Le Sabot Post-Moderne

I've a question and a thought to throw out.

1) When I look at the episode in the bible of Paul on Mars Hill, I see that he knew enough about the people he was speaking to to be able to relate the gospel to them. With the multitude of different "mini-cultures" out there these days even in the city of Dallas where I live, how do we even begin to prepare to relate the gospel to them through studying appropriate literature, philosophy, etc.? I would love to be able to do this but feel overwhelmed at where to begin.

2)I have a lecture on tape by Sam Logan, president of WTS, where he is discussing Jonathan Edwards 'Religious Affections' and he made a very interesting point. He said that if our desire to evangelize others is fueled primarily because we don't want to see them go to hell, then we are at greater risk of compromising the gospel than if our primary motivation to evangelize is because we love Jesus so much that our greatest desire is to see every knee bow and every tongue confess that he is Lord.

Good thoughts. I'm wondering if there isn't some underlying theological issue here -- has our theology taught us to be "afraid" of the pagans rather than bold in the gospel of the King? Because it sure seems to me like evangelicals culturally live in fear of all the bad stuff of paganism -- we're afraid of the gay agenda and "what it will do to our kids," we're afraid of feminism and "what it will do to the family," we're afraid of the licentious, depraved pop culture and "what it will do to us" ad infinitum ad nauseum. Now that we've managed to make ourselves afraid of all that stuff, does it make us naturally reticent to get involved with "those people," even though intellectually we might confess that fear is not the issue? And is this a result of some theological weakness? It would be real easy to bring up dispensationalism here, but I'm not sure if the all-purpose Reformed target is the culprit here, or if it's something else.

In any case, even if there is an underlying theological reason, it's still a lack of faith and a lack of love to let our fear keep us from being about our Father's business.

Jane, I wonder if part of the fear of the pagans agenda comes because we're trying too hard solve these problems politically instead of by evangelism. We used to get several newsletters from several different Christian political groups, and they seem to try to capitalize on the "fear factor" of their readers.

That's a good thought, Kelly, but I guess it's chicken or egg. If we (corporately) really had a good grasp of the gospel, would those evangopolitical fund-raising letters even WORK on us? But I know exactly what you mean -- I used to listen to Marlin Maddoux's radio show "Point of View" until I realized that the whole point of it was to keep Christians in a state of outraged ferment, which while certainly understandable, is not the biblical response to the lost and fallen world.

Good thoughts all! I think Jane is dead on with the fear theory. Just to add a bit to it: I think the fear may sometimes be rooted in unbelief. We are afraid because we don't believe God can really change people. We are afraid because we doubt the Gospel can impact culture. Once a Crackhead Transgendered Sun-Worshiper always a CTSW and look! We've filled our church with them.

"We are afraid because we don't believe God can really change people. We are afraid because we doubt the Gospel can impact culture."

I think you've identified something that is both at the core many of the problems in Evangelicalism as well as something we as Christians struggle with personally. (And is connected with the negative labelling and slurring of groups that was discussed last week.)

On a personal level, sure I believe in the abstract that the Sovereign God of the Universe can change my grandfather's heart. Personally, though, I don't have much faith that I'll see it ever happen. Though as I see the Holy Spirit working in the lives of those around me, that doubt is changing. . .

Sure Barb -- fear (of anything other than God) = unbelief. At least it sure seems that way to me.

Great words, John.
I have tried to share the same thoughts from time to time on our site, but every time I do, some fundy type comes out of the woodwork to throw "come out from their midst and be separate" at me. As if that just trumps Jesus' entire relational ministry.

David-

Thanks for the thoughts... :)

"With the multitude of different "mini-cultures" out there these days even in the city of Dallas where I live, how do we even begin to prepare to relate the gospel to them through studying appropriate literature, philosophy, etc.?"

I'm lucky, in that God called me to a relatively homogeneous culture. The ubiquity of Greek culture and language in Paul's bailiwick gave him a similar advantage.

Someone living in a large US city doesn't have this luxury. He's surrounded by mini-cultures, as you said. Fortunately though, he isn't surrounded in uniform proximity by them. His part of town might have a large number of Mexicans, or blacks, or Vietnamese immigrants, or bohemian types...

