It may have been a great idea to start out. But last week, someone’s¹ idea to ask for various definitions of “not the Gospel” in a Twitter hashtag may have brought in more questionable points than helpful reminders.

I contributed two of these myself, but thought to qualify the second one.

Poor Jesus is knocking on the door of your heart, and all He needs is for you to let Him in! #notthegospel
7:59 PM Jul 19th

“There’s a God-shaped hole in your heart that only He can fill.” #notthegospel (Well, not that slogan alone, anyway! Let’s not overcorrect.)
7:58 AM Jul 21st

Yes, such statements are not by themselves the Gospel. But still, someone could teach the whole Gospel and include such statements as these.

That’s a minor objection some could raise, and rightly so. But other Tweeters, it seemed, used the hashtag simply to offer silliness, or worse, imply that something was only heresy — or even that someone specific was only promoting Gospel-less heresy.

I think slamming all CMM — I don’t know how else to read that one — was a bit too far.

As of Wednesday morning this whole thing was still going. It will likely fade soon. Yet the fact will remain true that overzealous Christians defending the Gospel so much that they offend those who also believe and even promote the same message.

Soon after, the aforementioned Pyromaniacs blogger posted a mostly-open-for-discussion post about Calvinists that don’t seem to behave according to the doctrine of grace they profess to believe.² Unfortunately there are a few filthy-acting Calvinists out there who seem to commit the exact same error they decry in evangelicals and emergents: pick a problem, find the doctrinal hammer, and see every problem (whether it matches or not) as the problem that must be nailed with the same solution.

Yet true “Calvinism,” i.e. Reformed theology, sees God and His glory as the ultimate goal, and all problems — sin, suffering, free-willie emphasis, etc. — as means to that end. So such people who act as though Fixing Problems is the means aren’t practicing what they preach.

I give that disclaimer almost as a warning mostly to myself, because while going through some of these “not the gospel” Tweets, it could seem like I’m committing the same error in reverse.

In our haste to uphold the real Gospel, let’s not overcorrect and bash rightful Gospel derivatives — such as “we must live out the Gospel” or even “there’s a God-shaped hole” and so on. Not everyone who says such things is a corrupt compromiser. And even if they are, that’s no cause to throw out unqualified, un-nuanced (even on soundbyte-heavy Twitter) slams of certain people who arguably not only believe but promote, sing about and preach the true Gospel.

Witticism criticisms

ReformedFundy

Giving all your money to the poor: #notthegospel
12:00 AM Jul 19th

True — though Jesus more than implied it could be some people’s calling (Matthew 19: 16-30).

ReformedFundy

Giving away fiction novels is #notthegospel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzh3MYv1L4A
Monday, July 19, 2010 12:15:17 AM

No, but nothing is wrong with it either. I hope this isn’t another Reformed-people-oppose-fiction-not-aloud-but-in-practice thing. We need more Reformed authors honoring God in story.

Doing something, or giving something, or living a Christ-honoring life, may not be the only thing we need do to preach the Gospel, but it’s part of it. Scripture evidence backs this up: we must use words and deeds to preach the Gospel. This same is true against Tweeters’ proclamations that “lifestyle evangelism” is “not the Gospel.”

I’m not picking on ReformedFundy; two of his Tweets were simply the first I noticed here.

ecrosstexas

Any gospel presentation that has man contributing more than sin and guilt to his salvation. #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 12:15:34 AM

But can’t God change hearts and bring repentance and faith even to those who wrongly overemphasize Man’s Free Will and You Must Make a Decision. Even if I said even something as extremely free-willie as “God only needs your repentance and your faith, which you come up with on your own to meet him halfway,” does that make me a heretic? Am I guilty of not preaching the Gospel at all? I may not be right, but the Gospel could still be there.

kkiptum

RT @llanphere: “Heaven is only a prayer away.” #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 12:19:14 AM

ReformedFundy

The Sinner’s Prayer: #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 12:19:20 AM

These, like many other similar Tweets, are addressed to those who overdo the whole “pray this prayer” response to the Gospel call, as if the words themselves are magical or that repeating them guarantees you were sincere. However, how many non-Reformeds, outside “the loop,” know this? Saying this apart from context (Charles Finney, etc.) will just be confusing. Some will assume that the statement connotes you must do something apart from simple repentance and faith in Christ to save us. That assumption would be wrong. But let’s communicate this better.

venchenzareally

“God’s love is unconditional” #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 12:22:41 AM

This I can amen — but I’d add that God Himself, in Christ, fulfilled for repentant sinners His own condition of punishment. So in a sense, God’s love is both conditional, and unconditional.

airjomax21

RT @llanphere: Preaching predestination to unbelievers. #notthegospel #stopityouknuckleheads
Monday, July 19, 2010 12:31:16 AM

Amen. No further response necessary.

