. Timothy Keller’s thesis is that the arguments contrary to the Christian belief can be defaced by philosophy and reasoning. He addresses skeptics and believers to the merit of Christianity.
2. In chapter two, Timothy Keller argues against the question, “How could a good God allow suffering?” He notes that there is “suffering in the world”, so several people are confused how Christianity is liable (22). Continuing, Keller argues that, although God is unseen, this does not make Him invalid. As well, Keller explains as evolution is actually a much crueler option, than to believe in Christianity. “If you are sure that this natural world is unjust and filled with evil, you are assuming the reality of some extra-natural (or supernatural) standard by which to make you judgment” (26). Eagerly, Keller tells of a woman, who lost a lot. Although she stayed positive, as she has experienced that, every one evil occasion has one hundred good incidents (27). One thing people experience, is through suffering, they want to know that it was not in vain. But the “injustice has led to …show more content…
The most interesting argument to me was the dispute concerning the resurrection. Keller notes that history is proven, just as science in a laboratory (219). Instead of conclusively studying and following each cue to verge the answer, several consistently disprove miracles by saying there is no possible alternative. Timothy Keller quotes N.T. Wright to disprove this, as Wrights says,
“The message of the resurrection is that this world matters! That the injustices and pains of this present world must now be addressed with the jews that healing, justice, and love have won. . . If Easter means Jesus Christ is only raised i n a spiritual sense—[then] it is only about me, and finding a new dimension in my personal life. But if jesus Christ is purely risen from the dead, Christianity becomes good news for the whole world—news which warms our hearts precisely because it isn’t just about warming
2. In chapter two, Timothy Keller argues against the question, “How could a good God allow suffering?” He notes that there is “suffering in the world”, so several people are confused how Christianity is liable (22). Continuing, Keller argues that, although God is unseen, this does not make Him invalid. As well, Keller explains as evolution is actually a much crueler option, than to believe in Christianity. “If you are sure that this natural world is unjust and filled with evil, you are assuming the reality of some extra-natural (or supernatural) standard by which to make you judgment” (26). Eagerly, Keller tells of a woman, who lost a lot. Although she stayed positive, as she has experienced that, every one evil occasion has one hundred good incidents (27). One thing people experience, is through suffering, they want to know that it was not in vain. But the “injustice has led to …show more content…
The most interesting argument to me was the dispute concerning the resurrection. Keller notes that history is proven, just as science in a laboratory (219). Instead of conclusively studying and following each cue to verge the answer, several consistently disprove miracles by saying there is no possible alternative. Timothy Keller quotes N.T. Wright to disprove this, as Wrights says,
“The message of the resurrection is that this world matters! That the injustices and pains of this present world must now be addressed with the jews that healing, justice, and love have won. . . If Easter means Jesus Christ is only raised i n a spiritual sense—[then] it is only about me, and finding a new dimension in my personal life. But if jesus Christ is purely risen from the dead, Christianity becomes good news for the whole world—news which warms our hearts precisely because it isn’t just about warming