Defending Timothy Keller and the "Third Way"

No More "Dunking" on pastor Keller, please.

During my seminary days, I had the opportunity to take a class with Terry Gieger and guest lecturer Dr. Tim Keller. The class was on church planting, and I realize now that sitting in that class learning from Keller was like learning how to shoot a sky hook from Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. From that day, Keller has been an inspiration and model for me—one of the first people I thought about when considering a “Pastor/Theologian/Scholar.”

(Source¹)

I was really excited when Colin Hansen announced he was working on a kind of biography on Keller that was more about the influences “on” him versus his influence on others. In a way, we get insight into what formed Keller and shaped his life, ministry, and theology. Sadly, Pastor Keller passed away after a battle with pancreatic cancer in 2023 at the age of 72. His death has been particularly difficult for me in these last few years, as I’ve often found myself thinking: what would Tim Keller say about this?

You see, his books on God and humanity—rooted in sound theology and philosophical wit, combined with his apologetical approach to culture—were extremely “winsome.”

Now, some of you are already triggered. Today, when we hear the words “winsome” or “nuanced,” we may be thinking of certain Christian influencers and podcasters who argue against such tactics as they lead to a kind of “thirdwayism” that strips Christians of their convictions and boldness for the Gospel.

The accusation is that being “winsome” and “nuanced” leaves you neutral and weakens the Christian worldview.

In other words, based on the fear of a loss of conviction and a perception of weakness, the answer is to take Keller’s life work and accuse him of being a closet liberal whose empathetic approach to humans was toxic (I’ll write about toxic empathy at some point) because it leads to condoning behavior in contradiction to the way of Christ.

You know what I really dislike? I really dislike it when people and their words are taken out of their immediate context, when their cultural situation is ignored, and when they are called to the carpet and aren’t even here to defend themselves anymore. It literally makes me sick to my stomach, especially when the same people making these accusations were the biggest proponents of Keller when he was alive.

And this is why I decided to write this article.

Listen, it’s fine to disagree with Keller. I have areas of disagreement. It’s not okay to misrepresent his position and use his name for clout to get your view across. This is creating a straw man argument, not a steel man. And it says much more about the people who use this argumentation (in a negative way) than it does about Keller.

Who was Tim Keller? He was a pastor, theologian, and student of the culture, especially in New York where he pastored. His approach to apologetics and sermons was nuanced and winsome because the people who found themselves in his congregation—either visiting or as members—were complicated personalities who often felt defeated by the rat race of the world. Can you imagine getting up to preach and looking out and at various times seeing the likes of Diane Sawyer, Robin Williams, Arthur Brooks along with the everyday New York man, woman, or child, sitting and considering the truth of the Gospel?

Keller understood that only the Gospel was compelling enough to bring together those on the political left and right and find a common good in Christ who gives us the gift of unity. Sadly, this very thing seems to be what is missing today. Making blanket statements that suggest there is no way a Christian can be drawn to anything good in the political left because there is no good in the political left is a kind of extremism that is not building unity, but rather deepening the divide of our already fractured society.

I’d like to address some of the general accusations against Keller’s “Third Way,” which can become construed from how he actually used that term. What Keller was pointing to in his terminology of “third way” is that this third way was the way of Jesus. It is the path of believers who will not give their allegiance purely to a political party because their citizenship is first and foremost to the Kingdom of God. What you will notice in what follows is a failure of discernment. Our world is in a discernment crisis, and Christians are no different. We are failing to discern the cultural moment as we compare it to the eternal truth of Scripture. Part of this is a failure at rightly ordering our allegiances.

Let’s start with the belief that Keller’s way leads to political abstinence.

This suggests that Christians turn into modern-day monks who run to the hills (figurative language) and separate themselves from the public square, specifically politics. This is not what Keller advocated for. Keller wanted us to rightly order our allegiance and recognize that politics cannot in and of itself produce what only God can. It’s not a call to abstain from politics, but to turn first to God and then act responsibly as a Christian in the public square with your political activity. But don’t take my word for it. Take Keller’s.

“If you turn politics into an idol, you’ll turn to something.

If you’re a conservative, you’ll make a god out of the market. If you’re a liberal, you’ll make a god out of the state. What you’ll do is you’ll say, ‘That is the answer to all the problems.’ You will, just like the woman in a sense, use sex to do something only God can give her: closure. So you can use politics to try to get something only God can give you, which is mission, impact. Change the world. You can only do that through God.

Get involved in politics, but first, like the woman laid down her alabaster perfume, Pilate should have laid down his scepter. Then Jesus could have given it back. Jesus wouldn’t have said, ‘Well, you’re a Christian now; you can’t be involved in politics.’ Oh no. Finally, finally, finally, Pilate would have not been such a screw-up that he was in politics frankly.”²

Notice, Keller tells us to get involved in politics. He just warns us (wisely) of not turning politics into idolatry. This happens when we find ourselves turning first to politics to solve our cultural crisis before considering where the Scriptures point and lead us.

---

Side quest, that should be the main quest: How Do We Respond? We Make Humility Great Again… Learn more in my book; The Hidden Peace for a practical next step.

