Engaging Tim Keller on Theistic Evolution: Part I

[@denniscrumbley8274]

Thank you Jon, excellent discussion, as usual. Also, it's amazing how the Holy Spirit works. Just this morning, 1-3-23, I read Genesis 1-3, and even though I've read it numerous times and taught it for several years and taught Hebrew, I had some questions about some things and you hit on EXACTLY what I was wondering about. Specifically, the plants and shrubs. Amazing. Thank you again.

[@KM-zn3lx]

Funny, I read the same books yesterday as well!

[@jammystarfish]

I've come to agree with Answers in Genesis that the Church's rejection of Genesis 1-11 as history WAS and REMAINS the camel's nose in the tent, leading to apostasy.

[@tycer9754]

@@StevenSmith-1863wow. What a comment. I’m not even sure I understand all of what you are saying. But the last line is clutch. We can serve the worm, the dead empire, or the Lord of all creation.

[@nancycrayton2738]

Yes! Same here.

[@Wood424]

Yes Jammy, it's really old Liberal theology we are rehashing here (nothing new under the sun) creation, Adam and Eve, the flood, Moses and the crossing, Daniel the lion and the three Hebrews in the furnace and on and on until finally Jesus's miracles and the resurrection, dead men don't actually rise from the dead (especially after the beating he took). At my age I've seen it all before, kind of sad really.

[@andre-philippetherrien2185]

​@@StevenSmith-1863 That's an interesting claim on the origins of the office of single bishops governing whole regions. Any good books or articles to recommend for reading on this claim?

[@andre-philippetherrien2185]

​@@StevenSmith-1863 I'll try to look into those when I have the chance. This observation of yours would parallel an observation I've made while studying Classics and some Byzantine history in college. By the 4th century, Christianity had adopted the Pagan notion that any site on earth could potentially become a holy site if a sufficiently holy person or a miracle happened there. Pilgrimages to stylites and to other holy men/relics, or the elevation of virginity as better than marriage, were all echoes of the earlier Greek/Roman pagan hero cults, plurality of cultic sites and virgin priestesses. Instead of accepting the Word and the Christian community as sufficient ties to God, other more recognizable devices from the previous cultures were adopted to make up for a perceived lack of the numinous and "holiness" was identified in peoples and places, right and left, well beyond the pale of Scripture.

[@LacyRipley]

Jon's hard stare when Keller says, "...but I am a professional at the Bible..." 🤣🤣

[@justpassingthruuu]

so is Satan

[@nathanphillipsgo]

Amazing video. I knew that I disagreed with keIIer but videos like this make me realize that he sounds smart to those people that have no discernment. I kept thinking WOW that's bad.

[@johnlavender242]

Keller, Moore and Duncan. Uncredible.

[@oneagleswings8456]

This one got me fired up. Jon this is some of your best work IMO. Excellent commentary and cutting through all the bs

[@JamesRiddle_Christ_is_King]

When I got saved 30 years ago I found Morris, Gish and a young pre AIG Ken Ham. They spoke at a church in Raleigh in 1994. I'll never regret following these guys.

[@M3MAX]

Same for me. Within a year of being saved an elder from my church took me to another church that had Ken Ham there for a presentation. It was so good and only affirmed His work in my heart.

[@darrellpowell4331]

ICR is a great organization as well. They were in California but moved to Texas some years back. They have done a ton of work on Creation. Most have Phds.

[@JamesRiddle_Christ_is_King]

@@darrellpowell4331 I was more familiar with ICR in San Diego. I liked Gish and Morris a lot. And then, as AIG got going strong, they did a superb job as well and I started buying their stuff. These guys are all heroes.

[@darrellpowell4331]

@@JamesRiddle_Christ_is_King I have always struggled with Ken Ham's ark that he built. It was plainly a rectangular box not a boat.

[@M3MAX]

😂 what's the struggle about? It was built to biblical specifications.

[@DTQ14]

Loved this whole series thus far! Seems to me that the more one tries to not be an offense to the secular world they become an offense to God and His word.

[@stephenfennell]

I think this series analysing a prominent Christian's teaching is really interesting and worthwhile. I would benefit from the same sort of thing on other well-known pastors and theologians too. Jon Harris has good historical knowledge and a sharp mind that helps him make clear analyses.

[@-RM-]

Jon, would you be able to put all of your "Engaging Tim Keller" videos into a separate KZbin Playlist? I'd like to have a few guys at my church watch your videos on Keller, and having them in a single playlist would make it easier to share. Thanks for all you do!

[@shamish-2960]

The irony is, it's only a small subset of New Yorkers Tim Keller appeals to, many of which are transplanted from other places and are not actually New Yorkers, like Tim Keller himself. His audience is identical to the people in my church in the mainline suburbs of Philadelphia. I'm not sure how popular he is on Staten Island or Queens. I would think they would be able to see right through his nonsense. It's hard not too unless you really have disdain for middle and working class Christians.

[@shamish-2960]

@@StevenSmith-1863 Thanks Steven. I appreciate the prayers greatly. Yes I took my reply down to avoid too much personal info out there. Thanks again and God bless. I do wish people like Tim Keller and Thabiti knew the damage they do to marriages and families when they confuse doctrines.

[@SusieQ3]

Keller: I am an expert on the bible. Me: yeah, that's questionable. 🤷🏻‍♀️ I thoroughly enjoyed this. Thank you!

