Part 1, Part 2, Part 3,
Rick Warren is quoted as saying “My goal is the second Reformation of the church. Five hundred years ago, Martin Luther tacked his 95 theses to the door. The first Reformation was about creeds. This one is about deeds. This reformation needs to be about behavior, about what we should do. It's about the church's mission. I intend to give my life to this.” Pastors.com
Warren also stated that “In every village, in every home, in every business, in every government there is a man of peace, or a woman of peace. Somebody who’s willing to work. By the way they don’t necessarily have to be Christian, either.” [emphasis mine throughout]
I’ve had this “Social Gospel” theme floating around in my head now for a couple of months. Sometimes, the more you study a topic, from different perspectives, the more confused you become. In the last couple of weeks I have come across a couple of articles that have given me a clearer understanding.
That said, I will make a few comments about Rick Warren. I know that Rick Warren has also said that he believes in creeds and deeds and that they must both be present in order to fulfill the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20). My question to Rick would be this: “How will you incorporate the Creed portion of this proper balance of proclamation when you say that ‘they don’t necessarily have to be Christian’?” The Great Commission is an “exclusive” commission – IN Jesus Christ alone – Acts 4:12.
Tim Keller, in the Summary portion of an article entitled “The Gospel and the Poor” makes the following observations:
Jesus calls Christians to be "witnesses," to evangelize others, but also to be deeply concerned for the poor. He calls his disciples both to "gospel-messaging" (urging everyone to believe the gospel) and to "gospel-neighboring" (sacrificially meeting the needs of those around them whether they believe or not! The two absolutely go together.
1. They go together theologically. The resurrection shows us that God not only created both body and spirit but will also redeem both body and spirit. The salvation Jesus will eventually bring in its fullness will include liberation from all the effects of sin—not only spiritual but physical and material as well. Jesus came both preaching the Word and healing and feeding.
2. They go together practically. We must be ever wary of collapsing evangelism into deed ministry as the social gospel did, but loving deeds are an irreplaceable witness to the power and nature of God's grace, an irreplaceable testimony to the truth of the gospel.
Greg Gilbert, in an article entitled “Some Unfinished Thoughts on the Cultural Mandate” says the following: The push for evangelical cultural engagement is very strong right now, and honestly, I find much in that line of thinking very compelling. But I still have some significant theological and textual hang-ups with the transformationalist approach. Here are some thoughts about why that is, from my email conversation. These are unfinished thoughts, but thoughts nonetheless:
1) I think the biblical text is pretty clear that the cultural mandate does not carry on in exactly its original shape and character after the Fall.
2) I think the telos, the end, of human culture changes after the Fall. Before the Fall, human culture was intended to grow and expand until it resulted in a worldwide city perfectly under the perfect rule of God. No longer. Now, it seems to me that the Bible's picture is of human culture being pretty consistently on a judgment-ward trajectory. From Cain (or his son) building the first city, to Lamech, to Babel, to Sodom and Gomorrah, to the whore of Babylon, human culture considered in toto seems to be consigned to judgment, not progress in godliness. That point is only underlined, as I mentioned, by the Bible's attribution of all the first great cultural accomplishments to the line of the serpent.
3) Because of #1, I don't think I would say that the cultural mandate (even as it exists now) is the mandate of the church.
4) Because of #2, I think language to the effect that we are "joining God in his work of renewing the world" or "redeeming the culture" is probably not the best language. I believe that the best reading of Scripture is that at the end of the age, God will transform and glorify---not destroy and remake---this world. So I believe there is continuity between those two worlds. But I also think Scripture's general picture is of even more discontinuity when it comes to human culture.
5) I also think the language of "transformationalism" may be too optimistic, given all this. Of course it's true that Christians can do much good in society. But the good that's been done: Is it really fair to call that "transformation?" That's entirely subjective, I know. And maybe it would be appropriate to call some things in history (the work of Wilberforce comes to mind) "transformative." But I think the story of the church's engagement with culture on the whole has been and is going to be less transformational than a fighting of what Tolkien called the Long Defeat. Human culture has always on the whole progressed in sinfulness, filled up its iniquity, and wound up being judged. That's what happened in the Flood, it's what happened at Babel, it’s what happened in Canaan, and it's what happens on a large scale to the whore on the dragon.
6) Despite all this, I think Christians should engage their culture. But I think the motivation is not so much the hope of transformation or the working toward renewal as a few other things:
a) compassion for people;
b) fulfillment of the cultural mandate as it still stands for all human beings;
c) as a witness of the goodness and character of God;
d) as a sign of the coming perfect Kingdom;
e) others....
In a response to the above article, Thabiti Anyabwile, in an article entitled “Cultural Mandate?” says the following: How would you respond to what I think I see as two motions in Scripture?
1. The Scripture pushes the church and Christians away from adopting human culture and tradition.
I think I very much share with you the Bible's pessimism and steady decline where human culture is concerned. In addition to the passages you mentioned, it seems to me inside the church a cultural skepticism is evident in Col. 2:16-17, 20-23 and Gal.4:8-11 (where Paul even classes the Law as "weak and miserable principles" of the old life). In Col. 2 he instructs the church to leave the elementary or basic principles of this world and seems to class both Jewish and pagan religio-cultic ritual together as undesirable. Earlier in Col. 2:8 he waxes poetic against philosophy that depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world. As far as high culture (philosophy) and religious culture, the Scripture pushes us away from those things to something different.
2. The Scripture "backgrounds" human culture inside the church in favor of greater unity in Christ.
We can see that in a number of places, perhaps most clearly in Romans 14:1-15:13. Jew and Gentile differ in their cultural preferences in disputable matters like preference for meat/vegetables (14:2-3) and sacred/regular days (14:5-6). All these are lifted as examples and pushed to the background in favor of unity in Christ and an end to judging one another in such matters. It seems that the passages consistently contrast all that we think of as human culture (by which I mean the patterns of thought, belief, and behavior, not primarily the implements of culture--instruments, etc.) with Christ himself and what it means to be in Christ.
Where am I going with all this? It is not my intention to be “original” in what I’m posting here, but I desire to be true to the Scriptures. From my study thus far, I have concluded that Tim Keller’s thesis is the best description I have found regarding the Church’s mandate in God’s Universe. Although his article speaks to the issues pertaining to the poor, the principles can be applied in other areas as well.
In closing, one more quote from Keller’s article: “The original question I was asked to address was "How does our commitment to the primacy of the gospel tie into our obligation to do good to all, especially those of the household of faith, to serve as salt and light in the world, to do good to the city?" I will divide this question into two parts: (1) If we are committed to the primacy of the gospel, does the gospel itself serve as the basis and motivation for ministry to the poor? (2) If so, how then does that ministry relate to the proclamation of the gospel?”
The Gospel of Repentance, as preached by John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, the Apostle Peter, the Apostle Paul; and all the great Reformers of the past and present, is Primary. Secondarily, ALL individual Christians should be involved in Mercy ministries as the Lord provides opportunities for them to first love God, and their neighbors as themselves.
For further reading:
The Centrality Of The Gospel
As an atheist, I truly believe Africa needs God
Why Africa Needs Missionaries
Africa Needs God
No comments:
Post a Comment