McCoy reviews Keller's 'Generous justice', with attention to Jonathan Edwards

<p > </p > <p > </p >

Steve McCoy in his blog Reformissionary reviews [jan14,2k11] Tim Keller's Generous Justice -- how God's grace makes us just, underscoring the section where Keller draws on Jonathan Edwards for a key hypothesis that guides the pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church [pca], New York City.

<blockquote>Then Keller discusses Jesus and "your neighbor" in chapters 3 and 4. His explanation of The Good Samaritan in chapter 4 is rich. Just as he makes Luke 15 and "The Prodigal Son" come alive in The Prodigal God, he continues to surprise us at our own dullness as he reveals the *sparkle* of familiar stories. In this instance he does it both through exposition of biblical texts as well as the liberal use of the writings of Jonathan Edwards. Keller works through the objections he's received to teaching love for neighbor and the answers he's seen from Edwards. His use of Edwards is compelling. Then Keller does what too many fail to do with The Good Samaritan, which is bring Jesus directly to bear. Instead of teaching the parable merely as the great example of how to love neighbor, he goes one step further.

Jesus is the Great Samaritan to whom the Good Samaritan points. 

Before you can give this neighbor-love, you need to receive it. Only if you see that you have been saved graciously boy someone who owes you the opposite will you go out into the world looking to help absolutely anyone in need. (p 77)

</blockquote>i'm hoping to do more tracing of the neo-Edwardsians, many of them disciples of Edwards on Religious Affections [1746].

That title you can trace here --

A TREATISE CONCERNING RELIGIOUS AFFECTIONS IN THREE PARTS BY JONATHAN EDWARDS THERE is no question whatsoever, that is of greater importance to mankind, and what is more concerns every individual person to be well resolved in, than this: What are the distinguishing qualifications of those that are in favor with God, and entitled to his eternal rewards? Or, which comes to the same thing, What is the nature of true religion? And wherein do lie the distinguishing notes of that virtue and holiness that is acceptable in the sight of God? But though it be of such importance, and though we have clear and abundant light in the word of God to direct us in this matter, yet there is no one point, wherein professing Christians do more differ one from another. It would be endless to reckon up the variety of opinions in this point, that divide the Christian world; making manifest the truth of that declaration of our Savior, "Strait is the gate and narrow is the way, that leads to life, and few there be that find it." The consideration of these things has long engaged me to attend to this matter, with the utmost diligence and care, and exactness of search and inquiry, that I have been capable of. It is a subject on which my mind has been peculiarly intent, ever since I first entered on the study of divinity. But as to the success of my inquiries it must be left to the judgment of the reader of the following treatise. -- from the Author's Introduction Contents Introduction PART I. CONCERNING THE NATURE OF THE AFFECTIONS AND THEIR IMPORTANCE IN RELIGION. I. What the affections of the mind are II. Evidence that true religion in great part consists in the affections III. Inferences PART II. SHOWING WHAT ARE NO CERTAIN SIGNS THAT RELIGIOUS AFFECTIONS ARE GRACIOUS, OR THAT THEY ARE NOT. I. That religious affections are very great, or raised very high, is no sign II. That they have great effects on the body, is no sign III. That they cause those who have them to be fluent, fervent, and abundant, in talking of the things of religion, is no sign IV. That persons did not excite them of their own contrivance and by their own strength, is no sign V. That they come with texts of Scripture, remarkably brought to the mind, is no sign VI. That there is an appearance of love in them, is no sign VII. Persons having religious affections of many kinds, accompanying one another, is no sign VIII. That comforts and joys seem to follow awakenings and convictions of conscience, in a certain order, is no sign IX. That they dispose persons to spend much time in religion, and to be zealously engaged in the external duties of worship, is no sign X. That they much dispose persons with their mouths to praise and glorify God, is no sign XI. That they make persons that have them exceeding confident that what they experience is divine, and that they are in a good estate, is no sign XII. That the outward manifestations of them, and the relation persons give of them, are very affecting and pleasing to the godly, is no sign. PART III. SHOWING WHAT ARE DISTINGUISHING SIGNS OF TRULY GRACIOUS AND HOLY AFFECTIONS. I. Truly gracious affections arise from divine influences and operations on the heart II. Their ground is the excellent nature of divine things, not self-interest III. They are founded on the loveliness of the moral excellency of divine things. IV. They arise from the mind's being enlightened to understand or apprehend divine things. V. They are attended with a conviction of the reality and certainty of divine things. VI. They are attended with evangelical humiliation. VII. They are attended with a change of nature. VIII. They are attended with the lamblike, dovelike spirit and temper of Jesus Christ IX. They are attended with a Christian tenderness of spirit. X. They have beautiful symmetry and proportion. XI. The higher they are raised, the more is a longing of soul after spiritual attainments increased. XII. They have their exercise and fruit in Christian practice 1. Christian practice and holy life is a sign of sincerity to others 2. Christian practice is the chief evidence to ourselves, much to be preferred to the method of the first convictions, enlightenings, comforts, or any immanent discoveries or exercises of grace whatsoever

