# Non-Spiritual benefits of the Gospel?



## steadfast7 (Apr 17, 2011)

1. Are there any material, social, and emotional benefits offered in the gospel?

2. Should they be used alongside the spiritual/eternal benefits in convincing unbelievers (especially those who are more concerned with the here and now than the future) to believe?


----------



## MLCOPE2 (Apr 17, 2011)

We are not responsible to "convince" anyone, the Holy Spirit is the one who does the convic*t*ing through the preaching of the gospel.


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 17, 2011)

If you don't like the word "convince", how about "*persuade*"?!



> Acts 18:4, "And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to *persuade* Jews and Greeks."





> Acts 19:8, "And he entered the synagogue and for three months spoke boldly, reasoning and *persuading* them about the kingdom of God."





> 2 Cor 5:11, "Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, we _*persuade*_ others. But what we are is known to God, and I hope it is known also to your conscience."


----------



## Andres (Apr 17, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> 1. Are there any material, social, and emotional benefits offered in the gospel?
> 
> 2. Should they be used alongside the spiritual/eternal benefits in convincing unbelievers (especially those who are more concerned with the here and now than the future) to believe?



From the Westminster Shorter Catechism:


> Q. 32. What benefits do they that are effectually called partake of in this life?
> A. They that are effectually called do in this life partake of justification, adoption and sanctification, and the several benefits which in this life do either accompany or flow from them.
> 
> Q. 36. What are the benefits which in this life do accompany or flow from justification, adoption and sanctification?
> ...



To answer your questions, unless one counts the peace of conscience and joy in the Holy Ghost as an emotional benefit, I don't see any material, social, or emotional benefits from trusting in Christ. However those benefits which we do receive far surpass all the material riches, social graces, and emotional stability we could ever want in this world, so it really seems pointless to sell someone on this anyway. If the true gospel is proclaimed it will truly be "good news" to a man who is separated from God and perishing in his sins.


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 17, 2011)

Good post Andres. A further question would be whether those who got into the faith, and/or remain in the faith, as the result of an improved quality of life are perhaps very immature Christians or perhaps need genuine conversion?


----------



## toddpedlar (Apr 17, 2011)

If one tries to "persuade" someone to become a Christian by selling to them "improved quality of life", then what is that person doing that distinguishes them from selling them on the advice of Dr. Phil or Oprah? Many people find "improved quality of life" through various mechanisms, so if that's what is aimed after (even as a "secondary benefit"), the true gospel (which does not concern "improved quality of life" in the slightest degree) has been, at best, greatly darkened and obscured.


----------



## seajayrice (Apr 17, 2011)

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 

1Co 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. 

There is no seduction in the Gospel.


----------



## MarieP (Apr 17, 2011)

This is a very interesting and thought-provoking question!

I would say that Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King should be the focus of what is preached. Isn't this what God promised the Messiah would be? As the children's catechism says, I need Him as Prophet because I'm ignorant, I need Him as Priest because I'm guilty, and I need Him as King because I'm weak and helpless.

That said, I would disagree that the Gospel doesn't have emotional dimensions. Actually, my pastor recently said that, while he did see his need for Christ as Savior from his sins, the initial argument for him to come to Christ was that he never knew the love of his earthly father. He saw the love that the people of God had for one another, the love that Christ displayed on the cross, and the love that the Father has for all His children. In my opinion, this wouldn't be an invalid reason for coming to Christ (because God loved the world in this manner, that He sent His Son to die that those who believe in Him won't perish but have everlasting life).

But I think there's a danger too- and my pastor just taught a Sunday School lesson several weeks ago on this from JI Packer's Knowing God (it's the next to last chapter of the book). The question is, what are people expecting from God? If they are expecting smooth sailing all the way, life on a bed of roses, then they are terribly mistaken. In fact, coming to Christ makes our lives harder in many ways- repentance is costly, fighting sin and dying to self is hard, we may lose friends, jobs, houses, even our lives. The miracle of Christianity is not that all our problems disappear, it's what we find God doing in the midst of and through those problems. In order for the "peace that passes understanding" to pass our understanding means that the stuff that it comes in the midst of is some pretty awful stuff! I liked how Packer exposed the whole Keswick idea and showed how truly damaging it can be to one's faith. My pastor's Bible college was into this type of teaching, and this is what he was taught early in his Christian walk. 

