My concern in this discussion is the subtle effect this social pressure is having within the evangelical church. Not only is there a marginalization of Christianity occurring in society as a whole, there is also a marginalization of Jesus Christ occurring within the evangelical community. This marginalization of Jesus occurred among the non-evangelical churches decades ago beginning in Europe. However, its occurrence within the evangelical community is a relatively recent phenomenon. Let me share my story with you.

I was raised in the Lutheran Church of America; water baptized as an infant; and confirmed as a young teenager. My family went to church regularly on Sundays and intellectually I knew all the right ‘Christian’ doctrines. But it wasn’t until I joined the navy and visited a Christian servicemen’s center in California that I was challenged that I was not a Christian. I argued and debated this challenge; but when asked if I had ever been ‘born again’ according to John 3:3 I had no idea what to say. I had never heard about the need to receive Jesus Christ as my Savior, or about the need to be ‘born again’ in the Lutheran Church. I had come to realize that the young people at the servicemen’s center had something I did not; I didn’t understand what it was at first; but came to see that it was a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Being a Christian, I was told, was more than believing the right things; it was having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. And when I asked Him to come into my heart, my life changed dramatically!

One of the first things I wanted to do was share this experience with other people I knew. This eventually led to training in personal evangelism, being filled with the Holy Spirit, being called by God into the ministry, Bible college and seminary training, and ultimately ministry as a pastor and military chaplain. During my training and ministry my passion was always to help people without hope and without God experience the same life changing personal relationship with Jesus Christ that I had found.

During my time as a navy chaplain I began experiencing a struggle with two areas of increasing pressure from within the chaplain corps: the prohibition against the use of Jesus’ name in my prayers at civil ceremonies – lest someone in the audience who was Muslim or Jewish might be offended; and the prohibition against evangelization in the military. The pressure was to become a ‘counselor’, a ‘social worker’, or a ‘religious facilitator’; but not a Christian, Pentecostal, clergyman with a mandate to reach servicemen and women for Christ.

I understand these two issues create tremendous legal challenges for the military chaplain corps and they attempt to walk a fine line between not promoting a particular religion while not denying anyone’s free exercise of religion. However, it created a dilemma for me and my core values. The reason I was a military chaplain was because I believed people who did not have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ were lost; and it was my responsibility and calling to reach them before it was too late. If I did not lift up the name of Jesus Christ and bring the lost to faith in Him I would be denying the very God who I represented; and there would be no reason for me to be a military chaplain.

Worship

After retiring from the military I became concerned for the evangelical church while visiting a variety of churches as an itinerant evangelist. I noticed an increasing number of songs in worship services that made no reference to Jesus Christ or His atoning work; and more and more of the ‘new’ worship songs using pronouns such as He, Him, Lord, and God, and an abundance of first person pronouns. The churches that sang these new songs marketed their worship as ‘contemporary’; which apparently meant focusing primarily on the needs and desires of young adults, eliminating hymn books, and marginalizing the desires and tastes of senior adults in worship music.
 

I began counting the number of times Jesus’ name was used in the worship songs of one church I had attended for three years. The church sang about six songs (choruses) each week. Of the approximately two dozen songs sung over a four week period Jesus’ name was only mentioned about six times. Some weeks it was not mentioned at all!
Is Jesus Christ lifted up in your church's worship songs?	My concern was for the message being sent to the non- believers who were visiting the church; a Muslim, Jew or Buddhist could worship in these services and not be offended at the name of Jesus! Sometimes I wondered if I was becoming too extreme in my criticism but I couldn't shake the discomfort I was feeling. Yvonne and I eventually began attending another church; while not Pentecostal, they

were selecting songs which were clearly focused on Jesus Christ. One Sunday I picked up a copy of the church’s denominational journal and read an article written by Paul Bubna, the head of their denomination, entitled: What Is The Content Of Our Worship?¹ in which he said,

I sit often in services where there is little doctrinal content in the liturgy and no clear reference to Christ’s work on our behalf. A Jew, Muslim or pantheist would be comfortable participating in songs of praise that uplift no Savior as our cause for worship.

