Comments on: salt and light questions https://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/ fundamentalism by blunt instrument Tue, 04 May 2010 00:20:36 +0000 hourly 1 By: Brian Ernsberger https://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-5284 Tue, 04 May 2010 00:20:36 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/#comment-5284 I guess one must ask first the question, what do you mean by “influence”? If one means that we cause the world to not be antagonistic to the church/gospel, then we have one answer. If one means that we cause the world to be ambivalent to the church/gospel, then we have different answer. If one means that we cause the world to be accepting of the church/gospel, then we have probably yet a different answer again. And of course we must go back and examine the initial statement, should we even be “influencing” the world in the first place? Is not our being “salt” and “light” ultimately in relation to our presentation of the gospel message to a lost world? As such, the world will not welcome that “influence” for it exposes them to be the sinners that they are and Christ reminds us in John 3, “men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil.” Our “influence” had better be that we spoke the truth of the Word of God to this generation. Because their only hope is found in the Lord Jesus Christ and we, believers, are the possessors of that Blessed hope.

]]> By: Jack https://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-5282 Mon, 03 May 2010 18:48:47 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/#comment-5282 How about we preach the gospel to the world and display the reality of the gospel in our lives?

]]> By: Keith https://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-5280 Sun, 02 May 2010 14:59:09 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/#comment-5280 Do you mean “new evangelical” strictly? As in the original NE strategy from back in the fifties? If so, I’d say the results have been mixed in the political realm — although, I’d also say that their political approach wasn’t all that different from the fundamentalist’s political approach originally.

In the eclesiastical realm they’ve also been mixed — there has been some good: the SBC and renewal movements within the United Methodist Church, etc. And again, I’d say that even where their strategy failed, it didn’t do any worse than fundamentalism’s strategy.

Of course in the evangelical world today there really is no such thing as “The” new evangelical movement. You have evangelicals who are pacifists and quietists, you have evangelicals who are Christian socialists, and you have evangelicals who are a part of the ruins of the “religious right”.

]]> By: ox https://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-5276 Sat, 01 May 2010 06:48:30 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/#comment-5276 In reply to Keith.

Well, I will grant that the second metaphor in particular is intended to cause men to give praise to God. That does mean there is to be some positive effect on the world. But I wonder if it is the same as influence, in the sense of political clout or moralism, which is what I think the speaker I am mentioning meant it.

In any case, even if I concede your point entirely, would you say the new evangelical approach is working?

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

]]> By: Keith https://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/comment-page-1/#comment-5274 Sat, 01 May 2010 04:21:00 +0000 http://oxgoad.ca/2010/04/29/salt-and-light-questions/#comment-5274 “Is it the mission of disciples to be salt and light in such a way that they have influence in the culture of the world?”

In what other way could a disciple be salt and light? Salt that doesn’t savor? Light hid under a bushel? Of course the salt and light metaphors must mean that the disciples lives impact the culture around them. What else could they mean?

]]>