Topic 7 DQ 1
Charles Kraft has identified several myths (some of which are outlined in sidebar 18.1 of Chapter 18 in your textbook) about the communication of the gospel (for the full list, see Kraft 1991a, 35–54; note also the critique and notations in Hesselgrave and Rommen 1989, 193–96). As you read through the list, can you identify any that you have believed? If you think it is not a myth, how would you respond?
Sidebar 18.1
Contextualized evangelism and discipleship models must take into account such issues as local understandings of sin (Priest 1994; T. Chuang 1996; Strand 2000), repentance (Pesebre 2005), decision making (Hesselgrave 1978; Gener 2005), conversion (Rambo 1995; McKnight 2002), Bible translation (Nehrbass 2012), and religious ritual (Zahniser 1997), lest we push people to convert to our culture rather than to come to faith in Christ. Research into methods that are fruitful is not only desired but also necessary (Burke 2010; Daniels 2010; Daniels and Allen 2011; Gray et al. 2010; Woodberry 2011). While methods in and of themselves do not produce spiritual fruit, God uses patterns of ministry to draw people to himself, and it is worth our time to study those patterns that bear fruit in order to learn from one another in cross-cultural evangelism.Sin in Cultural ContextOne of the core concepts of the gospel message is the bad news that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). While in English we tend to think of one word for the concept of “sin,” in the biblical languages there are numerous terms encompassing many ideas. For example, Greek terminology includes such ideas as missing the mark, transgression, unrighteousness, lawlessness, impiety, depravity, and evil desire. Sin, then, is a multifaceted concept involving who we are on the inside (impious, depraved, unrighteous) and what we do on the outside (miss the mark, transgress, disobey).
“I became a Christian while living in Eastern Europe,” a student once confessed to me.“How did that happen?” I asked him.“I stopped praying. I ate pork and drank wine,” he said.“You did not become a Christian,” I told him. “You stopped being a Muslim.”“There’s no difference,” he retorted. “When a man falls from Islam he becomes a Christian.”In the ensuing discussion we sorted out the most serious challenge to Christians who are seeking to penetrate Islam with the gospel of Jesus Christ: how to demonstrate the spiritual validity of Christianity. To do so, we must develop relationships with Muslims that are based on integrity and respect. Muslims do not accept the faith of people for whom they have no respect, or from whom they receive no respect.B. Bradshaw 1988, 358Unfortunately, our tendency is to take our own understanding of sin—not just who we are on the inside but our ideas of which acts are sinful and which are not—into our new cultural setting. Although there is overlap between our understanding and the understanding of people in the new culture about what individual sins are, there is also discontinuity (Priest 1993, 1994).For monochronic people, missing an appointment or arriving too late may be interpreted as sin. For indirect people, public displays of anger and appearing out of control may be understood as sin. For collective people, not supporting the honor of the group will likely be seen as sin. For large gender-role separation people, switching male and female roles may be considered sin. This list does not even begin to address issues such as public displays of affection or dress (what to cover up and what may be revealed, appropriate use of cosmetics and jewelry), let alone the much more difficult issues of bribery and corruption (see B. Adeney 1995).
Topic 7 DQ 2
Chapter 18 describes different evangelistic methods based on assumptions about the conversion process as well as communicative elements of cultures that shape decision-making responses to the sharing of the gospel. What do you think about these methods? Do you think one is better than the others? Do you think they all have some merits and some drawbacks? Explain, analyzing specific elements of the methods as you compare them.