food4thought

Our task tonight is to think about eschatology. Eschatology is taken from the Greek word, ‘eschatos’ which means ‘last’. So we’re thinking about the last things. We’re thinking about God’s intended destination for His creation. We’re thinking about the arrival of the end.

But why start here? Why not leave it till the end? It’s where the gospel starts. The gospel is a promise concerning the future Kingdom of God. We can experience the inuagurated kingdom here and now through the Spirit’s work but the full experience of that kingdom awaits a future consummation in the future. The gospel is a promise that through faith in Christ’s work we will participate in that future kingdom. That’s why we’re starting here. We want to think about what the gospel promises so that we can work out whether we think it’s worth it!

In the unfolding scheme of human history there will be three significant events.

1. The Lord will return

The first thing that will happen is that the same Jesus Christ who departed from this world at his ascension will return.[i] Jesus has gone but he’s coming back.

The New Testament uses three common terms to refer to his return.

1. The arrival of Christ, from the Greek word ‘parousia’. This conveys the sense of the personal return of Christ. It was used in the first century for the visit of the Emperor. It is the commonest term in the New Testament for Jesus’ return.[ii]

2. The revelation of Christ, from the Greek word ‘apokalypsis’. This conveys the sense that things now hidden will one day come to light as the things which obstruct our vision of Christ are removed.[iii] The Lord’s coming will reveal who he is and what the world is.

3. The manifestation of Christ, from the Greek word ‘epiphaneia’. This conveys the idea of things now hidden being manifested or appearing.[iv]

Jesus’ return is not a peripheral issue in the Bible. There are more than 250 clear references to it. These show unambiguously that this is a matter of central concern in biblical thought. Whilst some of our Christian brethren may become over excited with over elaborate and speculative affirmations about the end times we must not allow their infatuation with peripheral issues to distract us from the core and clear issues that surround Jesus’ return. There are especially two things to note about the Lord’s return.

a. the nature of his return will be glorious

A complete description of Jesus’ return is impossible. It will be an event which will transcend the capacity of words to capture it. The depiction of his return in scripture is accurate, we’re not being miseled. The depiction is sufficient in detail, it’s everything that God thinks we need to know. But the depiction is not exhuastive. It’ll be even better than it sounds. And it sounds awesome!

Jesus’ first arrival took place in obscurity and weakness and it hardly seemed to cause a ripple on the surface of human history. Not so his return! His second arrival will be universally manifest. On his return he’ll come with his angels, be surrounded by blazing fire, against a backdrop of lightning flashes accompanied by dramatic volume.[v] Jesus’ return will be the final act of the unveiling of the divine presence, the culminating revelation of the majesty and transcendent glory of the Lord. It will be unmistakable. There will be no doubt whatsoever that he has returned. Somehow the whole world will see him.

b. the time of his return is unknown

The return of Christ will be sudden and unexpected.[vi] Jesus professed ignorance of the time of his return and explained that it was something that not even his apostles were to know.[vii] But it’s also true that the scriptures speak of certain events or signs that will precede Christ’s coming. The disciples asked Jesus what to expect before his return.[viii] Jesus’ response spoke of a period of time preceding his return characterized by four general features; religious apostasy, persecution and the world wide witness of the church, wars and conflicts between nations and disturbances in the natural order.[ix] It’s tempting to think therefore that we can plot the events and predict the time of Jesus’ return. But Jesus’ view was that we simply cannot predict when he will return. We need to remember that the signs are not given primarily to satisfy our curiosity about the end of the world. They point instead to Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah who had come to introduce the last days, the final period of history before he will return to judge.

• These signs are not restricted to the end of time immediately before Christ returns but they characterise the period in between Christ’s first and second comings.
• These signs are not to be used to date the return of Christ, their purpose is to reassure us of the certainty of his return but not the chronology of it.
• These signs relate especially to the preaching of Christ’s gospel and the opposition to Christ’s rule.

With respect to the preaching of Christ’s gospel three things must occur

• This gospel will be preached to all nations, which doesn’t mean that every person without exception must hear it before Christ returns. It means that missionary activity will dominate this period of church history.[x]
• This gospel will be preached to Israel, which means that this period will be characterised by Jews accepting Jesus as the promised Messiah of the Old Testament. There may well be a period towards the end of the last days in which greater numbers of Jews are converted.[xi]
• The gospel will be preached in the power of the Spirit, which means that Jesus will equip his followers to fulfil the missionary enterprise that he outlined in his great commission.[xii]

With respect to the continuing opposition to Christ’s rule three things will characterise this time

• There will be a period of tribulation during which time God’s people will suffer persecution. This will intensify immediately prior to his return.[xiii]
• There will be widespread apostasy as those who profess to be followers show their true colours and betray Christ. Once again there will be an intensification of this desertion immediately prior to Jesus’ return.[xiv]
• There will arise a figurehead known as the Antichrist who will be especially blasphemous and who will assert himself against Christ as an alternative to him.[xv] But the New Testament also speaks of many antichrists whose rebellious attitude typifies the spirit of the Antichrist.[xvi]

It’s hugely fascinating to study the scriptures and try to interpret the signs of the times in order that we might be able to predict when Jesus will return. We wouldn’t be the first to do so.

William Miller, from whom the modern Seventh Day Adventist Movement traces its descent, developed ‘kingdom arithmetic’. He predicted that the second coming would occur between March 21st 1842 and March 21st 1843. Obviously, Jesus did not return during that time. Disappointment swept through the Millerite ranks and once again embarrassment hovered over the church. Miller undaunted asserted that he had miscalculated. He refigured and asserted with confidence that Christ would return on October 22nd 1844. Most of the Millerites sold or gave away their possessions and prepared their wardrobe for the coming of the kingdom. They gathered in white robes and waited, and waited. October 23rd came and Christ did not return. The rumour that someone drew up alongside him, put his arm around him and said ‘don’t worry mate, it’s not the end of the world’ are totally unfounded!

