:: In.a.Mirror.Dimly ::

When Should Christians Part Ways?

Yesterday I mentioned that in our family relationships we can usually figure out when we need some distance from relatives who hurt us. When we withdraw from one another for a season, our long-term goal is healing and restoration.

Sometimes we need to cut ourselves off from ongoing conflicts in order to heal and to gain some perspective that will help us sort things out in the future.

I believe that Christians, especially evangelicals may be at such a point.

In my own evangelical family, there is a lot of concern about the warring of progressive and conservative factions.

The conservatives fear the progressives aren’t committed to the Bible and are tossing aside ancient doctrines in favor of the cultural flavor of the day.

The progressives have been damaged by some of the misguided theology and practice of their conservative pasts, ask hard questions based on their study of scripture, and fear that evangelicalism will be defined by the narrow parameters of the “truly” Reformed camp. They fear that evangelicalism will lose it’s broad consensus that has historically included both Arminians and Calvinists.

Both sides wring hands, worry, and write blog posts about some looming threat or danger.

Will evangelicalism split? Will there be even more division in the church?

Lately I’ve noticed so many blog posts where Christians are worried about being condemned or judged or excommunicated by someone else. From what I can tell, the minute someone sets himself or herself over me as a judge, that person is irrelevant to me.

If the leaders of some convention, coalition, board, or generative friendship want to pass judgment on me, I really don’t care. I have a diverse group of friends, pastors, and colleagues that I trust to confront me if I step out of bounds.

If someone wants to play heresy detective by evaluating how I interpret the Bible’s teachings on salvation, hell, women in ministry, homosexuality, war, inerrancy, or politics and then issues some kind of decree that I’m out of the family, I have no trouble ignoring that person.

There are plenty of Christians out there who should be ignored.

And here’s the thing, if reading what I write upsets you, you can ignore me too. I won’t take it personally. To be honest, if college-age me met 30-something me, both of us would probably need a time out.

God can use all kinds of Christians to do a lot of great things. God could use fundamentalist me to accomplish his work, and he can use progressive me to accomplish his work. The cross and resurrection retain their power even if my answers to the Christian theology quiz have evolved.

For who I am, where I’m at, and what God is doing in me, sometimes I need to shut myself off from those who are too combative and can’t see beyond their own narrow limits for the faith. I’m sure that I exasperate others who need to do the same to me.

As I mentioned yesterday, we find in the New Testament Paul and Barnabas separating over John Mark, and even in the case of Peter and Paul, there’s an understanding that each was called to a different people group. Given the ethnic tensions found elsewhere in the New Testament between Jew and Greek and Peter’s own waffling on the Jew/Greek issue, I think it’s safe to presume they could have been agreeing to disagree.

Everyone was reconciled in the end, but they needed the perspective that only time could give.

Though I see parting ways as a last resort, there are times when I think it’s necessary. If the evangelical camp is a kind of diverse and sometimes dysfunctional family, I think we’re at a place where certain parties need to keep their distance from other parties—at least for now.

If someone says I’m not a real Christian, I’ll continue to pray with prisoners, share the Gospel daily, read scripture, and deliver food to the local soup kitchen. Whatever some conservative watchdog says, nothing really changes. I’ll continue following Jesus, regardless of what label is being stuck on me.

Faithfulness to Jesus is what matters, and that’s why we sometimes need to ignore criticism.

While growing up as a Catholic, faithfulness was generally defined as attending church, confessing regularly, and taking Communion. That was the bare minimum you had to meet in order to be considered a good Catholic. Some Catholics did more, some did less, and quite a few shared my take on things.

As a Protestant I added daily prayer and Bible reading to the list, kept weekly church attendance in the mix, and volunteered at church on a regular basis. Sometimes I’d participate in outreach or missions work, but that was more like a yearly trip.

I was praying one day back in college, and I had an uneasy feeling when I began to ask myself some tough questions such as, “Are you a faithful follower of Jesus?”

I thought to myself, “Of course, I pray and read the Bible.” But was that what Jesus had in mind for his disciples? I’ve been rethinking that question and my answer for the past eight years.

In Matthew 11:2-6 John the Baptist voiced his doubts about whether Jesus was the Messiah. He had expectations about what a Messiah is supposed to do, but Jesus didn’t meet them. We read the following exchange in Matthew:

“When John, who was in prison, heard about the deeds of the Messiah, he sent his disciples to ask him, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?”

Jesus replied, “Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor. Blessed is anyone who does not stumble on account of me.”

