Follow us on twitterFollow us on Facebook
You Are Here
RELATED ARTICLESRELATED ARTICLES
ARTICLESARTICLES

Biblical Preaching in a Pluralistic Culture

By Michael A. Milton | Michael A. Milton is President and Professor of Practical Theology at Reformed Theological Seminary, Charlotte, NC

Here is the premise of this treatise: I believe the military chaplaincy approach to ministry — cooperation without compromise — is a model to be considered for civilian ministry in pluralistic North America today. We have seen what it is; now, is it biblical and is it practical?

Is the Model Biblical?

I want to turn to one particular event that is useful in the whole debate: Paul at Mars Hill. Paul was on his way from Thessalonica to Corinth. He did not intend, necessarily, to do what he did in Athens. The surprising turn of events that led him into the very religious environment of Athens was, in fact, a providential open door to preach the gospel. Can we make out a model of cooperation without compromise there? I want to look at Athens’ condition, Paul’s response, and Athens’ reaction.
Advertisement
Subscribe To Preaching

The condition of that city was both pluralistic and obviously committed to pluralism. That it was pluralistic can be affirmed by Luke’s citing of the religious groups. The city was full of idols, presumably spanning the gamut of possible deities of that period and that place — Jews who practiced and Jews who didn’t; Stoics and Epicurean philosophers; and those people who worshipped, among their other gods, the one with “To an unknown god” inscribed on an altar in one of the pagan temples.

This was surely a pluralistic city, but we can also see pluralism in their midst. Though the ideology is not stated as such, there was a peaceful coexistence of gods, of ideas, and a commitment of their time and thus their lives to “saying or hearing something novel.”[25] Indeed, it was Paul and his teaching on the resurrection of Jesus Christ that was so new that they laid their hands upon him and led him up to the Areopagus that they might discover the meaning of his message. So the pluralistic community and the ideology of pluralism, if you will allow me to call it that, provide a brief moment of opportunity for the gospel.

Look at Paul’s response. It is important to see what Paul did not do. Paul did not turn over the altars. In fact, he studied them. He did not take the opportunity to denounce their culture. In fact, he quoted from their poets. He did not resist the philosophers to retreat to the safety of the believing Jews, but he went along with the game, so to speak. In short, at every turn Paul cooperated with the pluralistic culture.

However, Paul never compromised. While cooperating, we know Paul’s spirit was “exasperated” — to use the translation of Richmond Lattimore — over the idolatry of Athens.[26] But Paul’s exasperation was an energy put to good work as he preached. At the Areopagus, Paul did not rail as an angry prophet against their idolatry (though he had been provoked in his spirit by it), nor did he protest their paganism (like an ancient Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church-Topeka followers with “God Hates Athens” lifted high)[27], but he approached the Athenian religious plurality with the care that God did when he sent Jonah to Nineveh.

Page   <  6  7  8  9  10  >
PREACHINGPREACHING
Free weekly email newsletter and monthly digital edition of Preaching magazine