Thoughts on language

In Scott Smith's book, "Truth and the New Kind of Christian," Smith discusses the problem of language and the Emergent church. I am not talking about the epistemology of language which postmoderns use as a basis for their argument. I am talking about simple, common diction that Christians use everywhere - the pulpit, books, in our evangelism, etc. Scott writes,

"Furthermore, McLaren, Jones, and other postmodern believers are sensitive to how we use our language, and the effects that our speech and written words can have on others. So, we should listen when they tell us that among postmoderns, if we talk of "winning" people to Christ, that implies just what they admonish - that someone will "lose." Or, that if we talk about apologetics as a "defense," then we are fighting with the postmoderns with whom we are talking, and that attitude will come across to them, so that we likely will not influence them positively for the Lord."

This is something that I think is very important. At my old church, a friend of mine who is not a believer told me, "I feel like bringing a Dictionary is more important than bringing a Bible." The job of any communicator is to speak the "language" of those he or she is speaking to. Now I am not saying that preachers should tone everything down so that a five year old can fully understand every single concept, but I know that before I was a believer, words like sanctification, propitiation, soteriology, etc. would have flown right over my head. The least a pastor or communicator can do is offer an explanation for what he or she is talking about.


Now I can imagine that this perspective will receive criticism such as "Well isn't the pulpit intended more for believers than non-believers?" and "Why should the culture's lack of education influence the communicator?" While I agree with both of these points to a degree, there are not many parents who talk beyond what their children can understand when they want them to learn something. Often parents will speak slowly and simply and the reason for this is because they're more concerned about the child's education than they are about their own methods for teaching. The same should be so with church ministry. There are many times when it is not only appropriate, but necessary to dull down one's language, and "educated" Christians need to realize that there are not many subcultures in the world where people speak with the same diction as they want to speak with.

Quite plainly, it is arrogant and non-missional for Christians to not want to adopt the language of the surrounding culture (within reason). God has not called us to develop a new subculture with its own language and list of taboos and norms. God has called us to transform (not create) the existing culture that loves and obeys Jesus, and this loving and obeying of the Savior is what is to distinguish the Church from the world, not the way we dress or speak.

So I empathize with the Emergents in their desire for Christians to speak the vernacular English wherever they're at. However, I think that there is a hidden motive in some of the Emergents complaint regarding language. What is most important in the examination of culture and language is that the church analyze how to effectively communicate the Gospel. What I worry about with critics like McLaren and Jones is that they're trying to eliminate the "offense" of the Gospel with hopes of making it neutral. Anybody who understands the Gospel knows that it is a message of reality, not neutrality, and while their might be words that are more appropriate than "winning" and "defense" (and I think their are), the possibility of attaining neutral Gospel language should not be pursued by the Christians. The church simply can not tone down the reality that Jesus calls sinners (all people) to repent and replace the idols of money, lust, earthly possessions, etc. with the joy that is found in a right relationship with our Creator. Hell is a concept that no matter how you change language, if we are going to be faithful to Jesus' concept of hell as it is revealed in Scripture, we simply can not remove the offense. Ultimately, God is God, not humans, and the desire of Emergent Christians (or anybody) to create Gospel neutrality flows out of a desire to be like God, determining right and wrong and what sort of Christianity we want to believe in. There are many sort of "Christianities," but only one of them is right, because God's Word is Truth.

So contextualizing our language means contextualizing our methods of portraying Biblical Truth. Vocabulary is a method of communication, and as such, it can and should be contextualized. Contextualization is NOT determining what we think Truth should/ought to be, and the Emergent church's desire to "contextualize" language is really a desire to make "truth" more appealing so that more people will buy into it.

So what are ways we can contextualize the Gospel in our churches and lives? What are the areas of concern in our culture where perhaps we are not being faithful in our contextualization? The point of the matter is that people can be so distracted by how ineffective the church's methods are in communicating the Gospel that they never even hear it.

A website among websites

I have been very blessed by Gospel Reminders. I hope you will be too. I try and view it everyday the second I get into my office.

I've been feeling very distant from the Lord these days. It mostly stems from the recent transitions I've had to make in my life in the past few years which has caused me to try and rely on myself in a lot of ways. Ultimately, it's largely because of my own stubbornness I think. That being said, I heard a song today that made me pause and thank the Lord for how He's taught me and remained so unbelievably giving and good throughout these last few years. I doubt many Christians are thankful for such a song. It's by a band called Bad Religion and they used to be my favorite band prior to following Christ. I still like their edgy and intellectual approach to music, but their lyrics are certainly the reflection of lostness and confusion. God has been good to transform my mind from a mind of hatred to a mind of love for Jesus.

