Reply to Questions about Compromising the Gospel by Settling for Truth

Last updated on: February 1, 2013 at 8:15 am by Brad Vaughn

Reply to Questions about Compromising the Gospel by Settling for Truth 2013-02-01T08:15:48-07:00 Brad Vaughn

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This is second post where I answer a reader’s questions about my latest article, “We Compromise the Gospel When We Settle for Truth: How ‘Right’ Interpretation Lead to ‘Wrong’ Contextualization.”

Comment from John:

Absolute moralism/relativism—this is a little difficult to swallow. I understand and agree with much of what you say hear. From a Chinese perspective, they fear in making moral judgments even within contexts that demand one. For example, abortion. Is this right or wrong? Pirating software or DVDs? I know the latter is silly, but it is an issue here. You can also see the laziness, lack of passion and simple irresponsibility concerning male leadership in families and churches in China (obviously, this is not particular to China).

JW:

Do not overlook the larger point of the essay––worldview affects our perspective and thus what we see when we read Scripture. Notice I did not say “truth.” Truth is truth regardless of any culture. However, what I notice may change due to my position in life, etc. Because Bible-loving believers rightly are concerned with absolute truth, there is an overreaction against difference in emphasis (which emerge from differing perspectives). When it comes to interpretation, evangelicals can be quite intolerant and fearful of anything that is not traditional. The line that runs through my head again and again is “What if . . . . What would this lead to?” For example, in the “What is the gospel?” debates (e.g. Scot McKnight’s book The King Jesus Gospel), I have never once seen an evangelical challenge McKnight’s exegesis. Instead, they simply misrepresent him as making false dichotomies or else just say, “What if . . . ?” To address the moral issues you mention, one needs to be a good exegete and have wisdom. This practically will mean a person must know the limits of their argument and so is able to measure the strength by which he holds a position. One needs to appreciate nuance in order not to be dogmatic when something is really debatable. In this way, we can figure out if the “infraction” holds for all perspectives (universal/absolute) or is contingent on certain factors. That sort of analysis is not straightforward and often requires patience–––most missionaries (and Christians) I know don’t have that appreciation for subtlety, lack humility, and/or don’t have breadth of familiarity with the respective issues.

Comment from John:

Here you mention sin, 罪. What would you suggest here during a presentation of the Gospel or teaching in general? What about the emphases on idol worship and the heart? Isn’t this the root of sin? The idea of preferring something other than God, i.e. self, money, or whatever we substitute for Him. Also, what about the idea of substitution? Is this is a place where both legal righteousness and honor/shame intersect?

JW:

Concerning “sin,” I don’t especially like the word 罪, because it narrows the meaning of the human problem to one isolated metaphor. It would be ok if we were very clear that we are talking in reference to a king, not merely a courtroom judge. Since we don’t do this very well, a better and safer way is 过犯. People will all admit they commit guofan. At this point, we illustrate the nature of sin with honor-shame language. I frequently describe sin as “publicly spitting in your Father’s face.” I’ve never had someone misunderstand that imagery. Idol worship is just one imagery for talking about the thing that people honor above all else. It’s no coincidence that Isaiah and other prophets interlaced passages about idolatry with honor-shame language. As far as substitution goes, you’ll have to see the dissertation for details. In short, honor-shame societies are collectivistic, which means groups share in each other’s honor-shame status. The group head represents the whole such that if he is shamed or honored, then so also is the group. Traditional theology uses terms like “federal headship” to refer to a dynamic that is just common sense to an Easterner. Of course, what is true for my father (in a family) or president (for a country) is reckoned to me. If the Prime Minister of some country spit on the face of China’s president, the nation would be enraged for disgracing China. If my father’s name were someone famous, like Steven Spielberg or Bill Gates, guess what? People would treat me different. for no other reason than this, a lot of people would be kind to me and honor me as they wouldn’t any other person who crosses their face.

Comment from John:

Linear/Cyclical History—I like the presentation you made here. This is true and helpful when we understand these aspects. Here, I would caution of what aspect we can accept and reject from both sides. For example, Buddhism has influenced Chinese culture as has Confucius, so deeply. Reincarnation is anti biblical, right? And not only in the new creation do we see a breaking of this endless cycle of sin, but now in the new Adam, Christ when he died and gave us new life. Can you explain the spiral or cone idea of thinking? This seems extremely helpful.

JW:

Yes, reincarnation is wrong. I’m not sure, but I wonder if your reply about Christ indicates that you mistook the answer I gave in the essay. Perhaps, you were just adding to it? New creation includes us (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15; cf. Rom 8 ). Christ breaks the cycle of sin and death, however this happens in stages within history. For example, his ultimate victory over death has not yet been actualized in all creation (cf. 1 Cor 15:24–28). Death has not yet died (cf. Rev 20:14). So, when the new heaven and new earth are established, the cycle will have ended completely. The spiral/cone, by adding a third dimension, idea seeks simply to illustrate that even cycles can have direction or purpose. So, the word “cycle” does not need to imply absurdity.

Contextualization

Gospel

Interpretation/Exegesis

Theological Contextualization

Compromise the Gospel

Contextualization

Previous Post

January 30, 2013

Questions About What Happens When We Compromise the Gospel by Settling for Truth

Next Post

February 5, 2013 A legal solution won't solve a shame problem. Agree or Disagree?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atonement Biblical Theology Book Reviews China Chinese Church Chinese Culture Chinese Language Collectivism Contextualization Culture (General) Ecclesiology Evangelism Gospel Honor & Shame (Face) Interpretation/Exegesis Justification/Righteousness Missiology Mission Methods One Gospel for All Nations Other Practical Contextualization Reading Romans with Eastern Eyes Resources Romans Salvation (General) Saving God's Face Seeking God's Face The Cross in Context Theological Contextualization Theological Education Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which city is known as the "City of Palms" in the Bible?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Jericho Damascus Bethany Jerusalem

Books by This Author Books by Brad Vaughn

See All Titles »