A New York state of mind...
by David and Tim Bayly on September 8, 2011 - 2:50pm
Good girls gone bad, the city's filled with them...
- Jay-Z, "Empire State of Mind"
Here's a list of the fifteen zip codes in New York City that have the highest rate of abortion. The graph was created by the Chiaroscuro Foundation and it tells us Manhattan's Chelsea - Clinton zip code has the highest rate of child-slaughter in all of New York City.
The Chelsea-Clinton zip code is the zip code of Redeemer Presbyterian Church...
Redeemer is filled with singles and the childless. (And by the way, the childlessness of Redeemer's zip code may be one reason for its high abortion ratio.)
(TB, w/thanks to Kamilla)
Clearnote Churches
Clearnote Fellowship
Christ the Word
Monthly archive
- May 2013 (21)
- April 2013 (33)
- March 2013 (43)
- February 2013 (28)
- January 2013 (41)
- December 2012 (31)
- November 2012 (37)
- October 2012 (38)
- September 2012 (21)
- August 2012 (28)
- July 2012 (46)
- June 2012 (50)
Popular Posts
Tags
Abortion euthanasia... (584)
Feminism (584)
Politics (366)
Reformed world (322)
PCA (302)
Evangelicalism (294)
Homosexuality (294)
Misc. (270)
Throw the radio in the bathtub (258)
Academia (256)
Reformed theology (234)
Culture (227)
Children are a blessing (218)
Emergent church (208)
R2K (Radical Two Kingdom) (196)
Recent Comments
- David J. Wegener on Some pics for your enjoyment...
- Emily Burlingham on Why move to Bloomington?
- Robert Woodyard on Some pics for your enjoyment...
- Tim Bayly on Some pics for your enjoyment...
- Christopher Lee on Some pics for your enjoyment...
Comments
Then it's a good thing they're their to speak the Gospel to the darkest corner of NYC.
Are you honestly implying that your brothers and sisters at Redeemer are rampant abortionists? You might want to reconsider that suggestion. It sounds slanderous.
sorry, "there" not "their"
Patrick, it looks to me like Pastor Bayly hasn't implied any such thing. He has stated two objective facts: 1) Redeemer's neighborhood has the highest abortion rate in NYC, and 2) Redeemer is filled with singles and the childless. He has left it to the reader to infer any possible causality relationship between the two.
More likely, the implication is that if Redeemer were preaching in such a way as to address the sin that is right under its nose it should be preaching against sexual immorality and abortion, and teaching the glory of motherhood and fruitful marriages, and the joy and blessing of children. The result of that kind of faithful preaching (addressing the sin that is right under your nose!) would be that the singles at Redeemer would get married and start having babies. And being that kind of salt and light to the Chelsea - Clinton neighborhood would either effect a decline of abortion rates there, or raise such opposition to the church that Redeemer gets run out of town. If anything, the evidence suggests that Reedemer is hanging out in "the darkest corner of NYC" enjoying the darkness with everyone else who's there, and not proclaiming the Gospel.
If you've followed what Pastor Bayly has written about Redeemer previously on this blog, this is just one more piece of evidence in a case that he has been building for a long time: that Redeemer Presbyterian Church is NOT salt and light as they claim to be; that they are being molded into the image of the sinful city around them, rather than winning that city for Christ; that their commitments are to coolness, hipness, trendiness, and acceptance (that is, Christians being accepted by the world as reasonable, non-judgmental types) rather than to Jesus Christ and the truth of God.
And yes, a corollary of all this is that Redeemer is almost certainly filled with men and women who are wallowing in all sorts of sexual immorality, and slaughtering their unborn children to hide it, just like most Evangelical churches in America. The almost certain fact that Redeemer is filled with these sinners isn't the point; the point is that the Redeemer hip-trendy-coolness-mobile roles right along churning out its hip-trendy-coolness while souls inside and out of that church are being dragged off to hell by these sins, and Redeemer doesn't address them.
When did Pastor Bayly start listening to Jay-Z?
If only we could see some more evidence (outside of innuendo and the like) to support this. They do things differently, and obviously, they're selling out the Gospel.
Kenethos and Patrick,
How about a search of Redeemer's website, including the sermons Pastor Keller has for sale - and the ONLY reference to abortion is a note that a local pregnancy support center has a post-abortion recovery support group.