TimmJones

Christian Hedonism: #nottheGospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 12:38:47 AM

A little vague? If he’s addressing Desiring God’s definition of Christian hedonism, I’d reply again that valuing Christ for His own glory, and seeking ultimate satisfaction in Him, is part of the Gospel. Still, someone who wrongly practices only a duty-driven life can still be saved.

SusanYenser

Let go and let God… #NOTthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 2:31:45 AM

Again, for those conditioned to react against perceived adding to the simplicity of the Gospel, this could come across as saying “faith is not enough to be saved.” In certain circles, people know it means that you don’t just sit back after you’re saved and not work out your own salvation — though knowing it is God Who works in us (Philippians 2: 12-13). But others may not get the inside reference. So though it’s true that “Let go and let God” is fraught with wrong meanings, so would be condemning the statement without offering more clarification.

voiceofthesheep

“Come as you are” – #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 11:03:46 AM

Yet another true rebuttal — that could still sound like adding works to the “simple” repentance and faith Christ gives His people for them be saved. Yes, converts should come as they are, but they should know Christ doesn’t expect them to stay that way. He gives us new hearts and minds (Romans 12: 1-2) and we are saved for good works (Ephesians 2:10).

lunchboxsw

Being perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect. #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 12:12:00 PM

mesa_mike

@piratechristian Sermon on the Mount #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 5:44:53 PM

(Picks up and comforts the crying babies who were just thrown out along with the bathwater.)

Folks: Peter said that God expects holiness, and Jesus gave the Sermon on the Mount. Knowing that apart from Him we cannot fulfill His expectations is essential to understanding the Gospel.

I’m sure of what he means. But what do people hear? Maybe we can be more careful.

LaneChaplin

Disney Movies #notthegospel (even though I love them)
Monday, July 19, 2010 1:27:45 PM

Um … I’ve mentioned others not getting references. This is one I fail to get myself.

jesusbayona

All spirit-filled Christians speak in tongues. #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 1:35:56 PM

That’s a better one, especially because some who say this audaciously claim it’s “full gospel.”

Awretchsaved

I’ve asked Jesus to come into my heart. #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 3:20:28 PM

Booo. A bit too far? Saying this is not “not the Gospel.” If this is all we say, sure, that could be a problem. But it is not worth implying those who say this are believing a false Gospel.

axiomvv

RT @mykelpickens: Theology is #notthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 3:43:12 PM

Um, if you have, believe and strive to live according to right theology, using it as a means to love God and learn more about Him — then yes, theology is how we know the Gospel. Can we not imply that only few people are theologians, instead of all of us, or that theology is only dry?

tegregory

@piratechristian My what an anti-socialist kick you’re on today. How’s this?: “capitalism, free market, government ‘freedom’ #notthegospel”
Monday, July 19, 2010 4:24:22 PM

Apart from Christ, anything is not the Gospel, and that includes both socialism and capitalism. Duh. But capitalism is at least closer to Biblical truth. (Example: the New Earth will feature privately owned property — Isaiah 65: 21-22.) Capitalism and socialism are not equal ills.

bobbycapps

RT @piratechristian: Feeding the Poor #notthegospel // #butisafruitofthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 4:42:23 PM

bobbycapps

RT @piratechristian: Social Justice #notthegospel // #butisafruitofthegospel
Monday, July 19, 2010 4:45:43 PM

Now there we go. That seems much more helpful in clarifying true meanings.

Of course, it’s difficult to address every nuance or possibility of misunderstanding. Yet if I can do it — at least, I hope I did — in the second of my two Tweets about this, can’t we all?

