Comments on: iMonk 101: Gospel Relevance=Gospel Application

By: Headless Unicorn Guy

Headless Unicorn Guy — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:59:05 +0000

In doing so, we’ve found that the church quickly divides between a kind-of theological conservatism that seems to fear becoming liberal, and a social response that wants to question the core truths of the gospel. — Mick Porter

i.e. a split into a Social Gospel without personal salvation, and a “Bible-Believing (TM)” Fundamentalist Gospel of Personal Salvation and ONLY Personal Salvation.

Both completely out-of-balance in opposite directions.

By: Mick Porter

Mick Porter — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:57:45 +0000

Wow, I really like this post!

We’ve just finished producing a DVD aimed at helping the church think through issues around justice and mercy from a gospel perspective.

There’s a bit of a trend to hold justice/mercy issues and “gospel” in opposition, but we found that as people get some hands-on experience trying to proclaim the gospel to really broken people they quickly understand the need to think through the kind of theology you are promoting here.

By: Christopher Albee

Christopher Albee — Fri, 29 May 2009 17:43:02 +0000

Greg Ogden described the Church in a way that was, to me, pretty unforgettable (and I paraphrase): “The Church is nothing less than the corporate replacement for Jesus Christ.” Great Commission aside, our charge is to do and teach the same things that He did and taught; it is no accident then that Paul dubs the Church the body of Christ.

Okay, so if someone were to walk through the doors of our local church this Sunday, would she come face to face with Jesus in all who attend there? Be honest now….

If the answer is “No” then how can that local body by any means apply the gospel to those outside their number as Jesus would? If the body of Christ is maimed, or hurt, or is otherwise unrecognizable as Jesus, it cannot as a body bring help and hope to a dying world. Sure, there’ll be some who possess a mighty compassion or zeal that compels them to minister as Jesus would, but they will be operating as individuals.

Paul sets forth in a straightforward manner how that the Church is the fullness of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23); and how that the body of Christ must grow into its Head, which is Christ; and how that this growth is accomplished as a result of pastors and teachers etc. equipping God’s people for works of service to build up the body (Eph 4:7-13). Whether these works ought to be inwardly or outwardly focused is probably a matter of debate elsewhere. But it’s probably both.

Point is, our ability to apply the Gospel to the world around us lies in great part with the willingness of pastors and teachers to equip their fellow members of the body to do it. It is a leadership issue. Do our leadership then equip their fellow members of the body with knowledge of who Jesus is? Do we grow in our knowledge of Christ through the the gospels? That is, do we know this Son of God? Have we witnessed His compassion and seen how He reaches out to the downtrodden, maligned and forgotten? Have we been caught up in His zeal for announcing the kingdom of God?

No? How then can we apply the gospel as the body of Christ if we don’t know Whom we embody? We can’t.

But conversely, the key to applying the Gospel is to begin with Jesus and get to know the One whose feet we are to convey the Gospel; whose hands we are to touch the lost with compassion; whose lips we are to speak words of reconciliation from God; whose arms we are to hold the broken and dying; and whose heart we are to feel His burden for a world that needs Him desperately.

By: Ron

Ron — Fri, 29 May 2009 09:51:09 +0000

I’m not so sure that first Christian community experiment in Jerusalem was failure when it comes to being a good example of living out the gospel in a community context — rather I think that community had to be dispersed as the seeds of new (though certainly different) communities in other places. It’s not that they were off base in sharing meals and worldly belongings or in dedicating themselves to the apostles’ teachings or in evangelizing on Solomon’s Porch. It just seems that there for a while they may have become a little too focused on their community, temporarily forgetting Christ’s directive to take His good news to the whole world. And as Jews, they may have retained some of their former religious attachment to the temple, which had been the center of Jewish worship for centuries. In order to build them together into a new temple “not made by hands,” I think God may have had to apply some pressure in order seperate them from that old, physical symbol of the new emerging spiritual reality. It’s interesting that Paul (then Saul) headed up the persecution that scattered that original community, which resulted in the planting of church communities in places like Damascus. Besides, Jerusalem was about to get leveled to the ground by Roman legions (something Christ foretold), and the physical survival of the early church was at stake.
With all that said, I think that God sometimes has to break up the party and take away our religious security blankets, both for our good and the advancement of His kingdom. And sometimes what He needs from us is just a little flexibility and a willingness to adapt and change when necessary.

By: Cassandra Williams

Cassandra Williams — Thu, 28 May 2009 16:19:45 +0000

After reading your article on the coming collapse of evangelical Christianity and reviewing your bio, I thought you might be interested in checking out my new book from Alban.
The book seeks to reclaim insights on authentic discipleship from the 1st century Christian communities and apply those to today.
Here’s a link to the book http://www.alban.org/bookdetails.aspx?id=6920

and one to an article excerpted from the book.
http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102511292653&e=001THnvRWHGIg6cSs1w14Eea-qYJc5TTAhuCQLQDj34ri174DG_BM8Zwpi7oU9gW2c9WPjjG–5b1Xf4NfnIfLOY7fH3hslHbqoENjF715kBCo=

By: Martha

Martha — Thu, 28 May 2009 14:56:08 +0000

I don’t see a struggle between words versus deeds. Whether or not St. Francis did indeed say that quote which has been attributed to him, it boils down to: live the Gospel. Not just lip-service; live it.

By: Ed

Ed — Thu, 28 May 2009 12:03:25 +0000

For me, one of the errors of gospel application is the perceived requirement that a direct gospel appeal must be made as part of the thing being done.

If a church decides to provide meals for the homeless, then there will probably be an obligatory sermon, or at a minimum, the handing out of pamphlets. It’s as if we are incapable of caring for others simply because they need the care and we can provide the care.

We put on our matching t-shirts emblazoned with Jesus fish symbols, crosses and some inane church vision statement, we take down contact information for “follow-up”, we provide childcare during events and then proceed to put a high-pressure salvation sales pitch on these children, we send everyone away with a shopping bag full of church material (when a bag of groceries might have been more helpful), and on and on.

I don’t know which is worse, sitting through a day of hard sell to buy a time share under the guise of a “free two-day vacation package” or taking advantage of the plight of others to force them to sit through a gospel hard sell during our “community fair”.

By: John Miller

John Miller — Wed, 27 May 2009 21:01:28 +0000

“The Church” is a gathering of people loyal to Jesus who believe certain things, but it is a movement of people who apply the gospel to those issues in their midst that demonstrate the meaning of the Kingdom of God.
I believe the word NOT is missing out. How ironic. Theory puts the NOT in the first part, reality and practice however, in the second part. Let’s get real folks…