You can listen to the message here:

SermonAudio.com - Knowing God Pt 28, These Inward Trials


----------



## Herald (Apr 17, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> 1. Are there any material, social, and emotional benefits offered in the gospel?



Kind of. The gospel itself offers these benefits through the new heaven and new earth (Rev. 21). However, there may be a temporal benefit in the gospel. There are the blessings associated with local church membership. Friendship, counseling, emotional attachment, help with material needs; right functioning churches often provide all or most of these to their members.





steadfast7 said:


> 2. Should they be used alongside the spiritual/eternal benefits in convincing unbelievers (especially those who are more concerned with the here and now than the future) to believe?



The benefits of the kingdom are part of the gospel message. I would not include any temporal gain as a reason for believing the gospel. As Todd said, "Many people find "improved quality of life" through various mechanisms, so if that's what is aimed after (even as a "secondary benefit"), the true gospel (which does not concern "improved quality of life" in the slightest degree) has been, at best, greatly darkened and obscured."


----------



## Peairtach (Apr 17, 2011)

There are "non-spiritual" benefits to the Gospel e.g. the resurrection of the body.

Even if we restrict non-spiritual benefits to this present life, we have things like better health on giving up excessive drinking, better use of money, etc, etc, etc.

But these fringe benefits shouldn't be held out to the unsaved or should only be mentioned as secondary benefits because the unsaved person will only truly understand Christ and the Gospel when he recognises his need of salvation from sin. If he's attracted to the Gospel for the wrong reasons it will appear at some point in his Chriistian life - if we can say he has life.


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 17, 2011)

What I'm finding out here in India is that the vast majority of adherents are coming to faith as the result of healing from sickness through the prayers of Christians, deliverance from demonic oppression, freedom from the fear of spirits, or a sense of God's fatherly love and compassion. The worldview is not one that puts much emphasis on the afterlife or the coming wrath due to sin. So whether Christianity is being "advertised" as having benefits regarding the non-spiritual or not, these ARE the reasons why most of the people are coming to faith. I'm wondering whether they need to be re-evangelized, or whether we can simply rejoice that God has used these particular set of means to bring to saving faith.

also, what about:[BIBLE]Matthew 11:2-6[/BIBLE]

it seems that Jesus felt it perfectly legitimate that people believe on account of his temporal benefits. But then, this might be unique to Jesus' own ministry ...?


----------



## Herald (Apr 17, 2011)

Richard Tallach said:


> There are "non-spiritual" benefits to the Gospel e.g. the resurrection of the body.



1 Corinthians 15:44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.


----------



## MW (Apr 17, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> I'm wondering whether they need to be re-evangelized, or whether we can simply rejoice that God has used these particular set of means to bring to saving faith.


 
I don't think it is an option but an obligation to always keep Christ and salvation from sin at the centre of the message. Where others try to make "temporal effects" central to the message they need to be warned in the solemn terms of 2 Corinthians 11 -- verses 2-4, for believers in general, and verses 12-15, with reference to teachers.


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 17, 2011)

Joshua said:


> steadfast7 said:
> 
> 
> > also, what about:
> ...


 Josh, I tend to agree. Is there a sense that Jesus' present ministry of healing and deliverance in the midst of an infant church in the present day continue to be authenticating marks of his Messiahship?

Thanks Rev. Winzer. Good reminder!


----------



## Jack K (Apr 17, 2011)

Jesus said to the crowds after feeding the 5,000: "You are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life" (John 6:26-27).

It sounds like you are right to have some concern. Jesus taught that there's a difference between being convinced about him by the evidence of God's goodness (signs), and following Jesus just because you want the things he can give you. If God is healing people in India and freeing them from demonic oppression, we want this to be taken as a sign that compels them to faith rather than as a product that makes them greedy for more.

