Podcast: Tim Keller, ‘Making Sense of God’

Mere FidelityThis week, the full cast of Mere Fidelity was joined by Tim Keller for a discussion of his superb new book, Making Sense of God: An Invitation to the Skeptical.

You can also follow the podcast on iTunes, or using this RSS feed. Listen to past episodes on Soundcloud and on this page on my blog.

About Alastair Roberts

Alastair Roberts (PhD, Durham University) writes in the areas of biblical theology and ethics, but frequently trespasses beyond these bounds. He participates in the weekly Mere Fidelity podcast, blogs at Alastair’s Adversaria, and tweets at @zugzwanged.
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Christian Experience, Church History, Culture, Ethics, Podcasts, Politics, Society, Theological. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Podcast: Tim Keller, ‘Making Sense of God’

  1. Keller? You guys have really hit the big time.

  2. Paul Baxter says:

    Something about Tim Keller’s voice has a subliminal effect on me that makes me want to agree with anything he says. It probably helps that I like MOST of what he says anyway.

  3. Tom says:

    Thanks for this. I was really grateful he had gave that second angle on the question of the unevangelised. It’s a question that has rumbled on for a while for me, not so much intellectually as emotionally, and I think the place I need to press towards more and more is a trust in God’s bigness and goodness that I can trust Him in those things where I find His lack of total explanation of His ways hard.

  4. Stephen Crawford says:

    This was fun to discover. Just hours before seeing this, my wife and I were having dinner with a friend who told us that she was going to a Presbyterian Church (PCA). So naturally I told her about Tim Keller, who she wasn’t familiar with. Then I get on here and find y’all have had a conversation with Rev. Keller.

    Alastair, could you say a bit more about what you were getting at with your questions? What did you mean by the danger of floating on a sea of secularity and picking up little bits of religion here and there? (It’s been a few days since I listened to the podcast fairly late at night, so I know I’m way off in that paraphrase.) Is the idea that in our attempt to recover religious forms of life, we’ll nevertheless hold on to a deeper framework that’s basically secular, and that that secularism itself will be mobilized in our very attempt to recover something beyond the secular? Or were you suggesting that it’s not enough to take up a few Christian practices while continuing to participate in a other ubiquitous practices that are themselves essentially secular? Or something else entirely? I’d appreciate it if you could shed some light on what you were getting at. The question sounded like it was getting at something pretty interesting, and I was sorry it wasn’t explored a bit deeper in the conversation.

    • Yeah, I was trying both to ask and to express rather too much at once in that question.

      The basic point of the analogy was that, whereas faith was once something that was an integral element of our ‘diet’, in the context of secularism it has now become akin to a supplement. Even when ‘religion’ has a place in our lives, it tends to be as the ‘something missing’ from secularism (which, it must be appreciated, is a position that depends heavily upon the ‘subtraction thesis’ of secularism).

      It is essential to recognize that the level of professed faith in a society doesn’t really give a full picture of the spread of secularism. A society in which 100% of the population professed faith could still be radically secularized. Secularism is less about the non-existence of faith as it is the positioning of faith as the marginal supplemental to our fundamental social ‘diet’. Such secularism entails a dis-integration of faith and life. Even when it retains faith, this faith is one distilled from life.

      The ‘religion’ resulting from this is established as its own distinct thing, purified from the sorts of natural entanglements that it once possessed in politics, social life, the larger edifice of human knowledge, etc. It is typical a matter for private individuals, consigned to a rather marginal realm. The sort of procedural secularism that Keller advocates for the state has just such a character. For instance, principled resistance to the idea of the state or society’s public acknowledgement of Christ’s kingship (something quite consistent with a society hospitable to and equitable in its treatment of people of various faiths or none) seems to drink deeply of these sorts of assumptions.

  5. Pingback: Retrospective on 2016 | Alastair's Adversaria

  6. Enjoyed this. I love Tim Keller.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.