Who Are The Ones Being Changed?
While searching Google for articles about Christian separatism, I found the following quote by R. C. Sproul, Jr., which I found to be interesting:
"I don't know what shows are on TV, and I don't know what songs are on the radio. I couldn't name enough current NBA players to fill a single team's roster. I'm not even sure if they still play the game in college.
So what have I lost? One of the ways we seek to spiritualize our worldliness is to see it as a tool for evangelism. That is, if I'm hip to the lyrics of the real Slim Shady, then I can help the homies be down with Jesus. If I devote my time and conversation to a disposable pop-culture, then maybe I'll lead the poor deluded fools to a more permanent city. Trouble is, of course, when I spend all my time down at Pleasure Island, what should happen but that I begin to grow donkey ears, and begin to bray rather than pray. I end up worrying more about Valerie and Eddie's relationship woes (or, to be slightly more current, Jennifer and Ben's) than I worry about the relationship between Christ and His bride. Yes Paul quoted Cretan poets, but until we master the Bible as well as he did, I'd suggest we'd be better off learning David's lyrics rather than 50 Cents' lyrics. Meeting people where they are simply leaves them where they are and moves us closer to them. Interbreed with monkeys, and you won't lift them up. Rather, devolution will follow.
Our calling isn't to mix and mingle, but to be set apart. That such scares us scares me. Where are they now? In a surreal world. Where should I be? Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. This is wisdom not from a dime-store poet, but from the very Spirit of Life. This is what's best for me, best for you, and equally important, best for those yet outside His grace."
I wholeheartedly agree with Sproul on this point.
Lately, I've been listening to a series of lectures by David Bercot called "What the Early Christians Believed" in which he extensively quotes from 2nd, 3rd, and early 4th century Christian writings. Among other things, he shows how separate the early Christians were from Roman society. Unlike modern so-called Christians, they understood that there is the kingdom of God and there is the world, and that the two are separate. Based on the writings Bercot quotes, it seems that the early Christians didn't participate in Roman politics or hold government office, they didn't fight in the wars of the Romans, and they didn't attend Roman theaters or sporting events. And I believe that those who did these things were excommunicated from the church.
But today's so-called Christians are in league with the world. They foolishly think that they can change the world by immersing themselves in its nonsense and wickedness in order to be a positive influence on non-Christians. And though they achieve some minor and superficial victories in their attempts to Christianize the world, to a much greater extent they Heathenize themselves by conforming to the ways of the world. The end result is the superficial, unholy, and counterfeit Christianity of modern Evangelicalism, whose adherents -- in the vast majority of cases -- don't think, speak, act, or look any different from the unbelievers.
But, I believe the reality is not only that many professing Christians don't understand that the Bible teaches separation from the world, it is also that they don't want separation, being in love with the world and all of its vain pleasures.
"I don't know what shows are on TV, and I don't know what songs are on the radio. I couldn't name enough current NBA players to fill a single team's roster. I'm not even sure if they still play the game in college.
So what have I lost? One of the ways we seek to spiritualize our worldliness is to see it as a tool for evangelism. That is, if I'm hip to the lyrics of the real Slim Shady, then I can help the homies be down with Jesus. If I devote my time and conversation to a disposable pop-culture, then maybe I'll lead the poor deluded fools to a more permanent city. Trouble is, of course, when I spend all my time down at Pleasure Island, what should happen but that I begin to grow donkey ears, and begin to bray rather than pray. I end up worrying more about Valerie and Eddie's relationship woes (or, to be slightly more current, Jennifer and Ben's) than I worry about the relationship between Christ and His bride. Yes Paul quoted Cretan poets, but until we master the Bible as well as he did, I'd suggest we'd be better off learning David's lyrics rather than 50 Cents' lyrics. Meeting people where they are simply leaves them where they are and moves us closer to them. Interbreed with monkeys, and you won't lift them up. Rather, devolution will follow.