John’s question for Jesus is loaded with implications: Does God really care about all of the stuff you’re doing? Are you faithfully representing God?

Jesus redefines faithfulness for John. God cares about things John didn’t quite expect God to care about. Jesus could have pointed to the content of his teaching or his religious observances. He didn’t.

The work of Jesus among the poor, his healing works, and his act of proclaiming the Gospel marked a successful and faithful ministry. While we can agree that these were the marks of a Messiah, our next question is: What do these marks mean for us?

Where we are, and where we’re going… My theory at this point is that the same marks Jesus used to validate his ministry also apply to faithful discipleship—how we define faithfully following Jesus. We’ll look at some passages tomorrow that will help us figure out what all of this means for us.

Today we continue my Christian Survival Guide series focusing on the topic: Sharing the Gospel.

Why do we share the Gospel?

Last week I talked about our motivation for sharing the Gospel. In brief, Jesus commanded us, and we have experienced the love and freedom of Christ. However, there may be another reason driving us.

We also fear what may become of those who resist the love of God.

Hell can be a powerful motivator, driving us to tell everyone we know that they need to follow Jesus or risk missing out on the life he offers in this world and in the world to come.

Do our beliefs about hell shape how we share the Gospel?

Do our beliefs about hell make us more up-tight when sharing the Gospel? With so much at stake, especially if we believe that hell brings eternal, conscious torment, I think it’s very possible that the love of God can be lost in the process. We can turn into messengers who only warn of a coming flood with a message of how to find safety.

That does not mean we should ignore hell. The Bible makes it quite clear that there are consequences for rejecting the love of God. However, sharing the Gospel is more about whether or not we will be with God, not whether or not we will be eternally punished. The former is relational and consistent with a Messiah who calls us his friends and his children, while the latter is a transaction.

And then there’s another possible response to thinking of hell as eternal, conscious punishment. We may block out the negative images from our mind. Is it perhaps so terrible that we cannot deal with it? In other words, can our view of hell drive us to the point that we fail to think about it?

I personally have wrestled with this. I almost can’t bear to think of hell and what it could mean for anyone, let alone someone I know. Hell has been a terrible abyss that I’m afraid to stare into, to consider, to wonder if it really is so.

Will a less terrible picture stop us from sharing the Gospel? Are there any possibilities for hell beyond eternal, conscious torment?

Can we know what is hell really like? Does it matter for sharing the Gospel?

At the most basic level, hell means separation from God. I think hell essentially can begin on earth as we make choices to move away from God’s caring rule. Being outside the Kingdom of God, as depicted in the Gospels, is a place of weeping and regret.

For the sake of argument, I’m going to rule out Purgatory and Universalism. While I know that some Christians believe in them, I’d rather focus on the ones that I and the majority of my readers here are likely to find more plausible. The traditional view of hell says there will be fire, darkness, and torment for eternity. The metaphorical view of hell states that hell exists but the details of New Testament are viewed as metaphor and hyperbole. Lastly, the conditional view proposes a hell where those within it are annihilated.

Will there be torment, suffering, and fire? Are we reading the scriptures as intended? A plain, literal reading does not work for poetry, metaphors, and hyperbole, and if we are mistaking metaphors and hyperbole for hard facts, we could be misrepresenting God and his plans for humanity.

It has been my suspicion that a real hell exists, but that the majority of references to fire and eternal suffering range toward metaphor and hyperbole ( I don’t have time to get into all of the arguments, but I’ll post links to other resources below to follow up). Jesus often used this Rabbinic teaching method (eg. “cut out your eye”), and many of the references to hell occurred in parables and stories. In addition, keep in mind that the Old Testament doesn’t speak of hell all that often. The dead go to Sheol, though a few later books like Daniel and the end of Isaiah make references to hell, which makes sense since the Intertestamental books of the same period also began to mention hell.

All that to say, we should be very, very careful when speaking of hell and using it as a motivating force in our evangelism. I think it is quite accurate to warn people about being separated from the love of God, but telling others they risk eternal, conscious punishment in flames and darkness (which when you come to think about it, doesn’t go together) may stray from the point. Will there be suffering in a state of separation from God? I have no doubt about it. But focusing on the nature of it, pulls us off course.

God desires that all people will come to know him. If we have also shared in the life he offers, we have two very good reasons to tell others about the good things God has done for us and to live differently because of the impact he has had. The consequences of rejecting him offer a third reason, but we should carefully consider the way hell impacts our evangelism.

