Ideas

The Cut-Rate Grace of a Health and Wealth Gospel

Kenneth S. Kantzer

God loves you (the TV evangelist shouts to his listening audience). He loves you and he wills for you to enjoy perfect health.

And he wants you rich. After all, the cattle on a thousand hills belong to him. Would an earthly millionaire make his own children eat poor food, wear shabby clothes, and ride in a broken-down family car? Of course not! Neither will your heavenly Father give you anything but the very best.

What is the desire of your heart? Name it, claim it by faith, and it is yours! Your heavenly Father has promised it. It’s right there in the Bible.

But is it? Jesus Christ said, “Take up your cross and follow me.” And the autobiography of the apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 11–12 reads like the very antithesis of the gospel of health and wealth: “Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one.… I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked.… [T]here was given me a thorn in my flesh.… Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. But he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.”

No doubt many who preach the unbiblical gospel of health and wealth are well meaning. They sincerely, though mistakenly, believe this to be an important part of the “full gospel.”

But the danger of this perverted gospel of health and wealth is that it makes false promises. These in turn lead to unscriptural desires for wealth and material prosperity, to false hopes for perfect physical health, and in the end to false guilt and despair.

Guaranteed Prosperity?

As with all heresies, some pieces of truth are embedded in the gospel of health and wealth. For example, the apostle John begins his third epistle with a friendly Christian greeting: “Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth” (v. 2). Health and wealth preacher Kenneth Copeland misinterprets this as a universal promise.

It is doubtful, however, whether the apostle John conceived of prosperity primarily in terms of financial and material things. In any case, this standard formula of greeting for a personal letter of that time is certainly no more than a wish, and definitely not a guarantee or promise. Likewise, the “abundant life” to which the apostle refers in John 10:10 is clearly spiritual life from God rather than material affluence.

The greatest evil of this perverted gospel centers in its complete reversal of biblical values. Wealth is not our goal. It is not wicked to be poor. The Christian is not to set a high priority on the well-advertised creature comforts that twentieth-century America makes possible. The abundance of things we possess is not the measure of our true success. What most Americans call success is in God’s eyes our downfall. God’s great goal for us is not wealth and prestige (though these may come), but goodness.

Our Lord warns those who would too readily follow him to count the cost first (Luke 14:28). When he bade Ananias call the apostle Paul to serve him, he added, “For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name” (Acts 8:16).

Christians who live in obedience to Christ must not expect to ride in Cadillacs, wear fur coats from Neiman-Marcus, live in a suburban mansion, and vacation each winter in the Bahamas. These are not always wrong, but we must not make them into life goals or special signs of God’s approval. Especially, we must not claim these material things as promises to be received by faith.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer understood the gospel better when he wrote, “Cheap grace is the deadly enemy of our church. We are fighting today for costly grace. Cheap grace means grace sold in the market … at cut-rate prices.”

Guaranteed Health?

The gospel of health and wealth is right at this point: A morally conscientious person who recognizes that his body is the temple of the Holy Spirit generally has better health because he takes care of himself physically.

Also, in a sense the Bible teaches healing in the Atonement. Scripture presents sickness as part of the curse from which Christ redeemed us. Isaiah 53 affirms: “Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows” (v. 4). But the Hebrew can also be translated, “Surely he has borne our sicknesses and carried our pains.” Verse 5 adds, “By his stripes we are healed.” Two New Testament references to this passage are instructive: Matthew interprets it literally to refer to the healing of physical diseases during our Lord’s earthly ministry (Matt. 8:17). The apostle Peter later applies the same passage figuratively to spiritual health and healing from sin (1 Peter 1:24–25).

As Gordon Fee says, “Isaiah … refers first of all to the healings of the wounds and disease of sin. Yet, since physical disease was clearly recognized to be a consequence of the fall, such a metaphor could also carry with it the literal sense, and this is what Matthew picked up” (The Disease of the Health and Wealth Gospels).

Healing from the effects of the Fall is clearly promised by Scripture. But according to Romans 8, the curse will be lifted completely only at the end time.

So the ultimate healing of the whole person is promised only with the resurrection of the body at the second coming of Christ.

Yet God can miraculously break into our present sphere when he chooses, healing our bodies now in anticipation of the final healing. Granted, Christians are divided on this matter. Some hold that in this present age God heals only through secondary means such as doctors and medicine, without miracle. Yet Scripture encourages us to pray for the healing of the sick. At least in part this is to be reckoned as miraculous healing (James 5:14–15). Therefore, when my children became ill, though I took them to the doctor I also prayed that God would miraculously heal them. However, we must understand that God has never promised to heal here and now.

One would not suspect this from the words of one faith healer, the late Hobart Freeman: “To claim healing for the body and then to continue to take medicine is not following our faith with corresponding action. If we feel the need of anything in addition to faith, then we do not have faith to be healed. When genuine faith is present, it alone will be sufficient for it will take the place of medicine and other needs” (Faith).

This is to hold out promises contrary to the teaching of Scripture. It should not surprise us, therefore, when the Associated Press reports, “Ten mothers, six or seven infants, and a diabetic man who stopped insulin in the belief that God would cure him, have died over the past three years as a result of refusing to take medicine.… All were followers of Hobart Freeman.”

Some genuine promises of Scripture are taken entirely out of their biblical context by those enthralled with the gospel of health and wealth. John 14:13 is an example: “I will do whatever you ask in my name.” But what does it mean to pray in Christ’s name? Certainly not merely to repeat the formula. Rather, it means to make requests on his authority. And it is only when we know that we are asking for what he wills (and not merely what we wish) that his promise holds. That is why, in a parallel passage making the same universal promise, John introduces the safeguard “according to his will” (1 John 5:14). Even our Lord inserts into his own prayer for deliverance “if you are willing” (Luke 22:42). To take a promise out of its context is to force Scripture to say what it does not say. We then turn its divine promises into false claims that will only delude the gullible.

Consider the simple believer who is assured by a preacher he trusts that John 14:13 is a universal promise with no qualifications. He may feel that his faith is utterly destroyed. He may question the truthfulness of God.

In anger he may rebel against a God who has “deceived” him. Few are harder to reach with the biblical gospel of God’s love in Christ than those whose relationship with God has been twisted out of shape by the false gospel of health and wealth.

Redemption’s Future Tense

The root error of the false gospel of health and wealth is this: It seeks to apply a theology of future glory to the believing and obedient Christian right now. But our Lord taught a theology for here and now that both sustains us in hard times and holds out hope for tomorrow. We cannot claim now what God in his grace has promised only for the future. God loves us too much to give us everything we want right now.

A Message from the Publisher: June 14, 1985

Harold L. Myra

This month we welcome David Neff to our staff as an associate editor. David has done an exceptional job as editor of HIS, standing in a long line of evangelical leaders who preceded him in that post (see photos).

Last year, about a dozen CTi editors attended Walter Wangerin’s writers’ conference in Indiana, where we met Virginia Grabill, a delightful and spirited professor of English at the University of Evansville. In 1947, as Virginia Lowell, she succeeded Ken Taylor as editor of HIS.

Virginia told us that at first she had to use her initials to mask her gender. Perhaps it’s a sign we have come at least a little distance that Linda Doll, David’s predecessor at HIS, gave no thought to disguising her identity. Linda now directs InterVarsity Press, which publishes both HIS magazine and an excellent line of books.

HIS was born in 1941 and, without exception, its editors have made significant contributions. I personally think of Bob Walker, editor of Christian Life; Ken Taylor, translator of The Living Bible and chairman of Tyndale House Publishers; Joe Bayly of David C. Cook Publishing Company, who has written his Eternity column for more than 25 years; Steve Board, editor of Eternity for 8 years (now also with Cook), who is currently giving us major editing help with the Christianity Today Institute; Paul Fromer of Wheaton College, who serves as our deputy editor, working closely with Ken Kantzer on editorials and on major projects.

So, David has a unique history behind him. I mentioned to Gordon MacDonald, Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship’s new president, and to Linda that I felt a bit of guilt in taking David from that significant post. But only a few weeks later Linda recruited Verne Becker, one of our editors on CAMPUS LIFE, to replace him. I next saw Linda at the recent meeting of the Evangelical Press Association (EPA) here in Chicago and told her she had missed her chance to leverage any of my guilt!

We have much humor and camaraderie among evangelical publications. We’re often asked about that, and it is always satisfying to describe the sense of common purpose in EPA. Certainly one of the most affirming and constructive aspects of my work in Christian journalism for nearly 25 years has been to share this spirit of cooperation and shared learning among fellow editors. I well remember my first EPA convention in the early 1960s in Philadelphia. Russ Hitt and Bill Peterson of Eternity were discussing the school prayer issue and giving a much greater depth to the question than I had previously heard as a young man fresh out of college.

