The Pleasantness of a Religious Life...

Recently I have been reading Matthew Henry's The Pleasantness of a Religious Life. What a joy this book has been to my soul!

The current discussion over evangelizing to the emerging culture has caused me to think often about the methods by which we preach the Gospel. And I have stated previously that I am generally in favor, or at the very least semi-supportive, of using modern methods to bring the Gospel to the unreached peoples of the world. However, last night Matthew Henry made me re-think some things.

Pleasure is a tempting thing: what yields delight, cannot but attract desire; it is next to necessity, so strongly doth it urge. Surely, if we were but fully persuaded of this, that religion [Christianity] hath pleasure on its side, we would be wrought upon by the allurement of that to be religious (pg. 49).

Henry understood the joy that is found only in Christ. He knew that if others could also grasp the idea that Christianity is the only thing in the world that produces long-lasting, immeasurable joy then there would be a strong sense of "allurement" constantly pulling and tugging at one's soul toward God. He goes on to say,

There is no pleasure in any learning like that of learning Christ, and the things that belong to our everlasting peace; for that which is known is not small and trivial, is not doubtful and uncertain, is not foreign to us, and which we are not concerned in; which are things that may much diminish the pleasure of any knowledge; but it is great and sure, and of the last importance to us, and the knowledge of it gives us satisfaction: here we may rest our souls. To know the perfections of the divine nature, the unsearchable riches of divine grace, to be led into the mystery of our redemption and reconciliation by Christ, this is food; such knowledge as this is a feast to the soul; it is meat indeed, and drink indeed...If the knowledge of the law of God was so sweet to David, 'sweeter than honey to his taste' (Pss. 19:10; 119:103), how much more so should the knowledge of the gospel of Christ be to us? (pg. 54).

Granted, Henry is speaking directly to believers in an attempt to strengthen their faith and love in Christ. But I think this can also apply to unbelievers. Often times they perceive Christianity as a way to get someone to stop drinking, or stop smoking, or quit some other "bad habit." And many times churches preach this type of Gospel: "Try Jesus and he will give you a better life."

The Gospel is not that your life will necessarily be better in the immediate sense. But rather, that the joy that will be produced from knowing God and knowing the depths of His riches and Grace will be eternal.

This is how I believe the Gospel ought to be presented. Yes, present the law. Yes, a sinner must come to an accurate assessment of his or her depravity before true repentance will occur. But then we must insert the "but God." After showing the sinful nature of the person, then the grace of God must be lifted up, then the glory of Christ must be explained, then the finality of His sacrifice must be preached, and then the future glory and joy of the believer ought to be presented.

As one who is of the proper age to be categorized as belonging to the post-modern, emerging culture, I can say that I personally didn't need to be reached by any sort of fancy methodology to get a hold of me with the Gospel. The Gospel was preached and then the Spirit went to work for a few years until finally the truth was made known to me. I understand that everyone is different. But my point is that it is the Gospel that saves, not our clever arguments or style adaptations. It is the glory of Christ and the work of the Spirit that brings about true saving faith.