Tags
Calvinism, Christianity, CSM, doctrine, error, gays, hell, homosexuality, mysticism, PCA, presbyterian, Redeemer, RPC, Sin, Tim Keller
::UPDATE:: I’ve added the video interview of Tim Keller as he discusses homosexuality after being directly asked if homosexuality was a sin. Watching this man hem and haw, hesitate, waffle and avoid a direct, firm answer should disturb any Christian. For the record, yes, homosexuality is a sin and it is condemned in Scripture….regardless of what Tim Keller tells the audience. In my opinion, this video, found at the end of the article, is what political correctness and covering one’s tail for the sake of popularity and continued speaking engagements looks like.
Note that Keller, not once after being asked, mentioned I Cor. 6:9 or I Tim. 1:9, 10 which tells us that the practice of homosexuality is a sin, is ungodly, profane, unholy and those who are will not inherit the kingdom of God. – JT
“We would say homosexuality is not the original design for sexuality. Therefore, it’s not good for human flourishing. We want people to do things that are good for human flourishing. But that’s not what sends you to heaven or Hell.” – Tim Keller
Well, those who know a little of Tim Keller’s theology may not be shocked, but we should all certainly be concerned to say the least. From Johannes Weslianus: PCA News & Views:
When it comes to sins like greed and idolatry, TE Tim Keller knows how to speak clearly about sin. But when it comes to homosexuality, he, well . . . uhhh . . . ummm . . . is not very clear. This is extremely odd, and I’m surprised that more people are not alarmed at it. This is not just a one time mistake. It is a pattern for Keller…..
Here are a few quotes from Keller from the article…see any waffling when discussing homosexuality?
Tim Keller:
Well, it’s much, much, much easier to to have private conversations about it. I think . . . uh . . . can make this short. I . . . I believe in general that if you preach on why homosexuality is a sin . . . uhhh . . . there are . . . at least in my . . . in my . . . in my . . . in my church I know there’s lots and lots of folks who have same sex attraction who know that that’s not . . . as a Christian, I can’t do that. I’m not gonna go there. There’s a good number of them. I’ve got a lot of non-Christians who are present who are friends of gay people but are not gay. Uhhh . . . and then uhh, there’d be a number of people with same sex attraction who . . . are there. And generally speaking, it’s almost impossible to preach a sermon and hit all 3 or 4 of those constituencies equally well. Ummmm . . . it’s just . . . it’s just think about . . . you know . . . you know . . . you’re a communicator. You know you need to . . . well, what’s my goal? Who are my audience and . . . wow! it’s like a conundrum you can’t solve. So, the best thing has always been for me..[CONSPICUOUS COUGH] . . . to not do the public teaching as much as segment my audience through . . . ummm [CONSPICUOUS COUGH] . . . Books, through classes, through one-on-ones, and so on. I think the time is probably coming in which we’re going to have be more public in how we talk about homosexuality. And I haven’t . . . I’m actually thinking quite a lot about it. Uhhh . . . as to how I will go about it or how we should go about it but I’m not prepared to give you 3 bullet points. (Note: ellipses represent pauses)
Keller again:
I would definitely say . . . a thoughtful Christian Biblical response doesn’t fit into any of the existing categories out there. It’s not a simple matter of saying there should be no moral differentiation between any kind of sexual activity. Christians can’t go there–they can’t say, “no it doesn’t matter.”
It’s also true however, that this is a country where we’re supposed to love our neighbor. This is a country where a Christian is supposed to care about a just society for ALL our neighbors whether they believe like we do or not. And that’s gotta mean our gay neighbor.
And I would say people in the more conservative movement don’t really want to talk too much about that because they’re very upset because they feel like the gay agenda is too anti-Christian and too anti-religious.
So I would say–the reason it’s good to end on this question is–it’s not something, the way forward, I don’t see spelled out anywhere in public. I don’t see anybody in public taking all the Biblical concerns about justice and mercy in that area and speaking about them. But I’m certainly not going to get started.
