Leftist theologian and The Gospel Coalition founder Tim Keller is known for his cryptic tweets. He has a habit of speaking in a way that baits conservatives into calling him out and claiming that they misunderstood his tweets or his motives. Over the past few years, it has become apparent to objective observers that Keller has smuggled a number of leftist ideas into the church under the guise of social justice and winsome pragmatism.
Keller occasionally gives a glimpse of his bag of tricks when he spews such nonsense as calling the negotiation of used car prices “systemically racist” or when he wrote the forward of a book about a Christianized version of Critical Theory. Keller has also promoted same-sex attraction identity groups within Christianity, endorsed foul-mouthed late-night talk show host Stephen Colbert as a “brilliant example” and a “witness” for his faith in a “form that the culture can handle”, and personally segregated unvaccinated members within his church from vaccinated church members.
Many evangelicals continue to turn a blind eye to the leftist trajectory of Keller, even as he drops new evidence of the downgrade on a nearly monthly basis. For those who claim ignorance, Keller recently created an 82 page Cultural Marxism manifesto, which should leave no doubt about his leftist thoughts and intentions. Of course, anyone who disagrees with his utopian vision of the future is a “fundie” in Keller’s eye.
Keller spends the first three chapters of the whitepaper creating novel critical accounts of the histories of mainline (Gospel-void apostate) Christianity and Evangelicalism. He leans heavily on leftist church historians, such as pro-LGBTQ egalitarian Kristin Kobes du Mez to spin the history of the American Church as racist and anti-intellectual. The latter three chapters utilize Keller’s faux history and critical theories from the first three chapters of the book to propose some truly leftist visions of the future American church.
“We envision a day when…Large percentages of Christians become able to speak about their faith in daily relationships in ways that are not perceived by most of the recipients as offensive or even awkward, but instead are received as helpful and positive.”
A true Gospel presentation takes the mirror of God’s law and calls out the sinner for his violation of that law before presenting God’s mercy in the form of Jesus’ penal substitutionary atonement on the cross. There is no way to inoffensively present such a message because the Gospel is offensive to the unrepentant sinner. When Tim Keller thinks that Christians will find a way to speak about faith without offending non-Christians, he must either be talking about faux Christians like Stephen Colbert or the mealy-mouthed weasily way that Keller himself speaks when he is waffling on homosexuality in front of a secular audience.
Keller’s vision for Evangelicalism is theologically weak, and dependent on pragmatism and cultural appeal, in an effort to make the church more appealing to the lost world.
“We envision a day when… An increasing number of Christian artists—working out both the realism of the Christian worldview about sin and the confident expectation of restorative grace— produce high quality stories, music, visual art all with the results that (a) more people see the beauty and intuitive plausibility of Christianity and at the same time, (b) people in general across our society will increase in hope.”
Keller fails to recognize that American Christianity’s dependence on personal stories, theologically shallow Christian music, and novel artistic depictions of Christianity is a primary cause of the downgrade of the American church. The true Gospel presented in a faithful way will not give hope to unrepentant sinners.
According to Keller’s vision, those who struggle with same-sex attraction should be allowed to carry that identity within the church and should even be relied upon for wisdom. There’s nothing like a church that relies on homo-Gnosticism for guidance on issues of family and sexuality.
“We envision a day when…. It is a community in which Christian men and women who describe themselves as attracted to the same sex, but who wish to live according to the biblical vision and ethic for sex are nurtured and respected, and their wisdom relied upon.”
Keller, an opponent of Christian Nationalism who believes in the myth of secular neutrality, also wants Christians to pursue a form of pietism when it comes to law and politics. Apparently, the “electoral interests” of Christians who pursue policies that reflect Biblical truth don’t equate to true justice in the eyes of Keller.
“We envision a day when… In politics and government, Christians are known for seeking the common good rather than their own electoral interests and for being cognizant of the importance of government policies for a just society.”
Of course, what would the manifesto of a Social Justice Warrior be without an appeal to “equity” in the form of the redistribution of money and power.
“We envision a day when…All of these changes would lead to a more just distribution of money and power, and people in general would have more control over their neighborhoods and their lives.”
In Keller’s socialist Christian version of John Lennon’s Imagine, Christians defend the freedom of pagans to exercise every form of debauchery under the guise of free speech for all in a “truly pluralistic society”, because Keller thinks that compromise is the key to earning the almighty “cultural capital” points.
“We envision a day when…Christians are known for their uncompromising stand for truth and their critique of false beliefs and narratives, and at the same time they are known for their civility and for their commitment to creating a truly pluralistic society in which all are free to voice and practice their worldviews and faith.”
Keller goes on to describe an “evangelical crack-up” that he believes should be implemented in order to create an environment in which his vision of Christian Socialism would flourish.
“For us, it will mean that, again, some denominations and institutions will divide. Some organizations will divide. Evangelicalism has fragmented into at least four zones. (As the following chart shows, that could be broken into six or more.) Some older institutions will have to decide which zone to ally with. The new institutions, new alliances, and leaders for a new renewal movement will mostly come from Zones 2 and 3—and especially Zones 2b and 3a.”
Keller wants new movements and institutions that will implement his vision to be formed through an alliance of compromising “conservative” evangelicals. He dubs these zones that are compatible to his vision 2b and 3a.
Keller hopes to forge a partnership between social justice-obsessed complementarians and wishy-washy social justice-obsessed egalitarian evangelicals who aren’t focused on doctrinal truth or teaching on Biblical family and sexuality. One might assume that groups in Keller’s 2b would be expected to give up complementarianism in their pursuit of their alliance with wishy-washy spineless mainstream evangelical group 3a, especially considering that both groups are known for their participating in nonsensical critical theory “power-divestment” exercises.
The most mind-boggling portion of Keller’s theory is the casting off from Evangelicalism of all those deemed fundamentalists (zone 1a). According to Keller, you belong to this group of fundamentalist cast-offs if you oppose social justice, are militant (whatever that means), believe in “rigid gender roles”, voted for Trump, or oppose Covid Vaccines.
The absurdity of Keller’s new theory is truly breathtaking because it pigeon-holes conservatives for their opposition to any form of woke politics. Keller’s Evangelical Zone theory, a leftist appeal to ecumenism, lacks real doctrinal clarity, which comes as no surprise considering that it was developed by a Critical-Theory obsessed cultural Marxist. How does Keller think that a coalition that includes his camp will succeed in a world that is hostile to Christianity?
“How will we thrive as a movement in a hostile environment? We must accrue economic, symbolic, and social capital in competition with other groups and movements in the religious field.”