But that’s not what Jesus had in mind when he spoke about being watchful. The signs aren’t there to tell us that the Lord’s return is imminent but that it’s certain. They tell us that he’s definitely coming and we must be ready for him when he comes.

Jesus is coming back. That’s where history is headed. It’s not like Groundhog Day where everything just keeps happening over and over again. And so Jesus exhorted his followers to eagerly anticipate and watch for his return.[xvii] We’ve got to be prepared for it because it’s going to happen. Some of us here need to make sure that we’re not caught out by his sudden return.

2. The dead will be raised

Bernard Manning, the comedian who died this week said this in an obituary he wrote about himself for the Daily Mail, ‘As I look down … and as I sense the affection from the mass of the British public, I know that I’m the one having the last laugh’. I have no idea whether he had a Christian faith, given what he said it’d be surprising. I don’t know where he got his ideas of the afterlife from either. But we all want to know what happens to us after we die.

The Bible’s answer is that we go on living. Both believers and unbelievers continue to exist consciously.

Assuming that we’re not around on this earth when Christ returns then there’ll be two phases to our life after death. There’s the intermediate state and the eternal state.

• The intermediate state is an interval of time in which the dead await the final judgment and the resurrection of the body.
• The eternal state refers to the experience after the judgement of Christ. During these times, the experience of the believer is very different from the experience of the unbeliever.

a. Believers to everlasting life in heaven

After death believers go immediately to be with Christ. Christ is at the Father’s right hand and in scripture the Father’s dwelling place is often called ‘heaven’ so we often say that when believers die they go to heaven. This word has various meanings in scripture but the predominant theological meaning is that it’s the place where God dwells. It’s a real place, in space and time. God is immaterial and is not limited to any place, not even to heaven, but it seems to be that heaven is the place where He manifests Himself in the most intense way. Whether we’ll be material or immaterial is not something I’ve resolved to my own satisfaction as yet. There are two alternatives often suggested. One is the doctrine of purgatory and the other is the doctrine of soul sleep.

Purgatory is a Roman Catholic idea built on a text from an apocryphal book called Maccabees. It’s not part of the New Testament canon it’s religious fiction. But the idea is that most of us aren’t good enough for heaven and so we need to suffer and undergo purging before we enter heaven. The trouble is that the Bible teaches that Jesus dealt with our sin in his death. He doesn’t need help from us to finish off the bits he missed!

Soul sleep seems more plausible because it employs biblical language. Proponents argue that in between our death and the eternal state believers slip into an unconscious state like sleep until they’re awoken by Christ on his return.[xviii] But the Bible teaches that even though sleep can be used as a metaphor for death the believer goes directly to be with Jesus.[xix]

The Bible says very little about the intermediate state which is frustrating because we want to satisfy our curiosity. The most important thing about it is that we’re with the Lord. It’s not the final state, there’s yet still much to look forward to but we are safe in his presence.[xx]

When Jesus returns to earth he will bring all his saints with him. Their bodies will rise up from the ground and believers living on earth will be caught up to meet him in the air. This is known as the rapture. There’s much debate amongst theologians about exactly when that will take place but no one doubts that it will happen. The various views on the rapture are usually tied in with various views of the millennium. People can be amillennial, pre-millennial and post millennial.

I once asked David Jackman for his views on the millennium and he said that he was pan-millennial. When I pressed him he said that it meant he was confident that it would all pan out OK in the end! Millennialism is a subject with which we’re not going to deal this evening. But there’s something on the blog about the dispensational Premillennialism of the ‘Left Behind’ series if you wanted to chase that up http://richardperkins.blogsome.com/2007/06/26/left-behind/.

After that will come God’s final judgement in which every human being will be held responsible and called to account.[xxi] Believers will be judged even though there’ll be no condemnation for those for whom Christ has secured forgiveness.[xxii] We’ll be judged according to our works. Every thing we’ve ever done, every thought we’ve ever had and everything we’ve ever said will be made known and judged. As Matt Fuller says in his article in ‘The End’ Revive 06

When we think back over even just the last week our most depraved moments, our most horrific thoughts and our most ugly motives will be exposed for our friends, our family, our colleagues and the whole world to see. And Christ will turn to us, smile and say ‘you’re forgiven, I’ve made you perfect’.

After judgement we will be kitted out with our resurrection bodies. This body will be imperishable, powerful and spiritual.[xxiii] It will be perfectly suited for life in the eternal realm, which we’ll think about in a moment.

Joni Eareckson Tada put it this way,

‘If you were to tell that tiny acorn that one day he would be as tall as a building with heavy branches and thick green leaves, a tree so great it would house many squirrels, that nut would say you were crazy. A gigantic oak tree bears absolutely no resemblance to an acorn. But they are related. Somehow, somewhere within that acorn is the promise and pattern of the tree it will become. Somehow, somewhere in you there is the pattern of the heavenly person you will become’.

b. Unbelievers to everlasting punishment in hell

We will, I trust, take no pleasure in examining the fate of those who remain unbelievers. We have to deal with this side of the salvation equation out of loyalty for Christ and out of love for unbelievers. Despite the fact that much of contemporary evangelicalism tries to marginalise Jesus’ teaching on this issue we’re not free to pick and choose which bits of the Bible we’re prepared to believe. It’s salutary to remember that of all the biblical teachers Jesus has the most to say about eternal punishment. He didn’t shy away from mentioning it in public nor of spelling out its implications. He did so because of his familiarity with hell’s reality. There was no debate in his mind about the fate of the unbeliever. And he did so out of compassion for the lost.

