CDM Archive

Discipleship Ministries of the PCA

Charles

Truth In All Its Glory: Commending the Reformed Faith

by

Here is a book that I hesitate to review. Why? Because in the limited space available I fear I will not do justice to its importance. I have challenged the author, William Edgar, to develop a leader’s guide that will encourage local church teachers and preachers to use this book.

Truth In All Its Glory, Commending the Reformed Faith is a fantastic book that really does what the title communicates. I would like to go through the book summarizing each chapter; however, I will forgo that desire and simply tell you why I think this is an important and strategic book.

For those of us who are Reformed in our understanding of Christianity, we love to be known as Reformed. However, for many who do not understand the Reformed faith, it has received some bad press through the years, some of which has been justified both by the way it was communicated and by the way it has been applied.

The Reformed faith is a system that is life-oriented. It is a system built upon the truth of God’s revelation set forth in the Scriptures. It does not embrace legalism or moralism. While believing strongly in total depravity of man’s sinful nature, it also believes in God’s ability to change peoples’ lives and to do so in a way that impacts the world around us.

Edgar does an outstanding job of showing the Reformed faith in its fullest and most glorious expression of biblical Christianity. He tells of his “conversion” to his movement into the Reformed faith, not too different from mine, hence I easily identified with his pilgrimage.

At first you think you are reading the best history book on the development of the Reformed faith as you read about the history and origins of Reformation theology. As one good example, Edgar writes, “Depravity is total in that every part of our being, from the body to the mind, is sinful. We are saved neither by light of nature nor by the law of God but only because of the “glad tidings concerning the Messiah.” Edgar highlights the central doctrines and themes of Reformed theology that communicates both to those in leadership roles as well as the average person in the pew.

This book could be used to prepare an officer in the church and to help us understand who we are in the Reformed faith. It is effectively and winsomely written. It is life-oriented because Edgar has a good grasp of our world and age and how the truths of the Reformed faith touch all areas of life. While definitely understanding and appreciating things like the five points of Calvinism, known as TULIP, Edgar is quick to point out that the Reformed faith is far more comprehensive than those five doctrines. He gives special attention to the doctrines relating to salvation and their application throughout the three parts of the book.

Having spent a good part of his life both in France and Switzerland, he demonstrates not only a grasp of different cultures, but also how to communicate his case from a worldview perspective while maintaining his commitment to the Reformed faith and the Presbyterian form of church government.

You will particularly be challenged to see how the Reformed faith is to be played out in our world. Part three is entitled “Living Reformed Theology” and underscores the ultimate purpose of the Reformed faith is spiritual and practical in nature, not merely academic in tone. A much needed theme for today stresses the importance of the church in the Reformed faith. “We have stressed that according to the Reformed faith, walking with the Lord is not only individual but also communal…Accordingly, the church is the fellowship of all those who are called to live in covenant communion with the Lord.”

You will appreciate his comments on the church in a section called “Ardor and Order.” There he deals with form and function of the church and he does not dodge the difficult topic of leadership and gender. He explains the church’s purpose is threefold-worship, edification, and missions.

My favorite part of the book is the final chapter, “All the Glory of God.” In this chapter Edgar puts everything together starting with creation, the fall, and then redemption. He writes about the church and kingdom and its mandates culturally, preaching and teaching the doctrines, and administering the sacraments. In this final chapter he gives a neat and concise summary of God’s Ten Commandments.

Throughout the book and especially at the conclusion, he makes it clear that while the Reformed faith is God’s system of truth revealed in his Word, there is more work to be done in the key areas of theology. He mentions three areas in need of change: interpreting Scripture, relating union with Christ to other doctrines, and developing the doctrine of the Trinity. And those must not be done in isolation from the non-western countries especially Africa, Japan, and China. Nor must we do our theology in a cultural vacuum. For, to paraphrase Abraham Kuyper, all of life is under the sovereignty of God and that is the heart of the Reformed faith.

Praying Backwards: Transform Your Prayer Life by Beginning in Jesus Name

by

One of the most strategic things a Christian can do is to pray. Prayer has been referred to as a Christian’s lifeblood. It is hard to be a growing Christian without an active prayer life; however, to grow properly, the early disciples are not the only ones who needed to know how to pray.