Not-one-single-reference on Redeemer's website to anything they are doing to support pregnant women, begging them not to slaughter the children in their wombs. Not one single sermon subject lising abortion. Not-one-single-reference to anything Redeemer, it's pastors, it's numerous groups, etc. are teaching or doing in regard to their neighborhood's shameful record of child slaughter.
But, by gum they DO have an arts ministry that serves "the spiritual, emotional and professional needs of artists"
Goodness, where WOULD 10018's abortion stats be without such a vital ministry?
Well done Kamilla. I wish I'd written that...
In all fairness, most Kellerites don't actually live in 10018.
Randall, that's almost more damning than if they did all live there. I haven't spoken to any members of Redeemer's strategizing team, but generally when you talk to these hipsters who are planting churches in trendy metropolitan areas they say that they're putting their church there--and then having all of the congregants commute an hour to and from church each Sunday--specifically because they want to be "salt and light" to the inner city, to that specific neighborhood. If that is the reason that Redeemer is located where it is located, then the fact that Chelsea - Clinton's abortion stats are so awful proves that Redeemer is failing at their purported mission to the inner city.
But come on, really: the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes. Redeemer is in that neighborhood to be hip, cool and trendy. See Kamilla's comment above. Doesn't their "arts ministry"--and utter lack of an anti-abortion ministry--speak for itself?
For more fairness, you might note that it's only their offices that are in that zip code. Their services are in zip codes not appearing on this chart.
And if you had even more fairness to spare, you might note that the 10018 zip code isn't really a neighborhood at all, so much as a business district, and we really have no idea how these stats are calculated, considering we weren't given a link to the source. So we have no idea if these are people living in the neighborhood that Redeemer should be ministering to, or if they're people coming in from other areas, with less opportunity for ministry.
"Redeemer is in that neighborhood to be hip, cool and trendy."
I'm shocked by how cynical you treat the motives of your brothers and sister in Christ. Midtown's banality aside, have you considered that it might behoove the church to reach out to people other than midwesterners? New Yorkers need the Gospel too.
A couple points.
First, I've added two links to the post, but please note that I'd already identified the source as the Chiaroscuro Foundation.
Second, anyone who's lived anywhere other than in an unincorporated area or a small town knows churches in even the smallest cities are filled with people from a variety of zip codes. This is as true of Peoria as it is of New York City. And in both Peoria and Manhattan, where a church has its offices is significant. Redeemer's zip code isn't the Bronx and it matters where Redeemer isn't as well as where it is.
Third, Redeemer is just like everyone else in not holding its services in its offices. All of us have had our worship services off-site and we would expect Redeemer to do the same thing for the very same reasons. Church Planting 101.
Fourth, Redeemer is not African American or Hispanic, but Asian and Caucasian. And it's fascinating that the highest rate of child-murder in New York City's zip codes is in white Manhattan where white Redeemer's offices are. Who'd have guessed?
Fifth, while allowing for a variety of zip codes among Redeemer's congregants, no one can seriously propose that the location of Redeemer's offices is meaningless, let alone that the child murder rate of that location is inconsequential. If it were the adult murder rate that was highest there in that zip code, I doubt anyone would be dismissive of the stats. But then, who cares about the babies? They can't be seen; their screams are never heard; their pain is never felt; and no Redeemerite already born is in any danger of being murdered in his mother's womb.
But of course, very many Redeemerites already born are in danger of murdering their child. And for lots of them, it will be the second or third child they've murdered. Fifty-six percent of the child-murders of New York City are committed by mothers who have already murdered another one of their babies.
Sixth, even if off by half, these stats indicate Redeemer's preacher should warn his congregation against murdering their child, and also call those who have already committed murder to repentance. Just as warning against her rampant idolatry formed the superstructure of the Gospel proclamation by the Apostle Paul in Athens, so warning against her wholesale child slaughter should form the superstructure of the Gospel proclamation by Redeemer's pastors in Manhattan. But it's not so:
http://www.baylyblog.com/2008/10/gospel-preachin.html
http://www.baylyblog.com/2009/01/nat-hentoff-my-hero.html
Seventh, when speaking of the horror of the "rampant abortionists" of Redeemer's 10018, we're using a euphemism. It would be more truthful to speak of 10018's "serial murderers."
