GOSPEL RENEWAL

Tim Keller Urban Plant Life London Church Planting Consultation, 2008-09 Introduction to the course- DNA In these talks I want to lay out the features or facets of what Ill call Gospel DNA. What is that? Redeemer Church in New York City wants to encourage a movement of churches, ministries, and leaders that are seeking to reach our great global cities for Christ, united and empowered by a commonly held Gospel DNA. At the core of this is an orthodox theologythe classic doctrines of the Biblical gospel. And there are plenty of churches in the world that do not hold to that. Yet that is not all there is to what we are calling DNA. Plenty of churches formally subscribe to gospel doctrines and have a heart-felt commitment to them, but they have not thought out the implications of the gospel for every part of their ministry. Your ministry can be gospel believing without being gospel-shaped and driven. This is one of the reasons we are not going immediately to the subject of gospel doctrines (that will be left for the April 2009 meeting.) It is too easy to think that once you have the gospel down accurately your ministry, preaching, outreach, and so on will be shaped by it. Gospel DNAis a range of distinctive theological emphases and strategic ministry values and priorities that arise from reflection on the gospel. Why use the term DNA to describe this? The DNA in each cell is essentially a set of instructions deep within an organism that a) directs how it develops and grows, and that b) makes it capable of self-replication. Gospel DNA is mainly a theological vision, a vision for what the gospel can accomplish in a heart, a community, and a city. We do not want to be part of a movement that is program-driven, that gives its participants packets of methodologies. Cities are too diverse for that. We want to be much more theologically-driven than program-driven. This fits the organic, dynamic imagery of DNA. Our emphases and values are deep and basic enough to unite us and yet free us to work across a wide spectrum of human cultures. The first feature of our Gospel DNA is an understanding of gospel renewal dynamicshow the gospel works to renew lives and communities. Another word for this, historically, has been revival. INTRODUCTION TO GOSPEL RENEWAL There is a lot of discussion and debate about what evangelical Christianity is. Today in the U.S. the word means conservative or even Republican, but that does not account for how the word and movement first arose in the late 17th and early 18th centuries. In both New England and Europe, some Protestant leaders began to notice something inescapable. New England Puritans saw it clearlyfor they had come to America in the early 17th centuriesthousands of believing Christians, eager to establish churches that operated on Biblical principles. But after two generations of living here they recognized that some of their children as they grew up exhibited signs of spiritual vitality, real fruit of the Spirit, while others did not. There were many people in churches who subscribed to sound doctrine, who lived ethical lives, and who were baptized and taking the Lords Supper, but whose lives did not show the marks of Spiritregenerated character. Though baptized church members, they needed to be converted! Many churches and pastors resisted this sentiment. Even in the 17th and 18th century the mainline or mainstream churches took great offense the evangelical preachers. They said, if someone was a church member and participating in the sacraments, they were Christians, by definition. But the

proto-evangelicals said there had to be a vital connection between sound theology and lifechanging experience. This evangelical principle has also been called revivalism, which is, today, usually a negative term. Critics point out that this evangelical ideathat church membership is not enough, but a personal encounter and conversion is necessaryis inherently individualistic. It implies that church involvement optional and unnecessary. It also seems to imply that what is important is not the renewal of the human community--of the doing of justice and production of culturebut rather getting your individual, personal relationship to God. In April we will face squarely these fair criticisms and real dangers that attend evangelical emphases on conversion. Nevertheless, here we accept the key revivalist insightthat the default mode of the human heart is works-righteousnesstrusting in moral effort or religious pedigree rather than in the finished work of Christ for justification. This insight of course comes from Luther and Calvin, namely that the gospel doctrines themselves are so counter to and offensive to human nature that our hearts find ways of either rejecting or re-engineering the doctrine (as in liberal theology) or of subscribing to them without functionally trusting and resting in them. Revival, then, is a recovery of the gospel. In personal revival the individual recovers both the deeper sense of sin and the greater wonder of grace that comes whenever you find and shed another layer of self-justification and self-righteousness. In church ore regional revivals a larger body comes to recover the gospel in both theological and practical ways. Revivalisms historic practices, as we have seen, often promote an unhealthy individualism and can lead to many unBiblical imbalances. But many critics of evangelicalism over-react, offering either a kind of sacramentalism or a social gospel. Properly understood, the necessity of conversion supports Christian community and the doing of justice. A church can be fervently evangelistic and revivalistic in the best sense, and yet committed to working for justice and shalom in the city. Therefore, we want to stimulate gospel renewal dynamics in our ministry. Merely teaching, preaching, baptizing and catechizing are not sufficient. What is a revival? What are renewal dynamics? A revival is a work of God in which the church is both beautified and empowered because the normal operations of the Holy Spirit (conviction of sin, enjoyment of grace, access to the presence of God) are intensified. It is an outpouring of the Spirit on and within the congregation, so that the presence of God among his people is becomes evident and palpable. Note: The view put forward here is differs from two other (more popular and widespread) views of "revival". This is opposed to: A common charismatic-church idea of revival, which sees revival more in the adding of the extraordinary operations of the Holy Spirit (miracles, healings, revelations). Our view sees revival to be a restoration of the ordinary operations (conviction of sin, assurance of grace). A common fundamentalist-church idea of revival, which sees a "revivals" as simply an especially vigorous season of evangelistic activity. This latter view can be traced to the work of Charles G. Finney. 1. THE INSTRUMENTS OF RENEWAL (See Appendix A Gospel Insight) The ultimate cause of a revival is the Holy Spirit, but there are three instrumental or penultimate means the Holy Spirit ordinarily uses. a. Recovery of the gospelOut of the default mode of self-righteousness, worksrighteousness, conservative or liberal moralism. When I went to Gordon-Conwell Seminary in 1972 I studied under Richard Lovelace. The very first semester of our very first year Kathy and I took his course (which he was teaching for the first time) "Spiritual Dynamics". The essential teaching of that course can be found in his Dynamics of Spiritual Life (IVP, 1979). It was a lifechanging experience for us both. Lovelace was an expert on the revivals and awakenings that have

