Contextualization

PDF EBOOK

STATEMENT

The missionary's task is to share Christ across geographical, cultural, and linguistic barriers. Contextualization involves presenting the gospel in an understandable and relatable manner (1 Cor. 9:19-23). Such contextualization is vital so the hearer might believe the gospel unto salvation and grow in grace. Proper contextualization displays courage, humility, respect, and sensitivity. Improper contextualization distorts, corrupts, and compromises the timeless truths of Scripture.

Introduction

In his book Contextualizing the Faith, Scott Moreau explains that contextualization lies at the intersection of faith and culture. Contextualization is not just about gospel proclamation or even theology but involves all aspects of life and practice. Everyone is engaged in contextualization wherever they are, and this fact will influence how Christians live out their faith. The issue is not whether one will contextualize but whether one will contextualize responsibly.

This responsibility becomes more challenging in a mission context. A missionary crosses geographical, linguistic, and cultural borders to bring the gospel of Jesus Christ to people who do not know Him. The missionary goes to live in a place that is “foreign” to him, learns a language that is not his mother tongue and lives in a culture with many strange behaviors that the missionary may not recognize or interpret correctly. All these factors impact the missionary’s efforts to present the gospel effectively.

Missiologists rightly assert that contextualization is essential to effectively reaching any people group with the gospel. However, contextualization is controversial in many mission circles today. Because of this, it is helpful first to think through some general guidelines that should govern one’s understanding of contextualization.

General Guidelines

If missionaries are to responsibly carry out contextualization among the people they are trying to reach, they must remember the following:

First, missionaries must allow Scripture to govern contextualization. Responsible contextualization never allows what Scripture forbids.

Second, biblical truth is not bound to a particular time, culture, or context but is timeless, culture-shaping, and relevant in any context. On the other hand, the truth needs to be expressed in cultural forms. Therefore, the task of missionaries is to strive to preserve and protect the truths revealed in Scripture while adapting their presentation of the truth to the particular context of the people they seek to reach. This is where contextualization enters in.

Elements of Contextualization

When presenting the gospel to those they are trying to reach, missionaries should strive to make it understandable and relatable.

The term understandable means communicating the gospel so that the hearers can intellectually comprehend it. For contextualization this signifies using terms and concepts that convey the message's meaning correctly and striving to explain the message coherently. Missionaries should aim to communicate the message so the hearers can grasp the content. The most important first step in achieving this goal is language acquisition, where missionaries seek to master the heart language of those they seek to reach to ensure their presentation of the gospel is understandable to their intended audience.

The term relatable means communicating the gospel so that it does not feel foreign to the hearers but connects with their lives. Concerning contextualization, this means removing all unnecessary cultural elements from the missionary’s home culture that might hinder the hearers’ ability to connect with the message. It also requires noting cultural patterns and linguistic expressions that the hearers would be familiar with that might make their hearing of the gospel “click” better. Paul acknowledged that he did this, summarizing his approach by writing that he sought to become “all things to all people, that by all means, I might save some.” (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). The second half of a previous verse, 9:12, is crucial in understanding this text, where Paul writes, “Nevertheless, we have not made use of this right, but we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ.” Paul was willing to do whatever was necessary to remove obstacles that might deter people from hearing the gospel. For example, Paul had the right to eat meat, but if eating meat would offend one of his hearers, he would refrain. For missionaries today, this might involve taking off one’s shoes upon entering a host's home. Eating meat or wearing shoes indoors is unnecessary for the gospel's message. Nor are they forbidden in God’s Word. However, if done in a missionary context where these things are culturally frowned upon, they may cause the gospel to appear unnecessarily offensive rather than culturally relatable. Missionaries should be willing to give up all such things to enable the hearers to “better hear” the gospel.

