All things to all men?

The debate about making the Gospel relevant or just givin' 'em the "old-time religion" seems destined to go on until Jesus comes. It seems one can always find extremes in any issue of importance, and it also seems to me that it's always easier to move toward one extreme or the other than to follow a balanced course that keeps a proper tension between extremes.

In terms of relevance vs. traditions, there are some who will try so hard to bring the Good News down to the understanding and tastes of any particular generation that they run the risk, at least in the opinion of some, of making the Bible a consumer philosophy. A recent, and unusual, example is a group of Italian priests who are taking inflatable "sanctuaries" to the beach to bring religion to the sun bathers. So much for the awe and wonder of the ancient cathedrals.

But to resist the suspected catering of the Gospel to modern "itching ears", others insist that the Bible be taught in exactly the same way as was used in the early to mid-20th century. An obvious problem with such thinking is that such traditions as our grandparents observed were all innovative at one time. If a church really wants to be "traditional" they should forget formal church buildings all together and and meet in homes, catacombs, or whatever location works; which is just what some in the "emerging church" movement are recommending.

So, does it really matter how the Gospel of Christ is brought to men, so long as it's brought? You might get that from Paul's words to the Philippian church, where he found reason to rejoice even in the preaching of some men who did so with less-than-pure motives, because he was glad that at least "Christ is preached." But the cause for his joy was that "Christ" was being proclaimed. And that, I think, is the "crux" of the matter (crux as in cross, the heart of the Gospel).

If the message of the cross, which will always be foolishness to the unbelieving mind, is clearly presented, with the equally clear insistence that salvation is a result of placing obedient faith in Christ's death on that cross, then that message may be, and should be, put into whatever terms and methods that will convey the truth of Christ to the heart of the hearer.

But if the message is other than the fully biblical truth of Christ (as in "God loves everyone too much to punish sin," or "Jesus is one of many ways to salvation"), then it doesn't matter what style or language or method is employed. Lies are lies, no matter how they're said. And the best lie is the one that makes the most sense to the person willing to believe it.