The thing about Bad Religion is that they have had a huge influence on people, especially young people. I'm realizing that many people develop their worldview from the music they listen to rather than the teachers they sit under. I know I have a tendency to think this way as well, and I definitely did when I was younger.

Father, can you hear me?
How have I let you down?
I curse the day that I was born,
And all the sorrow in the world...

Let me take you to the herding ground,
Where all good men are trampled down,
Just to settle a bet that could not be won,
Between a prideful father and his son.

Well you guard me now for I cant see,
A reason for this suffering and this long misery.
What if every living soul could be upright and strong?
Well, then I do imagine there will be
Sorrow.
Yeah there will be
Sorrow .
And there will be
Sorrow, no more.

When all soldiers lay their weapons down,
Or when all kings and all queens relinquish their crown,
Or when the only true messiah rescues us from ourselves...
Its easy to imagine there will be
Sorrow.
Yeah there will be
Sorrow .
And there will be
Sorrow, no more.

There will be
Sorrow.
Yeah there will be
Sorrow .
And there will be
Sorrow, no more.

I actually like this song because of how honest it is. The question I want to pose is "How do you react when you meet somebody so bold in their assertions that there is no God and that if there is, He's certainly not just?" I think the church is largely afraid of such questions because we're not fully convinced we even have an answer, but the Bible certainly does, and the answer is that King Jesus will make everything right one day and will be the director and definition of justice in the New World. While that answer may not be convincing to a lot of people, the more I deal with sorrow in my own life (and recently there has been a lot), the more I need to remind myself that Jesus is the only God who can redeem fallen circumstances and bring renewal, redemption, and rebirth.

The Prophet Dylan

I've always loved Bob Dylan as a poet. I can't say he's my favorite musician, but as a poet, he is brilliant. I am especially interested in what happened to him during the years he became a Christian. At one point, he wrote a song called "With God on our side" that I think is particularly relevant to the way that the "religious right" of America thinks today. In light of this election, I sense a sort of desperate hope that a certain candidate will be the next president of the U.S. and so I echo the words of Derek Webb, "We'll never have a Savior on Capital Hill." Dylan wrote this song responding to those who believe that the U.S> is a nation that God particularly supports and loves. Such people love to quote verses like Psalm 33:12 (or at least the first half of it which says "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord") and I believe there are very few verses that are taken out of context more than this verse. The reason why this is dangerous is because if you buy into the notion that this verse can be talking about any nation in general (even though this verse was written prior to the conception of the nation-state), then you have to conclude that the second half ("...The people whom He has chosen for His own inheritence") applies as well. The reality is that this nation is Israel, not America, and Israel is now dispersed (the elect). Therefore, verses like this are talking about the Church (see Rom. 9-11 for a more thorough understanding of how Israel is the Church). I only write this entry because it is thinking like this that gives conservatives such a bad rep.

I consider myself a cultural conservative and even support the war in Iraq (hence, I'm no pacifist), but there are times when I feel as though the church makes me want to stray away from classifying myself as a conservative because conservativism can just come across as so dang ignorant sometimes. In my pride, I run from being associated with anything that would bring false judgement upon me, so I launch myself to the opposite camp even though the opposite camp might not be right either. Nevertheless, I never want to be something solely out of a desire to NOT be something else (many liberals I feel are liberals only because they don't want to be rednecks or religious (two "schools" of thought that typically align themselves with conservative thinking; this irritates me). Without further adieu, and before I become more longwinded than I already feel like this is, soak up Bob Dylan's words. If you disagree with them, I'd like to hear why. Cheers.

Oh my name it is nothin'
My age it means less
The country I come from
Is called the Midwest
I's taught and brought up there
The laws to abide
And that land that I live in
Has God on its side.

Oh the history books tell it
They tell it so well
The cavalries charged
The Indians fell
The cavalries charged
The Indians died
Oh the country was young
With God on its side.

Oh the Spanish-American
War had its day
And the Civil War too
Was soon laid away
And the names of the heroes
I's made to memorize
With guns in their hands
And God on their side.

Oh the First World War, boys
It closed out its fate
The reason for fighting
I never got straight
But I learned to accept it
Accept it with pride
For you don't count the dead
When God's on your side.