Missionaries must recognize the significance of relatability. While missionaries may successfully make the gospel's message understandable to their hearers, it may still seem foreign to them. This is why Paul spoke with Gentiles differently than with Jews. The Jews could relate to the Old Testament background of the gospel, so Paul could include anything from the Old Testament when sharing the gospel with them. Most Gentiles, however, could not relate to Old Testament Israel’s history, and so Paul started with matters that better connected with them. For instance, when speaking to the Athenians in Acts 17:22-31, Paul mentions their worship of an “unknown god” and one of their poets who wrote of an awareness that humans come from God. These issues were relatable to Paul’s hearers, serving as contact points to more effectively connect the gospel with them.

These concepts of “understandable” and “relatable” are interrelated, as the ability to relate to the content influences understanding and vice versa. However, the two terms refer to different elements of presenting the gospel, so attention should be given to both when missionaries consider the task of contextualization. Laboring to make sure the gospel is understandable and relatable is critical to effectively presenting the gospel. When done well, the hearers can better hear and understand the gospel message of salvation so that they might believe it.

Two Types of Improper Contextualization

Throughout history, missionaries have sometimes committed one of two types of improper contextualization.

The first type is too little contextualization. Some missionaries have not sufficiently considered the culture they are trying to communicate to but have instead unwittingly presented the gospel in the clothing of their own culture. Some American missionaries have a strong attachment to the July 4th holiday, seeing it as a work of God in granting freedom to America. Including those from the host culture in the day's celebration, however, may confuse those the missionaries are trying to reach, causing them to think that the gospel is American or that God loves America more than other nations since He has not done the same elsewhere.

One missionary couple fervently believed that women must wear dresses or skirts and may not wear pants. According to their church background, pants are men’s clothing, and for a woman to wear pants was breaking God’s command to distinguish between the genders by their dress (Deut. 22:5). This caused no small amount of consternation among the people they were seeking to reach, as women usually wear pants in that culture. This couple’s culturally defined view of feminine modesty distracted from the actual offense of the gospel.

In short, missionaries must beware of failing to contextualize too little. They need to carefully consider what in their own culture is not only unnecessary but may even distort the gospel's message.

The second type is too much contextualization. Some missionaries have clothed the gospel with improper cultural material that has diluted the message, even changing the message to the point that the gospel is no longer present. For example, some missionaries working among Buddhists will tell the people they are seeking to reach that “Jesus is the way of release, nirvana.” This creates confusion, for while Christ did save His people from suffering, the Buddhist concept of “release” or “nirvana” is not in any sense related to release from the debt of our sins or deliverance from the dominion of the devil. If hearers understand nirvana in the Pure Land Buddhist sense, for instance, it would mean that Jesus is the way to reaching Buddhahood. Thus, the concept of nirvana miscommunicates elements of the gospel, and Christ’s work should not be associated with it.

A more comprehensive example of too much contextualization is Insider Movements. An “insider” is a person from a non-Christian background who has trusted in Christ but retains his original socio-religious identity. Thus, in a Muslim context, he can continue to worship at the mosque, read the Qur’an alongside the Bible, and even use the Qur’an extensively in evangelism. In this way, it is said a convert to Christ from a Muslim community can avoid persecution and increase the success of evangelism. In appearance, such converts to Christ are virtually indistinguishable from Muslims. Therefore, this approach leaves people in a condition where they do not appear to identify with Jesus as their only hope nor to testify to His message as alone trustworthy and able to save. This is a serious compromise of the gospel.

Missionaries must be aware of the danger here. If something in the hearers’ culture contradicts the truth of Scripture, missionaries must not adopt it into the gospel presentation. Therefore, Paul was willing not to eat meat (a matter not in conflict with Scripture) for the sake of the gospel, but he was not willing to accept the offering of a sacrifice the people of Lystra were trying to make to him (a matter that would conflict with Scripture; see Acts 14:8-18). Nor did Paul make any concessions to the Corinthians about matters of immorality (1 Cor. 6:9-11). If something conflicted with God’s revealed will in Scripture, Paul would not utilize it in presenting the gospel for the sake of contextualization.

