Introduction: 

We begin this course with reading Chapter 12 of The Reason for God followed by viewing several video clips of Tim Keller addressing some of the issues raised in his book. In this chapter Keller observes that what Christians regard as "Good News" – the Gospel – society construes as ranging from difficult to horrific. Christianinty affirms Jesus dying so that God can forgive sins. For many outside Christianity this assertion seems "ludicrous or even sinister,” according to Keller. Society struggles with the notion of God causing injury and death to his own son (even for the best of reasons) in terms of their own normative belief of what constitutes good. In fact many believe the cross personfies evil. Consequently a symbol that comforts the Christians alarms others. Given this dichotomy of reaction Keller poses the question "Why did Jesus have to die?"

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 12; The True Story of The Cross Slides

Scripture:

Ephesians 1:3-14
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. 5 He destined us in love[a] to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace 8 which he lavished upon us. 9 For he has made known to us in all wisdom and insight the mystery of his will, according to his purpose which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fulness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. 11 In him, according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 we who first hoped in Christ have been destined and appointed to live for the praise of his glory. 13 In him you also, who have heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and have believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14 which is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

Video: 

Tim Kellor on Theology of the Cross and Walking With a Limp; Nothing But the Cross; Jesus' Death as an Act of Friendship.

Study Questions:

1. Christian theology allows for many answers to the question: “Why did Jesus have to die?” Keller posits one answer – that “In the Christian account, Jesus dies so that God can forgive sins” (p. 187). What have been your assumptions about the reason for Jesus’ death on the cross? Are they different, or more varied, than that which Keller represents as “the Christian account”?
2. Keller sets up the argument that without forgiveness the desire to see evil punished becomes simple vengeance. “A cycle of retaliation will begin” (p. 190). As a former lawyer, I’m keenly aware that it is virtually impossible for a victim and a perpetrator to agree upon the proper punishment for a wrong. A third party is needed. In the Psalms, the Hebrew people cry out to God for their vengeance – but then are willing to leave the matter in God’s hands. At least at first blush Keller doesn’t seem to make any allowance for a third party (judge, arbiter, God, etc.) to decide proper punishment? Is this criticism of Keller unfair? Is a third party even needed, if there’s been, as Keller asserts “true forgiveness”?
3. “No one embodied the costliness of forgiveness any better than Dietrich Bonhoeffer” (p. 190). Later, Keller writes that “Forgiveness means bearing the cost instead of making the wrongdoer do it, so you can reach out in love to seek your enemy’s renewal and change.” Bonhoeffer, of course, was a Lutheran pastor who returned to Nazi Germany in an effort to kill/assassinate Adolf Hitler. How did Bonhoeffer’s decision to take another’s life without benefit of trial or hearing constitute “embodying forgiveness?” In other words, did Keller simply choose a bad example?
4. Keller asserts several times in this chapter that Jesus had to die in order for our sins (“debts”) to be paid (see, eg, p. 193). Keller places great emphasis on the necessity of Jesus’ death. What significance  does he place on the Resurrection? St Cyril of Jerusalem once said: “I confess the Cross because I know of the Resurrection.” Can the same be said for Keller? That is, for Keller, would God’s forgiveness of our sins have been completed on Good Friday, even without a resurrection on Easter Sunday?  Was Easter Sunday simply a nice addendum to the story of Jesus’ death?
5. In the section entitled “The Great Reversal” Keller says that “all life-changing love entails an exchange, a reversal of places” (p. 195). Do you find this to be as true as Keller does?
6. One criticism (from reformed theology) leveled at Mel Gibson’s The Passion of Christ was that it tended to place undue emphasis on the physical suffering of Jesus (and as a result, Jesus’ death and resurrection become less important by comparison). Does Keller’s insistence on a Jesus who “knew what it was like to be under the lash” (p. 195) lead to a similar pitfall – placing the focus on Jesus suffering, instead of the fact of his death and resurrection?