Certainly, there are many benefits of the gospel that we enjoy already in this life. There _is_ victory over evil and God _is_ good to us. These things are powerful signs and assurances of his love. But we must also remember that the dominant message of Jesus was that following him would result in worldly hardships, not worldly comforts. His followers are called to lose thier lives so that they may gain something far better, but also completely different from the things they used to seek after.


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 18, 2011)

Joshua said:


> steadfast7 said:
> 
> 
> > Is there a sense that Jesus' present ministry of healing and deliverance in the midst of an infant church in the present day continue to be authenticating marks of his Messiahship?
> ...


 It's just a thought.. Christ is still active in this world performing "signs" that authenticate his identity as the Messiah to a fallen world. In pouring out his Spirit, his work is primarily through his saints, the Church. Hence, it may be that in many contexts, signs, wonders, and healings are an extension of what he had begun during his earthly ministry, thus leading people to put their trust in him.

---------- Post added at 11:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:08 AM ----------




Jack K said:


> Jesus said to the crowds after feeding the 5,000: "You are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life" (John 6:26-27).
> 
> It sounds like you are right to have some concern. Jesus taught that there's a difference between being convinced about him by the evidence of God's goodness (signs), and following Jesus just because you want the things he can give you. If God is healing people in India and freeing them from demonic oppression, we want this to be taken as a sign that compels them to faith rather than as a product that makes them greedy for more.
> 
> Certainly, there are many benefits of the gospel that we enjoy already in this life. There _is_ victory over evil and God _is_ good to us. These things are powerful signs and assurances of his love. But we must also remember that the dominant message of Jesus was that following him would result in worldly hardships, not worldly comforts. His followers are called to lose thier lives so that they may gain something far better, but also completely different from the things they used to seek after.


 
Good thoughts Jack. Though this may be the means God uses to compel people to faith, it should certainly progress from this to more ultimate realities purchased in the cross. I think I have my sermon topic for Easter!


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 18, 2011)

Not to get into the spiritual gifts debate, but as I mentioned, reports of healing and deliverance from demonic oppression are so common place here it's hard for me to deny that it's at least _possible_ that there are some things going on that echo Jesus' ministry and the birth of the early church. It could be complete false and psychosomatic. I'm just staying open to what I'm hearing...


----------



## Herald (Apr 18, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Not to get into the spiritual gifts debate, but as I mentioned, reports of healing and deliverance from demonic oppression are so common place here it's hard for me to deny that it's at least possible that there are some things going on that echo Jesus' ministry and the birth of the early church. It could be complete false and psychosomatic. I'm just staying open to what I'm hearing...



Dennis, we hear of these things in the States. However, when we hear of them they are usually happening in a far off country with little to no way of confirming the veracity of such reports. There is no need to confirm the word of the Lord, or the power of the gospel in this day and age, through signs. The gospel is sufficient in and of itself. True deliverance from demonic oppression comes from the forgiveness of sins and the transference of kingdoms; from following the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience (Eph. 2), to the kingdom of God. Anything else just conflates the truth and opens the door to error.


----------



## jayce475 (Apr 18, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Not to get into the spiritual gifts debate, but as I mentioned, reports of healing and deliverance from demonic oppression are so common place here it's hard for me to deny that it's at least _possible_ that there are some things going on that echo Jesus' ministry and the birth of the early church. It could be complete false and psychosomatic. I'm just staying open to what I'm hearing...


 
Your question in the OP has at its heart the issue about spiritual gifts. Whatever miracles God does indeed work today (and yes God perfectly has His right to do so), it has to be apart from the authentication of the Christian God and the Christian faith. Revelation has ceased with the closure of the Holy Scriptures and everything that needed to be authenticated has already been authenticated. 1 Cor 13 says so, the Confessions support it to be so, so I do not see any reason for it to be otherwise. And I am certain that the issue with spiritual gifts is not particular to India. Charismatism is running rampant in China and many other developing Asian countries as well.


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 18, 2011)

Dennis,

Here as well, many people seek out an evangelist after having dreams. Or they begin believing or else become open to the Gospel after a healing. Several reported visions and voices of demons which prayers to Jesus halted, and thus they asked for greater teaching about this Jesus. Among one Mslm people group here, fully 20% of the Mslm-background folks who have come to faith and now continue living faithfully report dreams being one means by which their resistance to Christian teaching was vanquished.