Love,
Now that we have the source, it would now be charitable to mention that two of Redeemer's three service locations are actually in ZIP codes (10023 and 10065) with some of the LOWEST abortion rates. The third is not much higher, and indeed, all are below the US average of 23%.
It's also worth pointing out that the 10018's extremely high ratio is based on a small number of actual abortions. In fact, it ranks 10th out of the 45 or so Manhattan zip codes in number of actual abortions.
And I say none of this to excuse the sin. I have no criticism for your strong position against abortion. Neither do I disdain your criticism of Keller's lack of a voice on the issue. Indeed, this is a primary function of a denomination - to hold each teaching elder accountable.
But I am shocked that you would slander Redeemer's congregants with accusations of serial abortion. You do not know Redeemer's congregants, and you do not know their sin. Call your own congregants to account, and call Keller to account. But do not call Redeemer's congregant to account for their imagined sins.
If the teaching elders of this denomination want to spend all of their time straining at the gnats of theological arguments, so be it. But I cannot abide either your accusation that Redeemer congregants are participating in serial abortion. You do not have the facts. You do not know.
So, on one hand we have the offense of even the IMPLICATION that brothers and sisters at Redeemer are rampant abortionists (Patrick #1).
And kennethos's sarcastic summary of the post: "They do things differently, and obviously, they're selling out the Gospel."
And then there's the fact that most Redeemerites don't live in the listed zip code, and that their services aren't actually at that particular zip code, and that that zip code is not really a neighborhood at all.
Leaving aside the spectre of Redeemer's leaders giving an account on Judgment Day for why they would not preach against the slaughter, "But Lord, the zip code issue alone showed us three excellent reasons that there was no need!" -- let's examine for the moment the idea that this IS just a matter of Redeemer doing things differently. Let's assume that no one at Redeemer kills his babies.
But, what! Is part of Redeemer's "doing things differently" to refuse to reach out to those who have murdered their children? Surely Redeemer is not in the location it is in to studiously avoid reaching out to such sinners, is it? With so many repeat abortions? How could you have a church in such a neighborhood and have no outreach to the people that are there? Can kennethos or Patrick speak to this? Has Redeemer NO bowels of compassion for the lost all around? Will they refuse to call them to repentance because technically they are in a different zip code? Are they in the city in name only, but only accepting clean people from the suburbs, people who have not sinned and have no need of a Physician?
Dear Patrick,
The stats still aren't accurate because no one keeps track of chemical abortions--especially EPs--and Redeemer is the sort of rich white educated crowd who would disproportionately use chemical rather than surgical means to murder their unborn.
You're offended because I calmly observe that Redeemer is filled with serial child-murderers? Your church is, too. We're up near fifty percent prevalence today after decades of 1.3 to 1.5 million murders of unborn children per year. And again, that's not including all the chemical abortions. So who do you think is having these abortions? A quarter of all our unborn children killed year after year and you think God's Covenant people aren't sacrificing to Molech? The Bible belt has a much higher divorce rate than New England and you think God's people aren't serial abortionists?
I've long noted that our own churches are filled with people who have murdered their unborn children. Redeemer is no better, and given the demographics, almost certainly much worse. In fact, the one time Redeemer's senior pastor justified the church having no public pro-life witness, he did so by telling how much the approach was appreciated by a woman who met with him and, as he preciously put it, "volunteered that she had experienced three abortions."
Of such were some of us, dear brother.
Love,
Daniel, the zip code really isn't an issue beyond Tim's breathless assertion that Redeemer was in an abortion hotspot, and my evidence that it's really just a statistical anomoly. And again, I'm not here to argue about Keller or Redeemer's methods of outreach - I know very little about such things and I will leave it to you.
Tim,
Do you have evidence of the prevalence of abortion at Redeemer? Or are you just estimating, as you suggested above, that the rate is perhaps half that of the surrounding city?
Patrick, you act like unless there's hard proof that there is a prevalence of abortion at Redeemer there is no heightened need for them to speak to abortion -- as if the issue is that you don't see the proof. But I'm having trouble imagining that if you DID see the proof, you would think any differently. Would you then say, "Oh dear, there are THAT many within the flock who have had abortions? And THAT many with repeat abortions? Surely this is most egregious sin of the flock and I see now that faithful shepherds could do no less than address it strongly and often, in public and in private"? Or would it still be just fine if they never mentioned it.