In the intermediate state unbelievers are in torment awaiting judgement. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus, in my opinion, points us in that direction.[xxiv] This means that although the final judgement remains future our eternal destinies are set at death. After death, no one can change from being an unbeliever into a believer. Unbelievers enter the eternal state after the judgement. The eternal state is characterised by everlasting punishment.[xxv]

This teaching has been undermined in recent years by a position known as annihilationism. Proponents of annihilationism teach that unbelievers are not punished forever but at some point are simply put out of existence. The Bible however is clear on this subject and we must not let our distaste for this doctrine overwhelm our duty to follow Christ’s teaching. We must not let our compassion for the lost overwhelm our concern for God’s glory. We must concede that there is language that says the wicked will be destroyed but that does not necessarily mean annihilation. Destruction is used in the sense of no longer being for purpose. If a car has been written off we might say that it’s been destroyed which means not that it’s ceased to exist but that it’s ceased to be useful.

It appears deeply unfair that God should punish people eternally and so many of us struggle to comprehend the existence of hell. But we need to remember that each sin is an affront to an eternally holy God. Trying to calculate what our sin deserves is beyond our comprehension but it shouldn’t surprise us that such sins are infinitely offensive and deserve eternal penalty.

In summary believers go to be with God, awaiting the future resurrection of their bodies. Unbelievers go to a place of punishment, awaiting the final verdict against them at the last judgement. Both the righteous and the wicked will be raised physically to stand before God in the final judgement. Then the wicked will be punished eternally, while those in Christ will live with God in the new heavens and the new earth. The dead will be raised. There is an existence beyond the grave. We will not end in death.

3. The universe will be recreated

After the final judgement believers will enter into the consummated or perfected kingdom of God. We often speak about being in heaven after Christ returns. We don’t want to be overly pedantic but that’s not strictly true.

The Bible speaks of the new heavens and the new earth when there will be a future unification of heaven and earth.[xxvi] God has subjected this fallen creation to frustration because of human sin and it’s eagerly awaiting freedom from its bondage to decay.[xxvii] There’s some discussion about whether this world will be completely destroyed and God will start again with a whole new batch of stuff or whether He’ll take the marred mess that this world has become and re-fashion it. As with our resurrection bodies I take it that there will be both transformation and continuity when the earth is recreated. It will be this world that’s re-created but it will be this world transformed so that it’s unrecognisably recognisable. There will be all sorts of questions that we have about the nature of our existence in the new creation. Revelation 21 settles some of them.

3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”

But two things stand out.

a. it will be wonderful because of what is absent

There will be no more mourning, crying or pain. A friend summarises that comforting depiction by saying that we’ll have no need of hankies, hearses or hospitals in heaven. It’ll still be a physical place and we’ll enjoy physical pursuits like recreation, sport and work but there’ll be no sin. Ed has been building a shed and he thinks the fall is responsible for his inability to get it to fit together. He may have a point. We won’t sin. Imagine that. We won’t have to battle with temptation. There’ll be no lust, no envy, no anger and no resentment.

b. it will be wonderful because of who is present

The most important blessing of believers in the eternal state is the presence of God Himself. For all eternity we live with Jesus, seeing God face to face.

For the last few weeks our kids have been beside themselves with excitement at the prospect of meeting Colin Buchanan. Just before Revive Rufus asked me whether Colin was real so worried was he that Colin would turn out to be a fictional character from the DVDs he’d watched.

Can you imagine relating to God without the handicap of sin? Sin is the great barrier to enjoying intimacy with God. In the eternal state we are forever separated not only from the punishment that sin deserves but the power that sin exerts over us. It’s described like being at a feast.[xxviii] Another way in which scripture describes our blessing in Christ is an inheritance.[xxix] But the inheritance is not something physical like the contents of our parents bank balance or more usually the contents of their loft. The inheritance is God Himself. He will be our God and we His people. He will give us productive work to do as we exercise dominion over the creation as Adam and Eve were intended to. There are times in this creation when among the greatest moments we experience is the delight of spiritual intimacy with God. For some of us that may not be very frequent or even a very vivid memory but there are times when we’ve felt close to the Lord and in a heightened state of enjoyment that we belong to Him.

Let’s close with the implications of this doctrine

This is the future. How do we respond to that? Well I guess it depends which one is our own personal future. If we’re an unbeliever the future is profoundly unpleasant and we need to be very frightened. If we’re a believer the future is absolutely amazing.

1. it should keep us talking to our friends about Christ so that they share with us the joy of adoption into God’s family and they won’t be excluded from heaven

2. it should keep us waging war on the sin that deceives us into thinking that it’s more enjoyable to give into temptation than it is to be in heaven

3. it should keep us from making this earth our home and seeking satisfaction in this temporary world when ultimate happiness is to be found in glory

4. it should keep us going in the midst of trials for this momentary suffering is but a blip in God’s eternal plans for his heavenly people

5. it should keep us focussed on our Saviour and Lord who has rescued us and who will direct our lives under his wonderful kingship for all eternity

If you wanted to take this issue further let me recommend some resources. You could do a lot worse than digging out your copy of the Revive 06 book called The End. This book by Edward Donnelly has the worse design I have ever seen on a Christian book but the contents is brilliant.

