Non-Spiritual benefits of the Gospel?

[jayce475]

Good stuff Brothers. "Catalyst" and "propel" are great words. "Authentication" and "sign" were confusing terms from the start. In conclusion then, it's ok to let God's sovereignty use whatever catalyst he will to get people's attention regarding his grace, but do not magnify the temporal blessing such that it eclipses the work of the cross. Also, have the aim in mind to teach them true discipleship: even if all is taken from him and his health fails, the true disciple glories in the cross because it is better by far.

At a practical level, I would agree that we do not harshly discount the ways that God brings people to the faith. However, I would also seek to bring a biblical perspective to their experiences (which is essentially that their experiences do not in themselves validate their faith) during discipleship soon after conversion, as well as teach them how to share their faith with others in a biblical manner. Too often, be it in the villages of China or in charismatic circles in developed countries, immature believers end up telling others that they ought to believe just because so and so experienced some miracles the other day. A proper view of the gospel accounts and the closure of revelation requires this to be corrected. We preach Christ and Christ crucified and resurrected to the unbelieving world, not the prosperity gospel, regardless of how mild a form it takes.

 

[kvanlaan]

Very interesting thread - I think I would be more in the camp of 'watch out if you hear any indication of signs and wonders' but I had breakfast with a missionary in Addis Ababa once that, among other things, helped cure me of that as a knee-jerk reaction (I would class myself as a healthy skeptic still, but not out-of-hand dismissive). And reports from Pergy. Food multiplication incidents. Dreams. Odd occurances that we just don't see here. We can't dismiss them entirely because we weren't there and are skeptical. I would have real difficulty swallowing a raising from the dead, but for some reason, dreams, etc. don't seem that out-of-bounds.

As for material benefits of the Gospel, I would say that there are certainly several: a more well-regulated society, a diminished focus on material goods and the things of this world, compassion to your neighbour as a matter of course, meekness/humility and other improvements in one's character, etc. etc.

 

[earl40]

Very interesting thread - I think I would be more in the camp of 'watch out if you hear any indication of signs and wonders' but I had breakfast with a missionary in Addis Ababa once that, among other things, helped cure me of that as a knee-jerk reaction (I would class myself as a healthy skeptic still, but not out-of-hand dismissive). And reports from Pergy. Food multiplication incidents. Dreams. Odd occurances that we just don't see here. We can't dismiss them entirely because we weren't there and are skeptical. I would have real difficulty swallowing a raising from the dead, but for some reason, dreams, etc. don't seem that out-of-bounds.

As for material benefits of the Gospel, I would say that there are certainly several: a more well-regulated society, a diminished focus on material goods and the things of this world, compassion to your neighbour as a matter of course, meekness/humility and other improvements in one's character, etc. etc.

From Calvin's Prefatory address in his Institutes (referring to the Roman Catholic Church):

3. In demanding miracles from us, they act dishonestly; for we have not coined some new gospel, but retain the very one the truth of which is confirmed by all the miracles which Christ and the apostles ever wrought. But they have a peculiarity which we have not - they can confirm their faith by constant miracles down to the present day! Nay rather, they allege miracles which might produce wavering in minds otherwise well disposed; they are so frivolous and ridiculous, so vain and false.

Seems to me Calvin was a tad knee jerky.

 

[toddpedlar]

But I am very wary of denouncing any event, ordinary or extraordinary, that's leading people to faith.

As long as it is ACTUALLY leading them to faith in the risen Christ, yes.

Note that after the miraculous feeding of the people, (a sign and indeed a wonder), Christ himself had no qualms about telling many of them, in not so many words, to depart, as they were only hungering after another meal.

 

[jayce475]

On another note, apart from personal miracles, I have also met brethren from China who shared the gospel by telling others "You know why China has been so poor and uncivilized for so long? Because it's not a Christian country. Look at the US, UK, Australia and all the other Western countries. They are prosperous and civilized because they are Christian countries." And I have been told that this is a rather common method, especially in poorer places. Classic case of taking some truth and stretching it. And it is all well and good that a society is blessed due to God's grace, but that's not the gospel and ought not to form the basis of anyone's faith. It needs to be "I believe in God because the Scriptures say so and Christ died for me!", not "I believe in God because He healed me." or "I believe in God because God will make China great again"

 

[steadfast7]

Good point Jason, there is a difference between Christianity and the gospel. There are those who embrace Christianity because of its benefits, but those who believe the gospel will also do it for its benefits as well. Everyone starts their journey with God somewhere, some less ideal than others. It may be in the providence of God to "get them in the door" through material benefits and lead them to a more mature faith where Christ becomes their all in all. All this is affirming is that God can use means. There is something to be said, however, about God's "strategy" in placing Christ and him crucified as the centre of the gospel ensuring that it be a stumbling block to Jews, and foolishness to the Greeks.

p.s. excellent Piper video on the prosperity gospel here.