[@sulfuras1985]

argument from authority and he cites himself as the authority /facepalm that's my biggest issue with everything keller sad in this video. everytime he cites someone he cites a person or their work. basically he's saying "believe me/believe man" when God says "no, believe me." I know who I actually trust with knowing the truth and not lying to me about it.

[@inhisimage]

Yes! I was wondering if you would deal with Keller's theistic evolutionism. Most everyone else seems to ignore it but it is the fundamental root of the historical ills of the church.

[@brunodelconte]

Amen, I see this in our denomination where almost no one cares about Creation, but it never stops there. Some now refuse to call sexual sinners to repentance, deny death as the punishment for sin, and re-interpret the Holy Scriptures in unimaginable ways, ultimately betraying their faith completely and dishonouring the creator.

[@anitasmith203]

Keller has always struck me as a man very impressed with his own wisdom, able to twist scripture to suit his philosophies. The six day creation and worldwide flood are an embarrassment to him.

[@outboardprsnlstndup]

I see it the same way

[@liza1565]

I mean, his entire point in these clips is, “Look, I’m a smart intellectual type a fellow, and I don’t believe creationists. So, you don’t have to worry about it. Keller hath spoken.”

[@Jeymez]

@Pardoned Rebel i don't think it's a bad thing to listen to people like Keller, but i wouldn't encourage a new believer to watch this, because you don't want to expose a young believer, it's because they'll get caught up with that. me im never gonna change or let someone sway my faith in God's word, because i think it's easy for some people to throw things out of the bible. by dismissing Genesis, you might as get rid of the gospels. see when people pick and choose to dismiss certain things in the bible, your not really a believer then, because a true believer will back God's everytime.

[@michaelbrickley2443]

There is no evidence for a 6 day creation. Genesis creation story is a poem.

[@michaelbrickley2443]

@@Jeymezyoung earth creationist?

[@loiscarteaux9389]

Darwin's original title of his book is On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. Hitler was greatly influenced by Darwin. And it appears Keller is also. l Thank you for this series, so many people are so influenced by his teachings. Desperately need biblical discernment.

[@tanks1945]

The main problems with evolution is time and complexity in how "simple living systems" change into complex larger living organisms in such variety.

[@Wood424]

I beg to differ, the main problem with evolution is it contradicts Jesus and the apostles

[@KM-zn3lx]

Amen and just the study of a single cell is amazing. The complexity of a single cell is a universe in itself! Could only depend on a Godly mind!

[@biblicaltheologytoday9528]

Keller is wrong on the Hebrew of Genesis 1 and 2.

[@M3MAX]

"Im not doing/saying that" Tim Keller 😂

[@DaveNatandSalem]

Around 24:17 mark I think you might have confused Micro and Macro. Unless I'm hearing you wrong. Macro is across species (monkeys > men); Micro is within species (monkeys > monkeys).

[@Mojo19693]

Thanks for pointing that out, I don't think he realized he mixed them.

[@hglundahl]

30:38 B. B. Warfield is actually mentioned once in the wikipedia article _"The Fundamentals"_ The Deity of Christ - Benjamin B. Warfield But it's not just that the pro-Evolution view of him is perhaps in another work. It may not even be there. Here's from the wiki on him: _"Warfield's views on evolution have been a source of dispute. Scholars David N. Livingstone and Mark A. Noll highlighted Warfield's statements on evolution to demonstrate his acceptance of the theory in their article A Biblical Inerrantist as Evolutionist.[4] Theologian Fred G. Zaspel argues that these statements have led Livingstone and Noll to assume too much about Warfield's views on the subject. Zaspel writes "That Warfield actually committed himself to a doctrine of evolution seems impossible to affirm simply because although there are some indications that he entertained the idea, he never admits to accepting it."[5]_ _"Warfield studied and wrote about Charles Darwin's religious views. In an article on Darwin's religious Life, he concluded that Darwin's doctrine of evolution directly expelled Darwin's Christian belief. Warfield writes, "Thus the doctrine of evolution once heartily adopted by him (Darwin) gradually undermined his faith, until he cast off the whole Christianity as an unproven delusion."[6] Warfield did not believe that evolution required such a rejection of faith. His 1889 review of The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin included this statement: "There have been many evolutionists who have been and have remained theists and Christians."[7]"_

[@myhappyspace4533]

Very good video, well prepared. Thanks

[@hglundahl]

1:05:53 In the Progressive Era, Darwinian revolution and scientific racism went hand in hand ... I don't disbelieve you, but I know others will, so, do you have any resources you could link to?

[@BenRudolph]

Very relieved to hear that you haven't been suckered by evolutionary/old-earth dogma. Thank you for your faithfulness brother. I've been studying this from a scientific and theological perspective for years and I have found one's stance on Genesis 1 to be a litmus test for their faith. This issue was the first that concerned me about Keller. It is indeed a fault line, a watershed issue. Macarthur once commented that asking interviewees about their view of creation was the single most useful way to weed out worldly compromisers when screening bible teachers.

[@NicholasproclaimerofMessiah]

Tim Keller is parroting pop-culture. I'm not going to go into a grand explanation at the moment, but I have inspected the data which supposedly supports Evolutionism, and I have never found any data which actually supports the theory, let alone supporting it to a scientific standard. Jon is very correct when he characterizes the idea as being so far-fetched that it's like believing in miracles. At least, in context of an internal critique of Scripture, the Biblical miracles are not far-fetched; internally critiquing Evolutionism according to scientific standards, just shows that the theory is without scientific merit.

