I’ve spent the best part of the last 8 years moving in conservative evangelical church circles. The majority of the churches I’ve been involved with have been churches where the gospel of Christ is central not just in belief but also in proclamation. Whilst moving in these circles I’ve also often heard a repetitive criticism attached to them. I’ve heard many people complain that these ‘bible-based, gospel-centered’ churches are great on a lot of things but not great at being loving. My immediate response has often been to suggest that person offering the critique doesn’t really understand what biblical love is and that by preaching the gospel we are showing the utmost love. Often my response was justified. But often it wasn’t and the criticism was valid. It is not completely unfair to evaluate a number of the churches with which I am associated as being un-loving, or at least poor at displaying love.
This is a perplexing problem for someone like myself who holds to the absolute importance of gospel-centered bible teaching as the very core of the church life. Why doesn’t it seem to be working in some cases? Well I don’t have all the answers to a question like that, but I have noticed something that I think is contributing in part. I think that often we’re being reductionistic about the call placed upon every believer by the bible itself. Let me quote a section from Tim Chester and Steve Timmis’ book, ‘Total Church‘ to illustrate what I mean. Concerning ministry to the poor the authors comment:
“The most loving thing we can do for the poor is proclaim the good news of eternal salvation through Christ. It is by no means the only loving thing we can do for them, but it is the most loving thing we can do.” (p.75)
Often I think we’re forgetting to add in their little qualification ‘it is by no means the ONLY loving thing we can do…’ And forgetting that qualification can make the world of difference to whether or not a church is loving. So I still affirm, with the authors, that to proclaim the gospel is the single most loving act we can perform as Christians – BUT – its definitely not the ONLY one. We need to shake off that reductionism and teach regularly how the gospel causes us to love in a number of different ways. And then we need to display that true love to a watching world.
I lived in the bible-belt for too long and was horrified by the churches with the “game show host” looking/speaking pastor’s with the large following of people who obviously couldn’t think for themselves. Why does religion have to be a public thing? Why can it not be a beautiful private experience?
I’m not really talking about the ‘bible-belt’ churches – they’re not the churches I’m describing above. I’m speaking more out of a South African context here. The churches I’m talking about are generally extremely anti the whole ‘game show host’ type pastor and the large entertainment type services.
I suppsoe it once again coems back to a persons’ definition of what the Gospel is.
for some, The gospel is part and parcel of feeding the poor, and cannot be the gospel if that is missing (linked to advacnign the whioe Kingdom of God) . for others, it is a seperate spiritual act (which is often percieved as a spiritual dualsim)
what is your definition of Gospel in these terms?
I don’t see feeding the poor as the gospel. I see the gospel as the life death and resurrection of Jesus Christ to reconcile man to God. This I see as the pinnacle of God’s purposes to re-create all creation which is the ultimate purpose of the kingdom. I see feeding the poor as the outflowing of kingdom ethics in the life of a believer who has experienced the appplication of the gospel.
I don’t think Christ died so that we would feed the poor. I think he died in order to deal with the very reason that the poor exist in the first place and that is man’s rebellion against God. When we truly grasp that then I believe we will feed the poor.
Steve I’m with you in theory on that one, but in all honesty it often seems like most of us in reconciled Christians in church (who are supposed to be having that ‘true grasp’) spend all our time trying to grow deeper and get more meat and tell other churches that they are missing the boat, and very few of use ever get around to actually feeding the poor.
And i think the current trend is to pendulum swing to the other extreme by almost stopping evangelism altogether and going to social route, in the hope that people will see it and ask why, thereby finding God and meeting Jesus.
Now i’m not saying that’s right – but it certainly seems to be the knee jerk reaction to the ‘failings’ (or perhaps shortcomings) of the church.
I wonder to myself whether if more of us were being truly transformed by the gospel we’d even be having these conversations… It seems as though either churches are mastering on good doctrine OR highly social in their makeup – but very rarely both.
Is anyone getting it right on a significant scale?
I love the way you used the phrase ‘grow deeper’. I think that’s part of the problem. I’m not convinced we’re always trying to grow in a deeper understanding and existential knowledge of the cross of Christ and its significance – I think rather we’re just trying to grow in subjective inner experiences that we can call spirituality. Now I don’t deny subjective inner experiences as being a part of spirituality but I think that in many churches that experience is majored upon and so instead of a humble reflection on the cross one’s spirituality becomes a selfish desire for further experience. I might be wrong but that’s one of the impressions I’ve got in the past.
Another thing is that in my experience of visiting churches in SA, and I’ve visted a fair amount in number and diversity, is that there’s not a lot of clear preaching on the glorious richness of the cross that gets past the academic doctrine (which is necessary) and into the hearts and minds of the people. We either get reductionistic ‘get out of hell free’ messages or overly elaborate doctrinal messages that fail to connect the mechanics of the atonement with the listeners. But I might be wrong there twoi – its also just an impression I’ve had.
In terms of your final question – is anyone getting it right on a significant scale? Check out Tim Keller at Redeemer Presbyterian in New York (click on the ‘ministries’ tab above for links to his talks and papers), I think he is not only doing it himself but he is spawning a movement of likeminded people around the world – a movement that I very much want to be part of.
