Living at the Crossroads of the Biblical and
Western Story:
Faithfulness and Relevance
Michael W. Goheen
Vancouver, B.C.
Living at the Crossroads
Dilemma of the Missionary
Solidarity: Wants to be part of culture

Has good news for them in their setting
Rejection: Whole of culture distorted by sinful
idolatry

Fundamental incompatibility between Scriptural
and cultural story
Danger: Relevance may lead to unfaithfulness;
attempts to be faithful may lead to irrelevance
Illustration: Model of Cross-Cultural
Communication
Proclaim good news to Hindu
Adopt language/cultural categories (Tamil)
Who is Jesus?
Swamy (Lord)? 330m.!
 Avatar (god incarnate)? No finality!
 Just tell story? Maya!
 Kadavul (transcendent god)? Satguru (teacher)?
Chit (second member of triad of ultimate
reality)? Adipurushan (primal man)? Etc.

Problem!
Relevance seems to lead to unfaithfulness
“What all these answers have in common is
that they necessarily describe Jesus in terms
of model [story] which embodies an
interpretation of experience significantly
different from the interpretation which
arises when Jesus is accepted as Lord
absolutely.” (Newbigin)
No escape from this tension
Relevant: Must use understandable categories
 Faithful: Must communicate gospel

Caging the Gospel
“The gospel is like a caged lion; it does
not need to be defended, just released.”
Two sets of bars that cage gospel:
 Irrelevance:
Holding older or foreign
forms of the gospel (in attempt to avoid
cultural idols)
 Unfaithfulness: Capitulation to idols of
culture (in attempt to be relevant)
Gospel of John:
Model of Contextualization
I suppose that the boldest and most brilliant essay
in the communication of the gospel to a particular
culture in all Christian history is the gospel
according to John. Here the language and thoughtforms of that Hellenistic world are so employed
that Gnostics in all ages have thought that the
book was written especially for them. And yet
nowhere in Scripture is the absolute contradiction
between the word of God and human culture
stated with more terrible clarity (Newbigin).
Gospel of John:
Model of Contextualization
“In one sense the entire Gospel is a case
study in how John recontextualizes the story
of Jesus for a new audience and a new
generation. . . . The Gospel of John, then, is
a shining example of an effort to reexpress
the story of Jesus in a new theological
idiom and language, thereby enabling it to
speak afresh to a new audience and their
needs.” (Flemming)
“The time has come. The kingdom of God is
near. Repent and believe the good news.”
(Mark 1:15)
“I must preach the good news of the kingdom of
God to other towns also, because that is why I
was sent.”
(Luke 4:43)
In the synoptic gospels the
Kingdom of God is:
Central image for the Jews
Central image for Jesus
Central image for Matthew, Mark, Luke
In John’s gospel...
He employs images popular in
classical culture and philosophy
E.g., Heaven/earth, life/death,
light/darkness, flesh/spirit
Do we have a different gospel?
Bultmann’s answer: Yes. [Gospel has been co-opted
into idolatrous cultural categories.]
- Synoptics Jewish categories Horizontal, in time
Renewal of creation In kingdom of God
-John
Greek categories Vertical, in space
Salvation of individuals In heaven
Do we have a different gospel?
My answer: No
John articulates the same gospel in fresh language
in a new cultural context.
The language reflects a pagan worldview yet is
transformed and subverted by the gospel.
John 1:1,14
In the beginning was the logos...
...and the logos became sarx.
“John’s employment of the concept
[logos] to introduce the story of
Jesus was a master-stroke of
