“Jesus’s teaching consistently attracted the irreligious while offending the Bible-believing, religious people of his day. However, in the main, our churches today do not have this effect. The kind of outsiders Jesus attracted are not attracted to contemporary churches, even our most avant-garde ones. We tend to draw conservative, buttoned-down, moralistic people. The licentious and liberated or the broken and marginal avoid church. That can only mean one thing. If the preaching of our ministers and the practice of our parishioners do not have the same effect on people that Jesus had, then we must not be declaring the same message that Jesus did.”
- Timothy Keller, The Prodigal God
posted at "Of First Importance"
3 comments:
Is our message different than Christ's, or are we doing such a poor job of operationalizing His message in the nitty-gritty of life that His message has no impact? Perhaps we're not convinced in our hearts that His message is even relevant outside of that "spiritual niche" in our lives?
Thirty-five years ago, Larson and Miller wrote in "The Edge of Adventure," "The neighborhood bar is possibly the best counterfeit there is to the fellowship Christ wants to give His church. It's an imitation, dispensing liquor instead of grace, escape rather than reality, but it is a permissive, accepting, and inclusive fellowship. It is unshockable. It is democratic. You can tell people secrets and they usually don't tell others or even want to. The bar flourishes not because most people are alcoholics, but because God has put into the human heart the desire to know and be known, to love and be loved, and so many seek a counterfeit at the price of a few beers" (p. 156).
But then, perhaps the church hasn't been so good at dispensing grace. In 1983, Charles Swindoll wrote, "Where does a guy go when the bottom drops out? To whom do we Christians turn when stuff that's embarrassing or a little scandalous happens? Who cares enough to listen when we cry? Who affirms us when we feel rotten? Who will close their mouths and open their hearts? And, even though we deserve a swift kick in the pants, who will embrace us with understanding and give us time to heal without quoting verses? Without giving us a cassette tape of some sermon to listen to? Without telling a bunch of other Christians so they can 'pray more intelligently'?" ("Dropping Your Guard," p. 128).
A.W. Tozer writes, "There is an evil which I have seen under the sun. . .It is the glaring disparity between theology and practice among professing Christians.
So wide is the gulf that separates theory from practice in the church that an inquiring stranger who chances upon both would scarcely dream that there was any relation between them. An intelligent observer of our human scene who heard the Sunday morning sermon and later watched the Sunday afternoon conduct of those who had heard it would conclude that he had been examining two distinct and contrary religions. . .
It appears that too many Christians want to enjoy the thrill of feeling right but are not willing to endure the inconveniences of being right. So the divorce between theory and practice becomes permanent in fact, though in word the union is declared to be eternal" ("The Root of the Righteous," 1986, p. 511-513).
Does God's Word ever have the opportunity to meet the pavement in my life? And if it does, do I live God's principles and Christ's teachings when life gets hard, when it's unfair, when it's inconvenient? If I don't, how can I expect God's Word to be perceived as relevant by someone outside the church?
I guess I have a hard time understanding Keller here. It seems to me that Jesus did not attract the irreligious--those who were hostile or indifferent to religion. He seemed to more readily attract what we might today call 'the seeker,' the ones searching for 'something more'. The people He offended He called liars and hypocrits (thus the offense) because they faked bible belief (and practice) and were falsely 'religious'. And I don't follow "our churches" (Christianity?) draw "conservative, buttoned-down, moralistic people." I think such people are retained, not drawn. And this description seems to give them somewhat less than their due, for I think they are-for the most part-trying to be obedient to the Word in a culture which isn't. When Jesus opened His mouth to teach the crowds in Matthew 5, He reminded them of their spiritual bankruptcy (They were the licentious,liberated, broken, and marginalized.)and that they were lost and hopeless without God's divine grace. Or as Keller writes in his commentary on Galatians, “The message of the gospel is that you are saved by grace through Christ’s work and nothing else at all. As soon as you add anything to it, you have lost it entirely.”
This I more easily understand: the amazing grace that saves wretches.
Jesus, I think, was attractive because He lived out the Shema: He loved the Lord God with all His heart, soul, and strength. He taught that such love reflects and is reflected by obedience to God's will. And He affirms that love and obedience are inseparable, that love is evidenced by obedience(John 15). If ministers are preaching this obedience and parishoners are practicing this obedience (delighting in, meditating on, and living-practicing the Word), it seems we will be declaring the same message as Jesus.
Stephen,
You make a number of good points in your comment, but I think Keller's basic idea is still valid. Jesus was the 'friend of tax gathers and sinners [people considered notoriously sinful]' (Lk.15:1-2) in a way that generally doesn't seem true of most evangelicals (and by extension, of most evangelical churches).
Thanks for your thoughtful comments,
Doug
Post a Comment