And again:
What sends you to Hell is self-righteousness – thinking that you can be your own savior and lord. What sends you to heaven is getting a connection with Christ because you realize you’re a sinner and you need intervention from outside. That’s why it is very misleading actually to say, even to say, ‘Homosexuality is a sin’ because most people . . . Yes, of course homosexuality is a sin because greed is a sin, because all kinds of things are sins. But what most Christians mean when they say that and certainly what non-Christians think they hear when they hear that is ‘If you’re gay, you are going to Hell for being gay’. It’s just not true. Absolutely not true.
EISENBACH: So then, what’s . . . then how is homosexuality a ‘sin’. I’m not . . .
KELLER: Well, homo . . . [sigh] . . . Greed is a sin. In other words, it doesn’t help human flourishing. Basically, Christianity has an account of what we think human beings were built to do and what will therefore, help human flourishing. So, we would say if you spend all of your money on yourself, that’s bad . . . not only for your own soul, but for everybody elses. We would say homosexuality is not the original design for sexuality. Therefore, it’s not good for human flourishing. We want people to do things that are good for human flourishing. But that’s not what sends you to heaven or Hell.
Now will Keller supporters/fans be concerned? Yes? No? Should be!
Here’s the video:
Related Posts:
5 Reasons To Be Cautious With Tim Keller’s Theology
Keller has been entrenching himself on the broad path for a while now. He is sounding more like Rob Bell or Jay Baker than a gospel minister. That last paragraph you posted makes it clear that Keller has abandoned the biblical doctrine of sin and depravity. He should be thrown out of his church and shunned by all who name Christ until he repent.
Pingback: “it is very misleading…to say”: Tim Keller Teaching Elder « A Rose by Any Other Name
Oh my gosh people. Look up the contexts of each of these comments. Every single one of them were appropriate responses. I was at the forum where he mentions that a biblical response doesn’t fit into the existing categories. It was a public interview about his kings cross book and the fox news host purposely blindsided him with the question. Give the guy a break that he didn’t want to respond to the issue. Btw placing shudders in a transcript is only meant to make the person look less articulate then they really are. Everyone pauses like this naturally. Anyone instead of creaming this guy for choosing his words wisely in public can we stop nitpicking? Obviously he doesn’t think talking about homosexuality is a good idea unless it is the proper decision.
It is never ‘the proper decision’ for a Christian preacher to not directly, unhesitatingly call homosexuality sin. Ever. Thanks for stopping by.
Thanks Joel for the response. An honest question: if a preacher has been invited to a local lesbian, gay, and transgender group to talk about the essence of Christianity do you think in that context it wise to call homosexuality a sin? Hopefully you would say no, that there is a time and place and order to talk about it.
If asked directly by them if homosexuality was a sin, then yes, it would be wise to answer biblically. Waffling when asked a biblical question where the answer is obvious, does nothing when the Gospel is needed to be presented.
Joel I agree with you in principle. I guess I diagree that the above texts are waffling. I think tim Keller thinks that in the contexts he is being asked these questions a nuanced answer is best to actually KEEP the Gospel in focus. In NYC the gay question is a red herring at best and grounds to dismiss the preacher before the essence the gospel (atonement, etc) is actually given.
I could be wrong but I see these statements as ways for tim to want people to be justified before he requires them to be sanctified. Thanks for the dialogue.
I heard Keller say “the answer is yes” to the question: Is homosexuality sin? I have heard an entire sermon by Keller on homosexuality (which can be downloaded here: http://sermons.redeemer.com/store/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&product_ID=17481&ParentCat=6), where he is very clear that homosexuality is sin.
Additionally, I thought Keller was brilliant in bringing things back to the gospel. Not at all what the interviewer was looking for.
Rm 1:16 I am not ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God to bring salvation for everyone who believes. . .
There is no need to focus solely on homosexualty, however, if asked, be forthright and declare that it is sin! There are a lot of sins out there. Why hem and haw about the perversion. Why hem and haw about murder. They are both sin. So is dissipation Luke 21:34., 1Pet 4:4 You may want to look at websters definition.