I believe that if folks come to Christ after they are delivered from demonic presence, have dreams, report a marvelous healing, etc, that our duty is not to pick apart the validity of these experiences but to teach Christ and him crucified and praise God for the providences that brought these souls to you. We will see whether they are true or false converts once the deep discipleship starts. Just remind them that, even though Christ delivers from many physical pains as well, we are called in order to take up the Cross and that God may require much of us before our lives are done.

True deliverance from sin will also prove to be a true deliverance from a great variety of other ills as well.

Jesus told all who were laboring and heavy-laden to come to Him for rest. I do not think it is so easy to separate Christ from His benefits. If we labor and are heavy-laden and want rest, then that is good enough reason to come.


----------



## MarieP (Apr 18, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Christ is still active in this world performing "signs" that authenticate his identity as the Messiah to a fallen world



Why is it that so often those who put the most stock in modern "signs and wonders" seem to forget about the most important authenticating marks of the truth of Christianity, such as the Scriptures and the love and good deeds of the people of God? Even in the book of Acts, I don't see millions of people flooding to Christ because of "signs and wonders" but by the preaching of the Word. If sinners are to be persuaded to believe, it's going to be done when the Word of God comes with saving power by the illumination of the Holy Spirit.

When will they start extolling the greatest work of God- that people dead in their trespasses and sins, captive by the devil to his will, not subject to the law of God nor indeed can be, now are alive in Christ, love the law of God, freed from sin, and are captive to do the will of Christ?


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 18, 2011)

Just to be clear, I am not undermining the sufficiency of the Scriptures, the canon, or the gospel. Sorry for being unclear on the authentication bit. I did not mean to suggest that Jesus' words and the apostolic foundation require further authentication in an objective sense - this is certainly a done deal. 



> Revelation has ceased with the closure of the Holy Scriptures and everything that needed to be authenticated has already been authenticated.


Jason, you are forgetting the subjective element. Authentication requires 1) the thing that is authenticated 2) the thing that is authenticating it; and 3) _a person who is convinced that it is authentic_. There is still a _sense_ in which many yet-to-be-believers need "authentication" of God's revelation to their own darkened hearts and minds by the Spirit. Indeed, these need to be continually "authenticated" to our hearts as well. I realize that 'authenticate' is a badly misleading word, so I'll stop using it. Assurance, or the inner witness of the Spirit, are the proper terms. These are on-going and ever increasing. The mere existence of a canon does not mean everyone is automatically convinced of its authenticity.



> Dennis, we hear of these things in the States. However, when we hear of them they are usually happening in a far off country with little to no way of confirming the veracity of such reports.


Bill, I completely understand the skepticism. I still haven't been out here long enough to really see some compelling happenings yet - an many could be embellishments or lies. But if, out of love, I can make a judgment of charity to my Christian brethren for other kinds of reports, such as their conversion testimony, then surely I should be at least _open_ to believing God's lesser miracles in their life.


----------



## Peairtach (Apr 18, 2011)

Herald said:


> Richard Tallach said:
> 
> 
> > There are "non-spiritual" benefits to the Gospel e.g. the resurrection of the body.
> ...



1 Corinthians 15:44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

It is a physical benefit as well as a spiritual benefit; the body that rots in the grave will be raised. 

The New Covenant isn't a "purely spiritual" covenant any more than the Old Covenant is a "purely physical" covenant. The Old Covenant is typological and preparatory to the New Covenant.


----------



## MarieP (Apr 18, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> There is still a sense in which many yet-to-be-believers need "authentication" of God's revelation to their own darkened hearts and minds by the Spirit.



Can you prove this from the Scriptures? What do you make of Lazarus' response to the rich man at the end of Jesus' parable? If continued authentication by signs and wonders is needed, why was there more of this happening (which wasn't as predominant as many make it out to be) around the time of Christ than there is today, nearly 2,000 years after the fact?

