It has been pointed out that much of what transpired within the Jewish religious system served to mitigate or at least minimize prohibitionally the presence of sin within the community and its ensuing guilt. The fatal error for the Jewish community was the altered emphasis on the sacrificial system within the second temple construct. The sacrificial system that was given by God as a foreshadowing of the coming Messiah and the necessity of expiation that He would bring was turned into the religious rites and practices that served to make the worshiper worthy of God’s grace. If nothing else, the worshiper could claim that he had in fact been obedient to the commands of God because the rite of sacrificial worship had been carried out regardless of whether there was genuine repentance behind the act. Again, not much has changed in the modern day religious landscape. As a striking parallel, much of what is done in modern faith life follows this same pattern. First, the presence of truly unrepentant sin finds its ground in the common belief that the faith community itself places one in good standing with God so that perfection in righteousness is no longer a requirement. In short, God has promised to be faithful to His covenantal love commitment with His people and will not hold their sins against them. The problem is that this popular view completely forgets that it was the atoning blood of the Lord Jesus that opens this door and not membership in the faith community. Secondly, to maintain this good standing before God, it is admitted that lapses into sin must be addressed. Since perfection in righteousness is not seen as necessary, some other rite must take its place. Foregoing the theological error of excluding genuine repentance, there is a need to countermand acts of rebellion with acts of righteousness so that the “balances” may be maintained. The resulting system is one that promotes right standing before God as found in observances and not repentance. This premise has given rise to an overemphasis in what has been termed the “Social Gospel;” that is, a gospel based upon works of good will and charity to the less fortunate. The present work questions whether much of what is done in evangelical missions and evangelism is truly prompted by a right understanding of the need for perfected righteousness that is only found in the substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ; or whether missions are really being carried out as a means of personal salvation for the missionary striving to be acceptable before God. It is admitted that this is a seemingly harsh statement but given the propagation of error concerning the true significance of the community of faith coupled with the works based salvation that is so prevalent in evangelicalism today; the question is not (no pun intended) without merit. In surveying the landscape of Second Temple Judaism, the astute observer can and should draw some striking parallels to modern day evangelical life. Then, as now, the very word God has been high jacked to mean something that is more palatable to the supposed faith community. Unfortunately, much of what is espoused greatly misses the intended meaning of God’s divine revelation. Albeit, the sacrificial, ceremonial and civil law of ancient Israel has now been abrogated in the advent of Christ, it still has enormous value in understanding the grounds and basis for genuine salvation. God’s purposes for giving this revelation have not been altered but fulfilled. Without the correct understanding of God’s regeneration of the dead soul, not on the basis of merit but on the basis of His divine grace alone, coupled with the necessity of the substitutionary atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ to expiate iniquity and replace it with perfect righteousness imputed to the sinner, genuine evangelism is simply left undone. Smith makes much of what the apostle Paul said in his letter to the Galatians. This work echoes the words of Paul at this point. “If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1: 9, ESV) Much of what is passed off as the gospel simply does not qualify for reasons already mentioned. If what is held up as the gospel does not match what God has revealed as the true gospel, then how can it not be another gospel? To the examination of the true and living gospel through Jesus Christ attention must now be turned.
Older
Top