EPA has now grown to some 300 periodicals. About 500 persons attended the recent three-day meeting in which members elected as the new president Dean Merrill, senior editor of CT’s sister publication LEADERSHIP. We were pleased that both CHRISTIANITY TODAY and LEADERSHIP were given the top Award of Excellence in their respective categories, and that our new publication PARTNERSHIP came in second, right after LEADERSHIP, from which it was developed. Congratulations to editors Gil Beers, Terry Muck, and Ruth Senter and their staffs for their unusually fine work. In addition, a total of 21 awards in the EPA Higher Goals competition went to CTi publications, including five to CAMPUS LIFE. CT editors were especially happy with the first-place award given to the cover interview with Robert Schuller [Aug. 10, 1985], considering the huge effort required, and that the CT news section was again singled out for a first-place award for excellence.

The same week EPA met, we also held our first meeting of the CT senior editors (Gil Beers, George Brushaber, Kenneth Kantzer, Dennis Kinlaw, and J. I. Packer). These men will regularly give broad guidance and direction to the journalists who do the day-by-day work on CT. I was delighted with their spirit and insights. We forged a framework for equipping CT to meet the unique challenges of the mid-eighties with a careful blend of journalistic vigor and biblical wisdom.

We would greatly appreciate your prayers in that regard, for we also cautioned ourselves that we need most not energy and theological cleverness, but God’s great grace. We could win even more awards next year and have readers rise and call us blessed, yet miss God’s vision. Our prayer is that we will genuinely “live by God’s surprises,” not our own enthusiasms. We must work fully aware of our frailty (in Pascal’s words, “A draft of air can kill us”), but equally aware of God’s astounding power “in us who believe.”

Eutychus and His Kin: June 14, 1985

Prayer Time: Get A Pencil

Our assistant pastor has our congregation well trained. For years he has had the unenviable task of making announcements and promoting programs at the most incommunicable times: at the start of a service, just before a meal, or as we’re loading the bus. Our people just aren’t ready to listen at those times.

But I wonder if the reason they aren’t prepared to listen is because they know they will get a repeat of those same announcements during his next prayer. Take last Sunday’s invocation, for example:

“Dear Lord, we thank thee for our fine Sunday school attendance of 274 on this, the first week in our growth campaign, even though we have seven families on vacation and four members hospitalized, as noted in the back of your, uh, our bulletin. We ask your blessings on this service, and on our stewardship banquet this evening at 6 P.M. in the fellowship hall, 5:30 for those bringing cupcakes. What a joy it is to be here on this last Sunday before Millie and I leave on vacation to visit her sister and brother-in-law in Buffalo next week. Give us traveling mercies so that we may return to regular office hours next Wednesday at 9 A.M., and guide Brother Smith as he leads my Tuesday night Bible study at the regular time in room 102. Now give us all willing ears to hear the pastor’s message this morning, and to take notes, if we feel led, with the paper and pencils provided in the pews in front of us. Amen.”

Like I said, the pastor has the congregation well trained. They know that when someone is “praying,” that is the time to listen to announcements and critique the speaker.

Did I say “well trained”? Let’s say “trained.”

EUTYCHUS

Us Against Them

In sharp, quick strokes Vernon Grounds [“A Call to Respect God’s Image,” Apr. 5] has skillfully dissected the beast Demogoguery, which stalks pulpits and the national airwaves under the guise of a courageous religious uprising. Grounds exposes the twitching nerves of this unjust rhetoric: Destructive attacks that stereotype and dehumanize the people we oppose.

Unfortunately, many youthful believers think uncompromising rhetoric demands an “us against them” name-calling discourse. I witness this every fall semester while teaching freshmen composition.

JAMES VINCENT

Moody Bible Institute

Chicago, Ill.

Vernon Grounds’s unfortunate efforts to place the “Religious Right” on the same moral plane as Hitler and the KKK places him in the very camp he so self-righteously condemns.

ROBERT PETERS

New York, N.Y.

Hooray! for the message in Vernon Grounds’s editorial. Our goal is to save, not alienate; we are ambassadors, not terrorists. Thank you, Dr. Grounds, for your timely and practical call to honor the image of God in us.

REV. PHIL LUNDY

Bethel Baptist Church

Tillamook, Oreg.

There is no scriptural basis for Grounds’s thesis that Hitler, or any one of us, is “made in God’s image.” Genesis is clear that God originally created man in his own image, and that it is likely that had our first parents not rebelled and disobeyed God’s Word, their children would have continued to be born in God’s image. But note Genesis 5:1 and then 5:3. The original image was forfeited by the first Adam.

HADDON MACDAVID

San Diego, Calif.

All humans were “created” in God’s image (which image was marred by the Fall), but are not “fathered” by him except in rebirth.

The Scriptures do not teach hate, only separation. We can support good causes, but not align ourselves with unbelievers to obtain goals, for then we are no longer obeying Scripture. We should not equate our country, or our faith, with the vocal minority.

G. D. KRAGEN

Santa Rosa, Calif.

Grounds states, “granted that our government has not been guilty of atrocities as ghastly as Hitler’s Holocaust.” What do we call 1.5 million aborted (murdered) babies a year—more humane and less atrocious?

REV. MATTHEW SUSSANO

Bethel Assembly of God

Bath, N.Y.

History provides the gory illustrations to what happens when my beliefs are “holy” and yours are “satanic.” I then fall victim to my own idolatry of myself.

REV. ROB CALDERHEAD

St. Paul’s United Methodist Church

Coronado, Calif.

Name-calling proves nothing and does not answer to or even acknowledge the very real convictions of those with whom we disagree. In regard to the issue of abortion (legalized), the use of the term prolife to describe those who are against it directly implies that those who are in favor of freedom of choice on this issue are somehow against life or perhaps abhor “life.” Isn’t this a form of labeling and caricaturizing, even if it is unspoken?

CHRISTINE CHURCHILL

Portland, Oreg.

A Cheap Shot

In “The Supreme Court’s Changing Stance on Religious Freedom” (Insight, Apr. 19), Samuel Ericsson covers a range of issues, including the widely attacked school prayer decisions. But Ericsson’s accurate statement is negated by the accompanying Stayskal cartoon. Stayskal has made a specialty of such cheap shots—drawing cartoons that are clever but unscrupulous, since they distort the facts and principles of the cases alluded to. Ericsson, it seems, giveth understanding—at least to a degree—but Stayskal taketh it away.

STAN LICHTENSTEIN

Bethesda, Md.

Valuable Legal Aid

Thank you for the article about our legal status, entitled “Prolonged Legal Battle Forces Research Organization into Federal Bankruptcy Court” [News, April 5]. I am concerned that your readers not misunderstand the valuable service that attorney Michael J. Woodruff has rendered on behalf of Spiritual Counterfeits Project in our defense of the libel suit brought by Witness Lee and the local church. Woodruff has been our attorney for over 10 years. As SCP’s lead attorney in the Lee case, he gave us a reduced rate for his legal services, and worked many hours on his own time.

He stayed with us as long as he possibly could, right up to the eve of trial. The SCP staff and board have the highest admiration and respect for Michael—for the massive amount and quality of work he did.

REV. DAVID BROOKS

Spiritual Counterfeits Project

Berkeley, Calif.

The problem with SCP is that they judged the local church based on agnostic psychology and Western traditions, not by Scripture. All true Christians look defective in the world’s view.

MARGARET BELL

Living Streams Ministry

Anaheim, Calif.

Your article about SCP said that “CRI could be the next organization to be sued,” and that “SCP’s conclusions on the local church are similar to those of CRI founder and director Walter Martin, as expressed in the book The New Cults.” It needs to be noted that Dr. Martin’s analysis appears in the teachings of Witness Lee. Like SCP, Dr. Martin maintains that the local church is Christian, not cultic, although some teachings are criticized as unbiblical. While the possibility of a suit against us cannot be ruled out, CRI does not expect such a suit.

ROBERT M. BOWMAN, JR.

Christian Research Institute

San Juan Capistrano, Calif.

Somebody Else Said It

In “Leading Evangelical Scholars Trade Their Latest Insights” [Apr. 19] about the Wheaton conference, most of the words attributed to me were from a part of my paper in which I was quoting economist James Gwartney of the economics department at Florida State University. It is important that (1) Gwartney himself know that I made it clear I was quoting him; and (2) anyone who has seen Gwartney’s unpublished paper know that the mistake was an unintentional error on the part of a reporter and the record is now straight.

RONALD NASH

Western Kentucky University

Bowling Green, Ky.

Love For The Land

Praise the Lord! Paul Brand has spoken [“A Handful of Mud,” Apr. 19]. This article has the heart of the message we need to hear. The “graven image” in the background of your cover illustration points to the fact that most of us have no love of the land, only of money.

PAUL M. SHOGER

Oswego Prairie

United Methodist Church

Oswego, Ill.

We evangelicals spend most of our time on theological and social issues but rarely discuss environmental ones.

JON MILLER

Dallas, Tex.

Paul Brand’s “handful of mud” put together a study on planetary destruction from defoliation and soil erosion without once mentioning a very basic factor: overbreeding by both humans and livestock that is pushing us to the brink of suicide. He is right in saying that our view of trees as “timber” and not an essential part of the life cycle borders on blasphemy. I just returned from a periodic tour of several southeastern states, and the “slash and burn” mentality that I saw during years of service in Asia and Africa was everywhere evident.

HARVEY LESTER SPERRY

Greenwood, S.C.

Brand alleges that soil erosion and related problems are the fault of free enterprise and a runaway profit system. Both he and Philip Yancey suggest that such travesties might be solved by a modern application of the Jubilee laws. But those big corporate landgrabs have little to do with free enterprise. They could not take place in a truly free market. The great agribusiness corporations are fascistic, statist enterprises that have been receiving billions of dollars in federal support since the 1960s. These destructive, overstuffed giants can be broken down, not by granting the central government even more control, but by turning to a genuinely free market that has no room for corporate welfare. Does CHRISTIANITY TODAY have the prophetic courage to demand that we get the greedy, oppressive fat cats off the dole? The Jubilee was never intended to be applied outside of Israel, and no proponent of the idea has ever exegetically demonstrated otherwise.

DAVID CHILTON

Institute for Christian Economics

Tyler, Tex.

Does The Percentage Fall Short?

Your editorial, “Within Our Reach” [Apr. 19], is excellent. It is encouraging to see in print anything confirming my own perception that we now have the momentum. There is a major fallacy, however. You note that 58 percent of Americans now oppose most elective abortions and conclude that “… Americans now clearly have it in their power to pass legislation outlawing the vast majority of abortions.” Sadly, that is not true. It takes two-thirds of both houses of Congress and the legislatures of three-fourths of the states to pass a constitutional amendment, and unless the Supreme Court reverses itself, it will take a constitutional amendment to protect the lives of most unborn children. Fifty-eight percent is not sufficient.

THOMAS O. ALDERMAN

Eugene, Oreg.

The idea that a fetus is a person, and so an eternal soul, from the moment of conception is a religious belief, and is not shared by the majority of our citizens. Most of us—Jews, Protestants and a good many Roman Catholics—believe that we are given personhood at birth when we can live on our own as individuals, or at the earliest from the time of “viability” when the fetus can live on its own if born or removed prematurely.

J. E. SMITH

Minneapolis, Minn.

Is abortion more reprehensible to God than birth control?

ORVILLE RUTSCHMAN

Hesston, Kans.

Are We The Salieris?

Your review of Amadeus [“How Odd of God,” Apr. 19] is interesting but strange. It tries to compare Christ and his glorious free gift of salvation to the movie Mozart and his gift of music. Then, it works hard to create a perverted half-gospel message out of Salieri’s jealous attempt to steal Mozart’s requiem mass.

In the arts, the church is unhappy that it runs so far behind the world. And so we copy the world, or else we take their works and appropriate them by inserting gospel meanings. Does this situation make them the true and gifted sons of God, and us the envious Salieris?

SUE MULTANEN

Salem, Oreg.

Fleshly endowments such as Mozart’s brilliance were a blessing for unfallen Adam, but they are handicaps for fallen man. The “mystery” is not why some are blessed with beauty or brilliance, but why some are cursed with them.

JESS SCHILLING

San Antonio, Tex.

Rarely have I seen a more informative, interpretive, and inspiring review of a movie than the one you did on Amadeus.

RICHARD H. SCHNEIDER

Guideposts

New York, N.Y.

Motivations For Childlessness

Robert Roberts is too hard on those who have chosen childlessness [“Children: Who Needs Them?”]. How is a child to be compared with ample time for Bible study, ample time alone with God in prayer, or thorough devotion to one’s task as a missionary/teacher/evangelist? I have two children, and I find that the allocation of time among equally worthy activities is my biggest problem. As with many other things, the motive for childlessness is more important than childlessness itself. There are some who have the condition forced upon them by their inability to conceive. There are some who have heard a different calling from their Creator.

CYNTHIA JOHNSON

Kingsport, Tenn.

Manifesting Unity

I commend CHRISTIANITY TODAY for the establishment of the Christianity Today Institute [“The Christian as Citizen,” special section, Apr. 19]. I look forward to coverage of future institute proceedings. Amid the increasing polarization along political and theological lines in evangelicalism, the institute will serve a much-needed function of promoting discussion and consensus building in the Christian community. By bringing together those who share a common faith but who differ in their response to God’s norms for justice, righteousness, and peace in this world, we may discover that the body of Christ needs each one of us, that each has an important role. We may also discover that we differ less than we had imagined. Above all, it is an opportunity to manifest to our society the unity to which the apostle Paul calls us.

STEPHEN A. WEST

Raleigh, N.C.

The supplement section, “The Christian as Citizen,” was very timely, practical, and written with clarity. Thank you.

REV. DICK ROBINSON

address not given

When Jim Wallis cut the pages about the poor from the Bible, he must not have read them, as God gives some very specific principles in his Word concerning the poor. Both the Old and New Testament state the same fair principle. If one is without work, one can find much volunteer work to do until employed.

MRS. JAY HUGHES

Pendleton, Oreg.

Sojourners’ concern for the poor is definitely a biblical position. However, their emphasis on the economically poor, their view that the rich cause poverty by exploiting the poor, and the redistribution of wealth as the remedy for the poor are all political positions, and happen to be the same that Marxism holds. Jesus Christ never once changed a person’s economic condition.

GREG BROWN

Colorado Springs, Colo.

It was exciting to read the discussion about church and state. That issue challenged all of us to consider different points of view. Politically opposed evangelicals need to learn from each other. Perhaps your inclusion of Jim Wallis will challenge the narrowness of Sojourners magazine to follow suit.

REV. THOMAS A. KRAGT

Community Reformed Church

Lafayette, Ind.

I am discouraged to discover that there are no women listed as Fellows or Resource Scholars for the Christianity Today Institute. Surely there must be women who are qualified to speak to the issues of the day. There are many persons who are concerned about the lack of women’s representation in discussions of spiritual matters.

SUSAN T. MCCOUBRIE

Inver Grove Heights, Minn.

We agree with Packer and Henry that pluralism is not a mere expedient in a world of many religions and differentiated cultures. We take it to be a principle that is derived from the biblical teaching that the Creator God has established the norms for all of man’s responsibilities in every area of life—mathematical, physical, political, and ethical.

This principle of autonomous, but interrelated, spheres of life, under God, can be maintained, however, only if we recognize no dualism of “the secular and the spiritual.” We may not adopt the nontheistic vocabulary with its implications that some things do not belong to God, but to Caesar.

ARTHUR DAVIES

Holland, Mich.

Many thanks for inaugurating the Christianity Today Institute with the stimulating view of church and state.

HENRY DAVID GRAY

Congregational Journal

South Pasadena, Calif.

Letters are welcome. Brevity is preferred; only a selection can be published. All are subject to condensation. Write to Eutychus, CHRISTIANITY TODAY, 465 Gundersen Drive, Carol Stream, Illinois 60188.

Books

Have Your Neighbors Read This Book?

Marilyn G. Kunz

Making the evangelistic Bible study work for garage mechanics and research scientists.

Making the evangelistic Bible study work for garage mechanics and research scientists.

It is now clear that large numbers of people have become Christians through peer group discussions of the Bible. And when unchurched participants become serious about the Christian faith, they normally begin attending church—often the church of their group’s initiator.

Whole churches have been built using this method, and the gospel has penetrated neighborhoods and workplaces that likely would not have opened up to other evangelistic strategies.

What are the keys that make these groups succeed, causing the local church to grow? Here are five:

Key #1: A “Safe” Invitation

Instead of being asked to “join” a Bible study, people are invited to a home to hear about an idea: a discussion Bible study group for adults who are not experts. After dessert and coffee, the host or hostess explains how the group will function, using the method of inductive (investigative) study. A 20-minute sampler—one incident from the Gospel of Mark—gives a taste of what is ahead. Those who are interested set a time and place to start studying Mark 1.

The same thing can happen on the job. Any group that meets on neutral territory is less threatening for newcomers than meeting in a church. Lunch-hour groups currently meet every week among business people on Wall Street, research scientists meet at a pharmaceutical corporation, executives and clerical workers at a chemical firm; there is also an after-work study among garage mechanics with their Christian employer, and breakfast studies (weekday or Saturday) among small-town tradesmen and professionals. Workers who know one another through their jobs but meet in homes range from lobstermen on an island off the Maine coast to astronauts and their spouses in Houston.

Key #2: A Structure That Protects Those New To The Bible

An ideal ratio is six to eight people studying the Bible for the first time with only one or two firm Christians. Groups with too many “experts” do not appeal to raw beginners.

A group of six to ten is large enough to stimulate interaction and new ideas but small enough to let everyone speak and respond to the comments of others. If a group is twelve or larger, the discussion tends to split into two or three competing conversations. The moderator has to exert strong control and may be tempted to lecture. The quiet people and those who know the least sit back. Sometimes they stop coming.

But when everyone has a fair chance, each participant is greatly influenced by what he or she discovers and shares in the group. What a person hears himself saying about Jesus’ claims will be remembered long after what someone else tells him is forgotten. We recall only 20 percent of what we hear, but 70 percent of what we say. That is why discussion Bible studies are powerful agents of change.

Key #3: Studying Whole Books Of The Bible

Newcomers to the Bible need to lay a foundation before they can handle studies that skip around. Using selected verses here and there to present the gospel message confuses the person who cannot set them into a meaningful context. They also put the person at risk when approached by a cult using a thematic presentation. If methods are similar, the biblically untaught person has a hard time distinguishing between the authentic and the counterfeit.

Those new to Bible study should start with Mark; it is clear, concise, full of action, and does not require familiarity with the Old Testament. No wonder missionary translators usually begin with Mark.

Key #4: A Well-Prepared Set Of Study Questions

Groups function best with questions that help them observe, interpret, and apply what they find in the Bible text. The questions should be forthright enough to allow each person to take a turn as moderator, moving the group paragraph by paragraph through a chapter. The material must not assume that everyone understands Christian jargon or can easily comprehend a religious mind-track.

Key #5: Operating Guidelines

The following ground rules protect a group against misuse of Scripture:

1. Confine the discussion to the chapter being studied. This keeps the newcomers at equal advantage. As the weeks go by, of course, everyone’s scope of knowledge enlarges, and the group is able to refer back to chapters previously studied.

2. Expect everyone to be responsible for pulling the group back from digressions. The moderator’s job is greatly eased if others in the group help say, “We’ve gotten onto a tangent. Let’s get back to the chapter.”

3. Agree that the document (Mark, for example) will be the authority for the discussion. People should not be coerced into believing the Bible, but they can be encouraged to be honest about what it says and to refrain from rewriting it. As a group continues to study week after week, most members come to recognize the Bible as authoritative.

These guidelines keep a group on the path of orthodoxy. It is difficult to promote heresy in a group studying a book of the Bible in context.

Some Final Considerations

Not every church member should attempt an outreach Bible study. A wise pastor will not try to get “the whole church” into this approach to evangelism. Some Christians tend to tell others too much too soon. The discussion approach requires patience and a willingness to let the non-Christian build a framework of Bible knowledge and discover Christ’s claims for himself.

But once this has happened, the person is much more likely to hear and believe a gospel presentation from the pulpit or a Christian friend.

For those the church wants to encourage in this kind of outreach, a preparation series of four or five Wednesday nights or an all-day Saturday workshop may be used. Such a training program should include:

• An explanation of inductive study;

• Instruction in sensitivity to the non-Christian;

• Practice in introducing the idea of a Bible study to friends and colleagues;

• Participation in an actual Bible study discussion.

Copies of the study questions for Mark should be available as well. (For a handbook, How to Start a Neighborhood Bible Study, and study guides, write Neighborhood Bible Studies, Box 222L, Dobbs Ferry, N.Y. 10522.)

At one such workshop, two men were role playing the initial invitation. Jim later reported, “When Charlie asked me how I’d like to ‘join a group and study the Word of God,’ he lost me. I was suddenly aware that a person who had never studied the Bible would not call it ‘the Word of God.’ It would have been better if he’d simply asked me if I’d like to be in a Bible study for nonexperts. I would have said yes to that.”

Outreach can start in a neighborhood with one or two young mothers from the church inviting women on their block. The daytime group becomes so valuable that they want their husbands to share the experience, and an evening couples’ Bible study begins. Next, business people start studies at work.

Those who come to Christ through a discussion Bible study are able to reach out to their friends in the same way. Meanwhile, church members mature spiritually and become more effective leaders in the church. Small-group Bible study is a ministry multiplier.

Evangelism Takes Time

Earl Palmer

The gospel has its own urgent edge, and does its own convicting.

The gospel has its own urgent edge, and does its own convicting.

Most within the church find one-on-one evangelism one of faith’s great difficulties. With that in mind, CHRISTIANITY TODAY offers the following two articles. They are reprinted from LEADERSHIP journal.

A man who liked C. S. Lewis’s Screwtape Letters went on to read Mere Christianity—and was infuriated. He wrote the author a scathing letter.

Lewis’s response, in longhand, shows a master evangelist at work:

“Yes, I’m not surprised that a man who agreed with me in Screwtape … might disagree with me when I wrote about religion. We can hardly discuss the whole matter by post, can we? I’ll only make one shot. When people object, as you do, that if Jesus was God as well as man, then he had an unfair advantage which deprives him for them of all value, it seems to me as if a man struggling in the water should refuse a rope thrown to him by another who had one foot on the bank, saying, ‘Oh, but you have an unfair advantage.’ It is because of that advantage that he can help. But all good wishes. We must just differ; in charity I hope. You must not be angry with me for believing, you know; I’m not angry with you.”

What impresses me about that exchange is the light touch. Lewis acknowledges the man’s complaint, he gives him one thing to think about—and he stops. He steps back as if to say, “Your move,” which opens the way for the man to write again.

Journey Evangelism

Evangelism, like sanctification, takes time. Therefore, we must take the time it takes.

When we relate to people, we must remind ourselves that we are on a long journey together. The idea that this is my only chance to talk to this person is a great detriment. Even on an airplane, we should speak as if we’re going to know that seatmate for the rest of our lives. After all, to use another line from C. S. Lewis, “Christians never say good-by.”

When we share the gospel, it is part of a larger whole. Let me illustrate with small-group Bible studies, which our church has found to be our most authentic and exciting evangelistic event. What is fascinating is that we don’t try to be evangelistic. Our goal is to let the text make its own point and then enable the group to express their feelings about what is being read together. We consciously try not to cover everything the first week, but only what the text says. Our approach is this: “Read this Book like you read anything else. When you start into Mark, don’t give him an inch. Make him win every point. Don’t worry about whether this is supposed to be the Holy Word of God or not; just read it with the same seriousness you apply to your own thoughts.”

The amazing thing is that the text inevitably reveals its Living Center. Some weeks Mark (or Paul, or John) wins, some weeks he loses. But over time, the text comes out ahead, and the Christ of the text wins respect.

Too many of us preachers try to say too much all at once. Especially at the end of sermons—we throw in the kitchen sink trying to get somebody to make some sort of decision. We rattle off the most precious facts of our faith—the blood of Christ, the Cross, God loves you—and reduce them to hasty, unexplained sentences. It is far better to let the text make its own point.

I’ve found the same tendency in counseling. Somebody comes into my office and begins sharing his life. I listen very closely, trying to listen with my heart as well as my head. My mind is soon flooded with impressions, statements, Bible verses that I can hardly wait to unleash as soon as my turn comes. “Look at this; let me tell you this story; read this book; what you need to do is …”

As I’ve grown older, I’ve been asking God in such situations to help me sayone or two things—not 23. The poor person is already troubled, highly emotional—what is he supposed to do with a flood of input? He can only nod and say, “Oh, yes, thank you, Pastor,” and before long he’s nodding just to get out of the room.

In evangelism, people do not need admonishments as much as they need to be carefully heard. Once I’m listening, I range through their arguments to find out where I can agree with them. Very often the “God” they’re rejecting I would reject, too. Why not let them know that?

A Christian friend of mine was a high school principal in Los Angeles. One day a father came charging into his office, irate over the F his son had received in a certain course. The man had dreams of his son going to an Ivy League school, and now this teacher was destroying the plan. He wanted the grade changed.

My friend listened to the threats and demands for a while, and finally when there was a pause, he said quietly, “I can see that you care a great deal about your son.”

The man suddenly began to cry. The mask came off. He was strong but aloof, and the only way he knew to do anything for his son was by bullying. When the principal spoke about relationship, the point of deepest hurt was exposed. Now the father was ready to be helped.

My friend the principal knew he wasn’t going to ask the teacher to change the grade. So why be defensive? Instead, he listened with his heart until he got in touch with the man’s underlying journey.

I remember going to a Navigators conference in Colorado Springs during my student days. As part of our training, we were all going to go out and hit the city with a great witnessing blitz; Colorado Springs would never be the same. Jim Rayburn of Young Life had been invited to talk to us, and he said, “Well, I know what you’re headed out to do … you’re going to go out there and say to people, ‘Brother, are you saved?’ and you’ve got to say it real fast, because you may never see that person again.…” He paused a moment before continuing.

“And you won’t. You won’t.”

Then he shared his philosophy of evangelism, which was to take the time it takes to share the Good News of Jesus Christ with people.

I’m not saying we should not be urgent. But the gospel has its own urgent edge and does its own convicting of sin. Isn’t it good that the Holy Spirit takes care of that as we simply witness to the truth?

A crusty engineering professor in our city was shattered when his wife died of a sudden heart attack just as they reached retirement age. She had been a Christian, and after the funeral, he came to see me. I steered him toward the Gospel of Mark and some additional reading. After several weeks, I could see the New Testament was gradually making sense to him. My closing comment in our times together was usually, “Let me know when you’re ready to become a Christian.” (I rarely say, “Are you ready?” Instead, I ask people to let me know when they have enough information to put their weight down on the trustworthiness of Jesus Christ. I believe the most central evangelistic question is “Are you able, on the basis of what you’ve discovered about Jesus Christ, to trust your life to his faithfulness and love?” This draws together repentance from sin and response to his love.)

One Sunday after church, with a lot of people milling around, the engineer stood in the back waiting for me. He’s not the kind of man who likes standing around. Finally he got my attention so he could call out, “Hey, Earl—I’m letting you know.” That was it; he became a Christian at age 65.

We have to make room for people to struggle, because the stakes are so high. We should not be too pleased if someone comes to Christ with little struggle—it may mean that this is simply a compliant person, and the same compliance that eases him or her into Christianity may also ease that one toward the next thing that calls for obedience.

The Next-To-The-Last Word

The more sensitive we are to journey evangelism, the more we will recognize pre-evangelistic preparation. So many things in our culture are pre-evangelistic. Whether Robert Frost was a Christian I don’t know, but “Mending Wall” is most definitely a pre-Christian poem. It raises all the right questions. Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and the movie Apocalypse Now both raise huge questions that the gospel speaks to.

Now, as Bonhoeffer said, “You cannot hear the last word until you’ve heard the next-to-the-last word.” The next-to-the-last word is the law; it makes us feel guilty, trapped, judged. Only then are we ready for the Good News.

Evangelists who ignore the person’s journey are missing something important. Or, we make the mistake of listening once—and then freezing people in that state of rebellion. They may have spoken more outrageously than they believe; they may have only been trying to shock us; or they may have moved on from their first rejection of Christ. We must keep hearing the clues and moving along as they move.

G. K. Chesterton writes in Orthodoxy about five steps in his journey as a young man:

“One, I felt in my bones; first that this world does not explain itself. It may be a miracle with a supernatural explanation, it may be a conjuring trick, with a natural explanation. But the explanation of the conjuring trick, if it is to satisfy me, will have to be better than the natural explanation I have heard. The thing is magic, true or false.

“Second, I came to feel as if magic must have a meaning, and meaning must have someone to mean it.…

“Third, I thought this purpose beautiful in its old design, in spite of its defects, such as dragons.

“Fourth, the proper form of thanks to it is some form of humility and restraint. We should thank God for beer and burgundy by not drinking too much of them.

“And last, and strangest of all, there came into my mind a vague and vast impression that in some way all good was a remnant to be stored and held sacred out of some primordial ruin. Man had saved his good as Crusoe had saved his goods. He had saved them from a wreck, and all this I felt, and my age gave me no encouragement to feel it.

“And all this time I had not even thought of Christian theology.”

What a slow but elegant orbit he makes toward the Living Center.

Our Part In The Mystery

In the Bay Area where I live, I sometimes make jokes at the expense of a small town called Milpitas. Once while speaking on radio, I said, “You know, Beethoven is not on trial when the Milpitas Junior High Orchestra plays the Ninth Symphony. And Jesus Christ is not on trial when you or I or even C. S. Lewis tries to express the faith in a conversation or a sermon.”

Then about a year later it occurred to me: But were it not for the Milpitas JuniorHigh Orchestra—who would hear Beethoven? Even if badly played, it is better than no playing at all. Who plays Beethoven perfectly?

Some people trudge from church to church looking for the perfect rendition, They’ll never find it. W. H. Auden once observed that even though the line is smudged, we can read the line, and that is the mystery of evangelism: even though we smudge the line, it can still be read. You can whistle the tune of the Ninth Symphony even after listening in the Milpitas gymnasium.

Evangelism is far greater than any of us. That is why it takes time. But without us, it would take an eternity. And human beings do not have that long to make up their minds.

Tithes and Temptations

John W. Helfrich

Churches can forestall the “temptation to take” by adopting some wise financial policies.

Our office phone rang, and the voice sounded hurt, baffled, dismayed. It was a local Baptist pastor, and he had just discovered the church treasurer for some time had been helping himself to church funds, possibly as much as $20,000. The pastor wondered if the treasurer’s criminal conduct would affect the sale of church bonds.

Then a Pentecostal church called for help. Their treasurer of 30 years apparently had been falsifying records of designated gifts to missionaries and had been stealing from both the general and missionary funds. They also discovered that certificates of deposit had never been purchased, legacies from estates had been stolen, and church bank accounts and ledgers were missing.

The shock and sadness of discovering church theft is never easy to bear. It is small consolation that the problem of religious embezzlement is at least as old as Judas Iscariot, the keeper of the money bag for Jesus’ disciples, who helped himself to its contents (John 12:6). Even in today’s church, people are not immune to the temptation of taking what does not belong to them.

On the other hand, the need for trust and confidence within the church should never be underestimated. Trust is always an integral part of every healthy Christian community. The fact that theft and fraud within Christian churches is so minimal is strong testimony to the honesty and character of those who administer the funds within the body of Christ.

But the fact that people are tempted and embezzlement does occur suggests that the practice of “unmerited trust” should be questioned. By adopting a few wise financial policies, churches can maintain an atmosphere of trust while forestalling most temptations to dip into the till.

Preventive Medicine

The easiest place to take funds is from cash offerings—between the time offerings are taken and the time they are deposited in the bank. How do you reduce this temptation?

First, by having at least two people present whenever offerings are counted and recorded.

Second, by encouraging members to use church envelopes and keep records of their giving. Then, at least once a year, verify with each donor the amount contributed.

Many churches give little weight to the annual audit. While the services of a CPA may not be required in most cases, there is something pathetic, if not dangerous, in the casual approach that some church trustees take toward an audit. When church members Bill and Jean are assigned the audit and go to the home of “good ol’ Charley,” the church treasurer, to look at the books over coffeecake and tea, their work may be as misleading as the old-time law students who swore that they went over Blackstone—when the books of Blackstone were placed under the wheels of their passing carriage.

In addition, the internal audit should probably be supplemented every year or two with an outside independent audit by an accountant.

Sound Practices

At my church, the Three Village Church in East Setauket, New York, we have instituted the following procedures, which provide both freedom to function and financial integrity.

1. We separate the functions of the financial secretary and the church treasurer. That way, receiving and disbursing funds are handled by two different people.

2. Both officers are elected for one-year terms. Having them elected prevents suspicion of self-serving appointments. The one-year term prevents the possibility of continual embezzlement that goes on year after year.

3. The financial secretary counts each offering with a second person. Their accounts of cash and checks are entered in separate ledgers by their separate signatures.

4. The bank deposit is made by the financial secretary, who reports each deposit to the church treasurer.

5. The treasurer disburses funds by check. Cash transactions are held to a minimum. Some churches also require two signatures on checks larger than a certain amount, say $200.

6. A detailed breakdown of income and expenses is provided for each church member at the three business meetings each year.

Protection, Not Restriction

In the final analysis, no method of accounting is absolutely foolproof against theft. But these practices can minimize the threat.

As 1 Corinthians 10:13 points out, every temptation is “common to man,” but God also “will provide a way out.” The more thorough our procedures are, the less likely that those living with a temptation to steal will be prone to exercise it.

At the same time, our purpose is not only to prevent fraud but to protect the integrity of those handling church money. Every church treasurer and financial secretary wants his name to be beyond suspicion, and thus they often welcome these measures.

They agree with Paul, who knew the importance of good money management in the church: “Naturally we want to avoid the slightest breath of criticism in the distribution of their gifts, and to be absolutely above-board not only in the sight of God but in the eyes of men” (2 Cor. 8:20–21, Phillips).

Mr. Helfrich is an attorney and lives in Stony Brook, New York.

Theology

Tree Trunks and Other Trivial Pursuits

Philip Yancey

You cannot read very far in the Old Testament without encountering idols. Idolatry ranks as far and away the most common topic in the entire Bible. A nagging question haunts the pages of the Old Testament: Why did the Jews keep deserting the God who had delivered them from Egypt for the sake of carved tree trunks and bronze statues? What was the big attraction?

I gained insight into this issue on a visit to India, where idol worship flourishes. The four-star attractions in most Indian cities are temples erected to any of a thousand gods: monkey gods, elephant gods, erotic gods, snake gods—even a smallpox goddess. There, I observed that idolatry tends to produce two contradictory results: magic and triviality. For the devout, idolatry adds a dimension of magic to life. Hindus believe the gods control all events, including such natural disasters as monsoons, floods, diseases, and accidents. These powerful gods must be pleased at all costs. But what pleases a god depends on the god’s character, and gods can be fearsome and violent. Calcutta, India’s largest city, has adopted the murderous goddess Kali, who wears a garland of gruesome heads around her waist. Devotion to such gods can easily lead to a paralyzing fear and virtual slavery to the gods’ whims.

Other Hindus, less devout, take a different approach. They treat their gods as trivialities, almost like good-luck charms. A taxi driver mounts a tiny statue of a monkey god, draped with flowers, on the dashboard of his car. If you ask, he’ll say he prays to the god for safety—but you know about the traffic in India, he adds with a laugh.

Both these modern responses to idolatry illustrate what so alarmed the prophets of Israel. On the one hand, the taxi driver shows how idolatry can trivialize a god. Maybe the god will help you out, maybe not, but why not play along? Some Israelites took that spirit, drifting carelessly from god to god. No attitude could be further from that demanded by the true God. He had chosen the Jews as a kingdom of priests, a peculiar people set apart to him. He mocked the absurdity of carving a god out of a tree, the same tree used to cook a meal (Isa. 44:16–17). He is Lord of the Universe, not a good-luck charm.

Far too often, however, idols in the Middle East took a more sinister form, resembling the evil goddess of Calcutta. Followers worshiped Baal, for example, by having sex in the temple with prostitutes, or even by killing a human baby as a sacrifice. Worship of Baal could not possibly coexist with the worship of God.

Why did Baal and the other idols prove so appealing to the Jews? Like farm boys gawking at big-city life, the Israelites moved from 40 years of wilderness wanderings into a land of superior cultural achievement. When they settled down to a new occupation of farming, they looked to a Canaanite deity, Baal, for help in controlling the weather. In other words, they sought a short cut through magic. Similarly, when a mighty army threatened their borders, they smuggled in a few of that army’s favorite idols, hedging their bets in case their own religion did not bring them military success. Idols became a phantom source of power, an alternative place to invest faith and hope.

Worshiping graven images disappeared from Israel only after God dismantled the nation. But other, more subtle forms of idolatry persisted, and persist to this day. According to the New Testament, idolatry need not involve images of wood or stone. Anything that tempts us away from the true God may function as an idol. In a society dominated by appeals to image and status, idols abound. And, not surprisingly, idolatry produces the same results in us today that it did in the Israelites. Some gods—Mammon, beauty, success—appeal to our thirst for magic. On the human level, they work spectacularly. Success and money give us a kind of magical control over our lives. I worry more, however, about the false gods in my life that escape easy detection. In classical idolatry, a visible symbol expressed the change of loyalty that had gone on inside. Most of our idols today are invisible, not so clearly labeled. What modern idols make God seem trivial? What tends to reduce the surprise, the passion, the vitality of my relationship with God?

Most days, I am not so conscious of choosing between a god and God; the alternatives do not present themselves so clearly. Rather, I find God edged out by a series of small distractions. A car that needs repair, a coming trip, a leaky gutter, a friend’s wedding—these distractions, mere trivialities, may lead to a form of forgetfulness that resembles idolatry in its most dangerous form. The busyness of life, including all its religious busyness, can crowd out God. I confess that some days I meet people, work, make decisions, all without giving God a single thought. A friend of mine was stopped dead in her tracks by a skeptic. After listening to her explain her faith, he said this: “But you don’t act like you believe God is alive.” I try to turn his accusation into a question: Do I act as if God is alive? It is a good question, one that lies at the heart of all idolatry, and one that I must ask myself again every day.

Books

Book Briefs: May 17, 1985

The church’s role in healing the alcoholic.

Dying for a Drink, by Anderson Spickard, Jr., and Barbara Thompson (Word Books, Inc., 1985, 192 pp.; $12.95). Reviewed by Terry Muck, editor of LEADERSHIP journal.

It was late Sunday morning and Paul Taylor dragged himself out of bed with a groan. He was sick to his stomach, his head hurt, and his hands were shaking. He wished he hadn’t had so much to drink the night before; and he was looking forward to a strong cup of coffee.

Walking downstairs, he was surprised to find his wife and children sitting in the living room with the family doctor and the vice-president of the insurance company where he was a salesman. The doctor explained to Paul that they were there to talk with him about his drinking problem.

It was Paul’s wife who spoke first, her voice noticeably shaking: “Paul, last Tuesday we went out to dinner for our anniversary, and you got drunk. You poured a bottle of champagne on yourself and made a lewd remark to a woman who passed our table. When the maître d’ asked us to leave, you took a swing at him, and then passed out on the floor. A busboy helped me put you in the car.”

Paul stared at his wife incredulously as she went on to describe in detail three other similarly embarrassing incidents of the past year. He could not imagine why she was saying such things in front of his boss and doctor—but he was too surprised to respond. When she had finished, Paul’s employer began to describe his slipping work habits.

Paul’s teenage son followed with stories of parental abuse. And Paul’s doctor explained in graphic detail what drinking was doing to his physical health.

Then came the horror stories from his 17-year-old daughter. And finally, in a relational coup de grâce, Paul’s shy, 5-year-old daughter haltingly confronted her father.

By the time they were all through, Paul was in tears—and the next morning was on his way to an alcoholic treatment center.

Drying Out

This, of course, was not a chance get-together. It represented one family’s only hope in breaking the vicious downward spiral that Paul’s alcoholism had become. The intervention followed specific rules and guidelines, and although not all such meetings end as happily as this one did, thousands have led to the eventual arresting of alcoholics’ self-destructive behavior. And this, according to Dr. Anderson Spickard, coauthor of Dying for a Drink, is the only chance most alcoholics have of breaking out of a disease that affects over 10 million people each year.

“I told the story of Paul in the book because he was a good example of what faces someone addicted to alcohol,” said Spickard in an interview with this reviewer. “Very few truly addicted alcoholics can hope to stop drinking by themselves—the best studies suggest that fewer than one out of ten can quit without professional medical help.”

Intervention begins that help. If successful, it starts a long recovery process led by medical professionals trained to deal with alcoholics. But, according to Spickard, it is the key to getting the alcoholic to admit he needs help, and to make it work it takes the coordinated effort of relatives, friends, employers, doctors, and—oh yes, minister and church. One of the key points of Dying for a Drink is that the church does play a role, even though at times it is most effective if it just stays out of the way.

“It’s a question of timing more than anything else,” said Spickard. “In many ways my book is a call for the church to see that too often it has become an ‘enabler’ rather than a positive force in the treatment of alcoholics. An enabler is anyone who helps an alcoholic continue his addiction. It may be a wife who covers up for the alcoholic in front of his employer and friends, or a child who cleans up Daddy’s vomit. Enablers allow alcoholics to avoid the most serious consequences of their addiction, and thus help them continue to self-destruct. They do it out of love, of course, but are actually hurting the alcoholic’s chances of recovery.

“The church becomes an enabler when it doesn’t recognize the medical severity of the alcoholic’s problem. The biggest mistake made by church counselors is failure to recognize the underlying problem as alcoholism. Drinking is too often seen as a minor symptom of sin rather than an uncontrollable habit that can kill. The result is that too few alcoholics are sent to medical professionals. They are continued in nonproductive counseling relationships where prayer and Scripture study are used in place of medical help.”

Finding Forgiveness

In the first half of the book, Spickard, the director of general internal medicine and professor of medicine at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, outlines the problems alcoholics have traditionally faced in getting help. He notes that society has institutions to deal with alchohol-induced behavior (federal, state, and local governments), the physical havoc alcohol wreaks on heavy drinkers (hospitals), and the theological inappropriateness of alcoholic abuse and addiction (churches). But it has few resources available to help alcoholics themselves.

To be sure, writes Spickard, each of these institutions does something to help. Through law, governments try to protect citizens from homicidal drunk drivers who kill one person every 22 minutes. But the government can only go so far with protective legislation before the laws create more problems than they solve.

Through drugs and surgery, hospitals can detoxify, tranquilize, and surgically repair human beings blitzed with alcohol-related disease. But doctors are quite candid about their relative helplessness in the face of patients who invariably deny they have a serious problem.

Through a sermon, Sunday school class, or home Bible study, churches can effectively hold up the ideal of sobriety. But alcoholics, swayed by our culture’s unmistakable sermonizing that drinking is cool and controllable, become quickly apologetic-proof. No group of people is more adept at rationalization and compartmentalization than alcoholics.

So what can be done? In his book, Spickard recommends intervention with a program specifically designed to help alcoholics. The intervention itself needs to be choreographed by a professional, who helps choose the five or six members of the intervention team and the appropriate time and place for the intervention. The professional also helps the interveners rehearse the data of the confrontation—three or four specific instances where they were personally threatened or embarrassed by the alcoholic’s inappropriate behavior.

Once treatment has been accomplished (either 30 days in an alcoholic treatment center or 90 straight days of Alcoholics Anonymous meetings), close follow-up is necessary to prevent relapse. This is the time, according to Spickard, when the church can become the focal point of the alcoholic’s recovery. Up until now the church has been a very important supporting actor in the process. Now it has a chance to reassume the role of leading man.

“People come out of alcoholic recovery groups with their spiritual antennae fully extended,” said Anderson. “They want to know forgiveness. They are never more ready to hear the gospel. This is where church support groups can make a difference by providing two things: fellowship and a clear voice of what the Scripture teaches about Christian love and peace.”

Dying for a Drink is a book about people who are dying both physically and spiritually. There is treatment for both problems. But two different kinds of medication must be provided, and they must be taken in the proper order. This book responsibly describes that process, and gives hope to both alcoholics and a church that seeks total health for the body.

“Let My People Go”

Exodus and Revolution, by Michael Walzer (Basic Books, 1985, 149 pp.; $15.95). Reviewed by Rodney Clapp, associate editor of CHRISTIANITY TODAY.

John Calvin prooftexted from it. The English Puritans expropriated it. Black slaves were sustained by it. And Karl Marx quoted it.

In fact, according to political philosopher Michael Walzer, the story (historical narrative, not fiction) of Israel’s exodus from Egypt has been something of a foundational model and source of encouragement for nearly all the most important radical political movements in Western history. And thus the primary purpose of his book: To look at the pervasiveness of “exodus” thinking in influencing the action of the downtrodden throughout history.

Exodus Applique

Exodus and Revolution is a scholarly historical survey, never stinting on documentation. Consider Walzer’s citations from the period of the English Puritans. “Israel’s experience [in the Exodus] is on record in Holy Writ for our encouragement,” an English Puritan preached in 1642. And Oliver Cromwell claimed Exodus was “the only parallel of God’s dealing with us that I know in the world.…” That the Exodus was widely discussed, and even used to measure the rightness of the Puritan revolution, is evidenced in a 1645 pamphlet that noted, “But some will say, that our bondage is not yet so bad as that of Egypt was,” and went ahead to argue that, for some English at least, the “popish” oppression was just as bad.

Closer to home, we are reminded of American colonists attacking the “British Pharaoh.” They thought of their venture as an “errand into the wilderness”; and Cotton Mather dubbed John Winthrop the “American Moses.” By the time of the Revolution, the new land was “God’s new Israel.” And it occurred to both Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson that the Great Seal of the United States should feature the Exodus. Franklin proposed that it show Moses with rod lifted and the Egyptian army perishing in the sea; Jefferson suggested the column of Israelites proceeding through the wilderness behind pillars of cloud and fire.

These examples could be multiplied many times and not without a periodic tinge of irony. In Walzer’s words, “The Book of Exodus came alive in the hands of Boer nationalists fighting the British, and it is alive in the hands of black nationalists in South Africa today.” The oppressed have become the oppressors, and the very story that served well their ancestors now empowers their opponents.

Truth And Consequences

Having seen (through Walzer’s labor) the historical pervasiveness of the Exodus, it is important to note that Exodus and Revolution is not a wild-eyed polemic. Walzer, of the Princeton Institute of Advanced Studies, is neither writing a brief outlining God’s political handiwork nor addressing such crucial (and largely theological) questions as the appropriateness of employing Marxist analysis in a strategy for Christian social reform (liberation theology). He is, on the contrary, concerned with the recurrent manifestation of the Exodus story in Western politics, and not the correctness (or incorrectness) of each historical or contemporary application. There can be no improvement on his own eloquent statement of his thesis: “The Exodus is a story, a big story, one that became part of the cultural consciousness of the West—so that a range of political events … have been located and understood within the narrative frame that it provides. This story made it possible to tell other stories.”

The late Francis Schaeffer was fond of saying that ideas make a difference in the real world. Michael Walzer’s book serves to remind us that some of the most potent ideas come inextricably embedded in scriptural “stories” (whether society acknowledges the Source or not). Writes Walzer: “Though in attenuated form, Exodus thinking seems to have survived the secularization of political theory.” Stories—some special ones in particular—have consequences.

New Strategies to Evangelize Muslims Gain Effectiveness

Sharon E. Mumper

Christianity wins converts from Islam in spite of a growing Muslim revival.

If the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and the pursuit of “jihad,” Islamic holy war, has shaken the citadels of international power, the movement has endured some shaking of its own from an unexpected force: evangelical Christianity.

In recent years, as Islam has ascended to power in several countries, Christians have been gearing up for a spiritual “counterrevolution.” Organizations such as the Samuel Zwemer Institute and the U.S. Center for World Mission have alerted the church to the magnitude of the Muslim challenge. The world’s Muslim population represents an unreached group of nearly 900 million people.

“If we don’t go to the Muslims with the gospel in love, God will bring them against us in judgment,” says J. Christy Wilson, Jr., a professor at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary and a former missionary to Muslims. “Muslim eschatology teaches [that] they will conquer the earth. They consider themselves in a holy war to take over the whole world.”

Ironically, Wilson says, Muslims are more open to the gospel today than ever. “In the next 10 years I see a great influx of Muslims to Christ if Christians take the Great Commission seriously.”

As a group, Muslims have been the focus of little Christian missionary effort. Wilson says less than 2 percent of Protestant missionaries have committed themselves to Muslim evangelism. Don McCurry, executive director of the Samuel Zwemer Institute, estimates that for every one million Muslims, only one full-time Christian missionary is working in Muslim evangelism. He says, however, that the number may be growing. His figures do not include “tentmakers,” Christians who take secular jobs in foreign countries hoping to be involved in evangelistic outreach on the side.

Indeed, there is evidence of increased interest in reaching Muslims with the gospel. Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship’s triennial student missions conference at Urbana, Illinois, is a case in point. In 1981, only about 8 of the scores of workshops offered to Urbana’s 16,000 conferees concerned Muslim work or Muslim regions of the world. Last year, however, students crowded some 30 workshops on Muslims and Muslim evangelism.

Mission agencies that are committed primarily to evangelizing Muslims reported a phenomenal response from students at last year’s Urbana conference. Some 650 students inquired about the work of Frontiers, an agency dedicated to planting churches among Muslims. Frontiers president, Greg Livingstone, says that 2,000 young people have requested preliminary applications for missionary service since November.

Spurred by the ground swell of interest among missionary candidates, some established mission agencies have been forced to add Muslim evangelism to their ministries. Others have expanded their work among Muslims.

McCurry says that in the last three years, a dozen U.S. seminaries—including Fuller Theological Seminary, Dallas Theological Seminary, and Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary—have added courses on Muslim evangelism. In addition, the Samuel Zwemer Institute has translated its seminar material into six languages.

During the last five years, three agencies were founded by converted Muslims to evangelize Muslims in the United States. One of those organizations, the Fellowship of Iranian Christians, based in California, has gone international to reach Iranians around the world.

Livingstone says he is encouraged by the potential of outreach to Muslims. “I think in the next two decades we are going to see tens of thousands of Muslims coming to Christ, because I think God is gearing up to do something. He is not prepared to write off one-fifth of humanity.” Livingstone says that during the last 4 years, more Muslims have become Christians than during the previous 20 years.

In Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim country, hundreds of thousands of Muslims have turned to Christ, says Gordon-Conwell’s Wilson. Growing numbers of Muslims in Bangladesh are gathering for Bible studies, and 7 out of 10 people baptized in Iran are converted Muslims. In fact, since Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini gained political control in 1979, Wilson says, more Bibles have been bought by Iranians than in the entire history of the country.

Evangelism among Muslims has been bolstered by new approaches that are increasingly being used by mission agencies.

“We are far more sensitive to cultural issues than we used to be in colonial days,” says McCurry of the Samuel Zwemer Institute. “We are willing to let the converts sit down with an open Bible and design their own structure in terms of organization, liturgy, and lifestyle response to the gospel, rather than imposing the Western modes on them. As a result, Muslims now feel free to plant churches that are congenial to their ethnic and cultural background without compromising the gospel.”

Referred to in missions circles as “contextualization,” the approach gives churches the freedom to adapt some Muslim practices and styles, infusing Christian meaning into the old forms. This effort has resulted in some small Muslim-convert house churches in which believers use some Muslim worship practices, such as taking off their shoes, sitting on the floor, separating men and women during worship, and praying with their foreheads to the floor. In some cases, converts have adapted some Muslim dietary laws and feasts.

The approach is not without its critics. “Some would say it is syncretism,” says Livingstone, of Frontiers. “[But] others would say it is love—not forcing ‘Gentiles’ to become ‘Jews.’ ”

Another trend is an emphasis on the part of missionaries to build deep friendships with Muslims. New methods, like the Language Acquisition Made Practical (LAMP) program, encourage missionaries to develop close relationships with host families. In the LAMP program, a missionary enters a host culture as a learner. Some missionaries live with a family and learn firsthand the language and culture.

As a result of the LAMP approach, Livingstone says, “our people are getting marvelous relationships and entrance into clans that I personally did not get in 12 years overseas.”

Evangelical Orthodox Church Seeks Official Recognition from Eastern Orthodoxy

Leslie R. Keylock

Later this month, the 19 bishops of the fledgling Evangelical Orthodox Church (EOC) will take a major step toward seeking recognition for the EOC as a member of the worldwide Eastern Orthodox communion. Under the leadership of EOC presiding bishop Peter E. Gillquist, the bishops will fly to Istanbul, Turkey, to present themselves to the Ecumenical Patriarch, the spiritual head of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

The EOC bishops will be accompanied by Bishop Maximos of Pittsburgh, a representative of the Greek Orthodox Church in the United States. Bishop Maximos is sponsoring the EOC’s candidacy for membership in the second-largest Christian body in the world, including about one-fourth of the world’s Christians. Although the EOC stresses the importance of continuity with the Orthodox faith, the denomination is not officially recognized by any Orthodox body.

In an unrelated application process, the EOC received word last month that the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) had tabled the denomination’s request for membership. Arthur Gay, immediate past president of the NAE and chairman of the committee that investigated the EOC’s application, had recommended the church’s acceptance. But the organization’s executive committee felt that the time was not right for the denomination to be made an NAE member.

Gillquist said the EOC will continue to seek NAE membership. “We came to Christ through NAE groups, we subscribe to every syllable of the NAE statement of faith, and we have more affinity with the NAE than with the NCC-WCC [National Council of Churches and World Council of Churches].…

“Some of the greatest evangelical preachers, such as John Chrysostom, and some of the greatest missionaries, such as Cyril and Methodius, were Orthodox,” he said. “The EOC has not departed from its evangelical roots.

“If we’d been the [more established] Missouri Synod Lutherans,” Gillquist said, “I think the NAE would have accepted us.”

The roots of the EOC go back to 1973, when Gillquist and six other former Campus Crusade for Christ staff members formed the New Covenant Apostolic Order, a group of house churches scattered across the continent. They had become increasingly interested in the biblical and historical importance of the church and found themselves deeply impressed by the Eastern church fathers and the richness of their ecclesiology. The group was reorganized in 1979 as the EOC. Today the denomination consists of 2,500 members in 27 parishes in 10 states and in Canada.

In Istanbul, the EOC bishops will meet with several standing committees of the Eastern Orthodox Church, and finally with the Ecumenical Patriarch and his staff. The EOC representatives expect to be questioned about their denomination’s theology, ecclesiology, and worship. The denominational leaders say they hope to receive further guidance on how the EOC can be received as a fully recognized member of the Eastern Orthodox communion.

The EOC’s short history has been marked by controversy, especially over its efforts to implement what Gillquist calls biblical teachings regarding church discipline. In 1979, Bill Counts, a former Campus Crusade associate of the EOC’s founding bishops, wrote a paper for the Spiritual Counterfeits Project concerning the extent of authority the EOC bishops exercised over the church’s members.

Ron Zell talked to CHRISTIANITY TODAY as one who had been excommunicated from the EOC. “I feel they hurt people an awful lot by excommunicating a number of people who were struggling to have a relationship with the Lord,” he said. “The leaders set up a very disciplined hierarchical structure, but then they turned authority over to untrained lay ‘priests’ who abused it.”

Zell said he was excommunicated for objecting to the interference of a priest in his marriage. “They said I had made war on them,” he said, “but that was not my intent.” Since then, Gillquist and EOC cofounder Dick Ballew have apologized to Zell.

In a separate incident, former EOC bishop C. Ronald Roberson filed a $10 million lawsuit against the EOC for breach of trust. In the suit, he alleges that after he privately confessed to an adulterous relationship, EOC leaders spread the information to his wife and church before he had a chance to inform them.

David F. Wells, professor of historical and systematic theology at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, said evangelicals who are moving toward Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism “are reacting to a historical deficiency in evangelicalism. But I do not feel the solutions they propose are viable.

“Those who move toward Catholicism today are turning to a romantic, nineteenth-century Catholicism that no longer exists. Those who turn to [Eastern] Orthodoxy are retreating from modernity by escaping to another kind of romanticism, the aura, liturgy, and language” of the early church fathers.

DEATHS

Gordon H. Clark, 82, professor of philosophy and chairman of the philosophy department at Covenant College since 1975, taught at the University of Pennsylvania, at Wheaton (Ill.) College, and at Butler University, author of more than 20 books and commentaries; April 9, in Westcliffe, Colorado, of a liver condition.

Baker James Cauthen, 75, executive secretary and later executive director of the Southern Baptist Foreign Mission Board from 1954 to 1979, former missionary to China, professor of missions at two Southern Baptist seminaries; April 15, in Richmond, Virginia, of an apparent stroke.

William Stringfellow, 56, author, lawyer, Episcopalian lay theologian active in the anti-war and civil rights movements, fought for the ordination of women as Episcopal priests; March 2, in Providence, Rhode Island.

Leila Irene Routh McKinney, 95, widow of gospel music composer and Southern Baptist music pioneer B. B. McKinney; March 1, in San Antonio, Texas, of natural causes.

Robert W. M. Cuthbert, 50, president of the Moravian Church in Jamaica, founder of Christian Action for Development in the Caribbean; February 24, in Kingston, Jamaica, after being shot by an unknown assailant.

Michal Stankiewicz, 61, president and former general secretary of the Baptist Union of Poland, editor of books for Polish Baptists; February 21, in Warsaw, Poland, of an apparent stroke.

Apple PodcastsDown ArrowDown ArrowDown Arrowarrow_left_altLeft ArrowLeft ArrowRight ArrowRight ArrowRight Arrowarrow_up_altUp ArrowUp ArrowAvailable at Amazoncaret-downCloseCloseEmailEmailExpandExpandExternalExternalFacebookfacebook-squareGiftGiftGooglegoogleGoogle KeephamburgerInstagraminstagram-squareLinkLinklinkedin-squareListenListenListenChristianity TodayCT Creative Studio Logologo_orgMegaphoneMenuMenupausePinterestPlayPlayPocketPodcastRSSRSSSaveSaveSaveSearchSearchsearchSpotifyStitcherTelegramTable of ContentsTable of Contentstwitter-squareWhatsAppXYouTubeYouTube