Don't get me wrong, the church is still built upon the apostles and prophets (that faith once for all delivered and the attesting sings and miracles that happened in the early 1st century). But where is there evidence that that continues on today? You see a progression throughout the Gospels and Acts of miracles and signs becoming less an less a part of the apostolic ministry.



steadfast7 said:


> Assurance, or the inner witness of the Spirit, are the proper terms. These are on-going and ever increasing. The mere existence of a canon does not mean everyone is automatically convinced of its authenticity.



No, the mere existence of a canon doesn't mean everyone is automatically convinced. We need the Spirit of God to convince peoples' hearts. But what is the power of God unto salvation? Making the deaf to hear? Making the blind to see? Healing lame men? Raising the dead? No, it's the Gospel preached.

1 Cor. 1
21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

I'm not denying that God uses general revelation as the starting point (which all reject without the regenerating Gospel). I'm not denying that Jesus said people would see our good works and glorify our Father in heaven. I'm not denying the love we have for one another, as well as the other fruit of the Spirit, cannot be a powerful tool. But honestly, as I read my Bible, I see that signs and wonders actually have the lowest "success" rate.

After all, the message that "turned the world upside down" wasn't "Did you hear about the people who speak in tongues and who heal the sick?" But, "They proclaim another King, namely Jesus!" The only sign that seems to have stuck in the apostolic preaching was the resurrection (not sure if the cross would fit the definition of "signs and wonders" although it's a sign of God's love and a wonder Christ went there for me!). And the times that miracles were done among the Greeks, at least the two I'm thinking about (Lystra and Malta), they thought they were gods.


----------



## cih1355 (Apr 18, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> 1. Are there any material, social, and emotional benefits offered in the gospel?



One can have joy if he has the forgiveness of sins. 



> 2. Should they be used alongside the spiritual/eternal benefits in convincing unbelievers (especially those who are more concerned with the here and now than the future) to believe?



You don't have to talk about those things. You just need to talk about how Christ came to save His people from their sins. Man's problem is that he is sinner and that he is in rebellion against God. His problem is not that he lacks certain material, social, or emotional benefits.


----------



## jayce475 (Apr 18, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Jason, you are forgetting the subjective element. Authentication requires 1) the thing that is authenticated 2) the thing that is authenticating it; and 3) a person who is convinced that it is authentic. There is still a sense in which many yet-to-be-believers need "authentication" of God's revelation to their own darkened hearts and minds by the Spirit. Indeed, these need to be continually "authenticated" to our hearts as well. I realize that 'authenticate' is a badly misleading word, so I'll stop using it. Assurance, or the inner witness of the Spirit, are the proper terms. These are on-going and ever increasing. The mere existence of a canon does not mean everyone is automatically convinced of its authenticity.



Revelation has ceased with the Apostolic ages and all forms of authentication are no longer necessary, and I do not believe that my usage is out of the ordinary. Not entirely sure what that has got to do with experiential faith. Faith is real and Jesus is living, as every single one of us can testify. 1 Cor 1:22-23 "For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness". The Scriptures are sufficient in and of themselves to convert the soul and sanctify us. Faith is the hope of things unseen, and we believe to see, not see to believe. Healings can take place left right centre but they form not the basis of our faith. But rather, when we possess faith, we are able to see God working when healings take place. Without faith, no one shall discern spiritual things. If I am struck with cancer and God miraculously heals me, I do not believe in God (if I were unbelieving) or have my faith strengthened (if I were believing) because of the healing in itself (as you are suggesting if I am reading correctly). Instead, through the exercise of faith, which God has so graciously given us, I will come to understand that it is God who has answered my prayers and healed me. In terms of reaching out to non-believers, we preach, and teach, and instruct. Healings and other miraculous things won't make believers out of anyone. They did not during Jesus' ministry on earth and will not do so now.


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 18, 2011)

Consider the healing of the man born blind...

John 9:25, "One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.” *- recognition that he was healed.
*
v. 30 The man answered, “Why, this is an amazing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes. 31We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, God listens to him. 32Never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind. 33If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.” *- he reasons how this could be.*

v.35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?” 36 He answered, “And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?” 37Jesus said to him, “You have seen him, and it is he who is speaking to you.” *- special revelation.*

v. 38He said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him.* - regeneration and faith.*

Yes the Holy Spirit is the only one who creates faith
Yes the scriptures are the only infallible rule of faith and conduct
Yes the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation.