We need to focus on trying to live holy and Godly lives and all the more as we see that day approaching. This person should read chapter 10 of Hebrews. We are all wretched sinners and deserve hell but God’s mercy makes it clear that he loves us and the blood of Jesus makes us holy, however, our works should prove the sincereity of our faith and love for God. This man should be focused on pulling his brothers from the fire by telling them the truth. Homosexualty is a sin.Everyone will be judged by the deeds done in the body whether good or bad. This is a training ground where God want to refine us and make us more pure like gold refined in the fire. It shows Satan and his followers how though we have not seen God and have more working AGAINST us than he did, yet we can overcome. No temptation has seized you except what is common to man but God is faithful, he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear, but when you are tempted, he will provide a way out so that you can stand up under it. 1 Cor 10:13
Wow. Keller’s reluctance to classify homosexuality as sin is disturbing. Equally disturbing is his gospel, tucked away in that next-to-last paragraph. What sends you to heaven? Getting a connection with Christ. What exactly does that mean? Where is that in the bible? Not regeneration, not the new birth, a “connection”. Oh, and what about Keller’s definition of sin: that which is not good for “human flourishing.” A man-centered definition for a man-centered gospel. This does not sound like the speech of a born again child of God, much less a man called by God to preach His Word.
I am not a fan of his, but it almost appears as if he was trying to say that we should not harp on Homosexual sins alone. But he does not quite say that.
Personally when dealing with the homosexual issue I am sure to include heterosexuals also, as there are also plenty of them attending Churches while living in an adulterous lifestyle with the opposite sex. And with this reality, we should not be isolating homosexuals, but including them in living in Adultery.
Agreed. However, it is completely unnatural. Natural man does the lust of the flesh in a natural manner not in this unnatural manner. We are supposed to be trying to live in a supernatural manner. It is not natural for me to forgive someone that has done wrong to me and I need God’s help because naturally I am revengeful. Their behavior is not even natural, but unnatural. We do need to say it like it is; if asked. This man does not and I believe it if fear of what others will think of him or it is because of his pride of his followers or because of his love of their contributions or all three. Perhaps he may be one himself, I do not know; God does. I still agree with you though that we do not need to focus on them but at least say it like it is when asked. Snatch others from the fire and save them . . .Jude 23. It is for their sake that we need to do this. For the time will come when men will no longer put up with sound doctrine. Instead to suit to their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 2 Tim 4:3, 4
I have formerly supported Keller but he is increasingly becoming more apart from the Gospel and the reformed heritage it appears. has fame clouded his judgment?
To be honest I’ve never listened to Keller, but I do think it foolish and wrong to say what he said, regardless of his motive. Saying that however, I believe it reminiscent of a pharisee for a heterosexual to focus heavily on the sin of homosexuality purely because it is a sin he does not commit.
I believe we must allow the Law of God full force in highlighting and challenging sin when we preach, that the ground is prepared in the hearers heart to receive the Gospel. But at the same time, we must ensure that it is sin generally, applicable to us all, that we show to be the common problem.
If we are believers already however, I think it a far more effective use of the Law to focus on the parts of the Law we struggle to keep ourselves when applying it to our own lives. Maybe this doesn’t say much directly about Keller, but I believe it helps us to adopt an attitude in keeping with the comment Jesus made about “those without sin casting the first stone”, or “taking the plank first out of our own eye”.
Joe,
Read the last paragraph quoted in the post, which contains this: “We would say homosexuality is not the original design for sexuality. Therefore, it’s not good for human flourishing. We want people to do things that are good for human flourishing. But that’s not what sends you to heaven or Hell.”
That is clear evidence that Keller CONTINUES to slide into the social gospel, which is no gospel at all.
Hey manfred. This comment was not saying you go to hell if you are against human flourishing. That would be the social gospel no doubt! This is keller saying what sends us to hell is our own self-centerdness (the essence of sin is placing ourselves above god) and wish not to be with him. To be sure though it is an awkward comment but the Internet is failing us here because the full text of what he was saying is not before us. He was developing the self-centered idea of hell. Check it out. Hope that helps.
Keller is like most everyone else, wanting to be liked and not wanting to be called names.
There comes a point for the Christian, when we must face the facts that our faith will not win everyone over.
A good way of dodging the homosexuality trap has always been to say, “It is not God’s best”. A friend once used it on Tv until he was asked directly does the bible call it “a sin”. Yeah and Osteen had to face the heat of the live microphone. (Oh did i say it was a friend?)