communication to the world of his
day.” (Beasley-Murray)
New translation or articulation
of the gospel is both:
Relevant: He uses language of
classical dualism familiar to hearers
Faithful: Challenges the idolatry of the
classical dualism
Subversive Fulfillment
or
Challenging Relevance
Fulfills religious longing for order and
origin [relevant]
Subverts and challenges idolatrous
understanding [faithful]
New Testament Contextualization
The conclusion that we derive from the New
Testament, the book that contains the expression
of the revelation in its concrete conflict and
intermingling with the Jewish and Hellenistic
world of religion and civilization, is that the
religion of revelation stands in revolutionary
contrast to this concrete Jewish and Hellenistic
world, but at the same time freely uses its ideas
and thought-forms to express itself, and so
Christian truth experiences its first incarnation
(Kraemer).
True Contextualization
Bridge-building and contrast-making
(Kraemer)
Relevance and challenge (Newbigin)
Contextualization . . .
Often considered to be only how to be relevant, buildbridges, meet felt needs, etc.
Also challenging idols!
“Paul . . . calmly uses the terminology of the naturalist
and sacramental mysticisms of the mystery-religions
and thereby forcefully expresses the opposite
character of the prophetic religion of revelation. He
does not bother about making contrasts or building
bridges, but he is entirely absorbed in expressing the
truth and so reveals gulfs and bridges at the same
time. . . . Again Paul uses these terms and ideas freely
to express forcefully the revelation in Christ, the exact
opposite of what these mystery-religions were seeking
after (Kraemer).
John and the ‘world’
World: Pagan culture shaped by idolatry
Overstated by Robert Gundry: “John not only
leaves the world outside the scope of Jesus’
praying and loving. He also describes the world as
full of sin; as ignorant of God, God’s Son, and
God’s children; as opposed to and hateful of God’s
Son and God’s children; as rejoicing over Jesus’
death; as dominated by Satan; and as subject to
God’s wrath. In the only one of the four gospels to
mention the incarnation, then, the world looks
wholly negative. . . . The Fourth Gospel is
unalterably countercultural . . .
‘World’ in John
World: Pagan culture shaped by
idolatry
How can the language categories of the
‘world’ be used?
World: Place of missional involvement
In but not of the world
“. . . there is a tension in John’s Gospel between
separation from the world and missional
involvement in the world, a tension faced by the
church in every generation. True, the world is a
dangerous place and Satan is its ruler (John
12:31), but it is also the object of God’s
redemptive love (John 3:16). The disciples do not
belong to the world but they are sent into the
world on Jesus’ own saving mission (John 17:15,
18; 20:21). [Flemming]
In the world but not of it
Jesus’ Prayer for His Disciples
I have given them your word and the world
has hated them, for they are not of the world
any more than I am of the world. My prayer
is not that you take them out of the world but
that you protect them from the evil one.
They are not of the world, even as I am not of
it. As you sent me into the world, I have sent
them into the world.
- John 17:14-18
Cross as Model
“The Cross is in one sense an act of
total identification with the world. But
in another sense it is an act of radical
separation. It is both of these at the
same time.” (Newbigin)
Cross as Model
We must always, it seems to me, in every
situation, be wrestling with both sides of
