The Two Sides Of The Gospel

This article originally appeared in the book, A Call To Radical Discipleship by Bob Siegel.

Long before the era of government welfare agencies, our own American churches actually assumed that it was their responsibility to care for the physical and emotional needs of our country. They not only delivered souls, they delivered bodies, and spent money on the poor, the oppressed, the widow and the orphan. Christians, prior to the turn of the century, took Christ’s words about being the salt of the earth very seriously (Matt 5:13). To them, the words not only referred to the transformation of the soul, but the transformation of society.

Groups like the Young Men’s Christian Association (formed in 1860) collected money for the downtrodden, cared for the sick in hotels and lodging houses and established schools for children of poor families.

Similarly, the Evangelical Alliance formed by Josiah Strong in 1867 taught that Christians must “study the temporal and spiritual needs of the family and do all possible good.” 1

Somehow that mission has been lost. Today’s Evangelical church sees itself as a preaching mission primarily.

“We are to share the forgiveness of sin,” one frequently hears. “The physical world is important, of course, but not more important than the saving of a soul.”

Ironically, there are literally hundreds upon hundreds of Bible verses in which God commands His people to care for the needs of society. Jesus’ parable of the sheep and the goats serves as a fair representation.

“Then the righteous will answer him, `Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, `I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’ (Matt 25:37-40)

But all too often, the person who points to such verses is accused of being theologically liberal, the courier of a “social gospel.”

A Brief History

This unusual shift of affections began around the turn of the century when many people who grew up in a Protestant America became fascinated with certain philosophies which had been popular in Europe for years and were now spilling to the shores of the United States. Feeling that they had outgrown such “archaic” ideas as a sin nature, or a miracle, some pastors sought to reinterpret the Bible from a more modern point of view. As the Scriptures became “demythologized” the remaining task for the Christian was to offer social services and leave out all talk about heaven, hell or a need to be born again. This reconstructed version of the Christian mission became known as the Social Gospel.

Reacting to the Social Gospel was a group that crossed denominations lines, known as the Fundamentalists. Taking their name from the Bible “fundamentals” ( sin nature, miracles and anything else shined off by Liberal Theologians) the Fundamentalists over reacted by shying away from many programs of social reform, fearing that such actions would water down Christ’s message. Their return to an honest interpretation of the Bible was admirable, but they were so careful not to be classified as Liberals that they went too far.

Interestingly enough, the two positions became much more extreme and polarized after their original leaders passed away. Walter Rauschenbusch, an architect of the Social Gospel did believe in a supernatural conversion experience. On the other hand, William Jennings Bryan, the most well known and outspoken Fundamentalist, honestly felt that the gospel should leave its imprint upon society and its corresponding economy.

Later in the 1950’s, people like Billy Graham sought a happier medium by creating an offshoot of the Fundamentalists known as Evangelicals. Evangelicals admit the church’s obligation to make society a better place. Evangelicals believe that one can practice social reform without compromising the spiritual elements of the gospel. Today it gets a bit confusing because most people use the words fundamentalist and evangelical interchangeably. Many with a Fundamentalist mentality call themselves Evangelicals. Likewise, Evangelicals, claiming to believe in a literal interpretation of God’s word are labeled Fundamentalists and are accused of being uninterested in the poor and the needy. Today’s bottom line: Christians are learning to involved themselves in society again, but such involvement is still viewed suspiciously by many Bible believing churches. There exists in today’s church, vast untapped resources which might flow like life giving veins to a dead nation if they weren’t being so carefully protected.

Toward A Balanced Theology

Truth is, we don’t need to choose between the Social Gospel and the real gospel. Both are opposite sides of the same coin.

“But how can that be? Jesus’ death on the cross was about freeing us from sin, not feeding the poor or building a new world.”

Yes, the cross was instrumental to Jesus’ mission. But he came to accomplish several things. It may be helpful to review the original Jewish concept of Messiah. Although some messianic prophecies speak of a savior who forgives sin, the popular expectation of the Messiah was that of a warrior who would completely deliver the people of Israel from her enemies and from all infirmities. Jesus claimed to be this very Messiah after reading one such prophecy in a public temple service.

“The Spirit of the Lord is on me,

because he has anointed me

to preach good news to the poor.

He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners

and recovery of sight for the blind,

to release the oppressed,

to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

(Luke 4:18-19, From Isaiah 61:1-2)

Notice the phrase “preach good news to the poor.” This what the very word gospel means, good news. Typically, we take that to mean, “the good news that we can be forgiven of our sins.” True enough, but only partly true. Think. If forgiveness from sin is all of the good news, in what way is our message a gospel for the poor? Apparently Jesus is also talking about the good news of being delivered from the effects of sin. In the case of the poor, the specific sin they are being delivered from is the greed and apathy of a society who cast them aside.