For further reading on hell, see:

Four Views on Hell

Two Views of Hell

Wikipedia on Hell

Religion Facts on Hell

Yesterday I kicked off my survival guide series on evangelism by addressing the anxiety it causes.

Now, before you have a panic attack with me, we should move on to some basic Christian principles that tie into evangelism. Let’s begin with a story about panic attacks, but panic attacks about something other than evangelism.

My friend Billy had a crush on a girl named Jenny from our college. After we’d graduated, he managed to keep in touch with Jenny and so whenever we hung out he’d turn into the Jenny newswire. He saw her at the store, she replied to his latest e-mail, and there was a slight chance she may actually talk to him on the phone before the next solar eclipse. If he managed to speak with her in person the residual anxiety seemed to make him dizzy.

And then one day Billy pulled off a coup. Under the banner of a “reunion,” he managed to convince Jenny to come over to his place for a party with a few friends who came in from out of town. He had all kinds of time to hang out with her, and those of us subscribed to the Jenny newswire made sure we kept the other guests entertained while the two of them caught up.

Billy didn’t need a lot of coercing to hang out with Jenny, to talk about Jenny, or to organize an event around Jenny. He was smitten with her, loopy beyond the bounds of reason, and willing to organize his day around her if he could spend more time with her. That’s what love can do to us.

It’s easy to talk about someone you love.

I love this story because I’ve had my own Julie newswire when I’m visiting friends and Julie isn’t there. Love prompts us to talk about the beloved. And that’s the most basic first step in evangelism: fall in love with God.

It’s actually not that hard to do if you think about it. The problem comes when we don’t think about it. Christianity is built upon the work of Christ, dying for us, rising from the dead, and sending his Spirit. As we embrace what these events mean for us today, we can worship him in gratitude and appreciate the selfless love he has given us.

Keep in mind that Jesus literally spilled his blood on our behalf. This is not just a mystical other-worldly reality. Nails and a spear were literally driven into his body, killing him. It was horrible, violent, and painful, and yet he was so head over heels in love with the people on earth, his treasured creation, that he suffered and then defeated death so that we could live with him.

That’s a love worthy of throwing a party.

Our next post will sort out some of the biblical teaching behind the way we share the Gospel.

Over the past weekend I had a chance to hear a variety of Christians speak about writing and our call to be ambassadors for Christ. For the most part I was encouraged by the sincerity, kindness, and insight shared among these believers.

However, at certain key points I heard speakers, some who spoke to large crowds, sharing a kind of counterfeit version of the Gospel that almost left me in tears. I’d like to address this matter, but I want to avoid words like “danger” or “threat” that just inject venom and anger into these discussions. I’d rather just say that I heard some sincere followers of Jesus clouding and possibly distorting the Gospel and particularly our motivations for sharing it.

I’ll spend the majority of my time focusing on my understanding of the biblical witness concerning what the Gospel does and why we should share it. I’ll end with a few words of caution about ways Christians have distorted these ideas.

What Does the Gospel Do?

The Gospel reconciles us with God. I think we can all agree on that. As we join others who share the same Spirit and relationship with God, we form the people known as the church. We have all been saved and sustained in the same way.

The Gospel makes us citizens of God’s Kingdom, which is the other worldly and this worldly place where his will is done. When we pray, “Your will be done, your Kingdom come,” we are asking God’s Kingdom to expand on earth as his will is done.

Why Should We Share It?

We share the Gospel because Jesus asked us to do so, because it is the way others can be saved, and because God intensely loves his creation and longs that all would come to know him. We don’t share the Gospel to preserve our churches, to ease our egos, or to give a soul fire insurance. We want others to know the joy and freedom that comes from knowing Jesus today, sharing in his sufferings, and moving toward eternal life with him.

What’s at Stake

In getting back to our problem of a distorted Gospel. I heard several speakers challenge the Christians present to preach the Gospel in order to preserve America’s Christian character and to prevent God’s judgment from falling upon us. One speaker made it clear that Democrats were to blame. Such teachings cloud the real reasons why we should share the Gospel and what it accomplishes.

I used to think that America was a Christian nation, so when I speak of Christians who operate from this assumption, I can identify as a former insider. The trouble is that the Kingdom of God cannot be affiliated with the agenda of any one nation since the Gospel is Good News for “all people” and “all nations” are blessed through Abraham.