• [i] Acts 1:5
• [ii] Matthew 24:3, 1 Corinthians 15:23, 1 Thessalonians 2:19, 2 Thessalonians 2:1&8, Luke 19:12
• [iii] 1 Corinthians 1:7, 2 Thessalonians 1:7, 1 Peter 1:7 [iv] 2 Thessalonians 2:8, Titus 2:13
• [v] Angels Matthew 16:27, 25:31, Fire 2 Thes 1:7, Lightning Matt 24:27, Volume 1 Thes 4:16
• [vi] Matthew 24:37-44, 1 Thes 5:1-6
• [vii] Mark 13:32 & Acts 1:7
• [viii] Matthew 24:3
• [ix] For the four events see Mark 13:5f, Mark 13:9-11, 13 & 19, Mark 13:7, Mark 13:8, 24f
• [x] Isaiah 42:6 & 52:10, Matthew 24:14
• [xi] Romans 11:25 [xii] Matthew 28
• [xiii] Daniel 12:1, Matthew 24:9 & 21
• [xiv] Matthew 24:10-12 & 24, 1 Timothy 4:1, 2 Timothy 2:3, 2 Thes 2:1-3
• [xv] 2 Thes 2:4, Mark 13
• [xvi] 1 John 2:22, 2 John 1, 1 John 2
• [xvii] Mark 13:37
• [xviii] Matthew 9:24, 27:52, John 11:11
• [xix] John 11:11-14, Matthew 9:24, 27:52
• [xx] Revelation 6:10-11
• [xxi] Matthew 10:15, 11:22 & 24, Acts 17:30-31, Revelation 21:11-15
• [xxii] 2 Cor 5:10, Matt 25:31-46, Romans 14:10-12, Romans 8:1, John 5:24
• [xxiii] 1 Cor 15:42-44
• [xxiv] Luke 16
• [xxv] Matthew 25:41 & 46, Revelation 14:11, Mark 9:43 & 48, Luke 16:22-24 & 28, Rev 19:3, Rev 20:10
• [xxvi] Isaiah 65:17, Isaiah 66:22, 2 Peter 3:13 Revelation 21:1
• [xxvii] Romans 8
• [xxviii] Revelation 19:9
• [xxix] Matthew 25:34, Acts 26:18, Eph 1:11, 14 & 18, Col 1:12, 3:24, Heb 9:15, 1 Peter 1:4, Rev 21:7

An appraisal written at Theological College in 2000

The Alpha Course

‘People are struggling with evangelism. We don’t have to prove Alpha works – it just does’

[http://www.alpha.org.uk]

This sort of theological pragmatism is rampant throughout the church. The consequences are potentially pastorally disastrous. However, in an age where making disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ is proving especially difficult, it’s understandable. The apparent impenetrable secularisation of the western world has led to churches to grasp at what works. If someone could come up with a proven tool for increasing church numbers and breathing new life into tired congregations they’d be onto a winner. The Rev Nicky Gumbel [Senior Minister at Holy Trinity Brompton, London] has designed a simple 15 session course that will do just that. It’s called Alpha. You might have heard of it!

However, despite it’s world acclaim Alpha has not won universal approval. One dissonant voice wrote, ‘In giving many of those involved in evangelism what they want (ie numbers) can Alpha give those on the receiving end, the unconverted, what they need; that is, to hear the saving gospel as presented by Jesus and the Apostles, and preserved for us today in the Bible?’ [W.D. Scholes, A is for Alpha B is for Berean, The Churchman Volume 112 Number 4]. And that’s the essential problem with this highly popular course. It’s appalling that the weakness of a gospel course is it’s presentation of the gospel.

This essay explores that issue. It exposes the theology of conversion that underlies Alpha. It concludes with John Chapman that ‘[Alpha], in its present form leaves much to be desired and could not be used by anyone who takes the Bible seriously’ [First Things First: Alpha Examined, Briefing Number 185]. The Alpha course is analysed by asking three questions of the material.

First, what assumptions does Alpha make about the needs of prospective converts?

Secondly, what is the implicit or articulated concept of conversion?

Thirdly, what is it that produces the conversion it hopes for?

Each section concludes with a brief reflection on the practical implications.

1. The prospective converts are people whose lives are characterised by having something missing.

Rev Sandy Millar, writes, ‘many men and women today experience a real sense of spiritual hunger without having any contact with church’ [www.alpha.org.uk/sandym.htm]. Gumbel adds, ‘again and again … we find people who talk about this spiritual hunger, this gap. Amongst the millions who do not go to church, there is a longing, at time recognised and at times hidden, for a relationship with God’ www.alpha.org.uk/news/99-11.page6.htm]. They assume that unbelievers are spiritually hungry and genuinely searching for something to satisfy their longing for meaning. In Nicky Gumbel’s book, ‘Telling Others’, Millar writes, ‘it isn’t that people are not interested in spirituality, interest in the occult, religious experiences, spiritism and other forms of alternative searches is as great today as ever it was – but the universal spiritual hunger, that need to fill the God shaped hole has not been met by those things’ [p15].

Alpha is far more positive about the human condition than the Bible. We’re not described as rebellious creatures railing against the rightful rule of our creator. Insufficient attention is paid to the immorality of our sinful rebellion and the eternal consequences that we’ll suffer. It’s true that the talk covering the material on sin does acknowledge that unbelievers are rebels but it’s only a sentence. There’s no extended explanation of what that entails and why it’s so serious. Far more attention is given to the ruination of our lives from the unhelpful influence of sin. Alpha presents a picture of humanity in which we’re people who need rehab not sinners needing forgiveness. To be fair the course does acknowledge that there are eternal consequences to our rebellion. It warns that unbelievers will be cut off from God. But blink and you’ve missed it. Youth Alpha, a good source for the real theology of the course since it omits all but what it regards as essential, rather gives the game away when it writes, ‘sin is rubbish that clutters up our lives and clutters up our world’ [p5]. However, the Apostles in their missionary efforts thought these issues were central. We need only look at Paul’s classic evangelistic sermon to unbelieving Gentiles in Athens Acts 17:30&31 to see that sin and judgment were never excluded. In conclusion it’s hard to argue with Hand who states, ‘the plight of humanity in Alpha is not as serious as it is in the Bible’ [http://web.ukonline.co.uk/crn/page12.html].