But social injustice is not the only evil chain Jesus came to break. He also mentions blindness. Although such physical conditions can be blamed on no man (John 9) we would nevertheless agree that back in paradise nobody was blind. And so, all physical infirmities from blindness to deafness to death itself are ultimately the result of a sin cursed world. Jesus will someday overcome the entire biological curse of the earth (Romans 8:22-25). Meanwhile, as a sample and foreshadowing of this blessed day some will actually receive healing ahead of time.2

As we continue to study the New Testament, we see that the deliverance is even more thorough. Jesus not only healed people physically, he healed them mentally. Sometimes He did both at the same time.

Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people. News about him spread all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering severe pain, the demon-possessed, the epilectics, and the paralyzed, and he healed them (Matt 4:23-24).

The term epileptic is translated more accurately as lunatic in the King James. The actual Greek word is selanuiazomenos, meaning moonstruck or crazy.

Evidently, there is sometimes a relationship between mental/emotional problems and demonic affliction. 3

As we can see, the New Testament defines gospel as the good news that we will be completely free from sin across the board. 4 This includes the sin we commit and the sin committed against us, be it the evil of men, the evil of demons or the consequences of sin in nature. Christ means to free us physically, mentally and spiritually from all sin.

“If the cross is about atonement and forgiveness, how does the cross deliver us from the effects of sin committed against us?”

It is the cross’ connection to the resurrection which delivers us from sin committed against us.

If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin- because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.

Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. (Rom 6:5-9)

On the cross, all sin is destroyed. The resurrection brings about new life, completely free from sin. There could be no resurrection without the cross. It is a two step process, destruction of the old nature and creation of the new nature. The ultimate deliverance frees us from death and returns us to paradise.

But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep (1 Cor 15:20).

For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive (1 Cor 15:22).

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,

for theirs is the kingdom of heaven… Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you ( Matt 5:10, 12a).

I will no longer commit sin against others and others will no longer commit sin against me. That is the nature of paradise.

“But we aren’t free from all these things. That is, we won’t be until the Second Coming.”

True, but Christ’s kingdom is already in the world.

“The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, `Here it is,’ or `There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is within you” Luke 17:20-21).

Although the curse of sin remains in the world, we are to do our part to make the world a better place. Anyone entering the church is entering foreign territory, the embassy of heaven on earth. To the best of our ability, we do what we can to bring about paradise, even though we ultimately can’t succeed until Jesus returns.

Present Day Application

“If liberation from the effects of sin is also part of the gospel, will this not leave people confused about their responsibility? After all, there are so many needs in the world, where does one start?”

No one person can do everything but you can do something. God’s social commands are given to Christians as a whole. It is the entire church body that is called to reach the world. Individuals are expected to add their contribution by touching part of the world.

There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men.

Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good (1 Cor 12:4-7).

“But usually when I hear Christians talk about social justice, they talk more in specific terms than general terms. For example, some will say, ‘‘All Christians should be involved in a significant ministry to the poor.’’ How should we respond to those kinds of exhortations?”

It is human nature to over emphasize our burdens and priorities. It is also God’s purpose to place different gifts and visions in people’s hearts. The heart is so strong and so emotional that one may end up looking at life only through the lens of his/her own sensitivities. There is a tendency to think that my ministry is the same ministry everyone else should have. This is understandable if my work has resulted in changed lives. However, answering a call from God is not the same as answering the call from God.

It would be wrong for me to say that because I have seen a vital need to reach college students, campus ministry is therefore more important than any other kind of mission (even though my passions may tempt me to actually feel that way at times). Likewise, it would be wrong for other ministers to judge my job as inferior to theirs. In fact, as a campus minister I have at times been accused of running a cushy ministry. I’ve been told that students are not in need of help because they are all affluent and well off. If a valid ministry did exist on campus, it was to get these preppy faced, Frisbee playing kids off the plush campus and on to a permanent ministry to the poor. I respond by reminding such colleagues that suicide, teen pregnancy, anorexia and dysfunctional family backgrounds are common to the college community, but sometimes the defense is ignored. Emotional need is compared to material need and it loses out.

But even material need has its classifications. Sadly, I have been to a few missions conference where people bitterly argued over who was truly serving God. Those who worked in the inner city frowned upon the suburban churches only to discover that poverty is sometimes viewed in relative ways.