© Copyright Leadership University. All rights reserved. Updated: Saturday, 13-Jul-2002 09:01:30 PDT

-- Owlb

Daily Tim keller tweet machine

Tim Keller

@DailyKeller New York City

Dr. Timothy Keller is founder and pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan and bestselling author of The Reason for God. I post his words on Twitter.

http://www.redeemer.com/

R.R. Reno recently wrote a blog post at the First Things: On the Square website that "Culture Matters More than Politics". He points out that, in Marxist theory, economics and political power are the fundamentals, while culture is "epiphenomenal." Literature, poetry, music and the arts are merely the supportive apparatus for power interests. Therefore, politics – who controls state power – is the factor that most sets the course of human life. On the contrary, Reno states, the deeper sources of public life are what we believe about human nature, human destiny, and the meaning of life. These beliefs are carried out into life by religion and philosophy, by high culture and popular cultural domains, by a huge variety of human institutions, the vast majority of which are not part of the government. These shared beliefs shape a people's vision of a good human community and a good life, and politics largely follows on from that.

James D. Hunter has been making the same point for years, though he invokes Nietzsche, rather than Marx. In On the Geneology of Morals, Nietzsche argued that Christian moral claims – of the primacy of love, generosity, and altruism – were really just ways for the early Christians to grab power from the people who had it. Christian morality developed out of the "ressentiment" by the weak of the strong and as an effort to wrest their position from them. This view will also lead to the conclusion that politics is what life is really about.

Hunter argues that ressentiment – "a narrative of injury" – has now come to define American political discourse. Both conservatives and liberals make their sense of injury central to their identity, and therefore in each election cycle it is only the group out of power, who therefore feels the most injured and angry, who can get enough voters out to win the election. Politics is no longer about issues but about power, injury, and anger. How Nietzschean!  Hunter goes farther and argues that the Christian Right, the Christian Left, and even the neo-Anabaptist  (think Dobson, Wallis, Hauerwas) are 'funtional nietzscheans' in the public square, either because they see politics as too all-important, or 9as in the case of the neo-Anabaptists0 they think wielding political power is inherently non-Chrsitian  in each case, hunter says, Christians are being to shaped by nietzsche's view that politics and power is fundamental.

[Why don't we just call them 'hanabaptists,' have the hauwerwasians serve as a metaphor for the entire third of these current trends within anabaptistry --- taken together with its conceptual links to Christian mutual-benefit Anarchism --- and analogous trends among the lot of which we'd like to think there is intercommunication and perhaps on some level hybridization -- why don't we just shrink the terms of the  historiographical apparatus to a less verbose total of syllabels ands sounds in the time-alert word we use to signal one another, or timing prefix, in 'neo-.']

----------------------------------------------------------------------

=======================================

Thanks to media mogul Steve Bishop, the all-free offerings of whom have tawt me very much, very good, and sometimes very disconcerting or futher-work-requiring info, musings, factoid by factoid, theory by theory, trend by trend, thematic scopes of various websites or blog-entries that, so interesting an info-flow,  his info-management dailies drive me to pursue many of his recommended visits. he builds on a service to 'Read Twitter and Facebook as a daily newspaper.'  So, my procedure;  Read the article in a steve paper.li format, then click up the article in one of his offerings via, say, The steve bishop Daily -- TsbD for short, -- where he selects thinkers-practioners from the general 'neo-' flow within evangelicalism,  as it were, to showcase this set which I have used as a category -- simply on the authority of Steve's picks.  

I 'm thinking, first, the old 'neo-'s  from Carl F. h. henry to Richard hays.  

These newer voices, however, raise questions of how much identity can be attributed to that modernist stream, and how much of the new trends -- missional, emergent, lifeway, a list too long to recall at the moment but one which coud shoud shall include here Dr. Tim kelller's Daily Tweet webpage -- how many of the trends are clones, how many distinct ideationally and practically, how many clones however prove to be quite successful, compared say to the number of efforts in the indicated direction of the originator.  let's face it, looking at this particular ur-trend sociologically, there's an inherent pressure to be new in some allegedly vital sense, regard, feature, etc.  

Well, the reformational movement, reformational-worldview-motivated activities and organizations, are vested in knowing and anticipating change, enuff so as to challenge its philosophical participants at work in other spheres such as the academy, challenging our philosophers to reflect on the theme of change most basically and perhaps universally, but noting the limits, the gravities, the boundedness of change, large and smal.

Well, via TsbD I found his gem on the net in a series of articles on 'politics and culture' -- that series in particular I want to monitor in future, but am simply going to depend on TsbD to consider the latest offering as worth passing on.  okay, Steve

[As you can see i'm having a hell of a time with my keyboard, several keys won't capitalize, and several keys split between signs will only give the bottomost sign, not the top, so essentially that entire key is gone.  The plus sign i use for long 'i's true vowel-dipthongs  is gone.  i don't know when i can repair it.]


-- Owlb