I have read many books on prayer over the years and found much help in most of them, especially the reminder to pray and to pray correctly. While it is true that God knows our hearts, even when we do not articulate our prayers in the best way, and he reads our hearts as the primary indicator of our sincerity in prayer, we need to know how to pray in the right way.

To underscore this point Bryan Chapell suggests that the best way to keep our priorities straight in prayer, rather than end in the customary, “in Jesus name” is to start with that phrase to emphasize the importance of reordering our priorities in prayer. Properly done, prayer is a key reminder that it is not about us but about God. It is so easy to start with ourselves, our needs, and requests only to be discouraged and lose heart. Starting with God, however, sets our minds on the truth that God is who he says he is and will do what he says he will do.

Chapell develops this novel approach, though it is not really novel to all, to help us think through the whole exercise of prayer and how we enter into it. His opening question, “How would your prayer change if you began where you normally end?” Throughout the ten chapters and conclusion, Chapell, in his easily readable style, unwraps and answers this question. His main thesis is praying backwards will help us reorder our priorities and keep the focus on God. I begin by praying this prayer for Jesus sake, says Chapell, will make our prayers less self-oriented and more Christ directed, more blessed and more satisfying to our hearts. It is something like following Jesus instruction “to seek first his kingdom…” which will cause us to focus on God and His kingdom. That has a way of changing, tweaking, or readjusting our priorities in all of life, including our prayers.

Given my definition of a kingdom disciple, as one who thinks God’s thoughts after him and applies them to all of life, I appreciated his emphasis and reminder that “In biblical prayer, we think God’s thoughts after him.”

This book is challenging, practical, and able to assist you in thinking more intentionally about prayer. We discussed several of the chapters in our CEP staff devotions and benefited greatly from the studies.

Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church

by

This is a sequel to the last issue’s “In Case You’re Asked” which responded to a question regarding the church’s role and relation to culture. It was built around the review of Reclaiming the Center, Confronting Evangelical Accommodation in Postmodern Times. D. A. Carson wrote one of the chapters in that book which was the forerunner of the book reviewed here.

Our desire is to challenge and encourage Christians in leadership to know some of the issues in the church world. For example, one pastor of a sizeable church recently asked me, “What is this emerging church topic that I am beginning to hear about?” The reason for using this section of Equip for Ministry to review both books is because we have to carefully watch for the pendulum swing scenario. There are some good and valid things those within the emerging church movement are saying, and we need to hear and respond. However, as far as a paradigm, like postmodernism, there is so much missing that will make it a hollow movement and the younger generation, to whom it is trying to appeal, will question its value.

The analysis in Carson’s book on how ministry to postmodern generations is being reshaped is very important. Many involved in this movement are raising some legitimate issues that church leaders should address. After all, there is nothing particularly sacred about how ministry was been done in the past, except where God’s regulative principles apply. Although we cannot completely ignore the cultural influence and even legitimacy up to a point, we must have a solidly biblical theological base for how we do ministry today.

As readers of Equip for Ministry are aware, I have regularly challenged you to read that would fall into the “emerging” category, but to read carefully with much discernment. The concern is that, while the authors raise some good questions, they may have crossed the boundary and allowed things to be determined more by people than by the Word of God. That shows up in many areas, worship style being one, how the Gospel is presented could be another, and which parts of Scripture are used and which are not used still another.

We must be very intentional in creating a feeling of belonging among God’s covenant people. However, we must not mistakenly believe that we can “belong” before we can ‘become”. It is out of being a Christian, a covenant person, that real belonging has meaning. One clear example of this in our biblically Reformed circles is how we observe the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. You have to “become” or be a professing Christian before you can “belong” at the Lord’s Table; hence our PCA Book of Church Order, like other Reformed documents, sets forth a “fencing” of the Lord’s Table. That Supper is for believers only.

While I have appreciation for those concerned with reaching today’s generations, I also hope that we reach them in a manner which will result in making kingdom disciples. We continually face the exciting but dangerous swing of the pendulum, but our tendency is to move beyond the balance and throw out the baby with the bath water. We would do well to remember, “The medium is (or can become) the message.”