“Don’t talk to me about the inner city!” one man shouted, standing up out of his chair. “I know people in Central America who would sell their right arm to live in an American inner city!”

One gets the impression when reading Jesus’ parable of the sheep and the goats that he was simply listing an example of human sufferings that warrant attention. He wanted his people to respond with love and generosity to any kind of need wherever they happened to encounter it. He specifically mentioned the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the naked, the sick and the imprisoned. But can’t we infer from other scriptures that he also meant, the orphan and widow (James 1:27), the demonized (Matt. 12:22-29), the outcast (John 4:7-28), and the elderly (Lev. 19:32)? And would we need to have actual scripture verses to imagine that He also cares about the suicidal, the lonely, the drug addict, etc.? Would that not fit the overall thrust and spirit of His words?

A Relevant Gospel For Every Era

“The idea of one issue being no more important than another makes sense. Still, it seems that in history, Christians made a difference by coming together under the tyranny of certain injustices which needed swift corporate attention. Could we not then build a case that sometimes certain issues take precedence?”

Yes, certainly the importance of a movement depends upon the time and the season. The gospel always condemns whatever injustice happens to be fashionable. In Paul’s day, slavery was an evil that needed to be renounced (I Tim. 1:9, Gal 3:28). So clear were his condemning writings that almost two thousand years later, many American slave owners kept their slaves from the influence of the gospel out of fear that they would be without an excuse to release them. True, at times, passages such as “slaves obey your masters” (Eph 6:5) were taken out of context and used to justify slavery. 5 But this did not stop the abolitionists like Charles Finney, who used Christ’s authentic gospel as the trigger for a movement that would ultimately find expression in the Civil War.6 And so, it can be argued that in Finney’s day as well as Paul’s, part of the gospel was the renouncing of slavery.

But the end of American slavery was not the end of oppression in the world. In 1930’s Germany, under the dictatorship of Hitler, people like the Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer felt compelled to preach a gospel that condemned racism, euthanasia and terrorism. He joined the underground Confessional Church and ultimately was hung for his beliefs. This took place in our “enlightened” twentieth century, at a time when human beings believed that they were morally evolving. Following suit, the later part of our century has seen apartheid in South Africa and horrible bloodshed in places like Bosnia, etc.

Summary

The Bible recognizes no difference of importance in ministry but it does command us to meet a variety of needs. This command is given to the church as a whole, with individual members using their gifts and adding their part. However, because of recent church history, the idea of ministering to more than just the soul is an idea needing to be recaptured, without the fear of being branded as theologically liberal. It may be true that not every not every individual is called to work at some shelter but it is true that more of the poor would be fed today if churches would wake up and return to their special heritage. We try our hardest to make life better for people and in doing so we reflect the day when Christ’s death and resurrection reach their final fulfillment by restoring the paradise of God’s kingdom.

This task will take on a different direction, depending upon the times and the societies Christians find themselves in.

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,

for they will be filled (Matt 5:6).

Footnotes

1 Winthrop Hudson, American Protestantism (The University of Chicago Press, 1961)115

2 This teaching has been abused by those who perpetuate the Prosperity Gospel, a faulty theology promising that anything asked of God will be given, if we ask in faith. Financial prosperity and physical healing are emphasized the most. Without jumping to such needless extremes, we can still observe that Jesus’ death and resurrection will bring about complete healing and freedom from want, someday in the kingdom of heaven. In the meantime, God, at certain times, heals in this life, according to His will and purpose.

3 An ongoing debate exists between Christians who completely renounce any kind of psychology and Christians who embrace psychology to the point of underestimating the reality of spiritual warfare. I believe that both positions are far too extreme and this insightful passage suggests that we need not separate the two. Indeed, there have been documented cases where deep rooted psychological therapy and demonic deliverance have gone hand in hand. This is not to suggest that all emotional problems are demon related. Likewise, it would be naïve to assume that simply because psychology can explain a problem, that certain demons did not exploit this problem, creating a window into some one’s life. Suffices to say that Christ wants to deliver us mentally and spiritually, either as separate or integrated conditions.

4 Some types of Liberation Theology take this idea to extreme, unnecessary proportions. Claiming that God is always on the side of the oppressed, they justify violent revolutions. I believe we can resonate with the idea of being liberated from the effects of sin without having to embrace Liberation Theology.

5 Albert J, Rabateau, Slave Religion (New York: Oxford University Press, 1978)

6 Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christianity Volume II (Harper and Row Publishers, 1975, 1269

Scripture taken from THE HOLY BIBLE

New International Version NIV

Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House.

Printed in the United States of America