I don't think this acculturation has to happen before we minister to people in these mini-cultures. The process of befriending someone is also a chance to learn about their culture. The friends closest to my heart back in the States are my Pagans. When I met them, I barely knew the rudiments of Paganism. When I left for Ukraine, I could chat all day about the differences between Wicca or Reconstructionist Paganism and the like. Incarnational, cross-cultural work is the same, whether one is working in Saipan or in Seattle. It's a process of learning the mores and language of another group of people.

I think this process of acculturating through friendships is especially easily done, and valuable, when working with immigrants and foreign students. I can tell you, it is a frustrating and lonely process to try to live in a new country where people do things that seem incomprehensible and wrong to you. And I have an awesome support network.

Immigrants and students are often completely alone. Having someone take an interest in their home culture and help them with the myriad frustrations that come with being in a new country would be a great ministry to them. (I can tell you what a sinking feeling it is to get an automated message from the phone company and have no idea what to do... They do all the official stuff here in Ukrainian, which I can barely gist.)

Anyway, these are just a few thoughts...

David-

"He said that if our desire to evangelize others is fueled primarily because we don't want to see them go to hell, then we are at greater risk of compromising the gospel than if our primary motivation to evangelize is because we love Jesus so much that our greatest desire is to see every knee bow and every tongue confess that he is Lord."

I think this is SO true. That's one reason I grin when I hear well-meaning Arminians talk about how Calvinism hinders missions. If I really believed what they do, I would be paralyzed. What if I wasn't persuasive enough? What if I can't remember the proper response to a particular evolutionary objection to the Word? And so on...

I remember Winky Pratney always started his sessions off with an altar call, just in case someone died during the conference. What a sad view of God's sovereignty.

I preach the Gospel as winsomely as I can, and I remove all the offense from it that isn't integral to the message itself (by presenting it in a culturally-appropriate manner, etc.) But I never confuse my role with God's. There are lots of Reformed people who serve with interdenom missions, and do great work. But one reason I'm thankful to serve with a Reformed mission is because it does maintain that Kingdom focus that you bring up in your quote.

Have you read John Piper's "Let the Nations Be Glad"? If not, be careful. It will inspire you so much you might end up signing up for a tour of duty overseas somewhere. ;) The most inspiring book on missions I've ever read.

I /do/ think though, that compassion for the lost should also be an element in our evangelism. Though the ultimate end is to bring glory and worship to God, we should also feel a burden for the lost sheep, in emulation of our Savior...

pentamom, Barb and Kelly-

I have so little to add... You three really did nail it. Barb is so right that we've lost our faith in Christ's ability to change people and culture. To use a (possibly flawed) genetic analogy, we seem to view Christians and Christianity as a recessive gene that can only be preserved by isolating it from the surrounding dominant strains. So introduction of a foreign element would only weaken us, rather than transforming the other.

Sadly, there's an element of truth in this. Evangelicalism HAS become recessive. We gobble up the surrounding culture and then regurgitate it back in dumbed-down and 'Christianized' form. Our values and opinions are being transformed by the surrounding pagans, rather than vice versa. Look at any of the recent Barna data for examples.

So to an extent I think this 'circle the wagons' mentality is only a facing of facts. We're culturally, intellectually and spiritually outgunned. Sound the retreat.

As you pointed out, this is a faithless response. I'm curious, what do you think a faithful response would look like? This is something I've been mulling. :)

Jared-

" I have tried to share the same thoughts from time to time on our site, but every time I do, some fundy type comes out of the woodwork to throw "come out from their midst and be separate" at me. As if that just trumps Jesus' entire relational ministry."

That is one of their favorite prooftexts.

Though often misused, it IS an explicit command. And it creates a tension between the strong relational aspects of Jesus' ministry, and this command to be separate. How do you personally reconcile the two?

I don't think of it in terms of physical separation. For the same reason, I detest when the same critics cite "city on a hill" and use it to imply distance!

I think being separate has a lot to do with holiness, which Scripture insists has more to do with character than behavior (not that the latter doesn't flow from the former).
I think of holiness as more who/what we are than how we act. This is very troubling to modern legalists I encounter. For them holiness always looks a certain way, does a certain thing -- doesn't see rated-R movies or whatever.

And I've actually had a couple folks tell me that we shouldn't associate at all with unbelievers, citing the whole "for what do they have in common?" verse. Not sure how they fit this into a Christological evangelism, but I've seen one blogger in particular quote A.W. Tozer saying we should never under any circumstances go over to "them," but rather let "them" come over to "us."