There is a positive practical outworking of this theological downplaying of sin and its consequences nevertheless. It creates in the course leaders a genuine conviction that the gospel of Alpha has something to offer their unbelieving friends. No criticism can be levelled at the enthusiasm of Alpha supporters on that issue. Yet the approach of the course is fundamentally anthropocentric. It’s not a ‘rescue from judgement’ that the gospel offers but ‘adding what’s missing’. As the evangelistic booklet ‘Why Jesus?’ states, ‘nothing will fill this gap except the relationship with God for which we were made’. God is a convenient addition to life. He satisfies my hunger. He adds what’s missing. I’m a consumer who finds in God what I’ve always been searching for. Becoming a Christian seems little more than gaining a better life for our enjoyment. That’s just a lame version of hedonism isn’t it? The moral outrage of rejecting God’s rightful ruler, the Lord Jesus Christ is completely absent. Instead the aim of the course is to attempt to offer unbelievers in the gospel of Alpha what they’ve been searching for all along.

There’s a determination to look for points of contact with the culture and seek to capitalise on them. As Scholes points out, ‘Alpha succeeds in being relevant at a cultural level. We live in an age where … style is winning the victory over substance. Nineties man and woman are simply uninterested in anything that is not presented in the current idiom’. Alpha has taken seriously the emphasis of ‘becoming all things to all men’ [1 Corinthians 9] to heart but has confused cultural flexibility with doctrinal flexibility. This is Liberal Protestantism all over again. The comparison with the nineteenth century project in which doctrine was accommodated to prevailing opinion is surely not wholly without merit. Whilst Alpha may be some way from this approach the warning bells sound when Millar writes, ‘Nicky Gumbel by taking account of literally thousands of questionnaires has adapted and improved the course so that it is truly moulded to the perceived and experienced needs of those who attend. Without taking anything for granted, stripping the gospel down to its bare essentials, he has made Christianity accessible to this generation’ [Telling Others, p16]. Fortunately, enough of the gospel remains for God to convert those whom he has chosen. However, it’s a short step from a stripped gospel to a naked one. The end result for the unbeliever, clasping nothing else but a seriously attenuated gospel, will be embarrassed humiliation on the Day of Judgement.

2. the concept of conversion implicit in the approach of Alpha appears to be a process of incorporating unbelievers into a believing community.

Conversion occurs through winning people to acknowledgement of the reasonableness of Christian morality, adoption of that lifetsyle and assimilation into a social scene of Christian love and acceptance. Ian Lewis highlights the danger of this in his article for Evangelicals Now, ‘I am sure that many people are being converted through the Alpha Course but I have a suspicion that some of these people are being converted to a Christian lifestyle rather than to Christ’.

There’s no clearly articulated concept of conversion in the training manuals. It might be argues that it would be unlikely to achieve such widespread popularity if that were the case. However, Gumbel does acknowledge that conversion is part of a process [Telling Others, p16]. What he means by this is perhaps illuminated by a comment in the Youth Alpha manual that ‘Christianity is caught and not taught’. The emphasis on Alpha is therefore to get people to belong.

This criticism may sound harsh but a cursory glance at the course structure reveals that gospel material features in only three of the fifteen talks. This of course depends on a definition of the gospel that’s conerned with the life, death, resurrection and return of Jesus Christ. But the directly evangelistic material is located only in the talk in week three. Talk one is a promise that Christianity will provide the unbeliever direction, reality and an authentic life in all its fullness. Within the Alpha scheme this talk is designed to encourage people to continue with the course and at least to give Christianity a fair hearing. Talk two covers material of an apologetic nature about the existence and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Talk three then looks at the human predicament and the divine solution. It ends with a prayer of commitment. The next twelve talks are concerned with subject matter appropriate for a Christian basics course but not an evangelistic one. Perhaps here Alpha reveals its origins as a discipleship course developed under the direction of Rev John Irvine. And also reveals a confusion about what it’s trying to do. Beyond the third talk the language is inclusive and the approach is to assume that people have ‘prayed the prayer’. Indeed as early as week four, Alpha deals with the question ‘How can I be sure of my Faith?’

Another telling contribution is that the concept of biblical repentance is absent. Grudem defines repentance as, ‘a heart felt sorrow for sin, a renouncing of it and a sincere commitment to forsake it and walk in obedience to Christ’ [Systematic Theology]. Alpha defines repentance as ‘turning from the things I know are wrong’ [Youth Alpha, p6]. However, mankind is not the one who can define what he should turn from. Indeed if we were to have our way we’d turn from none of his sin but rather incorporate it into some form of pseudo-Christian belief system. In Youth Alpha this is taken to extraordinary lengths, ‘we can help their thought processes to mature by encouraging them to decide what is true for them personally as well as what they believe to be true about God’. Theological anarchy appears to have been legitimised by this comment. What this means in practice is that anything that presents too great an obstacle to involvement is excluded or watered down.