---

Keller’s “third way” leads to accommodation of sin

This is, in my view, an assumption based on fear. There is a fear that if you show compassion, empathy, and a willingness to entertain and understand ideas that are not the same as yours—you will eventually drift from your convictions into a posture of accommodation for sin. First, we need to clearly state that Keller never advocated for this. Second, we need to be careful that we don’t critique and reject Keller based on “what could happen” rather than what Keller himself believed “would happen.” We need to take into consideration the whole body of work (books, articles, and sermons) as we determine what Keller said about convictions and dealing with evil in the world. Let’s start with his words:

“The gospel removes pride, probably the greatest barrier to a sensitive yet clear exchange of ideas.... It tells us that we must never think we are beyond sin and the need for repentance and renewal. There’s the humility we need. The gospel removes cynicism and pessimism as well.... We should, therefore, never think anyone is beyond hope of change. That gives us the patience we need, grounded in hope. The gospel removes indifference.... For Christians, the uncomfortable question is this: If we have been loved despite our flaws, and if we have discovered the greatest thing in the world in Christ, how can we be either abrasive or quiet about it? That knowledge produces the tolerance, but more than that, it produces the love we need. Lastly, the gospel removes fear. While we should be concerned to not needlessly offend people, the assurance of God’s love and acceptance should give us the courage to face criticism and disapproval.”³

Notice what Keller is saying, and what he is not saying. Keller is saying that the Gospel is the motivation for both compassion in our dialogue and conviction in our beliefs. When we are motivated by the truth of the Gospel, we will not bend to compromise with sin, but we will communicate truth in compassion to those entrapped by sin. I think it would be a wise consideration for us to look at the life of Jesus. Jesus spoke with truth in compassion to those in sin and far from Him. However, he spoke with prophetic critique and conviction to those who were political authorities and the religious elite.

Keller’s approach is non-confrontational which will not work in our cultural moment

Now, I think there is something here that we really do need to consider. Keller’s cultural moment was VERY different from ours. In fact, we do live in an increasingly confrontational society. Not only are we confrontational, but the nature of that confrontation goes viral because of the contempt for the other person or political point of view. In fact, the author Arthur Brooks states, “America is addicted to political contempt.”⁴

I think Brooks is truly onto something, and he said this in 2019. Years later, we are deep in our addiction.

There has to be a remedy to the contempt that allows for meaningful confrontation without dehumanizing other image bearers of God, while being persuasive and compelling. Well, Keller gives us exactly this. He says:

“This, then, is how we confront a culture and persuade faithfully. Our premises must be drawn wholly from the Bible, yet we will always find some things in a culture’s beliefs that are roughly true, things on which we can build our critique. We will communicate something like this: ‘You see this “A” belief you have? The Bible says the same thing—so we agree. However if “A” is true, then why do you not believe “B”? The Bible teaches “B,” and if “A” is true, then it is not right, fair, or consistent for you to reject “B.” If you believe this—how can you not believe that?’ We reveal inconsistencies in the cultural beliefs and assumptions about reality. With the authority of the Bible we allow one part of the culture—along with the Bible—to critique another part. The persuasive force comes from basing our critique on something we can affirm within the culture.”⁵

Notice, Keller never moves away from the substance of the Gospel. Keller never advocates for the accommodation of sin. Keller never called us to remove ourselves from the public square and abstain from political engagement. Keller calls us to confront sin, engage in the public square politically, but to do so starting with our first allegiance to King Jesus and His Kingdom.

The principles of what Keller teaches is true regardless of our cultural context. Yet, we also have to be wise about the inflection point when it comes to strategy. I do believe that bold and assertive communication style can be warranted, and even needed in some situations and circumstances. Especially, if the person has a particular grace and gift in this area to speak in such a way that doesn’t cross the line into dishonor. Once again, discernment is crucial here.

So here’s my final thought on this. Please, just stop dunking on Tim Keller. If you are going to critique him, do so; just steel man his argument—represent him honestly, and read him for what he said, not what you fear will happen and then blame him for something he had no control over.

Thanks.

---

An Invitation:

If you liked the Arthur Brooks quote, I think you will enjoy upgrading from a free subscriber to a paid member of the Humble Theology Substack. I’m currently researching and writing on the topic of “Christian Nationalism” and found myself first having to deal with confrontation, contempt, and how to disagree. For paid subscribers, you will have access to my early articles, research, and the subscriber-only chat where I will post pictures of books I’m reading, progress I’m making, and an opportunity to dialogue on questions I’m considering.

I’d love for you to join! Not only will it be a place for you to start doing theology in the context of community but you will also be supporting me in my research and writing projects! I can’t do this without you!

1. Stafford, Tim. “How Tim Keller Found Manhattan: The Pastor of Redeemer Church Is Becoming an International Figure Because He’s a Local One.” Christianity Today, Carol Stream, IL: Christianity Today International, 2009.

2. Timothy J. Keller, The Timothy Keller Sermon Archive (New York City: Redeemer Presbyterian Church, 2013).

3. Timothy Keller and John Inazu, Uncommon Ground: Living Faithfully in a World of Difference (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2020), 30.

4. Arthur C. Brooks, Love Your Enemies: How Decent People Can Save America From The Culture of Contempt (New York, NY, Broadside Books, 2019), 28.

5. Timothy Keller, Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in Your City (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 125.