Keller on Risks for Evangelicals
32 comments | Permalink
Darryl Dash posts an extremely helpful set of notes on a recent talk by Tim Keller in the UK on the risks for evangelicals. Here are the highlights:
- Evangelicalism used to occupy the middle ground between fundamentalism and liberalism. It was orthodox, pro-scholarship, and facing the world. Recently, evangelicalism has become more hostile and condemning of culture. A younger generation has given up on evangelicalism as a middle ground and are looking for a new consensus. This group goes by a number of names, such as post-evangelicals or the emerging church.
- A new gospel is being preached about the Kingdom of God and Jesus Christ overcoming the evil powers forces of injustice in the world. The pendulum has swung the other way.
- To respond, evangelicals must understand and practice biblical repentance as a result of believing the gospel. This will allow evangelicals to admit their sins, even if they disagree with 80% of the criticisms from the post-evangelicals, and even if the remaining 20% is expressed poorly. To the degree that we understand the gospel, we will be able to freely admit our shortcomings as an evangelical movement.
- Don't ever think that we can respond to legitimate criticisms of our practice by defending our doctrine. In defending our doctrines, we have not responded to the criticisms of our practices. Orthopraxy is part of orthodoxy.
- It is necessary to draw boundaries. What really matters is how we treat the people on the other side of those boundaries. People are watching. We're going to win the younger leaders if we are the most gracious, kind, and the least self-righteous in controversy. The truth will ultimately lose if we hold the right doctrines, but do so with nasty attitudes and a lack of love.
- We need to approach the controversies with a repentant heart corporately and say, "Despite all the bad things that are being said here, there's a core of truth here and we need to deal with it."
posted by JT at Wednesday, October 10, 2007
32 Comments:
Recently, evangelicalism has become more hostile and condemning of culture.
Is this really that surprising? Look at what was acceptable on TV 30 years ago as compared to today. When the culture around us was not so depraved, it was much easier to look the other way. But today, we are confronted by a culture that is assulting the church at every level and the gates of hell are prevailing.
Thanks for pointing us to this, Justin. It's a significant, helpful summary of the current situation from someone who strikes me as being a faithful guide when it comes to an understanding of both Biblical theology and also the current evangelical/ecclesiastical situation.
The culture was just as depraved 30 years ago, it simply had "cleaner manifestations of its depravity.
The culture was depraved 30 years ago, just with different manifestations of the depravity.
"...and the gates of hell are prevailing."
How does that jive with Matthew 16:18?
We're not waging a culture war, we're waging a war for the souls of men and women. How much time did Paul spend writing about the depraved gladiator culture of ancient Rome? Sin is sin, and we need to call it sin, but we need to readjust our focus as well.
"A new gospel is being preached about the Kingdom of God and Jesus Christ overcoming the evil powers forces of injustice in the world. The pendulum has swung the other way."
1. Does the bible teach that the Kingdom of God and Jesus Christ overcomes the evil powers forces of injustice in the world.
2. Is it a "good-news" message to say that?
d.j. said:
"We're not waging a culture war, we're waging a war for the souls of men and women. How much time did Paul spend writing about the depraved gladiator culture of ancient Rome? Sin is sin, and we need to call it sin, but we need to readjust our focus as well."
D.J. I couldn't agree more. The sins of the past weren't as readily called sins by the church: racism, laziness, materialism, etc. In fact, most of those sins thrived in many churches. They still do.
Sinners sin because they're sinners. It's nothing to be shocked about. Preach the Gospel. Jesus wins. The gates of hell don't have a snowball's chance of prevailing. Relax, brothers. It's all going according to plan.
A very helpful and insightful article. I just read this a few nights ago.
thanks so much for keeping us well fed and nourished with spiritual food, justin.
"A new gospel is being preached about the Kingdom of God and Jesus Christ overcoming the evil powers and forces of injustice in the world. The pendulum has swung the other way."
I thought that was the gospel, not a new gospel??! Am I missing something here?!
Adam
UK
Adam,
Even more than that, I think I've heard Keller preach this so-called new gospel before. And I've heard Keller preach the old gospel too. And I think he's said that they are one and the same gospel...but different perspectives, which we must labor to keep together. I am confused by Keller's language here.
Anon, Adam, etc.
I was confused by this as well; after all that gospel is at least 2K years old (older if you take it back to Isaiah or beyond).
I do know that TK, like the rest of us, isn't always as careful to give all his caveats as I would like him to be. I also know he ultimately favors a more lutheran gospel, i.e., kingdom stuff doesn't drive his gospel bus.
But the most important thing here may be noting that this appears to be someone's interp of what he says. I would love to know if it's verbatim. Anyone know?
JT-the second point (about the new gospel) is confusing people here because it looks like TK is advocating it...but if you read the complete notes he discusses why this new gospel is wrong.
Lori
Here are some of TK's comments from the rest of the notes:
The new gospel is not that Jesus took away the wrath of God and that if you believe in him you can be forgiven. The new gospel is that the Kingdom of God is here. Jesus Christ has overcome the powers that are oppressing the world. By dying on the cross he has opened the way to a new way of life, allowing you to become an agent of peace and justice in the world. You become a Christian by entering into community and by a mixture of faith and work in making Jesus Christ Lord.
This gospel says to the non-Christian that we're not about the wrath of God, we're about a new way of life. It says to the unchanged evangelical that being a Christian is not just believing; it is following him.
We as classic evangelicals believe there are huge problems with that. When you change the gospel to deal with the powers, it ignores the problems within. As G.K. Chesterton supposedly said, the problem with the world is me. The problem with the world starts with our sin. The other problem is that we can't be agents of reconciliation without a heart change. We can't abandon being saved by grace alone through faith alone in favor of a program of works. It won't lead us to sing, "My chains fell off, my heart was free. I rose, went forth, and followed thee."
There's more if you read the whole thing...it is threads like this that start nasty rumors.
Lori
It's not verbatim; the post is my summary of what he said, typed while I listened.
Keller said the "new gospel" downplays the wrath of God and focuses on corporate, structural evil. In this version, becoming a Christian is simply joining a community that is working for peace and justice in this new understanding of the gospel.
Keller argues that there are all kinds of problems with this version. In any case, a proper understanding of the gospel will not downplay God's wrath, and will still lead us to deal with poverty and structural evil.
It's worth ordering the MP3 for a listen as my notes are only a summary.
Thanks for the link, Justin.
Thanks Darryl for clarifying that and for your work in bringing to our attention this important talk from Tim Keller.
I will have to listen to the talk myself to try and tie up some of these seeming Keller contradictions. In the meantime, I'd recommend anyone listening to Keller's talks from the Reform and Resurge Conference 2006, available on the Resurgence website, where he really nails down the gospel and wonderfully integrates both the "old" and "new" gospel perspectives (I don't like that terminology) and calls conservatives to start thinking about the social implications of the gospel and calls "kingdom" Christians to start thinking about the subsitutionary death of Jesus that saves us from the coming wrath.
Adam
"Don't ever think that we can respond to legitimate criticisms of our practice by defending our doctrine. In defending our doctrines, we have not responded to the criticisms of our practices. Orthopraxy is part of orthodoxy."
Does TK provide examples to "the criticisms of our practices"?
Ron
I meant to say "specific examples".
Anyways, who are these anti-intellectuals that he is talking about in the fragmented evangelicalism? And what makes them anti-intellectual?
-Ron
D.J., I would agree with you here. I simply think it is erroneous to think culture grows mroe depraved. I am not fighting a culture war, rather seeking to live under Christ, in Christ, in culture. Paul simply said those who practice some depraved actions will not inherit the kingdom of Heaven.
All he is doing is cautioning against gospel reductionism, and the pendulum swinging to far either way. This is a classic both/and. No big mystery here.
ryan
No big mystery, sure. Classic, yes. But to assume we are not guilty of it, that's what we should be cautious of. Every generation needs someone we respect to restate classic yet relevant concerns.
Casey, I don't think Keller has to assume people are guilty of it, there is ample evidence that many are guilty of it. I do not want get into a lengthy debate about it, but we all have short sighted the gospel at times. My point and I think the one Keller was trying to get at, is that the gospel is always more, never less.
ryan
1) Darryl did a good job on synopsis.
2)Ryan and Adam are both right. My message is: a) classic evangelicalism was weak on the corporate/kingdom aspect, b)some people are over-reacting and stressing the corporate/kingdom aspect to the loss of the classic formulations (forensic righteousness, penal substitution)-- this is a grave mistake, c)we should not treat these people as lepers, but rather be gracious and even repentant, balancing our own gospel preaching, but d) we should also lovingly point out the dangers of their emphases.
Tim Keller
Tim, thank you for responding here. However, I think you misrepresent the "emerging" gospel. We do not emphasize the gospel of the kingdom as a replacement to a gospel of personal forgiveness from sin, but as an addition to it - a recapturing of the fullness of the gospel. It's a both/and, not an either/or.
However, if the only way that you can understand personal forgiveness is by way of "forensic righteousness" and "penal substitution" then may I suggest that even your definition of what it means to be an evangelical is too narrow. One need not be a Calvinist to believe in the forgiveness of sins or even in substitutionary atonement. (After all, Calvin's penal substitution is only one particular theory of substitution.)
I would suggest that those in the EC (or in other branches of evangelicalism) who would question penal substitution still completely agree that personal sin has been dealt with at the cross. We would just describe it as an act of God forgoing punishment rather than inflicting punishment.
Hi, Mike. I see your points. Just two responses: a)I did not mention 'emerging' churches or try to represent them as a movement. I was thinking of very specific individuals, many of whom I know. So I don't think it's a misrepresentation. b)John Stott, Bill Bright, Billy Graham, and other evangelical leaders of the 20th century were not Reformed (by their definition or others') but they assumed forensic justification and penal substitution. It was not just a Calvinistic thing.
Whoops--the immediate preceding post is from Tim Keller
--Tim Keller
This post has been removed by the author.
Hi Tim, thanks again for your reply.
I confess that I haven't bought the CD of your actual talks so I'm just going off of Darryl's summary (which you said was pretty accurate). Anyhow, my impression was that you were referring to post-evangelicals and the emerging church as a general movement. However, if you only had specific people in mind then I apologize for misinterpreting your statements. As I'm sure you're aware, like evangelicals, us emergents are a pretty diverse bunch and it's more or less impossible to find one person who would speak for all of us. So it is advisable to level any critiques as specific individuals and statements rather than at the movement as a whole. However, even then I'd encourage you to read charitably. For instance, I know Brian McLaren has at times said things that express a dislike for penal substitution. However I know that Brian would still wholeheartedly affirm the idea of personal atonement in general and the need for personal repentance. He might just express the how and why of this slightly differently (as would I, to be honest).
As for penal substitution, you're quite right that it's not just the Calvinists anymore that hold to it (though that's who it started with of course). Anyhow, you're a Presbyterian minister, so I have no desire to try to dissuade you from penal substitution. However, all I hope to point out is that it is not necessary for all emergents to agree with the penal substitution theory of the atonement (though I'm sure a great many still do) for us to agree more generally with you about the substitutionary death of Christ on the Cross for the forgiveness of sins, or about the need for personal repentance and personal transformation. This is a message that is entirely resonant with the emerging church, and as I said, one that we would hold together with our commitment to the kingdom of God. (For instance, at the small emerging church that I lead, our mission statement is "transforming people to transform the world" - in other words, both/and.)
Anyhow, like I've said at my own blog, there is much that I like about what you said - and I think that there is much more overlap and agreement between yourself and those of us in the emerging church than perhaps you first thought. If you had perceived an imbalance in our approach, then that is a good critique that perhaps we need to be clearer in how we are expressing ourselves, but trust me when I say that the balance is there - it's not an either/or to anyone I know within the emerging church. I do hope that if we can put aside disagreements about various atonement theories, we will be able to find much common ground on the larger fact that we all affirm the need for personal and corporate redemption - the need both for individual repentance and for justice and peace to be extended to the whole world.
Shalom,
-Mike Clawson
http://emergingpensees.com/"
Whoever is responding as Tim Keller is not the Dr. Tim Keller from NYC!
What? You mean someone is pretending to be Tim Keller? Well if someone is, they're doing a pretty good impression in my view!
Adam
UK
Ok, if that's true, then it's just plain weird. Who have I been talking to then?
False Preaching produces confusion.
The Bible>Gospel> Clearly states that when you preach, preach the word of god.
Jesus himself says "Let your yes be yes and your no's no anything else comes from the evil one".
When any preacher or Christian starts talking about something else they are already abandoning the precious words of god for their own cheap talk.
Thats why the people in this blog are getting confused.
Had the preacher wisely said "Love the lord your god with all your heart all your mind and all your strength" None of you would have needed responded. Because he would have been preaching the gospel, not wasting precious time on unwise talk.
God produces peace, he is a god of order not of confusion.
You will always know true children of god by their fruit.
My recommendation to all that are capable of reading is to read the bible. (Unplug the TV and PC if you have to!)
The lord will then use his words in you and through you to help redeem your soul and the souls of others. And to meet often with other believers and have fellowship.
God bless you all
Love in Christ Jesus
xXxx A xxXx
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home