By Dick Keyes-- the speaker for the Spring 2003 Harrington Counseling Lectures at
Covenant Seminary. He is the author of Beyond Identity, True Heroism, Chameleon
Christianity, and is finishing a book on cynicism. The following article is taken from a talk on
the uniqueness of Christ that he gave during his time at Covenant.

One of the most contentious and difficult issues any Christian has to face today is the question of the
uniqueness of Jesus Christ. This issue is difficult, in part, because our society is religiously pluralistic.
We live in a society where kind, intelligent, sincere people all around us have very, very different religious
convictions from Christian ones. What would ever lead a person to believe that there is one true God and
only one way to Him in a time of such plurality? Or as it was asked to me once, what is your excuse for
believing such a thing?
The intellectual and spiritual atmosphere in which we live quickly answers that question by saying that
Christians who do believe in Christ's uniqueness believe it only because they are arrogant, ignorant, ethnocentric,
and perhaps neurotic. If a Christian tries to convert somebody, then he or she is seen as bigoted,
intolerant, imperialistic, and perhaps psychologically unbalanced.
Christians do not want to be arrogant, ignorant, ethno-centric, or neurotic, nor do we even want to be
thought of in that way by other people. At the same time, the uniqueness of Christ as the Son of God, as
the way, the truth, and the life, the only way to the Father, is not just something Christians can brush off or
leave aside as if it were optional or on the periphery of the faith.
As we relate to others in the midst of these challenging assumptions we must see the place from which some
of the assumptions stem. The conviction of Christ's uniqueness did not arise or thrive first in the nineteenth
century colonial era of Western imperialism. In fact, it did not even arise in Europe. The whole Christian
faith is a Middle Eastern religion, not a European religion at all.
In addition, religious pluralism is nothing new. The start of the Christian faith was in the Roman Empire.
The Roman Empire in the first century was possibly more pluralistic than modern America. It was more radically
diverse in the different religious movements. The Christian faith, with its claims to Christ's uniqueness,
grew and thrived exactly in that pluralistic setting. Pluralism in the modern world may surprise the
church today, but it offers no new challenge to the Christian faith.
Ironically, there is a special relevance of the New Testament for us now in dealing with pluralism. Far from
putting us in a new paradigm, pluralism puts us back into the first century, right into the setting of the book
www.covenantseminary.edu/resource
of Acts. Pluralism was exactly what the Apostle Paul was facing as soon as he stepped out the front door of a
synagogue onto the main street of any gentile city.
Pluralism and Relativism
While pluralism is not new, we need to see that our society has developed a way for viewing pluralism that is
widely accepted. That way of viewing is a philosophical system called relativism. Relativism is one possible
paradigm for understanding pluralism. It is a system that denies that anyone can know absolute truth about
God or about ultimate things and asserts that it is naïve for a person to think he or she has knowledge about
such truth. Relativism declares that we are finite; we have no standard or criterion to judge competing truth
claims, no scale with which to measure or examine differing beliefs.
When considering relativism, I often think of the example of a lifeguard on a beach who has an elevated
chair so he can look down over everybody and see what is going on. He has a perspective that nobody else
on the beach has. Everybody else has his or her feet in the sand, cannot see beyond immediate neighbors.
But the lifeguard has an elevated chair from which to see the whole beach. Relativism tells us that nobody
has that elevated view when it comes to religion. Everybody is at ground level, with only his or her local
perspective.
Relativism claims that we have a lot of people from different perspectives saying what they think ultimate
truth is, but that these people are simply expressing their own beliefs. They are attempting to name what is
not namable. Relativism claims that it does not make sense to talk about some religions being true and other
religions being false; doing so brings the wrong categories to the discussion. To the relativist no religions are
true or false. Certainly none are true in any way that would exclude any others being true. They are all true
in that they do more or less the same job; they express the deepest human longings and are means for
achieving social cohesion; they help hold societies together and give them a sense of unity and common purpose.
Just as you would never say that vanilla ice cream is the only true ice cream and chocolate ice cream is false
ice cream because you prefer vanilla, so also the relativist says you should never speak in such a way about
your religious preferences. The issues of true and false have no place in the discussion.
How does relativism relate to pluralism? Simply put, relativism disrespects pluralism. Relativism seems to
have high moral ground. It seems to celebrate the plurality of religious beliefs and be tolerant, non-judgmental,
generous, and enlightened. It seems to celebrate the diversity of religious perspectives, but in fact the
message of relativism is that it is the one exclusive and correct way to understand the full picture of religious
diversity in the world. In fact, relativism is extremely absolutist! It assumes for itself the very status that it
scorns when anybody else holds it.