this reality: that the Church is for the world
against the world. The Church is against the
world for the world. The Church is for the
human community in that place, that
village, that city, that nation, in the sense
that Christ is for the world. And that must
be the determining criterion at every point
(Newbigin)
Importance of Unbearable Tension
The deeper the consciousness of the tension
and the urge to take this yoke upon itself are
felt, the healthier the Church is. The more
oblivious of this tension the Church is, the
more well established and at home in this
world it feels, the more it is in deadly
danger of being the salt that has lost its
savour (Kraemer).
Reasons we do not feel this tension
Fragmentation of Scriptural story
Comfortable co-habitation in
seemingly harmless [Christian?
Neutral?] culture
Christendom mindset accepting private
role
Missionary’s Inner Dialogue
Way of being in the culture; state of mind
Desire to live in both worlds fully
Faithfulness to Biblical story
Views all of culture through lens of
Scripture
Seeks to discern idolatrous twisting of
words, institutions, cultural practices, etc.
Seeks to discern good creational structure
Romans 12.1-2
Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters,
in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies
as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to
God—this is true worship. Do not conform
any longer to the pattern of this world, but
be transformed by the renewing of your
mind. Then you will be able to test and
approve what God’s will is--his good,
pleasing, and perfect will.
Model for whole Christian life
This model of contextualization in
cross-cultural communication is . . .
 NOT
JUST FOR COMMUNICATION
OF THE GOSPEL
 FOR ALL OF HUMAN LIFE!
Western Culture
Common way of life rooted in a shared story.
Two levels of contextualization
Social and cultural institutions/
practices/ customs
Foundational story or cultural beliefs
Foundational Beliefs of Modernity
Insight and Idolatry
Progress
Humanism
Rationalism
Scientism
Technicism
Individualism
Foundational Beliefs Today
Insight and Idolatry
Disillusionment and suspicion
Pluralism
Consumerism
Non-rational anthropology
Spiritualism
Ecological concern
Egalitarian
Contrast Community
A community of justice in a world of economic and
ecological injustice
A community of generosity and simplicity (of ‘enough’) in
a consumer world
A community of selfless giving in a world of selfishness
A community of truth (humility and boldness) in a world
of relativism
A community of hope in a world of disillusionment and
consumer satiation
A community of joy and thanksgiving in a world of
entitlement
A community who experiences God’s presence in a secular
world
Questions:
What idols (modern or pm) do we need
to oppose? [antithetical stance]
What creational insight is being
idolized and needs to be embraced?
[affirmative stance]
Contextualization in . . .
Communal church life
Mission in the world
Communal Church Life: Some questions
How does Western culture (with its idols and insights) . . .
Shape our understanding of the gospel?
Shape our understanding of truth?
Shape our understanding and practice of being church?
Shape our understanding and practice of preaching?
Shape our understanding and practice of worship?
Shape our understanding and practice of leadership?
Shape our understanding and practice of prayer?
Shape our understanding and practice of ecumenical
relations in church?
Shape our understanding and practice of church discipline?
Shape our understanding of gender roles, participation, etc.
in church?
Understanding of the gospel
Public truth