If this contentious assertion that conversion is little more than belonging rather than believing is correct it’s not surprising to note the emphasis throughout the course on the importance of friendship and joint involvement in communal activities. It would be churlish to suggest that this approach is inappropriate. But it’s patently part of the Alpha strategy to foster friendships so that people feel indebted to their small group and the Christian sub culture. In an age of increasing individual alienation Alpha offers authentic friendship. That is surely a good thing. What is less laudable is the confusion this may engender in the course participants. The course lacks clarity about what constitutes authentic Christian conversion. People may think they’ve been converted but in fact all they’ve decided to do is belong to a crowd at church. In contrast the New Testament offers assurance of reconciliation with God on the basis of faith in Christ alone rather than involvement in a church organisation. As Hand writes, ‘Alpha, with its emphasis on small groups, ‘sharing times’, fun, sympathy and understanding, there is a danger of being converted to a loving group of people rather than to God himself’ [Falling Short? Day One Publications, p86].

3. what produces conversion is not the gospel alone once and for all time entrusted to the saints but whatever works for the designated target audience.

Gumbel, building on the insights of Graham Cray, posits preaching a different message when reaching either those from a rational or an experiential background. He writes, ‘the gospel involves both the rational and the experiential and it impacts both those from an enlightenment background who need to experience God and those who have sought experiences but who need to understand the truth about God’ [Telling Others, p27]. he argues that it’s as necessary and valid to attempt to convert someone from an experiential background with the gospel as it is to attempt to convert someone from a rational background with experience. That’s nonsense isn’t it? Consider for a moment the Apostolic model presented in Acts. The same gospel converted both religious Jews and irreligious pagans. Sure they may have had to make some concessions with a lack of familiarity with biblical material and concepts amongst the Gentiles but in essence the gospel was exactly the same. Further on in ‘Telling Others’ the theological observations of another College lecturer are marshalled to justify Alpha’s flexibility in content. Consequently, Gumbel argues that three types of technique must be included in an evangelistic course if it to be successful. He also regards them as equally legitimate ways of presenting the gospel to unbelievers. Thus gospel proclamation, social action and power evangelism are employed in order to win people to Christ. The inclusion of power evangelism is justified because, ‘it is firmly based in New Testament practice’ and ‘hence we should expect to see the supernatural display of the power of the Holy Spirit as part of his kingdom activity and as an authentication of the good news’.

What emerges is a lack of confidence that the verbal proclamation of the gospel will convert anyone. Mere words need to be supplemented with supernatural attestation. As we might expect much is made of the miraculous material in Acts. Supernatural spiritual activity of this sort is assumed to be normative. But the authenticating work of the Holy Spirit expected today is limited to an inward physical experience which is labelled ‘being filled with the Spirit’ or speaking supernatural languages. This approach leads to theological pragmatism in which the audience and their worldview become the determining factor for the evangelistic content. Gumbel writes, ‘I have found that those from an essentially Enlightenment background are at home with the parts of the course that appeal to the mind, but often have difficulty in experiencing the Holy Spirit. Others coming from the New Age Movement find that rational and historical explanations leave them cold, but on the weekend away they are on more familiar territory in experiencing the Spirit’ [Telling Others, p29]. Increasingly unbelievers will approach Christianity with a post enlightenment worldview and this will inevitably mean that Alpha will drift towards a non-rational evangelistic methodology.

This type of approach reveals an allegiance to a charismatic theology of conversion in which believers are not persuaded by cognitive engagement to willingly forsake other allegiances, submit to Christ and rely on his death. What is encountered in Alpha is what John Chapman calls, ‘a standard charismatic line on the ‘fullness of the Spirit’ being a subsequent experience to conversion’. Gumbel writes that, ‘the pattern on Alpha is that people come to Christ and are filled with the Spirit’. It soon becomes clear that he is not talking about two coincidental events but that the fullness of the Spirit is something to move onto post-conversion.

In practice therefore, the high point of the course becomes the ‘weekend away’ at which there is a concentrated attempt to teach about the Holy Spirit. This acts as an apologetic for charismatic theology and prepares to create excitement and a sense of expectation for the supernatural signs mentioned earlier. It also means that the balance of a so-called gospel course is biased in favour of charismatic teaching where five of the total fifteen talks are concerned with an aspect of the Holy Spirit’s work. It’s perhaps telling that the Spirit’s work in bringing new life through the word he has expired is not articulated.

Conclusion

It’s encouraging to note that Gumbel admits, ‘I’m sure that [Alpha] is greatly marred by human error and frailty. There is much room for improvement and we try to listen to constructive criticism’ [Telling Others, p21]. Alpha is greatly marred, in the mercy of God he may continue to convert people through it. However, there’s so little gospel content in it that God is not left with much to work with. Consequently those who are convinced that faith comes by hearing the gospel are left hoping that unbelievers ask some searching questions is their small groups.

Any serious Bible believer ought to be left asking four serious questions

1. Are we witnessing a new liberalism in which humanity’s felt needs become the determining factor for the content of the gospel that is preached to them? We may be.  

2. With Alpha’s emphasis on a subsequent and necessary post-conversion experience does this mean that the course has drifted into the territory of preaching something which is not a gospel at all? It may have. We need to heed Paul’s warnings in Galatians 1:9.

3. Do the proponents of Alpha have faith in the straightforward proclamation of the gospel to save those whom God has chosen? It doesn’t appear so. 

4. Will the gospel of Alpha work on judgement day? I concede that it can, but only just. 

The pastoral implications of these conclusions are terrifying. If we think solely in worldly success and ignore eschatological judgement we may as John Chapmans warns ’succeed in adding people to our churches who have never been converted’.

I’m not prepared to take that risk with a course in which I’m hoping to see unbelievers persuaded by the truth of the gospel. So I’ll be using another course. I’m using Christianity Explored at the moment www.christianityexplored.com and I’d encourage others to do the same.