Carson has done a tremendous service to the church in this book. I appreciated his insights and sensitive spirit. He has unique ability to show appreciation for those identified with the emerging church wave while at the same time looking beyond the present and seeking the long-term results of this approach? Being people of the kingdom, we cannot only live with a focus on the present moment because we know there is a final consummation. What happens today can have significant impact on what happens later. There are more and better things to come, as the writer of Hebrews reminds us.

Carson begins by showing how the emerging church actually began as a protest against three aspects of the church. Of course we are not unfamiliar with protest. We are “protestant” Christians. (I would much prefer to be called affirming Christians than protesting Christians, but we cannot rewrite history.) The three protests identified by Carson are: protest against traditional evangelicalism, protest against modernism and protest against the seeker sensitive church approach. One of the ways that this begins to work itself out in the church is that rather than centering on the Word, attention is given to visuals, symbols, incense, candles, etc. While it is true that the sermon is not the only thing involved in worship, everything must have a basis in the Word, if it is to be acceptable worship.

Carson points out how many traditional words like “gospel” and “Armageddon” must be deconstructed and redefined, which is a clear emphasis of postmodern philosophy. The tendency is making one’s preaching and teaching, as well as the entire worship, anthropocentric vs. theocentric. Leonard Sweet’s name frequently surfaces in connection with this movement. He says while warning against embracing postmodern worldview, the church must focus on four things: experiential, participatory, image-driven and connected (EPIC). Carson develops this critique early on the book.

In attempting to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the emerging emphasis, he maintains that while not everything about it is wrong, he does say, “the emerging church must be evaluated as to its reading of contemporary culture.” Most of it, says Carson, is tightly tied to an understanding growing out of postmodernism. This is an important point because postmodernists tend to have a wrong view of God. If that is off base then we will have a faulty view of culture, as well as who we are. (See Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book One, Chapter One, paragraph one).

A second point that Carson makes is that appeals to Scripture within the emerging church is usually of two kinds: One kind claims that changing times require that we not ask and answer the same questions dealt with during the modernistic period. Often, though not always, the movement tends to mock everything related to modernism with “stinging terms,” as being totally out of date. Yet Carson is quick to point out a second claim that is not guilty of this mockery of modernity.

Carson suggests that as the movement forges ahead, it must be evaluated for its biblical fidelity. It is easy to become so immersed into the culture that the church risks a “hopeless compromise” of its message. That is similar to Os Guinness’s comments that a church can become so focused on being relevant that it becomes irrelevant. This happens when it tries so hard to dwell on the present and move forward from there, while forgetting to start with the basic foundation.

Carson does not challenge the sincerity of the people involved in the emerging church. He goes to great lengths to highlight what he sees as their strengths. But he does not hesitate to demonstrate how their attempt to analysis and understand the present contemporary culture concludes. There is an obvious weakness of being so critical of modernism and what has gone before that understanding of the present is flawed. This leads to challenging absolutes by the replacing them with perspectives. Like postmodernism in general, the movement has the tendency to de-emphasis objective truth and exalt subjectivity, one’s perspectives about issues.

Carson also takes the time to evaluate what he calls two significant books identified with the movement. One is The Lost Message of Jesus, by Steve Chalke and another is Brian McLaren’s Generous Orthodoxy. Reading McLaren’s subtitle will give you an idea of the need to be exceedingly careful and biblical in ministry-“Why I am a missional, evangelical, post/Protestant, liberal/conservative, mystical/poetic, biblical, charismatic/contemplative, fundamentalist/Calvinist, Anabaptist/Anglican, Methodist, Catholic, green, incarnational, depressed-yet-hopeful, emergent, unfinished Christian.”

One other criticism that Carson makes which should be given particular attention, along with whether or not they really understand today’s culture, is how the emergents tend to use, abuse and misuse church history. One example among many is the protest against traditional evangelism and its failure to emphasize experience. Carson asks about their knowledge of church history with the revival movements and the great awakenings. Though modernism did tend to produce a rationalistic, logical, scientific paradigm, experience was always part of the Christian life. His treatment of 2 Peter 1 is extremely helpful at this point.