This Way Up The Mountain
The relativist is a closet absolutist. You may have heard the idea that all religions are ways, or paths, up the
same mountain. As these paths travel up the mountain the climber has no clue that there are actually other
roads up the same mountain. When he finally gets to the top of the mountain and sees God, the person realizes
that he was not on the only road at all but that there are lots of people on their way to God by all sorts
of paths or religions.
The Uniqueness of Christ in an Age of Relativism 2
This mountain analogy sounds very humble and makes any people who disagree with it feel ignorant, smallminded,
and arrogant if they think that their road is the only road. But the real question to ask is – where is
the person standing who is describing this mountain? He or she must be in an airplane in order to see the
whole mountain. Why is the relativist the only one who gets to have an airplane when all others sweat and
trudge up their roads in ignorance?
The relativist is not just giving us a lovely picture of openness. The relativist is giving one exclusive model
to understand all the religions of the world. Relativism is an over-religion or a meta-religion that forces all
religions into its mold. It sounds humble and willing to admit the fallibility of human knowing, but it produces
a single vision of ultimate truth that excludes all other contenders. The relativist claims an immaculate
perception of religious truth, but at the same time denies that anyone can have such a perspective.
Relativism denies pluralism, the idea that there are different options that differ substantially from each other.
Relativism actually destroys pluralism. It homogenizes all differences so they are seen as basically the same.
In the relativist's own illustration, pluralism is represented by these poor people struggling up the road on the
mountain, all of them in the same ignorance about what they are doing.
Think of what this means for specific religions. For instance, the Christian faith affirms a belief in a personal
God. Buddhism denies a personal God. Relativism says that these two religions are really the same in their
most basic convictions. This is a homogenizing process that obscures the real differences.
So, for the relativist all views are one view. All religions are paths to salvation. But here we must ask, what
does salvation mean? The different religions have very different views of salvation. Which salvation gets to
be the one that we are talking about? For Buddhism salvation is nirvana. The Buddhist finally leaves behind
all his desires and even his experience of his individuality. Compare this to the Muslim view of salvation. At
least for the hijackers of recent fame, it meant that they would be met by seventy-two dark-eyed virgins who
would be committed to indulging their every desire.
Whose salvation are we talking about? Whose heaven? If you take the relativist line, you have got to
acknowledge that we really cannot say anything about the nature of salvation because the moment a person
does, that person has excluded somebody else's view. So the only thing to say is that we know nothing. But
that does not get anyone very far. So salvation generically is defined as "enabling a truly moral life" or "keeping
the forces of despair at bay." The intriguing thing is that those statements do not sound like they are
coming out of any of the world religions but more like modern western liberal humanism forced onto the
plurality of world religions.
In Defense of Pluralism
Christians need to be the ones defending pluralism against relativism. We need to defend the point that
there is a difference among the religious options, and maintain that these differences are important.
Why are words like ‘conversion' or ‘proselytize' or ‘missionary' so offensive today? It is not just because the
people involved are belligerent and insensitive, because not all of them are. It is because the idea of conversion
or proselytizing is offensive to the doctrines of relativism. If somebody converts, he or she is saying the
options are not all the same – otherwise why would I change? You do not convert unless you believe there
are real differences between the options available. The existence of any convert is testimony to the fact that
those differences matter, and some conversions are enormously costly.
The Uniqueness of Christ in an Age of Relativism 3
The Uniqueness of Christ in an Age of Relativism 4
Why not change if you no longer believe your earlier convictions to be true? If they are important enough,
why not even persuade somebody else to change, if you care about them? Isn't this true of every other area of
knowledge? In history, economics, political science, medicine, physics – there are important differences. The
health of those academic disciplines depends on free discussion about the differences in those fields. Because
there is a plurality of views, people change their minds about affirmative action, tax cuts, global warming,
counter-terrorist measures, and origins of the American Revolution. People change their views about all
sorts of things and a good educational environment, and a free society, demands that conversions be possible.
Why is conversion such a problem only when it comes to religious truth in our society? If there is real plurality,
a real difference of religious options, then it is possible to be wrong and to be wrong in a way that matters
a great deal. If there really are differences, it is possible to be so wrong that it can be catastrophic. We
could, for example, be accountable to some far greater Being than ourselves. We could be entirely wrong as
to how to approach that greater Being. We could miss out on whole realms of meaning in our life here on
earth.
If there are real choices between religious options it raises some very uncomfortable questions. By contrast,
relativism, which does not respect the plurality of religions, is very comforting. It tells us that it is impossible
to be wrong in any way that matters. It is perfectly safe to be entirely wrong about God, or to totally ignore
God and questions of God's existence and relevance. Different views are differences only in preference –
vanilla, chocolate, coffee, whatever. This way of looking at things encourages people to sleepwalk through
the biggest choices of their lives.
