The above question is critical especially in light of the recent events in Ferguson, New York, and Paris. Although not surprised, I am continual amazed at blog posts created by those who call themselves "evangelical Christians" and their various assessments of Christian leaders such as Voddie Baucham, for example, and the things he has commented on related to the events particularly in Ferguson. My point here is not to necessarily defend Voddie, but to raise a bigger question related to how we hear and understand the gospel.
It is true that when many, like Voddie, call for individuals and families to take greater responsibility for their lives, we who listen need to be alert to how we hear such calls. Many bloggers and writers react to such statements because comments like these might appear to avoid addressing the injustice that in their minds exists in these situations. So we react to calls for taking greater responsibility. The challenge however comes when terms such as "responsibility" used in a politically charged way or heard in the same fashion become confused with language or principles that are actually centered in the gospel and the Scripture. Consider how this happens. A call, for example, to repentance is heard as a call to take responsibility for your life.
This occurred when one writer reacted to a call for repentance from another evangelical leader like it was a call for taking responsibility. Repentance is a kind of taking responsibility and yet it is not. If you mean taking responsibility as in "taking responsibility for the fact that you have sinned" - yes you can include the idea of responsibility in your understanding of repentance. But only in this way. So when Christian leaders address social issues with calls for repentance we need to listen carefully so that we do not read our political bias into such calls. In fact, depending on how you define "repentance" means the difference between a call to be a better more responsible person or the biblical way of admitting that you cannot change your life at all by your own power. The difference is huge.
The gospel is not initially a call to take responsibility and become a kind of "conservative thinking person," but instead it is a call to turn from something and turn to something - more perfectly someone.
Matthew 1:21 is clear - Jesus came to save his people from their sins. The work of salvation from sins as it is revealed in the gospel is accomplished by Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. As a result of all that Christ has done than there comes the call for repentance and faith in him only. This is not a call to be either "conservative," "progressive," or "liberal." It certainly is not a call to take responsibility and pull yourself up to a better life. It is a call to turn from sin and turn to God. When one does this - when you and I do this - we are turning to the only one that can bring the change we so desperately need.
The gospel is a call to turn from sin and have faith in Christ. When the gospel becomes our conservative views or our progressive/ liberal views we not only misspeak the message we also do not correctly hear it.
Gary Finkbeiner
It is true that when many, like Voddie, call for individuals and families to take greater responsibility for their lives, we who listen need to be alert to how we hear such calls. Many bloggers and writers react to such statements because comments like these might appear to avoid addressing the injustice that in their minds exists in these situations. So we react to calls for taking greater responsibility. The challenge however comes when terms such as "responsibility" used in a politically charged way or heard in the same fashion become confused with language or principles that are actually centered in the gospel and the Scripture. Consider how this happens. A call, for example, to repentance is heard as a call to take responsibility for your life.
This occurred when one writer reacted to a call for repentance from another evangelical leader like it was a call for taking responsibility. Repentance is a kind of taking responsibility and yet it is not. If you mean taking responsibility as in "taking responsibility for the fact that you have sinned" - yes you can include the idea of responsibility in your understanding of repentance. But only in this way. So when Christian leaders address social issues with calls for repentance we need to listen carefully so that we do not read our political bias into such calls. In fact, depending on how you define "repentance" means the difference between a call to be a better more responsible person or the biblical way of admitting that you cannot change your life at all by your own power. The difference is huge.
The gospel is not initially a call to take responsibility and become a kind of "conservative thinking person," but instead it is a call to turn from something and turn to something - more perfectly someone.
Matthew 1:21 is clear - Jesus came to save his people from their sins. The work of salvation from sins as it is revealed in the gospel is accomplished by Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. As a result of all that Christ has done than there comes the call for repentance and faith in him only. This is not a call to be either "conservative," "progressive," or "liberal." It certainly is not a call to take responsibility and pull yourself up to a better life. It is a call to turn from sin and turn to God. When one does this - when you and I do this - we are turning to the only one that can bring the change we so desperately need.
The gospel is a call to turn from sin and have faith in Christ. When the gospel becomes our conservative views or our progressive/ liberal views we not only misspeak the message we also do not correctly hear it.
Gary Finkbeiner
No comments:
Post a Comment