I share Carson’s overall conclusion: While not everything connected with modernism is to be discarded, while postmodernism has some valid criticisms of that movement, while there are things we should learn from postmodernists, and while we should read at least some of the emerging church spokesman (such as McLaren, Dan Kimball, Brad Kallenberg, and Nancy Murphy), we should be careful not to buy into a postmodern paradigm for the church. The danger is that it will take us away from God and his truth set forth in Scripture. While stories are valuable and helpful means of communicating with the postmodern generations, those stories must be tied to the grand story of Christ’s redemption and restoration. Even our own personal stories, which loom high in the emerging church style, have no real significance unless they are seen as part of God’s overall redemptive drama.

While we must walk a tight rope, even a razor’s edge, in understanding the Word and the world, and while the church must know how to preach and teach the Gospel of the Kingdom to today’s world, we must not, intentionally or unintentionally, rewrite the message. One way to accomplish that, along with serious study of the Word and reliance upon the Holy Spirit’s work in our lives to understand the Word, is to have honest and fair dialogue with one another. Carson’s book will give us a basis for such a dialogue.

Pastors should read this book. Church leaders should study this book and know what is happening today. Individual Christians also need to understand what is happening in the world and in the church world and have some encourage to be discerning and careful with God’s Word.

Soul Searching, the Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers

by

This is a strategic book. If I could, I would send a copy to every teaching elder in the PCA. It so clearly explains one of the main reasons why I wrote Making Kingdom Disciples, A New Framework. Robert Wuthnow of Princeton University describes Soul Searching as extremely important and “the most ambitious study ever conducted among American teenagers about their religious and spiritual lives.” Donald E. Miller says, “this book is a landmark study of the religious attitudes and practices of American teenagers.”

Christian Smith, Professor of Sociology at University of North Carolina, is one of the rising stars in the field of academia and he is also connected with the PCA. His earlier books have demonstrated his expertise as a respected scholar, researcher and Christian.

Earlier this year we reviewed the book Hurt by Chap Clark, which was an assessment of many studies and conclusions about the rising generation. Early in 2004 we reviewed a book by George Barna, Transforming Children Into Spiritual Champions. They basically concur in their conclusions. We are failing the rising generation, at least within the church. This book by Smith, representing four years of research, study and evaluation of teenagers between ages thirteen and seventeen over a four year period, funded by the Lilly Foundation, not only verifies the earlier books but adds another dimension.

Soul Searching deals with the place of religion in the life of the teenager. Of the 3,350 teenagers studied from across the country, they found that teenagers were not anti-religious nor did they have to be taken to church against their will. During the teen years, they were interested in religion but not too much of it. They believe in a creator God. They also believe that God is there to help in time of crisis but does not get involved in their day-to-day lives. They believe in right and wrong but do not know how to make that determination.

They found that the people having the greatest influence and impact in the teenagers’ lives were their parents. Teens generally copied the lifestyle of their parents. That was a second nuance of importance, along with their interest in religion. When asked where they learned their faith and the things they believe, teenager after teenager said, “from my parents.” Some even mentioned the influence of the church in their lives.

The study included the following statistics, “three quarters of U. S. teens between 13-17 years old are Christians…about half Protestant and one-fourth are Catholic.” “Christianity, in other words, still very much dominates American religion numerically at the level of teenage affiliation.” The study even revealed, “many nonreligious U. S. teens believe in God, attend church, and pray.” Another interesting finding was that most teenagers do not mix or match their religion, that is they affiliate with one religion or no religion.

They found that among the different groups studied, Mormons were most likely to hold to the religious beliefs of their parents with conservative Protestants second, followed by mainline Protestant Catholics and black Protestant teens. Jewish teenagers ranked fifth though a majority do “lean strongly toward their parents.” This means, says Smith, contrary to much opinion, teenagers are not flocking in droves to alternative religions, though some are moving towards paganism and Wicca. Presently Muslim teens represent one-half of one percent of U. S. teens and Buddhists less that one-third of one percent.

As you read Soul Searching you begin to get a good feeling about teenagers and start making some course corrections in your understanding of teens and their religious attitudes; that is until you hear Smith’s conclusion. Even with all the data about teens and religion, Christianity and the church, the bottom line is Smith describes them as moralistic, therapeutic Deists. They believe in God but not a God who has much to do with their daily lives; however, he is there in time of great need, or a crisis. They also believe in the idea of right and wrong but are not always clear as how to determine the difference. They believe that God wants them to live good lives because good people are happy and go to heaven.