occurred in the Christian Church over the years. From historical and Biblical study he drew insights about how and why times of 'renewal' occur. Lovelace wrote that most Christians, practically speaking, base their justification on their sanctification rather than the other way around. "Justification" has to do with our acceptance and "right standing" with God but "sanctification" with our actual character and behavior. Christians know (doctrinally, intellectually) that it is our justification that is the basis for our sanctification. But most Christians in their actual "day-to-day existence...rely on their sanctification for their justification....drawing their assurance of acceptance with God from their sincerity, their past experience of conversion, their recent religious performance or the relative infrequency of their conscious, willful disobedience." (p.101.) In other words, Christians theoretically believe that "Jesus accepts me, therefore I live a good life", but their hearts are practically functioning on the principle "I live a good life, therefore Jesus accepts me". The results of this reversal is pride, defensiveness, a critical spirit, racial prejudice and cultural ethnocentricity, an allergy to change, and other forms of spiritual deadness, individual and corporate (p.212.) Because this is the default mode of the human heart, it is the stasis to which churches tend over the years, unless some sort of renewal/revival dynamic arrests it. Revivals and renewals occur when individuals and churches 'rediscover' the gospel. The basic problem, according to Lovelace, is that even Christians do not ordinarily live as if the gospel is true. We don't really believe the gospel deep down. We are living as if we save ourselves. b. Prayer - united, extraordinary, kingdom-centered, prevailing prayer across cities and networks. Jack Miller talks about the difference between "maintenance prayer" and "frontline" prayer meetings. Maintenance prayer meetings are short, mechanical, and totally focused on physical needs inside the church. But frontline prayer has three basic traits: a) a request for grace to confess sins and humble ourselves, b) a compassion and zeal for the flourishing of the church and reaching the lost, and c) a yearning to know God, to see his face, to see his glory. Now these are not trite statements. It is quite clear when listening to a prayer meeting whether these traits are present. Most interesting is to study Biblical prayer for revival such as in Acts 4 or Exodus 33 or Nehemiah 1. There these three elements are easy to see. Notice, for example, in Acts 4, that the disciples, whose lives had been threatened, did not ask for protection for themselves and their families, but only boldness to keep preaching! Usually revivals start with a very small group of people, or even just one person, who begins to pray for Gods glory in the community. But usually it is just a handful and it is always some kind of extraordinary prayerbeyond the normal services and patterns of prayer. c. Creativity. No revival is like the past. The method of getting gospel out is new and fits the cultural moment. The revival called the Great Awakening was sparked by the method of itinerant evangelistic preaching, something that had not been seen before. The revival of the late 1850s were sparked by lay-led prayer meetings. You can never get back into Narnia the same way twice. Best to keep your eyes open. This is another way to speak of contextualization adapting to new cultural situations without compromising the content of the gospel. Religion (I obey-therefore I am accepted) leads to either pride (if I am living up to standards) or inferiority (if I am failing to live up to standards) but the gospel (I am accepted through Christ-therefore I obey) makes us both humble and confident at once. This is a key to balanced contextualization. If we need the approval of the receiving culture too much, it shows a lack of gospel confidence. If we need the trappings of our own culture too much, it shows a lack of gospel humility. Gospel humility directs us to neither hate tradition nor be bound to it. It is proud to imagine that other Christians did not find much grace in past contextualizations and therefore

we do not ignore tradition. But it is also proud to think that new cultural trends have no grace in them and that former cultures were all more spiritually pure. Thus we adapt and create. 2. THE IMPACT OF RENEWAL: ON INDIVIDUALS (See Appendix B Gospel Change) Revival occurs when a group of people on the whole who think they know the gospel are be brought to see that they really do not 'know' it. When this happens in any extensive way, many nominal Christians realize they are not converted and cross over in to living faith, and many sleepy Christians wake up to why they have been living in anxiety, envy, anger, and boredom. When the church stops 'basing its justification on its sanctification' there is an enormous release of energy, The non-churched are then attracted and drawn in by the transformed life of the Christian community, which finally becomes a sign of the kingdom, a beautiful alternative to human society without Christ. a. Nominal church members get converted. They see they never understood the gospel or experienced the new birth. 'Nominal Christian' (i.e. Christian in name only) church members come to realize they don't actually have a living relationship with Christ by grace and get converted. When this first begins to happen, it electrifies people. (Here are long-time members getting up and talking about being converted or talking about Christ in radiant terms or expressing repentance in new ways.) The early 'models' of renewal shake up other nominals and sleepys into renewal. b. Sleepy, unrenewed Christians get a new assurance of and appreciation of grace. 'Sleepy' or stagnant Christians 'wake up', they get a sense of Gods reality on the heart and higher, immediate assurances of his love Breaking that down, I mean: a) there is a new and deeper conviction of sin and repentance--not just for major 'behavioral sins' but for attitudes of the heart, but then there is b) the experience of a far more powerful assurance of the nearness and love of God, with the end result that Christians become both humbler and bolder at once. The more deeply one feels his or her sin-debt, the more intensely he or she feels the wonder of the payment. c. Non-Christian outsiders are attracted to the newly beautified churchgreat worship, service in the community, loss of the condemning, tribal attitudes. Result, often explosive church growth. Because of the conversions of the nominal and the renewal of the sleepy, there is, more passion and freedom and of the presence of God in the worship services. On the one hand, the renewed believers create a far more attractive community of sharing and caring and often great worship. There is the beautified community of the King. This can attract people from the outside. On the other hand, Christians who begin to experience God's beauty, power and love. put their relationship to Christ and the church first in their lives, and they become radiant and attractive witnesses, more willing and confident to talk to others about their faith, more winsome (less judgmental) when they do so, and more confident in their own church and thus more willing to invite people to visit it. As a result, that there are numerous conversions--sound, lasting and sometimes dramatic. Significant, even astounding church growth occurs. Many churches in America grow rapidly, but almost completely through transfer growth. When that is the case, renewal dynamics are not strong in the church. But in revival, conversions are not a trickle. In the U.S. from 1857-1859 a revival brought over a half a million new people into the church. In New York City is a well-attested fact that nearly all the churches grew 50% in membership in that 2-3 year period. In Northern Ireland during this same period, 100,000 new converts (nearly a third of the population) joined the church. It is estimated that 10% of the entire population of Wales and Scotland were converted during the same time.

