All Comments for: An Open-Handed Gospel | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2008 > April

Christianity Today, April, 2008 |

CHRISTIAN VISION PROJECT

An Open-Handed Gospel

We have to decide whether we have a stingy or a generous God.

Richard J. Mouw | posted 4/03/2008 09:14AM

Christians have not always been at their best when encountering serious believers from other religions, but Fuller Theological Seminary President Richard J. Mouw is a notable evangelical exception. In ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 comments.

Page: 1

Show All

Gregory Strong

Posted: April 09, 2008 10:28 AM

Thank you, Dr. Mouw, for this fine reflection, which is both theological and pastoral at once. In my own context, I have spoken and taught often of the need, in my own life and in the Church, for "passionate conviction with an equal humility." I believe this corresponds closely with what Dr. Mouw urges. It is a posture of being into which I and all of us in the Church should pray and strive to grow more and more.

Joe Chan

Posted: April 08, 2008 3:59 PM

I find the title of the article "arrogant". As creatures, we have no right to decide whether God is generous or stingy. God is who He is. Let us not try to create God in our liking or to make it appealing to human beings. He has revealed His nature and His plan of salvation to us in the Scriptures. Let us stop criticizing one another and focus on proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Savior and Lord.

so_free_me

Posted: April 07, 2008 8:16 AM

**And the truth is that we evangelicals often give the impression that we have decided to be a spiritually stingy people.** Sorry, this is rubbish. I refuse to waste my time trying to change others' false impressions of me. It is ONLY an impression, not the truth! No real evangelical believes that God is stingy; the problem is that of the ones doing the perceiving. I am not going to run around trying to point out how open minded I am in the false hope that it would make one bit of difference. The stereotype of the stingy evangelical actually gets reinforced when people like Mouw continue to wail and moan and tell us how bad we are. Sorry, I and all my evangelical friends give God's grace to anyone, absolutely anyone who comes our way. If someone wants to see me as a stereotype instead of for who I am, that is his problem, not mine.

Ephrem Hagos

Posted: April 05, 2008 12:12 PM

What would Christians say if they come across the unadulterated, deep mystery and power of the cross of Christ in the pages of the Holy Quran (Surah IV, 157-159) in common with what is wholly ignored in the pages of the Gospels and the Epistles? The judgement would surely fall right on the shoulders of all post-Apostolic Christians for having corrupted completely the Gospel of Christ! Let us remember that no one else except Jesus Christ is responsbile for opening and closing the doors to all the hidden treasures of God's wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2:3; Rev. 3:7). We cannot afford to have less than "an open-handed Gospel"because God works in mysterious ways!

Joe Chip

Posted: April 04, 2008 2:09 PM

Bravo for one of the best articles I've read on CT in a long time. This is why I keep coming back here, to hear articulate, moving defenses of the faith that ring true. As Christians, we should be the light to the world. We should, by definition, be the healers, teachers, philanthropists, mentors, and brothers and sisters to those without a knowledge of Christ. Instead, we usually are backbiters, condemners, warmongers and unloving of our fellow man. How sad that so often we get caught up in our delicate orthodoxy and forget our most basic orthopraxy! I hope this article gets wider circulation, as it is exactly what so many of us need to hear.

John W

Posted: April 04, 2008 12:35 PM


Thank-you, Dr. Mouw, for sharing your thoughts in this way.

Tom Nabors

Posted: April 04, 2008 10:55 AM


I was glad to read that Dr. Mouw is not “entirely clear about how to work this (the supposed happiness of God over the blessing the Rabbi gave to the Jordanian president) into my theology”. I was very glad that, apparently, the Cornerstone represented a Stumbling Block for him to be able to do that.

Carroll Hinkle

Posted: April 04, 2008 9:13 AM

I found much peace of mind and heart in reading this article. As a Catholic for the first fifty-two years of my life, and a contemplative nun for twelve years during the sixties and seventies, I spent at least ninety percent of my day in praying the scriptures, meditating on the scriptures and living a life of material poverty. As a Catholic I was taught from my earliest life when being prepared to receive Christ in the Eucharist that my relationship with Him was personal, I was taught and did invite Him into my heart, that I was to live in His presence in all that I said and did in my private and interpersonal life (all Catholic children are taught so). I was taught and believe that faith is through grace and that grace is the Holy Spirit's gift to us. Our Bible study came through our worship in the Liturgy. I must confess, I do not exactly what the constructs of "justification theology" are, but I'll bet I could understand it as consistent with what I have learn ed and believe

Mike Garvey

Posted: April 04, 2008 9:12 AM


Bravo Dr Mouw what you encourage is much needed extremely hard to do. Continue your efforts the Church needs this.