[@biblicaltheologytoday9528]

I think you are exactly right about death before sin. And Jesus believed it was real and historical.

[@Wood424]

Absolutely, and his words are final (on any subject)

[@hglundahl]

7:21 From when on do the rules change? Is Genesis 14 within their "non-literal" or their "literal"?

[@billybob-wx2re]

amen jon. i talk with my kids about this all the time. we'll be watching a nature show and inevitably some evolution comment will come up and i just go "how embarrassing is that?? they think this was all an accident!"

[@kaylar3197]

Yup all the time. You and your kids may enjoy The Riot and The Dance series. I found the first feature length instalment in my library's streaming app, and I think it is also on Amazon Prime.

[@billybob-wx2re]

@@kaylar3197 Thanks Kayla. I will definitely check it out

[@alexdagreat19]

How embarrassing that you are teaching your kids to be ignorant to science and our understanding of our natural world and history by telling them one of the most studied and observed scientific facts is fake

[@billybob-wx2re]

@@alexdagreat19 history isn't science "most observed" = zero observations?

[@alexdagreat19]

@@billybob-wx2re I referred to “history” as “natural history” as I said “both natural world and history” Correction: most observed = We’ve seen and recorded thousands of species go through micro evolution most famously moths and we’ve also recorded some species of cancers evolve into brand new completely different organisms also known as macro evolution. We have millions of transitional fossil that are different species going through macro evolution over millions of years, such as tetrapods going on land eventually evolving into amphibians and small non avian dinosaurs evolving into modern day birds, we thousand of fossils of the transition between humans and apes, we share 98 percent of our dna with modern day apes, homogenous structures and genetics downright are some of the biggest factors that play into why evolution is real. Not to mention 98% of all scientist know that evolution is a fact and acknowledge it. This is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to evidence and observations for evolution

[@hglundahl]

14:10 I cannot turn off the podcast, because I'm actually watching youtube. Do you exist on podbean too?

[@pauljones9032]

I think you went to Southeastern? What do you think of Sailhamer’s view in Genesis Unbound?

[@jobrown8146]

I think it was worth listening to Tim Keller speaking. Thank you.

[@johntobey1558]

I enjoy Dr.Keller's preaching. Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York city is a wonderful Church.

[@dillonpeters2729]

I was afraid you were going to say that you started off thinking that Darwinian evolution was wrong but acceptable, and then came to believe that it was true. Glad I was wrong!

[@kaylar3197]

I think most who start out with the view Jon described end up going one of those two ways. It's a fence few can sit on for very long.

[@supsoo]

I used to respect keller but now all i see is a man who is so sure of his intellect that he fits the bible to his view. A man so shallow that he has perfected the art of deflecting criticism and debate.

[@caleblepore9848]

Enjoying this conversation! One quick note (coming from someone who is a creationist and a biologist) about the terms micro- and macroevolution: microevolution, as taken by modern biologists, refers to any change within a species, while macroevolution refers to any change over the species level. Since most YEC biologists accept changes above the level of species (and even genus; consider how many genera came from the Canid family that got off the Ark after the Flood), all YEC biologists actually accept macroevolution, as defined by modern biologists. Rather than emphasizing the terms micro- vs. macro-, I would just focus on the fact that, according to Genesis, different kinds of plants and animals were created, so the idea of all life descending from a common ancestor is unbiblical (and I would say, opposed by lots of scientific data).

[@noah316]

The Christ that walked on this earth and preformed so many miracles that showed His ability to create from diseased body systems. Create brand new mature cells to function with no sign of decay or limitation. And Christ also showed complete control of every molecule around him. From the weather to the raising of the dead. This Is the same Christ of the Trinity that spoke each day, each molecule, and every living thing in six days. No difference!

[@hglundahl]

22:30 When he says "you don't need to believe in Modern Creation Science" - that is one thing, it could so far mean, you have objections on the _details_ of the programme of AiG or CMI. Some divergence on _explanations_ - but when he says "we know Modern Creation Science is absurd," that's very different, because that's saying "Deep Time" or "Big Bang" or "Molecules to Man Evolution" is _obvious_ rather than obviously or at least certainly on further reflection absurd, which they are.

[@c.m.granger6870]

Keller doesn't believe in a worldwide flood, I wonder if he believes in a literal parting of the Red Sea? Sounds to me like his belief in historical events is rather arbitrary.

[@c.m.granger6870]

@Joe Smith God revealed exactly what He wanted to reveal in Genesis, He created the heavens and the earth, not bedtime stories for ancient Hebrews.

[@mamainchristjesusofthechri9886]

Good discernment and wisdom! Curious which Christian denominations hold those 5 “orthodox” views on evolution… does he include the Roman Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox Church in his mind?

[@KM-zn3lx]

That was only the Roman Catholic view, per Pope recently. I recently left the RCC over a heretical homily by a Priest espousing evolution. He said Jesus'resurrection was a form of evolution and he was grateful to share in Christ's DNA.