When the Second World War
Came to an end
We forgave the Germans
And we were friends
Though they murdered six million
In the ovens they fried
The Germans now too
Have God on their side.

I've learned to hate Russians
All through my whole life
If another war starts
It's them we must fight
To hate them and fear them
To run and to hide
And accept it all bravely
With God on my side.

But now we got weapons
Of the chemical dust
If fire them we're forced to
Then fire them we must
One push of the button
And a shot the world wide
And you never ask questions
When God's on your side.

In a many dark hour
I've been thinkin' about this
That Jesus Christ
Was betrayed by a kiss
But I can't think for you
You'll have to decide
Whether Judas Iscariot
Had God on his side.

So now as I'm leavin'
I'm weary as Hell
The confusion I'm feelin'
Ain't no tongue can tell
The words fill my head
And fall to the floor
If God's on our side
He'll stop the next war.

The Real John Piper

The Resurgence recently had another interview series, this time on John Piper. Of all the interviews they've ever done, I would say this has been the most encouraging, and certainly the most practical.

The reason is because Mark Driscoll is concerned not with John Piper's head, but with his heart - his family, his struggles, his marriage, etc. Watch the entire video. I'm sure it will do for you as it did for me.

Click here for the video.

The Great Mission

When we open up the conversation of evangelism and what it's supposed to be and how we're supposed to do it and what evangelism even is, I think even more importantly, we need to address the question of what it means to be a church that is in sync with what the Mission of Jesus is. We find a church on every street corner here in America, and every church has its own belief on what it means to live out Jesus' mission, but what I see here are churches losing relevance by the day because of a lack of understanding regarding what on earth Jesus has sent us here for and how we're supposed to carry that out. It's gotten so bad that we've got parachurch ministries popping up all over the place because the church isn't doing evangelism. Because of this, you've got college ministries that aren't connected to the church at all, and you've got students in seminaries that aren't serving in church, and you've got mercy ministries and social networks that are all "Christian" but not church centered, and oftentimes not even Jesus centered. The mission of the local church is synonymous with the mission of Jesus, and the problem is that there's so many churches that aren't living out the Mission that you can't really blame a bunch of people who get fed up with their churches for not wanting to carry these things out and decided to go ahead and create this parachurch culture we live in. The mentality with parachurch life has oftentimes been, "Well if the church isn't going to do it, I'm going to do it elsewhere."

So what we need today are churches that understand the Gospel's call on our lives and are willing to make sacrifices like Jesus did in order to seek and save the lost. But even Jesus saying "I've come to seek and save the lost" poses a problem, because the greatest war that our church is having to battle is the need to remain Biblically faithful AND be culturally immersed. We've forgotten that the key element of that verse is that if you want to save the culture, you have to seek it. Jesus got this really well, we don't. Jesus willingly stripped Himself of His glory and placed Himself in a po dunk town among really lowly people, and here I am, having a hard time to even strip myself of some pride and get to know my next door neighbor, or I've so consumed myself with church related activities that I won't even give up some of my time to get to know my classmates. I can't tell you how many Christians I've met recently who I've talked to about evangelism and their response is "Well, I agree, but I just don't know any non-Christians," and herein lies the problem. And this is a staggering problem. We get the Biblically faithful part. We esteem God's Word. We hold is as absolute Truth. We're good, token 5-point Calvinists who love hymns and discussing Systematic Theology, but we're virtually useless for the Kingdom because of our inability to immerse ourselves into culture. So if we're going to talk about evangelism, I think we need to talk less about formulas for now and what exactly needs to be spoken, and we need to deconstruct our whole paradigm of evangelism and relationships and tackle issues regarding how we can even get the opportunity to try and share the Gospel with people.

One of the sad things is that we've so removed ourselves from the lives of non-Christians that we've taken evangelism and the carrying out of the mission to be nothing more than going to a crowded location, making people mad because we want to talk about Jesus on our time and not on theirs, and we give them a nice little cliché Gospel tract that tells them they're filled with sin, going to Hell, and they need Jesus. We've turned evangelism into holy salesmanship, and from everything I see, we live in a culture that hates traditional salesmen. Jesus and Paul certainly don't strike me as salesmen. Honestly, they strike me more of as military recruiters who are recruiting a bunch of uneducated, perverted, sinful, rebellious wrecks who are a little rough around the edges and he's giving them a mission, putting a gun in their hands, and filling them with the Spirit to go and carry out the mission of Jesus saying He'll always be with them and never leave them nor forsake them and that there's no way they can lose. The church oftentimes just seems to be a bunch of modified mormoms that aren't willing to love people like Jesus did, but we're willing to judge their lives and let them know that they're going to Hell if they don't repent. No compassion. No love. No commitment. And so while we might be motivated by love, it certainly isn't perceived, and perception is essential in repentance, since they're the ones who will be repenting for the first time, not us. When we share the Gospel, our friends should know that our love is a portrayal of Christ's love. They might not get it for awhile, but if its really what's in our hearts, they'll pick up on it, and then our Gospel will make a lot more sense.