It is relativism that is the opiate of the masses – especially in the modern university setting, where it deadens
and discourages what could be enormously stimulating intellectual and spiritual discussion. Discussions of
serious differences, however, too often are seen as dangerous and liable to offend somebody. Discussion of difference
is put under the carpet as quickly as possible. But if we respect the plurality of religions, we are saying
the choice between them is possible and necessary. God? No God? Which god? These are important
questions that everybody ought to grapple with. We need an atmosphere that facilitates asking these questions
and does not bury them in shame and fear of political incorrectness.
Any person is free to believe something that excludes my beliefs. Relativists do this all of the time. But it is
important that they admit that they are excluding my beliefs. And then we can talk – one absolutist to
another. We can be civil to each other, we can care for each other, we can love each other, we can have
wonderful discussions together. Even if we end agreeing to disagree, I find that we will always learn from
each other.
Welcoming the Open Discussion
If everyone would admit to being an absolutist – and everyone with any conviction about God has to
exclude somebody else's view of God – there could be much more fruitful discussion. We all hold some
absolutes. Join the club. We are all fundamentalists; it is just a question of what things are fundamental to
us. If we could agree this far, then the discussion about Jesus as the way to God could be a discussion held on
a level playing field. My hope is for an atmosphere in which the reality of pluralism can be put on the table,
in which there can be a civil interaction of different positions and their enormous implications. This calls
for courage to let questions be aired and discussed openly. We must welcome the open discussion.
In that discussion, Christians must be ready to give an answer for their hope with gentleness and respect.
Nothing so quickly discredits the Christian claim than if that claim is made in arrogance, defensiveness or
the desire to just win an argument. May we look to Jesus himself as the one to give us the humility and the
loyalty to truth which we need to represent him to our contemporaries.
This article originally appeared in Covenant magazine, the quarterly magazine of Covenant Theological Seminary.
Reprint permission is available upon request by e-mailing covenant@covenantseminary.edu. Begin a free subscription
to Covenant magazine at www.covenantseminary.edu/contactus/subscription.asp.
© 2003 Covenant Theological Seminary.
The Uniqueness of Christ in an Age of Relativism 5
Rooted in Grace for a Lifetime of Ministry
12330 Conway Road, St. Louis, Mo., 63141 314-434-4044 www.covenantseminary.edu
National Seminary of the Presbyterian Church in America
!"#$%&'()%!*+)',(
PART ONE IN A SERIES ON WINSOMENESS.
A Publication of
Ransom Fellowship
1150 West Center Street
Rochester, MN 55902
www.RansomFellowship.org
Resources
for Equipping
Wise Christians
-.%&(+*)%/##01
2''1%2*1(3
!"#$#%&'(( Deepening Discipleship
Developing DiscernmenD t
D
D
D
www.RansomFellowship.org 1
!ne of our neighbors uses a pickup occasionally
to haul junk to the dump or to
transport furniture when a new tenant
moves into one of his rental units. It's an old
pickup, showing signs of wear and the rust so
common in this part of the country where
salt is used to battle icy streets in winter. The
truck sports a bumper sticker which caught
my attention one day as he drove down the
alley behind our house. "Save me Jesus"
were in large-enough print to read as he
passed, but I had to walk over to where it
was parked to make out the fine print.
"Save me Jesus...," it said "...from your followers."
I haven't had the chance to ask him
about the bumper sticker. It'll be interesting
to talk about it, though I must say that I
fear hearing some story in which he was
treated poorly by someone claiming to be a
Christian. It's entirely possible, on the other
hand, that what he's suffered is an offense
against the cross, and that no believer has
mistreated him. That's a possibility, but it
troubles me that I doubt it is the case.
Worse, I confess that I would find it almost
refreshing to discover he has heard and considered
the gospel but rejected it because he
finds its claims to be offensive. Refreshing,
that is, not because it wouldn't be grievous
news—for it is—but refreshing because at
least this is an offense that has some integrity.
Given the present state of affairs, what
with pluralism and the insistence on tolerance,
we may wonder if it is even possible
for Christians to be winsome before a
watching world. To be attractive, that is,
without compromising righteousness or
hiding the gospel. Is it possible to live out
and speak the truth so that any offense
taken is limited to the offence of the cross?
The answer, I believe, is YES. We will
make mistakes and blunder, of course. We
have clay feet, and the Scrip-tures do not
give us leave to witness to the truth only
after achieving some sort of perfection.
There will be plenty for which we must
seek forgiveness from our unbelieving
friends, but amazingly such authenticity
and humility can be attractive in its own
way. Our foul-ups can even, by God's grace,
at least occasionally be redeemed instead of
remaining a hindrance in the relationship.