Moreover, while contextualization seeks to make the gospel clearer to the hearers by connecting it to their culture, some biblical truths will be completely foreign to the hearers but cannot in any way be “contextualized.” For example, when speaking with the Athenians about Jesus and the resurrection, Paul’s hearers said he was a babbler preaching “foreign divinities.” Later, when he again talked about the resurrection, some Athenians mocked him because they thought such a notion was nonsense (Acts 17:18, 31-32). Yet, despite their response, Paul did not then “contextualize” these truths so that they were more “understandable” or “relatable” to his hearers. Proper contextualization never involves the distortion of truth.

No matter who we are trying to reach with the gospel, the most important thing we have in common is not superficial appearance like hairstyles or social status but our common condition in Adam – that we are all alike under condemnation and alienated from God – and our common need for Christ – we all need the forgiveness of our sins and a restored relationship with God.

Furthermore, missionaries must remember that, as Christians, they are different from the lost. They love God; the lost love the world. They are children of the light, while the lost are children of darkness. There should be radical dissimilarities between the missionaries and those they seek to reach, which is not something missionaries should be ashamed of or try to hide. Indeed, a missionary’s first goal should be conformity to Christ, not the host culture. Missionaries should emphasize living godly lives more than adopting the ways of those around them. The more missionaries grow in Christ-likeness, the more they shine for Christ before others, a Christ-like life serving as a powerful witness before the lost. Christians are to be salt and light in the world, and an effort to contextualize that overly stresses conformity to the surrounding culture may result in losing one’s saltiness and hence being of no real use in Christ’s kingdom work (Matthew 5:13-16).

Motives Behind Errant Contextualization

Many missionaries do not even realize they are neglecting or abusing contextualization. They think what they are doing best honors God and best serves those they are trying to reach. They have no ill intent in their efforts, though they may need to spend more time evaluating their practices.

However, some missionaries improperly contextualize intentionally. For instance, some sincerely desire to see people won to Christ but do not believe God’s way is best or they doubt His power to save through His appointed means and way. As a result, they intentionally make what they think are harmless adjustments to the gospel to get more people to “believe.” Some feel pressure to impress their sending church and supporters or want to feel they are making a difference for Christ. So, they improperly contextualize to get more significant numbers of converts or establish more churches. Either way, some missionaries intentionally twist the gospel to increase the apparent positive results of their ministries.

One missionary told me that his language instructor came to Christ. During our discussion, the missionary admitted that the instructor still believed in Buddha even while “trusting in Jesus.” The instructor thought believing in both would make her future even brighter. This missionary came from a solid church background and should have known that this was seriously wrong, but he argued that his instructor was truly saved even though she still looked to Buddha as something of a “co-savior.” This missionary told others, including his supporters, about the beautiful story of his language instructor becoming a Christian.

Another example involves the training of leaders. Some missionaries once asserted, “In training leaders, particularly for rural churches, it is important to select recognized leaders in their communities.” The lists of qualifications in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 mention no such qualification. I have seen churches in the country where I serve follow the approach proposed by these missionaries. Leaders in the community were made leaders in the church to avoid a loss of face on the part of the community leaders and to take advantage of those leaders’ influence within the community. Sadly, in most cases, they were not qualified to serve as leaders in the biblical sense. Hence, they were a poor example before the church and could not lead the church in a godly manner.

Missionaries must note both unintentional and intentional mistakes and make efforts to avoid them if they hope to contextualize in a manner consistent with God's will and beneficial to their work.

Why is a Statement on Contextualization Important?