But are we to say that this man's healing had NOTHING to do with his believing in Christ? Was this event totally arbitrary and not used in any way by God to lead him to saving faith? 

Now, was he an immature believer, who needed to be taught further about the cross, atonement for sins, eternal life, etc? YES!
But was his experience any less meaningful toward his conversion? NO!

All I'm saying is this: this type of thing is happening ALL THE TIME. It actually disturbs me, to be honest how many adherents are following Christ for reasons just like these. But I am very wary of denouncing any event, ordinary or extraordinary, that's leading people to faith.


----------



## Jack K (Apr 18, 2011)

Pergamum said:


> Here as well, many people seek out an evangelist after having dreams. Or they begin believing or else become open to the Gospel after a healing. Several reported visions and voices of demons which prayers to Jesus halted, and thus they asked for greater teaching about this Jesus.



Such things were somewhat common also in the Native American culture where I was a missionary kid.

We can agree that apostolic authority and the signs that accompanied it are now closed. Yet we still say God's work in the world is often visible. And God completely controls all events, so that if startling events in a person's life seem to propel him to pay attention to the gospel proclamation, we may rightly say it appears God used those events as part of bringing the person to faith.

In Western culutres we hardly bat an eye when a person points to a personal crisis, like the loss of a job, as an event God used to lead him to faith. In many non-Western cultures, a dream or healing may be a more likely catalyst. Well, God controls these too and he may use them to lead people to belief in the gospel by showing them his power: "For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Rom. 1:20).

Should we call such events "signs"? That may not be the best term since it invites confusion with the apostolic signs and those of Jesus. But I do think Jesus' scolding of the crowds who only wanted him to make more bread, but failed to respond to his signs with faith in him, largely fits the situation Dennis is concerned about.


----------



## Pergamum (Apr 18, 2011)

Dennis,

I like Jack's terminology of these happenings being "catalysts" and this word would be a much better fit than the word "sign." 

If someone comes to you and says, "I was healed in Jesus' name" or "I dreamt of Jesus and now I want to know more" or "The demons that have bothered me fled in Jesus' name" then, rather than trying to convince these folks that they were mistaken or were mixing their Christianity with animism (though I suspect most Westerners who poo-poo such things totally are mixing their Christianity with Enlightenment ideas which deny the work of the supernatural today), I would advise using this as a platform to launch into deeper discipleship. "Great, since now you know the power of this Jesus, let me tell you more about him."


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 18, 2011)

Good stuff Brothers. "Catalyst" and "propel" are great words. "Authentication" and "sign" were confusing terms from the start. In conclusion then, it's ok to let God's sovereignty use whatever catalyst he will to get people's attention regarding his grace, but do not magnify the temporal blessing such that it eclipses the work of the cross. Also, have the aim in mind to teach them true discipleship: even if all is taken from him and his health fails, the true disciple glories in the cross because it is better by far.


----------



## jayce475 (Apr 19, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Good stuff Brothers. "Catalyst" and "propel" are great words. "Authentication" and "sign" were confusing terms from the start. In conclusion then, it's ok to let God's sovereignty use whatever catalyst he will to get people's attention regarding his grace, but do not magnify the temporal blessing such that it eclipses the work of the cross. Also, have the aim in mind to teach them true discipleship: even if all is taken from him and his health fails, the true disciple glories in the cross because it is better by far.


 
At a practical level, I would agree that we do not harshly discount the ways that God brings people to the faith. However, I would also seek to bring a biblical perspective to their experiences (which is essentially that their experiences do not in themselves validate their faith) during discipleship soon after conversion, as well as teach them how to share their faith with others in a biblical manner. Too often, be it in the villages of China or in charismatic circles in developed countries, immature believers end up telling others that they ought to believe just because so and so experienced some miracles the other day. A proper view of the gospel accounts and the closure of revelation requires this to be corrected. We preach Christ and Christ crucified and resurrected to the unbelieving world, not the prosperity gospel, regardless of how mild a form it takes.