So I think we as the church should wrestle with the mission of Jesus and quit leaving it up to our pastors to do on their own, and we need to build a framework for how we're supposed to live when we're NOT sharing the Gospel or when we're not in the confines of our church. I think this is pretty cool stuff, and no matter who you are, this is the kind of stuff that is going to inevitably step on toes and make people leave their comfort zone and, heaven forbid, give their time and schedule to, maybe even their money, but I think that's how we can know that it's consistent with what God wants. We'll give our resources to the things we believe in.

Happy Birthday John Calvin.

Today, on July 10th, John Calvin turns 499 years old. In the Kingdom of God, one day, I will tell God thank you for bringing such a man of expository power to the front stage of the church's movement, and I will thank John Calvin in a way that glorifies God. If you have never studied much of this man, and if all you know of him is what your High School or University Professor told you regarding his "crazy" views on God's predestined damnation of sinners or his belief that those who are rich are "more blessed" by God, then I am sorry, because you have been ill-informed.

The truth is that John Calvin had such a high regard for the authority of Scripture that he unashamedly preached the Truth, even the difficult Truth, and the realm of academia has tragically insulted Calvin throughout the years by putting words in his mouth that he never even spoke. Such is usually the case with "cultured" academia. I'm sure Calvin expected this though, as his desire to make friends never seemed to exceed his desire to serve God. It is ironic to me that history seems to judge people as if they ought to be perfect when it seems clear that nobody, save Jesus alone, has been. This is seen again in the criticism Calvin has received for condemning the heretic Michael Servetus to death. How Calvin has been disregarded for such an act! Nevertheless, God has worked mightily through him.

In all these things however, there is no theologian in the past 500 years who has influenced the world as much as Jean Cauvin (John Calvin). His esteem for the majesty of Jesus and his regard for the Authority of God's Word are unparalleled. Not even Jonathan Edwards can match his influence. I am sure that next year when he turns 500, there will be some sort of conference for him, which I would like to attend, but for now, since he is only 499, I will go out and buy a couple of cupcakes and put some candles in them in rememberance of John Calvin. I give you this quote from T.H.L. Parker:

And so we trace him preaching on Sundays with one hundred and eighty-nine sermons on the Acts between 1549 and 1554, a shorter series on some of the Pauline letters between 1554 and 1558, and the sixty-five on the Harmony of the Gospels between 1559 and 1564. During this time the weekdays saw series on Jeremiah and Lamentations (up to 1550), on the Minor Prophets and Daniel (1550-2), the one hundred and seventy-four on Ezekiel (1552-4), the one hundred and fifty-nine on Job (1554-5), the two hundred on Deuteronomy (1555-6), the three hundred and forty-two on Isaiah (1556-9), then one hundred twenty-three on Genesis (1559-61), a short set on Judges (1561), one hundred and seven on 1 Samuel and eighty-seven on 2 Samuel (1561-3) and a set on 1 Kings (1563-4).

Before he smiles at such unusual activity of the pulpit, the reader would do well to ask himself whether he would prefer to listen to the second-hand views on a religion of social ethics, or the ill-digested piety, delivered in slipshod English, that he will hear today in most churches of whatever denomination he may enter, or three hundred and forty-two sermons on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, sermons born of an infinite passion of faith and a burning sincerity, sermons luminous with theological sense, lively with wit and imagery, showing depths of compassion and the unquenchable joyousness of hope. Those in Geneva who listened Sunday after Sunday, day after day, and did not shut their ears, but were “instructed, admonished, exhorted, and censured,” received a training in Christianity such as had been given to few congregations in Europe since the days of the fathers.

If you have never read Calvin's classic 2 part work entitled Institutes of the Christian Religion, I invite you to medidate on their devotional nature and soak up the richness of Calvin's portrayal of Biblical truth. Happy Birthday, John Calvin.