3. THE IMPACT OF RENEWAL: ON CHURCHES (See Appendix C Gospel Centrality) Richard Lovelace describes what he calls the delta effect in churches before and after awakenings and revivals. Ordinarily, different traditions and denominations tend to major in one or two ministry areas while being weak in others. So, for example, Presbyterians are historically strong on teaching and doctrine, Pentecostals and Anglicans (in their own ways!) on worship, Baptists on evangelism, Anabaptist on care for the poor and community, and so on. During times of gospel renewal, however, these strengths are often combined in churches that are usually more one-sided. What are these characteristics? Lovelace (calling them secondary or corporate signs of gospel renewal) names these: a. Vibrant worship. When the gospel comes homewhen both Gods holiness and his love become far more magnificent, real, and effecting to the heart, this leads naturally to new Godreality in worship. In whatever mode or tradition, renewed churches have worship that is not one dimensional (not only cerebral, lecture-hall like; not only emotional; not only formal) but now involves the whole person, mind, will, and heart. There is a clear, widely-felt sense of Gods transcendence in the services. And the services both edify believers while attracting and helping non-believers. b. Theological depth. When the gospel comes homewhen the difference between moralistic religion and gospel grace becomes far more clear to the mind, this leads naturally to preaching and teaching that is gospel-centered and Christ-centered rather than moralistic. It leads to preaching that is theologically sound (because renewed interest in the gospel piques interest in Biblical theology) but also very life-related and practical. It also inevitably leads to preaching that does not simply make the truth clear, but also reallife-changing. More liberal churches during revival get more Biblically oriented. More fundamentalist churches get less sectarian and more focused on the gospel itself rather than denominational distinctives. c. Community. When the gospel comes homewhen you no longer have to keep up an image of yourself as competent and righteous, this leads naturally to the barriers coming down that impede relationships. Pretense and evasion are now unnecessary. Also, the gospel creates a humility that makes you sympathetic and patient with others. All this leads relationships within the church to thicken and deepen. These new relationships are now the main way the gospel actually shapes the life. Lives are not changed primarily in classes or meeting, but in close community, where the implications of the gospel are worked out in discussion and through modeling, and worked in though formal and informal accountability, friendship, discipline, and the formation of corporate worship and sacraments. During times of renewal, the distinct counter-cultural nature of the church becomes attractive to outsiders. 4. Evangelism. When the gospel comes homehumbling and affirming you, it turns every believer into a natural evangelist. Times of renewal are always times of remarkable church growth, and that growth is not the typical growth through transfer and church shopping, but conversion. Evangelism in renewal happens not primarily through any one program or venue but naturally within the relationships of the revitalized and new Christians. Evangelism happens because of a) the humility of the gospel. The gospel (unlike religious moralism) produces people who are not disdainful and contemptuous towards those who disagree with them. Also, it happens through b) the affirmation of the gospel. Because of the reality and joy of Christs love, we are not as concerned what others think. The gospel brings a gentle boldness. 5. Justice and compassion. When the gospel comes homewhen you realize that you did not save yourself but were rescued from spiritual poverty, it naturally changes your attitude toward people who are in economic and physical poverty. That is the message of James 1-2 and many other texts. Modern historians have documented well how social reformation has so often

followed in the wake of revivals and awakenings. Christians who have been renewed by the gospel render sacrificial service to neighbors, the poor, and to the community and city around them. Indifference to the poor and disadvantaged means there has not been a true grasp of ones salvation by sheer grace. 6. Cultural renewal. When the gospel comes home believers come to see that it is not simply the ABCs but the A to Z of the Christian faith. That is, the gospel is not just a minimum set of beliefs we have to affirm in order to be saved. A survey of 1 Corinthians shows that Paul deals with racial and cultural conflict, sex and gender roles, civil lawsuitsall kinds of life issues by referring back to basic truths of the gospel. So the gospel is really something like what has been called a world-viewa distinctive, comprehensive account of what life is all about which can be applied to every area of life. Therefore, Christians shaped by the gospel find that it affects the way they pursue their vocations and life in the public spheres. Gospel-shaped believers will have a deep, vital, and healthy impact on the arts, business, government, media, and academy of any society. A note on the interdependence of these factors. We have seen how each of these corporate factors flow naturally from a gospel renewed heart. But that is too simplistic a way to think of their flow. First of all, many individuals are only renewed by the gospel because they are drawn into a church marked by these things. Second, the vitality of each factor not only depends on the gospel-renewed-heart, but also on each other. The factors stimulate each others. When Christians give their lives sacrificially for the poor, their neighbors are more open to evangelism. Deep, rich community could be said to be a result of gospel-evangelism, but just as often it is a means to evangelismit makes the gospel credible, and often it is not through listening to preaching but listening to friends that brings us home spiritually. Despite the fact that these factors are mutually strengthening, almost always the specialists and proponents of each pit them against the others. Evangelists are very afraid that social justice emphasis will lead to the social gospel, in which improving society is considered evangelism. They also fear that care for the poor will drain energy, attention, and resources from evangelism. Social justice advocates often resist the emphasis on cultural renewal because, they say, we should be out in the streets, identifying with the poor, rather than trying to reach into the elite worlds of art, media, and business. Community-focused leaders are often very negative about fast church growth and various evangelistic programs. They want everything to be organic. These tensions must be overcome by leaders who understand how the gospel inspires all of these. [Note: These corporate characteristics do not only show up in renewed local churches, but also in the in the whole city when gospel renewal is going on in the Body of Christ as a whole. We will look at this subject under the heading gospel eco-systems in April.] 4. THE RESULTS OF REVIVAL. a. An excessive wing. Instead of being humbled by the sense of God and church growth, some leaders get puffed up in pride. Leaders are elevated before they are ready. Charlatans, condemning, doctrinal deviations. Usually, this wing puts more emphasis on experience, emotion, and power than on the gospel itself. Emotionalism does not center on the gospel. It tends either to legalism (people rely their emotional experiences for acceptance with God) or even to antinomianism and heterodoxy (people believe that doctrine and practice matter nothing, if they have their experience of God). b. Secular, liberal mainstream condemnation of the revival. Both secular people and more secularized liberal mainline churches already fear and disdain orthodox religious faiths. Any

