The Main Task of the Church « Reformation Faith Today

The Main Task of the Church

March 3, 2008 in Church, Ecclesiology, Gospel, Missions, Preaching & Preachers

Many thanks to Dr. Sean Lucas of Covenant Theological Seminary for the quote below. He posted recently a quote from Nelson Bell, father-in-law of Billy Graham.

There is a central emphasis which the Church and individual Christians must constantly keep before them and, because we “wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places,” we face the ever present temptation to change that emphasis to something more compatible with human reason and pride.

The all-important emphasis, the very key-stone of the gospel message, is redemption of the individual soul and this redemption means a change of destination, a change of eternal environment, for those who believe.

While it is true that the home, the community and the nation are safer, happier, and better in every when when lived in and influenced by Christians, these happy results are incidental to the Gospel of Christ, for our Lord came into this world for the primary purpose of saving sinners, giving to those who believe in Him eternal life.

Without discounting in the least the social implications of the gospel, we need to constantly remember that there can only be social blessings and changes after men have been saved from sin and live unto righteousness. There is the constant temptation to long for the fruit and forget the absolute importance of the true from which the fruit must come. Social reforms must come through and from redeemed lives. Without such a transformation vital and lasting changes cannot materialize.

6 Replies

wesvanderlugt
March 3, 2008 at 11:14 am

This is a good dynamic understanding of the necessary social implications of the gospel but the priority of the Spirit transforming lives before it is possible to transform homes and communities and neighborhoods and nations.
Les
March 3, 2008 at 12:06 pm

What I resonate with here is the emphasis on what the bible emphasizes:

1. Jesus came to seek and save lost sinners.
2. Jesus called us to be “fishers of men” not “fixers of men.”
3. The great commission is to “make disciples” not “make communities.”
4. The gospel is the death, burial and resurrection of Christ on behalf of the elect, not social action.

That said, my post-mil theology tells me that when God saves sinners and we do indeed teach them to observe all things Jesus commanded (which includes the epistles), then indeed society will get better. But it will be as a result of Christians doing what the bible says: loving our neighbors, loving our enemies, etc.
But I believe these things are not the task of the organized congregations.

Otherwise, I think we confuse the gospel with the implications of the gospel.
tg
March 3, 2008 at 1:21 pm

Recently I have heard the argument that when we are commanded to look after the widows and orphans, and even passages such as Micah 6:8 in the OT, it specifically, and almost exclusively refers to the people of God: Hebrews in OT times and Christians in modern times. What would you make of this analysis concerning giving/charity in the modern church?
Les
March 3, 2008 at 1:36 pm

TGT, et al:

A very helpful article is at 9 Marks. I will guote briefly and refer all there:

The gathered local church is given a specific role throughout Scripture. It would be a huge mistake to attribute everything Jesus did or everything individual Christians are to do to the function of the gathered local church. Just because Jesus healed the blind does not mean we should assume that the church is to open an eye clinic. Similarly, it would be absurd to commission the church with the responsibility for raising children, because that role has been given to parents (see Eph. 6:1-4).

and…

It is necessary, however, to emphasize that the church should not claim power and jurisdiction in every area of life, including social issues. There are greater calls on our compassion than even the most horrible physical sufferings, and no other body is charged with looking after meeting those greater needs and showing that kind of compassion than the local church.[44] It would be just like Satan and the world to desire the church to abstain from her role of proclaiming the exclusivity of Christ to become another welfare organization, when God did not give the church that function in Scripture. Ken Jones said it well at a CHBC Henry Forum. He said,

If the church never offers a single hot meal but preaches the gospel, then she is true to her calling. But if all she does is offer hot meals and dances in the neighborhood and gives away clothes but never preaches the gospel – she’s not a church…The church is not called to economically empower anybody, but it is called to deliver the message of reconciliation. But my concern is that…we are defining ourselves…by the programs that we offer and not the message we preach.

See the article here:
http://www.9marks.org/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID314526%7CCHID598014%7CCIID2376562,00.html#vi
wesvanderlugt
March 3, 2008 at 2:55 pm

To address your question, Tom, it seems that a biblical model begins with the poor and needy within the people of God, but it does not stop there. I think we can easily make the distinction between serving hot meals and preaching the gospel because we don’t know many people who actually need hot meals in our middle class communities. For other people who live among the poor, the distinction is unimaginable.
Les
March 3, 2008 at 3:58 pm

Wes, I don’t know if you have had a chance to read the link from my last comment above (9 Marks)–but their main point is that the task for caring for the needy outside the congregation would fall to the individual Christians and not to the local gathered church for such.

Do you agree with that or not?