Five years ago when I preached a sermon from Acts 17 on Paul’s experience at Mars Hill—the application of which was a call toward cultural relevancy in evangelism—I never dreamed that today I would be asking the (opposite) question above.
But I think it’s a fair inquiry: Has our quest for cultural relevancy made us altogether irrelevant?
At a fairly recent leadership conference in Grand Rapids, Brian McLaren, an affable and self-effacing leader in the emergent church movement, was asked a pointed question about homosexuality, which he effectively dodged because it was deemed too dicey an issue. At another national pastors conference, the ever-popular Bill Hybels prevented the distribution of a nine-minute Mark Driscoll-created video that encouraged young church-planting men to “fight like good sodiers” because the clip didn’t properly appeal to women as legitimate pastors-to-be. Once again, too controversial.
Not long ago a woman suggested to me that “maybe we should stop referring to God as ‘he’ and start using less gender-distinct language.” Because, after all, God is a Spirit and that’s a far more palatable concept in today’s world that God as Father.
There’s no doubt about it: culture is driving the agenda. And hi-jacked somewhere in the trunk is the life-transforming truth of God.
Consequently, many Christians, it seems, are afraid to let God speak through his self-relevant Word, electing instead to muzzle his mouth through two hands worth of cultural sensitivity.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m convinced that as followers of Christ we should be students of our culture (a point that is unmistakable in Paul’s example in Acts 17: “as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship…” v. 23 reads) AND loving communicators of the gospel of Christ in a way that is minus any artificial barriers like barely-sensible Christianese language (e.g. “journey’s mercies”) or extrabiblical requirements for spirituality (i.e., laser tattoo removal for would-be “seekers”).
But at some point, shouldn’t our cultural analysis cause us to accept some things and reject others, as all ideals and philosophies are tested against Scripture.
Is the pressure to be culturally relevant causing us to lose our saltiness? Has our fear of saying something insensitive left us with nothing substantial to say? And if we're afraid to say anything of substance, why should anybody listen?
What do you think we’re afraid of?
But I think it’s a fair inquiry: Has our quest for cultural relevancy made us altogether irrelevant?
At a fairly recent leadership conference in Grand Rapids, Brian McLaren, an affable and self-effacing leader in the emergent church movement, was asked a pointed question about homosexuality, which he effectively dodged because it was deemed too dicey an issue. At another national pastors conference, the ever-popular Bill Hybels prevented the distribution of a nine-minute Mark Driscoll-created video that encouraged young church-planting men to “fight like good sodiers” because the clip didn’t properly appeal to women as legitimate pastors-to-be. Once again, too controversial.
Not long ago a woman suggested to me that “maybe we should stop referring to God as ‘he’ and start using less gender-distinct language.” Because, after all, God is a Spirit and that’s a far more palatable concept in today’s world that God as Father.
There’s no doubt about it: culture is driving the agenda. And hi-jacked somewhere in the trunk is the life-transforming truth of God.
Consequently, many Christians, it seems, are afraid to let God speak through his self-relevant Word, electing instead to muzzle his mouth through two hands worth of cultural sensitivity.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m convinced that as followers of Christ we should be students of our culture (a point that is unmistakable in Paul’s example in Acts 17: “as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship…” v. 23 reads) AND loving communicators of the gospel of Christ in a way that is minus any artificial barriers like barely-sensible Christianese language (e.g. “journey’s mercies”) or extrabiblical requirements for spirituality (i.e., laser tattoo removal for would-be “seekers”).
But at some point, shouldn’t our cultural analysis cause us to accept some things and reject others, as all ideals and philosophies are tested against Scripture.
Is the pressure to be culturally relevant causing us to lose our saltiness? Has our fear of saying something insensitive left us with nothing substantial to say? And if we're afraid to say anything of substance, why should anybody listen?
What do you think we’re afraid of?
3 comments:
John, you are right on. The challenge for every generation is striking a healthy balance. If we are not relevant, no one will listen. We simply cannot preach in Latin (or 17th century English) and expect people to be saved! But if we do not proclaim the gospel faithfully, no one will be saved. “Persuasive words” given by man’s wisdom simply do not save; only the gospel has the power to save. (See Romans 1:16-17; I Corinthians 2:1ff.) We need to be both faithful and relevant in order to effectively proclaim the unchanging gospel in and to our changing culture. This requires both wisdom and courage on the part of church leaders because we will probably offend the sensibilities of both the Fundamentalists who think we have compromised because of our willing to engage the culture, and the Postmoderns (New Liberals) who think we are knuckle-dragging Neanderthals who need to re-read the text in light of cultural evolution.
I'm confused by the behavior of these enlightened new liberals and how easily they are offended. There seems to exist typical issues that set off these culturally evolving post-modernists, such as the examples Pastor John gave. Why are cultural gender issues like removing the masculinity of God and accepting homosexual behavior such hot topics? I believe there do exist REAL cultural gender issues like misogynistic lyrics in popular hip hop songs on MTV that seem to barely get any attention at all; rather it is typically accepted as 'art' and 'free speech'. I have to thank the Acton Institute's Anthony Bradley for his article in the Detroit News which was published back in May to open my eyes to this glaring inconsistency. It
is a real problem because my generation is molding itself in accordance with the behavior reflected in these lyrics and images. However, if I stand up and say, "This is offensive and wrong", I will be labeled as close
minded. Is this what I'm afraid of? I think I must be savvy enough to know where to expose the lies. I fail when my cultural relevance turns into acceptance, a pit I often fall into. By the way, I did happen across that Driscoll video on YouTube awhile back. Even though the topic is church planting, it had quite an affect on me in other ways, like how exactly I'm "trying to get a bigger subwoofer into my retarded car." It has been a great source of discussion with my friends and labmates. Definitely worth posting a link to it.
i think that's my biggest problem with the emergent movement--relevance has become idolatry for them. what do they do with scripture that clearly explains Christianas should be set apart (hello, holiness anyone?)?
I see this regularly working with teens (who are enamored with culture)--they're idea of what is and isn't right is based on what is first accepted and approved by culture and then biblical authority.
(interesting video my Driscoll. i think it's rather funny and scary how abrasive he can be.)
Post a Comment