In addition, classifying America as Christian at its founding raises serious historical questions since many founders were deists, slave owners, and generally greedy and corrupt. While some may have resembled evangelicals today, crediting good fortune to Providence—a common practice among the founders—did not make someone a Christian.

Christian sociologist Bradley Wright has also found that there is a much higher proportion of Christians in America today than during the Revolution. We could point at some places where Christianity impacted the founding of America, but calling America a Christian or godly nation from the start is a mistake that only white Americans could make. Our African American friends have much to teach us in this regard. America’s history is not a fall from grace spurred on by Democratic politicians. It’s more realistically a mix of high and low points.

Having said that, we should not ignore the possibility of God’s judgment. The Old Testament shows that time and time again God will judge a nation that neglects the poor, allows corruption, attacks its enemies without mercy, and concentrates wealth among the few to the detriment of the many. These are real, bi-partisan problems to consider in America.

Nevertheless, we should seek righteousness and preach the Gospel not as a means to preserve America or to keep America as a Christian nation. That turns the Gospel into a self-serving, political tool that unintentionally brands unbelievers and sometimes Democrats into religious terrorists who are calling down God’s judgment on America and only the true patriots will hold off destruction through their preaching.

In a sense, this kind of thinking turns the objects of God’s desire, those who do not know him, into enemies who are ruining our country and our place as the keepers of our country. Christians are servants who are called to follow Jesus and Jesus alone. Even allegiance to one’s country cannot be allowed to cloud the goals and motivations behind our calling.

I won’t say that such teachers are ruining Christianity or America, but they are distorting their Christian practice with political agendas and suspect history. As I stated in Coffeehouse Theology, an unexamined context can influence our theology and fool us into thinking that we are free from its influence.

Sadly, there are still some evangelicals who are failing to consider how American culture and particularly conservative politics are skewing their understanding of the Gospel and our mission as believers. They can be Christians who happen to be American patriots. That’s a different conversation. Our problems come when they create a Christian patriotism that uses the Gospel as a means of preserving America.

America is not the light on a hill. The light is Jesus shining through his people—a people that is not limited to those found in America.

My homiletics (preaching) professor trained me to make scripture easy to understand and to explain exactly what each passage means to my audience. While there is some value in biblical study and clear explanation for a group, we should not forget that Jesus didn’t always follow such a strategy.

Besides making difficult and challenging demands of his followers, Jesus made several confusing statements that left his audience wondering what he meant or even if he was possessed by a demon. As a result of these exchanges Jesus lost followers, received accusations, and was written off by many in his audience.

Many of his listeners stopped following when he claimed the following: I am the bread of life, my followers will never die, and you will see the Son of Man ascending and descending. He told parables with hidden and powerful meanings that cut to the hearts of some listeners and left others confused and bewildered.

Reaching an Audience

Jesus had a message from God to communicate, but he didn’t define success for his message by the size of his audience. It’s jarring to realize that Jesus could have probably grown a larger base of followers by toning down his message or explaining his theology better.

Perhaps we need to ponder this practice for ourselves as we consider the ways we teach and communicate spiritual truths. Are there times when we need to leave certain things unsaid so that our listeners are challenged to do their own thinking? Are we making it too easy to follow Jesus by always pressing for “the answer”?

The Benefits of Confusing Statements

Jesus left certain parts of of his message embedded in metaphors and parables so that his listeners had to ponder their meaning. I like the implication that understanding his teachings required dedicated time to think on them.

For disciples who are called to leave everything behind in order to follow Jesus, they shouldn’t be surprised when he also asks them to think long and hard about his teachings. John’s Gospel notes certain points (such as chapter 6) when the crowds balked at the words of Jesus. John, who often inserted explanations of what Jesus meant, didn’t offer an explanation for us either.

The author of the fourth Gospel knew that even as he recounted the life and teachings of Jesus, certain things should remain shrouded in mystery and ambiguity so that future disciples will ponder the teachings of Jesus anew and seek the guidance of his Holy Spirit.

This assaults are preferences for simple answers and clear explanations, but it assures us that the message of God can find a more lasting and permanent place in our hearts as we invest in pondering its meaning.

As the popularity of Jesus increased, so did the opposition of the Pharisees who set out to trap him and discredit his ministry. By resorting to a conflict over the observance of sacred traditions they thought they had a legitimate way to attack him.

Jesus disregarded the traditional practices of the Pharisees, opting instead to focus on the inner person and the problems that only God can fix. Anyone can wash a pot. God is not needed for that kind of religion.

