Relevance or Faithfulness?, 4

Let me make it clear -- we can be faithful and passionate about communicating the truth to people of our day!

I had been looking for examples of this for years.  It was in the midst of this I discovered Tim Keller and was greatly relieved that there was a model of a man who was theologically faithful and who worked hard at communicating to his particular context with significant effect – by God’s grace. He linked me to other authors.

I began to read about the Missional Church – critiquing both the traditional church that was designed in the Middle Ages, and the Seeker church which missed out on certain key truths. Lesslie Newbegin said we must now face the fact that we live in a mission field – that the people around us in the West must be approached as though we are in India. They were skeptical. They were not impressed with the Four Spiritual Laws. They needed to see and observe the church being itself. A lively, functioning church is a key component in God’s mission to the world with the Gospel.

Here is where my connection with Sovereign Grace Ministries was enhanced – for our goal is to shape vital churches that apply the Gospel to every area of life. What I have found in our churhes is sincere love for people -- humility -- a desire to learn and grow in ministry together -- and a winsome sincere godliness.  These are at the core of the missional model.

I have concluded that the call is to be faithfully relevant or relevantly faithful – to be so captured by the Gospel and its proclamation to sinners that we will be militant in our efforts to communicate it – not passive --aggressively finding ways to communicate the timeless truth in as clear a manner as possible. I would also say the best way to preserve the truth is not to put it in a box and surround it with soldiers -- but by proclaiming it to the lost so that, by grace, the number of believers increases.

It all begins with pastoral example. I cannot lead my people where I am not going.  This is not easy.

Just recently I was in conversation some some folks who were deeply exasperating to me -- I was angry with them by the end and did not care to find a way to explain the Gospel to them.  I saw them as arrogant -- and terribly mixed up.  Then I saw my own selfishness and told the Lord I had no natural love for them but he could love them through me.  And I also saw that it would take months of effort and hours of time to win the right to have a personal and heart-to-heart conversation with them.  Would I pay that price?  Or will I only engage in drive by evangelism?

Just the other day, while travelling, I was reminded that there is not much "neat evangelism" these days.  The young lady next to me said she was a Christian -- she had a baby out of wedlock, did not get an abortion despite her boyfriend's protests, was abandoned by him, but now has him living with her just to help with the baby.  She was lacking is discernment and moral courage -- did not know the Bible -- had a sense of having sinned to badly that there was nothing God would do for her -- and needed very practical help.  I referred her to some pastoral friends near where she lived.  To serve her would require more than inviting her to church.

So, as I look on theologically faithful churches today that are bearing significant evangelistic fruit (like Mars Hill). I am far more inclined to think it is not just a matter of sovereignty – it may be because they have been gripped by the love of Christ – and have labored to speak the Gospel clearly to the people where they are.

They have probably been led by pastors who spend time in relationship with non-believers anf have both proclaimed and listened to objections – much like Francis Schaeffer. They have probably been busy “sowing much” and in a way that conveys clear biblical content to their people (and this is not a formula – what could be more different than Tim Keller and Mark Driscoll?). It may be because they have been building churches with huge welcoming hearts so that unbelievers can come and see and taste what life in the body of Christ is like.

I think I need to be discerning – for I may not agree with all that they do or how they do it (I am not supposed to clone them-- that is lazy).  I may not agree with the fine points of their ways – but their method and passion are far better than my non-method and coldness of heart.  It does no good to nit-pick them -- granted they have ways to grow -- but so do I and my sins of omission are far less apparent than their sins of commission. 

They are fruitful and faithful because a sovereign God has raised up leaders who are faithful and fruitful in heart and work at communicating in a way that makes sense – and that means if my church is to be faithful and fruitful it will all begin with me. I am not to be passive. I am to put to death the deeds of the flesh – and certainly one of the deeds of the flesh is indifference to the Gospel mission and the selfishness that cloisters me in my safe zone.