If you asked Smith where teens get this moralistic, therapeutic deism he would quickly remind you that his study reveales that the parents were the greatest influence in their life. They have taught this to their children. They want them to be religious because those teens interested in religion are less likely to get involved in drugs and other destructive things and they do better in school.

As I read this challenging book, I immediately thought of Barna’s and Clark’s books mentioned above. Barna said parents are not helping their children develop a biblical worldview and the church is not helping the parents know how to do that. Clark says similar things about the parents, who according to the younger generation are abandoning them in the sense of not helping them to know how to understand life and reality. Of course they are giving their children the best of others things but are not taking the time to help them have a biblical framework for life. So many say that their parents are leaving those things up to teens and not trying to push them in the area of religion.

Smith states that the church is one of the few remaining social institutions in which adolescents participate together with fellow believers of all ages and life stages. This gives the church a great opportunity to disciple young people. However, if moralistic, therapeutic deist is an accurate description of today’s teens, then we have to conclude with Barna that both the church and the home are not shaping the solid biblical foundations for the youth.

Smith says in conclusion this book is intended to be “among other things, a stimulus for soul-searching conversations among adults in various communities and organizations about the place and importance of adolescents in our lives and, in particular, the significance of the religious and spiritual lives of teenagers today.” He further concludes, “To provide a bit of initial input to those discussions, in this brief unscientific postscript we step out of our normal sociological roles-with more than a little trepidation-to try to imagine some of the book’s possible prescriptive implications for communities of faith. To be perfectly clear about our purpose here; we are academic sociologists, not religious ministry consultants or promoters. Nevertheless, detailed knowledge and understanding of the social world often raises real questions about cultural and institutional practices and commitments that can make real differences in people’s lives.”

Need we say more? Let this book challenge you as parents and church leaders to evaluation what you are teaching the rising generation. More importantly, let it challenge you to examine your beliefs and practices and the teaching of the church.

Talking About Good and Bad Without Getting Ugly, A Guide to Moral Persuasion

by

Unless you have been a Rip Van Winkle, you know that we are living in an extremely complex culture, particularly in western North American culture. Our society is dominated by the ideology of pluralism and beliefs that “ideas do have consequences.” There have never been more choices on the religion assembly line. In the U.S. there are more than 150 organized religions. When we add all kinds of other religious groups or movements, the number mushrooms even higher.

Paul Chamberlain, a teacher of apologetics and ethics at Trinity Western University, is well aware of this dynamic. He understands that we are being pressured more and more to keep our religion to ourselves and not attempt to impose it on others, to buy into the idea that one religion is as good as the next and no one actually exclusively represents the truth. Chamberlain correctly assesses that bringing up either religion or politics in public is a risky business – in most cases we are told that it is simply not politically correct. It may suggest that I am right and you are wrong and that conclusion does not win friends. We simply have to learn to be tolerant of other people’s views.

You’ve heard that statement, “We simply have to learn to be tolerant of other people’s views,” however, tolerance is a concept that has undergone much transition today. Early on tolerance represented the idea that though you differ with me, I am willing to tolerate your ideas. And, although you may tolerate one another’s differing ideas, it was acceptable to attempt to persuade them to your side. Today, to be tolerant and remain politically correct has come to mean that I cannot assume that you are wrong and I am right – we simply have different views and I must approve your views regardless of whether they are right or wrong.

Chamberlain uses a dialogue between “Michael” and “Isaac” throughout the book. Isaac represents a new member of a university fraternity house, a traditionalist, and a moral thinker. Michael is seasoned member of the fraternity and speaks with Isaac on the day following 9/11. Michael challenges Isaac to reconsider whether good and evil are real categories and, if they are, are they merely determined by one’s culture? Maybe morality is simply a personal matter, which if so, should not be assumed to apply to others universally. Then there is the question about God. And what about evil? Is there a universal concept of God or evil?

Chamberlain demonstrates there are those who insist on being “politically correct” and tolerant, who believe there are no universal concepts applicable to all – except for one qualification. The one universal absolute that does transcend cultures, individuals and societies is that “tolerance is the supreme moral virtue.” That is true for everyone. It is a bit like the relativist insisting there are not absolutes except that there are no absolutes. Michael challenges Isaac’s right to impose his moral values on others. Isaac responds with the certain need for a point of reference, which Michael challenges.

