Tim Keller on preaching about homosexuality: "Ummmm... it’s just... it’s just think about... you know... you know..."

NOTE TO THOSE ENTERING BAYLYBLOG FROM AQUILLA REPORT: It's surprising Jim Bruce linked to this full blog post since his description of what went down in this interview is so far afield of what you see transcribed below. But read on and see for yourself.

On the direct matter of whether Keller is capable of calling homosexuality "sin," this post is much more to the point than the post below, although both are damning. Also read these four posts demonstrating Keller's departure from the Biblical doctrine of Hell here, here, here, and here. Then there's this post documenting Keller's principle of not preaching on abortion, and many other posts on Keller's failures concerning sexuality, God's Order of Creation, etc.

Finally, note that Aquilla Report never allows comments, so it's impossible to challenge or correct them. Which is the reason my wife predicts Dominic's link to this page will soon be killed.

* * *

(Tim, w/thanks to a faithful man) By now, when the President of our own Covenant Theological Seminary invites Tim Keller to model pastoral ministry to his students over in St. Louis, he should know precisely what he's going to get and not be left batting cleanup for him. But take a listen to this exchange from one of Keller's recent visits, there.

It's a Q & A session in front of men preparing for pastoral ministry. A Covenant student asks the Rev. Dr. Tim Keller this question: "How do you think the church is or should be proactive with regard to the issue of homosexuality? I see the prevalence of homosexuality, yet the church seems to be afraid to touch the issue. How do we actively speak to believers about this topic in truth and in love?"

Which question launched the Keller/Chapell duo into this session of semantic dodge ball, with protective pads and helmets.

Was Tim Keller's answer bad?

Yes, his answer was bad.

Why?

Because he's a preacher of the Gospel and he ought to rejoice at being used by the Holy Spirit to convict the world of sin and righteousness and judgment. He ought to know God's Moral Law is man's schoolmaster, his crossing guard to the Cross. Pastor Keller's ministry is to singles in Manhattan, so he should (and easily could, given his gifts) excel at the proclamation of the wickedness of sodomy along with God's love and mercy for those ensnared in this foul pit...

Tim could do better--much better.

Why doesn't he?

That's a question very much worth asking because the answer has to do with the nature of preaching itself. What is preaching? How ought it to be done? What sort of model for preaching are we presented in the New Testament? Is the preaching of the New Testament time-bound and hidebound, or timeless and trans-cultural?

If Tim Keller were not The Model for conservative Reformed pastors today, I'd not be constant in my criticism of his approach to all things sexual. Sadly though, he is. And doubly sadly, our seminary president is a fan.

If you're more visual than auditory, here's a transcript of this particular question and answer at Covenant Theological Seminary done by a longtime Redeemer Presbyterian Church of Manhattan member who's been warning me for some time that Tim Keller does not address homosexuality from his pulpit.

Tim seems to cede the point, here.

My necessary conclusion for ministers of the Word and Sacrament is that Tim Keller is no example to emulate in preaching to an effeminate age.

Unless, of course, Tim Keller is a correction of the Apostle Paul's bad example.

* * *

CHAPELL: [CTS student question] How do you think the church is or should be proactive with regard to the issue of homosexuality? I see the prevalence of homosexuality, yet the church seems to be afraid to touch the issue. How do we actively speak to believers about this topic in truth and in love?

KELLER: Uhhhh….well…(sigh)…The church is afraid to touch the topic? I….it may…….it..its possible…that….in the 20 yrs that I’ve seen that this issue has actually not.…ummm. it..uh…it hasn’t gone away its really gotten to be much much more..socially….

CHAPELL: Sure. Rural church, Sparta Illinois, 1985. I can tell the first Sunday I used the word ‘homosexuality’ and my wife wondered if I would have a job the next week. I mean, it was that scary of a subject at the time. So, if…now again, that’s rural Illinois but I’m guessing even now the church questions..now there’s all kinds of reasons for the fear. One, are you going to say something that your people are going to get mad at you about? Second, is the subject going to be so hot that the people who are struggling with an issue of of gender or sexuality, that I can’t even say in a public setting the kind of things I want to say to minister privately to this person. So how do I do this?

KELLER: Well, it’s much, much, much easier to to have private conversations about it. I think…..uh…I 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.

CHAPELL: have you been able to say…again, very different congregations and cultures…Could you would you say from the pulpit at Redeemer, ‘Same-sex attraction, if it leads to activity that is same-sex oriented is a sin’?

KELLER: O yeah..well, you have to because you get to it and you’re preaching and you do. sure. But..what I’m saying is if you go…if you make it the subject of your sermon, uhhhh… it’s uhhhh..uh an entire sermon on it would not be an easy thing to get..you..you…you have to say what the Bible says and nobody at Redeemer doubts where we are. But for me to do teaching in the worship service, I am now going to give you the re…you know….the biblical teaching on homosexuality, that has been a hard thing to do when my audience is so diverse. I would have to say the average church, the audience isn’t nearly that diverse. And…so….I have not…made that the main place in which I’ve taught. But…we…we’ve done a fair amount of teaching inside amongst our leaders, our counselors, our undershepherds, our elders. We talk about it. Nobody doubts where we are. But I think that preaching on a Sunday about it…uhhhh…making public statements is…kind of in the cards because I think it’s gonna be a very, very divisive issue in the future.

CHAPELL: Good.

* * *

My son-in-law, Lucas, comments: "He broke a rule in software development: you are supposed to under-promise and over-deliver."

Comments

Summary for those who don't like to read or listen:

CHAPELL: Could you be biblical from the pulpit on the issue of homosexuality?

KELLER: I could. In the future. (Maybe.)

yuck.

"And generally speaking, it’s almost impossible to preach a sermon and hit all 3 or 4 of those constituencies equally well."

It is so sad to hear a man who suppose to be preaching the Word be in such fear of offending his audience.

I second Joseph's, "yuck"

Ugh, this conversation makes me sick. If Tim Keller's church is "so much more diverse" than "Hick-ville 85' Illinois", then how does he not know that homosexuality is not only divisive today but a complete poison that has infiltrated his flock and, yes, even mid-west and southern US flocks?
I hate this attitude- "Oh, I live in NYC, I can't preach the gospel here- it's too progressive here to really say anything ever..ummm...AT ALL...um...ya know, kinda sorta?"
Dear Pastor Keller, I am a wicked sinner redeemed by Jesus blood. You may think I sound judgmental and you do well to think so, because based on your answer I am judging you. Stand up, be a man of God, a leader in your church, and preach the words God has given you to lead men from death to life everlasting. Reformed Pastors "don't kind of play cards", they trust in God's sovereignty that His elect will be saved by grace. What are you so afraid of that is more frightening than God's wrath?

His response is so shameful it poisons every word he's ever preached or written.

Kamilla

All of Keller's hemming and hawing made me think of this J.C. Ryle quote on preaching:

“Let us pray to be kept from corrupting God’s Word. Let neither fear nor favor of man induce us to keep back, or avoid, or change, or mutilate, or qualify any text in the Bible. Surely we ought to have holy boldness when we speak as ambassadors of God. We have no reason to be ashamed of any statement we make in our pulpits so long as it is Scriptural.”

"CHAPELL: have you been able to say…again, very different congregations and cultures…Could you would you say from the pulpit at Redeemer, ‘Same-sex attraction, if it leads to activity that is same-sex oriented is a sin’?"

That's a great example of how to ask a hard question (well, a little babblesque--- but it gets the point across).

It's so sad. Pastor Keller knows what he ought to be doing, but he's not brave enough to do it. And I fear what is worse: he won't even let a braver subordinate pastor preach the sermon that would, in effect, cause Legion to go into the Gadarene swine and create an explosion of oinking and a dramatic loss of wealth. Probably that's what he should be encouraged to do,given human frailty. With some people, it's enough if they just do no harm--- it is too much to expect heroism.

CHAPELL: Could you be biblical from the pulpit on the issue of homosexuality?

KELLER: I could. In the future.

Perhaps Keller doesn't know that Paul lived a couple thousand years preceding him.

"an entire sermon on it would not be an easy thing to get"

Wow, so Keller only teaches easy things? I didn't know being a pastor was so, um, uh, gosh, I mean to say, uh, easy!

I guess it's only the unbiblical pastors who make life hard for themselves.

Poor fools.

Number of Tim Keller's sermons on homosexuality = 0

Number of Jesus' sermons on homosexuality = 0

Pretty good company, don't you think?

Dear Zeke,

Sermons on wives submitting to their husbands: 0

Sermons on husbands loving their wives: 0

Sermons on not cheating on tax forms: 0

Sermons on incest: 0

Sermons on bestiality: 0

Sermons on rape: 0

Sermons on adultery: 0

Sermons on repenting of racism: 0

Sermons on citizens' rights to health care: 0

Sermons on slaughtering the unborn: 0

Sermons on murder: 0

Sermons on false shepherds: a number

Sermons on Hell and judgment: many

So what's your point, good sir?

Love,

Your complaint seems to be that Tim Keller is a poor example for pastors because he doesn't devote sermons to homosexuality. If Christ didn't preach on homosexuality, does that mean He is also a bad example?

Do you think this is a fair summary of Keller's response:

"I don't preach on homosexuality unless it comes up in the text. Knowing my congregation, I find it much more effective to teach them in private/counseling/small groups when it comes to homosexuality."

Do you think this is an accurate summary, and if so, is this a flawed approach?

The thing that's sad is that it is possible (indeed desirable) to be sensitive pastorally to the plight of the homosexual, while upholding the truth of the Scripture, holding out hope and love to the homosexual, and cautioning those who are never tempted by homosexuality to be proud over those who are.

de Witt preached a masterful sermon on Sodom and Gomorrah that I still possess and have our interns listen to as a model of how to deal both prophetically and pastorally with homosexuality.

It has been my model on how to preach on all sensitive topics --sensitive because of the diversity of age of the congregation, because of the cultural milieu, and because of our own tendency to think our sins and temptations are not as serious as those "icky" gay peoples'.

It is interesting to see the way we come up with excuses for our own behavior. Pastor Keller's reason for not preaching on homosexuality is that as a matter of communication and pedagogy his diverse audience makes it impossible to do so effectively. But, this is going to be true of virtually any sin that is preached on. For any sin, there are always going to be: 1) Christians engaged in it, 2) Non-Christians who aren't engaged in it but have lots of friends who are, and 3) Non-Christians who are engaged in it. Presumably we manage to overcome this problem with sins like selfishness, pride, harming the environment, racism, etc. I mean, there are racists in the audience, right? And people are engaged in it to lesser and greater degrees. There are proud and unloving people in the audience, right? Somehow we can overcome that pedagogical obstacle and preach on those topics. But, when it comes to homosexuality? Nope, too tough. No way to do it. Just can't be done. Maybe after more thought we'll figure out a way.

Of course, we all make excuses and carve out reasons to justify our actions, but how we respond when this sin is pointed out makes a great deal of difference.

Any way I could get a copy of that sermon Rev. Pierce?

>>The thing that's sad is that it is possible (indeed desirable) to be sensitive pastorally to the plight of the homosexual, while upholding the truth of the Scripture...

Or, to put it another way, "It's impossible (indeed reprehensible) to be sensitive pastorally to the plight of the homosexual in any other way than proclaiming the truth of Scripture."

Pastoral sensitivity, love, compassion, grace, and mercy to the sodomite, as to the covetous man, are inevitably demonstrated--and that, most consistently--by this statement I read somewhere:

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God" (1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

Biblical preaching never pits God's Law, judgment, and Hell against pastoral sensitivity. They are at its heart.

Love,

Tim,

You know I agree with you, brother.

Its not true that Keller has never preached on homosexuality at Redeemer. I know for a fact that he preached on it back in the 90s. I have a copy of the tape.

I believe thaey used to have a seperate evening service that was sometimes devoted to special topics. I think that was the service that it was preached.

By the way, I found most telling Tim's use of the words 'constituencies,' 'audience,' and 'communicator' for a pastor preaching to his flock.

Love,

Also, another poignant reminder of how long it's been since a certain seminary professor got his scant pastoral experience....

Just like the professor of Christian Education who heads up our missionary agency...

call me crazy, but pastors should head seminaries and missionaries should head missions agencies.

But, what do I know?

Oops, I meant certain seminary PRESIDENT got his scant pastoral experience.

>>Its not true that Keller has never preached on homosexuality at Redeemer. I know for a fact that he preached on it back in the 90s. I have a copy of the tape.

Well, there you have it. I was certainly hoping you wouldn't make that particular point, but I can see that you're more than a match for me.

Love,

"I can see that you're more than a match for me."

Not trying to start a debate but correct the perception that he has never addressed the subject from the pulpit. In addition to that sermon I know he featured the ministry of Harvest during a service once and served on their board at one time. All of which is public knowledge.

I think many have assumed that he's NEVER addressed homosexuality from the pulpit. In addition has he mentioned it as part of a sermon because the passage demanded it? Probably

So, the one time Keller has addressed the topic of homosexuality, it was in a "separate evening service"?

I see.

Kamilla

Bobby,
Tim Keller, by his own admission, considers the topic of homosexuality to be essentially absent from his "communications" in Sunday worship services.

According to Tim K, that sermon from...what, 15+ years ago...would be an anomaly (perhaps broaching the subject every 15 years can be construed as "regular").

Clint noted Tim K's comment in passing where he said:
"an entire sermon on it would not be an easy thing to get"

I'd like to add to the irony of this statement:
I thought his congregation of affluence, and NY Times snobbery more a bit more quick on the uptake than the rest of us? Wouldn't Manhattan be the ideal place to plant such difficult seeds?

I'm scratching my head...are Manhattanites too smart or too stupid to understand sin? Perhaps Tim K can help me out.

Dear Bobby,

This from a longtime Redeemer member, received in my e-mail yesterday. (And not the same member who transcribed the Covenant Theological Seminary Q&A.)

* * *
Your recent post on Tim Keller and the sin of homosexuality was spot on. ...Tim doesn't preach about homosexuality. ...I don't know how Tim reconciles the leaders' knowledge of the secret truth about God's view of homosexuality with the fact that a large percentage of Redeemerites would never have contact with the "leaders" who know the secret. The fact is that there are many people that attend Redeemer on a periodic basis that are publicly known to be practicing homosexuals and have never heard that those who practice homosexuality will not enter the Kindgom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10). I can attest that I sat in the same pew as a practicing homosexual on Sunday. This is not an academic problem.

* * *

Love,

Not disputing anything said by Keller except the fact that a number of posts said that there were 0 sermons on homosexuality when I knew that was not the case. Plus the fact that he has been active with Harvest paints a little bit of a different picture.

Dear Bobby,

As I understand it, back in February of 2009 Tim was preaching through Romans 1 and arrived at Romans 1:18-32. But when that sermon text arrived, the only passage that was read was 1:18-25. (The sermon is titled, "Heart of Darkness.") There, Tim mentioned 'idolatry of sex' in passing, but didn't mention anything Paul says in verses 26-32.

Is this correct? If so, it seem contrary to what Tim says, above, right?

Love,

I'm not a member of Redeemer nor do I attend on a regualr basis since I do not live in NY. I was not there to hear the sermon in question.

I only asserted that he has not had a total silence on the topic since his position is known by many.

Wow. If there is ANY place that needs to hear the truth of homosexuality and the gospel, it's NYC. I am continually dismayed at the men who have climbed the "corporate ladder" in Christendom who are so dead-set on protecting their approval ratings. It's painful to watch.

When my husband and I were driving through DC last fourth of July, I turned my head just in time to see several men come out of the posh Renaissance Hotel. My first thought was, "Wow! Those are some expensive suits!" My second thought was, "Wow! There's Rick Warren." Because of traffic, we were able to watch the scene for a short while: Rick Warren, walking down the street, surrounded by a small posse, cameras flashing in front of him, someone (who was obviously a reporter)asking him questions. It was really sad to see another man who had been entrusted with the gospel continue to revel in being a sell-out.

>his position is known by many.

Who are the many, and how do I become one of them? Inquiring minds want to know.

"I am continually dismayed at the men who have climbed the "corporate ladder" in Christendom who are so dead-set on protecting their approval ratings. It's painful to watch."

Are you assuming that this is Tim Keller's motive? How can you? How do you know this is what drives him?

Tim Keller can defend himself but we need to be careful when we assume what another believer's motives are.

