“CHURCH IN TRANSLATION” continued...

Three categories of Mission and Evangelism for us to consider in re-shaping how we do mission and evangelism in a post-Christian world:
•Culture and Evangelism: Shifting From Modernity To Postmodernity
•Leadership and Evangelism: Merging Missiology And Ecclesiology
•Worship and Evangelism: Practicing Missional Worship

CULTURE AND EVANGELISM: SHIFTING FROM MODERNITY TO POSTMODERNITY

Dan identified three shifts for doing evangelism and mission in a post-Christian world:

1. Shift our imaginations from “modern” to “postmodern” - Face reality and live in the present.
This is really nothing new; I have written and quoted others regarding this key concept often. Still, many people who have grown up in “church culture” don’t get it. For some, it is impossible to see and realize that the way we understand and interpret faith is through a specific set of cultural lenses. They think that the way we believe, express faith, and understand Scripture, church, doctrine, etc. is exactly how it really "is." However, we in western culture have been formed by an array of factors that affect our approach and grasp of faith. We have a “modern” worldview heavily influenced by the Enlightenment, where reason is advocated as the primary source of legitimacy and authority. Everything must make logical sense, so we look for rational, logical explanations and responses to everything--so everything (including faith) must be provable in terms of how we understand the world today (through our cultural world view).


See the irony here?! Faith - Provable...! For example, “moderns” read the Bible rationally to prove or disprove every word of the Bible in modern terms. The results of this thinking range from complete disbelief in miracles and relegating the Bible to fables (because they are not rational or compatible with the “ultimate reality “ of modern science) to completely airtight solutions and theologically forced dogmas on the other. The modern mind seeks to nail everything down into absolutes that can be proven empirically (with our senses; demonstrated by experience/experiment). This is how truth and enlightenment are figured out and, when carried to the extreme, result in dramatic systematic theologies like dispensationalism and the harder manifestations of fundamentalism. (Note: This modern, “enlightened” worldview is very different from that of the biblical writers, who came out of oral story telling traditions with high imagery and broad theological frameworks. No doubt they would be completely frustrated by much of our “modern” approach and understandings!)

The “postmodern” worldview is still not completely defined and understood. However, at its foundation, secular postmodernists reject the notion of absolute truth, along with “modern” assumptions and constructs of reality on the grounds that, basically, it has failed to live up to its billing! The Enlightenment said it could figure out this world and make it a better place, so why, after centuries of attempts, is it still a mess? Postmoderns deconstruct modernism and, in doing so, are actually returning to much of the mystery, possibility, and awarenesses of the ancient worldviews that surrounded the biblical writers. The deeper motivation of most postmodern thinkers, particularly for postmodern Christians, is not to reject truth or what is right and wrong, but rather to question the “modern” worldview assumptions that it has everything figured out. In many ways, Christians should be excited about postmodernism because postmodern people are more open to the reality of God’s mysterious, creative, unpredictable work. (ex. Romans 11:33 - “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom of and knowledge of God! How unsearchable His judgments, and His paths beyond tracing out!”).

Bottom line: “It is time to recognize where we have made cultural philosophies steeped in the Enlightenment more of a basis of our understanding of truth than the writers of the Bible intended. If we are willing to let go of the parts of the Enlighten-ment that are real encumbrances and lean into the best of postmodernism, we will begin to imagine a future that is throbbing with possibilities for mission and evangelism.” I like that!

2. Shift our conversations from propositional to invitational - Focus on relationships and have real conversations.
Early in the redevelopment process at First Cov. Minneapolis, Dan identified two groups of new attenders who were interested in what they were doing: 1. churched followers of Christ who had left the Church because had been severely damaged by it to the point where they swore they would never return to the institutionalized Church. (They even coined a word for these people, from the German: gemeindebeschaedigt!) There are LOTS of gemeindebeschaedigts in America right now, and they may be the best group of people to bring new life and mission into our church contexts. 2. postmodern seekers invited in by personal invitation. This is essential: postmodern seekers must be personally invited in. The average secular postmodern person is so inoculated against the Church that they resent it for what it represents and will never visit a church out of curiosity. They have had enough organized religion, sound bytes, and judgmental versions of Christianity, so the only way they will even come close is by many conversations over a long period of time to establish personal relational credibility with us who are inside the Church.


The way we converse with people like those described above is critical! Our conversations must be less propositional and more invitational--that is, relationships are more essential than facts and information and being “right.” From discussions with postmodern seekers at First Cov. Dan made the following observations:
•The most honest conversations that many Christians have are with people and in situations outside of the church. The Church tends to uphold a veiled (less-than-honest!) authenticity.
•The Church often makes Christian faith a construction and not a journey...a series of transactions and propositions and not a process.
•Many churched people shut down real conversations before they can even happen! Quoting Scripture, declaring answers, making judgments, pointing out the person’s errors, etc.
•In the Church’s inability to have dialogue, there tends to be an unhealthy extreme of either too many answers (which come across as simplistic platitudes) or no answers.
•Christians need to be able to express themselves in ways that do not put people on the defensive.
•Christians need to learn how to bring people together before they can bring people to Christ. The way we approach people in today’s culture is different than before.
•We always need to be learning what Church is, not just reinforcing the same thoughts and ideas that are more rooted in sociological practices than theological realities (ex. busy activities labeled “Christian” or “ministry”).