revival looks to them like their worst nightmareorthodox theology growing and on fire. So Charles Chauncey and Harvard professors attacked the Great Awakening and Jonathan Edwards with horror. They were upset to see orthodoxy, which they consider primitive and backward, increasing in numbers. Ordinarily, the liberal backlash against the revival points to the real excesses of the excessive wing in order to debunk it all. c. Conservative, traditional leaders are troubled by the excesses, and in some cases jealous and threatened, so for all these reasons they stay out or oppose it. Almost always there are both valid and invalid reasons that many conservative orthodox churches fear revival. The valid reasons are that the creativity and emotion of the revived churches leads to excess. The invalid reasons are envy and jealousy. Nevertheless, ultimately, they dislike it because they dont understand it. Lovelace wrote: "Much that we have interpreted as a defect of sanctification in church people is really an outgrowth of their loss of bearing with respect to justification." The importance of this principle cannot be overemphasized. It is a major mistake to think that dead congregations simply need to be more sanctified, when they do not understand the gospel. "Christians who are no longer sure that God loves and accepts them in Jesus, apart from their present spiritual achievements, are subconsciously radically insecure persons." (p.212) In other words--while the technically orthodox, the implications of justification by faith are not thought out or lived out, and the result is a Phariseeism, a self-righteousness, and a dead orthodoxy. Here are some marks of dead orthodoxy: There may be much more emphasis on defending the truth than on propagating it. The emphasis is on attacking false views, not winning people to Christ. There is smugness toward those without the "right" views. There may be strong, even fierce opposition to change or unpredictability in program and worship. What people call "closeness to God" is often the security that comes from familiar forms and procedures. There may be a desire for "inspiring", general sermons, but nothing disturbingOR an emphasis on rather demanding, exhortational sermons, but nothing that creates real joy over grace. There is total focus on the needs and concerns of members and the survival of the institution (church). No desire or intention to reach the world. Meanwhile, there may be a lot of hiding and a covering up of secret sins. d. Yet if it is great enough, the revival brings impact on the local neighborhood and even the broader culture. Revivals produce waves of people who become involved in works of social concern and social justice. This is a big subject, and there is scholarly debate about a lot of this--but there far more acknowledgement today than there was two decades ago that major social justice movements such as abolitionism had strong roots in the revivals. The reason for this is that real holiness changes the private and public lives of Christians. True religion is not merely a "private matter", providing internal peace and fulfillment. Rather, it transforms our behavior and our relationships. Thus a large number of real Christians changes a community in all its dimensions: economic, social, political, intellectual, and so on. The Great Awakening, of course, led to the abolition of slavery. A more routine example is the 1904-05 revival in Wales, which triggered many social changes. Life in the coal pits was transformed; workers and management engaged in prayer meetings on company time. Poor Law Guardians (who administered relief) commented that many working people came to take aged parents home from the workhouses where they had been sent so "inconsiderately". Long standing debts were paid, stolen goods returned, crime rates plummeted. Summary: These marks of revival may be small or large, long or short, dramatic or quiet, widespread or localized. They are subject to different degrees. But when the renewal dynamics are in place, these effects are seen. Without these dynamics in place, a church can grow in

numbers, but not in vitality, and thus the growth will not have lasting results. Actually, many churches in America do grow rapidly, but there are tell-tale symptoms of lifelessness. Most or all of the growth may be by transfer, not conversion. There is no deep conviction of sin or repentance and thus few people can attest to dramatically changed lives. Also, the growth of the many churches makes no impact on the local social order, because people do not carry their Christianity out into their use of wealth, their work, or their public lives. Without deep renewal of the gospel in the heart, our external lives will be 'sealed off' from what we believe, and our beliefs will never result in concretely changed living.

Appendix A

Gospel Insight
THE BASIC INSIGHT. The basic operating principle of religion in the world is - I obey--therefore I am accepted by God. The basic operating principle of the gospel is - I am accepted by God through Christ--therefore I obey. Two people living their lives on the basis of these two principles may (do!) sit right beside one another in the pew in the church--and both are striving to obey the law of God, to pray, to give money generously, to be good family members. But they are doing so out of radically different motives, in radically different spirits, resulting in radically different personal character. A basic insight of Martin Luther was that religion is the basic default mode of the human heart. Even professed secular and atheistic persons operate on the basis of it. And even Christians who know the gospel in principle and who have been changed by it continually revert to it. The results of works-religion therefore stubbornly persist in us. Christians believe the gospel at one level but at deeper levels we continue to operate as if we are saved by our works. Only a fraction of the present body of professing Christians are solidly appropriating the justifying work of Christ in their lives....Many...have a theoretical commitment to this doctrine, but in their day-to-day existence they rely on their sanctification for their justification...drawing their assurance of acceptance with God from their sincerity, their past experience of conversion, their recent religious performance or the relative infrequency of their conscious, willful disobedience. Few know enough to start each day with a thoroughgoing stand upon Luthers platform: you are accepted, looking outward in faith and claiming the wholly alien righteousness of Christ as the only ground for acceptance, relaxing in that quality of trust which will produce increasing sanctification as faith is active in love and gratitude....Much that we have interpreted as a defect of sanctification in church people is really an outgrowth of their loss of bearing with respect to justification. Christians who are no longer sure that God loves and accepts them in Jesus, apart from their present spiritual achievements, are subconsciously radically insecure persons.... Their insecurity shows itself in pride, a fierce, defensive assertion of their own righteousness, and defensive criticism of others. They come naturally to hate other cultural styles and other races in order to bolster their own security and discharge their suppressed anger. -- Richard Lovelace1 THREE WAYS TO LIVE It is typical for Christians to think there are two ways with God--to follow him and do his will or to reject him and do your own thing. Of course ultimately that is true! But there are two basic ways to reject God as savior. One is by rejecting Gods law and living as you see fit. The other is by obeying Gods law with all your mightso as to earn your self-respect and your salvation. The problem is that people who reject the gospel for moralism look to all eyes as if they are trying to do Gods will. So it is not enough to simply think there are two ways with God. There are three-religion, non-religion, and the gospel. There is as sharp a distinction between religion and the gospel as there is between irreligion (or secularity) and the gospel. Irreligion or unbelief is avoiding God as Lord and Savior by ignoring him. Religion or moralism is avoiding God as Lord and Savior by developing a moral righteousness and giving it to God so that then He owes you. But the gospel is not that we develop righteousness and give it to Him, so that then he owes us, but that he developed righteousness through Jesus Christ and gives it to us, so that then we owe him. The gospel differs from both religions and irreligion, from both moral conformity and self-discovery.

Richard Lovelace, The Dynamics of Spiritual Life (IVP, 1979)