Preaching the gospel is how God saves sinners (Romans 10:14, 17), and, as already noted above, contextualization is a crucial component of the effective communication of the gospel. Contextualization enables the hearers to comprehend what the missionary is talking about (understandable) and to see that the message genuinely connects to their lives (relatable). It places the gospel in legitimate cultural forms that make bridges for effective communication. A failure to properly contextualize can cause serious problems. It can blur the truths of Scripture, making the gospel appear to have no meaningful connection with the hearers. It can distort the truths of Scripture, twisting the gospel so that it is unclear or even unrecognizable. It can corrupt the truths of Scripture, polluting the gospel so that it is no longer the pure gospel but contaminated with error. It can compromise the truths of Scripture, making errant concessions where concessions should never happen, endangering the clarity and accuracy of what is communicated. In short, improper contextualization can leave the hearers in a position where what they hear is not the truth or appears irrelevant. Either way, it harms the hearers’ ability to understand and relate to the message.

Furthermore, contextualization does not stop after a person trusts in Christ. New believers must, personally and corporately, continually wrestle with the challenge of responsibly expressing their faith in Christ within their own cultural context. Missionaries can provide valuable assistance in this area of seeking to engage in broader dimensions of proper contextualization.

Virtues Displayed through Proper Contextualization

Proper contextualization isn’t just necessary for the sake of clarity. It also displays key virtues that, under God’s blessing, can increase the effectiveness of the missionary’s work. Such virtues include the following:

1. Contextualization requires courage, where the missionary bravely sets aside his known culture and seeks to communicate the gospel effectively in a foreign culture. 

2. Contextualization calls for humility, where the missionary humbly sets aside the attitude that his culture is superior to other cultures and willingly seeks to understand and apply legitimate cultural expressions from the host culture that might conflict with his personal preferences.

3. Contextualization displays respect, where the missionary shows the people he seeks to reach that he esteems them and is willing to adopt legitimate forms of their culture to better identify and communicate with them. 

4. Contextualization demonstrates sensitivity, where the missionary desires to avoid unnecessarily offending the hearers. 

In short, proper contextualization is vital to effectively communicating the gospel to those in the host culture. One key reason is that it displays the virtues of courage, humility, respect, and sensitivity, making the gospel presentation more attractive.

Conclusion

Communicating the gospel cross-culturally is difficult. It requires time and patience to understand the host culture so that missionaries can make sure their communication of the gospel is not confusing or alienating but understandable and relatable. Biblical contextualization encourages the removal of obstacles that might confuse the hearers so that they can understand the gospel and perceive it as meaningful to them. It also involves referencing legitimate cultural elements of the host culture to increase the understandability and relatability of the message for the hearers. But one must never remove anything necessary for salvation and sanctification nor add anything that might cloud the message of God’s Word. The point is to be faithful stewards unto God with the mysteries of the gospel entrusted to us while making every effort to present the gospel in an understandable and relatable manner so hearers can believe unto salvation and grow in grace.

Resources

Please check out the resources listed below for further information on these matters.

Books

• Brotherson, Derek, Contextualization or Syncretism? 

• Moreau, Scott, Contextualizing the Faith: A Holistic Approach

Articles

• Ashford, Bruce, “You Already Contextualize the Gospel. Do You Do It Well?” Center for Faith & Culture, Mar. 18, 2019. Accessed from cfc.sbts.edu.

• Clark, Elliot, “Faithful Contextualization in Missions” Reaching & Teaching International Ministries, Nov. 29, 2023. Accessed from rtim.org.

• Graham, Don, “IMB Trustees Define Contextualization” Baptist Press, Nov. 16, 2007. Accessed from baptistpress.com.

• Ibrahim, A.S. “Understanding Insider Movements” Gospel Coalition, Dec. 28, 2015. Accessed from thegospelcoalition.org.

• Lounsbrough, Mark, “Contextualization in Missions Today” in Faith Pulpit, Summer 2016. Accessed from faith.edu.

• Pratt, Zane, “Four Biblical Foundations for Contextualization,” 9Marks, July 18, 2016. Accessed from 9marks.org.