Daniel, for the third time, I'm not here to argue about whether Redeemer should be speaking to abortion. That wasn't mentioned in the original post, and I haven't mentioned it in any of mine.
Dear Patrick,
Anyone who reads Baylyblog would have known the context of this post is Redeemer's policy of avoiding identifying itself as having pro-life commitments. Down there in the south, this might be a surprise to you, but we've long known it and it's the context for any discussion here of Redeemer and child-slaughter.
If you comment again, use your full name--first and last.
Love,
Tim, please email me privately. I cannot find your email address anywhere.
Assuming Redeemer is similar, demographically, to other liberal Evangelical churches, it has a disproportionate number of women in its congregation--say sixty percent or more. (One of the best ways of testing a church's doctrine is to look at the male/female ratio. Other things being equal, the higher the percentage of women, the more liberal the doctrine.)
So Redeemer likely has about 3,000 women. And if we forget about ECPs and other chemical abortions, we're still at a general population prevalence of somewhere between thirty and fifty percent of women of childbearing age or slightly older (which is almost every last woman at Redeemer). So someone make a guess at the morality of Evangelical women attending a liberal Evangelical church that has a principle of not identifying itself as pro-life. Is the prevalence rate the same as the broader population? Higher? Lower?
Take your guess, and then remember that we're trying to establish whether Redeemer has 1,200 women who have murdered their own children? Or maybe 1,500? Or maybe only 1,000? Or maybe only 500? Or maybe only 250?
Think about it. Who in their right mind takes comfort from the fact that only 250 of the children of God's Covenant people in a particular congregation have been sacrificed to Molech?
Then consider that 56% of the unborn children murdered in New York City have had a sibling or two or three murdered before them.
Love,
>>>I'm not here to argue about whether Redeemer should be speaking to abortion.
But Patrick, it matters whether this is a prevailing sin where Redeemer has been placed or not. If you're right and somehow even though all around Redeemer the abortion stats are through the roof but not in Redeemer's area of influence... it's suspension of disbelief, but in that dreamland I would have no quarrel with you.
But if Redeemer IS in the midst of the worst place of the slaughter in the US (even if it is a few city blocks away in a different zip), then your "I'm not here to argue about whether Redeemer should be speaking to abortion" becomes tantamount to "I'm not here to argue about whether Redeemer should be speaking to sin."
And if a church will not speak even to the worst sin in its midst... does it not need to repent?
There's a button to contact David or me at the top of the main page, on the left side. It says "Contact Tim or David" and if you click on it, you'll be transferred into your e-mail program with my e-mail address already inserted in the header.
Love,
Well, to be fair, Tim Keller does say abortion is wrong the rare times when he does mention it. And if you go to any of the pastors at Redeemer and tell them you're having sex outside of marriage they will tell you it's wrong. However, neither of these things are ever emphasized in church from the pulpit where most people would actually hear it.
But I wanted to respond to Patrick, in his first comment where he said:
"Then it's a good thing they're there to speak the Gospel to the darkest corner of NYC."
They are most emphatically not speaking the Gospel to anyone. Tim Keller urged Christians at his recent "Social Justice" forum that they should do their volunteer work with secular organizations rather than Christian organizations. He caricatured Christian organizations as being in it only to "build their tribe". He commended Christians who do most of their volunteer work with secular organizations saying that they show their fellow volunteers that they are not "tribal", and that "they don't have to be in control of the agenda."
He thinks once their colleagues see that Christians "don't have to be in control of the agenda" (i.e. sharing Christ's message of salvation) that they will be so moved by that they'll be dying to know how they can follow Jesus too.
He admitted in that same talk that when you volunteer with a secular organization you won't be able to share Christ with those you're there to help. That stunned me because I don't know of any of these problems that can be solved without a personal conversion to Christ.
I had the good fortune of meeting a very sweet 23-year-old girl a few months ago. She lives in the public housing projects in the South Bronx, with her Voodoo-believing mom who is on welfare.
When she was 6 years old her biological father raped her. And he did so on more than one occassion. When she was 13 she discovered the porn collection on her brother's computer. When she was 14 she dropped out of school and never went back. When she was 16 she began working as a prostitute until she was 20. When she was 20 her mom was relieved that she had dropped prostitution and turned to stripping. Her mom even helped her make cute little outfits to wear at the stripper joint.