For all that Jesus was concerned with reaching out to those outside the mainstream, and healing those whom the religious elite thought were sinners – and who very well might’ve been – our own American Christianity has become so un-Christlike as to attack one man through whom God has turned many minds towards Him on one matter that is so rarely spoken of in the Bible? There are real Enemies out there – the same sort of Pharisaical enemies Christ saw – can we hold off on attacking each other on these more minor things?
Keller brings people to Christ, and I am sure that a relationship with Christ can tell the individual all they want to know about his or her sin life, so let’s stick to our job of Good News, the God who saves, the God who is so real he doesn’t need us to judge others’ sins for him.
One issue? What about endorsing eastern mysticism? What of Roman Catholic posturing? What of promoting contemplative spirituality? etc, etc.? One issue? Oh no my friend. See here.
Yes, I actually read that, and those too I would consider minor things – in fact, many of which are potentially quite cultural. A muslim friend of mine turned to Jesus recently, and part of her path involved reading early Christian monasticism. Does she believe she has to do what they did for salvation? No, but their lives formed a nice bridge between her Muslim heritage and Christ.
I think we are likely quite different in parts of our theologies, but it seems like we agree that Jesus is the path to salvation. But to simply tell someone that… well that’s sort of an Enlightenment-hangover style of thinking. Us in America, the West in general, we work in the direct-thought mindset, but many cultures – including Jesus’ – just don’t (one, not the exclusive, reason for the parables, I think).
Ok, my bottom line: yes, caution is a good rule for really anything in the life of devotion – but is God big enough to work through things that may be foreign to us? Sure, and it’s all for His glory through, all our undeserved only hope for salvation. (I don’t suppose you would like me much, though. I have gotten a good deal from monastic thought and contemplative spirituality, I listen to pastors like Greg Boyd, and I don’t have a problem with old-earth Creation… of course, all of that pales in the importance of Jesus alone).
Apologies for the long comment – I am tempted to write more, but if I decide to exercise that temptation, it will be via email.
Joel,
Ran across this post a month of so ago… obviously you wrote it awhile back. Interesting analysis. I’m left with understanding the intention of this post as a pastoral critique, clearly stating homosexuality is a sin, clarifying what you would say should you be on the stage instead of Keller (or what any pastor or Christian should say), and the views/beliefs of Keller should be called into question.
Are those intentions correct?
Yes.
Joel,
The other intention, which was more subtle, seemed to make clear your preference for truth. But, you have a tone which hints you prefer truth at all costs, even at the cost of grace or relationship. I’ll be careful not to make assumptions, but I wanted to make sure your intentions were correct and you were aware of both the overt and covert message.
First, Joel, I’m curios if you have a preference to blend grace and truth or if it’s all or nothing? Your bio says you are a pastor. If you were in Keller’s shoes, how would you answer the question from the pulpit and how does your church form relationships with people who are homosexual? Your post did not seem to answer that other than to say homosexuality is a sin.
Second, I’d be interested to read a longer discussion discussing how you realistically address the issue in a community. Otherwise it seems I’m just reading a bully pulpit… Again, I cannot make assumptions about your community. Hence, I’d be interested to see a longer, more in-depth, post about your views, ideas, and context – rather than just a critique of how another pastor is dealing with the issue in his context.
Perhaps you’ve already written such a post? If so, could you link it?
Thanks
Joel,
You don’t need to post this comment but feel free if you think it adds to the conversation. I was interested in hearing your thoughts on this topic in response to how it’s lived out in a church/community. In several discussions on the topic, Keller has alluded to or directly stated he is not yet ready to make a definitive statement on this topic. He flatly said it’s a sin. I guess my question next is… now what? Why do we care? What does this mean? No one wants to answer the next question, including Keller. So, he pauses, stutters, waits, jumps around. However, he continues to say he’s working on a better thought out answer… meanwhile, his community interacts with real people, real lives, in real situations. Discussing this on a blog in such a way seems more about defining who is in and who is out. Who is a sinner and who is not. Homosexuals are sinners. Great. So am I. So are you. Are we all now unwelcome at church? Is that the role of church – to atone for sin. I thought that was the role of Jesus… guess I was wrong.