Bobby,

It is clear from what Keller has said regarding his "diverse" congregation (couple that with the question and his answer regarding homosexuality)that he is purposefully avoiding it. Obviously, no one can know the motives of any man's heart 100 percent. But you can make an educated guess.

But thats not the words you applied towards Tim Keller. the words you used were: "climbing the 'corporate ladder' of Christendom" and protecting the "approval rating."

Thats much different & assumes a selfish motive.

Yes, Bobby. I'm taking an educated guess that is what is driving Keller to make the decisions (or not make the decisions) regarding preaching about homosexuality. I'm taking an educated guess that how he looks before men (as opposed to God) is playing a huge role in this, hence the words "climbing the corporate ladder of Christendom" and "approval rating." I'm sorry that I didn't spell it out in my first comment. I presumed that nuance could be detected.

1. "climbing the 'corporate ladder' of Christendom"

2. protecting the "approval rating."

Motive 1 is not really what the commenter meant. Tim Keller has been head pastor for a long time--- he is not climbing any ladder. Rather, he is like an entrepreneur, and his sin would be trying to make his organization big, not trying to rise within it.

Both motives are certainly at work, even if they are not Pastor Keller's main motives. Everybody would want their church to thrive and want to be liked by everyone. The problem is that those goals can be easily confused with preaching the Gospel successfully, since often they do coincide with it.

I was just thinking about the novel and movie The Bridge on the River Kwai. The brave British colonel slips into being a Japanese collaborator, with the finest of motives.

Dear Bobby,

Put a good spin on it for us, a positive construction of the concern for nuance and audience. Meanwhile, I will defend those who call a "spade" what looks and smells like a spade. You're being willfully obscurantist here unless you know personally of some good reason for avoiding such passages in Scripture.

Love in Christ,

David Bayly

"homosexuality, it was in a "separate evening service"?"

I guess they're "separate but equal"? The only ones who are loved enough to hear the truth are those in the evening service?

Do they publish that in the bulletin? "For Those We Love: Biblical Truth Sermon, 6pm. (The unloved need not show up.)"

So many wonderful, beautiful things to point out about sexuality coming directly from the Scriptures.....so many apparently lying fallow in the fields of Pastor Keller.

I don't know if he's climbing the corporate ladder of anything, but if I am beginning to understand some of the intricacies of Biblical and systematic theology, I do know that he's apparently cheating his congregation out of that teaching.

Yes, Prof. Rasmussen. That's what I meant by "corporate ladder." Thanks for clarifying.

Here's my concern with this thread. The goal of preaching against homosexuality is to call people to faith and repentance for this particular sin. It seems that Tim Keller believes that he is able to more effectively accomplish this by means other than preaching from the pulpit. He knows his flock, and believes private confrontation, small, groups, etc lead more to faith and repentance and helps them more clearly see the Gospel. If he is correct and wins more people to repentance by NOT preaching against homosexuality from the pulpit, isn't that something to praise? Tim knows his flock, and knows how best to reach them. That seems to be his point in the discussion above.

And I still want to know why Tim Keller is criticized for not preaching against homosexuality while Christ is not. Christ called sinners to repentance, and having listened to quite a few of Keller's sermons on-line, he does the same. If Christ effectively preached the Gospel and didn't preach against homosexuality (among other sins), why can't Keller do the same? Please tell me what I'm missing...

Zeke,
I think Keller knows his flock so well that he knows not to broach the subject. If there was any sort of approach to sodomy within the body by way of small groups and the pastors, then I would think Keller's hearers would be more receptive to this message by now. Dontcha think?

I'm willing to bet Redeemer's M.O. on sodomy is "don't ask, don't tell".

Craig -

Here's an excerpt from Redeemer's membership application. I think this is a far cry from "don't ask, don't tell." In fact, I wonder how many other churches ask this of their prospective members:

"In the culture in which we live, there is a lot of confusion about what it means to live a sexually pure life. We believe it is important to let people know what we understand the Scriptures teach in regard to this.

We believe sex is a gift from God by which we declare to a spouse that we are committed completely and exclusively to them. On that basis we believe sex outside marriage is wrong, and that living with someone with whom you are romantically involved and yet to whom you are not married is also wrong. Can you give your assent to those beliefs?