The primary reason, however, for
being confident that it is possible to be
winsome and attractive to sinners is the
example of Jesus. He was without sin and
never compromised the truth, and yet
attracted sinners to himself. He even called
them to repentance—not a particularly
popular message for sinners—and though
not all believed, the record of the Gospels
is that they followed him around in droves.
Our message is the gospel of Christ, and
since he is attractive, shouldn't our proclamation
be attractive as well? Since our lives
are to reflect his righteousness, shouldn't
our lives be as winsome as his was?
What an irony: Christ attracted multitudes
wherever he went, while much that
passes for Christian witness today is neither
attractive, creative, nor winsome,
but aggressive, insensitive, and rote.
Imagine what it would be like, a friend
recently said, to sit in the chair of an angry
dentist. Or one who is offended by your
dental habits and decides that you need to
be taught a good lesson in dental hygiene.
Or one who accosts strangers with the sad
state of their mouths, expects them to submit
to treatment on the spot, and when
they refuse issues dire warnings. Or one
who has reduced the rich array of dental
medicine into a single therapy that can be
accomplished in less than five minutes. Or
one that uses the identical technique on
every patient, time after time.
Graceful, salty conversation
"Be wise in the way you act towards outsiders,"
Paul wrote to the believers in
!"#$%&'()%!*+)',(%2''1%2*1(3
-.%&(+*)%/##01
Jesus was without sin and never
compromised the truth, and yet
he attracted sinners to himself.
www.RansomFellowship.org 2
Colosse, "make the most of every opportunity.
Let your conversation be always full of
grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may
know how to answer everyone" (4:5-6). The
final Greek phrase translated "everyone,"
actually means "to each one." Each individual,
in other words, "is to be treated as an
end in himself," Peter O'Brien notes in his
commentary, "and not subjected to a stock
harangue." Which is precisely how we want
to be treated, and if we think about it, how
we would expect to treat anyone who bears
the image of God.
Paul's notion of our conversations with
non-Christians being "seasoned with salt" is
intriguing. Pagans in the first century used
the expression to mean witty; Jewish rabbis
used it to mean wise. Wisdom and wit are
related, and both are characteristic of the
conversations of Jesus recorded for us in the
New Testament. His insight into people
and the world was astounding, and his
enigmatic answers and probing questions
fostered reflection and further questions
instead of terminating the discussion.
He often turned things
on their head in unexpected
ways, and his stories usually contained
twists, often amusing
ones. "Those who are the salt of
the earth," O'Brien says, "might
be expected to have some savor about their
communication." Salt makes food zesty and
flavorful, and keeps it free of corruption. So
our witness must never be insipid or dull,
never tactless or argumentative. After all,
we are witnessing to the Lord of life and
glory.
"Ah, well," someone might respond.
"That's all fine and good for the likes of
Paul and C. S. Lewis and G. K. Chesterton,
but I'm just an ordinary person. I
barely know how to share my faith and
now I have to be creatively attractive,
too?" A good question. The answer is that
we misunderstand the meaning of creative.
We are made in the Creator's image,
and therefore creativity is inescapably part
of our very being. We may not have artistic
gifts, but that's not the issue. Creativity
is expressed not just in art, but in hospitality,
warmth, and community when
we open our life and heart and home to
another, even at cost. We may not be able
to write good fiction, but we can all host
neighbors for an evening's reading. We are
attractive and winsome when in Christ's
name we ask questions and truly listen,
when we share the suffering of another,
and when we risk everything to be
authentic. From this perspective, it is the
ordinary believer who has the best shot at
being winsome in life and conversation. If
Paul or Lewis or Chest-erton were alive
today their fame would likely isolate
them, and raise barriers we don't have to
worry about.
That may be reassuring—it should be
reassuring—but it still is not an adequate
answer for the question we've raised. Just
what does it look like for a Christian—an
ordinary Christian—to be winsome and
attractive in our pluralistic world? How
might our conversations be graceful and
salty as we interact with our non-Christian
neighbors and friends? How can we be, in
other words, more like Jesus?
Beginning in the beginning
If we wish to reflect on this in the light of
Scripture, we will seek an answer in terms
of Creation and Redemption—since it is
the Fall, the other aspect of the Christian
world view which is causing the difficulty.
Since we share a common humanity with
unbelievers because like them we are made
in God's image, the doctrine of Creation
forms a foundation for Christian witness.
And since Christ is both our final example
and Lord for all of life, his humanity is the
ultimate demonstration of the grace of God
in redemption.
The Francis Schaeffer Institute (Covenant
Seminary), under the direction of
Jerram Barrs, has identified eight principles
of communication which are central to the
vision and work of the Institute. The principles
are their attempt to name vital
aspects of communication for the Christian
in a fallen world. The list can be best
understood as an effort to imagine
Christian witness in light of the doctrine of
Creation as demonstrated by Christ. To ask,
in other words, what our conversations
with non-Christians would look like if we
really believed in our heart of hearts what
the Bible teaches about every person being
created in the image of God and loved by
him even at the high cost of the death of
his beloved Son. The FAS Institute's list is
as follows:
Respect for those to whom we communicate.
Building bridges of commonality to the
listener.
Understanding what others believe.
Language comprehensible and familiar to
the listener.
Reasoned presentation of the message.
Clarity, a careful definition of the
message.
Challenge to both the mind and the
heart.
Imagination and creativity in presenting
the glorious gospel.
A list, it seems to me, worthy of being
meditated over and prayed for daily.
Consider a few of the implications
that follow if I truly believe my neighbors
are created in God's image. Among other
things, I will not be dismissive of them,
their ideas, their lifestyle, their choices, or
their values. Even if they seem repugnant to
me, or irrational, or inconceivable, or
entirely lacking in common
sense. That might be difficult, of
course, especially if they do not
return the favor, but such is the
cost of following Christ.
This means that I will
work hard to never be guilty of
misrepresenting what they think, or summarizing
it unfairly. I will honestly seek to
learn from them, realizing that they live in
God's world just as I do, and so will have
learned much that I do not yet know. I will
remember how painful it is to face up to
being mistaken, so that my probing of their
beliefs will be clothed in humility. I will
realize that calling them to repentance
requires me to demonstrate repentance,
since like them I am a sinner in need of
grace. Treating those with whom we disagree
with the respect worthy of the person
created in God's image is both disarming
and heartwarming because such love is in
short supply in this broken world. It may
not bring all to Christ, of course, but it will
mean that we are living out what we claim
to believe.
Because I am talking to someone made
in God's image, I will take the conversation
seriously instead of seeing it merely as a
means to an end. As I ask questions of
them appropriate to the moment, we might
indeed get to the big issues of life. I will not
imagine, however, that only a conversation
on that level is significant, for that too
would treat them with disdain. And just as
Creativity is expressed not just in art, but
in hospitality, warmth, and community
when we open our life and heart and home.
www.RansomFellowship.org 3
I resent being invited to "dessert" only to
discover I am at a sales presentation, so I
will never ask people to take a "survey"
which is merely a cleverly written set of
questions designed to manipulate the conversation
in a certain direction. I will refuse
"bait and switch" tactics, in other words,
because they treat people with contempt.
In short, treating people as if I truly
believe they are created in God's image
means nothing less than loving them as
Jesus loves them. Which means they should
truly believe that I would be willing to die
for them. !
~Denis Haack
Sources:
Word Bible Commentary: Colossians, Philemon by Peter
T. O'Brien (Waco, TX: Word Books; 1982) p.243 &
Fullness and Freedom: The Message of Colossians &
Philemon by R. C. Lucas (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press; 1980) p.175. "Awakening Christians
to Answer the World: An Introduction to the Francis
A. Schaeffer Institute at Covenant Theological
Seminary" (booklet) available from FSI, 12330
Conway Road, St. Louis, MO 63141.
Ransom Fellowship is a writing and speaking ministry designed to help
Christians develop skill in discernment—by which we mean skill in studying the
Scriptures and applying the truth of God's Word to all of life and culture.
For more information or to receive a sample copy of Ransom's newsletters,
Critique and Notes from Toad Hall, please log on to our website at:
www.RansomFellowship.org
Ransom Fellowship
1150 West Center Street
Rochester, MN 55902
Fax: 507.280.9535
Email: info@ransomfellowship.org
"#$%&'!(% )!*+*$ ) , $-&'!( .(/+/'%-#%%'!(
1. How might it be possible to determine the difference between someone taking offense at the gospel and someone taking offence at
us? What is our responsibility in this?
2. What was your reaction to the questions about the angry dentist? Is this an unfair metaphor? Why or why not?
3. Where do you see creativity in Jesus? How would you characterize his conversations with unbelievers? To what extent would he have
learned this in today's training in evangelism?
4. Discuss each of the eight principles (from the Francis Schaeffer Institute), unpacking their meaning and implications. Have you
known anyone who exemplifies them?
5. What problems or hesitations do you face in conversations with unbelievers? Would you hesitate to ask a neighbor about the
bumper sticker on his truck? Why or why not? How would you respond if he told of the actions of an offensive Christian?
6. What is the difference between seeking to share the gospel while talking to a friend, and manipulating the conversation?
7. "Treating people as if I truly believe they are created in God's image means nothing less than loving them as Jesus loves them.
Which means they should truly believe that I would be willing to die for them." Do you agree? Why or why not? What other implications
can you think of that follow from believing that our neighbors bear God's image?
8. Covenant before the Lord to begin praying daily for a non-Christian friend, by name, expressing willingness to be used of God to
bring them to Christ. Would they consider you their friend? How can you deepen that friendship?
