This presentation was developed by InterVarsity (or at least by InterVarsity staff members, principally James Choung) to be used for, among other things, making the issues of the gospel clear and concise. This presentation was first analyzed by us in 2010, and does not include more recent (if any) changes to it. It departs somewhat from the other two presentation booklets (which are very similar) mainly in the following ways:
- 1) It is tries to make larger use of the meta-narrative or the “big picture” of what God was and is doing in the world, though in so doing it does not speak directly to eschatological issues (what God will be doing in consummation).
- 2) It places greater (much greater) emphasis on “following Jesus with his power and community to heal the world.” (emphasis ours) than do the other presentations we’ve mentioned.
Links to resources for Understanding and Evaluating the “Four World’s Presentation”:
- InterVarsity on-line videos “Big Story”: Gospel Presentation
- Four Worlds Presentation (Keynote Video)
- The Big Story OSU Version
- Explanation of the Big Story
- Comparison: Bridge Vs. 4 Worlds
- Talking Points
- InterVarsity Site for Evangelism for a New Generation
Analysis
Pros:
- 1) Begins with a felt need...people ache for a better world.
- 2) Connects that felt need with the ....”storyline of the Bible...”
- 3) Also begins on a positive note, “in the Christian world-view God created a good world and it worked beautifully...”
- 4) Does speak in terms of both “we” (people) and “the world” (the environment and other animals) as being damaged by evil.
- 5) Legitimately refers to social evils such as “27 million people living in slavery around the world today,...” without being merely being a “social gospel” or just a “social justice” presentation
- 6) Does not suggest a specific partisan political solution to the mess. We consider this a pro because we believe there is room for significant debate among evangelicals about what sort of institutions bring about social justice in the long-run and in a lasting way.
- 7) Offers Jesus as the One through his incarnation who identified with us, owned the judgement we deserved by the cross, and overcame (though it does not clearly specify exactly what He overcame as one might like) by his resurrection.
- 8) Challenges potential followers of Christ with the prospect they would also be sent to heal.
- 9) Could be viewed as a good platform (tool) to speak to outsiders who are very concerned about the environment and are glad to see the gospel is relevant to that.
Cons:
- 1) It can be seen as overcorrecting for the alleged “personal” and “individualism” impression that the 4 Laws and Bridge Diagram seem to give; however, depending on how it is presented, it too can give an undesirable impression that the evil of the corrupted “world” (read environment) and social issues are the main thing to be healed. In a worst case construal it could be called a “save the world” sort of presentation that makes personal salvation almost an after-thought, but we believe that sort of criticism goes too far.
- 2) The substitutionary atonement that Jesus made for us (by dying on the cross) isn’t as clear in this presentation as in the other two tools mentioned before this. Conceptually it is there, but we think it needs a well-trained person to highlight and clarify it so those with whom we share do not miss it, but rather understand what it means and its importance.
- 3) Its emphasis on social justice can be highjacked by people who present it who also have a partisan means to social justice (like Critical Theory modus operandi) OR who think that social justice is the central message of Christianity. Further, it is still a matter of legitimate disputation among evangelicals (we believe the conversation among us is far from finished--indeed we don’t even now think the two sides are really dialoguing in constructive ways) on what are the best ways to reform structural injustice.
Summary: We think this could be an effective tool in presenting the gospel if and only if it is used by someone who understands the theological issues of the gospel well and can highlight and clarify certain aspects to outsiders, especially substitutionary nature of the atonement through Jesus’ sacrificial death and resurrection and what that means.
Surely the good news of the gospel includes a relevant sense of redemption for a fallen Creation in the here and now and not just in the eschaton (read social structures that oppress, abuses to the physical environment and animals); that is something many folks are concerned about, However we need to be careful that the need for personal salvation of particular individuals by personal choice (not through socialization in the community) needs not to be lost. This booklet (as it stands) creates the possibility that it could be lost, if used in the hands of poorly trained evangelists.