Chamberlain expands this idea to talk about how new technological developments have brought great dilemma to the scene. If the definition of tolerance and political correctness are in vogue, then who’s to say that embryonic stem cell research is wrong, or euthanasia or abortion? On what basis can we say that lethal injection is wrong to end a person’s suffering? Therefore, Chamberlain says that our society is morally confused. With all the conflicting viewpoints, how can we reach real conclusions about these or any other topics?

Throughout this book, as issues are raised and Isaac is challenged to rethink his traditional moral approach to things, one begins to feel a sense of frustration, even hopelessness, to be quiet and live our lives, hold our beliefs and allow others to do the same. However, Chamberlain believes that it is possible for us to make a difference in this moral morass. The final chapter has several suggestions that we can apply in an attempt to challenge a person’s moral values while respecting their right to hold to them. He uses examples from history to point to people who have stood firmly in their beliefs and made a great difference. To do so does requires “careful strategy”.

The bottom line is that we should not hesitate, if we are well-informed and aware that we cannot force our views on others, to be social activists, fighting for what we believe to be right and not capitulating to those views that we believe are wrong and destructive. Adults should read this book. Students should carefully read it, and study groups can benefit from working through the eight chapters.

About the Church and Culture

by

I was asked recently, “What role does culture play in determining the church’s ministry?” That is a good question, especially when there are so many different ideas and responses regarding it. I would like to build my response around a review and recommendation of Reclaiming the Center, Confronting Evangelical Accommodations in Postmodern Times, by Millard Erickson, Paul Kjoss Helseth, and Justin Taylor.

I want my response not be read as pro or con, but as a challenge to move carefully and cautiously, following Scripture and developing a biblically sound theology to guide us. We need to dialogue with one another and work through some of these murky waters together. We have much to learn and much to teach as leaders in Christ’s church.

Consider a statement made by George Marsden in his book, Evangelicalism and Modern America. He said, “Sometimes the price that we have to pay for popularity is an adjustment of the message to what the audience wants to hear.” At a recent major youth conference, one of the speakers suggested that one’s goal is not to “preach the Word” but rather to engage the audience. I often use a statement by Cornelius Plantinga to emphasize the need to understand our world: “Suppose we get close enough to secular culture to understand it, to witness to it, to try in some ways to reform it. How do we keep from being seduced by it?”

In a historical perspective, the Church has always struggled to communicate to the people in understandable terms. Especially since the days leading up to and into the Protestant Reformation, communicating with the people has been one of the Church’s goals. By the time the Westminster Divines wrote the Westminster Confession of Faith, the emphasis was definitely on making the Word available in the “vulgar” everyday street language of the people (WCF 1:8). The Divines addressed the need for both the educated and uneducated to be able to read, understand, and apply the Scriptures. They understood well that you couldn’t address people in a cultural vacuum. They also were aware of the impossibility of completely divorcing oneself from this enculturation.

You can observe this in 17th and 18th century theology. At that time the, cultural context was basically determined by Enlightenment philosophy or modernism, as we call it today. That was a paradigm that replaced revelation, supernatural religion, faith, and understanding, with reason, logic and natural religion. Much of the “reformed theology” of that time was done in that context. Hence, many of the theologians were under the influence of Scottish Realism, which attributed man with certain foundational knowledge that he knew with his own mind. Revelation did not play a major role in giving him those foundational “truths.” They simply bought into the language and philosophy of the culture and did their theology in that context. Nancy Pearcey in her book, Total Truth (reviewed in the January/February Equip) sugested that one of the main reasons Western Christianity so completely embraced the philosophy of dualism was because the church failed to develop a consistent language to express their theology but rather borrowed language from the world.

Part of the philosophy of Christian Education and Publications’ training and resources ministry is not only to challenge the church but also to provide tools that will help it understand the Word and the world. David Wells has said, “Not only must evangelicals be trained to understand the context of God’s revelation, but they also should expend some comparable effort to understand the culture they propose to address…. An evangelical theology must involve serious study of one’s culture and its history.”

How can we minister to people in a particular context that reflects an understanding of the culture without changing the message? How much does the way we attempt to communicate truth and the Gospel betray the very message we are attempting to communicate? Marsden raised this question: “Will our attempt to communicate the Gospel truth be done deliberately and controlled or will it be done haphazardly and unconscious of what we are doing?”

