How has my understanding of the Gospel changed?
Upon my return from T4G 08, that's the question I was asked to answer in a random national poll of pastors for a leading Christian magazine. They wanted to know how I would rate myself and my church on seven different questions, both now and ten years ago. Here are the questions:
- I (my church) focus more on the Epistles or the Gospels.
- I (my church) believe the mission of the Gospel is advanced by proclamation or demonstration.
- I (my church) believe the goal of local evangelism is to grow my church of to grow the church.
- I (my church) see the Kingdom of God as a future heavenly reality or a present reality on earth.
- I (my church) believe conversion is a singular decision or a journey over time.
- I (my church) believe the Gospel is more exclusive or more inclusive.
- I (my church) believe partnering with other local churches is essential to our mission or not important to our mission.
So what are your answers?
#1,2,4,5,6 - yes
#3 - "goal": neither
#7 - "essential": hmmm . . . need more time to think
Posted by: Michael DeBusk | Apr 23, 2008 9:07:00 AM
Generally: I don't see these as "either or" questions.
1. Both
2. Proclaimation
3. The church ... and my church (universal and local)(in that order)
4. Both
5. Decision followed by journey
6. ?
7. The right kind of partnerships with other churches (not all churches would be the right partnership)
Posted by: Jim Peet | Apr 23, 2008 9:17:19 AM
uno. Gospels with a mixture of the Epistles
dos. Proclamation with demonstration (preach the gospel always)
tres. local is the key here, so my/universal
cuatro. both
cinco. singular...journey is sanctification
seis. exclusive
siete. important
Thanks Michael for this most helpful of posts.
Posted by: TW | Apr 23, 2008 9:44:57 AM
Man, I hate all of those questions. Honestly, I think most of them are false dichotomies.
1) Well, we just finished an 18 month series on the gospel, so lately it's been more in the gospels. Not sure if that's the norm or not, I've only been at this church for six months.
2) I think this is a false dichotomy. That being said, I do think there's been an over-intellectualization of the gospel in terms of seeing it primarily as being cognitive consent to a set of ideas, with little or no emphasis on a transformed heart. So in my particular context I'd say demonstration, but I'd say that the norm should be both and we shouldn't set up such a dichotomy in the first place.
3) Well, by growing the local church we are growing the universal church. I mean, I don't think any of us would freak out if someone who was helped by our ministry went to another church here in town, but obviously our immediate goal is to bring people into our community. But to me it seems like an odd question, perhaps I'm misunderstanding it?
4) Both, again though, with the hard emphasis that dispensationalism has placed on the future aspect for the past 100 years, I think it's important we put a strong emphasis on the present reality of the kingdom.
5) What's meant by "conversion"? It's kind of a problematic term. If by conversion you mean justification, it's a moment. If you mean sanctification, then it's a process. I think both can be legitimate uses of "conversion."
6) Oy, I really hate this question. I don't know how to answer it. Perhaps by saying we're exclusive toward unrepentant religious people and inclusive toward repentant prostitutes?
7) I'm with Jim. I'm all for unity between churches, but not if that means we have a philosophy of unity built on massive events where 10 churches show up and sit in segregated parts of the room and simply ignore all their distinctives in the name of "unity."
Posted by: Jake Meador | Apr 23, 2008 2:02:52 PM
1) Neither, my focus is knowing God via the bible.
2) Both, proclamation without demonstration is empty and demonstration without proclamation is humanism.
3) Neither, the goal (if that is the right word) is to grow the kingdom by loving God and people.
4) Present and future reality.
5) A series of decisions over the journey - if love is a decision.
6) Way more inclusive than my narrow view :)
7) Essential - unity is not an option.
Posted by: Kansas Bob | Apr 23, 2008 5:20:59 PM
I think a lot of these questions are "both and". I agree with Jake that there are false dichotomies.
1. It shouldn't be one over the other... if you do this you are not proclaiming the whole counsel of God which includes the OT as well.
2. We need to proclaim and demostrate... to proclaim without demonstration is make our proclamation hollow.
3. The Church... but church's that are faithful in evangelism usually see growth.
4. The Kingdom of God is now and not yet.
5. I there is a point of decision when we repent and believe, though that might be a process for some. The work of sanctification is an ongoing process. Sometimes we get so focused on that point of decision that we forget Christ commissioned us to make disciples, not converts.
6. Both - inclusive in that their is level ground at the foot of the cross, but also exclusive in that "narrow is the gate", and that only through Jesus can people come to the Father.
7. What does this have to do with the Gospel. I think that we should be unified and think Kingdom, but not at the expense of truth.
Posted by: Shane Vander Hart | Apr 23, 2008 11:22:32 PM