Tim Challies, over at Challies dot com wonders if evangelical priorities are a bit skewed.
The Westminister Shorter Catechism asks the question, “What is the chief end of man?” Many of us know the answer. “Man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.” While this is not a phrase drawn directly from Scripture, the wisdom behind it surely is. The Bible tells us with great clarity that man was created primarily to bring glory to God. Thus the chief end, the overwhelming purpose, of Christians and of the church is to bring glory to God. There is no higher calling. And as John Piper has told us repeatedly in his books and teaching ministry, we do so by enjoying Him forever. “The great business of life is to glorify God by enjoying him forever.”
I believe, though, that many evangelical churches would have to disagree with this. They might not say so, but their actions would prove that they feel man has a higher calling. I believe many evangelical churches would have to say, “Man’s chief end is to evangelize the lost.” For many Christians and for many local churches there is no higher aim than to bring others to the Lord.
This is interesting to think about, considering all the emphasis on being seeker sensitive, or contextual to our culture, or missional, emerging, or what have you. It seems to Tim that the driving force behind all of these movements is not how we can better glorify God, but how we can better reach those who do not know God.
I think there is something deeper here. The catechism raises another question with its answer, “What is the best way to glorify God and enjoy him forever?”
The way that this question is answered drives the issue of emphasis. I would like to think that those who have a heavy push on evangelism are doing so out of good motives (trying to bring glory to God’s name) and not just selfish ones (bringing glory to their local church). I realise that there are always some who have these mixed up. I also realise that there is probably a little bit of both in all of this, but over all I would like to give them the benefit of the doubt.
This means, then, that they are still seeking to glorify God, they just think the best way to do that is to “win converts”.
This I disagree with, and I think this is the main issue for Tim as well. He is mostly reacting against the kind of church that looks to get people in the doors, and hope that they continue to grow there; a place with no further discipleship or growth challenge. The church becomes a place with an entrance requirement, and nothing else.
When we make such a heavy plea to get people to come to Christ we make the impression that God has no attractive power on his own. When we work on being seeker sensitive, we might forget the offence of the gospel. When we make the church into another social service club like the Lions or the Kinsmen, we remove the very parts of the church that would bring glory to God.
The body of Christ requires constant growth and interaction. We cannot allow ourselves to grow stagnant. There is an old adage in farming, “If you are not growing, then you are shrinking.” Much of business works this way, if you remain doing the same old things, the same old way, then not only are you not growing, but you are really moving backward.
The Orthodox say that the highest goal for a Christian is unity with Christ; unity with him in mind, spirit, and will. This, I think, is a much clearer goal for a Christian to work toward, and also for a church to promote. This requires constant accountability, constant challenge, constant growth.
A body of believers growing fuller and deeper; reflecting Christ more fully day by day, certainly brings great glory to God.