In my opinion, this whole "us" versus "them" thing is contrary to the spirit of the Gospel. For, were it not for "Him," "we" would be "them." How can we ever forget that?

They quote A.W. Tozer in preference to Matthew 28:18-20?

Hooookay!

Now I realize the Great Commission isn't a blanket endorsement for going out and doing any stupid thing that we want to call "evangelism," but doesn't it bother these people at all that the primary thrust of the GC is "go" and they're insisting on "sit tight and let them come in?" No, no, don't "compel them to come in! We might get our HANDS dirty doing that! It might make us want to SIN! (Which we'd never want to do otherwise!!!)"

Christians really need to learn that keeping their souls safe does not consist in keeping them in a sterile environment; it consists in obedience. You can walk into a nest of Satanism in perfect safety if you're doing it obediently; in fact, that's a lot safer than staying home out of disobedience!

It might make us want to SIN! (Which we'd never want to do otherwise!!!)

*grin* Yeah, whatever.

Sadly, my sin is more ugly and harmful in my own home than it is outside my home and among the "heathen. Really struggling this week with anger and controlling my tongue. And I hate that it is my hubby and kids that bear the brunt of my struggles with sin.

Reminds me to be thankful to God for the grace He shows us every day. . .

What does a faithful response look like? I really have no idea, but I can tell you what we do.

We talk to our neighbors a lot, we help them if we are able to.

Mike takes a bunch of tomatoes to work once a week or so to share, since we've been blessed with such abundance, and we give others to the neighbors and to our chapel family.

Mike leads the music at chapel and we have the team over to our house for meals and family time.

Homeschooling our children is the best way we know to bring up our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and we pray that when they are grown the Lord would use them to establish seven new faithful, godly families who can minister to others in their respective callings as families.

It doesn't sound like much, but the point is that we do whatever we are able to do given our calling as a military family and our resources.

If there's any principle to be found here, I guess it's just to take advantage of the opportunities the Lord makes available to you! Some are called to the military, some to business, some to education, some to missions, some to politics... Whatever you do, do it as unto the Lord, for His glory.

This is coming from a person who has spent a lot of time working in political campaigns, writing protest letters, picketing...

I think it's been pretty well summed up. The Christian "culture" is replacing true service and faith, at least in America. Everything from how to act, how to dress, and even (blech) what vitamins to take is now available, prepackaged and sterilized against the world through some Christian store, outlet or (ick) MLM. Christianity is big business now, and some church "leaders" have been preying upon the almost cult-like mentality that followers seem to strive for.

Think about it, some churches have become so pharisaic in their way of dealing with their members, laying so many rules upon their life about what can be said or watched or done, all they would need is a commune to be a real cult. And yet, we share in the responsibility for this. We've let the Christian "culture" movement overtake the beautiful freedom of our religion and turn it into yet another set of rules to be followed.

Jesus didn't hang with these folks. That alone should speak volumes about his ministry.

Dr. Tuba-

You're spot-on about the Christian kitsch. It's so annoying to walk into the Family Christian Store and see two shelves of 'Christian' dieting books at the front, and a half-row of theology books at the back gathering dust...

"Jesus didn't hang with these folks. That alone should speak volumes about his ministry."

Exactly. We've allowed ourselves to be segregated into a nice, comfortable, and largely irrelevant subculture. And within this subculture we have our own lingo, t-shirts, television stations, ad nauseum. A person can live cheerfully within this Christian bubble and practically never interact with the outside world. And before someone in the outside world can enter this bubble, we pressure them to begin looking, dressing, talking and acting the part before we'll accept them. (Thankfully there are some wonderful exceptions.)

Kelly-

"Some are called to the military, some to business, some to education, some to missions, some to politics... Whatever you do, do it as unto the Lord, for His glory."

I think a right understanding of Calling is one of the greatest gifts of the Reformation. :)

"We pray that when they are grown the Lord would use them to establish seven new faithful, godly families..."

Awesome. That's the same thing I think as I look at my four boys -- my primary disciples. We're raising them to be world-changers, no matter what God calls them to.

I like your point about taking the opportunities that God gives us. If you look at Jesus's miracles, so often it's written that He was 'moved to compassion' or something similar. I think that's key. God puts certain people in our path, and puts them on our heart.

Ethics is not necessarily the handmaiden of theology.