Criticisms of the Social Gospel Concept and it's Proponents

Our Topic for Today:

• What types of criticisms have been leveled at proponents of the Social Gospel?
• Are these valid criticisms?

Yesterday's post addressed the basic question, What is the Social Gospel?.


One way of learning about the Social Gospel, and the Social Gospel movement and it's impact on religious adherents, both past and present, is to examine the criticisms of the Social Gospel.


A variety of criticisms have been leveled at the proponents of the Social Gospel concept.  Most of the criticisms come from conservative and fundamentalist Christians.  They view the  Social Gospel movement as being  contrary to their own interpretation of the role of the church and the responsibilities of individual Christians toward their "neighbors".


A few examples of specific criticisms are found below:


CRITICISM:  The gospel message should be focused in individual salvation of one's own soul and gaining entry into heaven instead of focusing on living conditions, hunger, sickness, physical needs or other earthly concerns.  We can best demonstrate God's love by preaching to men about salvation.

• "The social gospel concentrates not so much on individual salvation of one’s own soul, but rather on the “evangelization” and “conversion” of social structures and institutions to a “Christian” form, culminating in the promised kingdom of God. For example,(according to the Social Gospel)  if a businessman becomes a Christian, his main concern should not be personal piety, but rather a change in his business practices, or even better, the business practices of everyone else. These changes might include better working conditions and wages for his workers, less concern for profit, and more concern for social responsibility and the environment. .....Paul identified the gospel with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, for our sins. The resurrection of Jesus is the central truth of the gospel:"
  
  
  

  -- A Brief History of the Social Gospel by John A. Battle*

•  It is true that Jesus and the apostles had an incredible healing ministry. And we see various versus exhorting us to care for the helpless (Isa 58:6;  Jas 1:27), but we must remember that though we may help someone physically, we must also care for their soul . All our efforts to provide physical healing reap only temporary results because all things on this earth will pass away (Eccl 3:20; Matt 24:35), however, our efforts to provide spiritual healing leads to eternal life for those who believe (John 3:16; John 4:14). Physical pain we experience as a result of disease or old age is an echo of the spiritual pain inflicted in our soul due to sin.

 ---http://www.todaysreformer.org/article/gospel_attraction

• If we are to show the love of God to the world, this will primarily (but not exclusively) be in terms of our spiritual help towards them, rather than a social gospel.  . .... Paul's conception of love to the world around him was clearly rooted in the need to preach to them, rather than provide material help. ,,,. His debt was to love in the form of preaching.

-- http://www.aletheiacollege.net/mm/7-5Is_A_Social_Gospel_Biblical.htm

CRITICISM:  Improving people's living condition wont get them into heaven.  Christians who get involved with "good causes" may lose their energy for saving souls.

• Significant changes in society have been effected by preaching and example. Nevertheless, the abolition of slavery, the enactment of child labor laws and greater rights for women, while improvements to be thankful for, have not made society any more godly. Nor is it any more likely under these better conditions that a higher percentage of mankind will end up in heaven than before. While such changes are worth working for, many who call themselves Christians have become so absorbed in good causes that they have lost their fervor for saving souls.   "Christian activism" is not Christian. It represents a detour from the straight path the church is to walk before the world. It can confuse the real issues, lead to compromise and unholy alliances, and divert time and effort that would better be used in proclaiming the gospel.
  
  ----The Berean Call, Dave Hunt

CRITICISM:  Jesus never did anything to improve people's outward lives.  He was only concerned with their inner hearts.  By intervening to alleviate the distress people face we may actual be interfering with God's retribution and punishment of those people.

• From the Bible, we do not see Jesus Himself doing much of this activity. He ministered the gospel that would change the hearts of individuals. Once that takes place, the works of the kingdom of God begin to be done by those people whose hearts were changed by Jesus coming in.

 http://thechristianviewpoint.blogspot.com/2010_10_01_archive.html

• We must be careful what we mean when we feel that God looks down upon the human condition, and is " moved with compassion" towards men, and therefore comes to their aid. Scripture abounds with examples of God doing this for His people. But not once do we read of God physically intervening to alleviate the distress of, e.g., an earthquake which has affected unenlightened people, and sharing some kind of social Gospel with them. Indeed, should He do so, one is faced with the paradox of God bringing that " evil" upon those people, and then being moved with compassion and partially reversing that " evil" .

 http://www.aletheiacollege.net/mm/7-5Is_A_Social_Gospel_Biblical.htm

CRITICISM:  Jesus never established an organizational structure for dealing with the physical needs of individuals.  Jesus was concerned with changing the inner spiritual life of people instead of responding to their physical needs.

• "The gospel of Christ provided for no organization other than the local church with its "bishops and deacons" (Phil. 1: 1). This was sufficient for all that the gospel was intended to accomplish in remolding individual character"......."There is no question that Jesus taught some things relevant to these issues but He provided for no organized approach to such problems and they certainly did not form the burden of His gospel."
  
  ---The Impact Of The "Social Gospel" On The Church by Sewell Hall of Atlanta, Georgia

CRITICISM:  The Bible does not command the church to fix the problems of the world.

• In "The Shameful Social Gospel" T. A. McMahon, president of The Berean Call ministry, accuses proponents of the social gospel of assuming that Christians can best win people to their faith by alleviating the human suffering produced by poverty, disease, social injustice, and civil rights abuses. The social gospel is "a deadly disease" that reinforces "belief that salvation can be attained by doing good works" and acting morally and sacrificially. Every time Christians have undertaken practical actions to benefit humanity, McMahon contends, they have "compromised biblical faith and dishonored God" because the Bible does not command the "church to fix the problems of the world.
  
   -- http://www.crosswalk.com/news/commentary/11627652/

• The social gospel teaches that Christianity is about improving this world. It seeks to help people in the here and now…… The presumption is that the church should do something practical and useful in the here and now. That thinking translates directly into homeless shelters, soup kitchens and every other kind of social aid program to help the impoverished….the church is to teach the Gospel to the lost, teach Christians how to be stronger and under certain limited circumstances help Christians in need.  Interestingly, the record in Acts says not one word about helping non-Christians, or establishing any kind of social aid or welfare programs for them. These things were not even done in the name of gaining an audience to preach to. They simply are not part of the divinely authorized mission and work of the church.

-- http://www.timberlandchurch.com

CRITICISM:  Jesus never tried to alter man's social condition.  He knew that there would always be social problems like sickness, hunger, and poverty.  In fact, Jesus cautioned against trying to help the poor when he said that "you will always have the poor with you".

• I'm sure you've noticed that Jesus came into a world that was dominated by an oppressive government, saturated with slavery, and disadvantaged economically for much of the population. Yet, He did not seek to alter man's political, social or economic status. Why not? Simply put, the externals in life will never change much. It is forever true that one "born of woman is of few days and full of trouble" (Job 14:1). Jesus told the truth when He noted, "the poor you have with you always" (John 12:8). So He came to change what was in the hearts of men and women.

http://www.timberlandchurch.com

CRITICISM:  The Social Gospel message fails to increase church membership.

• "If you really look at the modern church today, those churches that are standing for the gospel are the ones that are growing. And the ones that have a watered down message and social gospel message are shrinking."

-- RALPH REED, CHAIRMAN, FAITH AND FREEDOM COALITION: 

CRITICISM:  The Social Gospel is based on politics and is closely linked to Black Liberation Theology which began in the late 1960s..

• The social gospel espoused by religious-left churches in the U.S. is another form of liberation theology, which takes a political route to redemption for man's collective soul.  The social gospel of an Obama presidency could be traced back to the race-based class dialectic of the black liberation theology movement. That movement emerged as the theological wing of the broader Black Power movement of the late 1960's - early 1970's. 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/obamas_politics_of_collective.html

--http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/a_president_obamas_neoliberal_1.html

CRITICISM:  Social Justice is a code word for Nazism and Communism.

• "I beg you, look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can," Beck urged.  "Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes!"  Beck went on to hold up images of the hammer and sickle, and to exclaim that churches that preach social justice are close to Nazism and Communism.

--Glenn Beck,

CRITICISM:  The Social Gospel is a political conspiracy and part of a plot to establish a world government.

• The Social Gospel was, in part, the creation of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). And the CFR was chiefly behind the propagation and widespread dissemination of the Social Gospel. The original CFR plan to create a Social Gospel was hatched as part of a massive operation to change public opinion favorably towards world government. The crisis at that time was World War I and its aftermath. Dr. Erdmann notes that as a consequence of the failures of the Versailles Peace Conference after WWI, John Foster Dulles, as one of the chief architects and propagators of this Social Gospel movement, “became convinced that the use of propaganda was essential in shifting public opinion in America from its traditional isolationist stance to a new policy of interdependence.” In the ensuing highly-orchestrated campaign to change public opinion, Dulles and other CFR moguls worked to transform the ideology of the churches.

- The CFR and the Social Gospel: Part 1
http://herescope.blogspot.com

CRITICISM: The Social Gospel contributes to the development of the AntiChrists one-world religion.

 The social "gospel" agenda of Rick and Kay Warren, as evidenced by their P.E.A.C.E. plan, is ripe for biblical compromise and unwittingly contributes to the development of what the Bible prophesies will be the Antichrist's one-world religion.
 Rick is determined to stamp out disease, hunger, poverty, and crime-a noble  but impossible task that Jesus never gave to His disciples. Rick is mobilizing "people of faith" to do this. It is the old "social gospel" repackaged but now far more dangerous because of the ecumenical thrust. Jesus told us that our job is not to make a "better world" for our grandchildren to enjoy but to "preach the gospel" and thereby to call people out of this world for heaven.

----The Berean Call,  Dave Hunt

For further thought:

• What are the strengths  and weaknesses of these criticisms?
  
• Do any of these criticisms distort the true principles of the Social Gospel as they are actually practiced by Christians?
  
• What other criticisms can be made of the Social Gospel?
  
• Do these criticisms reflect a clear understanding of the interpretation of Jesus's words by  those who promote the Social Gospel?
  
• How does you own interpretation of Jesus's words and examples coincide or conflict with the principles of the Social Gospel?
  
• Does pursuit of the social gospel reinforce or undermine personal accountability and the opportunity for inward spiritual growth?

These are questions we will need to continually explore as we dig deeper into the implications of the Social Gospel, Social Justice, and the question of What Jesus Would Do? in regards to physical and social needs.