Thread:
I'm thinking about Tim Keller's influence.

There is the curious fact that Keller is well-regarded among the culture elite (or at least has not suffered the sort of vilification one might expect given his influence). How can we explain this?

Looking at Prodigal God and other writings, you see that his approach to urban ministry is deeply political in a way that appeals to Democrat-heavy cities. It involves two moves:
1) equalizing sins: elevating the sin of hypocrisy, "moralism," and "religion" (the sins of "conservatives") and equating these with the sins tolerated among liberal (e.g., homosexuality)
&
2) emphasizing "self-righteousness" as a sort of chief sin (the sin of "red states").
Keller effectively downplays the sins that liberals tolerate while elevating the sins of their political enemies, the red state conservatives.
But the greatest appeal to liberals is that critiquing the "self-righteous" vilifies political action, particularly the action of social conservatives (e.g., anti-gay marriage). And the equalization of sins eases concerns over changes in social policy (e.g., gay marriage).
Keller does not deny that the liberal sins are sins. Instead he posits a third-way that critiques both "right" and "left", which allows people to be above the sexual deviancy and above the hypocrisy.
But the equalization/elevation described above still appeals to those who are unwilling to directly confront and wholly reject the liberal zeitgeist which dominates urban areas.
It effectively neutralizes conservative political opposition to the zeitgeist on social issues.

His ministry theme or ethos has been very influential in every region of the US. It is captured in the language of "brokenness" and the "church is for messy people".
Now that equalizing homosexuality and self-righteousness is no longer effective (bc people are unwilling to call homosexuality something deviant or sinful), they've switched to race...
The emphasis on "racial justice" follows the same program: the "self-righteous" conservatives (whites) refuse to reflect on their complicity in injustice, while we (white) liberals rightfully want racial justice but tend to be too "secular" about it.
One thing to notice is that this political posture is not fundamentally political; it is an urban ministry apologetic. But it has become the dominating political theology of elite evangelicalism.
Evangelical elite political theology is ultimately an apologetical approach that appeals to urban liberals by demonizing non-urban conservative Christians.
And it strongly suggests that the elite evangelical program of "moral witness" is oriented toward the sensibilities of educated, white urbanite liberals, and that it relies on the vilification of non-educated white, non-urbanite conservatives.
[End]

More from Health

You May Also Like

🌿𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒂 𝑺𝒕𝒂𝒓 : 𝑫𝒉𝒓𝒖𝒗𝒂 & 𝑽𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒏𝒖

Once upon a time there was a Raja named Uttānapāda born of Svayambhuva Manu,1st man on earth.He had 2 beautiful wives - Suniti & Suruchi & two sons were born of them Dhruva & Uttama respectively.
#talesofkrishna https://t.co/E85MTPkF9W


Now Suniti was the daughter of a tribal chief while Suruchi was the daughter of a rich king. Hence Suruchi was always favored the most by Raja while Suniti was ignored. But while Suniti was gentle & kind hearted by nature Suruchi was venomous inside.
#KrishnaLeela


The story is of a time when ideally the eldest son of the king becomes the heir to the throne. Hence the sinhasan of the Raja belonged to Dhruva.This is why Suruchi who was the 2nd wife nourished poison in her heart for Dhruva as she knew her son will never get the throne.


One day when Dhruva was just 5 years old he went on to sit on his father's lap. Suruchi, the jealous queen, got enraged and shoved him away from Raja as she never wanted Raja to shower Dhruva with his fatherly affection.


Dhruva protested questioning his step mother "why can't i sit on my own father's lap?" A furious Suruchi berated him saying "only God can allow him that privilege. Go ask him"