Its funny – Tim Keller preaches about the cross in basically all his sermons and I once heard him make this remark. He said that he doesn’t mind if at the beginning of his sermon people are taking notes but if they’re still taking notes at the end then he feels that he has failed in his talk. He wants the sheer magnitude of the gospel to bear down the listener everytime the bible is opened irrespective of which section of Christian doctrine, ethics and practice he is dealing with. That’s what I think we need: Preaching on the cross that leaves us unable to do anything but feed the poor etc.
I will be sure to check it out… I am always hungry to see God at work and the Church getting it right, even if it’s usually to lessen the guilt of my own lack of fullness to my salvation.
On your first point though, I would split between Churches who major on emotional experiences, and those who want ‘deeper understanding and existential knowledge of the cross of Christ ‘ and say that if kept unchecked both can become consumerist – driven type churches. You can have a hugely deep and vast knowledge of the Cross or a Knock-you-down-constantly move of the spirit or both and STILL have hearts that are not truly gripped and transformed to the point of living out Christianity.
I hate to end my thoughts there but i honestly i have been sitting here, blankly staring at my mac for about 10 minutes trying to figure out what it is that DOES actually change people’s hearts and for the life of me i can’t put my finger on it.
Because i see consumers in all kinds of churches and i see people alive and free and living it out in those same churches.
except, of course, the quakers.
i jest.
Paul’s letters seem to say that only one thing changes people and that is the knowledge and application of the cross. Note how often when talking to believers in his letters he reminds them of their previous lifestyles and then he says, ‘BUT you were washed, you were cleaned’ etc. etc. They changed because their standing before God changed and they came to understand that. That’s why Paul wishes that people who preach any other gospel would be castrated – because he knows that only the gospel of the cross will change people in the end.
Tim Keller would probably put it this way: We’re forced to repent of our selfishness and consumerism when we’re confronted by the amazing grace of the cross in our own lives. When we existentially discover that nothing we have done has made us right with God our importance of self is radically re-directed from a self-centered identity to an indentity in Christ which is and always has been other-person centered.
I know its hard to conceptualize this when you look at so many poor examples around us – that’s been my struggle since becoming a Christian. But I’ve also seen exceptions, I’ve seen what Paul is talking about actually happen in people’s lives. I’ve seen people move completely upstream at great cost to themselves because they’re motivated by an unquenchable love that burns in them as a result of being in Christ. And so I hold on to that and I daily seek the Lord and ask him that he might give me such knowledge of the cross that I disregard self for the sake of others.
I actually really hope that that is the case. my gut is that if it was then it would be less of an exception and more of a norm, because there are lots and lots of great bible teachers out there and lots and lots of congregations with a great deal of knowledge about the cross.
But as you have said, it seems those we want to be like are an exception not common… and i would hazard a guess that even though all those exceptions do have great bible teaching and specifically a good Cross Doctrine, that there is something more than that going on.
Perhaps it is a culture of selflessness that develops, perhaps it is an anointing of a leader or a spiritual blessing/favour of some sort. perhaps it’s relationships that are on another level or maybe it is a collective holy discontent, but my church experience, and i think yours too, seems to point to there being something…. else?
One other example you might want to look up is the book ‘Total Church’ by Tim Chester and Steve Timmis. They’re in Sheffield in the UK – maybe you can take a weekend off to visit them? Tim Chester’s personal blog is listed on my sidebar under ‘clever guys’. He spent many years working for Tearfund and is now a full-time church planter as a well as quite a theological brain. I finished reading their book about a month ago and it was epic – and its full of stories of changed lives. Their angle is ‘gospel’ in ‘community’. Check them out.
Matt, regarding your question…’what is it that DOES actually change people’s hearts?’
I don’t think there is a verse in Scripture that answers this question better than 2 Cor 3v18 –
“And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit. ” (ESV)
Paul’s logic is simple…beholding the glory of Christ is not only the means of becoming a Christian (John 1v14, 2Cor 4v6), and it is not only the goal of the Christian life (1 John 3v2), but beholding the glory of Christ in the present age, is also the means by which are being transformed into the likeness of Christ.
I believe that what our churches need above all else is to see and marvel at the beauty and majesty of the Lord Jesus. And if beholding the glory of Christ is the powerful way by which we are transformed, then the ultimate goal of our pastors and bible-teachers is remarkably simple…they have to teach the Scriptures in such a way that will show Jesus for who he truly is. Though many of us will agree to this in theory, I dont see enough of this kind of teaching in our modern-day evangelical circles…And at this point I fully agree with Stephen…the cross of Christ is the place where the glory of Christ is portrayed most supremely.
hope this helps…
Stephen it is very encouraging to see a post like this on your blog, a great thing to be reflecting on.
Hi Stephen
I just think it’s so great when people are looking seriously for the way of love and genuine Christ-likeness without feeling that they need to leave the Bible or solid doctrive behind. As you’ve said (fairly) orthodox doctrine is not opposed to love in action. People just seem to get lost in the joy of doctrine. But I am afraid that those who then say there is no need for doctrine or Greek exegesis will find themselves without foundation when challenges come. Go, go , go!
Hey Stephen
thanks for the thought provoking post. i’m continually challenged when i come to this blog.