[@mamainchristjesusofthechri9886]

@@KM-zn3lx that’s such an odd thought 😂 and sad

[@KM-zn3lx]

I used to believe in evolution as Intelligent Design model even though I didn't realize it as a term back in my youth. Then I studied microbiology and biology and even though that involved evolution I was confronted with the illogical steps of it! There were so many gaps. I even discussed this with the atheist professor after class. I told him he should be telling the class it was a theory and not a fact as it couldn't be proven. He did say it was a theory later, but still believed it. At one point I said it could be part of God's way of creating the world and he refuted that would mean God made mistakes (i.e. dinosaurs, men from chimps), I thought about this and said you're right, I can't believe in evolution then. That was in my 30s. I was taught evolution throughput my youth as a fact. I graduated with a 3.78 gpa in science.

[@KM-zn3lx]

......there are scientists who now believe in a young earth. The Bible explains much but genisus and revelation are books of basic explanation about God's power, not explicit details of his process.

[@Psalm144.1]

@@KM-zn3lx A lot of the cornerstone tv Origins episodes are on KZbin.

[@chiefofsinners5272]

"Well, there are gentlemen alive who imagine that there are no fixed principles to go upon. "Perhaps a few doctrines," said one to me, "perhaps a few doctrines may be considered as established. It is, perhaps, ascertained that there is a God; but one ought not to dogmatise upon his personality: a great deal may be said for pantheism." Such men creep into the ministry., but they are generally cunning enough to conceal the breadth of their minds beneath Christian phraseology, thus acting in consistency with their principles, for their fundamental rule is that truth is of no consequence." Spurgeon

[@hglundahl]

1:06:42 And Friedrich Engels worked out some of the parallels ... _"The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State"_ 1884

[@lakerunner5085]

I googled “Tim Keller Evolution” because the pastor at the CRC church I joined about 6 mths ago mentions his fondness for Tim Keller occasionally, and the topic of the theology class before church is on Genesis and evolution. The theology group leader believes in theistic evolution and I believe Biologos. I’m concerned with all this not to mention that our lead pastor and the church member leading the theology class are both Calvin University alumns and Biologos is headquartered in Grand Rapids, MI where Calvin is. I’ve noticed too that this Loren Haarsma PhD Physics guy at Calvin has contributed to the Synod. Would appreciate input here. I’m a six day creationist and thankful for the ministry of Answers in Genesis. This theology class will go for another month or two on this Genesis topic. I’m Reformed, but concerned the CRC may not be a good fit? Thoughts?

[@banmancan1894]

Hi @lakerunner5085, I noticed that no one responded to your statement, so I wanted to jump in, although, I'm sure I'm probably too late to help ): I am a Science and Religion M.A. grad (which is taught within a School of Divinity) and do find it interesting that the program at your church has limited discussion on a theistic evolutionary framework. I would find it far more beneficial to have an exegetical discussion on what the scripture entails (and does not entail) and present the three popular views (YEC, OEC, and evolutionary creationism) as potential understandings of the text than just push for one. For instance, one of the reasons I have enjoyed the perspectives coming out of the Discovery Institute is that they want people to compare the positions within science and the available evidence. DI and BioLogos have tended to be at odds historically, so their resources may also present an alternative view than what has been presented at your church. I find that presenting only one view on such a divisive subject without analysis of the other positions is a fast way to get people either into tribalistic tendencies or rebellion towards the view in the discussion. With that all being said, if I were in your shoes, I would propose to my pastor that I (or he) could teach about the alternative views besides TE.

[@nobel9511]

This reminds me of those who feel this subject is nonsalvific however in the church I grew up in CRC today most teachers today hold to his UNBIBLICAL view and whole congregations have never heard preaching on creation , but then what do you do with Colossians 1:14-17

[@brich2542]

More and more I wonder - What Jesus do they believe in?

[@johnlavender242]

14:08. Still watching.

[@lydiabouts8572]

We're gonna have to buy WHAT whole thing, Tim?? THE BIBLICAL ACCOUNT?? From the BIBLE?!🤦🏼‍♀️

[@gregb6469]

An excellent book on this subject is OLD-EARTH CREATIONISM ON TRIAL by Tim Chaffey & Jason Lisle.

[@brentbergman1738]

Jon, perhaps an answer to the difference between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 is to be found the Hebrew word Toledot. There are 10 Toledots in Genesis, "These are the generations of . . ." And the focus changes in each one. Keep up the good work.

[@mikeyonce2323]

I would like for any of those holding to any of the old earth views to explain Ex 20:8-11 and Ex 31:12-17. I don't see any reasonable way to get around those passages.

[@rzu1474]

Simple There made up

[@Wood424]

Jon, I believe what is missing from any discussion on the subject is, what does Jesus have to say about it, and how does it affect the salvational message. Jesus speaks of the first parents as literal, historical individuals. Paul calls Jesus the last Adam, and Romans 5: 12 reads "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned... ", if there is no one man no Adam than its all nonsense and Jesus and the Apostles are proven to be false. Theistic Evolution (in my opinion) is simply another way of accommodation, it's the first thread you pull on until all the fabric comes apart.

[@KM-zn3lx]

TLW....true! I steadily deepened my relationship with Jesus when I realized I believed in Genesis. We will never understand everything about an infinite God while living as flesh on this earth!

[@JonathanGrandt]

Saying “Theistic Evolution” is not really so different from saying “Respect for marriage act” or “healthy cigarettes”. Darwinian evolution IS atheistic. What next, Christian yoga?