Of course during all that time she was heavily addicted to drugs. She and her mom smoked pot together almost every day.
When I met her she was depressed beyond belief because she hadn't worked in more than a year and couldn't even afford the subway rides to look for work.
I began to work with her by trying to show her what you need to do in this life to get legitimate work. She was rejected at interview after interview because she had no previous (legitimate) work experience. Through constant encouragement, she was motivated to keep trying. I told her she could do it and I helped guide her in what she needed to do each day in order to make it happen.
After two and a half months, she was offered two really good jobs in the same day! She took both of them! Together they add up to more than a full-time job.
At the same time I constantly talked to her about Jesus, the Gospel, the Bible and Christianity. She has deep animosity towards all. But one day she asked if she could go to church with me the following Sunday. Of course I said sure! I would have invited her sooner but when we first met and I mentioned I was a Christian she screamed at me and said "I WILL NEVER EVER GO TO CHURCH AGAIN IN MY LIFE!" Three weeks later, she invited herself to go!
I was left with a stark choice. Take her to my former church, Redeemer Presbyterian, where I knew she would not feel the least bit intimidated or offended by Tim's preaching. Or take her to my new church, a fire & brimstone kind of church where I felt she would be so put off she wouldn't listen to a thing the pastor said.
I prayed about it and God led me to take her to my new church. The first Sunday guess what the pastor brought up? He briefly mentioned prostitution and called it a sin. He also mentioned homosexuality which she has been involved in. He mentioned fornication, adultery and as Tim Keller would advise, he also mentioned greed.
I squirmed! She told me she had had sex (at 23) with over 1,000 men and 300 women. When the service ended we walked outside and I was just waiting for her to lash into me for taking her to such a place. She got very quiet, then she looked up and almost whispered and said, "you know, I've done some really bad things in my life."
The Holy Spirit had used that "fire & brimstone" kind of sermon to reach her heart! She felt convicted. No one I had ever taken to Redeemer had any sense of conviction whatsoever. Although they all did like Tim Keller very much. But he wasn't pointing them to the cross.
I started thinking about all this shortly after I met her. And I wondered the following things.
- How would her life been different had her dad never raped her? - How would her life been different had her brother never had a stash of porn on his computer for her to find?
- How would her life been different had her mom been a Christian instead of a Voodooist?
- How would her life been different had her mom insisted that she stay in school? Had her mom insisted that she not do drugs or become a prostitute or a stripper?
I think we can all see her life would have been VERY different. And the only thing I know that could have possibly avoided any or all of those things is if each of those people had had a personal conversion to Biblical Christianity.
What are the chances that her dad, if he had been a born-again Christian, would have even thought of raping his 6-year-old daughter? What are the chances that her mom, as a born-again Christian, wouldn't have done everything in her power to get her off drugs and to keep her off the streets?
And what are the chances that people ministering under Tim Keller's direction would ever led any of those people to Christ? What are the chances that working in a secular organization they would have ever been able to do so? In fact, that's not even their mission. Keller says their mission should be to win over their fellow volunteers by showing that "Christians" don't mind volunteering in an environment where "Christians don't control the agenda."
Keller says all this talk of winning souls is just "building up your tribe", he mocks it as being "tribal".
I'm sorry to say but none of the ministries Redeemer is involved in would have helped one bit in this precious girl's life. Not one bit. And the reason is because they are NOT there to speak the Gospel to the darkest corner of NYC, as Patrick hopefully claimed they are.
Two videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L9jHlrMRJAo#!
Tim hedges on the exclusivity of Christ (around 11:30). The two words he uses most in answer to this question are "if" and "maybe".
And he hedges on homosexuality (around 55:00).
He also says being in hell is "where your soul shrivels." (I bet the souls in hell wish that's all it was. He also says you can get out of hell anytime, even in a billion years, if you so choose.
And this audio from his social justice forum to promote his book on the same subject, on March 28th of this year:
http://my.ekklesia360.com/Clients/mediaaudioplayer.php?CMSCODE=EKK&mediabid=922600&useSkin=skin_plain.xml&CMS_LINK=http://my.ekklesia360.com
Listen especially closely at his comments between 16:40 - 18:40 and keep the story of this girl in mind. And ask yourself how this kind of "ministry" he urges on us could possibly have helped her.