Our calling isn't to mix and mingle, but to be set apart. That such scares us scares me. Where are they now? In a surreal world. Where should I be? Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things. This is wisdom not from a dime-store poet, but from the very Spirit of Life. This is what's best for me, best for you, and equally important, best for those yet outside His grace."
I wholeheartedly agree with Sproul on this point.
Lately, I've been listening to a series of lectures by David Bercot called "What the Early Christians Believed" in which he extensively quotes from 2nd, 3rd, and early 4th century Christian writings. Among other things, he shows how separate the early Christians were from Roman society. Unlike modern so-called Christians, they understood that there is the kingdom of God and there is the world, and that the two are separate. Based on the writings Bercot quotes, it seems that the early Christians didn't participate in Roman politics or hold government office, they didn't fight in the wars of the Romans, and they didn't attend Roman theaters or sporting events. And I believe that those who did these things were excommunicated from the church.
But today's so-called Christians are in league with the world. They foolishly think that they can change the world by immersing themselves in its nonsense and wickedness in order to be a positive influence on non-Christians. And though they achieve some minor and superficial victories in their attempts to Christianize the world, to a much greater extent they Heathenize themselves by conforming to the ways of the world. The end result is the superficial, unholy, and counterfeit Christianity of modern Evangelicalism, whose adherents -- in the vast majority of cases -- don't think, speak, act, or look any different from the unbelievers.
But, I believe the reality is not only that many professing Christians don't understand that the Bible teaches separation from the world, it is also that they don't want separation, being in love with the world and all of its vain pleasures.
posted by Stuart DiNenno at 12/08/2004 03:44:00 PM
8 Comments:
Christians couldn't remain separate from the world because the Rome largely converted. We Christians haven't really come to terms losing that influence starting with the secular Enlightenment movement.
To shamelessly toot my own horn, I've been writing some essays about Church and State. Take a look, poke around. Drop a comment. My Blog is Pseudo-Polymath.
Peace.
I think that the majority of the Romans were never really converted to Christianity. Based on what I've read and heard, I believe that the separation between the Christians and the heathen Romans began to come to an end when the Roman emperor Constantine made Christianity into a state-supported religion. As I understand it, after this point there was an influx of many people into the church. It seems that being a Christian became the trendy thing. But it's likely that many of these new Christians were false converts.
I don't believe that any real purity can be maintained in the church without a distinct separation from the world. And separation is an alien concept in the minds of today's Evangelicals.
Of course it would be worth the effort to learn the names of every NBA player if that served to somehow bring people to God. And I would even mud wrestle with sinners if it were a means by which they might be saved. But what basis would I have for believing that God would work through such a silly thing?
I suppose that it comes down to one's view of soteriology. I don't believe, as it seems many do, that the gospel message is some magic pill that instantly, in and of itself, turns carnal-minded worldlings into spiritual-minded saints. I believe that when God saves a man, He gives him the hunger for spiritual truth and inclines his mind away from vanities. Therefore, I don't believe that the gospel is to be presented while people are engaged in light-hearted banter about sports and other frivolous pastimes. And it's obvious that people who are blissfully occupying themselves with all of the pleasures that today's entertainment culture offers, have not a mind for spiritual things.
It's foolish to interpret every biblical exhortation and example as if they have no limitation. For instance, when the Scripture says that whatsoever we do should be done to the glory of God, that does not mean that everything that a person can possibly do can be done in a God-glorifying way. A woman cannot do her work as a prostitute to the glory of God and neither can a bank robber. Likewise, when Paul said that he was all things to all men, we shouldn't take that to mean that to the frivolous he became frivolous, or that to the pleasure-seeker he became a pleasure-seeker.
Consider where and to whom Jesus and the apostles preached. In most examples where a particular venue is named, they were preaching in the synagogues. Why? Because that is where thinking, serious-minded people went to search out religious truth. And when Paul preached to the Gentiles in Athens, where did he go? He went to the place where all the philosophers and their followers met. Why? Because that was also likely to be a place where thinking, serious-minded people would be seeking truth.
