One Way?
If the first seven chapters of this book are Tim Keller’s ranking of the seven biggest objections to the Christian faith, then I personally believe he got number one spot on. For years, the one doctrine of the Christian faith that has caused me the most heartburn when talking with skeptics is the doctrine of exclusivity.
I think the reason I’ve struggled with this doctrine is because, to me, it seems arrogant, smug, mean, unfair, inconsiderate, narrow, and outdated. It’s no wonder Christians are often given the worst label today’s culture can assign: close minded.
What I have failed to realize over the years (and what Tim Keller’s teaching and this book has helped me to see) is that every religion and every worldview makes exclusive truth claims. Since Christianity is not the only religion/worldview that makes an exclusive truth claim, the issue is not why we have exclusive truth claims, but rather how are Christ’s exclusive truth claims different from others? I find that subtle difference very freeing.
I loved Keller’s question at the end of the first chapter, “Which set of unavoidably exclusive beliefs will lead us to humble, peace-loving behavior?” What a great question. Said another way: which set of exclusive beliefs lead to the most inclusive lifestyle?
The model we’ve been given by our founder is of someone who made himself nothing, became a servant and gave his life as a ransom for the world. The instructions we’ve been given are to consider others better than ourselves, to pray for our enemies, to eagerly remember the poor, to look after widows and orphans, and to give generously, just to name a few. For hearts transformed by the Gospel, the outflow of our love for one another and for the world is far from exclusive. As Keller said, we have access to “the strongest possible resource for practicing sacrificial service, generosity, and peace-making.”
Therefore, one significant take-away for me from the first chapter is that attitude, body language, communication style, tone and a genuine interest in people might be the most important factors to embodying the way Christ’s exclusive truth claims are different. Based upon the New Testament record of Jesus’ life and his teachings, I cannot imagine him ever talking to a large group of followers poking and fun at the “pop culture wisdom” of his day while the crowd claps and yells in smug excitement that screams, “we are right and they are wrong!”
Jesus reserved his harshest comments for the arrogant, religious exclusivists of his day: the Pharisees. Though the Pharisees believed they had the exclusiveTruth, they did not seek to live an inclusive lifestyle of grace and charity, but rather an exclusive lifestyle of power and control. Jesus humbly served people, he asked questions, he listened and he taught with a perfect mix of grace and truth. This is our model for engaging a skeptical world.
So, here are some questions to help keep this discussion going:
- What were some of the highlights of the introduction and chapter one to you?
- If Keller was ranking the top seven biggest objections to the Christian faith, do you agree that exclusivity is the number one objection? Why or why not?
- Why do you believe we are so easily tempted to form an exclusive community rather than an inclusive community?
- I’ve heard it said that “telling people the truth is never an option, however, the method and timing of telling someone the truth is always optional.” Do you believe the Church needs to do a better job at “telling the truth” or “method and timing”?
- Were you surprised to read that Keller agrees religion can be one of the major threats to world peace?
- Do you believe this chapter better has equipped you to engage with people about the doctrine of exclusivity? If so, how? If not, what issues do you believe were left unaddressed by Keller?
7 responses so far
Keller made one point at the end of the first chapter that I thought was interesting. He wrote:
“Christian believers are not accepted by God because of their moral performance, wisdon, or virture, but because of Christ’s work on their behalf. Most religions and philosophies of life assume that one’s spiritual status depends on your religious attainments. This naturally leads adherents to feel superior to those who don’t believe and behave as they do. The Christian gospel should not have that effect.”
But I’m afraid that sometimes it does have that effect on Christians and that is part of what “turns off” some non-Christians.
[Reply]
Adam T. Reply:
January 6th, 2010 at 10:43 pm
Good observation Katie. I think you are exactly right, even though we’ve been “saved by grace”, it appears there is still a strong temptation to feel/act arrogant and smug. Why do you think there is such temptation to feel/act this way despite Scripture’s clarity that we bring very little to table, apart from our sin?
[Reply]
Katie Reply:
January 10th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
Probably because we are human. And this temptation is not unlike any other temptation we face.
[Reply]
Loved the first chapter. If I didn’t know better, I’d think this book was written just for me. There was one area I thought that Keller could have addressed in a bit more detail. When I think of exclusivity, I think of the following: “You will not spend eternity with God unless you accept Jesus Christ as your savior.” That is where I would think most non-Christians have trouble with Christianity being exclusive. Keller asserts that all religions make truth claims, but do they all make a claim as seemingly bold as this one? If not, does Keller’s argument that “everyone’s doing it” still hold weight? Excuse me if this is a stupid question. Thoughts?
