Session #4

*According to Watson, what is the recovered gospel?

The recovered gospel is the whole enchilada…the past, present and future. The recovered gospel communicates the life and sacrificial death of Christ along with his resurrection as the elements of the past. It also connects to the present by making a relationship with God now possible because of the atoning death of Christ. The recovered gospel would go one step further though in being the gospel of Jesus rather that just the gospel about Jesus. This gospel of Jesus exposes the truth of a promise of good news for the poor, release for captives, sight for the blind, and freedom for the captives (Luke 4:18-19). I guess it is an assurance that one day things will be different, very, very different, and you will be a part of it. This seems to expose some sort of necessity for the church to be in constant preparation for the coming of Christ and the ultimate rule of God. There is the idea that at some point time and eternity will be fused into a glorious new creation (p. 193). I like this idea of transitioning from “Be saved!” to “Be ready!” but I am concerned will how it might be communicated. I guess I am still digesting it, but it rings with some degree of pressure and fear of an impending day to come. I think I am still struggling to digest this concept (I have only read Watson’s article, so maybe after reading the other five articles in this assignment I may get it more), but the top two full paragraphs in p. 194 have me a bit lost. Would an effective communication of the transformation of the world someday really tremendously impact the American culture? Does the American culture really care that much about tomorrow, enough to give up their small pleasures in the present for the promise of some cosmic reconciliation in the future? I’m not sure, but I am curious.

*Hall presents 4 worldly quests, how do these issues relate to the gospel, our mission, and our congregation?

I think that the quest for moral authenticity becomes the foundation and security of a congregation. It should be rooted in the truth of the gospel, and as a result the gospel should be the foundation of the congregation. I would say that during the mission, the quest for moral authenticity should be exposed. It is important to note here that moral authenticity will not necessarily be exposed through the mission of the congregation, but rather that a QUEST for that moral authenticity. There should be a genuine wrestling with the tension between the truth and demands of the gospel and where we are as Christians. In addition, I believe this genuine desire for authenticity is what attracts people to the gospel message, and should be what attracts people to the church. Even though the church isn’t perfect, in its quest for true obedience to the call of God the hope is that it will separate itself from cultural norms.
For my generation (Gen X), the desire for, and pursuit of genuine community is a tremendous draw. Not only does it inform the congregation, but there is also a desire to connect relationally with the Trinity, and as a result understand oneself so that honest interaction can exist with others. I believe that a true understanding of oneself is a crucial piece necessary to develop and sustain community. This quest also becomes a shared experience that fosters the development of deeper relationships. I agree with Paul’s use of the body to describe the church, and feel as though living as the body will draw the attention of an increasingly independent culture.
The quest for transcendence and mystery is a bit more difficult to connect. I believe it can be the intangible that woos people to the message of the gospel, the church, and to study and work at the mission. I believe it is true that we will never completely grasp the whole truth of the gospel, but rather than inhibit the pursuit of the gospel completely for many it enhances it. I do believe that for many people thoughts of transcendence and the frustration of mystery repel them from a deeper pursuit of depth. People are lazy and scared and would like everything explained for the most part. As they are a result of our cultural influences, transcendence and mystery invoke fear or apathy, but for a group it is exactly what drives them.
I think that meaning can be closely connected to the moral authenticity. People what to understand what is going on n their lives. I believe that people (whether in the church or otherwise) seek to understand what is going on in the world, and how their story fits into it. Especially today, we develop with an understanding that things can be understood. Because of many of the advances in science and technology, we expect to have something explained. The mental muscles that allows us to accept that there will be no satisfactory explanation of something have atrophied. When things can’t be explained, we just respond by desiring more thorough investigation. Someone, somewhere must know the meaning, and when we admit to the fact that that someone is God, it provides our answers.

*Describe West's thesis statement and expansion of it in his article.

West is expanding upon Newbigin’s thesis that NA has built us a degree of resistance (I paraphrase) to the gospel message which makes it more resistant than a society never exposed the gospel at all. It is as though America has been given a vaccination of the gospel message and has morphed in such a way as to build up immunities to the message of the gospel. As west assures us though, America is not without hope. America is different, but there are still ways in which the gospel can infect our society. He explores the ways in which our societal makeup actually make us vulnerable to infection by the gospel message. The fact that our political system is based upon the convictions of present society, the existence of a spiritual ethos, and hope that human power can be steered to serve the interests of God. There is hope for the gospel in out present age.

*Critique Brownson's missional hermeneutic. How does his model correspond with your current hermeneutical grid?

Okay, I have to admit that Brownson lost me a bit here, even to the point where I think I lost my location on my own hermeneutical grid. However, he finished strong, and reminded me how simple a missional hermeneutic can be. I believe that the truth of the gospel can be true the particular as well as the universal. There is inevitably going to be some sort of connection to people individually, but a string individual connection does not discount a connection to the universal. I believe it places us properly with in the greater context when we recognize that both are true simultaneously. I resonate with his conviction to speak the truth in love and to communicate the truth of the gospel message, and I am also puzzled by it. How can we interpret the gospel message in such a way that it does connect with the universal and the particular? There does need to be a move of the Spirit to draw us towards that interpretation.

*Dyrness provides a missilogical theology to the fray, how would you apply his vernacular approach to your ministry context?

I think the vernacular approach is where the gospel message must begin, but it is our responsibility as leaders within the church to make sure it doesn’t remain there for our church. Initially we must explain the gospel in such a way that it does make sense in a person’s specific situation simply because that is what they understand. However, we must not allow it to remain there, but must continue to inspire others to examine the gospel message in such a way that they gain a deeper understanding (and appreciation hopefully) to the universality of the gospel message, and their connection to humanity worldwide. In my present context it is best done when people in our congregation purposefully prepare and share their faith with others. Many times a person’s evangelistic technique in our church is simply to bring friends to a church service. This eliminates their responsibility and opportunity to deepen their understanding of the principles of the gospel message in such a way as to tweek the vernacular message of the gospel so that another might understand it without distorting the message itself. The opportunity for short term missions, and cross cultural ministry further expands that opportunity.

*Satari begins to unravel the tangled gospel. What are the tangles, barriers, and distortions that your cultural context has done to the gospel?

I think my current cultural context has neutered the intensity of the gospel because of the relative acceptance of it as a harmless option in the endless buffet of interests today. I believe the distortion that is greatest is the prevailing idea that a relationship with God will do something for you, and that God will meet you exactly where you happen to be. While I certainly believe that to be true, God is also not satisfied with us remaining there. Unfortunately, that is when discomfort enters in through what we would call spiritual growth. The difficulty here is that the relationship began with God being the ultimate source of comfort and assurance. How then can He desire for us to do something that seems to be uncomfortable? A genuine relationship with God is founded upon submission to Him and a desire to trust that we are unholy and must be drawn into a place of obedience in accordance to His desires, not our own. The tangle is that a relationship with God through Christ is all about warm-fuzzies.