We also believe that practicing a homosexual lifestyle is not an option for a Christian. Can you subscribe to that belief as well?"

Zeke,

1. What means has God appointed for calling men to faith and repentance? Please cite Scripture.

2. The "whole counsel of God" does not consist only in red letters. The biblical principle is preaching to the sins of your people--preaching to their consciences. This is what Jesus and the Apostles modeled for us. It is the precedent.

Here's the issue: God has appointed the preaching of His Word as the central means by which men are called to faith and repentance. The model for preaching is to apply God's Word to the consciences of the hearers. This is what Jesus and the Apostles always did.

Tim Keller freely admits that the consciences of his people are burdened with the sin of sodomy. And then freely admits that he withholds the primary means that God has appointed for leading those men and women to repentance and faith: preaching. This is not a question of contextualization. It is a question of love and faith. Tim Keller does not love homosexuals. Or he hasn't the faith that God uses the means God promises to use to bring men to repentance and faith. In other words, he doesn't believe in preaching.

This is inexcusable and indefensible in a minister of the Gospel. Stop defending it.

If he finds himself lacking the courage and compassion to address the issue, he needs to move away from Manhattan and find some place where his preaching can be more relevant. Perhaps there's a vacancy in Sparta, Illinois?

"And I still want to know why Tim Keller is criticized for not preaching against homosexuality while Christ is not. Christ called sinners to repentance, and having listened to quite a few of Keller's sermons on-line, he does the same. If Christ effectively preached the Gospel and didn't preach against homosexuality (among other sins), why can't Keller do the same? Please tell me what I'm missing..."

Zeke,

Jesus is fully God and in complete harmony with everything revealed in the scriptures. That includes homosexuality being an abomination. Jesus didn't come to soften the message of God the Father and neither should Tim Keller. There are souls at stake. The whole counsel of God must be preached from the pulpit; even the gnarly parts that make people hate us, and cause them to leave our churches, and stop giving financially. We must trust God.

Jake S.,

If Redeemer's membership literature says that people must be sexually pure...great. Although they should call impurity what it is - sin. Having documents that call people to purity in no way replaces the absolute necessity to preach purity from the pulpit. Like Mr. Mentzel said, the method of reaching men that has been given to us is preaching. Again, souls are at stake...really.

Jacob, you answered your own question: hearing of the Word is the ordinary means God calls people to faith and repentance. Luke 24 and Acts 11 come to mind. I'm not disagreeing with that, and I doubt Keller would disagree with you. He believes homosexuals should be confronted with what the Bible has to say about that particular sin, but he doesn't believe preaching a sermon on it specifically is the best way to do that. He knows and loves his flock, and believes that is the best way to reach his people. He may be right or he may be wrong, but I don't think cowardice has anything to do with it. If I remember correctly he candidly discussed his stance against homosexuality in an issue of the New Yorker last Fall. That's certainly not cowardice or shirking from the truth.

It seems you are missing my point about Christ. The implication is the Keller is wrong for not preaching against homosexuality from the pulpit. But to be consistent, how can you also not say that Christ was wrong? Of course a pastor must consider the whole counsel of God, but I don't see a mandate to preach specifically against homosexuality. He must not accept it, but must he preach against it from the pulpit? Is that the only way he can show love for his flock? Did Jesus not love His flock?

Zeke,

Methinks you're placing Mr. Keller in a dangerous position by asking us to compare him with Jesus Christ. Like I said before: Jesus is God. He is in full unity and agreeance with the whole counsel of God. For whatever reason the scriptures do not record Jesus Christ's explicit preaching against sodomy. In no way would this suggest that He didn't! But he indeed said, "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." Your suggestion that to be consistent we must call Christ wrong is heinous.

Every faithful preacher in history (a better comparison that you should use for Mr. Keller) has preached the full counsel of God including fleeing from the wrath of God due to the practice of sodomy. Mr. Keller gets no pass if he is to be faithful...even in Manhattan.

Jesus always preached authoritatively and faithfully against sin!

John 21:25

'I'm willing to bet Redeemer's M.O. on sodomy is "don't ask, don't tell".'

This is a very serious charge to make against any church within the PCA and borders on slander.

Pages