Yes, Keller is pausing because he doesn’t have a well-thought out, truthful yet graceful response. Perhaps because this is so real in lives that the only way it can be answered is in real relationships – not on some blog dealing with hypothetical situations or some stage where one person is forced to shout out, “You’re a sinner!” Plenty of those in New York, trust me.
I think, on the grace side, it’s fair to say Keller gave the best answer he could in the corner he was in. In the meantime, I’m trusting his church is really engaging and loving people – with truth AND grace. Meanwhile, I’m trusting that you too are working on a well thought out way to love people who are homosexual or heterosexual. I asked you to post your thoughts on how to really do this in a church and it’s been over five days without a single thought back… don’t you think it’s fair to give Keller at least five minutes?
I like what you said, it is good to give him a minute to think about what to say. I’d still like him to say it for the homosexuals sake. They need Christ too and God can change them. If he will say it, the homosexuals would be -I think- more apt to give it more consideration since he is their teacher. The lust of the eyesi and flesh is something every human has to deal with, but God has provided a way out. 1 Cor 10:13 and if we, sinners , (which includes homosexuals) will put on the full armor of God Eph 6, we will be able to resist and please God. As it is, we supress the truth by our wickedness Rm 1:18. None of us can claim to be standing firm for it is not us who makes us stand. I don’t care to answer it publically because it just makes so many angry, but I do it anyway even if I am hated. Jesus said they will hate us but remember they hate us and hated him first. I’d like to elaborate more but I have to go.
For further clarification, Keller does have many talks on sexuality and many of them address homosexuality. One in particular he addresses it in great depth. It’s called Sexuality and Homosexuality and you can find it here:
http://thegospelcoalition.org/index.php?/resources/name-index/a/tim_keller/topic/Sexuality
I think it would be fair to post the sermon link or take snippets to balance out the overall critique. Sorry, knew it was out there but couldn’t find it earlier.
Jesus was unflinching about what was and what was not a sin, but at the same time he delivered his most harsh messages to the self-righteous and his most kind (but stern) messages to those caught in sin, particularly sexual sin (think of the lady at the well John 4:9 or the John 8:3 and the lady caught in adultery). When confronting sin we are to remember Matthew 7:3 and the illustration of the plank in our own eyes. If you understand your own great need for a savior and how devastating your own sin is, it is going to be difficult to treat another sinner too harshly. If you think you are basically a good person, that you are okay, you are one of God’s special people, and your sin debt is nowhere as bad as a homosexual you will have a pious self-righteous attitude.
Is homosexuality a sin? Of course it is, Keller was trying to point out that it was not the most terrible sin, nor the chief sin, and definitely not as destructive as a pharisitical self-righteous attitude. Not only are we to confront sin, but we are to do in an attitude of love with the hope to win the sinner over not crush them with our moral superiority.
Ande and Steve – I completely agree with your comments.
It is interesting to note that there were circumstances in the Bible where Jesus was asked about a specific sin and did not provide a direct response. In the story of the alduterous woman, the Pharisees asked him “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” Jesus’ immediate response was silence and when the Pharisees kept on questioning him he finally responded ““Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”
If Jesus avoided giving a direct answer such as ” yes, adultery is a sin and it is condemned by God” does it mean Jesus was hesitant in admitting in public that adultery is a sin?
Did the Law state that adultery was a sin? Yes. Did the Law say that adultery is condemned by God? Absolutely.
So, why did Jesus did not just give a straight answer? Was Jesus avoiding the truth? I am sure everyone will agree here it was not the case. Although the fact that this adulterous woman was a sinner and yes adultery is absolutely condemned by God, I think the message Jesus wanted to get through is that his purpose on earth is not to condem but to save ALL sinners by grace and this adulterous woman is not more or not less of a sinner than ANY of us….so why single out her particular sin? I think he wanted to tell this woman that as much as everyone thinks she is a greater sinner because of her adulterous activitiy, her sin is not worst than anyone else and He came on earth to offer her and all sinners reconcialiation with God simply by Grace.
I think that Jesus’ second message was for everyone one else who was ready to stone her. I think He wanted to tell them that they were so quick to condemn this adulterous woman but under what right? They are no less sinners than she is.
