The Gospel is an individual promise with serious collective implications, not the other way around. Collective salvation is a quasi-religious concept reflected in liberation theology, the Social Gospel, and social justice. It’s not Christian theology. We are accountable for our own sins, not the sins of others (2 Cor. 5:10).
Salvation is “collective” only in the sense that Jesus’ atonement is sufficient to cover the sins of every human being. He died “for all.” But every person does not choose to accept his gift of salvation. This decision, which results in salvation, is personal.
— D. C. McAllister, in an article posted on PJ Media titled “Note to Tim Keller: The Bible Does Not Support America’s Collective Guilt on Slavery” —
Key point: From Tim Keller’s life and ministry we can learn this important lesson: The social justice narrative is a “gospel” diametrically opposed to the biblical gospel. The two do not align and can’t be reconciled. To bring them together is to misrepresent and even manipulate the biblical gospel.
With this post, we conclude our series on Tim Keller’s legacy of casting doubt on Christianity. Keller was widely respected, so the claim that he left a legacy of casting doubt on the Christian faith may strike many as unfair or even blatantly false. Even so, he had his critics. I would encourage my readers to carefully evaluate statements Keller made and their implications — as well as the questions and doubts they generated (and generate) in people’s minds. We are not speaking, necessarily, of outright denials of Christian teachings, but of various ways Keller undermined them. To undermine is “to make (someone or something) weaker or less effective usually in a secret or gradual way.”
Also, if you haven’t already done so, read all the articles in this series. They are accessible from this page.
To undermine is “to make (someone or something) weaker or less effective usually in a secret or gradual way.”
—The Britannica Dictionary—
This post is specifically about Keller’s casting doubt on God’s plan of salvation. We’ll consider five items, or five ways Keller did this, whether he intended to or not.
Item 1: Keller misleads people about salvation when he claims, “[H]eterosexuality does not get you to heaven…. So, how in the world could homosexuality send you to Hell?”
Consider first a rhetorical question we cited in our last post, which focused on Keller’s take on homosexuality. He said, “[H]eterosexuality does not get you to heaven…. So, how in the world could homosexuality send you to Hell?” Keller shared this “insight” when he was interviewed by David Eisenbach at Columbia University in 2008. We offered a short sound clip last time of Keller, but here you are encouraged to watch the six-minute-thirty-seven-second video that showcases more of the exchange.
Theologian Robert A. J. Gagnon, now a Professor of Theology at Houston Baptist University, responded to Keller’s statements in the interview. At the time he wrote his response, Dr. Gagnon was an Associate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He wrote,
Toward the end of the interview Eisenbach asked Keller about whether he thought homosexual people will go to hell: [Said Eisenbach,]
I wrote a book about the gay rights movement because I was appalled by the oppression and the discrimination against homosexuals in my America. This questioner asked, “What do so many of the churches have against homosexuals and what about your church‘s approach to homosexuality? Is it a sin? Are they going to hell?”
This question led to a 6-minute response on Rev. Keller‘s part that I have to say is disappointing. In Rev. Keller‘s defense, let me say that some allowance has to be made for the venue (New York City, Columbia University, responding to a homosexualist professor with perhaps a majority of people in the audience left of center), the time (only 6 minutes), and the intent of the speaker (Rev. Keller trying not to alienate others from the Christian faith). Maybe too some allowance should be made for the “Stockholm Syndrome” : he has imbibed the culture of New York City for too long.
Even with these considerations I still find his response to be disappointing, especially as regards his unqualified insistence that homosexual practice will not send anyone to hell; but also for criticizing the church in an unqualified way for “oppression of homosexuals,” claiming that an act of homosexual intercourse is not as bad as an instance of greed (any greed), and viewing sin merely as “something not good for human flourishing.” Much of the response had the feel of a dodge and some of what Rev. Keller said is so misleading as to come under the rubric of misinformation. This isn‘t justified even when one is in “seeker-friendly” mode (emphases added).
Much of the response [Keller gave] had the feel of a dodge and some of what Rev. Keller said is so misleading as to come under the rubric of misinformation. This isn‘t justified even when one is in “seeker-friendly” mode.