[@billybob-wx2re]

nailed it

[@megajam5286]

There are already Christians who practice yoga

[@bretlynn]

yes, in order to have a high view of the Bible, you must believe in creation

[@chiefofsinners5272]

It's surprising with so much interest today in true crime and the apparent difficulty for "science" to give an accurate picture concerning the reality of history, (The Making of a Murderer) that any Christian would feel compelled to avoid giving God the benefit of the doubt.

[@hglundahl]

8:55 As a most of my Christian life Young Earth Creationist, with a kind of "pause" in favour of myriadennia and some scenario for lost millennia on the lines of Tolkien or Howard from after my Catholic conversion to my reader of City of God before June 2000, I certainly avoided the biology section of Lund university. Latin and Greek, for yours truly! And admiring your bravery or confrontation preparedness to take biology at such a young age at a secular university!

[@dianewoerner6870]

I have a question regarding the "new" evolutionary theories, however they've evolved since Darwin. If natural selection (i.e. the proper dominance of the fittest) is still part of the process, then why are we now encouraged to be so upset by the reality that white Christian males have historically been the most fit to shape Western culture? Presuming, of course, a certain definition of cultural success, which now (like so many things) seems to be shifting considerably. Am I missing something?

[@lauramckinney9896]

Thank you. Completely contradictory.

[@sierragrey7910]

The entire group discussion between Keller, Moore, and Duncan is puff. I hate to say that but these men appear to be more concerned about influence and politics that truth. This type of group discussion is not helping the church.

[@ThomasCranmer1959]

Editor?

[@hglundahl]

12:13 By modern ideas, I suppose you don't mean modern single concepts, like rockets or hydrogen, but modern enunciations, like "evolution took billions of years" ? You would agree it is possible "waters above heaven" could mean hydrogen molecules above the atmosphere, along with molecules of H2O? Or that Moses could have prophetically known and known we would be able to know that Nimrod was trying rocketry? Or that St. John could have seen that Apoc 13:18 is calculated from ASCII?

[@preston0808]

You're full of wisdom. Thanks for putting out great content, and for explaining so well the absurdity of darwinian evolution

[@craigchambers4183]

One of those latter comments is as revealing as any, that his scientist friends say we are not genetically connected to just two people; the consensus (from those not believing the Word the same way Jesus exposited) is that we all come from a small group on the African sub-continent. Beyond the fact that in one generation Adam and Eve were a small group, those 'scientists' - who did not observe Creation that the Creator, Jesus, created - cannot somehow find it is odd for them to say that a small group had to come from disparate pools all of whom went back one or two generations to a male and a female. How many pairs were there in this small group that were the originals, not connected together? Additionally, they would have to conclude that there were several genetically different humans that made up that group, all evolving over time some organs that could seed disparate humans and who found one another from the same pool (literally and figuratively) and from there could seed each other in the whole group. Fantasy. Gosh, even writing this seems so convoluted.

[@thomasmanns7358]

Amen Jon!

[@chrish5791]

When I hear Keller trying to make Christianity more palatable to a fallen world the verses that come to mind are James 4:4-5. The great evangelists of years past confronted man with his sin and his need for a Savior rather than an watering down the Word to make it less offensive. It seems to me that Keller is in great danger himself from his teaching others things that are contrary to Scripture. Honestly I’m not sure that Keller is a Christian though him seems sure that he can straddle the divide between the Christian world and the secular world with impunity. The Word of God is offensive to a world engulfed in sin and to try to make it less offensive is to corrupt the path to redemption for these lost souls. Peter warned of scoffers like Keller in the 3-7 verses of the 3rd chapter of his second epistle. Thank you for your stand on the truthfulness of Scripture, Jon. It shows the blessings of having godly parents that share their faith in Scripture with their children from an early age. “Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. Or do you think that the Scripture says in vain, "The Spirit who dwells in us yearns jealously"?” James 4:4-5 (NKJV) “knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation." For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” 2 Peter 3:3-7 (NKJV)

[@NicholasproclaimerofMessiah]

There is an excellent channel on the science-so-called, called Examining Evolution, but the woman also has a very irresponsible theology channel; I do highly recommend Examining Evolution though. That's not where I learned about the matter. I was already well aware by the time I discovered her channel, so I was able to scrutinize the channel, and, the videos I've seen, hold up very well. They are short, clear, logically sound, careful, and factually accurate.

[@hglundahl]

17:43 One obviously _should_ verify what the main objection is - and then defend the truth heads on against that objection.

[@MrWholphin]

2 Peter 3 nails it. Evolution won the culture because the global flood was first dismissed. With a black box as big as geological deep time it can seem like anything is possible.

[@dougmeeks]

Sorry you have macro and micro evolution confused. Tim Keller is correct on the differentiation between the two. 24:43

[@dougmeeks]

@@StevenSmith-1863 one type of sparrow was introduced to the North American continent 1852. Now it is evident that the sparrows in the north are much larger to protect against the colder weather and the southern ones are lighter. No breeding was done to get them to arrive or survive like they have. Of course God’s providence is in all things but we can sensibly call it microevolution just like we call other processes by scientific, human made terms.