Under this context Jesus found it wise not to provide a straight answer which would have been misleading from the true message of the Gospel. As the bible states, Pharisees “were using this question as a trap”. Jesus knew it was a trick question.
I think that Tim Keller responded very wisely. Because many Christians have behaved like pharisees, many skeptics have the misconception that God hates homosexuals because it is one of the worst sins in the world and for that reason they will go to hell. Under this context, I think Tim realized it was a trick question and I believe that God gave him the wisdom to not provide a straight answer but to refocus the question to the message of the Gospel.
Finally I would like to add that when I read about the life of Jesus, in some cases He had a ministry of Truth appearing very harsh with people’s sins and in some cases He had a ministry of Grace appearing very soft on sin. I believe He hated sin and his seeming softness did not mean he was condoning it but in those cases he wanted the message of Grace to be the focus. What I find the most striking is to whom that ministry of Grace and Truth tends to be directed to…he had a ministry of Grace with those who were viewed by society and the religious leaders as the worst sinners in this world (adulterous, tax collectors, etc..). An to whom was He the harshest with? Pharisees….the ones who appeared holy and blameless in the eyes of the world.
Quite clearly, the interviewer was trying to trap Keller in a corner to make it easy for people to write off what he had to say. Keller’s response was to say words to the effect of “OK, before we single out any one sin (as an action), let’s remember that there are lots of things the Bible calls sin that probably all of us do – they aren’t good, but they aren’t the key issue. More importantly, let’s talk about the bigger problem of Sin (as a condition) and how we can be made whole through Christ.” I think it is pretty clear that he was encouraging people to look at the larger story of the Gospel before being too critical of the bits that comprise the life of a person who has responded to that Gospel.
Am I saved by grace or by works? By grace!
And that is what Keller is trying to bring it back to. Although listening to his sermons on the net it becomes pretty clear that he believes that a faith that is not accompanied by works is dead – but the works come from the faith and not the other way around.
I thought I would also add that when critiquing a statement of an individual, it is wise to think about the context. Let’s say someone asks “is homosexuality a sin and condemned by God?” but this question is asked by two different people:
1- The first person is a homosexual who is not a Christian and thinks that the God of the Christian faith does not love him or want to pursue him because of his sexual orientation.
2- The second person is a homosexual who has embraced the Christian faith and is wondering whether or not God calls him to change his lifestyle in order to be faithful to His commandments?
Wouldn’t it be fair to say the focus of the response should differ in these two circumstances? In situation #1, the response might be more like Keller’s response to Eisenbach…..focus on the message of Grace without undermining the Truth. In situation #2, the response might be more like his sermon on homosexuality……focus on the Truth without undermining the message of Grace.
With this in mind, we need to remember the context of this interview….Keller was interviewed by an atheist in a room full of non-believers who probably had the misconception that the God of the Christian faith does not love homosexuals.
I think, as Christians, we need to be mindful of who our audience is when addressing issues like sin and homosexuality. We know that Jesus was mindful of his audience in similar circumstances because as previously discussed, in some cases He emphasized the Truth and in other cases he emphasized Grace when dealing with sin.
My observation is that some churches tend to have the “Truth at all cost” approach and other churches have the “Grace at all cost” approach. We need to be reminded the Christ had a ministry of Truth AND Grace and it becomes dangerous when we fall under an extremist approach.
Joel Taylor, why didn’t you ever respond to these comments?
Homosexuality is a sin period. And yes so is greed, lust, adultery etc…etc…
Repentance (Recognizing that you are a sinner in need of a Savior, and recognizing that your sin is contrary to the Holiness of God and Turning from it) is the issue here. Everyone one wants to be saved but nobody wants to count up the cost, which is exactly what Jesus told us over and over again:
“If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” Luke 14:26
“Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple.” Luke 14:27
“For which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost, whether he has enough to complete it?” Luke 14:28
“So therefore, any one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple.” Luke 14:33
Jesus makes it clear that a man must forsake all to be His disciple. The problem with those who are homosexual and all other sinners who don’t repent and come to faith in Christ is that they do not want to forsake all. And they don’t forsake all because they don’t truly believe in the first place. They love their sin and will not turn from it. It’s proof that they do not have saving faith and the Spirit of God, which is the source of regeneration and sanctification is not in them.
