Tim Keller

BeginQuote:

Skeptics should consider another surprising aspect of these accounts. Mary Magdalene is named as the first eyewitness of the risen Christ, and other women are mentioned as the earliest eyewitnesses in the other gospels, too. This was a time in which the testimony of women was not admissible evidence in courts because of their low social status. The early pagan critics of Christianity latched on to this and dismissed the Resurrection as the word of "hysterical females.” If the gospel writers were inventing these narratives, they would never have put women in them. So they didn’t invent them.

EndQuote

Therein lies the great heresy of the age we live in. Our obsession with social revisionism has taken us into a pit. In order to answer a simple question regarding the resurrection of Christ, Tim Keller employs the testimony of women from the Scripture by asserting that the resurrection must be true because their witness was not legally admissible at the time.

These apologist pastors have taken us into a dark place and we are just standing and watching it happen with open hands of inexpressible surprise - in silence. And lest you be inclined to speak out, then you may also be held accountable by an army of similar minded believers who will take you to the dock and quietly have you silenced by shame as they march on in their vain parade which they call the Gospel. Having removed the power of the Gospel they have now bolstered it with Social Justice.

⁨ܡܫܚܐ⁩

Evidence?

The only evidence that Christ was raised from the dead is that He is seated at the right hand of the Father to His everlasting glory.

A sister once said to me that she had been witnessing to her head of English at her teaching school and that he wasn't yet saved. So I said to her that she ought to invite him to my home for dinner. When he came I set aside his feeble manner of needing to hear worthless garbage and laid before him the only truth he needed to hear. For two weeks he hated me. Then he was born again from on high.

And yes the apologetic sister didn't even bother to mention it. It is far better for these self righteous Christians for whom a parade is much more desirable, to play with mere words that cause men to perish, than to speak the truth plainly and in the fear of God, that they might live.

Keller is no different. He is more concerned by his own appearance before others than the glory of God.

As to your claims:

It is very good evidence that the apostles were truthful. Not that the resurrection is true. More to the point revisionism is a rewriting of Scripture by explaining truth through a telescope and seeing the present day. It is neither truth nor is it true.

Who said that God despised women? Who said that God favours men? Only the feminist makes those claims and the zealot draws them into a chord and strangles babes with its meaning. And we all stand by wringing our hands as men perish and we still cannot speak plainly with love.

Lastly:

One time I was giving a pastor whom I knew the means to understand the prophetic ministry. He played dithering responses and finally I said to him that a certain man just a few hundred yards away was perishing with cancer and needed to be saved.He agreed because the man was his relative. So I said lets pray.Two days later the man was saved and went to be with Christ.

Did he tell me of this great thing that the Lord had done? He preferred his own weakness of mind and inability to stand on the truth of the resurrection of Christ that is the very power of God unto salvation than humble himself and bear witness of the truth.

Apologetics and social revisionism you can throw into the bin. I prefer the Risen Christ. And I too am a miserable sinner.

ܡܫܚܐ⁩

3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[b] and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

Yes Paul did speak of eyewitnesses of the risen Lord. And Jesus made that a qualification for the apostolic office,

Unless you yourself have seen Christ with your own eyes then by what means shall you bear witness of Him?

That is the real issue.

If a sister witnesses to her head of department for five years and produces nothing then what power will produce life?

If a pastor witnesses to his relative for two years and recieves only resistance even when he is near death - what power will produce life?

Why are we concerned by powerless words and refuse the power of God?

Trying to have a socially desirable apologetic discussion where it is meet to make the assertion that it is a socially disconnected fact of the first century for women to be not only witnesses of Christ raised from the dead, but the first witnesses, is a schism.

It immediately draws the mind to a political fact of social equality today, by asserting that a social inequality of another day is now proven today so that even the resurrection of Christ is the very evidence of it and it finds its appeal in the natural mind and speaks nothing to the need for Christ.

Of course my comments are worthless to the natural mind. So please feel free to ignore them. Yet it pleased the Apostle Paul to write according to authority of God and not by a social means of pleasing the flesh of men. Read his list Tod!

ܡܫܚܐ

Dear Bill,

The Op said:

BeginQuote:

I have a general question about this Pastor. I have been reading and watching a bit about his indulgence with the "social justice” issue among others. Seems to me that there are some disturbing issues with his positions.

Being one of the leaders of the Gospel Coalition it seems his opinions have transferred to the organization??

EndQuote:

That is a political question is is not? At least an answer that may illuminate the 'disturbing issues' would necessarily be predicted on the 'social issues'. Is the gospel a social Gospel? I rather thought that a man could die of hunger and yet find his place in the kingdom of heaven.

ܡܫܚܐ

by TMK on 2020/10/12 16:00:57

//Trying to have a socially desirable apologetic discussion//

You are making a gigantic mis-leap to suggest Bible teachers making the point of the female first witnesses are doing so for some social agenda. That is a bunch on nonsense.

Thank you! Tod.

⁨ܡܫܚܐ

That is the folly of it all. Some Christians are allowing strong leftist principles to deride their Christian values. Others have allowed feminist and Marxist theories to form their spiritual agenda at the expense of their biblical teachings. Some of these affected Christian evangelicals that seem to pass Marxist agenda as the gospel truth include Tim Keller, Russell Moore, Al Mohler and Thabiti Anyabwile of The Gospel Coalition. While these men teach their following to adhere to some the teachings of the Reformed Protestant Movement, they also couple that with the fight for social justice and make contrived mercy efforts. How holy can they really get? Well, it gets worse; these false shepherds also have the gall to declare that Christianity should be culturally neutral. How then do they justify their calls for Christianity to engage culture rather than separating from it if it is neutral? Isn’t that a bit confusing to the flock?

Well Dear Bill,

The above speaks into the real meaning of the original Op. The link is here.

https://reformationcharlotte.org/2019/03/17/tim-keller-takeover-social-justice-church/

Just for the record Mr Pro - I despise politics and all political meanings to the core. I wouldn't give you twopence worth for Republicanism or its Marxist rival. I wasn't making a political meaning in anything I was saying. Just giving direction to the spiritual mind.

Regards,

⁨ܡܫܚܐ⁩