Skip to main content

The Motivational Gospel

The world is full of false Gospels.  For many years the Prosperity Gospel dominated the public persona of Christianity, but another false Gospel is slowly supplanting it.  We can call this the Motivational Gospel.  It's much like the prosperity Gospel, but it places heavy emphasis on effort.  In many ways it is more difficult to discern from the true Gospel.  Whereas the Prosperity Gospel promises health and wealth in return for financial donations to specific people/organizations (I hesitate to call them churches), the Motivational Gospel assures the believer that God is there to help him achieve his goals if he is willing to put in the blood, sweat, and tears.  It sounds so much more genuine than the garbage peddled by Prosperity Gospel "preachers," but it is still severely lacking. This Gospel is very popular right now.  Why should we flee from it?

1) It is false.  Simply put, this is not the Gospel that the Apostles preached.  They came as heralds of the king, not snake oil salesmen.  They came demanding wholesale submission to the Lord of the Universe, not inviting people to sample Jesus like some sort of smorgasbord.  They proclaimed the truth of who Jesus was and what He did, and called people to repent.  That is the Gospel!

2) It is carnal.  Christ did not come and die so that you could achieve your dreams.  God did not initiate the Covenant of Grace so that you could lose weight or have a healthy self-image.  If this is the Gospel that you hear on Sundays, then you should find another church.  This Gospel is particularly popular with athletes, who misappropriate the promises of the Word to motivate their athletic pursuits.  There's LeBron thanking the "man upstairs" for helping him win another championship.  There's Russell Wilson and Kerri Walsh Jennings (who, to be fair, seem more authentically Christian than many "Christian" celebrities) sharing motivational memes on social media.  There's 50% of college athletes, most of whom will never achieve their ultimate goals, posting self-reassuring messages online about how God will get them where they want to be.  The Gospel is eternally-minded and calls us to Heavenly priorities.  Certainly we should entrust every endeavor to God, but "I can do all things through Christ" has nothing to do with your career, athletic pursuit, or weight-loss goals (it's actually about enduring suffering).  Frankly, we twist the Gospel when we make it subservient to our earthly pursuits.  The Gospel is supernatural and spiritual.  The temporal affects of the Gospel, which must certainly follow if that Gospel is genuinely embraced, flow from the spiritual realities it proclaims.

3) It is anthropocentric.  Today's Gospel is individualistic and man-centered.  God exists to love and fulfill you.  He is here to fulfill your goals.  The problem is that that is not true, even if those goals are spiritual and admirable.  God does not exist to help you get over your divorce or to help you deal with losing your job.  Now, God certainly cares about those things and your faith is worthless if it doesn't help you deal with such practical concerns, but the point I'm trying to make here is that the Gospel is not about you.  The Gospel is about Jesus Christ and what the Trinity has done/is doing through His person and work.  If you are a Christian, then you are a part of the body of Christ.  Your needs and desires become subservient to the needs and desires of that body.  The beautiful thing is that by losing yourself in Christ, you actually find yourself.  By submitting your own desires to Christ's, you find true fulfillment.  Jesus is the true Bread of Life.  He gives that water that truly quenches our thirst. He binds the wounds and heals the brokenhearted.  This is all, however, secondary to the glory of God, the exaltation of Jesus Christ, and the reconciliation of the Creation to her Creator.  Our benefits are personal byproducts of the cosmic effects of the Gospel.

This Motivational Gospel is pervasive in our culture today, particularly here in the United States.  It is contagious, and understandably so, but it is also nothing short of dangerous.  We must beware any Gospel that encourages us to look more at ourselves and our needs than at Christ and the demands of His Kingdom.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, l...

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repe...

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...