----------



## kvanlaan (Apr 19, 2011)

Very interesting thread - I think I would be more in the camp of 'watch out if you hear any indication of signs and wonders' but I had breakfast with a missionary in Addis Ababa once that, among other things, helped cure me of that as a knee-jerk reaction (I would class myself as a healthy skeptic still, but not out-of-hand dismissive). And reports from Pergy. Food multiplication incidents. Dreams. Odd occurances that we just don't see here. We can't dismiss them entirely because we weren't there and are skeptical. I would have real difficulty swallowing a raising from the dead, but for some reason, dreams, etc. don't seem that out-of-bounds.

As for material benefits of the Gospel, I would say that there are certainly several: a more well-regulated society, a diminished focus on material goods and the things of this world, compassion to your neighbour as a matter of course, meekness/humility and other improvements in one's character, etc. etc.


----------



## earl40 (Apr 19, 2011)

kvanlaan said:


> Very interesting thread - I think I would be more in the camp of 'watch out if you hear any indication of signs and wonders' but I had breakfast with a missionary in Addis Ababa once that, among other things, helped cure me of that as a knee-jerk reaction (I would class myself as a healthy skeptic still, but not out-of-hand dismissive). And reports from Pergy. Food multiplication incidents. Dreams. Odd occurances that we just don't see here. We can't dismiss them entirely because we weren't there and are skeptical. I would have real difficulty swallowing a raising from the dead, but for some reason, dreams, etc. don't seem that out-of-bounds.
> 
> As for material benefits of the Gospel, I would say that there are certainly several: a more well-regulated society, a diminished focus on material goods and the things of this world, compassion to your neighbour as a matter of course, meekness/humility and other improvements in one's character, etc. etc.


 
From Calvin's Prefatory address in his Institutes (referring to the Roman Catholic Church):

3. In demanding miracles from us, they act dishonestly; for we have not coined some new gospel, but retain the very one the truth of which is confirmed by all the miracles which Christ and the apostles ever wrought. But they have a peculiarity which we have not - they can confirm their faith by constant miracles down to the present day! Nay rather, they allege miracles which might produce wavering in minds otherwise well disposed; they are so frivolous and ridiculous, so vain and false. 

Seems to me Calvin was a tad knee jerky.


----------



## toddpedlar (Apr 19, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> But I am very wary of denouncing any event, ordinary or extraordinary, that's leading people to faith.


 
As long as it is ACTUALLY leading them to faith in the risen Christ, yes. 

Note that after the miraculous feeding of the people, (a sign and indeed a wonder), Christ himself had no qualms about telling many of them, in not so many words, to depart, as they were only hungering after another meal.


----------



## jayce475 (Apr 19, 2011)

On another note, apart from personal miracles, I have also met brethren from China who shared the gospel by telling others "You know why China has been so poor and uncivilized for so long? Because it's not a Christian country. Look at the US, UK, Australia and all the other Western countries. They are prosperous and civilized because they are Christian countries." And I have been told that this is a rather common method, especially in poorer places. Classic case of taking some truth and stretching it. And it is all well and good that a society is blessed due to God's grace, but that's not the gospel and ought not to form the basis of anyone's faith. It needs to be "I believe in God because the Scriptures say so and Christ died for me!", not "I believe in God because He healed me." or "I believe in God because God will make China great again"


----------



## steadfast7 (Apr 19, 2011)

Good point Jason, there is a difference between Christianity and the gospel. There are those who embrace Christianity because of its benefits, but those who believe the gospel will also do it for its benefits as well. Everyone starts their journey with God somewhere, some less ideal than others. It may be in the providence of God to "get them in the door" through material benefits and lead them to a more mature faith where Christ becomes their all in all. All this is affirming is that God can use means. There is something to be said, however, about God's "strategy" in placing Christ and him crucified as the centre of the gospel ensuring that it be a stumbling block to Jews, and foolishness to the Greeks.

p.s. excellent Piper video on the prosperity gospel here.


----------

