Cultural Relevance

Why is cultural relevance a big deal?

The scriptures are relevant to this and every culture. They do not need updating, correcting, or revisioning. On the contrary, what needs revisioning is our understanding and obedience to God's word as we live out His mission in context. When we live a humble orthodoxy and humble missiology, we will be salt and light in contemporary culture—a biblically-faithful, culturally-relevant, counter culture.

Here is a brief article Ed Stetzer wrote to be an encouragement at Catalyst:

The fight goes on. Like a giant tug of war, each side is pulling hard. The battle lines: Cultural relevance versus biblical faithfulness—a classic tyranny of the "OR." Yes, cultural relevance can be confusing. On the one hand, the church can be so focused on cultural relevance that it loses its distinctive message. Don't think it won't happen—it has happened to countless churches and denominations. On the other hand, it can decide that culture does not matter. That leads to a church whose message is indiscernible and obscure to those who are "outside." Let me propose an alternative: our churches need to be biblically faithful, culturally relevant, counter culture communities. Not everyone buys into what I've just said. Whole ministries exist just to tell you not to pay attention to culture. To them, a virtuous church is one that is culturally irrelevant. In their view, a mark of holiness is not just being disconnected from sin but also being disconnected from sinners and the culture they share with us every day. Preaching against culture is like preaching against someone's house—it is just where they live. The house has good in it and bad in it. Overall, culture can be a mess—but (to mix metaphors) it is the water in which we swim and the lens through which we see the world. And the gospel needs to come, inhabit, and change that and every culture (or house). Preaching against culture is not the pattern of the New Testament church (see Dean Fleming's Contextualization in the New Testament), the historic church (see Ruth Tucker's From Jerusalem to Irian Jaya), or today's church (see Breaking the Missional Code). Culture clearly does matter! For 2000 years, missionaries have courageously sought to take the message and make it understandable. Through these two millennia, changing cultures have impacted the church and its missional strategies. Conversely, in many cases, the church has also impacted culture. The reason ministry models have to change is because they have an unchanging message that must be conveyed in a changing world. That message is Christ, the gospel, and the Scriptures. Jude 3 says that we are to "contend for the faith once delivered for the saints." That's essential. But, the Bible also clearly gives us a mandate to make the message understandable. We do more than just translate it into a language. We also have to translate it into a culture. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 9:22-23, "I have become all things to all men." Why? Because the message needs to be contextualized. The "how" of ministry is, in many ways, determined by the "who, when, and where" of culture. That's also essential. We have to both contend and contextualize. This brings a balanced focus in our proclamation and practice. When we contend for the gospel, we remain biblically faithful. When we contextualize, we communicate the message effectively. When we contend and contextualize, our churches are biblically faithful, culturally relevant, counter culture communities. Those who preach against culture are often unaware that they live in one. But the dynamic culture around them is often not the culture of their church. What they yearn for is typically not a scriptural culture, but rather a nostalgic religious culture of days past. The irony of this is that every church is culturally relevant. It is simply a matter of whether the culture of the church is in any way similar to the culture of its community or only meaningful to itself.

What is your take on all of this?