9Marks & The Missing Keller

9Marks Ministries (Mark Dever) has a new set of articles up about the "missional" church (see left side of their homepage).  Jonathan Leeman's article, "What in the World is the Missional Church?," is most prominent and includes history, quotes and thoughts from Guder to Stetzer.  You may find his article and others at 9Marks worth reading, and at least an honest attempt of baptist reformed types who desire to understand "missional."

An obvious problem with Leeman's article is that he didn't even mention Tim Keller.  Keller is a reformed conservative (as is 9Marks & Dever) and so discussing Keller should have been essential, and maybe even central to this article.  On top of that, missional thinkers admit they owe much to Keller's writings, sermons, conference messages and local church example.  So in my mind, regardless of some of the thoughtful things Leeman says, missing Keller is missing  "missional."  It's disappointing.

Comments

[Scott Zeller]

Agreed. I noticed the same things about that article. And lacking Keller was only part of lacking a whole lot of insight and punch overall.

The "Missional Life" article from the same set was good though I thought.

SEZ

[Matthew]

Steve, what happened to your "Missional Baptist" blog? I've tried to access off-and-on for the last hour or so - only getting the "404 error" message.

I've been out of the loop for a while so I might've missed an announcement concerning it... any info you could give would be appreciated.

[Joe Thorn]

Yeah, for all the talk about the "conservative takeover" Keller's absence in the article is beyond me.

I also take issue with his "Five Issues." :)

If, in the first "issue," he is suggesting that the transition from modern to postmodern is not a critical issue in the church, how about demonstrating the point, or at least saying more than, "I should unpack all this much further, but I’ll leave it at that."

In #2 I believe his concern of reductionism in the missional church is more reflective of his own reductionism of the missional church.

Ultimately I do not think the article really demonstrates the validity of his concerns.

His "issues" become less critical as the article continues, "I take slight issue with..." and then "I also take a little bit of issue with..." I wont go into them.

He ends his article with "I have offered the five critiques above not because I think he and others are on the wrong path, but because I think they are on the right path. They inspire me. My critiques are offered in the attempt to help the cause." I would not have guessed this was how he would end it, and honestly, if he would not have said it I would not have known this is his position. And to the point, if you have to say this at the end to make this point clear, the article should be re-written.

[Tim Keller]

Oh, I don't know, Steve. I don't have much 'out there' on the subject that can be evaluated. I honestly would have been surprised to see me mentioned.

[iMonk]

Steve....

Just letting you know that I great appreciate your "backbone" in blogging, and certainly your efforts to keep Dr. Keller's work before those who can benefit from it.

It is a puzzling omission, particularly since I can't think of a church anywhere more similar to Dever's vision of a real church than Redeemer.

Oh well. Go Cubs :-) Ahem.

MSpencer

[Joe Thorn]

Tim,

I understand what you are saying, but from your newsletter articles, to your conference sermons/lectures, to the recent Desiring God promo videos - you have addressed the nature of the missional church exceptionally well (especially for the reformed community), and Redeemer and your church planting network have come to be identified with the best of "missional" work out there by many Evangelicals.

By the way, I, and some of our church members are very excited about the DG Con this weekend.

[Steve McCoy]

Joe, stop sucking up to Dr. Keller.

Dr. Keller, please make sure you make time to take a picture with Joe Thorn in Minneapolis. He is short, stocky, bald, and you will look powerful and majestic next to him. That's why I spend so much time with him.

And while I agree that you have few directly "missional" writings, I think it's obvious that all of your stuff is influenced by missional thinking. Many others seem to recognize this considering how many come to my site searching for "tim keller missional" and similar things.

[Toby]

If you can label it you can use it, manipulate it, make up crap about it, and tell your people not to watch it, listen to it, buy it, etc.

[Matt Snowden]

Steve,

I just got back from a conference put on by Mercer University. I picked up a book written by Anthony L. Chute titled, "A Piety Above the Common Standard: Jesse Mercer and Evangelistic Calvinism." Have you heard of this work or the life of Mercer? It is really fascinating.

[Mike McKinley]

Hey Steve,

Did you know Jonathan Leeman when you were at SBTS? He's one of my favorite people in the world, such a wise and gracious guy. And way smarter than I'll ever be. I totally want to be him when I grow up.

I'm on the 9 Marks payroll, so I gotta step in for my boy. I don't know why he didn't mention Keller, but hopefully I've created a ruse to deflect attention from it.

Hey, look over there!

[Steve McCoy]

Mike, I met Jonathan first at Capitol Hill. At least I think that's where it was. Might have been SBTS.

We have emailed on this issue before I posted this. I told him I was surprised that he didn't mention Keller. I don't want to give his email response since I don't have permission to make the email public. I will say our emails were on friendly terms and he is very gracious.

And though I like Jonathan as much as I know him, I don't want to be him when I grow up. :)

[Mark DeVine]

I am very happy to see “missional” churches discussed on Dever’s site. I hope Mark will come to appreciate and then vocally support ministries like Keller’s. I also hope the term “missional” displaces “emerging” because of the seemingly intractable confusion of the two terms emerging and emergent.

I am currently leading my church in the urban core of Kansas City Missouri to merge with a missional church in St. Louis and I have found your links to the Keller and Driscoll videos from Desiring God helpful tools to help introduce my folks to what I hope to see happen.

[Stuart]

I think he's probably a little too scared of "ecumenicals" and that position informed the rest of the article. But it was historically accurate, fair, and mostly positive. Overall, for me it was more helpful than not.

