Tim Keller Faces Backlash Over Stunning Political Tweet
It’s no surprise then that he continued advocating for unity at the expense of true unity, writing:
Tim Keller, founder of The Gospel Coalition and cultural Marxist extraordinaire, has a long history of saying awful, terrible things, such as when his church called for more same-sex intimacy in churches, said that if you have white skin, the bible says you’re involved in injustice, trashed the Social Justice and the Gospel Statement, endorsed the notion of a “gay Christian,” affirmed Christians have “liberty of conscience” to vote for pro-abortion Democrats, and explained that Christians will be purged from government and schools and that they brought it on themselves.
In fact, he’s usually so bad and distinctive in his wrongness, that we created a Tweet Generator about him.
It’s no surprise then that he continued advocating for unity at the expense of true unity, writing:
This is quite the villainous view, given that Keller downplays and distorts the fact that political differences are frequently moral differences. You can debate the implementation of tariffs and how much property taxes should be, but you can’t debate whether little boys should be given puberty blockers and told they’re girls or whether or not we should stop butchering a million babies in the womb each year.
The fact that BigEva treats the murder of babies in the womb as a tertiary, if not quaternary issue among believers, fills us with so much heat and righteous rage that it’s near impossible to describe. These progressives will say they can’t worship with someone wearing a confederate logo on their hat three pews up, but they can with the nurse who punctures baby skulls during her 9 to 5, or the politician that consistently votes to keep the murder mills open. In fact, the same folk who say not to separate and break church unity over baby murder insist that you must do it over racial issues and personal prejudices.
Keller has previously argued that a policy may be evil, but because the scripture doesn’t directly command a Christian to address that policy in a certain way, then the political party who holds that policy can rightfully be supported. The fact that one may be supporting and promoting great moral monstrosities is lost in him. He previously said:
“The Bible binds my conscience to care for the poor, but it does not tell me the best practical way to do it. Any particular strategy (high taxes and government services vs low taxes and private charity) may be good and wise—and may even be somewhat inferred from other things the Bible teaches– but they are not directly commanded and therefore we cannot insist that all Christians, as a matter of conscience, follow one or the other.”
Question. What if one party wants to kill the poor?
“The Bible binds my conscience to love the immigrant, but it doesn’t tell me how many legal immigrants to admit to the U.S. every year. It does not exactly prescribe immigration policy.”
Question. What if one party wants to kill the immigrant?
“The Bible tells me that abortion is a sin and great evil, but it doesn’t tell me the best way to decrease or end abortion in this country, nor which policies are most effective.”
Question. What if one party wants to kill the babies and entrench baby butchery into law, being the party of infanticide, and want to remove all restrictions and restraints on abortion so that the country runs red with the blood of the innocent under the guise of freedom and the right to choose?
That’s just a “political difference.” No use getting breaking fellowship over that.
We’ll leave these fine folk the last word:
