Been thinking about something for a while, and thought I might share my thoughts … It starts with this verse:
“Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” James 4:4
Yeah, I know. Pretty harsh. But if we believe it, isn’t it worth looking at?
The Church has, on some level, always struggled with their relationship to the world. They are not the world, but they live in it and are called to it. Over the last decade or so, the modern American Body of Christ has centered this discussion around one word: relevant.
In order to spread the gospel and fulfill the Great Commission, some interaction with the world is necessary. Different Christians and groups of believers have different views on how to handle this. I don’t have time or space to address every perspective on this continuum. Suffice it to say we have communes and compounds for the separation, Christian night clubs for the immersion, and everything inbetween.
In order for the world to hear the gospel of Christ, there must be some shared cultural considerations. A common language is key for communication. Within that common language, adaptations must be allowed for since languages constantly change. Idioms and phrases are added or lost, cultural definitions changed. If we spoke in Middle English (for whatever reason), most people would not be able to understand even simple concepts.
So we return to the concept of relevance. Defined, relevance is “relation to the matter at hand; also: practical and social applicability.”
The modern idea of relevance takes its cues from the popular culture or the culture with which we hope to communicate, more the second part of that definition. Punks need a punk-looking dude to minister to them. A CEO needs a Christian businessman to relate to. You get the picture. Movies, music, and other media are seen as necessary elements to effectively communicating the truth of Christ.
As I’ve spoken of before, I don’t see this type of relevance considered in the New Testament. In fact, while this type of relevance is by no means sinful and could be the work of God at times, it has a real danger to it: the attempt to befriend the world.
More on that later.
First, let’s discuss biblical relevance. John the Baptist had a very relevant ministry. He was sent to prepare the way for Christ, an event very close to his own time. It was very relevant for that generation. “Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand.”
Of course, John didn’t dress particularly well or make a lot of friends in high places, but I would still say he was pretty relevant.
Jesus always addressed the real issue with people, sometimes harshly. Their sin, their need to be healed, their hypocrisy, His very presence were all very relevant to those He spoke and ministered to.
Of course, after speaking, people tried to kill Him or just left Him in droves.
Peter, on the Day of Pentecost, addressed the supernatural tongues the city of Jerusalem witnessed that morning, concluding that they were to be saved from this “evil generation.” While thousands were converted that day, Peter and the other apostles were ultimately persecuted and executed.
In other words, true biblical relevance will lead the world to hate you.
It is difficult to save people from an “evil generation” when we’re trying to be and look just like them.
Biblical relevance is the specific call to repent to that generation and those within that culture.
The only real cultural consideration is to make sure that our cultural habits don’t get in the way of THAT MESSAGE.
How might our modern view of relevance then be dangerous? First, it is not in styles or cultural expressions that we err. It is the message we must change in order to befriend the world. Instead of repentance (not the word alone but the true spiritual idea and concept of it), we approach grace as a means to be saved and yet remain unchanged in behavior.
Secondly, our ministries and assemblies become so worldly that no one can see the difference between the Church and the world, and we are satisfied with that, if not proud of it. This makes “returning” to the world extremely easy for thsoe who would be believers, although it could be argued that they never really left the world in the first place.
Thirdly, and maybe more important, if not foundational, we are more concerned with what the world says about us than what God’s opinion is. God doesn’t have an opinion, though. It is the only truth. The fact that we forsake this truth for the opinion of an evil generation is tragically expressive of who we really worship.
The challenge here is not to change our dress or music style, but rather what we say, what we do, and who we do it for. That alone makes us relevant. Were not those on the Titanic who tried to get people into lifeboats while the liner was sinking relevant? I would say so. Nothing else but truth in love makes us relevant.
Christ doesn’t need our help to make Him cool or attractive enough. If we really believed He alone was truth and had what all men need, would we even try?
Peace.