Since Kamilla is so adept at navigating Redeemer's website, it's a shame she didn't post a link to Redeemer's Home Fellowship Group map. The map is a very good representation of where Redeemerites live, since the HFGs meet in actual homes. I have provided the a link below. Notice the almost complete absence of groups in the 10018 area, along with the 10012 area. Then notice the very high concentration of groups in the Upper East Side and Upper West Side, as well as lower Manhattan. These areas have the lowest abortion rates in NYC - far below the national average, even lower than that of Indiana, and perhaps Bloomington? Maybe we should be praising Redeemerites for their "salt and light" contributions to reducing abortion, considering how few occur in the neighborhoods where they live.
http://www.redeemer.com/connect/fellowship_groups/find_a_group.html
http://www.citidex.com/map/zipco.html
Sorry, I know I'm going on a lot here... but I just had to add... Keller's idea of "ministry" is spreading Keller's "gospel" of cultural renewal to liberal upper class Manhattan elites. When you hear him the say the word "gospel" just think "cultural renewal" because that's exactly what he's talking about. He is not, very sadly, speaking of the Biblical Gospel.
Mason, you know as well as I do that the Upper West Side (zip 10023), is filled with highly successful, educated single people. The kind who are most likely to take birth control seriously. Unless you can draw some more direct correlation to what Redeemer has taught and the low birth rate, I'm afraid that correlation here doesn't show causation. (And yes I feel the same about Tim's opening post).
Jonathan -
I agree about correlation/causation. My point is that the original post really proves nothing about Redeemer one way or another. One could just as easily make the case, based on the data, that Redeemer is doing a great job in reducing abortion in NYC. Manhattan has 2 million people living in it, and only about 10,000 of those attend Redeemer with any regularity. Even if Tim Keller and Redeemer railed against abortion the way the Bayly's would like I doubt the numbers would be any different at all. Which makes me wonder what the purpose of the original post really is.
And Jonathan, to say the Tim Keller equates the Gospel with cultural renewal is just wrong. Here is Keller's definition of the Gospel: "Through the person and work of Jesus Christ, God fully accomplishes salvation for us, rescuing us from judgment for sin into fellowship with him, and then restores the creation in which we can enjoy our new life together with him forever."
http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/2008/spring/9.74.html
And if you have ever heard a Keller sermon - and it seems you have heard many, he ALWAYS ends with the centrality of Christ in our lives and the importance of resting on Him in faith alone. You may disagree with Keller on some things, but to say he advocates a "social Gospel" is plainly incorrect.
From #2:
/... He has stated two objective facts: 1) Redeemer's neighborhood has the highest abortion rate in NYC, and 2) Redeemer is filled with singles and the childless. He has left it to the reader to infer any possible causality relationship between the two./
It would be interesting to know the gender ratio for his singles' population, at least. If there is a large surplus of women over men *, and I suspect that there is, then it tells me that the pastoral need is to work with the single men to get them to the point that they would be 'match fit' for marriage. That would then help that proportion of the single women who do want husbands and family.
* Perhaps it is worth adding that Redeemer is hardly unique in that regard. As I've said before, getting our evangelism of adult men "right" would fix so many of the problems we have in our churches.
Ross, there are far more women than men at Redeemer. Tim's probably about right when he said it's probably around 60-40.
Mason, I agree with the first half of what you said. But on the second half I have many issues. Yes, he ends each sermon with something about Christ. But I've never heard him say in church at the end of a sermon anything like this, 'we all have sinned and there will be great devastating eternal punishment for that sin unless we repent and accept the forgiveness that Christ freely gives and can genuinely say Jesus is Lord."
And without that or something like it, there's just no way a person can understand from his sermons 1. that we've sinned; 2. that we need a savior; 3. that we must repent and 4. that we must accept Jesus as Lord of the universe and Lord of our lives. Those are simply not things you'll ever get from a Redeemer sermon. You may get them 'accidentally' if you stay involved in the church long enough and happen to run into somebody who believes those and thinks it's important enough to talk about. But you won't get it from a sermon.
You quoted Tim's understanding of the Gospel as, "Through the person and work of Jesus Christ, God fully accomplishes salvation for us, rescuing us from judgment for sin into fellowship with him, and then restores the creation in which we can enjoy our new life together with him forever."
