Walking In Wisdom

I applaud every church that wants to win seekers, connect postmoderns with Jesus, and impact baby boomers or generation X or millennials or whatever. God loves people and they all need Christ regardless of their culture or their background or whatever. The problem I have had through the years is with the notion that if you are really serious about reaching these secular generations you have to somehow get beyond the Bible. Churches pride themselves on their cultural relevancy as they play Beatles songs in the Sunday service, and jettison the Bible to the back seat in favor of felt-need talks on subjects of supposed interest to the secular mind. This philosophy has divided countless churches across our country as Christians and God's Spirit within them are starving to be fed biblical depth and challenge. Jesus' commands to "feed my sheep" are skirted in favor of the priority of preaching to lost secular people without the Word of God. All of this is defended from the Mars Hill sermon of Acts 17. Many churches call themselves "Mars Hill" as a way of anchoring themselves to this mission of reaching postmoderns, etc. The defense that has been given for this diluted, "less is more" philosophy of ministry is Paul's message on Mars Hill in Acts 17.

Here are five ways they are totally getting the Mars Hill sermon wrong:

1) The name is wrong: The Greek term, Ares Pagios is actually two words. Modern versions transliterate the location of this sermon and call it "the Areopagos." Ares is "the god of war" and Pagios means "hill." When the King James version was translated, Christianity was a very Roman religion so they substituted the Roman God of war who is Mars. That's where the term Mars Hill came from, ironically a pretty awful translation. (Obviously not all churches bearing the name "Mars Hill" subscribe to the misinterpretation of Acts 17).

2) The tone is wrong: Paul showed great wisdom when he began his sermon with an appeal to the common ground of their belief in a particular idol, "the unknown God," but we know that he was anything but warm in his actual feelings. Acts 17:16, "Now while Paul was waiting for them at Athens, his spirit was being provoked within him as he was observing the city full of idols." Inside Paul was grieved and outraged at the proliferation of pagan idolatry. The word for "provoked" is the same word used in the Septuagint translation of Exodus 34:14, "For the Lord whose name is Jealous is a jealous God." Paul was not passive or indifferent to the wickedness of their idolatry; he was deeply troubled about it, yet he showed enough self-control not to alienate them as he began.

3) The use of secular materials is wrong: While Paul did quote from two Greek poets familiar to his hearers in the body of his sermon (Epimenides and Aratus), he used quotes that supported biblical concepts of God. More common in our day is using secular sources, i.e. film clips, pop music, and Hollywood personalities to support concepts that are more psychological than biblical, more secular than scriptural.

4) The avoidance of Paul's conclusion is wrong: The most glaring misuse of the Mars Hill sermon as a model is the failure to end where Paul ended. Churches use Acts 17 as a defense of their secular sermons without Christ or the cross, without scriptural substance and without authoritative contradiction of the secular mindset. All of these things however appear in the end of Paul's Acts 17 Mars Hill message. Paul told them idolatry was wrong, completely contradicting their world view, (v. 29). Paul told them God commanded them to repent, (v. 30) and Paul told them that Jesus was raised from the dead as proof of God's intent to hold them accountable (v. 31).

5) The absence of urgency is wrong. Many modern churches that buy into the misuse of Mars Hill claim that secular seekers need a lot of time to weigh the options and consider the claims of Christ before deciding. That may be true, but it is not an excuse for draining the urgency from our pulpit appeals each week. There were many on Mars Hill that said to Paul "we will hear you about this again" (v. 32), but Paul's tone was also strong enough that "some mocked" (v. 32). He told them that God had overlooked their ignorance for a time but now commanded all to repent (v. 30). He told them they would face personal judgment for their failure to act on what they were hearing in that moment (v. 31). In short he pressed them to decide on the spot what they would do about what they were hearing.

In summary we can learn much from Acts 17. Churches with a desire to reach pagans in any culture would do well to approach people with sensitivity and a genuine appeal to any common ground that can be found. Acts 17 however does not support sermons without Scripture, without the cross, without contradiction or authority, and without an URGENT CALL TO PERSONAL CONVERSION TO CHRIST ON THE SPOT!

Acts 17:30, "Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent!"