Evangelism, mission and social action are topics that you could ponder and talk about for hours. In acknowledging this, I still have found it frustrating with some of the gaps in content of my notes and readings for college.
Here are just three of my frustrations:
Frustration #1 in Word and Action
TITUS.... ???? Titus is an entire letter that spells out, I think rather clearly, the relationship between word and action - so that in everything they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior! Should this not have a greater influence in the discourse of word and action?
Frustration #2 in Inter-Faith Dialogue
I find it offensive that one of the reasons given to the benefits of inter-faith dialogue is that if you listen to them, they will listen to you. Does anyone think it is wrong to only listen to someone just so you can be listened to in return? Where is the integrity and genuineness in that?
Frustration #3 in Word and Action
The body and unity of the church... I often find that when the 'great debate' between social action and evangelism takes place we fail to acknowledge the nature of the church and it's diversity of gifts that God has given it.
God gives some to possess word gifts and be pastors, teachers, evangelists... where as others he gives them the gift of helping... and sure we should all be prepared to give reason for our hope but I still think there is far too great an emphasis on priority which leads to a hierarchy instead of a attention given to the unique partnership the great commission and the great commandment have. I think these are two of the most distinguishable expressions of a life transformed by the gospel.
Acts 6:1-6 is often used to promote the priority of word proclamation.... but I wonder if it actually should be used to promote the gifts and functions of the church? We have hands to help those in need and beautiful feet to bring the good news of the gospel to those perishing? Are we saying that our hands are not of importance to the body?
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
opening up a can of worms...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm with you on #2. It's really important that Christians are open and honest, especially in evangelism (2 Cor 4:2), where even Christians who believe in the power and sovereignty of God can end up acting as if it's all about their effort.
So I wonder how this works in 'dialogue'? The idea of 'lets just have a chat so we can each understand each other's beliefs better', is completely unloving if you believe that Jesus is Lord. But if your hope/goal in 'dialogue' is to explain the gospel clearly and passionately with the expectation that the person will be converted, in what way is that what people generally mean when they describe 'dialogue'?
Thanks Haley, good post! I like your ideas about the church as body...
I think dialogue is the wrong word too. re:#2 It's probably better to go for 'inter-faith debating': I'll hear your case and you hear me put mine...then the offense can rest with the claim that Jesus is right.
YES, those are frustrating. and maybe it is more often part of the discussion, but i'll put in three cheers for the book of james, too!
Post a Comment