[Reply]
Adam T. Reply:
January 6th, 2010 at 11:29 pm
Hi Geoff, not a stupid question at all. I think you bring up a really good point. This one made me really think for a while. I would love to hear Keller’s response to this question.
So, I’ll go out on a limb and try to throw out my thoughts: I do believe there are some who make claims that are just as bold.
For example, the three big monotheistic religions (Islam, Judaism and Christianity) all have a bright line of “here is who’s in and here is who’s not in”. In addition, on the other side of the fence, I think some of the neo-atheists, like Christopher Hitchens, basically label religious people as “evil” because of their belief that religion is the source of everything bad in our culture (which again smacks of “here is who’s in and here is who’s not in”).
For those with a much more pluralistic or relativistic worldview, I believe their truth claims surrounding the particulars of salvation are not as bold (i.e. all paths lead to heaven or there is no heaven). However, I don’t believe the real issue is the particulars of salvation, but rather what does one believe is Truth. When one says “You will not spend eternity with God unless you accept Jesus Christ as your savior,” aren’t they really making a claim about Truth. Therefore, I think that someone with a pluralistic or relativistic worldview does have claims that are just as bold (i.e. truth is relative, there is no absolute truth, how can anyone claim to know anything with certainty?).
Again, excellent question. I’d love to hear other’s thoughts on this too.
[Reply]
How timely is it that we are discussing the exclusivity of the cross and Britt Hume, a Fox News anchor, is currently under fire for suggesting that Tiger Woods would benefit from embracing the truth of Christianity? Not surprisingly, his comments re: Buddhism v. Christianity has created a fire storm.
One report AP reads:
WASHINGTON – Fox News analyst Brit Hume says he doesn’t regret urging Tiger Woods to become a Christian so the golfer can find forgiveness for marital infidelity.
Hume told CBN News that “Christianity is a religion for sinners — and I think that Tiger Woods has an opportunity here, and my prayer would be that he would take it.” Hume has been denounced for saying that he doesn’t think the famous golfer’s belief in Buddhism “offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith.”
The longtime journalist said he wasn’t surprised that the remark aroused controversy. “If you’re trying to find the two most explosive words in the English language, those two words are ‘Jesus Christ,’” he stated.
He recognizes that openly expressing faith in Jesus Christ offends a lot of people. “People rage about this,” he said. “It’s very offensive to those who don’t share the faith, [and] it’s offensive to some people who claim they do share the faith. This is to be expected, and it has been happening to people who proclaim their faith in Christ for as long as anybody can remember — this is part of the deal.”
Hume described how he became a Christian. “Eleven years ago, my son committed suicide,” he shared. “And as you can imagine, it was absolutely devastating. And yet throughout that whole horrible time, I had this sense that God was there for me, that he would rescue me, that he would save me — and he did.”
The news analyst said he was deeply moved by the hundreds of letters of condolence he received after that tragedy. “I felt that I was seeing in them the face of God,” he recalled, “and I felt that it was time for me now to face up to the Christian faith which I purported to belong to, and try to face up to the implications of what I purported to believe — and I’ve been trying ever since.”
Hume is right. I cannot think of 2 more explosive words in the English language than “Jesus Christ.” We should not be surprised when people are offended by the exclusivity of the cross (John 14:6; Acts 4:12). Jesus’ message was as polarizing (Matthew 10:16ff.) in His day as is now.
[Reply]
I confess that I am a believer who struggles with listening and relistening to Tim Keller sermons because his way of explaining the gospel makes so much sense to me. For example, I especially liked the section in the Introduction entitled “A Second Look at Doubt” because it helped me understand that the doubts I may have about the Christian doctrine are representative of an alternative belief system that can and should be examined as critically as the Christian beliefs that my doubts are attacking.
Also, in a message of his that I recently heard, in discussing the submission of wives to their husbands in Ephesians, he noted that this doctrine had been misused at times by the church and he made the statement, “I am not arguing for the church, I am arguing for the Bible”, which makes me appreciate his priority.
Since the Bible says that Jesus Christ is the exclusive way to salvation, we should not be ashamed of the gospel (Romans 1:16), but we do need to deliver the message with more grace than we sometimes do.
[Reply]