Clear Contextualization (Part 2)

In the Sahara and Sioux Falls

As depicted in the scenarios in my previous post, syncretism doesn’t just pose a threat when bringing the Christian faith to those who have never heard the gospel. We face just as much of a pressing danger of syncretizing the gospel here in Sioux Falls.

Take a look at the culture around us and you will see all kinds of places where gospel truths have been co-opted, corrupted, and muddled. The confusing of distinct gender roles, the oppressor/oppressed ideology of cultural Marxism, viewing children as a lifestyle choice, and the trans-confusion of our day are all ways that (more often than not) well-meaning Christians have syncretized the foundational truths of the Christian faith with pagan religion. Many professing Christians get their sexual ethic from secularism claiming that Jesus had an ethic of “love and acceptance” and therefore we should tolerate people’s sexual delusion. The result isn’t just a confused Christian faith, but an entirely new faith that isn’t founded upon the solid rock of Christ.

In an attempt to “make Christianity relevant” to the culture around us, Christians are tempted to soften and sacrifice clear Biblical truth on the altar of contextualization.

Commitment to Contextualization

Though there are plenty of bad examples of contextualizing the gospel to the culture around us, contextualization is necessary to consider when communicating biblical truth to any culture. This can be done poorly, or it can be done with the wisdom that only God supplies (James 1:5).

Contextualization is the process of making biblical truth clear within a given cultural context. It is making adjustments from one way of looking, communicating, and explaining to another way of looking, communicating, and explaining.

One of the passages that Christians will often point to regarding contextualization is Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23:

For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.

—1 Corinthians 9:19–23

Becoming all things to all people can sound a lot like syncretism. Is the Apostle Paul taking shortcuts to proclaim the gospel to all people? By no means!

As our wise friend Jeff Purswell says, “Voluntary self-denial supersedes the rights of a robust conscience.” If we have strong convictions on a certain non-moral topic, denying our rights to act according to our conscience should be our instinct so that we might not put up a hindrance to gospel community. For the sake of the gospel, this was Paul’s disposition towards the confused Corinthians.

There are a lot of similarities between the church in Corinth and our current cultural moment. If we are not careful we can tend to accommodate the gospel to the culture in our work of contextualization. Rather, Paul demonstrates to us a better way. Standing secure in the truth of the gospel and benefiting fully from all the fruit that the gospel produces in his life, Paul accommodates his lifestyle and surrenders his rights.

Nevertheless, we have not made use of this right, but we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ.

—1 Corinthians 9:12b

Paul is adapting and adjusting his lifestyle, his method of communication, and the different points of the gospel message that would speak to the hearts of those who were listening. He did all this without compromising the truth of Christ’s life, death, resurrection, and ascension.

To the Jews, Paul addressed their heritage as descending from the people of Israel and held out Jesus as the Messiah that God had promised to them. (Acts. 13:16-42)

To the Gentiles, Paul didn’t quote Scripture or appeal to philosophy but rather appealed to nature (Acts 14:15-18).

To the Greeks, Paul builds bridges with Epicurean and Stoic philosophers laying out a robust doctrine of God and Biblical worldview. (Acts 17:16-24)

To the Romans, Paul appeals to his Roman citizenship to speak before the council and proclaim Christ’s resurrection from the dead. (Acts 22:22-23:10)

On the other hand, bad contextualization makes the gospel more palatable at the expense of biblical truth. The late Tim Keller helpfully points out,

Contextualization is not—as is often argued—‘giving people what they want to hear.’ Rather, it is giving people the Bible’s answers, which they may not at all want to hear, to questions about life that people in their particular time and place are asking, in language and forms they can comprehend, and through appeals and arguments with force they can feel, even if they reject them.

—Timothy Keller

Contextualization is making things clear in the specifics of people’s lives. It is engaging with the fine print of life. When we pursue clarity in the ways we understand people’s beliefs and in the way that we speak we can address the core of the matter and the heart of man. May we be people who speak and think clearly so that people from all cultures and walks of life hear unhindered about Jesus who saves helpless and confused wretches like you and me.