Gale	Posted: April 04, 2008 1:20 AM

I am reminded of an interview on TV of a leading evangelical and a leader in the homosexual community. They were seated side by side with the interviewer on the other side. The evangelical, when questioned about his position, began to quote the scripture about homosexuals going to Hell, and while I in no way want to mask the scriptures or tone down God's word, it seemed so cold...and cringing I thought "How will anyone understand this? How will this reach anyone?/" And then something happened. The homosexual seated beside him said "But some people don't care about that" and the evangelical turned to him, and with genuine concern in his voice, said "But you do, don't you?" And the man answered, "Yes, I do." ...then after a pause followed "But not everyone does" conversation turned back to politics. When he was debating issues, the evangelical sounded hollow and harsh--but when he was speaking in gentleness to the man beside him, the love of Christ was evident...it showed.

Dirk	Posted: April 03, 2008 6:09 PM


Thank you, Richard Mouw, a breath of fresh air!

Andrew Dosa

Posted: April 03, 2008 6:04 PM

Is there a single reference in the Hebrew Bible or New Testament where God makes it clear that doctrinal purity is essential for salvation? Don't get me wrong. I am not condoning rejection of appropriate doctrine, but if doctrinal purity were essential, then only Hodge and John MacArthur would be heaven bound. The rest of us, bound for hell because we do not have the doctrine all correct, are just fooled. Some of us may be great lovers of the Lord, but God would have no room for errors of thought. And If Hodge and MacArthur were not great lovers of the Lord, well, God certainly has little care for love so long as the thinking on doctrine is right.

Cathy

Posted: April 03, 2008 5:20 PM

In response to the comment by Eng Hoe, it is God who delivers us from eternal damnation to eternal life, not our love, trust or doctrinal belief! God reaches out to us in Christ, and continues to reach out to us in the Spirit. Hebrews encourages us in hospitality to strangers, for we might be entertaining angels unaware. Non-believers are strangers to whom we should be offering hospitality, gracious hospitality. How can there be any question?

John H. Armstrong

Posted: April 03, 2008 4:15 PM

Dr. Mouw has underscored the problem for so many evangelicals here and elsewhere. His solution is cogent and urgent. The next generation of Americans will not listen to the gospel we preach, both personally and corporately, if we do not hear and heed what Mouw says. His words ring true for me precisely because I came, after a long journey of faith and struggle, to understand what he is saying and then embrace it openly as an evangelical ministry leader and author. The cost to me, and my real friends, has been high. I am now seen as an enemy of the gospel for saying exactly what Mouw articulates in this piece. Andrew D. make a good point, one I could make from Latin American experience, but we also need to be careful about all related stereotypes since they work both ways if we see the whole Church throughout the whole world. God is developing a "new ecumenism" and many of the older debates will pass away. Will we be ready for it and respond in faith? I pray so.

Ted Voth Jr

Posted: April 03, 2008 3:52 PM

The Religious Right have given Christianity as a whole a bad smell in the nostrils of 'the Culture'-- what John would've called the world. We can't afford this, especially since in one fundamental way our world is different from the 1st century Roman world. In that world no one knew what Jesus was like. Now everybody does. Gandhi remarked to the effect that he found Christ very appealing, but that he had real problems with us Christians. Let the mind be in us that was in Christ Jesus... Let us be in the world His Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Gentleness, Goodness, Faith(fulness), Meekness-- BIG one!-- Self-control-- which brings us right back around to His Mind!

Charlie J. Ray

Posted: April 03, 2008 3:42 PM

www.reasonablechristian.blogspot.com While I agree with the spirit of this article and that it sounds very noble, I can only conclude that it is merely the slipperly slope to liberalism. Charles Hodge says in his Systematic Theology that Roman Catholics are Christians and his brothers in Christ. J.C. Ryle, though critical of Roman Catholicism and Anglo-Catholicism in the Episcopal Church, said that Anglo-Catholics and Roman Catholics were indeed "Christians." Historically, however, we know that this sort of "tolerance" for heresy led eventually to the liberal theology we see at Princeton Theological Seminary today and the sort of mass apostasy we're seeing in the Episcopal Church USA these days. I might add that many of the "Evangelical" seminaries are headed in a liberal direction as well. Among those I would include Fuller Theological Seminary. I would also include the seminary where I earned my master of divinity: Asbury Theological Seminary. Don't hurry to compromise.

Sam	Posted: April 03, 2008 2:45 PM


Dr. Mouw this is a much needed framework many evangelicals (and those of the fundamentalist persuasion need to hear). I feel that this is the sort of openness and confidence that was handed to me during my three years at Fuller.

