4. If we do not apply it biblically, we leave it to others to do so heretically.
Perhaps you’ve seen the provocative and tragic photo from history of the KKK members standing beneath a banner that declares “Jesus Saves.” The sobering truth is that many of our religious forefathers and theological heroes had tremendous blind spots—and even some willfull unrepentant positions in the face of correction—as a result of poor application or no application of the gospel to cultural ills and systemic injustices. “Just preaching the gospel” did not appear to cure many of the racism enmeshed within a very Protestant white culture in the historic American South. (The photo in question actually comes from Portland, Oregon, interestingly enough.) Why do we suspect we are any more spiritually evolved than they? We look up to them so much, and yet we suspect we need less exhortation than they.
I do not believe the vast majority of those who criticize the so-called social justice movement do so out of racial animus. And yet the reality is that if we do not teach the full counsel of God’s word, and hold people specifically accountable to it, we give false assurances and enable all manner of hard-heartedness. Many of these critics lead or covenant in churches that practice biblical church discipline of unrepentant members. In such cases, they realize “just preach the gospel” is not sufficient; the gospel must be applied biblically, or it can be taken for granted by some that it does not speak to specific areas of their life.
I know the objection will be that nobody really believes we shouldn’t help people apply the gospel to the obedience that proves they believe it. But the way so many only do this for selective areas of concern leads me to think we are more OK with some sins than others. Typically we are less OK with the sins of others and more lenient with any exhortation to repentance that indicts ourselves. Which leads to the final point:
5. “Just preach the gospel” becomes selectively applied and leads to hypocrisy.
As I said previously, it is interesting to note how the gospel alone is said to be sufficient for sins like racism and perceived social injustice, but not for the “sin” of being concerned about those sins. Indeed, I have been flummoxed by the number of people who spend lots of time rebuking liberal figures like Rachel Held Evans and Rob Bell or political opponents like Democrats or Republican “NeverTrumpers” and then turn around to say “only the gospel” will cure sins that land closer to home.
For instance, last week on Facebook I read curiously as a friend of a friend posted a lengthy and detailed “take down” of ex-NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, the foolishness of his protests, the disrespectfulness of it all, and so on and so forth. Within this diatribe he acknowledged that racism still persists in some places and people, but that protests are pointless, because “only the gospel works.” It occurred to me that it did not occur to him that he apparently didn’t think “only the gospel” would work against misguided protests. No, disrespectful protests apparently require long Facebook rants that call people spoiled, immature and rude. That’s how you solve that problem. The implications-free gospel isn’t the solution to that.
This kind of hypocrisy is rampant on social media. We assume “just the gospel” is enough for us, while long and prolonged deconstructions, critiques, “take-downs” and refutations are exactly needed for them. This, friends, is pride. It is arrogance. It is textbook plank-speck type stuff.
What’s the solution? Well, it’s the gospel! The gospel is the cure for sin. The gospel alone is power to justify, heal and reconcile us. But the gospel that alone saves does not come alone. And indeed, if we cannot help each other see where we are “not in step with the truth of the gospel” (Galatians 2:14), we deny that very power, and in effect deny that very gospel.
The gospel is indeed the antidote to every sin and suffering. But “just preach the gospel” misses the mark as the solution to all manner of ills, because the good news has necessary implications that adorn and amplify it.
This article originally appeared here.