[Will Shin]

Depending on where you're from, everybody has their favorite Missional promoter. In Texas, when I mention Tim Keller, the reaction I get from church planters, church planting coaches, and church planting professors is, "Who?" Over there, Leonard Sweet and Bob Roberts, jr. are the big-name Missional Church gurus. Of which, maybe some of you are saying, "Who?"

[Steve McCoy]

Will, personally, I don't like Keller because of where I'm from. It has nothing to do with that. I like Keller because of what he says, and I think he is saying it much better than most. I'm all for having more local guys who can encourage us to be biblical, but there are a few guys who speak without the same boundaries.

[Will Shin]

I'm just responding to the comment on the original post, "An obvious problem with Leeman's article is that he didn't even mention Tim Keller."

The same can be said, "An obvious problem with Leeman's article is that he didn't even mention , , .

There are just too many local Missional gurus for Leeman article to have mentioned.

Even Tim Keller humbly acknowledges that he is just a local NY Missional guru, not a national one. And then denominationally, he's not well known beyond the PCA circles.

[Steve McCoy]

Will, though I hardly think this is a topic to argue about, I disagree. Keller is a pastor who focuses on his local church. That's true. That doesn't mean his is only a "local missional guru." His influence is not only across the country, but around the world. He is, after all, building a network of churches planting churches in world class cities.

[Joe Kennedy]

We're using Keller's Church Planting Manual in our Urban Church Planting class at NOBTS here in New Orleans. My prof is from Texas and planted in New Mexico. I don't think Keller's nearly as regional as you think, Will. But Steve's right- it's not exactly an issue worth debating.

[Will Shin]

Let me clarify. You argued that Leeman's article should have mentioned Tim Keller. I'm just saying, then, why not also argue that Leeman's article should have also mentioned Leonard Sweet, Bob Roberts, Brad Graves, etc. etc. There are many Missional churches with theologians, pastors and church planters who plant churches nationally and internationally. Why criticize Leeman's article for failing to mention one man when there are a plethora out there? Tim Keller is well known primarily in the New York area. He's not as recognized in Texas or where I am at in California. Bob Roberts is unknown in New York when I was living there. But his name is the staple of "missional" church plants in Texas.

I'm not saying Tim Keller's church planting works are locally restricted. But that his reputation is at par with a plethora of others. So, again, why hype up Tim Keller in criticizing Leeman's article when he's a dime a dozen?

That's all.

[Will Shin]

By the way, I'm not presenting a new debate. I'm responding to Steve's primary thesis to his post: why didn't Leeman mention Tim Keller?

And my response is: why should Tim Keller be mentioned when he's just one of many Missional church planting gurus. I could write a blog post criticizing Leeman's article for failing to mention Bob Roberts and his Missional church planting network.

I'm not debating Tim Keller's work, but addressing the criticism made of whether Leeman should have mentioned Keller.

[Steve McCoy]

Will, Keller is anything but a regional influencer. So your premise is wrong there. I really like Roberts (and have corresponded with him), but I don't put him in the same category as Keller.

For example, Keller has the same basic reformed theology as 9Marks guys. He has also spoken at Reform & Resurge and Desiring God in the past few months (both reformed/Calvinistic groups), and they are looking to him for missional thinking and practice.

So I don't think putting Keller and Roberts/Sweet in the same category for a 9Marks article writer is even close.

Have you read/heard much of Keller's stuff?

[Will Shin]

Steve, sorry to say this, but Keller is a regional influencer in the sense that once you move further away from New York, his name is lesser known.

For example, the Southern Baptist Convention. On one hand, they are national and international, but on the other hand, they are "more" known in the Bible-belt states, and lesser known in the non-Bible-belt states. Here in California, to my surprise, I'm running into many Southern Baptist pastors who never heard of Paige Patterson, Adrian Rogers, Jack Graham, and Al Mohler.

Yes, they're more than "regional," but at the same time, they're "more" known in their immediate region and "lesser" known once you move further away.

So, no, Steve, my premise stands correct.

Secondly, you're categorizing Keller from Roberts/Sweet into two different theological camps is incorrect because if you read and compare their church planting and missional concepts and principles, they're identical. There isn't anything "Reformed" about Keller's concept of Church Planting that differs from the non-Reformed side. In fact, there is too much pragmatism in Keller's stuff.

On the other hand, if you compare Keller's concept of Church from Dever's or Lloyd-Jones, you'll see a world of difference. Keller's church planting toolbox, sadly, is not new, but is a repackaged Bob Logan's toolbox.

Considering that Keller's ecclesiology, especially on matters of church planting, is more in-tune with Sweet/Roberts than with Piper/Dever, I can understand why maybe Leeman did not want to mention Keller.

And, yes, Steve, I'm very familiar with Keller, as my background is PCA before becoming Southern Baptist. And many within PCA do not regard Keller highly because he's to pragmatic and not Reformed in his ecclesiology.

[Steve McCoy]

Will, thanks for the conversation. I've sent you an email that should make my point clear. Please drop the conversation here. Thanks.

Let me add one thing. Monergism has a biographical sketch of Keller, which clearly puts his influence far beyond his region. He is listed there along with Piper, Sproul, Mohler, and yes, even Dever. If 9Marks and Leeman wanted to understand "missional," not even mentioning the guy with national & international influence who fits into their theological group is beyond me.

But since I like Leeman and Dever and 9Marks, and I know they mean well, I will forgive them if they send me free stuff. :)