God draws those whom he predestined to faith in His Son (John 6:44). And if He draws you then you will believe, you will repent, and you will trust totally in Christ and Christ alone for your salvation.
Keller failed to make his answer clear and precise according to the gospel, which leaves room for error. I do not believe that any God called Preacher should do that. There is too much at stake….
Brother Joel I hope you don’t see this as a rebuke or nothing on my end. My response was for those who commented. I really do wonder why you never responded though. Not that you have to respond to every comment you get…..
Rest in Grace!
brdavision
Pingback: Tim Keller’s Obfuscation of the truth: “Homosexuality” « Touch ya Neighbor Ministries
Just to make a point in this discussion:
In my opinion Keller evades this provoking question brilliantly by focusing on the essence of the broken relationship between God and men: self-rightiousness. This concerns everybody and provides a level-playing field in the discussion who will go to hel/heaven or not. Therefore his comment is not about not-speaking out against sin(homosexuality), but keeping the door open voor the sinner to enter. You have to be both wise and creative to get the message of the gospel across without scaring your audience away (Col 4:5). Furthermore: speaking out against sin is relative and culturally based. I am from the Netherlands. Keller’s comment on homosexualtity in this interview would be considered a crime here en he would probably be prosecuted. So give the guy some slack. He is one of the few persons who is able tot put the gospel in the context of our post-modern society and still get a powerful message across. God will do the rest and if a particular person (homosexual or whatever) will open his or her heart for the grace of God, i’m pretty sure God wil show them what needs to change. And so the journey on the narrow path begins.
Well articulated. I see your point. But Tim Keller is still full of crap, theologically speaking.
I don’t agree on everything he says. But he approaches the Gospel from a different perspective. It’s more apologetic and he’s trying to reach a critical, non-believer audience. Therefore you need to enter into their world, language and (false)values. That may seem theologically vague on the surface, but beneath the surface Keller’s view of the Gospel is very elementary. What really strikes me about Keller is that in his books/sermons/teachings he is able to put our every day life and activities in today’s age into perspective and point them toward Christ in very basic and elementary way. OK, the guy is popular and that comes with a price. Maybe he manouvered himself into the public debat whilst not entirely ready (on this particular subject)and everything he does or says is put under a magnifying glass (this forum is a nice example!).
Just a thougt: Agustine of Hippo distinguished between primary and secondary beliefvalues. On the first we need to have unity as christians, on the second we need to give room to oneanother to differ. In all things we need to have love as brothers ande sisters in Christ. My guess is that you’ll find more in commom with Keller on the primary values then you might exepct. But that’s of course entirely up to you. To analyse, judge and dismiss is easy (don’t get me wrong: sometimes also necessary). But give Keller some ‘latitude’, it won’t hurt the Case of Christianity.
“So I would say–the reason it’s good to end on this question is–it’s not something, the way forward, I don’t see spelled out anywhere in public. I don’t see anybody in public taking all the Biblical concerns about justice and mercy in that area and speaking about them. But I’m certainly not going to get started”
What on earth does this mean????
I think it is like saying:” Nobody else is addressing this…I don’t think I will either”
That was the clergical approach prior to 1941 in Germany also.
Keller is one of the most thoughtful preachers I have ever heard. This question was based upon a condemnatory form of ‘Christianity’ which does not support what the gospels tell us about Christ’s teaching. Yes, homosexuality is a sin, as is murder, as is theft, as is driving a car over the speed limit. The ‘conservative, fundamentalists’ seem to want to target a selection of sinners (such as homosexuals) because they see things in simplistic yes/no terms. As TK points out, what determines our hell/heaven destination is clearly linked to our relationship with God through Jesus – the Jesus who died for our sins past, present and future. Or, are these fundamentalists so perfect that they never sin – if so, then cast those stones. The love Jesus demonstrated seems far away from the condemnatory ‘Christianity’ of the conservative fundamentalists.
“I think the time is probably coming in which we’re going to have be more public in how we talk about homosexuality. And I haven’t . . “.
Notify me when he does address this issue please