W. Davd Phillips

How we frame something determines how we understand it.

My own denomination is calling for a Great Commission Resurgence. One reason they are doing so is because they want to restructure the denomination. They are attempting to own it the Conservative Resurgence of the 1970′s-1990′s in this way. Their heart is in the right place in that they also want to see the convention be a leader in churches who are baptizing people. Others are calling for a Gospel-Centered lifestyle and a Gospel-Centered church.

Both ideas sound great. This is a movement calling for people to live and speak the Gospel and to go and tell the world of Christ’s love. What could be wrong with that? It sounds biblical. But is that really the case? How are we framing the discussion by using these terms?

Please Note: This is not necessarily an attack on those pushing for these ideas. This is as much a discussion on how we frame our words and how those words affect meaning as the methods being promoted.

To use Gospel-Centered in reference to Christianity or the Church places the church and Christianity in submission to the Gospel. That sounds nice, but its not biblical. The church is to be submissive to Christ alone. Otherwise, it is not a church, but a community organization.

To use Great Commission Resurgence language frames the discussion that a whole-hearted allegiance to Christ has been there all along, people are just not carrying out the Great Commission. I get the concept. It is an attempt to emphasize the behavior that corresponds to our belief. This is a danger of those who are trapped in modernity’s tentacles. This requires us to agree that belief and behavior can be separated. It cannot. You live what you believe.

One reason people aren’t sharing the Gospel is because they do not really believe the Gospel – with all their heart, soul, mind and strength. Another reason they do not share may be because of how we have taught them to frame the message of the Gospel. We frame the conversation in terms of the future, not the present. We tell people they can get out of hell and get into heaven. All they have to do is intellectually ascent to a few truths, and all is well. That is not the Gospel. That is an attempt to get people into a baptismal pool to increase numbers.

So why do we not need a Great Commission Resurgence?

1. We are emphasizing action without a consideration of the heart.

We are challenging people to tell what they may intellectually know, but do not fundamentally believe. Intellectual knowledge is not belief. What you believe will be demonstrated by behavior. If we want to see the Gospel shared more, we need to address the issue of relationship, not behavior.

2. Action stems from emotions and passions first, not intellectual knowledge.

According to Steve Addison’s new book, Movements That Change the World, every movement is a result of white-hot faith, then a commitment to a cause, then contagious relationships. Only then will rapid mobilization and adaptable methods take place. In other words, passion born out of a relationship leads to commitment and then passionate, contagious relationships. Those relationships lead to mobilization and methods. Until our passionate relationship with God through Christ is in place, a movement cannot happen.

3. We are focusing on the Great Commission while not emphasizing the Great Commandment.

The Great Commandment must come before the Great Commission. The great commandment speaks to relationships. The Great Commission speaks to behaviors that occur as a result of relationships. If we do not get the relationships part right, there will be no great commandment.

What do we need to do?

1. We must help people fall in love with Jesus all over again before we guilt people into actions that will be unsustainable. Again, we have framed the Gospel as unnecessary for this life. We have framed it as future focused, and all we need to do to ensure our eternal condition. How it has been framed means that there is no need for people to be involved in a community of Faith or in a relationship with Christ because it is not about relationships, it is about an intellectual understanding of events two thousand years ago. It may be that we need to share the real Gospel so that people can begin a real relationship with Christ.

2. We need to reframe the meaning of success for our churches. We have turned success into a numbers game that is killing pastors. They are so worried about the numbers they are burning out. Their relationships with God, Christ, themselves and others are unhealthy. We must help people understand that being obedient to God is more important than numbers. We must help people learn how to be healthy emotionally and spiritually. We don’t know how to do that; we aren’t even there ourselves.

3. We need to help our pastors model a healthy relationship with Christ, not necessarily a great understanding of theology. Theology is important, but only in the context of a relationship with Jesus. We need relational theology, theology learned and experienced in the crucibles of a relationship with Jesus. A life immersed in the power and presence of Jesus will be broadcast to the masses without words. Systems will not pronounce the Gospel; love will. Love of God, of ourselves, of others. They will know, by our love – of God, ourselves, and others – that we are followers of Jesus.

To say we need to focus on an object or behavior rather than Jesus to describe our Christianity or our community of Faith. We need to let our lifestyle, our actions, our communities be defined by Jesus and him alone.