Once again, he leaves out what's required of us. Our acknowledgement and acceptance of those facts. But greater than that is the fact that he puts the second part of that statement - the restoration of creation - as the primary purpose of salvation. He says, "the primary purpose of salvation is cultural renewal."
Following that, everything Redeemer does is geared toward that statement, as opposed to the Gospel. That's why he can say it's good for us to spend our limited volunteer time with secular organizations. Because after all, they're working to "renew the culture" too (if you believe in the secular version of renewal). So to him it really doesn't matter whether you work with a secular or Christian organization.
That's why he can say things like "evangelicals" are just out to "build their tribe" and condemn them for doing that.
And that's why Redeemer can post this on their website as their statement of faith, what they call their "Core Values":
http://redeemer.com/about_us/vision_and_values/core_values.html
1. The 'gospel' is the good news that through Christ the power of God's kingdom has entered history to renew the whole world. When we believe and rely on Jesus' work and record (rather than ours) for our relationship to God, that kingdom power comes upon us and begins to work through us.
Notice, that there is NOTHING about personal salvation there. It's all about "cultural renewal". This time it's phrased as "to renew the whole world". What about "that kingdom power comes to SAVE us?" And why is it called Kingdom Power? Why not just call it "Christ" or "God"?
Then if you read the rest of the "Core Values" on that page, you'll see nothing else about sin or salvation. But you'll see plenty of "we believe nothing promotes the peace and health of the city like the spread of faith in the gospel." "It reweaves the fabric of whole neighborhoods." "We believe the gospel has a deep, vital and healthy impact on the arts, business, government media..." Still nothing about personal salvation. (It would if there was any personal conversion taking place, but not without).
That page is the very definition of the social gospel.
Somewhat off-topic, but what are EPs? Are EPs another term for the morning-after pill?
Just curious.
Jonathan: What an amazing story!
As for your links: the March 28th audio wasn't too astonishing. I think he poorly worded it. The other stuff you reference is not good. I want a pastor to be forthright about truth. He's wasting a lot of opportunities it seems to me.
Paul spoke to Felix about faith in Christ, and also righteousness, self-control and judgment.
Many Reformed preachers today have a fear of man.
Dear Sue, I'm sorry, I meant ECPs and here's a link telling you what they are:
http://www.baylyblog.com/2009/03/medical-abortions-the-antiabortionists-achilles-heel.html
If anyone read this post on ECPs, they would know neither Guttmacher nor NRL count child murders done by ECPs. The abortion stats cited by the Chiaroscuro Foundation aren't accurate. They're low. Guttmacher considers ECPs contraception--not abortifacients.
Concerning Redeemer, educated rich women avoiding abortions through contraception increasingly are doing so by the use of ECPs that kill their child in the first few days of life. But officially, everyone calls it "contraception."
Then too, chemical abortions later in pregnancy are taking the place of surgical abortions.
Mason, I've rarely known a man who is as adept at studiously avoiding the conclusions everyone else finds obvious. The interview Jonathan linked above is awful.
Wonderful testimony, Jonathan. May God bring your friend safely home, God have mercy on us all.
Love,
Tim Bayly -
What conclusions am I avoiding? Seriously, I have no idea what you're talking about.
Jonathan -
I think you have two problems. First, you don't really know what the Gospel is. The Gospel doesn't "require" any work of us - we don't have any part in it, which is exactly why it's Good News: left to our own devices we would be helplessly lost. I don't think any pastor worth his salt - especially a Reformed pastor - would include any requirements of us when defining the Gospel. Take a look at Romans 1:16-17 and see if the Gospel has any requirements for us according to Paul.
Second, if you don't see the sin, need for repentance, and personal saving work of Christ in every Keller sermon you really aren't paying attention. EVERY sermon I've heard Tim Keller preach starts off by defining a problem or problems in both us as individuals and in society. He talks about the Scriptural remedies for those problems, then the ultimate remedy, which is faith in Christ alone. All of these elements are there in every single sermon I've heard, and I've heard a lot of them. No disrespect to you, but if you don't see those things then you really need to listen harder. You may favor the blunt fire and brimstone approach, which certainly has its place, but Keller is just as skillful at conveying the crucial messages.