For followers of Jesus there is an emphasis on the internally rooted sins such as pride, envy, lust, immorality, slander, and some of the more serious crimes such as murder. Physical regulations cannot stop these sins at their source in the heart, even if external rules can certainly do something to dam them up. In fact, the more the Pharisees moved away from the internal goals of the law, the more they missed out on the heart of God and the real power that can heal sin.

The Pharisees neglected the laws of God because they made their own doctrines on par with the law of God. Perhaps these laws began as well-meaning guides on the path to obedience, but over time they took on a power of their own and even threatened the greater commands from God. This passage is a reminder that we can associate our own traditions and practices too closely with real obedience to and love for God.

After so frustrating a confrontation, Jesus traveled to the Gentile region of Tyre and the Decapolis, respectively west and east of Jewish Galilee. While in Tyre Jesus tried to keep a low profile, but the news about him spread and a woman boldly sought him out in the home where he was staying.

We don’t know much about this woman. Did she have a husband or was she a widow? Did she come alone because no one else she knew believed in Jesus or wanted anything to do with this Jew? In addition, she didn’t bring her daughter with her, and we only read that she begged Jesus to drive out the demon, not that he should go with her to heal her daughter. What does this tell us about her faith?   

In one of the only times Jesus denied someone who wasn’t a religious leader testing him, Jesus told her that now was not the time for the Gentiles to enjoy God’s favor. That wasn’t to say that it couldn’t happen some day, but he told her that at the moment she was on the outside of God’s work.

The woman’s faith only grew stronger in the midst of this let down. She believed that the one who could feed thousands with bread surely had some crumbs to spare for her daughter. Unlike those who begged in other situations, this woman humbled herself and reasserted her belief that Jesus was not only willing but able to grant her request. When Jesus healed her daughter he showed that God honors faith wherever it may be found.

After leaving the Gentile region of Tyre, Jesus visited the Decapolis where people begged him to heal a deaf and mute man. People are still begging Jesus to heal. Evan after witnessing his miracles they struggle with doubt that he can do the same things for them.

Rather than show his miracle to the masses, Jesus pulled the man away to a private space and even commanded the healed man and the crowd to keep it a secret. However, they only spoke of him all the more because of their amazement at his mighty works.

Throughout the Gospels those starting from scratch, without religious expectations for Jesus, had a much easier time in accepting Jesus, while those with preconceived notions of a Messiah, religious practice, or theological perfection in  mind couldn’t see the big picture because of their obsession with the minor points of the law that had become inflated in importance. Perhaps the place to begin with Jesus is to first figure out his terms and to then sort out what matters from there.

Much like my previous series on the book of Romans, I’ll be starting a series of devotions and reflections on the Gospel of Mark. While I’m at it I’ll also stick up the occasional post on theology or Christian living.

I like Mark because he begins with a bang, jumping right into his declaration that his work covers the Good News about the Messiah and then wastes little time in introducing us to John and Jesus. Jesus emerges as a miracle worker and preacher who immediately runs afoul of the religious authorities, and isn’t afraid to use complex imagery that alienates some listeners while conveying his deeper truths to those who wrestle with his words.

Throughout the Gospel of Mark Jesus follows a course that his followers and opponents generally don’t expect or can’t quite explain. If we step back from our familiarity with Jesus and his ministry and try to insert ourselves into the world Mark describes we will find in Jesus a challenging and unexpected Savior.

If the people who witnessed Jesus’ miracles found him puzzling, with many rejecting him outright, then any reading of the Gospels should be uncomfortable at some levels, stirring up some tough issues, confusing us, and leaving us with difficult choices to make. Jesus offers us salvation, communion with God, and the freedom of discipleship, but that path has a cost and will become quite difficult at times.

As we enter into this brief Gospel that dives right into the ministry of Jesus and shows his various actions and teachings receiving a variety of responses, let us pray that this account of Jesus will push us and pull us in good ways, showing what we must leave behind, and how we can take active steps toward greater intimacy with Christ in our daily lives. 

Christians, especially evangelicals, should be concerned about Sarah Palin’s book that releases on November 17th. It’s not quite on par with the coming of the apocalypse or government-sponsored death panels, but I think we have real problem on our hands.

It doesn’t have to do with Sarah Palin the author.

I don’t begrudge Sarah Palin writing a best-selling book. Good for her. I hope it pays the college bills for her kids and helps her grandkid. I know I was really excited about the release of my book, and I’m sure Sarah Palin is too.

It doesn’t have to do with Sarah Palin the politician.

