A convergence of ideas has occurred in my mind recently.
Our team, as a form of development and bonding, reads a chapter of the book Authentic Communication by Tim Muehlhoff and then we discuss its implications for our ministry during staff meetings. (Excellent book by the way, well worth the read!!)Well, several weeks ago we talked about an idea presented in his book that if we intend to make an impact on people then what we do needs to have low predictability while retaining high information. Muehlhoff suggests that we need to act, speak, and present our perspective in a way that challenges the assumptions made about "our kind" while still offering valuable information about who Christ actually is and what we actually believe. As you may know, I am always a fan of low predictability, so this idea naturally got me thinking.
The next marker on the way to the convergence happened in a conversation with some of my students. In talking about evangelism, the Four Spiritual Laws came up (not surprising amongst Cru members). The students suggested that the booklet they had all learned to use was too simple, and that it wasn't working well with students. They liked internalizing it so that they had a basic road map of the Gospel in their minds, but they felt they needed something more for the students they shared their faith with.
A couple of days later, I remembered a study I learned about in Sociology class. The study looked at social groups and the commitment levels and/or responsibilities placed on members to see the correlation between the two. Researchers assumed that a low-level commitment at entry level increasing over time would make for the most loyal membership in a group. The study found, however, that a range of higher commitment levels actually had the best chance of producing loyal members, implying that people actually preferred a sense of buy-in or strong commitment to a group their joining.
Finally, this past weekend, I read Epic by John Eldredge (another FANTASTIC book, while we're at it!). The book presents the Story of God and shows how all the stories we love mimic this one, great Story. In four sections he presents the Gospel message in terms of story elements like hero, villain, battle, struggle, hope, victory, and happily ever after. The presentation moved me immensely - I felt so inspired and motivated to live for God and to "play my role" in the story! I wanted to join in battle to win human hearts for God, despite it sounding much harder than the generic "go out and share your faith" kind of exhortation.
These four things have converged in my mind. So far the I can only say that I think the Four Laws is too simple for today's generation. Not that they aren't true, but that they're a model of presentation, parts of a story rather than a story. And that, I think, is the issue. Would you rather read a textbook on the parts of a narrative or a narrative? Which one would move you and become a favorite on your bookshelf? Stories move us because the parts are woven into a whole and built into a moving symphony of ideas, while the textbook teaches us to understand a story and even retell it, but is not a story itself.
So, over the next few days, I'm going to try and think and write and post about this. About balancing simplicity of truth with beauty of composition and trying to contextualize the "basics" of the Gospel in a way that moves those I share it with. Maybe I'm wrong to be thinking this way - let me know your perspectives! But before you toss out my ideas completely, consider the following: If story isn't meant to be a part of our efforts, then why did Jesus speak mainly in parables?
No comments:
Post a Comment