vs. private religious message or therapeutic formula
vs. relativism or rationalism
Story of universal history

vs. doctrine, unchanging ideas
Message of comprehensive restoration



vs. otherworldly platonism
vs. spiritual or religious message only
vs. individualistic reduction
Power

vs. doctrinalism
Ecclesial self-understanding
“The images which the church uses for its selfunderstanding will largely determine what the church will
actually become.” (Driver)
Images will be drawn from culture
96 images of church in NT (Minear)
Images unconsciously assumed by many today?







Economic or business: Supermarket or cafeteria of programs
Social institutions: “friendliest church around”; community centre
as hub for special interest group activities
Entertainment industry: Impact with music, technology, rhetoric
Educational institutions: Dominance of Bible study and teaching
Therapeutic industry: Place of spiritual/psychological healing
Charity institutions: Care for needy and poor
Political institutions: Pressure group; democratic ideal
Insight to be embrace and idolatry to be challenged
“Advanced state of syncretism”?
I see people who are desperately trying to reach the posteverythings who in their desperation are trying to throw out
essential elements such as the substitutionary atonement,
forensic justification, imputed righteousness, the Sovereignty
of God, or the inerrancy of Scripture. Many of them are
probably over-adapting to the post-everything situation. But
while they do not have our theological resources, often we do
not have their level of engagement with the people of the
emerging society. To correct this, let us confess that we really
have failure across all our parties to reach the coming society,
and let us resolve to use the premier resources of Reformed
theology. If we can make these changes, then we may really
start to see renewal and outreach, and we might actually be a
resource for the broader body of Christ in this culture (Keller).
Relevance or Capitulation to PM?
I was part of what is now known as the Emerging Church
Movement in its early days…. I had to distance myself,
however, from one of many streams in the emerging
church because of theological differences. Since the late
1990s, this stream has become known as Emergent. The
emergent church is part of the Emerging Church
Movement but does not embrace the dominant ideology
of the movement. Rather, the emergent church is the latest
version of liberalism. The only difference is that the old
liberalism accommodated modernity and the new
liberalism accommodates postmodernity (Driscoll).
What are the implications of
contextualization for . . .
Our communal church life?
Our mission in the world?
 Evangelism
 Diaconal
mercy
 Seeking justice
 Missions
 Our callings in culture
Our Mission in the World
How does Western culture (with its insights
and idols) . . .
Shape our understanding and practice of
evangelism?
Shape our understanding and practice of
diaconal mercy?
Shape our understanding and practice of
missions?
Shape our callings in public life of culture?
Comprehensive Vision for Cultural
Engagement
Two biblical starting points:
 Lordship
of Christ
 Comprehensive scope of salvation
Developments in evangelicalism
20th c: Individualistic, otherworldly,
dualistic
 Mid-late 20th c: Increasingly
comprehensive
 Early
Some Starting Examples
Businesswoman in business driven by profit
motive
Ph.D. student in postmodern university
Worker in humanistic psych hospital
History teacher in public school
Athlete in professional world of greed
Politician in liberal government
Pastor in consumer-driven church
Unfaithful Ways to Resolve
Unbearable Tension
Withdrawal
Accommodation
Dualism
The Gospel speaks:
Word of grace… culture is good
creation
Word of judgement… culture is
idolatrously twisted and sinfully
distorted
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
Avoid every kind of evil (I Thess. 5:21f).
Creational design-Spiritual power
misdirected
by power of sin
redirected by redemptive
power of Spirit
Good creational
design
Cultural Discernment
What is the creational insight or
structure?
What is the idolatrous distortion or
direction?
What kind of healing action is
possible?
Biblical Example: Household
OIKOS: Extended family in Roman empire
structured hierarchically and oppressively
Fundamental social building block of
Roman empire
Undifferentiated institution made up of
marital, family, economic, political
relationships
Oppressive and hierarchical distortion
Response of the early church
Reject?
Affirm?
Transformation!
Subversive Fulfillment
Ephesians 5:21ff.
Discerned creational relationships
Transformed relationships creating
new institution recognizable as good
news to culture
Faithful Witness in Culture
“. . . Christian living will need to be done
within culture. . . . but God’s presence
in this world aims at reformation and
transformation of its structures, never
uncritical acceptance of them.” (Philip
Towner)
Four final comments
A faithful witness will produce
suffering
A Suffering Witness
Missionary encounter with idols of culture
will produce suffering
“. . . if we take seriously our duty as servants
of God within the institutions of human
society, we shall find plenty of opportunity to
learn what it means to suffer for righteousness
sake, and we shall learn that to suffer for
righteousness sake is really a blessed thing.”
(Newbigin)
Four final comments
A faithful witness will produce
suffering
A faithful witness will need
community
 Equipping,
nourishing, supporting
A faithful witness will need to be
rooted in a healthy spirituality
Need for Prayer
If the church is indeed to be Jesus’ agent in bringing his
whole agenda to his whole world, it needs his own Spirit.
Indeed, if the church attempts to do what has to be done
without constantly seeking to be filled and equipped by
Jesus’ own Spirit, it is committing blasphemy each time
it opens its mouth. This is not a plea that all Christians
should enlist in the charismatic movement. Rather, it is a
plea that all Christians, particularly those involved at the
leading edge of the church’s mission to bring healing and
renewal to the world, should be people of prayer,
invoking the Spirit of Jesus daily and hourly as they go
about their tasks, lest they be betrayed into the arrogance
of their own agendas or into the cowardice of relativism.
Four final comments
A faithful witness will produce suffering
A faithful witness will need community
A faithful witness will need to be rooted in a
healthy spirituality
A faithful witness will be ‘together with all
the saints’ (Eph 3.18)
Blind spots—need for new eyes to see
conformity with world
 Dialogue across history, culture, traditions