Meanwhile, as others began pointing out, many of the “not the Gospel” ideas coming under fire may not themselves be the Gospel. Giving out novels, lifestyle evangelism, redeeming the culture, changing the world or living a purpose-driven life alone can’t save us. Most Christians know this, at least in theory. But the Gospel does bear fruits. And it could include those things.

And as Frank Turk himself later noted:

Frank_Turk

#notthegospel – does the Gospel have any necessary consequences? If so, why are we afraid of these things?
Monday, July 19, 2010 7:48:50 PM

When I was younger and a snarkier Christian, I rewrote the first chapter of Genesis. Unlike some, I wasn’t trying to remove the six-day creation parts. Instead I rewrote it the way an evolutionist might, in retelling his account(s) of the origin of the world.¹ This was called the L.E.F.T. Bible, the Liberal Evolutionists’ Favored Translation.

But I think Marvin Olasky did a much better job.

On March 11 last month, he debated “social gospel” activist Jim Wallis, who seeks Biblical and Christian justification for liberal welfare and wealth-distribution policies. Earlier that afternoon, Olasky has given a lecture about Christian responses to poverty and affluence. The afternoon is for academics, Olasky said. He wanted to start his introduction to the debate with a little snark.

In his hotel, considering a Gideons Bible in the drawer, he wondered: how would a “progressive Christian” version, such as Wallis’s Sojourners organization, translate three famous parables?

First, from Luke 10:

A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. The stripped him of his clothes, they beat him and they went away, leaving him half-dead.

But a Samaritan came to where the man was, and was outraged that some people were so poor that they were forced to steal clothes. He returned to Jerusalem, and using rhetorical brilliance to overcome prejudice against his ethnic group, he convinced the Sanhedrin to pass the Good-Looking Samaritan Act, which gave a new suit of clothes to every disadvantaged youth who might otherwise turn to crime along the Jerusalem-Jericho highway. And the Act also erected a monument at the spot where the robbery victim had died.

What about Acts 3?
Continue reading …

Listening to “emergent” Christians talk about their ideas on the internet is not very easy.

For me, that has proven especially true in the past couple of weeks, for at least three reasons.

The first is that they keep saying things about God that are not too Biblical, or imbalanced, even if they aren’t strictly heretical (i.e., something that keeps you from being a real Christian).

The second is that they keep assuming other Christians, such as myself, mainly believe as they do for certain reasons — they want to preserve power, they want to shoot homosexuals in the streets for sport, they’re all legalists, fundies, etc. They don’t give much leeway to those who believe “traditional” Christianity, and live their faith in love, because they really believe the Bible teaches this and God wants it.

The third reason is because these are not just philosophical issues that can be talked about over (insert trendy drink of your choice) while tapping out notes on your (insert i-Something of your choice).¹ I keep getting that impression from a lot of “emergent” advocates — and to be fair, from some “traditional” Christians too — that all this is just a bookish discussion.

Instead, this stuff is vital. It affects people’s lives. Believing wrongly about spiritual realities ruins marriages, families, churches. False doctrine (no matter which doctrines you believe are false) corrupts how one views God, morality, salvation, how to interact with the world.

And what if it’s true that Christians who still hold to the Biblical framework of man’s personal sin against God²), and eternal consequences for failure to repent and believe Christ? If so, those who claim or act otherwise are in a lot of trouble. Why? Because in their efforts to help the world, heal its hurts, etc., they’re stepping right over dead bodies — ignoring man’s true problem, deadness in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 1-2), in order to treat flesh wounds.

One month ago I addressed this issue in Part 1. It started with a fantasy-world analogy³ and actually dared to finish with a surface evaluation of the civil rights era. Now I’ll finally finish up, with some thoughts on Christians and others who could seem to prefer moral zeal but without Biblical knowledge, following a certain earthquake.

Do your paperwork

More than a month has passed since the earthquake that tore through the half-island nation of Haiti. Already afflicted with disease, death and poverty, the island is still suffering the aftermath of that near-apocalypse. The blighted country’s existing population of orphans undoubtedly swelled, and charity workers, Christian or not, are trying to figure out what to do.

They want to help the suffering people, they really do. They have great hearts, those charity workers. But what they also need to make sure they have is, um, the right paperwork.

This also goes for a certain group of Baptists.⁴ In early February, ten members of an Idaho church were trying to get into the Dominican Republic, crossing the border with multiple Haitian orphans in tow. Instead they were arrested and charged with child kidnapping.

More recently, eight of the Baptists were freed and returned to the U.S. in time for some to get on the Oprah show.⁵ But two of their leaders, Laura Silsby and Charisa Coulter, are still jailed in Port-au-Prince. They hadn’t had the right documents, Haiti authorities said, and oh, by the way: some of the children weren’t really orphans. A World magazine story (on Feb. 4) further describes:

[Silsby] told reporters last week: “Our hearts were in the right place.”

[. . .]

The Americans, members of a group called New Life Children’s Refuge, said they planned to establish an orphanage for children in the Dominican Republic. CNN reported that the group has no experience running an orphanage, and that the group’s headquarters are listed as Silsby’s now-foreclosed home.

What I hope is that the missionaries (or missionary wannabes?) are not now thinking this is simple anti-Christian persecution. I hope they aren’t claiming “this was God’s will” for something that just wasn’t very good sense. I hope good intentions aren’t being held up over God-glorifying wisdom.

I also hope other Christians won’t pick on them too much. Rather, we should seek to encourage good-hearted Christians who could use some, well, wisdom too.

In Romans 10:2, Paul refers to non-Christian Jews who have “zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.” They don’t “submit to God’s righteousness,” the apostle says. In their case, having a “heart in the right place” was not enough.

The same is true of not only the Baptists in Haiti, or the social-gospel “emergent” folks, but any Christian. We should also be Biblical. We need to do the right paperwork. Otherwise, we risk making Jesus look bad, or else, have all these great intentions to help people but instead miss the real problems. ⁶

Rejecting society-prosperity “gospels”

Not having an actual orphanage to take the “orphans” to is a bad enough problem. Far worse is the issue described in Part 1: if you had a God-given “power” to give resurrection from death to some victims (though you don’t know who), why would you ignore it in favor of only treating not-quite-dead-yet people for surface wounds?

Yet many Christians, “emergent” or not, do this all the time.⁷

We get wrapped up in things like Natural Disaster Recovery, and Man’s Inhumanity to Man, and Addressing Injustice, and tend to neglect the far worse problems in man: the natural disaster of the Fall, man’s inhumanity to God, and the worse injustice of not constantly giving Him glory.

Many know the health-wealth-and-prosperity “gospel” teachers are an easy and rightful target for Christians who point out their heresies and/or greed.

But how is a society-prosperity “gospel” much different? It turns the Christian religion, or missionary work, primarily into trying to heal a society’s wounds, without the “secret power” of the Gospel that God uses to raise someone from spiritual death!

Though it sounds cliché, John 3 remains clear: Jesus told Nicodemus that unless anyone is personally, supernaturally, “born again,” he cannot even “see” the Kingdom of God. The Gospel, personal and life-transforming, powered by Christ’s divinity, sacrificial death and resurrection, is what raises people to life. It’s the secret power. It’s the only ultimate hope for humanity.

No one is saying all Christians should end their Haiti relief work, or any civil-rights work, so we can all only yell John 3:16 all over the place. Rather, Scripture is clear that helping the poor, feeding the hungry, addressing injustice, defending life, etc., are part of Christians’ Gospel-powered presence in the world. However, in combating civil-rights evils, or caring for the poor or orphans after the Haiti earthquake, shouldn’t Christians at least also spread the Gospel that Christ died to save sinners from their own spiritual deadness?

The choice is not “either we preach the Gospel, or we help the poor or fight injustice.” Christians throughout history haven’t seen this as a dichotomy (though a lot of people nowadays seem to force it into a black-and-white issue). Neither does the Bible.

By rooting everything we do not in our own society-prosperity work, but in that secret power of God to replace hearts of stone with living hearts of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26), we stay truly humble. We work out of gratitude to God, not confidence in our own morality or intentions. We still have zeal, but with Biblical knowledge. We do our paperwork — and hopefully have a little more common sense and hearts in the right place. Best of all, God, and not us, will get the glory.