One of WastedEvangelism’s “In Action” highlights puts into practice the multiplying effect of biblical social action: Joseph’s Storehouse, a non-profit food bank co-op ministry in South Florida, provides a ministry to families and individuals who face food scarcity and through its food development resources also provides area food pantries with pounds and pounds and pounds of food. Here’s their Facebook post from this morning and the picture they shared.
0 Comments
to the confrontation and the seeming ultimate curse of total unforgiveness is all about Jesus vs. Jerusalem temple leadership. It is interesting that contemporary church leadership typically uses the threat of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit against lay-people who do not surrender to how that leadership understands their own authority and how they perceive God’s will over those very lay-people’s lives. However, church leaders cannot escape the narrative fact that the Mark 3 Beelzebul episode itself, the preceding conflict thread (2:1–3:6), and, as well, the Sower parable (4:1–12) seem specifically directed at them. Jesus uses the convention of shame in the Beelzebul story, pointing to a needed correction within church leadership. For church leaders a posture of shame is needed, which once adopted reminds them of the illusive nature of status, the dangerous allure of power, and the recurring failure of faulty structures to guard the gospel and the church from the destructive influences and seductive cultural patterns that oppose God’s reign over all spheres of humankind. It should not surprise us that the shaming inherent within the Beelzebul episode, intertexted through Mark’s Old Testament links, connects church leaders to the church’s responsibility (and neglect) for the economically vulnerable. Caring, protecting, and advocating for the poor gives away power and public association with those living with the effects of poverty risks lowering one’s church community status. However, maintaining power and its enabling structures so that one’s social standing and status remain in place (even among, and more particularly, the Christian community) at the expense of the weakest and most vulnerable among us is synonymous with blasphemy against the Holy Spirit—breaking covenant, risking outside status and, thus, the condition of being eternally never forgiven. The biography of Jesus vs. Jewish leaders in Mark 1-3 is linked to the biography of the disciples, who like the ones beside Jesus (i.e., his associates and extended family, 3:21; cf. 6:1-6) and like Jesus’ earthly family (3:31–32), are at risk of being outside (6:51–53; 8:16–21; 8:34–38; cf. 9:33–34; 11:31; 16:14), if they, too, are not doers of God’s will (3:33–35). This is particularly relevant to church leaders, as they stand before the Mark 3 text (i.e., the Outsider-Insider sandwich), for the Beelzebul episode ought to shame them in those areas that are too closely identified with that which opposes God’s rule and kingdom (cf. Mark 1:15; 3:25). Mark’s Beelzebul episode functions similar to OT penitential prayers, allowing the reader/listener to enter a life narrative that reflects an appropriate shame for allowing those destructive forces and influences to distract from obedience to God’s word and work in the world. And like OT penitential prayers, a disposition of shame humbles the reader/listener before their “disobedience to the Mosaic ideals” that often reflects “mistreatment of the poor and the weak,” and gives them a way home that maps a spiritual disposition for restoring a fractured obedience to God. Interestingly after confessing that Jesus is the Messiah, Peter is soon rebuked as a surrogate of Satan’s interests: “Get behind Me, Satan; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s” (Mark 8:33). Significant to the reader/listener is the immediate juxtaposition of the Peter-Satan rebuke and Jesus’ admonishment that true followers must deny themselves (the opposite of power, an emptying of power) and take up their cross (v. 34). Church leaders who intentionally incorporate social action in a church’s evangelistic activities fulfill the obedience implications of the Beelzebul episode and, thus, raise Jesus’ honor rating in the public sphere. Without such a public disposition, church leaders are further warned that “whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels” (Mark 8:38).
Dangerous Sunday Morning Devotion: Can’t benefit from the milk if your can’t handle lactose8/16/2015
A while ago, I was reading a novel about the investigation of a mysterious plane crash. It was a great read. Enjoyed it immensely. It was entitled Crashers, written by Dana Haynes. “Crashers” is the name given to Go-Teams who are sent in immediately to investigate airline plane crashes, leading experts from specific fields vested in determining the cause of the crash, so it never happens again. In the midst of the storyline, a character, not necessarily religious, ponders a rather curious thought that got me thinking about the church and the poor. She said, "Land of milk and honey . . . Bloody lot of good it does if you can’t handle lactose and you’ve got diabetes to boot."
In the field of social services, of which I have been vocationally related for the last seventeen years, outcomes are an important element in determining what actions are needed. So, likewise with evangelism—if an outcome of evangelism is “personal decisions for Christ,” then activities of soul-winning, witnessing, crusades, and salvation-centered preaching are reasonable; if numerical church-growth is the outcome, then activities that promote such “growth” are acceptable; and, as I posit in Wasted Evangelism, if addressing the issues of poverty and social-righteousness are outcomes, then social action is a valid evangelistic activity. It is not entirely clear that the New Testament presents the concept of evangelism merely from verbal consideration related to the etymology of the word “evangelism.” The early church, especially reflected in the Gospels, seems more interested in creating a narrative understanding of evangelism so future church generations could imagine what it means for the gospel of the kingdom to have been inaugurated. Any attempt to develop a coherent theory of evangelism must begin with the implications of the presence of the kingdom, which is wholly constitutive of the gospel. The parable of the Sower who sows, which fits within this framework, offers a narrative definition of evangelism that includes social action outcomes. *Adapted from the chapter entitled “Wasted Evangelism” on Mark 4’s parable of the Sower who sows in Wasted Evangelism >> We do not typically approach the subject of evangelism and social action impartially, but with political, demographic, and religious preconceptions and biases. Opening up a conversation to re-assess the nature of evangelism is difficult, especially when social action and issues of poverty are injected into the discussion. The intent of Wasted Evangelism is not to debate the subject, or to review the history of the various positions regarding evangelism and social action, but to offer an exegetical and biblical theological approach to the question, Can social action be evangelism? It is important, nonetheless, to recognize there are barriers that can militate against an open discussion on the subject of evangelism and social action. For many, the meaning of evangelism is self-evident because of its association with “proclamation” activities (e.g., preaching, proclaiming, witnessing, etc.). Evangelism’s etymological relationship to the term “good news” (i.e., the evangel) can box one into defining evangelistic activity as passing on information, that is, to tell, preach, or share the news of Jesus Christ—that is, to evangelize. For many conservative evangelical Christians defining evangelism any other way causes the gospel (i.e., the news) to lose its meaning, robs the people of this important information, and diminishes the work of salvation in Jesus Christ. Evangelism’s strong association to the news of the gospel suggests to some that anything outside verbal, cognitive-based activities is a threat to the fundamentals of the faith. Additionally, those who have the highest interest in evangelism are often those least interested and least skilled in critical, theological reflection. Since evangelism is understood as a self-evident activity, rarely is the subject examined exegetically or evaluated theologically, but is usually consigned to matters of practical theology (e.g., missions, preaching, personal witness, church outreach programs, and church growth). (Meaning is often confused with application.) This, then, does not promote biblically relevant criteria to precede the discussion and, thus, limits the possibility of new, creative, and potentially sound understandings of biblical evangelism. Within evangelical circles, to advocate that social action can be evangelism is challenging, for such subjects as poverty and the poor are often relegated to the private sphere. Therefore, anything related to the public arena of rights, laws, and taxes or the confronting of social or governmental systems on behalf of the poor are often associated with the “social gospel” and the theologically liberal church. Although historically the church was deeply involved with issues of poverty, a “great reversal” took place between 1900 and about 1930. Evangelical fundamentalists turned away from their social responsibilities as a reaction against the social gospel that was perceived to be aligned with liberalism, which had diminished Bible infallibility and inspiration and weakened biblical views of sin, hell, salvation, and the deity of Jesus. When civic and political social concerns became suspect in the minds of evangelical academics and popular revivalists, social action responsibilities took on a minor role for much of the evangelical Christian community. Anything associated with the social gospel was considered a distraction and, to some, a betrayal to the fundamental essence of the gospel (i.e., the information, that is, the news of Jesus Christ). This history spills over into any contemporary discussion on evangelism and social action. There are also demographic barriers to an open discussion regarding the association between evangelism and social action. Over the last seven decades, people have been moving out of urban centers and into the suburbs, including Christians and their churches. The twin demographic forces of urban flight and suburban sprawl contribute to the evangelicals’ disassociation with issues of poverty and the poor. As a result, this social transformation helped reinforce a one-dimensional understanding of the gospel [see note below], which determines, for many, the nature of evangelism. Suburbanization of American society has moved much of the evangelical communities of faith outside populations affected by poverty. Rather than church communities promoting social action on behalf of poorer communities, the (upward) mobility of American families toward the suburbs demand that suburban churches serve a socializing and stabilizing function. Not a very likely set of social forces that will generate social change on behalf of the economically vulnerable hidden outside their neighborhoods and unknown within their circles of friends and acquaintances. The barriers reviewed here are not exhaustive, but are limited to those most relevant to the arguments and conclusions of the studies found in Wasted Evangelism. To overcome these barriers, these studies focus our attention to the text of Scripture, particularly the Gospel of Mark, as a basis for entering into a discussion on the biblical relationship between evangelism and social action. *From the "Introduction" to Wasted Evangelism. [Note] A one-dimensional gospel indicates solely a person/God dynamic relationship; whereas a multi-dimensional gospel includes the person/God dynamic and, also, creation/God, person/creation, and person/person. Wasted evangelism considers the multi-dimensional gospel more representative of a biblically sound narrative definition of the gospel. I begin my book, Wasted Evangelism, Whenever someone attempts to redefine terms like “gospel” or “evangelism,” one must tread carefully for hallowed ground is being disturbed and sacred pillars are being moved. I am fully aware, with my book and with this site, that I have entered a debate on the subject of evangelism and social action that has a history of polarizing positions, in which relationships can become strained or, all too often, severed. I recognize that I have made conclusions in Wasted Evangelism and will promote, even advocate, for positions, actions, and outcomes here on this site that will make many within my conservative and evangelical Christian family uncomfortable. My hope is, nonetheless, that the studies in Wasted Evangelism (for those willing to plough through its 6 studies) will cause many to dig deeper into the text, specifically the Gospel of Mark, to hear what the Bible says about the relationship between the gospel, evangelism, and social action. And, that the content of this site will provoke Christians and the Christian community to take up social action as a means to illustrate and realize that God’s kingdom has broken into time and space through the appearing of his Son, Jesus, the Messiah. The purpose of this site and the principles behind Wasted Evangelism is to connect Christians and churches . . .
In my first interview after the release of Wasted Evangelism, I was asked: In The Hobbit, Gandalf tells Bilbo Baggins that if he does come back from his journey, he will not be the same – a quote you use. Has your journey to the start of this book changed you forever? I heard that dialog in the movie and I felt it best described the journey I have been on, not just in writing Wasted Evangelism, but in social action, a the journey I want others to take—a journey through the Gospel of Mark and entering paths that get them much closer to those living in poverty.
Wasted Evangelism is the result of a seven-year journey in Mark’s Gospel, seeking to determine the relationship of the gospel to the wider biblical material regarding poverty and justice. For me, this was no mere academic exercise alone, but a deeply spiritual one that made it clear to me that the church has a biblical responsibility to be intentionally involved in social action. For me, not only has social action been my profession, it has been an important part of my spiritual journey as well. Over these years I have come to realize there is a wide gap, a very unbiblical breach, between the issues of poverty and my evangelical Christian community. For many years I lived out my faith at the far “right” end of that gap. For the last sixteen years on the other side of this gap I have had the privilege of working with people dedicated to moving our economically vulnerable neighbors, often trapped in poverty, toward self-sufficiency. As a result of experiencing both ends of this gap, I often find myself alone in most any room I am in. Among my peers and colleagues in social action I am extremely conservative as an evangelical Christian, sometimes even politically suspect; among my conservative Christian family I am often viewed as too liberal regarding social action and the gospel, sometimes even borderline heretical. During the summer of 2006 I began to seek out my own biblical rationale for my new vocation in community action—I wanted some personal justification from God’s Word that my faith should be legitimately connected to my work in social action. Wasted Evangelism is a reflection of that search. As Gandalf said to Bilbo Baggins, I can’t guarantee a safe return—seriously the wading into the swamps, caves, rugged mountains, and precarious valleys (using Tolkien’s middle earth imagery) of the world of poverty is not safe. It is dangerous. The conditions themselves are not safe; the politics are not safe; the surrounding powers and wealthy will be chief in opposition, and they are not safe. Even the church itself will often be unfriendly while on the journey, nor will the church readily offer shelter. Self and status will have to be sacrificed. There is no guarantee of return. But if they, the poor rich readers, non-poor Christians, do return, they will certainly not be the same. __________ Michelle Snyder graciously provided my first interview upon the release of Wasted Evangelism: Social Action and the Church’s Task of Evangelism, on her blog, White Knight Studio. This post an excerpt from that interview. For me, not only has social action been my profession for the last eighteen years, it has been an important part of my spiritual journey as well. Over these years I have come to realize there is a wide gap, a very unbiblical breach, between the issues of poverty and my evangelical Christian community. For many years I lived out my faith at the far “right” end of that gap. For the last sixteen years on the other side of this gap I have had the privilege of working with people dedicated to moving our economically vulnerable neighbors, often trapped in poverty, toward self-sufficiency. As a result of experiencing both ends of this gap, I often find myself alone in most any room I am in. Among my peers and colleagues in social action I am extremely conservative as an evangelical Christian, sometimes even politically suspect; among my conservative Christian family I am often viewed as too liberal regarding social action and the gospel, sometimes even borderline heretical. During the summer of 2006 I began to seek out my own biblical rationale for my new vocation in community action—I wanted some personal justification from God’s Word that my faith should be legitimately connected to my work in social action. My book, Wasted Evangelism, is a reflection of that search. This site is my attempt to connect Christians and churches to the issues of poverty, in hopes that the Christian community will engage these issues and become God's solution on behalf of our weakest, most vulnerable neighbors. Joseph’s Storehouse needs Air Conditioning for its expanded warehouse. In America 40% of our food supply goes to waste. Joseph’s Storehouse seeks to remedy this and help our neighbors to alleviate their own food scarcity. Joseph's Storehouse is a non-profit food bank and co-op established in South Florida to supply food pantries and, as well, low-income single parents, individuals and families. The Storehouse has also donated over 37,000 pounds of food (over 18 tons!) in June alone to area food pantries, churches, and soup kitchens that do not have adequate resources or limited funding for their own food supplies. To date in 2015, they have been able to give away 84 tons of good, healthy food. Joseph’s Storehouse is able to support limited hours of operations from a minimum admin fee we collect, as well as, from small donations from our supporters. Our first space was originally 1,800 sq. ft., out-growing it in about 8 months. The present warehouse where our families, individuals, and feeding programs shop in has, now, doubled to about 3,600 sq. ft. In order to cool the larger facility for both the food and our shoppers, Joseph’s Storehouse requires the purchase and installation of least 2 four-ton condensers and air handlers. We are currently utilizing a used 4 ton condenser that was donated and we bought the matching air handler. Though thankful for this unit, it is insufficient to cool our current space here in South Florida. The cost of the new units is $9,800. Along with some current support on hand, we are seeking the remaining $7,900 to complete the project. Prayerfully and joyfully please consider giving to support our community efforts. And, if you are in the area, come see us if you haven't already! (See Joseph's Storehouse Facebook page.) Consider giving to Joseph's Storehouse air conditioner GoFundMe project |
AuthorChip M. Anderson, advocate for biblical social action; pastor of an urban church plant in the Hill neighborhood of New Haven, CT; husband, father, author, former Greek & NT professor; and, 19 years involved with social action. Archives
February 2024
Categories
All
|
Pages |
More Pages |
|