 |
||
 |
||
Jim's PERSPECTIVEOctober 21, 2014The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe the gospel. Mark 1:15 Some years ago a pastor friend, while vacationing near Nashville, sent me a humorous greeting card. On the front was a black and white photo taken probably sometime in the 1930s. Two gaunt-looking, grim, stoic, joyless men dressed in black suits and wearing black hats glared menacingly out at the viewer. On the inside of the card was one word in capital letters: REPENT! It was a funny card, but it struck me as a poignant comment on a particular kind of gospel preacher, as well as a comment on the nature of preaching itself. The word “repent” carries some negative, and often stereotypical, connotations in the minds of a quite a few people concerning the nature of Christians and Christian ministry. Unless we happen to tune into an AM radio broadcast in certain rural parts of the country, we are not likely to hear the message of repentance—in the context of “hell-fire and damnation”—proclaimed much today. As part of an urban-oriented, “enlightened” and cultured people, we expect to hear engaging, intelligent, witty, and “useful” sermons that we can apply to our lives to make them better. A woman in one of the churches I served as pastor once told me—with a straight face—“Jim, you’re a good preacher, but you only preach from the Bible. I don’t give a damn what the disciples were doing; I need something for me today.” That’s a direct quote, by the way. I’m still laughing about that, but what a telling evaluation that actually is. She was right, of course. I do preach only from the Bible. That is to say, the Bible is my principle point of reference and source of authority. And yet, one would never hear me use the words, “The Bible says….” As many who know my basic bent will agree, I quote extensively from the scriptures. And I try my best to put my comments and interpretations in an accurate exegetical context. I will say, “Paul, in Romans 3 or whatever, verse thus-and-such, says this….” I am a believer in good, responsible exegesis as a basis for scriptural interpretation and preaching. The word in Greek, as I’m fond of saying, is “exegesthai,” and it means “to lead out,” and it should be obvious that the thing one is trying to lead out is the meaning of the text. There are preachers I have known who state (perhaps somewhat arrogantly and pompously), “I don’t need any seminary professors telling me what to say, or what the Bible says. The Holy Spirit gives me the words.” I get that, and my own testimony is that I rely on the Holy Spirit for understanding and wisdom. (A quick side-note, and, BTW, something I learned in seminary, is that there is a direct connection between Old Testament “wisdom” (sophia) and the Holy Spirit in the New Testament.) Biblical interpretation, it seems to me, without being grounded in actual, practical, and firsthand intelligible experience is lacking in depth. In other words, if something in scripture has not touched, or impacted, one personally, or is not relevant to one’s life (or others’ lives), or if it is not something that one has not attempted to think through, one should not espouse an opinion when one really doesn’t know what one is talking about. I feel that a lot of preaching today is second-hand, in that preachers often repeat without question what they have been told or taught, whether in seminary or bible college, or what they have received from the “party lines” of a specific religious tradition, or even from a mentor/spiritual guide that they revere. I am not at all suggesting that religious traditions, or mentors and spiritual guides should not be relied on. Again, as people who know me will attest, I also quote extensively from a number of mentors and persons who have been instrumental in the development of my spiritual life. There were many teachers who helped to form the thinking processes that inform and guide me to this day. Some of these guides are authors I never met or knew (but whom I love nonetheless), and they are persons from the distant, as well as more recent, past of church history, including the biblical characters themselves or persons throughout the centuries who, as the writer of Hebrews points out in chapter 11, “were all commended for their faith.” I think that what I am trying to say is that what we preach should be subject to unrelenting and unmerciful scrutiny and self-evaluation. One should ask what one actually knows, and not just what one has been told. One should ask, “Why do I believe this?” or “Why are we doing this?” I know too many Christians who don’t dare question their own belief systems and religious practices because they see such questioning as a lack, or breach, of faith. “You’re not supposed to question God,” I have heard it said more than once. Philip Yancey is an author who is not afraid to ask tough questions in the face of criticism from one’s peers (I am thinking of fellow Christians). Where Is God When It Hurts? Disappointment with God, and Prayer: Does It Make Any Difference? are three of his many book titles, and good examples of what I think God truly means when He says, through the prophet, “Come, let us reason together….” (Isaiah 1:18). To those who claim reliance on the Holy Spirit to “give them the words….” I would challenge them to ask the Spirit what the Spirit is actually trying to communicate to them. Because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth, and because of Jesus’ promise that “the Spirit will lead (us) into all truth,” it would stand to reason that one could pray, “Lord, what do you think about this?” and expect to get something of a true response—unless one is afraid to find out the truth is that God does not have much, if anything, to say about their particular received traditions or their cherished practices. Now I think I’m ready to talk about the need for preaching “Repent ye, and believe the gospel.” I have a friend who came to my home to visit me a little more than a year ago. He is a good guy and a dedicated Christian who passes out gospel tracts and witnesses wherever he gets the opportunity. He drops by once in a while to remind me that Jesus is coming soon, and that I need to be out ministering because “the harvest is great, but the workers are few.” I believe that. However, the last conversation we had was on the nature of preaching, in the sense of its primary task. He was of the opinion that we need to be about warning people of the dangers of hell, and therefore we must preach repentance. I said to him that my understanding of preaching is to tell what you know (and that’s all you can tell), and that “as therefore you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him” (Colossians 2:6). And since I received him in love and joy, I felt that the emphases of my preaching is as it was for my late father-in-law, Earl Tyson, who preached the love of God and the joy of “living in the kingdom on the way to the kingdom.” I told him that I was well aware that there are Christians who believe, as does my friend, that to preach God’s love—without first preaching repentance—is to “water down” the gospel and shirk the responsibility of warning unbelievers that they will perish if they do not turn. When my friend explained to me that he receives the word of God as a “little child,” I told him that I take seriously what Jesus said, “unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven,”and I believe that to be actually true, in the sense that without repentance one cannot see the Kingdom, comprehend the Kingdom—hence cannot “enter” the Kingdom. He responded by saying, “Jim, in the past I have heard your testimony, and you have a tremendous testimony. But I have to ask you, in all of that did you actually repent? Because I think that you are claiming to know something you don’t know.” Ouch. I actually laughed out loud and said to him, “In all my years as a Christian you are the third person who actually has spoken those very words to me: …’you are claiming something you don’t know.’” I told him that some time ago, when the second of those three asked me, “Did you actually say the words, ‘Lord Jesus, I repent. Come into my heart and forgive me of my sin.’” I said, “No, I didn’t. I was too busy weeping for my sin.” I said to him that I felt it went without saying, and I know that God was—and is—OK with it. Allow me to explain here how I understand repentance and the need to preach it. The word, “repentance,” in the Greek is “metanoia,” and it literally means, “after/behind one’s mind,” or, put another way, “after a change of mind.” But the Hebrew sense of repentance comes from a word (shuwb) that means, “to turn.” I see it this way: someone driving in Virginia on Interstate 64 West with the intention of going to Staunton (pronounced “Stanton” for you non-Virginians) via Interstate 81, at the intersection of I-64 and I-81, must go south. If one goes north to Harrisonburg, then one is going in the wrong direction. The moment one “turns,” that is, turns around by steering onto the exit that will allow a reversal of course to get back on Interstate 81—this time going south—one is said to have “repented,” i.e., changed one’s mind. But in thinking about it, it occurs to me that something has to precede the actual turning. It is the realization that one is traveling in the wrong direction and needs to change course. Please do not misunderstand what I am saying. I am not talking about feelings of sadness, guilt, and regret for having taken the wrong road. Feelings have relatively little bearing on the action of repenting, or, turning. I am referring to the reasoned understanding that one needs to reverse one’s course. Comprehending the extent to which one is going the wrong way has nothing to do with the actual decision to turn off the interstate and go another way. In repentance, as a biblical concept, one need not understand one’s need for a savior. But it is, I believe, crucial and non-negotiable that one needs to recognize the need simply to take an action to alter one’s present course apart from a savior. There is a pre-requisite within the idea of repentance that does need to be discussed: confession. “Confession,” in my understanding, is an admission of wrong. Again, accompanying feelings of remorse are not required. I may not be capable of regret or realizing anything beyond the need to go another way. But I must at least recognize my need for a different direction. Nearly forty years ago I heard a minister friend once say, “When you confess the sin, the sin loses its power over you.” That struck me as profound. Confession is naming the thing that has gone awry. Let me say again: one need not correctly identify the depth and nature of “the wrong thing,” but one must at least admit that one is wrong. To identify the thing, whether through revelation by the Spirit of Truth, or through a “eureka” moment in which the light bulb comes on (possibly the same thing), is to be free from it, or, rather, to take the first steps toward being free from it. “Taking the first step” away from the thing that went awry is repentance. The realization of having done (said, thought, intended) the wrong is confession. Failure to confess, or name the thing, means, I believe, that one cannot take another step toward self-awareness and freedom (Remember Jesus’ words: “Except you turn….you will not enter the Kingdom of God….”). In any relationship the unconfessed—or unnamed— thing will always stand as a barrier between the two parties. In Galatians 5:1 Paul writes, “It is for freedom that Christ has set you free.” Confession/ repentance is actually the means to that freedom. And the preaching of freedom, in my opinion, is the essence of the preaching of the gospel. Repentance must be preached because it speaks to what it means to be “delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.” Therefore, “Repent, and believe the gospel.” - Jim Radford |
||
|
©2013 Jim Radford. All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication prohibited.
|
