A question...does context trump over process as it relates to conversion and evangelism? Where do they inter-twine and cross over?
'One who finds resolution is often prompted by some sort of crisis"
Catylsts for generating crisis in people
- mystical expereinces
- near death experiences
- illness and a need for healing
- general dis-satisfaction for life
- desire for transcendence
- experienced an altered state
- psychological problems
- other types of pathologies- interest in Jesus as a psychological problem rather than a sincere love of Christ
- conversion from a different faith perspective
- because of external factors (politics perhaps)
- tragedy
"we have to avoid provoking crisis. Life is good enough at it. Anything else is manipulative" -a paraphrase
I tend to agree with many of these points. Do you? Post your thoughts...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Definitely agree...
Jesus came to restore the whole man, to the whole world.
So why would we be trying to make more crisis while Jesus is working to restore it?
I believe this is the unspoken and un-addressed [for the post part] failure of the church
I think the most relevant examples to look at would be the examples of our own lives. Can you point to a certain crisis that triggered conversion for me? If I cannot find one, does that mean I am not christian yet? Or is it possible that I can be born again without going through crisis? Then I realize that rebirth is a crisis in itself. It is a point when I lay my life at the foot of the cross and pick up a Christ-life. Does it matter how I got there? I think kez is right that the church does not need to foster in crisis, but I do think that the church as Christ's body should be there when someone does go through crisis to help foster rebirth.
I don't know if I fully understand it, but it seems like McKnight has a decent theory on why we desire relationship with Christ, and how we come to the realization that we need grace. I feel like he goes a little beyond the cliché "God-shaped hole" theory.
Kyle, in my comment above I was specifically responding to the last quote Ryan put, "we have to avoid provoking crisis. Life is good enough at it. Anything else is manipulative."
The church has often used the word [bible] as a way to create more crisis [i.e. - theological difference, elect vs. free-will, baptism as obedience vs. point of salvation, etc.] with heart motives [if they are honest] of exclusivity or superiority. I believe these are things that need to be discussed, wrestled with, but the default mode of the Christian heart should be humility. We should not be so quick to say 'turn or burn' – instead we should enter into the suffering to bring new life [reborn/birth].
Now having said that... the Good News of Jesus is at its’ best in the sh** of the world. After all the Good News is the calling of a King who is and will set things right [shalom].
Which is greater at bearing a seed to produce fruit, a compost pile or dry ground? This is the calling for the Church - to enter into the mess. Not to make crisis, but to respond to it as Christ did! [the cross is ‘crisis, suffering & restoration’ at it's best].
He [Jesus] began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. - Mark 8v31 [TNIV]
Here is a quote that has haunted me for some time…
“Jesus did not come to explain away suffering or to remove it. He came to fill it with his presence.” - Paul Claudel
Post a Comment