandfather I have refrained form commenting to see if anyone actually brought up who Keller is and no one did. Well Keller is Presbyterian theologian, so yes I see a lot of OSAS type of statements, so I understand why you are getting a lot of opposition here.. Keller is also part of the new Calvinist movement along with Mark Driscoll and John piper, the more I study on this man the more I am leery of anything he would state or say. Keller's theology is a combination of Calvinism and OSAS type of doctrine. Grandfather like Ed you get mad when you are accused of Calvinism or adhering to Calvinistic influenced theology, But the both of quote Calvinists. Now as much as I hate Lordship salvation(MacArthur's Salvation theology) Keller's is worse I believe.. How ever both Keller and MacdaddyArthur are both Calvinist, They just have a little different views on sin. Keller's take in a nutshell is if you are chosen to be saved all the sinning in the world can't keep you out of heaven. MacArthur believes you know if you are chosen and meant to be saved if you can make Jesus lord. But both do not believe in backsliding because of the irresistible grace and the underlined predestination agendas. A lot of people don't seem to know or discern people agendas when they teach their theologies, Kellers whole agenda is to spread Calvinism.

Rocky
Let's assume all of what you said was correct (it wasn't totally accurate but that is not the point) what effect does all of that have on the Keller's statement as quoted by Grandfather?

I totally understand if you read into it more than what was actually said or if it is even slightly modified what was said it will have an effect.

But if we take that statement as made and have it coming from an anonymous author what problem would you have with it?

[Grandfather]

Hi Grandfather I have refrained form commenting to see if anyone actually brought up who Keller is and no one did. Well Keller is Presbyterian theologian, so yes I see a lot of OSAS type of statements, so I understand why you are getting a lot of opposition here.

Hmmm, so a statement by someone that is a Calvinist cannot be true and must be opposed simply because they are Calvinist? Remember even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Is this one of those occasions?

Keller is also part of the new Calvinist movement along with Mark Driscoll and John piper, the more I study on this man the more I am leery of anything he would state or say. Keller's theology is a combination of Calvinism and OSAS type of doctrine.

Hmmm, I thought all Calvinist believed in the perseverance of the saints, OSAS, or the P in TULIP. So I don't understand why you call in a combination of Calvinism and OSAS. But again, we are not discussing either Calvinism or OSAS, but this statement and this statement alone.

Grandfather like Ed you get mad when you are accused of Calvinism or adhering to Calvinistic influenced theology, But the both of quote Calvinists. Now as much as I hate Lordship salvation(MacArthur's Salvation theology) Keller's is worse I believe..

I've only seen Keller being quoted here, I've not quote MacA and I don't believe Ed has on this thread either, so I question why you are bringing this point up. And while I am accused of being a Calvinist, I've listed my points of believe on this forum. If you read them you will see I don't qualify. But again, I don't see this statement as Calvinist, but a universal truth. In ourselves we are sinful, in Christ we are accepted.

....both Keller and MacdaddyArthur are both Calvinist, They just have a little different views on sin. Keller's take in a nutshell is if you are chosen to be saved all the sinning in the world can't keep you out of heaven. MacArthur believes you know if you are chosen and meant to be saved if you can make Jesus lord. But both do not believe in backsliding because of the irresistible grace and the underlined predestination agendas. A lot of people don't seem to know or discern people agendas when they teach their theologies, Kellers whole agenda is to spread Calvinism.

While I may share some of your above mentioned concerns and observation, the quote in question makes no reference to this subject and in fact does little if anything to discuss the validity of the quote.

I'm not asking you to endorse Keller, but instead what you thought of the quote (and only the quote) Not the quote in context of Keller's theology, but simply as a stand alone statement. Not, because Keller believes this.... then when he says this.... he really means this.... Again, I'm not interested in debating, discussing, reviewing, condemning, condoning, approving, endorsing, etc Keller. But simply this statement and this statement alone that happens to be made by him.

[Rocky]

Hi Grandfather I have refrained form commenting to see if anyone actually brought up who Keller is and no one did. Well Keller is Presbyterian theologian, so yes I see a lot of OSAS type of statements, so I understand why you are getting a lot of opposition here.. Keller is also part of the new Calvinist movement along with Mark Driscoll and John piper, the more I study on this man the more I am leery of anything he would state or say. Keller's theology is a combination of Calvinism and OSAS type of doctrine. Grandfather like Ed you get mad when you are accused of Calvinism or adhering to Calvinistic influenced theology, But the both of quote Calvinists. Now as much as I hate Lordship salvation(MacArthur's Salvation theology) Keller's is worse I believe.. How ever both Keller and MacdaddyArthur are both Calvinist, They just have a little different views on sin. Keller's take in a nutshell is if you are chosen to be saved all the sinning in the world can't keep you out of heaven. MacArthur believes you know if you are chosen and meant to be saved if you can make Jesus lord. But both do not believe in backsliding because of the irresistible grace and the underlined predestination agendas. A lot of people don't seem to know or discern people agendas when they teach their theologies, Kellers whole agenda is to spread Calvinism.