This insight has been more and more evident to me over the years as Ive studied the Bible. a. Romans 1-4 The classic statement of these three ways to live can be found in Romans 1-4. In Romans 1:18-32 Paul shows how the pagan, immoral Gentiles are lost and alienated from God. But in Romans 2:1-3:8 Paul counter-intuitively says that the moral, Bible-believing Jews are lost and alienated from God as well. In 3:9 he says: What can we conclude them? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin, as it is written there is no one righteous, no even one.there is no one who seeks God. The last part of this statement is particularly shocking, since he concludes that thousands of men and women who were diligently obeying and believing the Bible were not even seeking God in all their Biblical religion. The reason is that, if you seek to be right with God through your morality and religion, you are not seeking God for your salvation, but you are using God as a means achieve your own salvation. Paul then proceeds in the rest of the book of Romans to explain the gospelin which you seek God in Christ for your salvation, through grace alone and through faith alone. b. The Sermon on the Mount The Sermon on the Mount is especially clarifying in this regard. At the end of the sermon Jesus forcibly offers two gates roads, two trees, two foundations on which to build ones house. What are these two ways? Traditionally, preachers have said that Jesus is speaking of A) living Gods way (i.e. according to the principles of the Sermon) and B) living immorally, disobediently. But if Jesus is contrasting these two ways at the end--surely we would find Jesus treating the two way within the sermon. And if we go back, we do see a continual contrast drawn--but it is not between those disobedient to Gods word and those obedient to Gods word. The contrast is between Jesus way and the Pharisees way. In 5:21ff. Jesus contrasts the Pharisees way of obeying Gods commandments (which is supplying minimum, external compliance) and Jesus way, which motivated by a very different, inward, thorough change in motivation. In chapter 6 we come to see what that new inward motivation really is. When they give to the poor (vv.1-4) and pray (vv.5-7) they do it for acclaim, applause, and reward. They feel superior and believe they have leverage over others and over God for their spiritual performance (they will be heard for their many words.) In chapter 7 we see Jesus warning against being judgmental and condemning (vv.1-2) and against being quicker to give criticism than to take it (vv.3-5.) In short, what do we see in the Sermon on the Mount? Jesus is not contrasting people who dont obey the law, give alms, and pray with those who do. Both groups of people in the sermon obey the law, both give to the poor and both pray--but for profoundly different reasons. The works-righteousness group does it out of a desire to get leverage over others and over God, which leads to superiority, pride, inability to take criticism, and minimal, external obedience without inner change in holiness and character. Actually, 5:20 announces that the Sermon on the Mount is not a contrast between the moral and the immoral or the religious and the irreligious but rather is a contrast between the religious Pharisees and those who believe the gospel. c. The Two Lost Sons But perhaps the most vivid depiction of this is in the parable of the prodigal son in Luke 15. The two sons in the parable represent the two kinds of persons around Jesus in 15:1-2--a) the younger brothers, the tax collectors and sinners, and b) the elder brothers, the Pharisees and teachers of the law. A close reading reveals that both sons within the parable are alienated from the father and the feast of salvation. The father must go out to both sons to invite them in. Both of them try to control the fathers wealth--the younger son with overt rebellion and immorality, the elder brother with absolute compliance and obedience. This reminds us that there are two ways to try to be our own Savior and Lord. One way is by disobeying the law of God--the other is by obeying the law of God (and thereby earning your way to heaven and getting leverage over God.)

10

The shocking end of the parable shows us that the bad boy is saved and the good boy is not. Even more shocking is the fact that the good boy is not saved in spite of his goodness but because of his goodness. In v.29 he explains the reason why he is angry with the father--I have never disobeyed you. The works-righteousness of the elder brother makes him feel the father owes it to him to act in a certain way. He represents a person who obeys the law of God--even one who professes to believe in Christ. But though Christ may be his example, his help, his rewarder, Jesus is not his savior. Works-righteousness turns you into your own Savior. This is a devastating depiction of religion, but it is by no means the only one. But in the gospels these three ways--religion, non-religion, and the gospel--are constantly depicted in Jesus encounters. So often there is both a Pharisee and a publican (Luke 18) or a Pharisee and a fallen woman (Luke 7) or a respectable crowd and a demoniac (Mark 5) and a publican (Luke 19)--in every instance it is the less moral, less religious person who connects more readily to Jesus. Even in John 3 and 4, where we have a similar contrast (a Pharisee and a Gentile, immoral woman) we see the woman receiving the gospel with joy while Nicodemus (evidently) has to go home and think about it. The legalist says, the good people are in and the bad are out. The secular relativist says, the tolerant are in and the bigots are out. But the gospel says, the humble are in and the proud are out. Those who know they are not good are on the way at least. d. Religion in the Bible. Overall, the Bible uses two words for religion or religiousthreskeia and deisidaimonisterous which Paul and Luke only use negatively for (Acts 25:19; 26:5; Col 2:18,23.) Only James uses it positively once. (James 1:26-27). The book of Hebrews has a number of synonyms for worksreligions as well. Dick Lucas has a wonderful way to summarize the teaching of Hebrews. He imagines early Christians talking to their neighbors in the Roman Empire. Ah, the neighbor says, I hear you are religious! Great! Religion is a good thing. Where is your temple or holy place? We dont have a temple, replies the Christian. Jesus is our temple. No temple? But where do your priests work and do their rituals? We dont have priests to mediate the presence of God, replies the Christian. Jesus is our priest. No priests? But where do you offer your sacrifices to acquire the favor of your God? We dont need a sacrifice, replies the Christian. Jesus is our sacrifice. What kind of religion IS this? sputters the pagan neighbor. And the answer isthis Christian faith is so utterly different than how every other religion works that it doesnt really deserve to be called a religion. Following this lead, Kierkegaard also makes a distinction between the aesthetic, the ethical and the spiritual. This last word is usually translated religious, but he means by the ethical what we are calling religion. By Kierkegaards account, the aesthetic is a worldly life in which pleasure and happiness is sought. The ethical life is a life of self-denial through which salvation is sought.

Some evangelicals have often said, Christianity isnt a religion, but a relationship with Jesus Christ. Im not sure thats the best way to put it. Many moralistic people are also seeking a relationship with Jesus Christ, but its based on their performance. On the other hand, a relationship, not religion life might run the risk of making the mistake of what Bonhoeffer calls cheap grace. Bonhoeffer meant by that term a non-costly lovei.e. the love of a non-holy God who just loves and accepts us. Many people in the evangelical movement think of a relationship with Jesus as basically meaning that hell forgive you as long as you try to live for him. Its a mixture of a love view of Gods holiness and a low view of how radical his grace is. It is a lowlevel works-righteousness. So the gospel is distinct from religion on the one hand and cheap grace on the other. Sum: Sometimes, of course, people talk about the Christian religion and, broadly speaking, that is all right. We are going to use the word religion more negatively for the rest of this material as a heuristic device.