[@danreichenberg5249]

As someone who is back in the PCA after a 17 year absence, I'm really troubled by this type of rot. And, it is rot. It is unbelief. The Kellerites are telling people that you can hold onto your unbelief and "have salvation too." None of us believe perfectly, but we are to "not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of our minds." "Let God be true, and every man a liar." Thankfully there are people in the PCA, like Del Tacket, that are fighting for the angels on this subject. But, this is a cancer. Not only in the PCA, but in all of the evangelical church.

[@Msizyke41]

The thing about evolution is that the entire premise is predicated on the idea, "because God cannot be measured, how can we determine the history of earth apart from Him?" Which is inherently nonsensical as a premise to start with as a Christian.

[@hglundahl]

40:26 - here my blog post is marking an appreciation for your answer to Keller, I had to look up your name and it seems you are a relative of Monsignor Ronald Knox ...

[@王宏亮-x8h]

Insightful!

[@hglundahl]

24:19 I would hold speciation is possible. I think there was _one_ pair of hedgehogs on the Ark, there are now 17 species.

[@fenrir9938]

Can you cover Michael Heiser? So many have fallen prey to his teachings. My brother's church in TX is doing a 40-week study on his books. 😕 Heiser doesn't believe in original sin. Believes men and angels have ultimate freewill (God can't override our decisions ever) but parts from Open Theism by "backloading" God's Sovereignty to say that God will fulfill prophecy at the end of time without explaining how he rectifies this against his ultimate freewill beliefs. He interprets OT Israel through the lens of the surrounding pagan culture as he has degrees in Ancient History and Semitic Languages from secular universities most likely taught by non-believers. No seminary degree, not that that matters much these days either. Ultimate freewill and no belief in original sin are defining characteristics of the Pelagian heresy aren't they? Even freewill Armenians believe in God's Sovereignty. The Arminian vs Calvinism debate is more about freewill in salvation/how we are saved. Not that God can't override our choices ever. That's an Open Theism argument.

[@hglundahl]

35:18 With a very small schooling in science, it is perhaps understandable he would go to Genesis 1 and 2 ... If he had a somewhat wider understanding of archaeology, he might ask: Did Amorrheans evacuate En Geddi (Asason Tamar) in 3500 BC? Or did they do so in Genesis 14, in the years around Abraham's 80th birthday? Because, if 3500 BC (the carbon date) is immediately correct, and not just an indirect indication wrong by 1565 years, Genesis 14 is historically false. After the evacuation at the end of the Chalcolithic, dated at 3500 BC, there was no population in En Geddi before the Iron age, well after Abraham's times. So, if the date is correct, there was no one who could be attacked (and evacuate) in Asason Tamar. And a 1565 years' discrepancy between real date and carbon date is not a question of wiggles as recognised by uniformitarians, it's not like the Hallstatt plateau (anything between c. 760 BC and 450 BC carbon dates at usually 550 BC), its beyond that and only fits with a major buildup of the carbon 14 content.

[@johnlavender242]

It seems that Keller’s brand of Christianity is askew of the Biblical brand of Christianity.

[@lydiabouts8572]

Is the account of the worldwide flood a chant, also? A completely different genre? Why doesn't he believe in THAT?

[@rzu1474]

Cause it didn't happen

[@noxvenit]

Keller's use of the words "can" and "cannot" is deceptive. There are two senses in which one "can" or "cannot" believe sets of propositions: (i) possibility and (ii) permission. When someone asks a question such as, "Can one with hold believe in Modern Creation Science, and still be a Christian?" he is asking if it is permissible to do so. In that sense, "Yes, one can with hold belief in MCS, because other people who done so," is not the answer to the question actually being asked. Keller might as well affirm that an adult can believe in tooth fairy on the grounds that he, himself, believes in the tooth fairy. The rest of his reasoning is contrived to reach a conclusion palatable to his audience.

[@kevinsolveson5480]

I'm about 14 minutes in right now, and I just wanted to tell you, Jon, how refreshing it is to me to know that you hold to the Grammatical-Historical interpretation of Genesis. So many evangelical leaders, from John Piper, to Sean McDowell, to William Lane Craig, to Tim Keller have waffled. Fight the good fight, Jon!

[@clay8546]

That’s because those people actually have brains and look at evidence People like you think the Bible fell out of the sky and don’t bother to understand science

[@banmancan1894]

As an evangelical, I will say that one should also use the historical-critical method as well. One can better understand what the Biblical authors are saying if they understand the differences and nuances of the culture around them.

[@nuancedliars112]

I burnt a tim keller book in October.

[@soulosxpiotov7280]

Some teachers in Southeastern Seminary who believed in a 'Darwin' framework?

[@soulosxpiotov7280]

There's a pattern of those who claim to be 'Christian' that I've seen for some time, and it goes like this: they reject the biblical literal creation account, but also reject the world wide flood BUT OFTEN ALSO reject that Jesus walked on what and also OFTEN REJECT the miracles of Christ. In other words, they have a heart of unbelief. So, how far can a person go such that, well, their unbelieve demonstrates a lack of true salvation?

[@dimitrisiliadis4939]

Remember that Christians in the past (based on the Bible) believed the earth was the center of the Universe? Do you remember that? Connect the dots ...