—Dr. Robert. A. J. Gagnon—
You may recall that in our discussion of this statement from Keller about heterosexuality, homosexuality, and the roads to heaven and hell, we cited seven Bible passages that speak of God’s judgment of sexual sin. In three of those passages (Rom. 1:18-32; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; 1 Tim. 1:8-11), homosexuality is named and condemned explicitly. In three more Bible passages (these from the Old Testament — Gen. 19:1-29; Lev. 18:22, 20:13) homosexuality also is directly and clearly presented detestable to God, even though He loves sinners (homosexuals included) and sent Christ to die for them.
In no place in Scripture is homosexual activity presented in a positive or even a neutral light. It is always deserving of and subject to God’s judgment. While a failure to trust Christ for salvation certainly does cause a person to spend eternity in hell, such disbelief cannot be separated from one’s sins — actions and attitudes contrary to God’s clearly stated commands. We must never forget that a person goes to hell because he or she has failed to repent of his or her sins and to trust Christ for forgiveness of those sins.
While a failure to trust Christ for salvation certainly does cause a person to spend eternity in hell, such disbelief cannot be separated from one’s sins — actions and attitudes contrary to God’s clearly stated commands.
Tim Keller’s efforts to divorce a lack of faith in Christ for salvation from the very sins that render every individual ineligible to enter heaven only muddy the water regarding salvation. This emphasis, it must be noted, effectively minimizes one’s need to repent of wrongdoing when coming to faith in Christ. Repentance is essential, for a person cannot turn to God and fully rely on Him without also turning away from, or repenting of, his or her sins — the path of going one’s own way rather than God’s.
A second consequence arises from Keller’s denying that sins send a person to hell. Personal responsibility for sins is underemphasized. Let’s put it this way. If a person is condemned to hell for eternity, that individual is only paying the penalty for the sins he or she committed in this life — sins of which he or she is personally guilty. Romans 3:23 tells us that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” and Romans 6:23 declares that “the wages of sin is death, but the [a]gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
Item 2: Keller’s statement that, “The more you understand how your salvation isn’t about your behavior, the more radically your behavior will change” undermines the gospel and its requirement that people must repent.
Unfortunately, what Keller claims about heterosexuality, homosexuality, and the paths to heaven and hell is not his only misrepresentation of the gospel. Keller stated, ““The more you understand how your salvation isn’t about your behavior, the more radically your behavior will change.” Yet, as we have already seen, salvation is about one’s behavior, as well as his or her attitudes. Paul wrote in Romans 5:8, “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (emphasis added). When God confronted Adam and Eve about their disobedience in Genesis 3, He asked Adam, “Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?” (v. 11); and He asked Eve, “What is this you have done?” (v. 13). Furthermore, to the Christians at Galatia, Paul wrote this:
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God (emphasis added).
Therefore, salvation is about behavior. It is about rescuing individuals from the penalty of their sins, their behavior and attitudes that do not align with God’s will. I can imagine that one possible line of defense offered for Keller’s statement would be that Keller said, “The more you understand how your salvation isn’t about your behavior, the more radically your behavior will change,” not “The more you understand that your salvation isn’t about your behavior, the more radically your behavior will change,” But why make a statement that has to be explained in such detail? Isn’t it better to be clear at the outset?
Yes, of course there’s a sense in which one’s salvation is more about that individual than about what he or she has done, but it isn’t hard to make the case that Keller mudded the water on this issue rather than clarifying or offering some profound insight. In our day, non-Christians especially need to hear clear teaching about God’s plan of salvation. They don’t need ambiguity. Even if a statement sounds witty, insightful, or clever, if it clouds a biblical truth rather than clarifying it, it isn’t worth saying.
Item 3: By promoting the social justice narrative’s definition of justice, Keller tampers with the gospel.
In a previous Word Foundations post titled “God’s Assessment of CRT,” we heard from Conversations that Matter podcaster Jon Harris. As a guest on Joel Webbon’s Right Response Ministries podcast, Jon was asked to name the two social justice advocates in evangelicalism that give him the greatest concern. Jon named David Platt and Tim Keller. He explained that by embracing and emphasizing the social justice movement’s definition of justice rather than the biblical definition, Keller effectively and essentially alters (or at bare minimum misrepresents) the gospel.