Folks who drink up politics will certainly find it an interesting read, and I have no issue with the book as a political work. Does Palin want to lambaste the McCain campaign staff? Go for it. Does she want to raise her profile before running for President in 2012? Huckabee may not be happy about that, but don’t worry about me.

Go for it Sarah. I have no qualms with that. It’s a free country made up of mavericky, real Americans who will love her book. Some don’t think she should run for public office, but I’m not going to debate that because I know as little about politics as she knows about the Sunnis and Shiites.

We should be concerned because Sarah Palin knows her only shot in an election is mobilizing the conservative evangelical base. If we think Christianity has been overly-politicized now, we should shudder at the thought of what Palin can do.

In addition, as Palin stakes her claim as a “Christian” politician, Christianity and evangelicals in particular will continue to be painted as right-wing political affinity groups. Lost in the mix is the Gospel, Jesus, and the Great Commission. Will those on the left, who need to hear the Gospel, believe that Jesus comes with a Palin 2012 bumper sticker?

Read Palin’s book. Campaign for her. Vote for her. That’s fine with me.

But we should be concerned that the effectiveness of the Gospel message will be blunted because it is being associated with the Republican party, and Palin may need to do that all the more to solidify her place. Christians may play right into this by holding her up as a model Christian, a standard bearer for evangelicals.

Let’s remember that some could hold up President Obama up as an ideal Christian as well. For those on the right, such a notion should help communicate the polarizing effect of upholding Palin as an evangelical leader.

A Suggested Way Forward

Whatever we think of Palin, Obama, and their Christian beliefs, let’s resolve to carefully select spokesmen and spokeswomen who aren’t politically polarizing and who are best known for their faithfulness to Jesus, the Messiah and Prince of Peace. We could pick those who have passed from this world or we could pick those still among us.

We could talk about Dorothy Day, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Wendell Berry, C. S. Lewis, Billy Graham, or any other model Christian who has a solid record of preaching the Gospel, serving others, and gracefully representing the cause of Christ. Christians cannot afford to let a politician represent us because politicians have to take sides. For those called to reach the whole world with the Gospel, that is a mistake we cannot afford to make.

When God called Richard Stearns to leave his corporate job in order to take over as president at World Vision, Stearns laid down in his bed, pulled the covers over his head, and wept like a baby. Nevertheless, Stearns answered God’s call, committed himself to the Lord’s work, and now shares how God has broken him.

It all began with him confronting what God expected of him.

Richard Stearns has done Christianity and humanity as a whole a tremendous service in writing The Hole in Our Gospel. With personal stories, biblical reflection, and the powerful insights he has gained in the field, Stearns pulls the church out of its bubble in order to show it the needs of the world, the heart and calling of God, and some action steps.

Stearns deftly presents the things that break God’s heart without ragging on American Christians. Stories, scripture, and statistics are the currency that he hopes will change the investments of the church today.

The book works because Stearns is frank and honest about his personal story. Before World Vision, Stearns was in many ways the model US believer. When the call came to World Vision, he fought against it, wanting to hang on to his place at the top.

Once president of World Vision, God dug deeper into his life, challenging him to give more and more. Stearns helps readers deal with their own desires and weaknesses when it comes to global poverty because he’s done the very same thing himself.

After reading Brian McLaren’s Everything Must Change, I could easily notice some striking similarities between Stearns and McLaren. Both believe in directing greater resources to fighting poverty, in applying scripture to the crises of today, and in the connection between addressing poverty and spreading the Gospel. Stearns rightly argues that a church up to its elbows in caring for the least of these commands attention and offers a compelling case for the Gospel.

Stearns is a bit less confrontational though, and his biblical interpretation would fly in just about any church—unlike McLaren’s flirtation with liberal theology in a post-conservative context that sends some hearts aflutter.

In many ways, this is a book that every Christian should read. If you’ve read Everything Must Change and hesitate to recommend to a conservative friend, Stearns is just the guy to read in his stead.

This is isn’t the kind of book with glaring flaws or major weaknesses. If anything, the book does stray toward the long end of things with several sections that don’t seem necessary. Nevertheless, Stearns has written a book that is not only needed, but effective. No one will be quite the same after reading it.

Once you ask what God expects of you, how can you not be the same?

For Additional Information:

Videos about The Hole in Our Gospel including Willow Creek’s Bill Hybels interviewing Rich Stearns

Amazon.com Product Page

Author’s Note: This book was reviewed as part of the Thomas Nelson Blogger Review program.