Jonathan, the ultimate purpose of Christ's work on the cross and His resurrection is indeed cultural renewal. Not cultural renewal in a temporal here and now sense, but a complete renewal of creation in a new heavens and new earth for Christ and His church. I seriously doubt anyone here would disagree with that. And Redeemer constantly emphasizes personal salvation - I really don't know how you can say otherwise.
Jonathan, I assume you are the Jonathan Cousar at freedomtorch.com, is that right? (With all the things you're sharing I just wanted to know that you weren't some random anonymous Jonathan ;)
>>Tim Bayly - What conclusions am I avoiding? Seriously, I have no idea what you're talking about.
I know, and it's tragic. One of the problems of New York City (and all of the US and Western world, for that matter) is that men live under the deceitfulness of wealth, yet think they see. You listen to their blindness and their rich preachers and you see it's a system of the deceitfulness of wealth whereby the pastor scratches the people's ears and they love it so. But what will they do in the end?
Love,
Love,
Mason:
If I'm a good person why do I need good news?
If I'm shown to be a "bad" person, then I need good news.
When I am regenerated, converted, and justified, then there are good works required. Imperfect good works, imperfect good works that God graciously accepts in Christ, but good works nonetheless.
[I have no first-hand experience with Redeemer PCA in NYC so I am speaking in generalities.]
Eliza -
I don't see your point. Tim Keller has never said or even implied that all people are basically good. Quite the opposite.
Good works are not "required" for salvation. If one is justified then they will be sanctified, which produces good works - but salvation is not predicated on those good works. You may be saying that very thing, but I disagree that God somehow accepts good works as a condition of salvation. That's basically Roman Catholic teaching.
Tim Bayly -
Please enlighten me. How are my ears being tickled and my eyes blinded by "deceitfulness of wealth?" If I'm truly blind, and you truly want to help, cryptic answers are of little value.
Why are you having trouble imagining that he would say that? It sounds to me that Patrick is pointing out that our host is making an assumption that may be baseless about the parishioners of a fellow church in his denomination. He's not saying that there is no heightened need for them to speak to abortion, he's saying that it is wrong of anyone to imply that they themselves are abortionists based on no real evidence. We've already established that the content on the chart is largely invalid. The original post says "Redeemer's congregation is full of the childless", which seems meant to imply, along with the table showing the high Chelsea abortion rate, that Redeemer's parishioners abort their babies. Patrick has reasonably pointed out that they don't actually live in that ZIP code, so that implication is not valid. If that is not the intended implication, that's another kettle of fish.
Mason:
I'm in an OPC (not a Roman Catholic church!) and we are taught that good works are necessary for salvation. Not for the part of salvation called justified, but for salvation. I believe you are the one that is wrong.
>>which seems meant to imply, along with the table showing the high Chelsea abortion rate, that Redeemer's parishioners abort their babies.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that. I'd hoped I was explicit. But apparently not, so let me repeat myself in a way that's more clear: Redeemer's parishioners are child-murderers.
I've said this about my own congregation and about every other congregation in the country. I've gone over and over the numbers and prevalence. And the reason for posting on Redeemer is that it's a reputedly Reformed and Biblical congregation located in a zip code where two-thirds of the unborn children are murdered by their mothers before seeing the light of day--double the national average. Yet their pastor prides himself on their church not being identified as being pro-life.
A congregation of thousands of young people--overwhelmingly women--who are in New York pursuing academic and artistic and corporate and legal wealth and fame, yet you men are filled with righteous indignation that a pastor has had the audacity to imply that Redeemerites murder their unborn children?
Wake up and smell the bloodshed. If you'd been in my office and listened to the tears, you might begin to live wisely, knowing the day is evil and all around us are God's Covenant People who have sacrificed their children to the Canaanites' Molech.
Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, “You shall also say to the sons of Israel: ‘Any man from the sons of Israel or from the aliens sojourning in Israel who gives any of his offspring to Molech, shall surely be put to death; the people of the land shall stone him with stones. I will also set My face against that man and will cut him off from among his people, because he has given some of his offspring to Molech, so as to defile My sanctuary and to profane My holy name. If the people of the land, however, should ever disregard that man when he gives any of his offspring to Molech, so as not to put him to death, then I Myself will set My face against that man and against his family, and I will cut off from among their people both him and all those who play the harlot after him, by playing the harlot after Molech.'" (Leviticus 20:1-5)
An old balladeer sang, "When you gonna wake up, and strengthen the things that remain?"
Love,