Bibliography

• Alpha Website http://alpha.org.uk
• Alpha Manual, (London: HTB Publications, 1993)
• Alpha Administrator’s Handbook, (London: HTB Publications, 1998)
• Chapman J, ‘First Things First’, The Briefing Issue #185
• Gumbel N, Questions of Life, (Eastbourne, Kingsway, 1993)
• Gumbel N, Telling Others (Eastbourne, Kingsway, 1995)
• Gumbel N, Why Jesus? (London, HTB Publications, 1991)
• Hand C, ‘Alpha Examined’, http://web.online.co.uk/crn/page12.html
• Hand C, Falling Short? The Alpha Course Examined, (Epsom, Day One Publications, 1998)
• McDonald E, Alpha New Life or New Lifestyle? (Cambridge, St Matthew Publication, 1996)
• Scholes WD, ‘‘A’ is for Alpha ‘B’ is for Berean’, Churchman Volume 112 Number 4
• Wells DF, Turning to God, (Carlisle, Paternoster Press, 1989)
• Youth Alpha Manual, (London: HTB Publications, 1995)
• Youth Alpha Leader’s Manual, (London: HTB Publications, 1996)

An essay produced early on at College

‘Praise is essentially advertising, as odious as that comparison might seem’ [Confessions of a Teenage Praise Junkie’ The Briefing, Matthias Media, Issue 170]

Tony Payne was driven to this conclusion from a detailed study of the Psalms, the book of the Bible in which more than half the references to praise occur. However, it’s an idea that’s not simply limited to that collection of Israel’s poetic songs. As Wallace puts it in his New Bible Dictionary article on Praise puts it, ‘the whole Bible is punctuated with outbursts of praise’.

This paper argues that a biblical theology of praise ought to be legitimately understood as the public proclamation of the praiseworthy attributes and actions of God in a manner closely akin to contemporary advertising. Four implications are then considered for congregational life.

1. The Nature of Praise

In an article for the Moore College publication ‘Explorations’ Harding conducts an analysis into the biblical concept of praise. He notices that over 80% of the occurrences of the English word praise are translated from two Hebrew words. He concludes that these two words are synonymous in meaning and that they, ‘denote public acknowledgement of favours received, as well as the advertisement of qualities, excellences and deeds’. Rather than being a religious word, praise simply describes an ordinary everyday activity in which someone tells others of an excellent quality or an extraordinary achievement. Harding’s etymological study of the use of these words therefore confirms Payne’s assertion that praise is essentially advertising.

2. The Content of Praise

This inevitably provokes the question, ‘what is it that is being advertised?’ Woodhouse in his article on church music in the Matthias Media publication ‘The Church Musician’s Handbook’ maintains that the content of praise is, ‘declaring what God is like and what he has done’. This is evident in one of the earliest songs of praises. It comes from the lips of Moses and his fellow redeemed Israelites. In this song they addressed God and told him of their intention to publicly declare his character as Israel’s warrior who had defeated Pharaoh. The content of praise as either a recollection or proclamation of God’s saving acts or his work of creation is a consistent theme throughout the Psalms. The content of praise in the New Testament is related to its Old Testament counterpart by continuity and transformation. In Peter’s first letter he attributes praise to God for his great mercy. Since God had decided to grant new life to believers whose salvation for all eternity had been secured he was worthy of praise . Therefore the content of praise remains God’s wonderful character and deeds. However, the deeds that are proclaimed in the gospel era are transformed and now advertise the saving acts of the gospel. In the New Testament the focus is therefore considerably more upon the achievements of Christ on the cross. This drives Payne to write, ‘In the New Testament then, praise is somewhat similar to evangelism’ . It is an announcement of what God has done in Christ by saving his people. Woodhouse goes further and argues that, ‘The highest praise of God is the proclamation of the gospel’ . This is persuasive since there is nothing greater that God has achieved and there is no clearer declaration of his character than his accomplishment of securing the eternal salvation of his people. Indeed it is this very thing that causes the saints in heaven to praise the slain Lamb of God.

3. The Exponents of Praise

Having considered briefly the content of praise it is necessary to consider whom it is that does the advertising. In the Old Testament after the ark was brought into Jerusalem David appointed Levites whose specific responsibility was to praise God. David also went to the trouble of writing a Psalm of praise so that they would have something good to sing! This Psalm makes a telling contribution to this subject since David’s concern was that this praise should be carried out among the nations so that they should know what God had accomplished. This unique caste, who were set apart for these responsibilities, were therefore able to fulfil their priestly role by mediating between God and the nations. However, the rest of the Old Testament makes it clear that praise was not to be limited to a small spiritual elite. In Isaiah 43:21 God promised that he would do a new thing. His saving activity would result in an international people proclaiming his praise. This is fulfilled in the gospel accounts of Jesus birth where men and women from a variety of social, national and religious groups publicly extol his virtues. This is seen clearly in Christ’s glorious entry into his capital city when the crowds gathered to praise him. The shouting and declaring announced that he was the rightful heir to David’s throne, God’s Messiah. In 1 Peter 2:9 the redeemed people of God were exhorted by Peter to declare the praises of God who had brought them out of darkness into light. There is therefore a corporate responsibility incumbent on the redeemed people of God to advertise his mighty deeds. Yet on an individual level there are frequent occurrences of praise emanating from an individual who had benefited from God’s favour. One such example occurs when the blind man begging on the Jericho pavement had his sight restored, he immediately declared what God had done for him and others were provoked to extol the attributes of this saving God . Consistently however, it was the beneficiaries or observers of God’s mighty acts who praised him.