11

Appendix B

Gospel Change
MORALISTIC BEHAVIOR CHANGE Think of how we ordinarily try to instill honesty in children and youth: If you lie, youll get in trouble with God and others or else if you lie then you will be like those terrible people, those liars, and you are better than that! But look at these last two statements! What motivations are you bringing to bear on them to change their behavior? Fear (youll get in trouble) and pride (youll be like a dirty liar.) But if you stir up and use sin (fear and pride) to get people to do the right thingthen you arent actually changing the heart. You arent getting at the fundamental self-regard and selfcenteredness and self-absorption of the human heart. You are just manipulating it, jury-rigging it. You are, as it were, bending the person into a different pattern with fear and pride rather than melting them into a new shape through enough joy and love and gratitude. To extend the metaphorif you bend your heart like a piece of metal then either you will break it or it will just snap back. If you use fear and pride to get someone to tell the truthwatch out. Why? Well, think of the reasons that people do lie? The reasons are fear and pride! So the moralistic elder-brother approach to behavior change nurtures the fear and pride that will eventually erupt in other ways. That is why so many people who have been raised very morally find that under some stress or temptation suddenly they do things they never thought they were capable of. They are shocked! They cant believe they embezzled or lied, that they committed adultery, that they felt so much blind hate they lashed out. I wasnt raised that way! they say. But unless the gospel is used the heart itself isnt changed. The behavior can be altered by putting pressure on the will via fear and pride, but the hearts basic self-centeredness and insecurity isnt dealt with apart from the gospel. THE NATURE OF TRUE VIRTUE Jonathan Edwards tackled this difference between heart-change and moralistic-compliance in The Nature of True Virtue and The Religious Affections. The following is my summary of his gist. There are two kinds of moral behavior: common virtue and true virtue He recognizes that the vast majority of people are honest out of fear (be honest--it pays! or if you are not honest, God will punish you!) or out of pride (dont be like those terrible dishonest people) Edwards is by no means scornful of thiswhat he calls common virtue. Indeed, he believes this is the main way God restrains evil in the world. Nevertheless, there is a profound tension at the heart of common virtue. In common virtue, you have not done anything to root out the fundamental cause of evilthe radical self-centeredness of the heart. In common honesty you have restrained the hearts self-centeredness, but not changed it. Ultimately, moral people who are being moral out of fear and pride are being moral for themselves. They may be kind to others and helpful to the poor at one level, but at the deeper level they are doing it so God will bless them (religious version) or so they can think of themselves as virtuous, charitable persons (secular version). They dont do good for Gods sake or for goodness sake but for their own sake. The fundamental self-centeredness is not only intact but nurtured by common virtue and this is can (and will!) erupt in shocking ways. That is why so many churches are plagued with gossip and fighting. Or why so many apparently moral people can fall into great sins. Underneath the seeming unselfishness is great self-centeredness. So Edwards says--what then is true virtue? It is when you are honest not because it profits you or makes feel better, but when you are smitten with the beauty of the God who is the truth. It is

12

when you come to love truth telling not for your sake but for Gods sake and its own sake. But that kind of motivation can only grow by a deeply touched by grace. How does true honesty grow? It grows when I see him dying for me, keeping a promise he made despite the infinite suffering it brought him. Now that a) destroys pride on the one hand, because he had to do this for me--I am so lost! But that also b) destroys fear on the other hand, because if hed do this for me while Im an enemy, then he values me infinitely, and nothing I can do will wear out his love for me. Then my heart is not just restrained by changed. Its fundamental orientation is transformed. HOW THE BIBLE MOVES US TOWARD CHANGE. In light of all thislets look further in the Bible and see how it calls us to change. We already saw how Paul dealt with Peters racismnot with a mere moral exhortation using fear and pride as the motivators but with a call to remember the grace of the gospel. In 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 Paul wants the people to give an offering to the poor. But he says, I dont want to order you. I dont want this offering to simply be the response to my demand. He doesnt put pressure directly on the will (saying Im an apostle and this is your duty to me!) nor pressure directly on the emotions (telling them stories about how much the poor are suffering and how much more they have than the sufferers.) Instead, Paul vividly and unforgettably says, You know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich (2 Cor 8:9) When he says you know the gracehe of course is spiritually reminding them of that grace, but he uses a powerful image, bringing Jesus salvation into the realm of money and wealth and poverty. He moves them by a spiritual recollection of the gospel. Paul is saying, Think on his costly gracethink on that grace like thisuntil you are changed into generous people by the gospel in your hearts. In Ephesians 5 Paul is speaking to spouses but especially (it seems) to husbands. Many of them, perhaps, had brought from their pagan backgrounds many bad attitudes toward marriage. Marriage was seen as mainly just business relationships (you had to marry as well as you could). Paul wants to encourage husbands to be not only sexually faithful but also to cherish and honor their wives. But in Ephesians 5 (as in 2 Cor 8 and 9) Paul does not show unloving husbands just some moral example but (again) shows them the salvation of Jesus. Jesus was the ultimate spouse to us in the gospel. He showed sacrificial love toward us, his bride. He did not love us because we were lovely but in order to make us lovely. So the solution to stinginess is a re-orientation to the generosity of Christ in the gospel, where he poured out his wealth for you. Now you dont have to worry about moneythe cross proves Gods care for you and gives you the security. Now you dont have to envy any one elses money. Jesus love and salvation confers on you a remarkable statusone that money cannot give you. A solution to a bad marriage is a re-orientation to the radical spousal love of Christ in the gospel. Thou shalt not commit adultery makes sense in the context of the spousal love of Jesus, especially in the cross, where he was completely faithful to you. Only when you know the sacrificial spousal love of Christ will you have real fortitude against lust. His love is fulfilling which keeps you from looking to sexual fulfillment to give you what only Jesus can. What is the point? What makes you a sexually faithful spouse, a generous-not avaricious-person, a good parent and/or child is not just redoubled effort to follow the example of Christ. Rather, it is deepening your understanding of the salvation of Christ and living out of the changes that understanding makes in your heartthe seat of your mind, will, and emotions. Faith in the gospel re-structures our motivations, our self-understanding and identity, our view of the world. It changes our heart. Behavioral compliance to rules without heart-change will be superficial and fleeting. The purpose of preaching is to show people the practical implications of faith in the gospel for their practical life.

13

In Titus 2:11-15 Paul calls his listeners to say no to ungodliness and worldliness and to live selfcontrolled lives. But how does Paul tell them to get this self-control. Remarkably, he says it is the grace of God that brings salvation which teaches us (Grk paideia) to say no to ungodliness. In Titus 3:5 he explains what he means by the grace of God. He saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. This is how we say no to temptation! Many people of course think that the more you talk about grace-grace-grace the less incentive people will have to lead a godly life. But if when you lose all fear of condemnation (Rom 8:1) you lose all incentive to be holy, that means the only incentive you had to be holy was one of fear. The religious person says: I must obey God or hell reject me. The Christian says: I want to obey the God who came and has been rejected for me! Think of all the ways you can say no to ungodliness. You can "Nobecause Ill look bad! You can say NoIll be excluded from the social circles I want to belong to. You can say No because then God will not give me health, wealth, and happiness. You can say Nobecause God will send me to hell. You can say Nobecause Ill hate myself in the morning and disappoint myself and have low self-esteem. But (see below) virtually all of these motives are really just motives of fear and pridethe very things that also lead to sin. You are just using sinful self-centered impulses of the heart to keep you compliant to external rules without really changing the heart itself. Also, you are not really doing anything out of love for God. You are using God to get thingsself-esteem, prosperity, social approval. So your deepest joys and hopes rest in other things beside God. This kind of obedience does not issue from a changed heart at all. Paul is saying: if you want to really change and gain self-control you must let the gospel teach youa word that means to train, discipline, coach you over a period of time. You must let the gospel argue with you. You must let the gospel sink down deeply until it changes the structures of your motivation and views of things. The gospel, if it is really believed, removes the needinessthe need to be constantly respected, appreciated, and regarded well. The need to have everything in your life go well. The need to have power over others. All of these great deep needs come because the concept of the glorious God delighting in you with all his being is just thata concept and nothing more. Our hearts dont believe it. So they operate on their default mode. IDOLATRY AND THE GOSPEL In his A Treatise on Good Works, an exposition of the 10 commandments, Luther said something that changed my life. He said the first law of the Old Testament lawthat you must have no other gods before God--and the New Testament teaching of justification by grace through faith alone are both, in essence, the same thing. To say you must have no other gods but God and to say you must not try to achieve your salvation without Christ is the same thing. Why would that be? Anything you look to more than Christ for a sense of acceptability, joy, significance, hope, and security is by definition your godsomething you adore and serve with your whole life and heart. If you try to achieve your sense of self by a performance (as I have often done with my work and ministry) then you are putting something in the place of Christ as a Savior. That is an idol by definition. The sign of idolatry is always inordinate anxiety, inordinate anger, inordinate discouragement. Idols are good things (family, achievement, work and career, romance, talent, etc) that we turn into ultimate things in order to get the significance and joy we need. Then they drive us into the ground because we have to have them. If we lose a good thing, it makes us sad. If we lose an idol it devastates us.

14

Luther concluded from his study of the commandments that you never break one of the other commandments unless you are also breaking the 1st. Idolatry, then, is the fundamental root of our sins and problems. He says you dont lie, commit adultery, or steal unless first you are making something more fundamental to your hope and joy and identity than God. When you lie, for example, it is because your reputation (or money or whatever) is more foundational to your self and happiness than the love of Christ. You never break the other commandments without breaking the first one. We always sin because we are trusting something besides Jesus to our real, functional trust and savior. Heres Luthers point. We sin, we break the commandments. But why do we sin in the particular instances and ways that we do? Why do we fail to forgive, not control our temper, tell lies, or lash out in the particular instances that we do? For example, lets say a person cheats on his income tax form. Why does he do that? Well, you say, because he is a sinner. Yes, but why does his sin take this particular form? (Lots of other sinners dont cheat on their income tax.) Luthers answer would be that the man cheated because somehow money and possessionsand the status or comfort from having more of themwas more important to his hearts significance and security that what he had in Christ. We sin because we are not at that place and moment believing the gospel. The solution is not simply to force ourselves or scare ourselves into doing the right thing, but to use the gospel on the idols of the heart. Idols are always an alternate form of self-salvation apart from Jesus. Now we can also see that the gospel not an elementary principle that we grasp when we are saved and then we go on to discover and live by more advanced Biblical principles. No. Rather, since all sin is rooted in idolatrous attitudes, and idols are always pseudo-saviors, something we trust more than Christ for our significance and security, then unbelief in the gospel of Christ is always a major root of every actual sin. The gospel is that I am saved not by my own righteousness and behavior, but because I am righteous in Christ. All our failures in actual righteousness come from a failure to rejoice in our legal righteousnessin Christ. All our failures in sanctification (living a Christ-like, godly life) come from a lack of orientation to our justification. And therefore we will never change unless we come to grips with the particular, characteristic way in which our heart is resisting the gospel and continuing its self-salvation project through idolatry. Two disclaimers: 1) This does not mean that Christians should not use every possible means to exercise self-control in the crucial moment. If you feel an impulse to pick up a rock and hit someone with itdo anything at all to keep yourself from doing it! Tell yourself Ill go to jail! Ill disgrace my family! Anything. Theres no reason why in the short run a Christian cant simply use will-power like that to make a change that is necessary. But in the long run change will only come from changing the hearts deepest affections with the melting, moving grace of God. Titus 2:11-14 says that it is the grace of God that teaches us to say no to ungodlinessand live selfcontrolled lives The ultimate way to shape the life into self-control is to use the gospel of grace. Moving the heart with the gospel is how we really change. 2) This does not mean that change is simply a matter of personal prayer and repentance. The idolatrous patterns of our lives are extremely deep and did not arise in us through just individual choice. They are a product of what has been done to us and our social surroundings. Getting the gospel in deep takes far more than personal prayer and resolutions. Counseling, community, intimate friendships and accountabilityall of this is crucial for personal change! But if you want to see a pattern in your life changed in any lasting way, it is not enough just to have friends exhorting you nor even just to uncover childhood patterns of insecurity through self-reflection. You must apply the gospel to your heart at the point of your idols. Otherwise there will be no heart change, no lasting change.

15

Appendix C

Gospel Centrality
WALKING IN-LINE WITH THE GOSPEL. One of the most intriguing passages in the New Testament is Pauls confrontation with Peter in Galatians 2. We know from Acts 10-11 that Peter the apostle was Jewish and had been raised to see Gentiles as spiritually unclean, people that he should not eat with. Table fellowship in ancient cultures was very significant. Eating with someone symbolized openness and a measure of acceptance. The Pharisees believed they could make themselves more acceptable to God by separating themselves for unclean people, places and objects. This is why Jesus eating with sinners was so outrageous. Then Peter learned the gospel--that it is only Jesus who can make us clean and acceptable and presentable to God. After understanding this, Peter began to eat with Gentiles. But in Galatians 2 we see that Peters older ingrained sense of racial superiority re-asserted itself. He again refused to eat with Gentilesincluding Gentile Christian brothers and sisters. Paul confronts Peter about this in Galatians 2:11-16but look how Paul does it! He does not simply say, Racism is against Gods will. That is true of course, but Paul is not content to merely say it that way. Instead, he says to Peter, you are not walking in line with the truth of the gospel. (v.14) The word for walking is the Greek word orthopedia-and it means to walk in a straight line. Literally, he says- you are not walking straight in-line that accords with the truth of the gospel. According to Paul, the truth of the gospel is not just a set of doctrines by which you get saved. It is something that guides the way you live and act in every area of liferace relations is just one of them. Paul applies the gospel to racism. He says racism is a failure to believe the gospel deep down, a failure to think out the implications of the gospel of salvation by grace. Paul didnt say simply stop being a racistthough of course that was his goal. He reasons, If we are all saved by grace alonehow can you feel superior to anyone? How can you continue to be racially and nationally exclusive? Use the gospel on your heart! Peter, of course did know the gospel at one level, but at a deeper level he still didnt really know it. We wasnt walking in line with it. He wasnt being controlled in his depths by it. To walk straight according to the gospel hints that it is possible to walk off to the one side or the other. The image indicates that there is a gospel-guided or gospel-shaped approach to everything that is unique. So Pauls example in Galatians 2:14 shows us that we must not simply ask in every area of life, What is the moral way to act? but What is the way that is in-line with the gospel? The renewed church is the place where are working to bring every area of life "into line" with the gospel. THE GOSPEL EFFECTS EVERYTHING In an unpublished paper on 1 Corinthians 15 The Gospel, Don Carson draws two broad inferences from the chapter. The first is that the gospel is normally disseminated in proclamation. The overwhelming majority of references to the gospel in the New Testament speak of communicating the gospel through words. However, as a steward of the gospel, Pauls responsibility was not exhausted simply by disseminating it to non-believers. Paul also found it necessary to hammer away at the outworking of the gospel in every domain of the lives of the Corinthians. (Carson paper, p. 12.) After stressing that the gospel is primarily disseminated through proclamation and preaching, Carson writes:

16

Yet something else must also be said. This chapter [1 Corinthians 15] comes at the end of a book that repeated shows how the gospel rightly works out in the massive transformation of attitudes, morals, relationships, and cultural interactions.[J]ustification is by faith alone, but genuine faith is never alone; we might add that the gospel focuses on a message of what God has done and is doing, and must be cast in cognitive truths to be believed and obeyed, but this gospel never properly remains exclusively cognitive. (Carson, p.10.) The rest of the Corinthian letters demonstrate this over and over. When Paul denounces the Corinthians divisions and party spirit (1:10-17) he says that they comes from pride and boasting, a betrayal of the gospel of sovereign grace (1:26-31.) When Paul deals with the issue of sexual sin and discipline in chapters 5-6, he gives directions for behavior and grounds his appeal in the gospel of justification (6:11) and the fact that they were ransomed by the death of Christ (6:1920.) In chapter 7 the questions of singleness, divorce, and remarriage are worked out in the context of the priorities of the gospel and the transformed vision brought about by the dawning of the eschatological age and the anticipation of the end.(Carson) In 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, Paul eloquently appeals for financial generosity on the basis of the gospel. 2 Cor 9:13 says that radical, humble generosity is being submissive to the confession of the gospel (i.e. materialism fails to take seriously the gospel of Christs sacrificial death for us.) Similarly, in Galatians 2:14 Paul challenges Peters attitudes toward Gentile Christians by insisting that he was not walking in line with the truth of the gospel. "The gospel must also transform the business practices and priorities of Christians in commerce, the priorities of young men steeped in indecisive but relentless narcissism, the lonely anguish and often the guilty pleasures of single folk who pursue pleasure but who cannot find happiness, the tired despair of those living on the margins, and much more. And this must be done, not by attempting to abstract social principles from the gospel, still less by endless focus on the periphery in a vain effort to sound prophetic, but precisely by preaching and teaching and living out in our churches the glorious gospel of our blessed Redeemer. (Carson, pp. 12-13.) So what does it mean to be committed to the centrality or primacy of the gospel? It means that the gospel must be proclaimed and preached to the world. But it also means that it is the basis and mainspring for Christian practice, individually and corporately, inside the church and outside. Gospel ministry is not only proclaiming it to nonbelievers so that they will embrace and believe it, it also teaching and shepherding believers with it so that it shapes the entirety of their lives, so that they can live it out. TWO CASE STUDIES: THE GOSPEL APPROACH TO RACISM AND SUFFERING. Case Study #1 - Racism Moralistic persons will tend to be very proud of their culture. They easily fall into cultural imperialism. They try to attach spiritual significance to their cultural styles to make themselves feel morally superior to other peoples. This happens because moralistic people are very insecure, since they look a lot at the eternal law and know deep down that they cannot keep it. They use cultural differences to buttress their sense of righteousness. Relativistic persons will tend not to cultural imperialism but cultural relativism. This approach says, Yes, traditional people are racists because they believe in absolute truth. But truth is relative. Every culture is beautiful in itself. Every culture must be accepted on its own terms. This, however, makes it impossible to make distinctions between evil and right in culture. Note: Relativists are ultimately moralistic. Since their identity (like anyone who does not grasp the gospel) is based some human quality or achievement, they can be respectful only of other people who believe everything is relative! They will feel superior to all those they don't feel are 'open-minded'. But Christians cannot feel morally superior to relativists or moralists or anyone. The gospel approach to race. Racism is rooted in a failure to believe in grace. The gospel leads us to be somewhat critical of all cultures, including our own (since there is truth), yet we can feel morally superior to no one. After all, we

17

are saved by grace alone, and therefore a non-Christian neighbor may be more moral and wise than we are. This gives the Christian a radically different posture from either moralists or relativists. Case Study #2 - Suffering Moralistic persons have a major problem when suffering strikes them. Why? The whole point of moralism is to put God in one's debt. Moralistic people feel that God owes them a safe life because of their goodness. So when suffering hits us, the moralistic heart is forced to either feel terrific anger toward God (if you feel you have been living up to moral standards) or terrific anger toward yourself (if you feel you haven't been living up.) You will either think "I hate God" or "I hate myself" or you will swing back and forth between both poles. Relativistic persons are more likely to become bitter against life or God, since they don't feel they deserve troubles in life. The gospel approach to suffering is different. On the one hand the gospel humbles us out of being mad at God. Jesus, the very best person who ever lived suffered terribly. This demolishes the idea that good people should have good lives and bad people have bad lives. If God himself was willing to become involved in terrible suffering of life out of love--then we should not think ourselves exempt. On the other hand, the gospel affirms us out of feeling guilty or mad at ourselves. Jesus suffered and died for us, 'while we were yet sinners.' The trouble we are experiencing at the moment might be designed to 'wake us up', but it can't be a quid pro quo punishment for our sins. Jesus got the punishment for our sins. If we realize that we are accepted in Christ, then (and only then) will suffering humble us and strengthen us rather than embitter and weaken us. As others have said: Jesus suffered, not that we might not suffer, but that when we suffer we could become like him. So the gospel is the way that anything is renewed and transformed by Christ, whether a heart, a relationship, a church, or a community. It is the key to all doctrine and our view of our lives in this world. Therefore, all our problems come from a lack of orientation to the gospel. Put positively, the gospel transforms our hearts and thinking and approaches to absolutely everything.

18