The Gospel-menical Church - Part IV

I have taken some heat for bringing up a critique of the word missional and what is usually implied about through what it means and how many are using it. I posted this article written by Ryan Kelly on what God's mission is and that I gladly join that mission. I urge you to read his article before you go any further here. I think it is introduces where I am going and prevents any reader from assuming they know where I am going here. This is a great place to pick up our Gospel-menical church discussion.

One phrase I continually hear when it comes to being missional is that the goal of missional churches is to "join God in the work He is already engaging in the community..." or something to that affect (this is not a direct quote).

This phrase or idea (that I badly misquoted) has had me in deep thought because I am not sure it is biblical or that we can see examples of it in Scripture. In my study I have, in fact, seen quite the opposite. Let me explain.

Let's start with Acts 8:26ff:

Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, "Go south to the road—the desert road—that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza." So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians. This man had gone to Jerusalem to worship, and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the book of Isaiah the prophet. The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it." Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. "Do you understand what you are reading?" Philip asked. "How can I," he said, "unless someone explains it to me?" So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. The eunuch was reading this passage of Scripture:

"He was led like a sheep to the slaughter,
and as a lamb before the shearer is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.
In his humiliation he was deprived of justice.
Who can speak of his descendants?
For his life was taken from the earth." [NIV]

The phrase spoken by missional proponents cannot be fulfilled unless a person of God is present thus making it a false statement or simply that it is an ambiguous and circular argument. I call it ambiguous because it becomes a question of God being present in the lives of those who don't know Jesus. I believe God is present in this world, but he has equally charged us through His Son Jesus to "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you..." (Matthew 28:19-20 NIV) It cannot be that God is at work in the lives of the world absent faithful witnesses of Christ. That goes against everything we've been taught by God in His Word.

The eunuch asked Philip, "Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?" Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus. -- Acts 8:34-35 [NIV]

The eunuch did not know what he was reading about because no one had ever explained the gospel to him.

Some might argue that God was already at work in the life of the eunuch since he went to Jerusalem to worship. However, since he was not a Jew and did not grow up hearing the stories of how God had rescued his people from Pharaoh and how the prophets proclaimed the coming Messiah. He only knew what he had read in the prophets but did not understand what it all meant. God worked in the world by sending Philip to proclaim the Gospel.

We bring the presence of God through sharing the Good News of the Gospel. Unless someone shares the Gospel, is God truly "already at work"? I would submit that God is at work in the world through us and if we're not willing to share, the world may not know what God's will for them is.

As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, "Look, here is water. Why shouldn't I be baptized?" And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing. --Acts 8:36-39 [NIV]

Only at the sharing of the Gospel by Philip do we truly see God at work in the world. This goes for the saved and the unsaved. We must continually be reminded where our hope lies. We cannot assume God is "at work" if we're not willing to be at work ourselves in sharing His Word with everyone we come in contact with. When it comes to that, I agree with Robert Preus when he said, "The Gospel assumed is the Gospel denied."

I see two dangers in assuming God is "already at work" in the manner of the original phrase: 1.) We get ecumenical universalism. People who accept every and all doctrine without a Berean spirit or 2.) Complete atheism.

Our ultimate Mission (with a big "M" like Ryan Kelly referred to in his article) is to proclaim Jesus Christ and Him crucified for the forgiveness of our sins. That is the best and most biblically faithful way we can join God in the work he is already doing in the world. When we share the Gospel, the Holy Spirit is active in the lives of the people who hear. If we are unwilling to share it, we have assumed they understand His Word and the possibility occurs that they might follow any and every kind of false doctrine that is out in the world. Some may even wonder why it matters to be a Christian since non-Christian organizations are able to accomplish the same kinds of things without Jesus. The difference is we know where our ultimate hope lies.

"You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven. -- Matthew 5:14-16 [NIV]

__

The Gospel-menical Church - Part III

I continue seeking a Gospel-menical life. Those of us who claim Christ and the Christianity believe we have been redeemed and have been saved from something. That is the claim anyway. I am afraid that the answer to this question has had a shift; mainly because of a culture that has decided that having an answer to any question has become arrogant.

I believe the answer to the question, "What are we saved from? What are we redeemed from?" is sin and death. I believe it is that simple because of what I read all throughout the gospels and especially what Paul tells us in Romans.

"There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit." -- Romans 8:1-4 (ESV)

I hear more than ever this claim that our soteriology cannot be about saving us from hell in the future, but that it brings heaven to earth. It is difficult for me to find that in the Scriptures when I read the passage I just quoted from Romans. We are sinners. There will not be heaven on earth until Jesus Christ returns in glory to bring His Kingdom with him.