4. The Recipients of Praise

It has been established that the content of praise is the character and activity of God and that the redeemed people of God who have benefited from his favour carry it out. It is necessary now to establish for whose benefit is this activity of praise. Although praise occurs in the presence of God it is not primarily addressed to him but instead to those who are listening. As Payne writes, ‘Very often in the Psalms, praise is in the third person – that is, it is spoken or sung about God, being addressed to those who are listening rather than to God himself’ [Confessions]. This is evident in Psalm 138 where although the praise is addressed to God it has the character of proclamation. The beneficiary of God’s activity sings to God about all that God has done but this is performed in the presence of others. As a result God is praised because these others hear of the marvellous things that he has done. The context for many of these Psalms of praise was the temple where the nation gathered to sing from Israel’s songbook so many would have heard God’s praise. However, many of the Psalms are an exhortation to praise not the praise itself. For example in Psalm 96 the congregation are exhorted to sing praise to God’s name but to do so among the nations as they declare his marvellous deeds. In a sense this Psalm is simply a song sung to one another to encourage the congregation to get out and do some Old Testament evangelism. A similar emphasis is found in Deborah’s song celebrating God’s victory. Her concern was that the Kings and the Rulers of the nations should hear God’s praise . Under the New Covenant this responsibility remains however once again it is Christ who becomes the subject matter as lips declare his achievements to the nations . In conclusion praise is intended primarily for the benefit of the hearers who are confronted by the praiseworthiness of God rather than for God himself.

Payne writes, ‘Music is to praise as the jingle is to advertising’ [Confessions]. His purpose in saying this is to draw attention to the fact that praise is verbal in content but that any number of accompaniments can be added to this verbal proclamation in order to get the message across. Woodhouse observes, ‘Although the Psalms were undoubtedly sung, they were handed down without a note of music attached to them. There are no melody lines in the Book of Psalms and yet the element of praise is undeniable. Praising God cannot therefore depend upon music’. Contrary to contemporary church culture the Bible nowhere equates praise with singing. These writers begin to address the issue of how praise ought to be conducted. Throughout the scriptures there are references to verbal declaration without musical accompaniment but also to those supplemented with a cacophony of noise. In 1 Chronicles 29:10 David praised the Lord by speaking unaccompanied. In Psalm 150 seemingly every musical instrument is gathered to enhance the announcement of God’s greatness demonstrated by his mighty acts. David implores his readers to throw the kitchen sink at it! The purpose of adding music, singing or raising one’s voice appears to be a function of effective communication as well as the inevitable excitement on the part of the participant as they recall God’s goodness. The maxim that people get their theology from what they sing should be a warning to songwriters but also a great encouragement that a catchy jingle cements sound teaching in a way that some sermons seldom do.

Having outlined the biblical emphasis on praise the implications of this for congregational life can be considered. Payne’s article is an insightful analysis of many misconceptions shared by many in congregations. Three of these are considered here and the last is an observation from Smith.

First, Payne observes, ‘Praise is usually seen as a special religious practice normally conducted in church meetings’ . It is a religious practice inasmuch as it is those of the Christian faith who carry it out and it does occur in Christian meetings. However, the great emphasis of the Psalms is that the praise of God ought to be carried out in front of unbelievers. Consequently many service leaders and musician’s may need to reform their terminology so that the congregation are not misled into limiting their praise to the comfort zone of a church service.

Secondly, Payne observes, ‘Praise is an experience of communion with God where God’s presence is especially encountered’ . This misunderstanding results from confusion about how God is experienced. Emotionalism is substituted for an authentic encounter with God through his word. The danger with this view is that, ‘Music can be manipulative if it is used create a mood or to entertain’. Clearly, at times, the one praising will be emotionally moved by the content of their praise but increasingly people may begin to develop a dependency on their emotional experiences rather than the word of God as they assess their spiritual health.

Thirdly, Payne writes, ‘Praise is a personal encounter with God usually strongly emotional in its tone in which we speak to him and tell him how much we love him and honour him’ . The emphasis of the Bible to be a people who declare God’s praises publicly must be maintained against the current cultural trend of individualistic self-absorption that inevitably infects the church. When we praise we do so as Peterson demonstrates in God’s presence but it is primarily for mutual edification or for the education of the nations. The fourth observation is prompted by Smith’s comment that, ‘Musical taste is a major problem area because most people unconsciously think that their musical taste is superior to others’ . Perhaps this view persists because there is the belief that one type of music is more sacred than another. However, as Woodhouse points out, ‘Music itself cannot be Christian or non-Christian’ . This is therefore an unnecessary area of conflict. Congregations have flexibility in praise to use music or to dispense with it. When music is employed there is the same flexibility that the early church had when they sang Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs. As Peterson comments, ‘The aim in any congregation should be to develop a musical tradition that is appropriate to the group concerned’ [’The Old and the New’, The Church Musician’s Handbook].

Conclusion

Payne has it right. Our praise of God is the public declaration of God’s gospel achievements. We can put it to music if it helps but it’s not compulsory. However, in meetings together we ought to sing to encourage one another to be busy at the business of advertising.

Bibliography

• J.D. Douglas & N. Hillyer, New Bible Dictionary (Leicester: IVP, 1982)
• S. Ferguson, New Dictionary of Theology (Leicester: IVP, 1988)
• W.A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996)
• W.A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996)
• J.B. Bauer, Encyclopaedia of Biblical Theology, (London: Sheed & Ward, 1970)
• D. Peterson, Engaging with God, (Leicester: Apollos, 1992)
• R.J. Gibson, Explorations (Adelaide: Open Book Publsihers, 1997)
• A.M. Harman & P.F. Jensen, Reformed Theological Review, (Volume 55, 1996)