As we deal this issue, we walk a tightrope. We can genuinely attempt to communicate God’s truth in a way that takes those universal or absolutes, which mainly, but not totally, transcends one’s culture, or we can carelessly communicate in a manner that relativizes those truths.

How we communicate, even how we worship, must reflect a cultural sensitivity. However, ultimately, our message and worship cannot be audience determined. How we frame “the message” in a particular cultural context is another matter. It is one thing to have an understanding of the audience, which is a must if we are to communicate. It is another to merely accommodate our message or worship to their wishes, desires, or wants. James D. Hunter has written about how evangelicals learned to market their message, insinuating that the message became audience driven. When that happens discipleship is reduced to formulas and checklists. Communicating the Gospel becomes driven by organization and technique. Hunter further indicates that one of the most significant changes that has taken place in evangelicalism is the shift from objective to subjective truth. His research among college and seminary students indicates that we will see even greater accommodation to modernity. The church is cautioned to watch and not to be squeezed into the world’s mold (Rom 12:1,2).

Evangelicalism has always attempted to adjust to its culture. Though there have been different nuisances within that movement, there has been basic agreement on the Bible and Gospel. There has also been much variation in how the Bible and Gospel are communicated but without accommodating to the world’s ways.

One thing is certain; we cannot influence the world by being like the world. We cannot be both in the world and like the world and accomplish any lasting purpose. Within Christianity, especially within the North American church, there has been cultural sensitivity and a genuine desire to reach today’s audience. Reclaiming the Center raises the warning that what may appear to be positive may in fact be accommodating to the point of changing the message. Whether they are called post-conservatives, younger evangelicals, post-fundamentalists, or the emerging church matters not. Labels do not always communicate what they are intended to. Some who would be identified by those labels may not be intending to change or alter the message of the Gospel, but in fact may be doing just that. I wish every pastor, teacher, leader would read this book, especially the chapters by Justin Taylor, D. A. Carson, Douglas Groothuis, J. P. Moreland and Garrett De Weese, and Millard Erickson. Carson’s analysis of Grenz’s writings are most helpful and challenging. Groothuis’s chapter on truth is basic and essential. James Parker’s chapter on the Requiem for Postmodernism, and Moreland and DeWeese’s chapter on foundationalism are highlights in the book. The other supporting chapters add their helpful thoughts.

The title of Erickson’s chapter, “Flying in Theological Fog,” reflects a deep concern in today’s postmodern world. Along with the writers, I wonder if we are flying in a fog and are lacking in the instruments needed to land safely. The new conservatives or younger evangelicals may not be trained to fly in this foggy culture and they may spin out, fly into the ground and die. Erickson and Carson express great concern that some of the newer evangelicals may lack, or at least fail to demonstrate, the historic understanding or perspective to see the implication of their theology. It is one thing to learn about culture and its ideologies. It is another to embrace and adapt them a message that will be altered by them. What we believe must be based on God’s revelation. Therefore, we must have a solid doctrinal foundation that requires carefully choosing our means of expression.

The obvious message is that we cannot accommodate our culture by developing postmodern churches, but rather build biblical sound churches to minister to a postmodern world. Or, to put it in terms of the book, our theology is determined by God’s objective truth, not by the community’s reflection of its beliefs. Objective truth determines the norms and boundaries of the community.

If you have not caught it, Reclaiming the Center, is not only a response to evangelical accommodation, but to the book Renewing the Center, by the late Stanley J. Grenz. Whether you would find yourself in complete agreement with the writers or not, it is important to understand what they are saying about this topic. I think there is much at stake here.

Reclaiming the Center reminded me of the need to be discerning, to understand philosophical thought and development, and to be doctrinally sound. Obviously, many involved in this “new evangelicalism” or “emerging church” have a genuine desire to reach today’s people. Without careful consideration, however, the message intended may not be the message received. It may even conflict with God’s message. Erickson’s closing statement expresses my challenge,

“Our aim is not to tie ourselves too closely to any given cultural situation, but to be prepared to contextualize the message in such a way as to make it more easily understood by our contemporaries. The exact course of evangelical doctrinal formulation is unknown, but we have suggested in this chapter (and this book) some instruments that will help plot the course.”