Geoff

Posted: April 03, 2008 2:19 PM

I'm confused by some of these comments. Dr. Mouw's whole point, I think, is precisely that the Christian faith cannot be blindly reduced to a doctrinal statement. Yet, he affirms that doctrine is of the utmost importance. In this, he is holding up the tension of faith in Christ: On the one hand, we believe, confess, and are saved. On the other hand, salvation is not about our believing, but about Jesus Christ as Lord. Living as followers of Christ isn't about figuring everything out, it's about trusting in God regardless of whether we understand all the details. As for gnosticism, etc... Christianity is, and always has been, pervaded by different elements, some of which may be heretical. I daresay that each one of us holds some heretical view about something. Why? Because none of us has a grasp on the entirety of the Gospel. So it has nothing to do with gaining man's approval, but has everything to do with humility and trust. I would assume the apostles understood that?

Bill Bray

Posted: April 03, 2008 12:44 PM

I am the head of OSM, a student mission to Hindu and Muslim lands, places closed to overt evangelical witness. Every student missionary faces this problem all day long with peers from his homeland--we have to be winsome witnesses and somehow keep the door open without compromising the truth. Anyone who has ever tried to witness to cultural blocks, i.e. nations or lifestyle groups, will have plenty of stories of trial and error. We certainly don't always succeed. Dogmatics, while fine in the classroom and in the pulpit, shut doors in real life and block the gospel. We evangelicals have to earn the right to be heard by our love in both word and deed.

Andrew Brinkerhoff

Posted: April 03, 2008 12:01 PM

There is no question that we have a generous God. He gave His Son as a free gift to the whole world, because only the righteousness of His Son will satisfy Him. He wasn't pleased with the first century Jews when they trusted in their own descent from Abraham and rejected His gift, and He is not pleased with Jews or Muslims today when they do the same. There is no mystery about what God is doing in the "Abrahamic religions" - Christianity is the only Abrahamic religion. "And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed" and "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day." We have access to God only through Christ, and the blessing of the rabbi is but the form of religion without the power. Neither descent from Abraham, nor circumcision, nor knowledge of the Torah, nor fine sentiments appealing for world peace can please God, nor can any approach Him in prayer without Christ. God is not their God. Only the free gift of Christ can change that, and in that gift, God is generous.

Eng Hoe

Posted: April 03, 2008 11:52 AM

In response to the question, "What must I do to have eternal life?" Jesus confirmed that the expert in the law had answered correctly : "I must love God with all my heart, and with all my soul, and with all my mind and with all my strength. And I must love my neighbor as myself." (Lk.10). It is love and trust (Jn.3:16) that delivers us from eternal damnation to eternal life; not correct doctrinal belief. There are millions of illiterate people in the world who know Jesus in their hearts but would probably fail an evangelical doctrinal test. When its their turn and they are "met at the pearly gates", I doubt if the angel Gabriel would put them through a doctrinal test before qualifying them to enter. I think he might take out his stethescope and put it to their hearts and check if they have life : "He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son does not have life but the wrath of God remains on him."

Glenn K

Posted: April 03, 2008 11:33 AM

Typical of so many Christian leaders today who wish to gain man's approval, Dr. Mouw talks (albeit quite eloquently) out of both sides of his mouth. For all of his protestations of how truly evangelical he is, I cannot seem to square that with his expressed desire to hold to theological uncertainty regarding the core teachings of Jesus and the apostles about salvation by grace through faith in Christ. The apostle Paul was quite uncivil when confronting false teaching (Phil 3:2) and Peter ( I Peter 2) and Jude where similarly disposed. I fear that if the apostles had adopted the attitude of men like Dr. Mouw, we would have a syncretistic gospel today which would have adopted features of Judaism, gnosticism, and various ealry church heresies in order to show openness and love toward the opponents of the truth. Thank God they had a bold spirit and were willing to endure to some ridicule for Christ's sake. I just wish Dr. Mouw had the same backbone.

Andrew D.

Posted: April 03, 2008 11:16 AM

Dear readers Living in Italy, in a Roman Catholic nation, and witnessing corruption and bribes at all levels, because many Italians have been brought up to believe they can live as they please as long as they get the right rituals done for them and as long as they are baptised in the "Mother Church" I think Richard Mouw needs to encounter full blown Roman Catholicism in majority Catholic nations before being so doctrinally charitable. I say "doctrinally charitable" or "charitable doctrinally" because I concur that we as Evangelicals need to learn to be more charitable to people who are different from us. We need to make no comprosises on the Gospel but we must love all, including radical Muslims, homosexuals, etc. Most Roman Catholics do not have any assurance of salvation and too many of them have other mediators, besides our Lord Jesus Christ. Yours sincerely, Andrew Diprose (TUTOR for Distance Study students of the Italian Evangelical Bible Institute)

Page: 1

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment