Skip to main content

The great cancer: the gospel assumed


There’s a very important article by David Gibson called ‘Assumed Evangelicalism’.  It's well worth reading the whole thing but just to whet your appetite I'll summarise...  Gibson starts by retelling the stories of two movements – the Mennonites and the UK Student Christian Movement:
The first generation of the Mennonite Brethren movement believed and proclaimed the gospel and thought that there were certain social entailments. The next generation assumed the gospel and advocated the entailments. The third generation denied the gospel and all that were left were the entailments. 
In its earliest days the SCM believed and proclaimed the atoning blood of Jesus. The next generation assumed it but did not make it central. The following generations have rejected and denied the apostolic gospel.
Gibson defines ‘assumed evangelicalism’ as a church, organisation or movement which: 
believes and signs up to the gospel. It certainly does not deny the gospel. But in terms of priorities, focus, and direction, assumed evangelicalism begins to give gradually increasing energy to concerns other than the gospel and key evangelical distinctives, to gradually elevate secondary issues to a primary level, to be increasingly worried about how it is perceived by others and to allow itself to be increasingly influenced both in content and method by the prevailing culture of the day.
It's a subtle and difficult thing to spot but Gibson gives us two helpful questions with which to examine ourselves:
  1. To what extent does scandalous and transforming grace dictate our priorities and shape our visions and strategies? If the gospel is assumed there will be legalism and/or license. We will think that the gospel is just for unbelievers not for believers. We will look for Jesus plus...
  2. To what extent do the evangelical distinctives of biblical authority and the Cross dictate our priorities, and shape our visions and strategies?  Are these truths just filed away in a dusty doctrinal basis or they the source of our joy, taught and preached week after week.
Assumed evangelicalism is rife. And the solution is getting explicit. As Glen Scrivener tweeted a few years ago:

“For every use of ‘gospel’ as adjective I want 3 explanations of the noun & if u bang on abt gospel-centred by golly u’d better centre on it”

Good point well made. So here are a few explanations to get us going: What is the gospel?
Let's be explicit about the gospel. Let's not lose our relish for the good new of Christ crucified and risen and given to us. Let's communicate it with all the different colours that the Bible paints it for us. Let's be gospel-centred in a richly biblical way. Let's keep pointing to Christ in his Word.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Everlasting gobstopper theology

The idea here is that there are layers to Christ's fullness and when the biblical authors present Christ to us they might only explicitly refer to one layer but as they do that the underlying layers are also implied. Or to put it another way, the glory of the underlying layers shines through the layer that is presented to us. That might sound strange, abstract and not particularly helpful but let me try to explain.  The incarnation implies the pre-existent Word When John identifies "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" as the key test of orthodoxy, Augustine asks (Homily 6 on 1 John) how can this be when so many heretics happily affirm the humanity of Jesus but deny his deity? Augustine then asks us to dig a bit deeper and consider: From whence did he come? "Was he not God?" Simon Gathercole demonstrated (in his 2006 book, The Pre-existent Son ) that Jesus' phrase in the synoptic gospels, "I have come", implies divine pre-existence.  So whenever we ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Building a RAFT: transitioning well

From the archives - originally written 8 years ago in the midst of international family transition… When Duncan Olumbe led an excellent session for the iServe Africa ministry training course on transition , there was one thing that he mentioned but didn’t have time to go into detail on: building a RAFT. The idea of building a RAFT comes from Pollock & Van Reken's  Third Culture Kids: Growing Up Among Worlds but it’s applicable to anyone moving on, whether adults or children, expats or citizens. The basic plan is Reconciliation-Affirmation-Farewells-ThinkDestination. It’s not only practical and proven but it also fits well with the pattern and teaching of the apostle Paul, someone who certainly knew what it was to go through a lot of transitions. Reconciliation Deal with conflict before you leave. Forgive and ask for forgiveness. We can easily sweep conflict under the carpet. Particularly when we are leaving it’s very tempting not to bother dealing with unresolved issues. But...
Post a Comment
Read more

10 things servant leadership is

Having cleared away 10 things servant leadership is not , here are 10 that it is. [Credit to Harrison Mungai for his help in observing many of these features and helping us to think through this really important area.] I used to think that all that was necessary in gospel ministry was faithful Bible handling. Preach the Word carefully and surely everything else should follow? But I was wrong. Sadly it is possible to have high quality expository preaching and ungodly leadership. It shouldn’t be possible but it is. And it’s a very ugly thing. Peter Mead has written  on the danger that can be done to a church or ministry when appointment of leaders values ability over character. So here are ten aspects of biblical servant leadership, specifically in relation to gospel ministry leadership, from 1 Thessalonians, especially chapters 2 and 3: Servant leadership is, wherever possible, Plural . A lot of articles and books on leadership assume that it is a personal project. Search G...
Post a Comment
Read more