Tim Keller is paster or Redeemer Presbyterian and New York City
Grace of the city. Grace in the city. Grace for the city. This was the three-point message Tim Keller delivered this evening. With these, Tim made a compelling case for Christians moving into the city on purpose. He referenced several passages of scripture, ranging from Psalm 107 to Jeremiah 29 to the book Acts and finally Revelation showing how God’s intention for his people was life in a city.
It’s essential to say, before moving on, that “city” in a biblical context referred to any walkable, mixed-use, diverse, dense human settlement. When your civic, economic, social, and spiritual needs are all serviced in proximity, a life fabric is created that can’t happen in the suburbs where one must drive to church, to the grocery store, movies, friends, everything. A life out of the city, Keller posits, is a life of isolation. He connected this thought with Jesus’ crucifixion, which happened outside the city
When God placed Adam and Eve in the garden, he argued, the command to subdue the earth should have and would have been the building of a city. His logic here is that, when God redeems the creation and it’s exactly the way he wants it, it is characterized by a gleaming city. And the passages referenced throughout the Bible support the idea that God has an active vision for the grace of the city, the grace in the city, and the grace for the city.
The grace of the city is the indwelt blessings it brings whenever a walkable, mixed-use, diverse, and dense settlement puts people in proximity to one another. The personal growth and challenge, the fiscal benefits of networking, the spiritual depth of life interconnectedness, and the proximity of rich relationship become a sum much greater than the parts. Keller believes the city is the intended medium for bringing people up to their potential, to God's vision for them.
But if a Christian is to move to the city, there must be an active and intentional vision for grace in the city. Especially in a place like NYC, but certainly everywhere, people make their ways to cities in an effort to secure a career, make more money, make a name. The city is something to be taken from and not given to. Keller’s very quotable here: “Because we are citizens of God’s city that will be, we are free to be the best citizens of the cities that are.” We can live in a spirit of giving, of civic selflessness, for our benefit and the benefit of our neighbors.
Keller urged his hearers to consider the consequences of a suburban lifestyle and the benefit—God’s intention, even—of living in the city. But why the city and not the country? His reply to this question is lighthearted but insightful: Cities have more people than plants; the country has more plants than people . . . Since God loves people more than plants, he has more of a vested interest in the city.
6 comments:
Alas, I think Tim is getting biblical typologies about Jerusalem mixed up with missiological ethics, with a bit of proof-texting and environmental sensitivity thrown in for good affect. You can't just pull out a thing and sermonize it; where is the covenental and narrative context? (As a GCTS grad, he should know better--but he probably skewed practical rather than exegetical in his coursework, just a guess.)Keller would do well to read Greg Beale's work on temple themes in the New Testament, and especially in Revelation (for example, in his book The Temple and the Church's Mission (IVP, 2004)). I wonder, too, how he would address the plain alignment in the book of Genesis between city building and the line of the children of darkness (the descendents of Cain)? One might say that Cain's children build cities for themselves, but Abel's (where Abel is a type of Christ) wait for God to build them a temple, and, until then, are refugees and wanderers over the face of the earth. As for the last paragraph about God loving people more than plants, that syllogism seems a bit rocky to me. (1) Cities have more people in them than suburbs or other agrarian locales; (2) God loves people more htan plans; (3) therefore God loves cities more than suburbs etc. meaning that on an obedience or blessing scale of 1 to 10, he gives a higher number to urbanites than farmers. Repent, oh farmers! Produce fruits--I mean--but fruits worthy of repentance! So lets give Tim the benefit of the doubt, and say that his "city trope" is, perhaps, just a clever way of saying that Jesus, the "man for others" (quoting Dietrich Bonhoeffer), calls us to be for others as well. As you write, "the proximity of rich relationship becomes . . . the intended medium for bringing people up to their potential, to God's vision for them." Amen! And that point opens up some rich questions when it comes to constructing a theology of work.
I hate it when a misspelling ruins a joke. That should be "buy fruits worthy of repentance."
Because I just can't stop posting here. Digging around for a little more, I came up with the following article "A Biblical Theology of the City" by Keller on his Web site. Here is the link: http://tinyurl.com/6xd3td. I'm interested to see whether he addresses some of my questions--and especially how he handles Genesis' negative treatment of the city.
Again, because I can't shut up, Keller's observations make me think about the fundamental glue of cities or suburbs: the quality of the relational glue, the strenght of individual relationships. Keller uses "city," again, as a helpful trope, but he's really talking about tight relationships. And, of course, that's where the Internet comes in. Did God say to our forebears: God, thee, and invent the Internet. As sillly as it sounds, the jump between city typology--and here I am giving Keller the benefit of the doubt--and Facebook are not that far off. Consider this article, for example: http://tinyurl.com/6zukuo. Keller has, perhaps unknowingly, stepped into a very deep pot: sociology. If there is anything we are aware of at this moment in history, understanding and mapping human connections is a difficult and complicated undertaking, much less evaluating them! Final thought: I said a moment ago that at least the gist of where Keller is going is helpful to open discussion up about a theology of work. All me, then, to add next to a theology of work a theology of the network; an ethic for digital anthropology.
Whatever objections are raised about Keller's emphasis on "city", it is very difficult to ignore the fact that the vision John saw was not a garden coming down out of heaven but a city.
Whatever objections are raised about Keller's emphasis on "city", it is very difficult to ignore the fact that the vision John saw was not a garden coming down out of heaven but a city.
Post a Comment