The Gospel and Multiethnicity

Among those alive in 1989, who can forget the images of the fall of the Berlin Wall? It was one of those moments in life that make an indelible impression on many so that they remember where they were and what they were doing when it occurred. My family and I were living in France as the television broadcast live images of people scrambling over the wall and throngs of people standing on the wall singing while others with sledgehammers chipped away at the stark, ugly edifice which had separated the German people for decades. We recall President Reagan’s earlier words to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev—“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” A country that had been torn for decades was soon reunited.

That historic event may serve as a pale and imperfect analogy to what Christ accomplished at the cross when by His death, when through His blood, He brought peace to former enemies—Jews and Gentiles—by removing what the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 2:14 calls the “dividing wall of hostility,” and by “killing the hostility” (v. 16). Christ inaugurated a new state of being and a new way of living which is a model for believers today in our quest to experience and express the reality of being part of the new people of God.

Grace Church of Philadelphia is committed to “multi” in many ways—multi-generational, multi-socioeconomic and multi-ethnic ministry. Because we have a multi-ethnic missional objective, we want to be intentional in healing divisions and in celebrating God-given diversity. Our desire is that Grace Church reflect the diversity of our urban community and the diversity which exists in the body of Christ—not because it’s a great idea, although it is; not because we have overcome bigotry and eradicated all traces of prejudice from our hearts, because we haven’t; not because it will be easy, because it won’t be; but because there is a biblical basis for this commitment, because multi-ethnic diversity is God’s idea.

When we come to Scripture we need to ask ourselves, “How does the gospel challenge our prejudices and tendencies toward tribalism—where we find safety in being with people (or in a church) where most people are much like ourselves?” For those who believe the gospel, who are committed to the good news of salvation in Jesus Christ and to the power of the Holy Spirit to effect transformation, there is an answer. It lies in that world-changing, history-altering event: the incarnation, life, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and present reign of Jesus Christ.

There is a fairly recent academic field called Hate Studies. Whatever the merits of Hate Studies as an academic discipline, we know why there is hatred—the depravity of the human heart and rebellion against the Creator. Hatred of others expressed in racism is a form of idolatry. It elevates the distinctions of the physical image over the common origin of the spiritual image endowed by the Creator. According to “The Genetic/Evolutionary Basis of Prejudice and Hatred1,” “prejudice and discrimination have an evolutionary basis, rooted in the nature of primate and human subsistence groups.” The author asserts that “if prejudice and discrimination can be reduced, then reduction of hatred will follow.” He then proposes new techniques or education or other limited ways of reducing prejudice and discrimination. He fails to understand that there is no solution apart from the one solution God offered in Christ who bore all the sins of the world and has the power to transform the human heart.

We live in a world full of strife and divisions and hatred of “other” peoples, where groups of people have sought to eliminate other groups because they were different in skin color, language, or customs and traditions. We shouldn’t hide or smooth over the reality of wrongdoing against other people in our own nation’s history—including slavery and the forcible acquisition of Native American lands. As Christians, we are called to model genuine love for all people, to express in visible ways our indifference to ethnic differences. We are not blind to differences, but differences must not divide us. Distinctions remain part of our earthly reality, yet what we have in Christ transcends those differences and those distinctions.

The gospel teaches us that all people who are part of the family of God stand on level ground at the foot of the cross. There is no ethnic or racial superiority, no superior culture, and no dominance of one group over another. What counts is that we are “in Christ.” Sadly, churches rarely reflect this new covenant reality. In a 1963 speech Martin Luther King said—“We must face the fact that in America, the church is still the most segregated major institution in America. At 11:00 on Sunday morning when we stand and sing…we stand at the most segregated hour in this nation.”

Over forty-five years later we need to ask ourselves if much has changed. How many churches still speak of “black hearts” and children sing “My heart was black with sin”? Perhaps it’s time to throw out the wordless book and use the words of the Book which neither describes sin as black nor hearts as black or white. Isaiah 1:18 says, “though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.” The word “black” is not used with “heart” or “sin” in Scripture. We need to ask if we are willing to be agents of reconciliation and open our doors to all people or choose our comfort and traditions over conformity to a color blind gospel.

In Ephesians 2:11 Paul tells the believers at Ephesus to “remember” what they were apart from Christ. There are some things we need to forget (or try to forget), but we should never forget what we were before God saved us! Paul uses the terms “circumcision” and “uncircumcision,” a common way of setting apart Jews from everyone else. Today we have our own descriptors which divide people. Some are helpful; others are not. We need to understand that many of these are sociological categories, not biblical ones. From God’s perspective there is only one race—the human race—and we are all descendants of Adam and have a common lineage.

Ephesians 2:11-22 draws several contrasts between our previous condition outside of Christ and our present privileged position in Christ. Our status has changed from alien to citizen. Our position has changed from outsiders to insiders in Christ (v. 13). Our relationship has changed from hostility to peace, since Christ is our peace (v. 14) and came and preached peace (v. 17). From believing Jews and believing Gentiles, God has made “both” into one (v. 14). He has created one new man (v. 15), reconciled both in one body (v. 16), and granted access to both in one Spirit (v. 18).

In this passage, Paul calls on believers to remember the hopelessness of their former condition apart from Christ. They were aliens, strangers to covenant promises, without hope, and without God (v. 12). They were far away and there was a dividing wall which needed to be removed—most likely a reference to the Law itself. Christ’s work at Calvary removed the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile, abolished the “law of commandments” and brought different ethnic peoples into one body, the church. These accomplishments provide the foundation on which we build as we seek relentlessly—though often failing—to experience and express that unity today.

The division experienced between Jews and Gentiles was an expression of alienation from God. The healing of the division took place at the cross and takes place there today. What a glorious accomplishment! Jews and Gentiles, those who were near and those who were far away, have been brought near by the blood of the cross and peace has been secured. All human efforts, however well-meaning they may be, or however wise they may appear from a human viewpoint, are powerless to bring about real change. Laws may be passed that condemn hatred and punish criminal acts against others, but laws cannot change the human heart where the hatred resides.

God is giving His church in our day the opportunity to rectify the wrongs of the past, a past tainted with racism, segregation, and discrimination. Urban churches in particular have the privilege of engaging in multi-ethnic ministry that may not be available in mono-ethnic areas. Since Christ builds the church, we cannot build multi-ethnic churches. We cannot coerce diverse ethnicities to worship together. But we can be intentional and welcoming and seek to reach all people with the gospel without regard to their ethnic group or socioeconomic situation.

This poem summarizes the message of these verses—from hopelessness and despair to redemption and reconciliation. This is what we earnestly desire to reflect in our community.

It’s dark, it’s bleak, all is lost, despair;
Division, hatred, racial strife, beware;
All human efforts, worldly wisdom, lead nowhere;
Ah, the Son of God, in human form, our only hope appears;
His sacrifice, His precious blood, our awful sin did bear;
The cross of Christ, His blood made peace, oh hopeless one draw near.
Now reconciled, one body we, what wondrous grace we share.

Notes

1 Journal of Hate Studies (vol. 3:1; 2003/2004, 113-119).


Dr. Stephen M. Davis is associate pastor and director of missions at Calvary Baptist Church (Lansdale, PA) and adjunct professor at Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary (Lansdale, PA). He holds a B.A from Bob Jones University, an M.A. in Theological Studies from Reformed Theological Seminary (Orlando, FL), an M.Div. from Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary (Lansdale, PA), and a D.Min. in Missiology from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (Deerfield, IL). Steve has been a church planter in Philadelphia, France, and Romania. He and his wife Kathy recently moved back to Philadelphia to plant Grace Church with his brother John and his wife Dawn and three other couples. Steve’s views do not necessarily represent the position of Calvary Baptist Ministries.

Discussion

for the record, “dark” has been hijacked by some as a subtle and derogatory code word for minorities.

[dmicah] for the record, “dark” has been hijacked by some as a subtle and derogatory code word for minorities.
Hijacked by whom? …and what evidence has led you to believe this?

I had to laugh a little when someone mentioned earlier how Adam and Eve would have looked. No way to know, of course, but it has always annoyed me that SS materials still often depict semitic folks from Bible history as fair skinned, blue-eyed Europeans (or maybe Norwegians?) Seems like that is finally changing but wow, it’s about time!

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

[Steve Davis] Among those alive in 1989, who can forget the images of the fall of the Berlin Wall? It was one of those moments in life that make an indelible impression on many so that they remember where they were and what they were doing when it occurred…A country that had been torn for decades was soon reunited.

That historic event may serve as a pale and imperfect analogy to what Christ accomplished at the cross when by His death, when through His blood, He brought peace to former enemies—Jews and Gentiles—by removing what the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 2:14 calls the “dividing wall of hostility,” and by “killing the hostility” (v. 16). Christ inaugurated a new state of being and a new way of living which is a model for believers today
An analogy, while not required to be perfect must have essential comparisons for their use. Unfortunately here Steve Davis uses very unparalleled contexts. The conflict between East and West Germany and the tearing of the veil and the peace brought by Christ are quite far removed in their antagonisms.

The peace brought by our Christ our Lord was not one that had the aim of reconciling peoples, rather in fulfilling the plan of God for the reconciliation of man to God, not man to man. While it is true that Jews and Gentiles (along with a wide variety of racial and ethnic groups) were no longer distinguished by genetics or geographical boundaries with regard to God’s protocol for identifying his people, the reconciliation of these different people was a by-product or anecdotal to the true objective which was their reconciliation to God and so the new believers had a new identity, namely that as followers of Christ whereas before Christ, if one believed the prophecy, they had to acquiesce to the genetic and geographic identity of the Jews.

The conflict between East and West Germany was just that, a conflict of man to man. Their reconciliation was not a by-product or anecdotal to something greater, that was the very aim of the wall being torn down while any resolution of animosity between Jews, Gentiles or whatever social/racial identification one can name, was anecdotal or a by-product of Christ’s work which is the reconciliation of man to God.

The points are best illustrated in Scripture:
2 Corinthians 5 (NIV)

16So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer.

17Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!

18All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation:

19that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

20We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.

21God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Colossians 3 (NIV)

1Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God.

2Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things.

3For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God.

4When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.

5Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry.

6Because of these, the wrath of God is coming.

7You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived.

8But now you must rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips.

9Do not lie to each other, since you have taken off your old self with its practices

10and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge in the image of its Creator.

11Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.


12Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.

13Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.

14And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.
The emphasis cannot be any clearer. Our spiritual identification, which is exactly the basis for our membership and interaction within the body of Christ, is just that, spiritual. There is no proper place for racial, ethnic or even gender identification with respect to our spiritual person. One might counter with the over-exaggerated response, “Well I guess we just have to pretend we are not men and women or black, white, or brown?”

The bible makes no such suggestion that you deny your social and/or biological reality, nor do I here. However, with respect to your spiritual identification none of these are valid points of evaluation or merit. And even within the ecclesiastical structure of the church where women are not allowed to be ordained and function as authoritative teachers of Scripture, this not a spiritual hierarchy, it is an administrative one.

And when we decide to, instead of remaining as close as we can with this divine guide, move outside of this construct and begin determining the value of a ministry based on worldly (kosmos) kinds of priorities, we begin introducing just what the texts here removed, that is some value based in genetics, geography and gender. It conflicts directly with the texts.
[Steve Davis] Grace Church of Philadelphia is committed to “multi” in many ways—multi-generational, multi-socioeconomic and multi-ethnic ministry. Because we have a multi-ethnic missional objective, we want to be intentional in healing divisions and in celebrating God-given diversity. Our desire is that Grace Church reflect the diversity of our urban community and the diversity which exists in the body of Christ—not because it’s a great idea, although it is; not because we have overcome bigotry and eradicated all traces of prejudice from our hearts, because we haven’t; not because it will be easy, because it won’t be; but because there is a biblical basis for this commitment, because multi-ethnic diversity is God’s idea.

When we come to Scripture we need to ask ourselves, “How does the gospel challenge our prejudices and tendencies toward tribalism—where we find safety in being with people (or in a church) where most people are much like ourselves?” For those who believe the gospel, who are committed to the good news of salvation in Jesus Christ and to the power of the Holy Spirit to effect transformation, there is an answer. It lies in that world-changing, history-altering event: the incarnation, life, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and present reign of Jesus Christ.
Stating that a goal of a church in its outreach is to be “multi” many things appears to be a thoughtful stance, that is it appears not to reflect inflexibility, particularly in a society where being inflexible is treated almost always as a negative quality. However, though sincere, I believe Steve has it backwards with regard to his review and objective and I do not mean to be so direct as to sound insulting. Let me explain.

He is right, churches often are “multi” many things. If you look in Acts one can identify multi-facetedness in many contexts. But these conditions are incidental or anecdotal to something else. The goal in Acts or in our commission to preach the gospel to the world and involve ourselves in the ministry of reconciliation wasn’t or isn’t to gain a certain kind of result that reflects a favorable demographic for those socially sensitive. No where in Scripture is such a thing stated or implied. If you look in Acts this simply was the result of the context of that particular church but no such binding demographic status has ever been implied.

Again, we are instructed to operate unlike the world. Yes, we are to share the gospel with all men. All humans are our objective. We cannot rightly decide who will and who will not have the gospel and with that Steve Davis excels. But implying or even deciding what those results must be like, even in a culture that might have many races or ethnicities present, isn’t something for which we have been licensed and since we have not been licensed as such it fails as a valid measure for whether or not our particularly local assembly is appropriately satisfying the protocol of God.
[Steve Davis] There is a fairly recent academic field called Hate Studies. Whatever the merits of Hate Studies as an academic discipline, we know why there is hatred—the depravity of the human heart and rebellion against the Creator. Hatred of others expressed in racism is a form of idolatry. It elevates the distinctions of the physical image over the common origin of the spiritual image endowed by the Creator. According to “The Genetic/Evolutionary Basis of Prejudice and Hatred1,” “prejudice and discrimination have an evolutionary basis, rooted in the nature of primate and human subsistence groups.” The author asserts that “if prejudice and discrimination can be reduced, then reduction of hatred will follow.” He then proposes new techniques or education or other limited ways of reducing prejudice and discrimination. He fails to understand that there is no solution apart from the one solution God offered in Christ who bore all the sins of the world and has the power to transform the human heart.

We live in a world full of strife and divisions and hatred of “other” peoples, where groups of people have sought to eliminate other groups because they were different in skin color, language, or customs and traditions. We shouldn’t hide or smooth over the reality of wrongdoing against other people in our own nation’s history—including slavery and the forcible acquisition of Native American lands. As Christians, we are called to model genuine love for all people, to express in visible ways our indifference to ethnic differences. We are not blind to differences, but differences must not divide us. Distinctions remain part of our earthly reality, yet what we have in Christ transcends those differences and those distinctions.
Here I agree strongly with Steve and he makes some very important observations and conclusions that are reflected in Scripture. Though I do not agree that all social differences or preferences that are based in ethnicity or race are always bad, sinful or based in some rebellion though obviously many are, as believers when we are proclaiming the gospel our message must be about Christ and Christ alone and how he moves us up and away from the limits and sinful tendencies of our worldly identification to that of our spiritual identification which does not include our racial, ethnic, geographical or gender elements that are valid elsewhere.

Unfortunately Steve Davis attempts to fuse the responsibility of America’s government and its people in history along with its formation that involved slavery and conflicts with the natives and such results with that of the church. The church and the gospel it presents has nothing to do with America’s decision (which sometimes included Christians and sometimes did not) to evolve has it did. We are not called in our spiritual context as believers and followers of God in Christ to be apologists for America. Our national identification is not our spiritual identification and in fact, to refer to such contexts is to actually introduce a very unnecessary and unbiblical agitator to the process.

Christians, when they represent the gospel, are God’s ambassadors, not America’s. While it might be true a second later we are suddenly in a context where our ambassadorship as a citizen is called upon and suddenly we are speaking with respect to, for or about our nation and as a citizen, when we minister we do so as God’s children and God’s ambassadors which has no reference to national interest in that respect.
[Steve Davis] The gospel teaches us that all people who are part of the family of God stand on level ground at the foot of the cross. There is no ethnic or racial superiority, no superior culture, and no dominance of one group over another. What counts is that we are “in Christ.” Sadly, churches rarely reflect this new covenant reality. In a 1963 speech Martin Luther King said—“We must face the fact that in America, the church is still the most segregated major institution in America. At 11:00 on Sunday morning when we stand and sing…we stand at the most segregated hour in this nation.”

Over forty-five years later we need to ask ourselves if much has changed. How many churches still speak of “black hearts” and children sing “My heart was black with sin”? Perhaps it’s time to throw out the wordless book and use the words of the Book which neither describes sin as black nor hearts as black or white. Isaiah 1:18 says, “though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool.” The word “black” is not used with “heart” or “sin” in Scripture. We need to ask if we are willing to be agents of reconciliation and open our doors to all people or choose our comfort and traditions over conformity to a color blind gospel.
My words to Steve here would be first, whatever observations Martin Luther King Jr. had about the church they are only made valid if they reflect the protocol of the Bible. It could easily be said by many (and is) that the American fundamental and conservative evangelical church is the most gender bigoted place on earth where women are denied opportunity to be ordained and function along side of men.

We do not respond to observations alone that by a world’s standard intend to inflict shame when it is not warranted. Our shame comes from whether we have adhered to the Scriptures or not. If a ministry seeks to minister to all comers it is ministering as it should. Whatever such results are, whether it results in having more blacks, Asians, Hispanics and so on are not valid measures from Scripture. The measure is whether we are faithful to preach to all men. We do not control the results and it is rather unwise to attempt to introduce a standard for the church or anyone to themselves that demands a ministry reflect a certain demographic, even in a multi-demographic culture, in order for that Minister to believe he is following the protocol of God.

Finally, when we go about identifying people as we begin ministry with the deliberate aim of appealing to their racial, ethnic, geographical or gender identification we begin wrongly. We are not of this culture we are counter culture. Does this mean there will never be a culture or regional flavor in our local assemblies? Of course there will be but these, again, are incidental or anecdotal and to attempt to cater to these is to get the program of God backwards which is exactly what the “User Friendly” movement did, only here it appear Steve Davis is amplifying this principle and using it in a racial/ethnic context.
[Steve Davis] In this passage, Paul calls on believers to remember the hopelessness of their former condition apart from Christ. They were aliens, strangers to covenant promises, without hope, and without God (v. 12). They were far away and there was a dividing wall which needed to be removed—most likely a reference to the Law itself. Christ’s work at Calvary removed the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile, abolished the “law of commandments” and brought different ethnic peoples into one body, the church. These accomplishments provide the foundation on which we build as we seek relentlessly—though often failing—to experience and express that unity today.

God is giving His church in our day the opportunity to rectify the wrongs of the past, a past tainted with racism, segregation, and discrimination. Urban churches in particular have the privilege of engaging in multi-ethnic ministry that may not be available in mono-ethnic areas. Since Christ builds the church, we cannot build multi-ethnic churches. We cannot coerce diverse ethnicities to worship together. But we can be intentional and welcoming and seek to reach all people with the gospel without regard to their ethnic group or socioeconomic situation.
I wish that Steve’s final words were reflected in the main body of his thesis. He, to me, contradicts himself here. While he asserts that we cannot “coerce diverse ethnicities” we must reach all people his earlier assertions included criticisms (implied in the least) of churches that do not reflect multi-racial and ethnic demographics.

Further, the statement “God is giving His church in our day the opportunity to rectify the wrongs of the past, a past tainted with racism, segregation, and discrimination” is used to further his suggestion that because of this we must make this part of our concentrated effort. Frankly Steve is gravely wrong.

He might believe, by way of observation, that God is giving the church the opportunity to rectify wrongs of the past regarding racial or ethnic antagonisms but that is not what the Bible teaches. The opportunity of the church is always based on the prescriptive protocol of God which is already established in Scripture.

As well, ministries are not held liable for the misuse of Scriptures by others and here Davis, in the least, implies this. Because ministries in the past may have done something that did not line up with God’s protocol for ministry somehow now makes the rest of the church responsible for adding to or amplifying its mission to balance or rectify this?

No, in fact what this teaches to the people it aims to provide rectification is that holding a grudge by a racial group is acceptable within God’s body and they are owed something. What the church should be teaching is…”here is gospel and here is your reconciliation to God which is Christ Jesus who makes all things work for his good to them that love him.” We owe the world the gospel and the ministry of reconciliation because this is God’s commission to us for fulfill in the world.

While I am confident Steve is always thoughtful and here he does not display a lack of thoughtfulness and admire his willingness at the end to temper his assertions, I am must say I fully reject them where they seek to fulfill a desire to identify and measure ministry by values removed in Scripture which include race, geography and gender.

Alex, I don’t think anybody’s saying we should encourage a minority group to retain a grudge. That would be holding on to lingering resentment about an offense that occurred in the past. Davis’ point is more along the lines of “let’s make sure the offense is not still occurring.” The passages you cited do argue against “our ‘race’ deserves special status in the church” but they also argue against “we don’t want folks who are different among us” and in favor of “let’s put some extra effort to making sure other ethnicities know they are fully accepted.”

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.