Nooma & Velvet Elvis

Am still feeling captivated by the NOOMA videos (or more precisely, #1 "Rain") and am trying to weigh up the whole "doing evangelism in a faithful yet relevant way".
As part of that weighing, I decided to have a look at Biblical critiques of Rob Bell's first book, "Velvet Elvis". The best I read was at Reformation 21. From the excerpts they quote, I have to say I agree with their conclusions: Rob Bell is clearly well-intentioned and seems well-taught. He's a great communicator and he says things in fresh ways. And so you really want to agree with him. But there are some serious errors in that book.
Pivotally, he seems to tie truth to experience rather than knowledge. And that seems to work itself (unsurprisingly) in tying our relationship with God to our experience of Him, rather than His revelation of himself to us in and through the Bible. For example,

Bell speaks of a time in his life when he was getting burned out trying to be a “super-pastor.” He reveals the advice of his counselor that helped him come to grips with the essence of his sin.

“He said, in what has become a pivotal moment in my journey, ‘Your job is the relentless pursuit of who God has made you to be. Anything else you do is sin and you need to repent of it’.” Velvet Elvis, 114

Once again this sounds appealing and may have good motives. Bell hopes to help people rid themselves of an idealized version of what they are supposed to be, accept who they are, and realize that this is an important part of accepting God’s grace.

Yet, the Bible speaks of sin and grace in so much more profound and accurate terms. Where does the Bible ever suggest that our primary calling is “the relentless pursuit of who God has made us to be”? Bell makes it sound as if the essence of godliness is self-realization. His “sin” was that he was trying to be a “super-pastor,” something that went contrary to his personal make-up. Apparently, he was too creative and spontaneous to fit that mould. His “repentance” was a matter of deciding to “kill super-pastor” and be true to himself.

Now I do believe that experience is a key part of God's work in us. But it seems to me that the flow must always be:

Bible ---> Head ---> Heart

and not the other way around. As a very good friend once said to me, once you lose the Bible as decisive authority, you cut the anchor chain. The ship might drift quickly, or it might drift slowly, but it will drift. Now from what I've seen, I think it's unlikely that Bell himself will drift far. But those who are brought up on his teaching or intentionally imitate him may well do.

So back to the NOOMA videos. Should we (as this month's issue of the Briefing suggests) never use them for anything other than critique? Well, I'm still not convinced on that front. Rain seems to me to be a great video to share with friends who've been going through hard times. It seems to say a lot of the things I would want to say, but often don't have the opportunity or the courage or the words. In many ways, it is echoing Jesus' call, "come to me all you who are weary and are heavy laden and you will find rest for your souls." Now I would really struggle to get many of these friends into church, or to read a Christian book on the subject. But it is so easy to watch a 10 minute video that's freely available on the internet. Yes it is true that if they liked it so much that they went and read all of Rob Bell's stuff they might put their trust in Jesus in a way that is less well anchored than you might want. But at least they'd have put their trust in Jesus! And the far more likely scenario is that it will make their minds start turning and asking questions.
Watch it for yourself and let me know what you think!

Faithful evangelism

So there's this one guy. And he's just so easy to listen to. And at the same time he's a Christian and he's real and he's talking about things that really matter to people. And he says things like, "I mean that's why so many of us are so fascinated with Jesus, because he never stops insisting that God really, really loves us exactly as we are. I mean, isn't that what draws you to him?" And this guy is telling me how if you do evangelism by going into the street and telling people that they're facing judgement then that isn't what Jesus would want - he wants you to really love them.
And then there's this other guy. He's clear and reasoned and convincing. And he's a Christian too. And he's saying that this first guy has got it wrong. That if we really love people, we've got to tell them of the danger they're in. And then he goes and does it. He calls 4 guys from off the street and talks with them. He talks about their sin and that they're facing hell and they need a saviour to save them from God's judgement.
And then there's this third guy. And he's sincere and serious. And he's an atheist. And he's saying that "if you saw a building on fire; and if you knew that there were people in it; and if you knew that you were capable of running in there and saving someone who wasn't able to help themselves... would you just stand there and do nothing? And unfortunately, by not clearly seeing the issue, I think that's what a lot of Christians do - they just stand there."
And then there's me. And I'm torn between what the first guy is doing and what the second guy is arguing. And if there's one thing I'm sure of, it's that I don't want to just stand there.