Rocky
Let's assume all of what you said was correct (it wasn't totally accurate but that is not the point) what effect does all of that have on the Keller's statement as quoted by Grandfather? Ed it was accurate again you come to rescue of Calvinistic teachers, but ok I will bite

I totally understand if you read into it more than what was actually said or if it is even slightly modified what was said it will have an effect.

But if we take that statement as made and have it coming from an anonymous author what problem would you have with it?

I don't know it does have a OSAS overtone to it. But Ed you don't get the fact that it is from a Calvinist with an agenda. So if some one with a different agenda and theology said it I still would think that they are biblically inaccurate. But may be I would be more receptive to an explanation if it did not come from a false teacher. I believe Calvinism is a false Christianity and needs to be completely dismissed and its teachers..

[Rocky]

Hi Grandfather I have refrained form commenting to see if anyone actually brought up who Keller is and no one did. Well Keller is Presbyterian theologian, so yes I see a lot of OSAS type of statements, so I understand why you are getting a lot of opposition here.

Hmmm, so a statement by someone that is a Calvinist cannot be true and must be opposed simply because they are Calvinist? Remember even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Is this one of those occasions?

Keller is also part of the new Calvinist movement along with Mark Driscoll and John piper, the more I study on this man the more I am leery of anything he would state or say. Keller's theology is a combination of Calvinism and OSAS type of doctrine.

Hmmm, I thought all Calvinist believed in the perseverance of the saints, OSAS, or the P in TULIP. So I don't understand why you call in a combination of Calvinism and OSAS. But again, we are not discussing either Calvinism or OSAS, but this statement and this statement alone.

Grandfather like Ed you get mad when you are accused of Calvinism or adhering to Calvinistic influenced theology, But the both of quote Calvinists. Now as much as I hate Lordship salvation(MacArthur's Salvation theology) Keller's is worse I believe..

I've only seen Keller being quoted here, I've not quote MacA and I don't believe Ed has on this thread either, so I question why you are bringing this point up. And while I am accused of being a Calvinist, I've listed my points of believe on this forum. If you read them you will see I don't qualify. But again, I don't see this statement as Calvinist, but a universal truth. In ourselves we are sinful, in Christ we are accepted.

....both Keller and MacdaddyArthur are both Calvinist, They just have a little different views on sin. Keller's take in a nutshell is if you are chosen to be saved all the sinning in the world can't keep you out of heaven. MacArthur believes you know if you are chosen and meant to be saved if you can make Jesus lord. But both do not believe in backsliding because of the irresistible grace and the underlined predestination agendas. A lot of people don't seem to know or discern people agendas when they teach their theologies, Kellers whole agenda is to spread Calvinism.

While I may share some of your above mentioned concerns and observation, the quote in question makes no reference to this subject and in fact does little if anything to discuss the validity of the quote.

I'm not asking you to endorse Keller, but instead what you thought of the quote (and only the quote) Not the quote in context of Keller's theology, but simply as a stand alone statement. Not, because Keller believes this.... then when he says this.... he really means this.... Again, I'm not interested in debating, discussing, reviewing, condemning, condoning, approving, endorsing, etc Keller. But simply this statement and this statement alone that happens to be made by him.

Grandfather did not meant to ruffle your feathers if you cant make the connection that's ok, you will only see what you want to see. However, you are the one that quoted a false teacher. So I brought out his theology and the agenda for the quote. The quote is unbiblical, sorry but it is, what do you want me to say?
You said

Hmmm, so a statement by someone that is a Calvinist cannot be true and must be opposed simply because they are Calvinist?

Yes absolutely.

You said:

Not the quote in context of Keller's theology

Well there is the problem.
You are asking me to take a quote form him out of context, why? To turn a blind eye from false teachers? I am an avid reader and researcher, almost to the point of obsession, always have been. I am very analytical so asking to take any quote at face value is an impossible thing for me to do. I always ask, who is this person? what is this person trying to say, and why are they saying it, and what is the agenda, and is it biblical. I am telling you false teachers have agendas, the bible shows us this. So a quote from a false teacher as an agenda, it is to spread the false teaching

You said

I'm not interested in debating, discussing, reviewing, condemning, condoning, approving, endorsing, etc

Psst this is a discussion forum. Then why make a thread about a quote from a Calvinist and asked what we think? You asked what we think, we gave you what we thought Maybe when you make a thread you should put a disclaimer in there some where that says "please don't discuss or debate, review, condemn condone, approve or endorse, matter fact have no thought or comments what so ever," And also maybe not ask; what do you think? ..