Introduction: 

We begin this course with reading Chapter 9 of The Reason for God followed by viewing several video clips of Tim Keller addressing some of the issues raised in his book. In the previous chapter, Keller examined various clues to the existence of God. In this chapter, he takes a more in-depth look at what might be seen as an additional clue. The difference between the clue he talks about in this chapter and the ones he discussed previously is that this clue is embedded in us. Keller uses this clue to make a startling and perhaps controversial claim: that on a subconscious level, we're all aware of the presence of God, even if we don't recognize it consciously--even if we consciously reject the possibility. This additional "clue" he bases this claim upon is our innate understanding of morality.

After having completed the readings for this session and reviewed the accompanying video you may choose - on a purely optional basis - to answer the study questions and submit them at etwimber@hotmail.com or to contact Dr. Wimberley by phone or email to request a time for dialogue about what you have learned. You may do so by phone or dialogue via Skype or Facetime. Dr. Wimberley's phone number is 239.405.4164. We may convene group meetings of the class using the Zoom application on our computers. You can enroll in this course by emailing etwimber@hotmail.com or by texting Dr. Wimberley at 239.405.4164.

Readings: 

Keller, Timothy (2009) The Reason for God. New York, NY: Penguin, Chapter 9; Chapter Slides; Esfahani, Emily "Is Human Morality a Product of Evolution?" What is Common Grace by Tim Kellor;

Video: 

Tim Kellor on Re-enchanting Our World; In the Image of God; Cultural Relativism - Timothy Keller; Tim Keller on how Christianity Promotes a Peaceful Pluralism; Abraham Kuyper's Story; Abrahm Kuyper - Common Grace / Special Grace; Common Grace Versus Saving or "Special" Grace; Who Was Abraham Kuyper?

Study Questions:

1. Is it an oversimplification to summarize Keller’s chapter as saying, essentially, that “we lose any authority to label things as ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ without a foundational belief in God.” In other words, to put it succinctly, we can’t call things “good” if we don’t’ acknowledge “God”. If this is oversimplified, how so?
2. Keller writes, “I have not tried to prove the existence of God to you. My goal has been to show you that you already know God is there” (p. 156). Does he accomplish this task, or might the skeptic say that he merely shows that we “wish” God were there? Is there a difference between the two?
3. It might be said that Keller doesn’t show us that we already know that God (the Judeo-Christian biblical God) already exists, but at best only shows that we believe some concept of a god (some spiritual creational force) already exists. Is this a fair criticism? Is even this more modest aim important in leading to finding the reason for the upper-case God?
4. Keller argues that humans sense that some acts are morally wrong and others morally right, and that this is evidence that we inherently recognize God’s existence – ie, that the world is ‘broken’ in some way (see p. 155-6). Do you believe in Keller’s premise – that there is a shared sense of right and wrong that is universally accepted? Or do you feel that right and wrong is culturally or historically based? Is an ‘evolving’ sense of right and wrong fatal to Keller’s argument?