OK, enough of the overly extemporary style. This is important and serious and powerful stuff. How do we rightly do evangelism? How do we tell others about Jesus in a way that is faithful and honest and effective and relevant. In answering this question, I'm going to attempt to find a middle path between the "emerging church movement" as typified by the "first guy" (Rob Bell) and (what I call) the "unchanging proclamation" establishment as typified by the "second guy" (Todd Friel/Way of the Master). In doing so, I am almost certain to please no one, but that never stopped me before!

I think the main thing I want to say is that I believe they're both right:
On the one hand, we must keep proclaiming the central truths of the Gospel: we're cut off from the God who made us by our rebellion against him. As a result we deserve and are facing his judgement. In his love, God sent his only Son to die in our place, taking the punishment we deserve so that we don't have to. God raised Jesus to life to prove it and he now offers the free gift of eternal life to everyone who will trust him.
On the other hand, we must do so in a way that is culturally relevant and understandable, and sincerely loving. But most of all - and surely if we miss this, we surely must have missed the point - we should be looking (primarily) for people to see how glorious Jesus is and so turn to him (rather than see how scary hell is and so run from that). Isn't that what the parable of pearl of great price is all about?

The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and covered up. Then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.
Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, who, on finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it. (Matthew 13.44-46)

So here are some of the dangers that I think we need to be careful to avoid as conservative evangelicals:

1. It's not about numbers: Our job is not to create a large church, it's to be faithfully living as Christians (which means loving God and loving others with words and actions and lives and therefore includes proclaiming the gospel, but is much more than just word-evangelism)
   
2. We must not value conversion over discipleship: Jesus commands us to make disciples not to make converts. Our job is not done when someone professes faith in Christ - it is only just beginning. It finishes when Christ returns or God calls them home.
3. We proclaim Christ and him crucified (1Cor 2.2): When we're telling people the gospel let's proclaim "Christ and him crucified" - not just "him crucified". The way we do evangelism often implies that people already know who Jesus is and why they might want a relationship with him. That might have been true 100 years ago; it certainly isn't true today. In Piper's words, let's preach the gospel through to its conclusion: eternity in relationship with God, the One to be desired above all else.
4. You don't have to proclaim the whole gospel in one go: Our task is an urgent one. Jesus could return very soon (even today). Or it might be a long time (Matthew 25.1-13). There seems to be a balance in the teaching on Jesus' return that says both these things - i.e. we need to be ready whether he comes quickly or delays. So that will mean giving urgent priority to Christ, while at the same time, doing things in a way that is strategic - that looks to the long term. (Otherwise, Paul would surely not have stopped in any city for more than a few days?!). So a good aim for an "evangelistic event" or "guest service" would be to whet people's appetites for Jesus (so that they leave longing to hear more) rather than trying to ensure that they have heard the whole gospel in one sitting. [My guess is that the former is far more effective in 21st-century Britain than the latter, but I'll leave it to someone else to look up the stats!]
   
5. Evangelism is about life as well as lip: I don't agree with St Francis ("Preach the Gospel always, and when necessary use words"). You will always have to use words if you want someone to come to know Jesus. But it is surely the case that a godly life is an essential part of faithful evangelism (see 1Peter 2.12, for example)
6. Confrontational evangelism is not the only valid style of evangelism: Sometimes, we see kicking off a conversation about the Cross as the only valid form of word evangelism. But surely, God has made us all different, with different gifts. A helpful explanation I've seen in this context is differing evangelism styles. You can "do evangelism" by inviting someone along to an event at church or answering their question about what Christians believe.
7. Evangelism must be understandable and culturally relevant: Why don't we stand at the front of church and just read Bible passages on a Sunday? Surely it's because we believe that we need (i.e. God wants us) to preach in a way that is particularly relevant to the individuals in our church and in our town. And surely the same goes for evangelism. We do our best to make it relevant and engaging and individual and sincere while by no means changing the central message.

May God keep us from complacency and keep us holding out the gospel by word and deed in a way that is loving and relevant and real and faithful.