Later I came across an article on Christianity Today.Com written by Michael Hamilton entitled The Triumph of the Praise Songs: How Guitars Beat Out The Organ In The Worship Wars² in which he said, “American churchgoers no longer sort themselves out by denomination so much as by musical preference.” He observed that since the 1950s “denominational divisions have steadily become less important in American church life.” But acknowledging that we are still sectarians at heart said, “Our new sectarianism is a sectarianism of worship style. The new sectarian creeds are dogmas of music. Worship seminars are the seminaries of the new sectarianism; their directors are its theologians. The ministers of the new sectarianism are our church worship leaders.” The questions that immediately came to my mind were: What kind of theology are these new “seminaries” promoting? What message are its “theologians” and “ministers” presenting to the people sitting in the pews?

Hamilton inadvertently answered these questions for me as he developed the historical part of his article. He identified the source of the changes when he said, “All of the changes that have precipitated our worship wars are in fact part of a long trail of cultural dislocations left behind by…the baby boomers.” He described the effect that the unwillingness of this abnormally large generation of Americans to follow their parents’ lead had on society: “they reoriented our society toward peers and away from family. They have moved the psychic center of the family away from obligation to others and toward self-fulfillment.” He then observed that the generation that did this in society did the same thing with religion. “Surveys consistently show that baby boomers…attend church not out of loyalty, duty, obligation, or gratitude, but only if it meets their needs.”

This raises the additional dilemma which the evangelical church must grapple with concerning the methods we are using to reach people. Are we giving people in the world, who we are trying to reach, more of what they already have, to attract them? Or does the church present a message that offers something different; something that the world doesn’t have? Are we simply attempting to ‘reach’ people or are we trying to make disciples of Jesus Christ out of people who are not believers? Too often it appears we are more interested in attracting people by giving them what they already have and then giving them more of the same to keep them coming back than we are in changing lives.

Talking about the generation that finds its identity in its musical style Hamilton says, “the kind of music a church offers increasingly defines the kind of person who will attend, because for this generation music is at the very center of self-understanding.” What kind of self-understanding is the church imparting to those it reaches? Is it truly helping people enter a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and discipling them to become mature followers of Jesus?

My concern is with the marginalization of Jesus; and church after church I visit confirms Hamilton’s observation that “the focus on individual experience aligns perfectly with the baby boom’s luxuriant self-concern…one cannot sing praise songs without noticing how first person pronouns tend to eclipse every other subject.”  I noticed that the scripture passages from which many of the praise songs drew their inspiration increasingly originated in the Old Testament or the Psalms. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, except when combined with the self-centered focus of the songs, and the worship experience being centered on the individual instead of on exalting Jesus Christ.
Hamilton concluded his article by saying, “We need…to welcome any worship music that helps churches produce disciples of Jesus Christ.” I agreed with the obvious sentiment behind the conclusion, but questioned the ‘kind’ of disciples being produced when the focus is so dramatically self-centered and minimally on the Savior and His work on our behalf.

 This issue becomes even more significant when taken in the light of Hamilton’s observation that:

Once this oversized generation decided that music would be the primary carrier of its symbols and values, music quickly became, in the words of George Steiner, “the new literacy of western culture.” When one chooses a musical style today, one is making a statement about whom one identifies with, what one’s values are, and ultimately, who one is.

Hamilton continues his description of the baby boomer’s music as “the mediator of emotions, the carrier of dreams, and the marker of social location. It is therefore bound to be an integral part of baby boomers’ connection to the eternal truth of life in God.” But precisely what ‘eternal truth’ are they connecting with in the church’s music? What ‘eternal life in God’ are they experiencing? What ‘God’ is being connected with? These are difficult questions which demand answers if the church is going to present a relevant message to a postmodern culture.

A personal relationship with…who?
 

Years ago distinct, clear, unequivocal altar calls were given in churches for people to receive Jesus Christ as Savior. Today, if an altar call is given, people are often invited to enter into ‘a relationship with God.’ My question is, “What God?” We attempt to be ‘sensitive’ to people’s feelings and give invitations couched in an apology. Trying to assure those present that we won’t ‘embarrass’ them, everyone is requested to close their eyes and bow their heads so no one will see who is making such an ‘embarrassing decision’ to enter a relationship with ‘God’.