[@eigganatsalnac5008]

Thank you so much again Jon for all your efforts. I am benefiting tremendously from much of your work. Learning a lot and it helps me in sharing to others the dangers of listening to Keller. Keller preaches a lot of ideas…. ideas that takes his listener away from the bible. It is wiser for christians to stay away from Keller if they desire to grow in the word and be sanctified. if earth is so old and evolution is true…. it just cannot be… because, if Jesus will appear today… He will look physically/biologically the same as how He appeared with the apostles & eyewitnesses. Jesus is the same yesterday, today & tomorrow…. so…. even if He appeared many thousands of years ago……. Jesus is the same….. My Lord God & Savior Jesus is never a monkey….. yesterday, today & tomorrow.

[@hglundahl]

50:42 I would like to know exactly what work of St. Augustine he's talking about. I do know, in City of God, he actually does credit Genesis 5 and 11 and between them Flood with historicity. Given the different text versions for each, the time from God creating Adam to birth of Abraham would be between 1599 and 3434 years (Samaritan plus Masoretic vs LXX plus LXX). And if he knew modern science, he would know that this cannot be combined with the Evolutionist view, with Adam both being first real man and ancestor of all men alive today. To have those criteria on Adam, one needs to have Dating methods dysfunction when it comes to very old ages (like beyond carbon dates 3000 to 3500 years old).

[@leefury7]

I worked for 20+ yrs at a world leading physics laboratory. Definitely anti-Christian. But I learnt something from and Israeli physicist who said that think either/or when it comes to creation is wrong. It's both/and. He pointed out that time is different on the outer edge of the universe and because of that what might appear here on earth as being 10,000 yrs, on the edge of the universe it would be millions of years. Time is a very interesting subject to study the history of. CS Lewis had a chapter on time in "Mere Christianity." There's also a head burner of a book titled, "Dimensions of Time: The Structures of the Time of Humans, of the World, and of God."

[@russelljones2305]

As a Creationist I have found that the majority of Christians who are theistic evolutionists are predominantly A-millennial and have a strong indoctrination in Augustinian doctrines. The true history of Augustine’s beliefs are derived from his background in Manichaeanism and those Christians who were influenced by the Gnostic Cerinthus who was the first to introduce spiritualising the millennium and placing the reign of Christ in the believer in the first century. The belief structure of A-millennialism is historically traced back to the Sadducees and the Gnostics in 2Timothy 2:18 and 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4. Theistic evolution is noted to have been promoted by the Rev Thomas Charmers of the Church of Scotland. Many of the Augustinian based Churches in the late 1800s embraced the Darwinistic evolution, there were a small portion that resisted this new ideas, Charles Spurgeon was one who reacted aggressively against Darwinism. In my research on this, the spiritualising through Amillenniumism gave the licence to liberalise all areas of the Bible.

[@bjn3232]

What sample size are you basing this off of? I’m an evolutionary creationist and I’m not Amillennial nor do I know any one else who is.

[@jackuber7358]

Frankly, this presentation coupled with others provide, with the clarity of crystal, the incontrovertible and conclusive testimony to Keller's status as a false teacher and heretic. To so boldly call into question veracity and perspicuity of scripture is exemplative of false teaching and thus is definitive of a doctrine of demons. He should not be heard and definitely not heeded and must be called out as the wolf he so eminently presents.

[@anitasmith203]

Biblically, there can be no sickness and death (evolution) until the fall of man (rebellion and sin). Sin brought death, no sin, no death. But Genesis chapter 3; sin entered creation thru Adam and Eve, and God judged the sin and spiritual death occured immediately, death occured physically, years later.

[@EPHESIANS_5..11__Lady]

TK has given me headaches for the past three months. The leadership of the church that I've been attending for two years defend him and continue to use his book about work for young adult bible study. My heart is heavy every time I see the related church announcement on the screen but I've had no better option in my country until now; I still have to go to that church because the gospel is always preached. The lead pastor (an American) believes in the six days of creation but for him disagreement on the interpretation of Genesis 1-2 falls into the category of level 3 issues. He thinks that TK's positions on social justice and human & earth origins do not make him a theological heretic to be avoided in all his writings. 🙍

[@kaylar3197]

Until now? Is there a better option now? if not, I pray that God would lead you to a faithful church in your area soon -- even if that is a newly planted church that doesn't have everything lined up for them. As long as they are seeking to worship God, truly, as His word prescribes, it could be a great improvement.

[@EPHESIANS_5..11__Lady]

@@kaylar3197 The last time I saw that announcement was on Jan 1st; I didn't want to look at it on Jan 8th so I don't know for sure but the pastor didn't announce anything new--therefore I think they still use that book ("Every Good Endeavor"). Thank you for praying for me; I really appreciate it. God bless you.

[@elizabethcochran3395]

Seems odd for Keller to leave out the scientific reasoning and research that Morris and Whitcomb applied to write their classic work, The Genesis Flood. He makes it sound like they were just making things up. Also, good point on Keller citing turn of the century scholars. Why are we citing men with less information under a lot of pressure as a standard?

[@rzu1474]

The flood never happened

[@mikezeke7041]

Seeing that old earth evolution seems to be a deconstruction point..,

[@hglundahl]

16:09 So far he has a point. To x, y or z, believing in _modern_ creation science may be the only option he has to be a creationist, but to w or v or t, the creation ministries could be about as wrong as the evolution believers. Modern Creation Science, in any form of it, is an apologetic tool and partly an exegetic tool for belief in Young Earth Creationism. It is not identic to it. By the way, this is also a reason why a creationist can very well challenge what is a consensus or near consensus in Modern Creation Science. Like, to some, Carbon 14 being _totally_ irrelevant, I hold the model C14 levels rose, so a sample from Babel, 4500 years ago, would date like over 10 000 years ago, because it started out with a lower ratio, and that gave the sample instant extra years. At the Flood, 5000 years ago, it was even lower than that, my latest carbon date for 2957 BC is "39 000 BP" ...

[@nick7977]

If Gen. 1:28 is true, I don’t see how Macro evolution is true.

[@darrellpowell4331]

Jon great podcast. My take: if death entered the creation before the Fall then we do not need Christ. If Adam and Eve were not historical then we do not need the cross and Christians are to be pitied above all people as the Apostle Paul claimed. Anyone who believes that Gods hands are tied to time or that time has some magical potion to it is fundamentally a nonthinking person. Poor God, He has the power to create ex nihil but He doesn't have the power to say how long He took doing it. Keller is a lost soul. His god is not that powerful.

[@-RM-]

So, Keller's statement "all you need to know is that there are people like me" (who believe in evolution and are "Christian") is a terrible twist of logic and a horrible attempt at biblical apologetics. You don't look at what a few outlier members of a group believe in order to define the fundamental set of beliefs of the entire group (the core beliefs which define membership). The group's beliefs must first be DEFINED, then one can judge each member's beliefs according to the predetermined standard. The more we look at Keller's way of thinking, the more he is shown to be a charlatan.

[@thediamondcreeper7566]

Straying from God's word is never excusable but can be understandable under certain circumstances.

[@ethanpaz6390]

You really have to condense this and simplify what you're trying to get. I've watched 1/2 hour on two of your episodes about Keller and still have no idea what's the problem with him. What's the difference between the context of Keller's speech and the context based on you giving this podcast? Both of you hold to the authority and sufficiency of Scripture but make arguments in different ways. To prove that point, I didn't hear you citing Scripture for any of your refutations of Tim Keller in the same way Keller was giving his arguments about the various creation accounts. Maybe you elaborated more in depth later on; I'll concede on that point. Perhaps try doing a timestamp on your videos or condense your presentation.

[@hglundahl]

52:22 Purgatory is not a second chance. It's about someone dying saved but still tainted.

[@bretlynn]

keller uses the exact same argument as Jehovas Witness do. "well I'm a christian and I don't believe jesus is God"

[@GoTeleOnTheMountain]

I’ll preface this by saying that I don’t generally agree with you and haven’t read your book, but I watch your videos with interest and with the goal of sorting things out for myself. That said, you present TK as forming his beliefs to pander to liberal NYers, when it seems to me that he is explaining his previously/sincerely held beliefs in a way tailored for his audience (common rhetorical strategy, nothing scandalous)(difference between compromise and contextualization). When engaging Tim Keller (and any other opponent, if it’s fair to use that word), I think you should avoid speculation about his character and motives, or at least qualify it as mere speculation. To speak as though you know why TK holds his views (to accommodate hostile NYers, etc.) is ungracious (since your assumptions skew negative), dismissive, and poor argumentation. In my view, it serves to groom your audience to already be against Keller - biasing them to take your side over his - by using speculation irrelevant to the ideas in question (I am not saying this is your conscious goal, just a likely byproduct). I think the biblical view is that I can’t even be so sure of my own motives as you seem to be of Keller’s. I get that you think he’s a false teacher (I don’t, other than suspecting we all are to some degree); should false teachers be defeated with potentially false claims in turn, or with truth and nothing but the truth? By speaking of things you cannot know (someone’s motives), you risk attempting the former. You have a built-in support group of followers which allows you to get away with arguing the wrong way, but I believe you care about doing it the right way. (I leave this comment as a lay-person with no presumptions to expertise in any of the topics being discussed in the video or even in my own comment.)

[@JordanCardwell]

When God introduces Jesus, He starts in Genesis.

[@hglundahl]

10:06 For my part - no, I do not. If Adam's progenitors were non-human and had no souls, they could not give Adam a language when on this theory he needed to get it, as opposed to having it infused. Adam was then treated ill by God, while already God's image, but before sinning. You could _try to_ get around this in two ways: a) language developed gradually from non-human communications - and frankly no, plus this would make "God's image" a gradable thing, if possible, which it isn't; b) Adam was made God's image only after growing up - and this again means God treats Adam badly, because he pulls Adam up from something he would be ashamed of, and God imposing shame on Adam before he sinned, or equally sparing him shame by amnesia, which is a loss, before he sinned, is a no no. For a Roman Catholic, the idea "Adam is metonymous for a much wider human population" is a no no from Session V of the Coucil of Trent. CSL did this in The Problem of Pain, probably one reason why he chose Anglicanism over Catholicism, but Catholicism does certainly not allow that.

[@hglundahl]

10:58 Some Deep Timers and Theistic Evolutionists would say "death before sin is no big deal, if it's not human death" (not sure how a Theistic Evolutionist would make this work for him, Swamadass seems way off the bat, and it would make "men from Eden" guilty of the at least rape part of bestiality when getting wives from "men from outside Eden"). But Adam growing up as a feral child or Adam becoming a man with memories of a previously bestial life or Adam forgetting about a previous bestial life is not even amenable to that solution - it's _human_ major trauma _before sin._

[@ThomasCranmer1959]

Theistic evolution is a form of creation science.