Doesn't it seem silly to picture Paul milling around outside of the Circus Maximus chatting with people about their favorite chariot racers and then suddenly interjecting some comments about Jesus? Yet that is precisely the kind of thing that today's so-called Christians would be doing and calling it evangelism.
We cannot know every avenue by which God brings people to Christ. But I think we can be reasonably sure that He is not ordinarily going to bless evangelism methods which mix the holy with the unholy by conveying the sacred message of the gospel via frivolous and meaningless things like sports, games, rock 'n' roll music, and all of the other vain things with which the worldlings fritter away their time.
But this is all part of what I call "knee-jerk Christianity." That is, today's "Christians" think that everything the world does or teaches must have a Christian alternative or answer. The world has rap music, so we must have rap music with "Christian" lyrics. The atheists teach evolution, so we must debate them and prove them wrong. People play sports so we must be involved in sports so that we can get our message to them.
But those who do such things only succeed in dragging themselves and their so-called Christianity to the level of those they seek to change. In trying to appeal to the degenerate rap music fan, the professing Christian degrades himself. In debating a fool who believes that monkeys became men, the professing Christian makes himself a fool. And in trying to appeal to the light-hearted who have a penchant for frivolous games, the professing Christian makes himself light-hearted and makes the gospel seem frivolous.
If people really want the truth, they will seek it and they will find it. And it is not very hard to find today. I first learned about Christianity through a television program (Pat Robertson, who I would not listen to today). And that got me interested enough to go to a book store, and buy a Bible and some other books about Christianity. I became a Christian before I ever set foot in any church meeting place and before I knew another professing Christian.
And with the Internet, it is even easier today. One can not only get basic information about Christianity on the Web, but he can also obtain a thorough theological education without ever having to leave his house.
In others words, there are many places where serious-minded people who truly desire knowledge of spiritual things can go to find out about Christianity. In the U.S. we have many thousands of church meeting houses, public libraries, book stores, the Internet, and millions of people who profess to be Christians and usually have some knowledge and/or literature that they can pass on to others. Therefore, I don't understand why anyone would think that he would have to resort to doing all of the silly things that today's Evangelicals do in order to get the message of the gospel to the people.
"So how do you do evangelism? Do you simply wait for people to come to you and then present the four spiritual laws? Is that the way Paul and Peter did evangelism?"
I "do evangelism" by letting people know that I am a Christian and trying to exemplify godliness to them. And once I get to know them a little bit, I'll inquire about their beliefs and try to get a conversation started. But I don't assault people with the gospel. If they want to know, they will ask me or express an interest when I introduce the topic.
In the time of the apostles, the gospel message was new and unknown to many people. But here in the American South where I live, it's almost impossible to find people who have never heard of Jesus Christ and the Bible. Either they know the gospel, or think they know and don't want to hear anymore about it.
The only "evangelism" that is taking place here is that multitudes are being drawn into the false churches of modern Evangelicalism, and thereby led into an unholy, counterfeit Christianity, which makes them worse off than if they had never professed to be Christians.
And you'll have to explain "the four spiritual laws" concept to me. It sounds like just another false teaching of today's Evangelicals.
"What would be your advice for a married Christian whose spouse is not a Christian? By your definition, it almost seems like they should get a divorce."
My advice would be that he/she should do what Paul said, which is this:
"If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him." (1 Cor. 7:12-13)
The very fact that he said these words is proof that Christians were separate from the heathen in those days. Paul had to let them know that they were not to go to the extreme of separating from their spouses. If he had been speaking to modern Evangelicals, he would have been giving a superfluous teaching in this passage since they don't separate from anyone.
But then I believe that the overwhelming majority of today's Evangelicals have not been born again. Since they are of the world, there is no reason for them to separate from it. The real separation that is needed today is for true Christians to come out from among the worldlings in the denominational pseudo-churches.