!"#$%&'()%!*+)',(
PART TWO IN A SERIES ON WINSOMENESS.
A Publication of
Ransom Fellowship
1150 West Center Street
Rochester, MN 55902
www.RansomFellowship.org
Resources
for Equipping
Wise Christians
-.%&(+*)%/##01
2''1%2*1(3
!"#$#%&'(( Deepening Discipleship
Developing DiscernmenD t
D
D
D
www.RansomFellowship.org 1
!ccasionally I am asked what Christians
need to do to reach the postmodern
generation with the gospel.
My answer is that I am not particularly
impressed with the available programs, and
I don't believe ministry should be left to
professionals. I have no formula for reaching
the world, and believe none exists. I
am confident, however, that God is at
work, and that we can engage our post-
Christian culture with discernment. And
that we can incarnate the love of Christ
with four simple things: learning to listen,
being authentic, opening our lives
and homes with warm hospitality, and
giving the gift of unhurried time.
Simple things. They are also the
most radical expression of Christian
faithfulness possible in our postmodern
world. And they are so rare in evangelical
circles as to constitute a scandalous denial
of the gospel.
In reality, of course, they only sound
simple. Everything in our culture and
churches leans against them. On the deepest
level, however, they capture something
of what is at the heart of our cove-nant
calling before God. Best demonstrated by
Jesus, they define something of what it
means to be incarnational in a lost world.
Or as John Perkins put it, "Jesus did not
commute from heaven every day in a fiery
chariot."
Consider listening
When was the last time someone really listened
to you? I don't mean merely sat quietly
waiting their turn to speak—but truly
listening? Their body language and focus
made you the center of their attention,
demonstrating they cared about what you
thought and felt. Their questions proved
their interest in you, that you were worth
knowing. They listened actively, asking
more questions to be sure they understood.
They proved their willingness to enter your
world, with all its brokenness, even if it cost
them.
Can you think of a more meaningful
expression of love? If you can't remember
such a time, doesn't your heart ache for it?
The question I'd like to pose here, however,
is this: Do we listen this way to our non-
Christian friends and neighbors?
We often think of witnessing primarily
as proclamation: telling the gospel to someone
and inviting a response to the claims of
Christ. And there is truth to that, since
there is good news to tell. What must be
remembered, however, is that proclamation
always occurs within some sort of
relationship. Even when I speak to a
group—on a campus, perhaps, or at a lecture
at a Borders Book Store—I must
make human contact with my listeners. If
I fail to tell the gospel in terms they can
understand and find plausible, it is
"proclamation" only in the sense that
a public speaker is making noise
before a crowd.
Jesus faithfully proclaimed the
good news, but if we trace his ministry
in the Gospels we find he listened
as well as spoke. Which is a bit
surprising, since if there was anyone
who didn't need to ask questions to
learn what his listeners thought, surely it
was Jesus. His divinity allowed him to
know what was on their minds before they
opened their mouths. Occasionally he simply
acted on this knowledge, amazing his
audience with his insight into their hearts.
Repeatedly, though, he asked questions,
and in the ongoing conversation shaped his
message to their ideas, doubts, and fears.
His message never changed, but it also was
never merely regurgitated.
The importance of listening, however,
extends beyond our gaining information.
Asking questions and listening changes us.
!"#$%&'()%!*+)',(%2''1%2*1(3
-.%&(+*)%/##01
We can incarnate the love of Christ
by learning to listen, being authentic,
opening our lives and homes
with warm hospitality, and giving
the gift of unhurried time.
www.RansomFellowship.org 2
More specifically, it affects our reading of
the Scriptures.
To see what I mean by this, consider
the preaching ministry of pastors and teachers
within the church. I mention them here
not to put them on the spot, but because
their proclamation of the gospel is public
enough to provide a ready illustration.
"When we study the Bible," Timothy Keller
says, "we only extract answers to the questions
that we implicitly or explicitly
have on our hearts as we read it."
Some pastors, for example, concentrate
on theological books, and so
their sermons tend to reflect the
questions of interest to theologians.
Ordinary Christians may find it
interesting, but it is often far
removed from the concerns of
everyday life. "It is not really true
that some sermons are too academic
and thus lack application," Keller says.
"Rather, the preacher is applying the text to
the people's questions that he most understands—
other academics." Other pastors,
on the other hand, interact primarily with
believers. Christians feel "fed" by their sermons,
but hesitate to invite non-Christians.
The sermons address their concerns, but
not the concerns of unbelievers.
This applies to us as well. Our "people
context," Keller says, will shape our reading
of Scripture and our proclamation of the
gospel. So we must learn to listen, and we
can do that, Keller says, by varying our
reading and by varying those with whom
we talk.
Varying our reading is relatively easy—
assuming we've planned our lives to include
sufficient reading in the first place. We can
make sure our reading includes work by
thoughtful non-Christians who provide a
window of insight into the hearts and
minds of those who do not share our deepest
convictions and values. At a retreat I was
once asked what single magazine I found
most helpful in understanding our pluralistic,
postmodern culture. "Rolling Stone," I
said. "It allows me to listen in as postmoderns
discuss pop culture in light of the
questions and issues that most concerns
them." One participant commented that
they "wouldn't allow such filth" into their
home. Ignoring the fact that Jesus warns us
not to identify evil in externals but rather
in the heart, the point is not that everyone
should subscribe to Rolling Stone, but that
we each need to listen to those we are called
to reach with the gospel. It is true that
magazines produced by fallen people contain
the sad traces of their fallenness, but
who can claim exemption from that? "All
our righteous acts," Isaiah says, "are like
filthy rags" (64:6).
Entering another's world
Varying who we talk to is more difficult,
and certainly more threatening. At the least
we should always have one non-Christian
for whom we are praying by name, daily,
asking not just that they come to Christ
but that we be used in the process. As well,
we should each find natural ways to interact
meaningfully and regularly with unbelievers.
It may involve joining a book discussion
group, an investment club, or some
other forum where friendships can be
forged and where conversation flourishes.
Such opportunities abound, though most of
us are too busy to take advantage
of them.
Listening can also take a
more radical form. Students at
the Francis Schaeffer Institute,
for example, are given an
assignment worthy of being
emulated by all discerning
Christians. They attend a meeting
in the community where
they will be in the minority and
will find it easier to disagree than to agree.
Perhaps it's a lecture sponsored by pro-abortion
activists, or a talk on Buddhism or
neo-pagan spirituality. The assignment is to
listen, to demonstrate that we care enough
to learn about the things they hold most
dear. And when we do speak, to demonstrate
that, contrary to popular opinion,
evangelical Christians can be thoughtful
and discerning and compassionate—even
when outside our comfort zone.
"Christians are frequently too quick to
give answers," John Seel and Stephan Fisher
write. "Unless we can identify with a modern
seeker's sense of meaninglessness out of
our own life experience or out of empathetic
reflection, our answers to their deepest
longings will seem trite and sentimental."
The very thought of rendering the gospel
"# $ % & ' ! ( % ) ! * +*$ ) , $ - & ' ! ( . ( / +/' % - # % % ' ! (
1. Tell about a time when someone really listened to you.
2. What are some of the barriers to listening? Are there particular barriers that exist for Christians listening to non-Christians? How
should we respond to them?
3. To what extent does the doctrine of the Incarnation inform your definition of witness and Christian faithfulness? What are the
implication of Incarnation in following Christ?
4. "Christians are frequently too quick to give answers. Unless we can identify with a modern seeker's sense of meaninglessness out of
our own life experience or out of empathetic reflection, our answers to their deepest longings will seem trite and sentimental."
Discuss.
5. Consider the notion that learning to listen includes varying our reading. How would you assess your reading over the last year?
What should you plan for the next year?
6. Consider the notion that learning to listen involves varying whom we talk with. How would you assess your track record in this
regard? What plans should you make?
"Christians are frequently too quick to
give answers. Unless we can identify with
a modern seeker's sense of meaninglessness
out of our own life experience or out of
empathetic reflection, our answers will
seem trite and sentimental."
www.RansomFellowship.org 3
trite and sentimental should be a great horror.
Identifying with the seeker brings us
back, once again, to the notion of Incarnation,
of entering another person's world
to bring them the gospel. And though Jesus
did more than listen when he entered our
world, we certainly dare not do less.
Listening opens doors into hearts and
minds and lives so our good news makes
sense. Listening also changes us, just as the
Incarnation forever changed the Second
Person of the Trinity. We will read the Bible
differently, attuned to a set of questions
that are the heart's cry of our neighbors.
Listening is winsome because it is an
expression of compassion. An entering into
someone else's broken life, at the cost of
sharing that brokenness. If our listening is
mere silence masking our preparation for
the next assault on their beliefs or values or
lifestyle, our hypocrisy will be evident and
the conversation soon terminated. Never
was Christ accused of such duplicity. His
listening was earnest and his questioning
sincere. Sinners flocked to be with him and
to hear him talk. Perhaps if we learn to listen
we'll find them more ready to listen to
us. But even if they don't, we'll know we
have loved them as our Master loves us. !
~Denis Haack
Sources: Perkins quoted in Postmodern Youth Ministry
by Tony Jones (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan; 2001)
p. 70. "Preaching the Gospel in a Post-Modern World"
by Timothy Keller, a course syllabus in the Doctor of
Ministry program at Reformed Theological Seminary.