Would a Muslim, Jew, or Pantheist be confronted with the claims of Jesus Christ during your worship?

There seems to be something wrong with the idea that entering a relationship with God publicly would be humiliating. Instead, it would seem more appropriate, for a truly repentant person, who wanted to enter a relationship with God, to run toward Him and plead for His acceptance! And there, I believe, is the problem; the decisions people are making today are intellectual decisions to accept a nameless, faceless, ‘god’ whose presence they enter with impunity.

Gone, in many churches, is the concept of coming to God with tears of repentance, and a heart filled with sorrow for the heavy weight of sin that the individual is carrying, to a loving Savior pleading for forgiveness. It is difficult for me to understand how we can even imply that coming to Jesus publicly is somehow an embarrassment; especially when Jesus hung on a cross in full view of everyone, stripped naked and bleeding; spit at and mocked; the epitome of humiliation to purchase our salvation.

I hear an increasing number of people giving testimonies about accepting ‘God’ as their savior. One church elder following a short term missions trip to a foreign country shared a testimony that five men accepted ‘God into their hearts’ during an evening worship service. The thought occurred to me, What ‘God’ did they accept - Buddha, Allah, Krishna, or Jesus? I knew the answer to the question, but I failed to understand the need to replace references to Jesus with ‘God.’ If I were a non-Christian visitor I would have been confused; the testimony was not clear.

Similarly, I hear pastors referring to our spiritual relationship with ‘God’ and that that relationship is entered into ‘through’ Jesus Christ. On the surface this sounds perfectly acceptable; but combined with the other trends I am observing, a troubling pattern seems to be emerging. It is beginning to sound as if we are relegating Jesus Christ simply to the status of a threshold and doorway; and once a person enters through this ‘doorway’ it is left behind, no longer necessary.

I don’t think this shift in focus has necessarily been a conscious one; but rather a subtle and almost unnoticed shift. As my wife and I discuss this she tells me her practice is often to mentally think of Jesus when she sings songs about ‘God.’ My concern is in the message this sends to the youth of the church and to the non-believer or seeker we are trying to win to Christ. This is playing directly into the postmodern mindset of moving away from the reality and toward the virtual or individually defined ‘god.’ If the Christian church is to have a credible witness in this postmodern culture it must remain firmly connected to Jesus Christ in all aspects of our divine relationship. If we continue this move toward relationship with ‘god’ and away from Jesus, I believe we are in great danger of allowing each individual to define who that ‘god’ is for themselves; and it may not be Jesus!

The confusion created by the exchange of the word ‘God’ for ‘Jesus’ is evident not only in the minds of non-believers and seekers but also with worship leaders. I frequently hear worship leaders say, “Father I thank you for dying on the cross…” and “Oh God, our Father, thank you for shedding your blood for us…” This is wrong! The ‘Father’ did not die on the cross; nor did He shed His blood for us. At first I thought this might simply be misspeaking on the part of the individuals involved, but the occurrences are becoming too prevalent for this to be the case. This may sound like verbal hair splitting, but I assure you it is not. If we are to present a clear ‘Christian’ message to a postmodern world, we must get our focus back on Jesus Christ and get our terminology straight!

The One who died on the cross and shed His blood for the purchase of our salvation was Jesus Christ. It is this same Jesus we invite into our hearts and lives. And it is Jesus with whom we have a personal relationship and who dramatically changes our lives from within. It is as we enter into, develop, and maintain a loving relationship with Jesus Christ that we glorify and please the Father; for without such a vital, ongoing relationship with Jesus we cannot have a relationship with the Father.

Evangelism

The disciples, and by extension the Christian Church, were commanded by Jesus in the Great Commission as recorded in Matthew 28:19-20, to make disciples of all peoples. In Acts 1:8 we are told that the purpose of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is for the impartation of power to be Jesus’ witnesses. Postmodern thinking disputes the necessity of this and says no one has the right to try to persuade anyone else to believe anything other than

Are you bearing a clear witness for Jesus?

what they already believe. There is ever increasing pressure applied on Christians to keep their faith to themselves; whether at work or at school; socially or politically. I find it disconcerting that an increasing number of highly respected Christian leaders, writing about believers

exercising their ‘spiritual gifts’, actually plays into this postmodern mind set. Their choice of words could be interpreted by some as saying it isn’t necessary for every Christian to be a soul winner. In one book I read recently, the author said individual believers do not need to be soul winners because:

“The individual believer's responsibility is first of all to the Christian community and to its head, Jesus Christ. The first task of every Christian is the edification of the community of believers. If we say that evangelism or soul winning is the first task of the believer, we do violence to the New Testament and place a burden on the backs of some believers that they are not able to bear. The idea that every Christian’s first responsibility is to be a soul winner ignores the biblical teachings about spiritual gifts. Further, it puts all the emphasis at the one point of conversion and undervalues the upbuilding of the Church which is essential for effective evangelism and church growth.”³

Another author's comments about personal evangelism could also be interpreted negatively as saying individual Christians need not concern themselves with people "making decisions" all the time:

"Not all Christians are gifted evangelists. Certainly, God expects us all to be able to tell others what He has done in their lives...But too many Christians have suffered too long from the implication that they should be tremendously gifted evangelists, seeing people "make decisions" all the time. That simply isn't the case. And to continue to foster that attitude robs individuals of their ability to evangelize in the way God intended, according to the gifts He gave them."⁴

When I read the missions statements of many churches the first priority is ‘to glorify God,’ or ‘to worship God,’ followed by a reference to being a community of believers. Most frequently evangelism is near the bottom of the priority list. This is a reversal of the Bible’s emphasis on the centrality of the redemption of mankind. The Scriptures say that God the Father loved the world so much that He sent His Son – Jesus to purchase our salvation. Jesus acknowledged that He came to ‘seek and to save that which was lost.’ Before His departure He commissioned His followers to go into all the world to make disciples; and gave the Holy Spirit to impart power for them to bear witness about Him.

Too often today when people do make decisions to enter a relationship with ‘God’ the decision essentially remains a secret. There is more celebration over the birth of a human baby than over a person being born spiritually into the family of God. Something is wrong with this when the Scriptures say the angels in heaven rejoice over one sinner who repents! If the angels in heaven are rejoicing, why aren’t we? I can’t help but think it may be directly related with the earlier concept that the original decision was an ‘embarrassing’ one; and once having been made it would be embarrassing to acknowledge it publicly.

So, do I think that Jesus is being marginalized in the church today? Yes, I believe He is; and therein lies the reason George Barna, the pollster, can say his research shows there is essentially no attitudinal difference between the Christian and the non-believer on a wide variety of issues. Is there a solution to this problem or is it too late?

The Solution

I believe the solution to this problem is clear: restore Jesus to His rightful place! I think of the letters to the seven churches in the book of Revelation. The church in Ephesus was charged with forsaking their first love (Rev 2:4). For the Christian, who would that be but Jesus Christ? The church in Pergamum, in spite of major problems within the community and persecution from the outside, is commended with these words: “…you remain true to my name. You did not renounce your faith in me...(Rev 2:13)” The church in Philadelphia, though having little strength, was commended similarly, “…yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name.(Rev 3:8)” Finally, there is the church in Laodicea which is known as the lukewarm church. Here the picture is the pathetic one where Jesus is standing outside, knocking on the door, asking to be invited back in (Rev 3:20). How could that have happened? How could Jesus end up on the outside of the church requesting to be invited back in?

My heart is heavy and I am worried! I want to sound a warning, but don’t know how many will listen. We must get back to the basics. We must get back to lifting up Jesus. In John 12:32-33 Jesus said, “But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.” In Acts 4:12 the disciples, speaking of Jesus said, “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”And in Philippians 2:9-11 Paul writes about Jesus: “Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

I believe if we want to see the church’s impact in the lives of people in our communities restored, and the lost won to Jesus Christ, we must repent and get back to our first love - Jesus! We must lift up Jesus in everything we do: in our lifestyles, our words, our worship, and our preaching!

Even those who have faithfully upheld the name of Jesus need to carefully rexamine how they articulate their beliefs in Jesus in this postmodern society. More than ever we are entering a time when our testimonies and Christology must be clear! As it was in the books of Acts, for the Christian, it will be Jesus not 'God' who will be the dividing and deciding factor. We must know what we believe and why.