3. Shift our perspective from dualism to holism - Revisit theological moorings and view the the world differently.


“Dualism” is the practice of pitting things against each other. “Holism” is the practice of seeing everything as a whole. A dualistic Christian believes God created everything, that we are all created in the image of God, and God loves everyone. But they look at the devastating results of human sin and assume that its effects are so damaging that no one except those who have committed their lives to Christ can know much about God. Also, dualists hold that the starting point of God’s relationship with people is His wrath and anger against people because of the sin they’ve inherited, often inferring that people are worthless before they make a confession of Christ--and in some cases they are made to feel worthless afterwards as well. It is very much an “us” and “them” view; an “in” and “out” understanding of reality; “God likes me better than you”--dualistic!

Dan asked: “Why do evangelicals have interfaith debates rather than forums or conversations? Is Jesus not winsome enough and the Holy Spirit powerful enough that, when He is presented clearly, He will make Himself known in the hearts of people? Many evangelical Christians do not believe this to be enough and would rather describe our relationship with other religions and lifestyles in dualistic war terminology.” Jesus taught humility, servanthood, kindness, loving our enemies, living sacrificially, giving anonymously, praying for others, not judging others, not buiding self-esteem around material things. When people say they follow Jesus, then trample on His life ethic, they appear hypocritical. And American culture rightly calls out this “dualism” (ex. Christian pastor and congregation from Topeka, Kansas picketing military funerals, preaching that the casualties of war are God’s punishment for our society tolerating homosexuality!


“Christians” preying on the bereaved! Broadcasting simplistic political assumptions about complex issues!). The Church has a lot of work to do here. Much of the decline and rejection of the Church is because of dualism, and rather than be defensive when gemeindebeschaedigts rip into Christianity and the Church, we need to sit with them in their anger and disappointment and call it out for what it is: hypocrisy!

Dan again: “Imagine Christianity as a movement of people known for not condemning people. A movement where there are no threats to burn other religion’s holy books. No signs being held up at public events that say “God hates...” No broad or wildly insensitive judgments and condemnation against people groups (or worse yet, entire nations) who have been devastated by natural disasters or unimaginable terrorists attacks. Imagine more Christians and Christian denominations being more like Jesus, creating safe space for sinful, imperfect people to journey to God.” (ex. our Covenant “evangelism” approach: “One Step Closer!”)

In the book, “Unchristian,” the authors conducted thousands of interviews with late teens to 30-somethings and found common perceptions and themes: the Christian Church is hypocritical, driven by ulterior motives to get decisions for Christ, anti-gay, sheltered, too political, and overall, angry, anti-everything, and judgmental. Shifting from dualism to holism is our best chance at correcting the harsh truths of these claims. This shift is a big one! It is often masked by such common church phrases as “standing up for truth,” “slippery slope” arguments, debates about what is sacred and what is secular in our culture, etc. And of course there is no guarantee that just changing this aspect of our approach will overcome people’s objections to the message of Jesus Christ and the Bible, which exist in every age. It does guarantee to remove many of the false and unnecessary barriers between people and Jesus Christ, including institutional, sociological, and theological barriers.

Shifting from dualism to holism asks us to reflect deeply on the impact of our theological moorings and assumptions. This is why the view of atonement embraced by the our Covenant denomination is so important to Christian mission today! P.P. Waldenström asserted that “atonement has its origin in God’s love.


All of God witnesses to this love, but only in Jesus is its essential nature fully disclosed. There it is seen to be unconditional; ‘it does not love for any other reason than that it is love.’ Love moves God to stand at the side of sinners and to identify with them at whatever cost.” Evangelicalism has lived under the Reformed teaching of wrath for so long that it doesn’t even recognize its on vitriol! We need to hear again the words of Paul: “Don’t show contempt for the riches of God’s kindness, tolerance, and patience by not realizing that God’s KINDNESS leads you toward repentence.” (Romans 2:4) And this, from Franciscan friar Richard Rohr: “God does not love us if we change; God loves us so that we can change.”

Well, as usual, I added more detail than I orignally intended, got long-winded, and only just summarized the first of three parts of Dan Collison’s inspiring, insightful workshop from the Midwinter Conference! So I think I better stop here for now and conclude with a third installment of my blog in two more weeks, hopefully finishing up this topic with just one more part. The rest of Dan’s material is more specific and less conceptual (?) so it can be communicated with shorter points and headings. Look for it after Easter. And let me know what you think of Dan’s perspective! If the old adage, “the proof is in the pudding,” is true, what is happening in the life of First Cov. Minneaplis certainly bears out the truth of Dan’s teaching and approach to ministry! A blessed Holy Week to you all...