We’ve warned about this before. According to Scripture, we uphold biblical justice when we render “impartially and proportionally to everyone his due in accord with the righteous standard of God’s moral law.” Thus, authentic justice is about making sure people get what they deserve — that which is rightfully theirs — whether good or bad, according on what they have done in light of divine commands.
Redefining justice to mean meeting needs and making it an obligation effectively rules out charity, which believers are to exercise voluntarily to assist the poor, helping to alleviate their needs. Insisting that caring for the poor is an obligation is an affront to the gospel in the way Jon describes, but also in another way. It essentially adds works to the gospel — thereby creating and promoting “another gospel.” We’ve seen the same type of error cropping up in the Southern Baptist Convention; calling Micah 6:8 the “Great Requirement” essentially adds works to the gospel. This is a heresy Paul warned against and condemned in his letter to the Galatian Christians.
The following tweet is a great example of Keller’s conflating justice and charity.
If a person has grasped grace they do justice. If they don't, they say they are grateful for God's grace, but in the heart they are far from him. Not caring for the poor reveals that at best one doesn't understand grace and at worst you may not have encountered Gods saving mercy.
— Timothy Keller (1950-2023) (@timkellernyc) November 25, 2020
Having grasped grace, Christians engage in charity. Justice, however, is something else. Yes, Christians should work for and uphold justice, but justice is not served when people operate under the assumption they are obligated or required to meet the needs of those who have less than they do. Nor is justice served when the government takes wealth and resources from individuals who have, to redistribute those resources to people it has deemed to be in need. This is socialism, and it is inherently unjust.
What, then, does justice look like? It occurs when people are treated impartially, or fairly. Charity occurs when people voluntarily use the resources they have to benefit others. Charity, by definition, cannot be forced. Moreover, engaging in charity is not a requirement for salvation, but evidence one has indeed been saved.
To redefine justice, therefore, is to manipulate and misrepresent the gospel. Only biblical justice (rendering to people what they truly deserve) aligns with the true gospel and its various elements.
Item 4: Accepting the social justice narrative’s definition of justice compels Keller to promote a definition of sin contrary to the biblical definition, and thereby to again tamper with the gospel.
Just as an individual can’t redefine justice without essentially altering the gospel, so, too, he or she cannot redefine sin without manipulating it. The following clip carries most of the audio from this video.
In Scripture, sin consists of the attitudes and actions
-
- that are an affront to God’s holy character and
- of which which an individual is guilty, because he or she has held those attitudes and performed those actions.
We’re making two points here to refute Keller’s claim. Sins are attitudes and actions contrary to God’s will of which an individual is personally guilty. I am not responsible for my grandparents’ sins, or their parents’ or grandparents’ sins; but I am responsible for my own. This is not to say I ought not to care about my forebears’ actions, lifestyles, or posture toward God; nor is it to say I have nothing to learn from them or their stories. Further, it isn’t to say that I need not ever be concerned about the actions and attitudes of those around me. Society’s attitude toward God and the things of God are legitimate concerns, of course; but they do not determine my own relationship with God.
In other words, you are not guilty before God for sins your ancestors committed. Nor are you guilty of any sin simply because of your race, ethnicity, biological sex, or other trait or factor totally beyond your control or influence.
Yet Keller says if you have white skin, “the Bible actually says are involved in injustice, even if you didn’t actually do it.” The Bible, however, doesn’t say this! Keller goes on, claiming that “studies have shown, have pretty much proven that if you have white skin, it’s worth a million dollars over a lifetime.” Social researchers can determine a lot of things, but this conclusion, I believe, is a leap, even for them. Don’t be fooled by the manipulative myth of “white privilege.” There are too many other variables involved in the creation and accumulation of wealth and other resources that have absolutely nothing to do with skin color.
Keller essentially has redefined sin, because he is promoting the idea that whites are guilty of oppressing blacks and other minorities because they are white. He’s also essentially contending individuals should feel responsible for certain sins even if they haven’t personally committed them. Further, he is demeaning blacks with the underlying assumption that they are perpetual victims.
There’s more! Critical race theory, which Keller obviously espoused, offers no forgiveness to whites, and it promotes envy and resentment among blacks. Thus, it promotes division between whites and blacks. All of this is contrary to the gospel, which unites people of all races under the blood of Jesus Christ (see “Social Justice and Biblical Christianity Are Incompatible: Here’s Why, Part 1 and Part 2“).
When someone comes to God on His conditions, that person confesses the sins of which he or she is personally guilty. Make no mistake. Scripture is clear that each individual will stand before God and give an account for his or her deeds and misdeeds. In terms of eternal salvation, everyone who becomes eligible to enter heaven does so by relying on God to give him or her a new birth. People are not born corporately, but one at a time (even twins and triplets). So it is in the spiritual realm. With regard to salvation, no sinner can repent of another’s or others’ sins. The sins of which a man or woman, boy or girl is guilty are not those of his or her ancestors. They belong to the individual. This is not to say that sins of omission are not real — but that the sins my ancestors committed or failed to commit are theirs — not mine.
Nevertheless, Keller was adamant. He says, “The whole structure of the gospel is based on corporate responsibility.” No, it isn’t. He further condemns white people for failing to see the corporate nature of the gospel. These clips (a montage) are taken from this video.
It is undeniable. The social justice movement redefines sin and thereby tampers with and misrepresents the gospel.
Item 5: Keller’s statement that “Religious people find God useful. Gospel people find him beautiful” misses the mark and is more confusing than clarifying.
The way this “observation” is framed leads me to believe that Keller is trying to condemn pharisaism. Yet there is a sense in which it is appropriate and right to “find God useful” and to enjoy the benefits He affords us when we come to Him on His conditions.
An astute observer has said, “Remember that Christianity isn’t at all about what we do for God, but what He does for us.” Don’t we find what He does for us useful or beneficial to an infinite degree? As Psalm 1:1-3 declares,
Blessed is the man
Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly,
Nor stands in the path of sinners,
Nor sits in the seat of the scornful;
2 But his delight is in the law of the Lord,
And in His law he meditates day and night.
3 He shall be like a tree
Planted by the rivers of water,
That brings forth its fruit in its season,
Whose leaf also shall not wither;
And whatever he does shall prosper.
While I have included Psalm 112 in my list of Scriptures highlighting the benefits of being committed to the Lord, I am not in any way promoting a “prosperity” gospel by including it. The one who “delights greatly in His commandments” is on the right track to work hard, make wise investments, and use his wealth wisely — but also to be blessed by God in material ways, as God sees fit. The person does not “find God useful” for material blessings alone, but primarily for the broad fulfillment in life that comes from obeying God’s commands.
The point here is that God is useful and beautiful, and in God’s plan of salvation, we can fully enjoy and appreciate both.
An Apparent Effort Not to Offend
It is apparent that, just as we observed in part 1, Keller is driven by a keen awareness that the gospel will be less unattractive to a New York audience, and to any urban audience, for that matter, if its harsher elements are softened. This is extremely unfortunate, because sometimes people are convicted (and some people are convicted) only when they realize that the good news of the gospel is as wonderful as it is only because the bad news of the gospel (that everyone is a sinner destined for hell) could not be any worse than it is.
Sometimes people are convicted only when they realize that the good news of the gospel is as wonderful as it is only because the bad news of the gospel could not be any worse than it is.
I would suggest to my readers that, as with Nineveh in Jonah’s day, the bad news of judgment doesn’t need to be softened, but forthrightly declared. Yes, declared lovingly, but also declared truthfully, without apology or adjustments to accommodate people or make them “feel better.”
Even as it relates to a core truth of the gospel — that Jesus is the only way to heaven — we see Keller soften his answer for a more “progressive” audience. Contrast his response to this question in this interview by Eric Metaxas to this one at Columbia University.
Be forewarned. Be discerning. Be alert. Don’t let Tim Keller cast doubt on your faith in Christ and the Bible. Furthermore, please warn others not to let him cast doubt on theirs.
Copyright © 2023 by B. Nathaniel Sullivan. All rights reserved.
This article is available for publication and distribution by Exposing enemies within the church, LLC.
Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture has been taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Be First to Comment