If you can replace Christ, Jesus, or Christian with any other religious or spiritual group or organization, it is not be the Gospel. Here's an example of things I have heard people say our duty as Christians is...it is not a direct quote, but representative of many things I have heard:

As Christians, we can work for change in the world. Caring for the environment, extending to the poor generosity and kindness; a hopeful outlook. We can bring the Kingdom of God here to the world now.

Replace "Christians" with any other words: Buddhist, Muslim, follower of Oprah, the "One" organization, communist, friendly, political, an upstanding member of the community, etc. Are these intrinsically good things? Some are, absolutely. Are they the Gospel? No.

[Side-note that bears including: my friend Dave brought up recently at a great camp that the Insane Clown Posse Juggalos (fans of ICP) go and do service projects in their communities. If you want to look up who those people are, please take the time to Google them but I warn you it is NSFW. You'll understand my previous points better if you do it, but you'll need a mind bath afterward.]

Those things like caring for one another and the poor are very well fruits of our Christ-likeness, but none of these things sets us apart as Christians from the rest of the world. What sets us apart is our willingness and desire to die to ourselves, take up our cross, and follow only Christ.

I have friends who aren't part of a church say things like, "the church is not representative of who I want to be as a Christian." and, "I know lots of good people who aren't Christians."

I don't think that I am a Christian so I can be a good person. I am a Christian because I am a sinner who has no hope without Christ. In that, the church represents Christianity very well. We are all in need of a Savior who saves us from ourselves. Leaving the church because there are broken people there isn't the answer, it is arrogance because apparently you can do it on your own.

Try replacing Christ in this next statement:

"Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures..." -- 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (ESV)

It is very difficult to do (I would say impossible). It worries me that many have changed the Gospel of Jesus Christ for something that is akin to moralistic, therapeutic Deism in order to look good to culture. They don't fit together.

It has never been and will never be arrogant to say that I know my Redeemer lives. Jesus Christ saved me and He can save you too.

__

"Gandhi Is My Favorite Christian Hero" by Ben Cook

My friend Ben shared this a couple of years ago and since I am posting old articles here as new in my "Gospel-menical Church" series, I figure not everyone has read it since he posted it in 2010. Plus he references one of my articles which makes him and his article doubly awesome!
-------

"Be the change you want to see in the world." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Go ahead and peruse your Facebook profile information page. Skip across to your friends... Eventually, you're gonna probably find someone who has this exact quote listed as a "favorite quote." It's so common, in fact, that several Christians will choose Gandhi's quote over any quote from Christ himself.

That's noteworthy. Even if it's just anecdotal; it's noteworthy. And poignant.

My good friend, Mike Lewis wrote an excellent article which provokes us to consider whether Gandhi would have even accepted the teachings of Christ at all - instead of the emasculated, play-nice-in-the-sandbox, "Jesus" we experience in popular culture. While that is an interesting question altogether, I am perhaps frustrated for another reason.

The emergent church movement is a wonderful, God-sent re-focus for our faith. I am thankful for the stirring they provide for us all. But my hesitation is this: the epistemology of this movement is ambiguous at best. Here's what I mean: I know what is true because it comes from the lips of Christ. Knowledge and truth really come from Christ - whatever He declares as truth is truth. In the above quote, Gandhi expresses truth very eloquently. But it's not truth because Gandhi said it. It's truth because it is declared as truth by the author of truth.

Here comes my question: now that Christians are more attentive to social justice issues... are we doing it because we are attentive to the Spirit of Truth, or are we doing it because it is a cultural value? As postmodern values take deeper root in our culture we see a steady erosion of any standard of objective truth. Except one: social justice/human dignity. The single objective truth in postmodernity is that people should be helping people.

How is it that we have come to the conclusion that we should be agents of social change in our communities? Is this truth given to us by Christ, or is it a cultural value cloaked in Christian terminology and verses? I know, I know - the criticism here is easy to say "who cares, as long as we can agree that it's important? Why can't Gandhi speak truth?" But how we get there matters.

According to Gandhi, we are agents of social change because of human dignity. According to Christ, we are also agents of social change because of human dignity. But also because we have received grace from our heavenly father. Oh, and also because our example in the world will bring glory to our heavenly Father.

When we are not attentive to Jesus as the source of truth, we can miss the boat on some very BIG issues. (The first 4 minutes of THIS VIDEO will illustrate nicely) Yes, this call for social justice has gotten so big in some emergent circles that it has started to eclipse the gospel. The real gospel. The gospel that Gandhi cannot give. The gospel that brings life. The great commission-driven gospel. The you're-a-sinner-Jesus-died-for-you-there-is-an-afterlife gospel.

Jesus puts social justice in its proper context in John 6 when he says, "the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." (John 6:33) In fact, in the greater context of John 6, Jesus is actually frustrated because the whole point of the miracle - feeding 5,000 people - was for people to turn to God. That act of kindness served the purpose of the gospel. But it was not the gospel.

May we always be attentive to Jesus: the way, the truth, and the life.

__