The book argues that genuine gospel-humility means “not thinking more of myself or thinking less of myself, it is thinking of myself less” (32). How does this conception differ from what is commonly called humility? Is Keller’s distinction valid, or is it merely playing with words?

Compare and contrast The Freedom of Self-Forgetfulness with another one of Keller’s works, such as The Reason for God. What key themes and ideas do the two works share? How does each illuminate Keller’s approach to faith?

How does Keller conceive of the nature of success, and how does he redefine it throughout his analysis? How does his conception of success compare to ideas of success espoused by other strands of American Protestantism, such as the controversial “prosperity gospel”?

Keller argues that the modern self-esteem solution fails because even if we set our own standards, we either cannot meet them (producing self-condemnation) or we set them so low that we condemn ourselves for having low standards. What are some of the potential strengths and flaws of Keller’s dichotomy? What other alternatives of standards and self-esteem are available that could possibly challenge Keller’s framing of the issue?

Keller argues that Reformed Christianity uniquely reverses the performance-verdict sequence: The verdict enables performance rather than performance earning the verdict. Compare and contrast Keller’s view with Christian theology that argues for the importance of “good works” as a key component of salvation. How do these other strands of theology interpret the issues of salvation, justice, and/or what it means to live by faith? How are they different or similar to Keller’s approach?

Consider Keller’s use of biblical exegesis, philosophical sources (Kierkegaard), literary authorities (C.S. Lewis), and popular culture references (Madonna). How does this range of sources strengthen or weaken his argument? Does the inclusion of secular voices make his case more or less persuasive?

The book originated as a sermon series and retains many characteristics of oral discourse. What are some of the rhetorical and literary techniques he uses? What are the advantages and disadvantages of reading what was originally preached rather than written for the page?

Keller’s argument depends heavily on his interpretation of 1 Corinthians 3: 21-4:7, particularly Paul’s statements about not caring what others think or what he himself thinks. Are there other ways to interpret these verses that would support different conclusions? How crucial is Keller’s specific exegesis to his overall argument?