It think your "four spiritual laws" method of evangelism has some basic spiritual flaws. I don't recall any man in the Bible ever beginning an evangelistic message by telling sinners that God loves them. It seems to me that it is more biblical to tell them that God's wrath is upon them until they repent of their rebellion against Him. But conspicuously absent from your four laws is anything about repentance, without which there can be no forgiveness.
I suppose you've derived these things from a "Campus Crusade" tract or something similar, which ends by asking the sinner to pray a prayer to ask Jesus into his heart. That is also unbiblical. Salvation is received the moment a man repents and believes the gospel. Reciting the so-called "sinner's prayer" is meaningless.
What you have in these things is the false feel-good gospel of modern Evangelicalism which is deluding millions into a false hope of salvation.
It's true that "there is a difference between salvation and sanctification." but the latter always accompanies the former to some extent. We shouldn't be so foolish to think that those who profess to have been in the faith for decades, but bear no fruit of holiness in their lives, really are Christians.
It's also true that "everyone's spiritual journey towards Christ is not the same." But I don't see salvation as a step-by-step process and if "unconventional means" includes conveying the sacred gospel message through the frivolous, foolish, and profane things of the world, then I think God is all against it.
And I believe that we can, to a certain extent, know what is in a man's heart by his actions. I understand that the spirit of anti-judgmentalism is pervasive in today's pseudo-Christianity, but the Bible gives specific principles for judging and separating from those who profess to be Christians but continue to unrepentantly sin. And it certainly is not wrong to condemn false religion and those who propagate it.
1 Corinthians 13 was written to a Christian church. That is, people who had already repented and believed. It contains some important truths but it doesn't shed much light on the subject of evangelism.
And I'm not saying that an evangelistic message shouldn't include an explanation of God's love for mankind through Christ. But people must hear the bad news as well as the good. Sinners need to be confronted with their sins and made to understand that repentance is a prerequisite for forgiveness.
Only those of a broken and contrite heart can savingly believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. A message which offers God's love to sinners but doesn't convict them of their guilt for breaking the commandments of God, and doesn't make it clear to them that they must deny themselves by abandoning their life of self-pleasing, is a false gospel.
People also must be made to understand that God requires a life of obedience after they have believed. Of course, obedience to biblical precepts can never justify a man in God's sight because no one can obey perfectly. The imputed righteousness of Christ is the only basis for a believer's justification in the sight of God. But those who truly have a regenerate heart have a desire to please God and that will manifest itself in a life of obedience to Him. Those who are habitually and unrepentantly disobedient to the Word of God show themselves to be false converts and they need to be confronted with that fact.
And leading people to believe that they are saved because they made a knee-jerk "decision for Christ" by praying a prayer, walking up an aisle, raising a hand, signing a pledge card, etc., only deludes them into a false hope of salvation which leaves them in a worse state.
You're welcome to comment on any other of my posts, Kurt. But we've gone back and forth on this one enough, and I'd like to put our discussion to an end at this point.
I do have some hostility towards today's preachers. I think that the overwhelming majority of them preach a false feel-good gospel out of a desire to avoid offending men. But in doing so, they offend the God whom they claim to serve.
I have not witnessed any dramatic change in those who are supposedly converted by today's preaching and evangelism methods. They might show up at a building once or twice per week and abstain from the more blatant sins (maybe), but godliness is much more than these things.
A Christian writer once said, "If our common life is not a common course of humility, self-denial, renunciation of the world, poverty of spirit, and heavenly affection, we do not live the lives of Christians." I think that's true and I think that very, very few of today's so-called Christians live a life which fits that description.
Despite the great deal of effort that many Evangelicals put forth in doing things which they think are being done in service to God, I'm afraid that, come the judgment day, most of them will only hear the words "I never knew you."
But with these comments, I now put our discussion to an end. I'm going to leave the topic open for others to post comments, but I don't want you to respond to this post, Kurt. Please honor my request.
Post a Comment
<< Home