"Radiohead's Kid A" by Seel and Fisher in Critique #9-
2001 (pp. 14-15).
Ransom Fellowship is a writing and speaking ministry designed to help
Christians develop skill in discernment—by which we mean skill in studying the
Scriptures and applying the truth of God's Word to all of life and culture.
For more information or to receive a sample copy of Ransom's newsletters,
Critique and Notes from Toad Hall, please log on to our website at:
www.RansomFellowship.org
Ransom Fellowship
1150 West Center Street
Rochester, MN 55902
Fax: 507.280.9535
Email: info@ransomfellowship.org
!"#$%&'()%!*+)',(
PART THREE IN A SERIES ON WINSOMENESS.
A Publication of
Ransom Fellowship
1150 West Center Street
Rochester, MN 55902
www.RansomFellowship.org
Resources
for Equipping
Wise Christians
-.%&(+*)%/##01
2''1%2*1(3
!"#$#%&'(( Deepening Discipleship
Developing DiscernmenD t
D
D
D
www.RansomFellowship.org 1
!t a recent conference for pastors I was
amused during the Q&A session by
how few questions were actually
raised. It's not that no one was interested in
participating. There was a long line at the
microphone in the aisle; so many, in fact
that only a fraction had a chance to speak
before time was up. What was amusing was
that almost no one actually asked a question.
Instead, they made comments, sharing
a quote or telling a story or expanding on
some point that one of the speakers
had made. The moderator mentioned—
more than once—that the
hour was intended for asking questions
of the speakers, but his
reminders seemed to fall on deaf
ears. A few of the participants asked
questions, but most contributions
were little monologues. The tone was that
of proclamation rather than questioning, of
seeking to instruct rather than being content
to listen.
As I sat there, my attitude slowly shifted
from amusement to irritation. I had paid
good money to attend this conference, and
the idea was to learn from the speakers, not
hear every Tom, Dick and Harry pontificate
about their latest hobby horse. My irritation
turned into disgust, and I walked out.
It was only later that I recognized my selfrighteousness,
and remembered that I, too,
prefer proclamation to listening. Not only
is asking good questions hard work, but sad
as this is to confess, I tend to prefer almost
anything I have to say, to anything you
have to say.
There are other reasons why many of
us aren't good at asking questions. We
have never practiced the skill, and so aren't
very comfortable with trying. Or we have
a limited understanding of what teaching
or mentoring or evangelizing includes. We
imagine it to be merely a transfer of information
instead of a dynamic process in
which we walk alongside another person,
helping them discover truth. And then
there is the ever-present problem of busyness.
Let's face it: simply telling you what
to think takes far less time than helping
you think it through. Less effort, too. And
I maintain more control over the conversation
if we stay away from questions, since
I can never be quite sure where your
answers will lead us. It's troubling for the
discussion to wander off into areas about
which I know little, or worse, have doubts
about.
In Church on Sunday, Work on Monday,
authors Laura Nash and Scotty McLennan
are concerned that little meaningful conversation
occurs between the Church and the
business world, even though many on both
sides desire it. And now because businesspeople
are open to spiritual concerns in a
new way, a host of programs and experts
have arisen to address that need, but the
spirituality taught in these seminars is seldom
Chris-tian in any meaningful sense.
Though Nash and McLennan identify
numerous reasons for the failure to
communicate, and though there is culpability
on both sides, one reason they
identify is that Christian leaders don't
ask questions or listen. "Even among
those who were enthusiastic about possibly
creating a forum or other occasion
to explore faith and work," they write,
"few [clergy] suggested that they were eager
to hear what businesspeople had to say
about their impressions of the tension they
faced at work. Feeling they had seen just
about enough of what business really cares
for—consumerism, selfishness, careerism,
insensitivity—they prepared themselves for
lecturing, not listening."
Windows into hearts & minds
Before we get too critical of those clergy, we
should consider whether there aren't times
when we act similarly. Whether there aren't
!"#$%&'()%!*+)',(%2''1%2*1(3
-.%&(+*)%/##01
Many of us think of witnessing as
almost exclusively proclamation, with
a few questions thrown in as a staged
tool to launch the presentation.
www.RansomFellowship.org 2
situations in which we assume we already
know enough about the other person to
skip asking questions or listening, and simply
get to the proclamation we want to
give.
One place this weakness tends to show
up is in our interactions with non-Christians.
Our preference for telling rather than
listening, of proclaiming rather than asking
questions is one reason I think so many
non-Christians find many presentations of
the gospel to be unattractive and less than
fully personal or engaging or winsome.
Many of us think of witnessing as almost
exclusively proclamation, perhaps with a
few questions thrown in as a staged tool to
launch the presentation. The questions can
have the added problem of being duplicitous,
in the form of a fake "survey,"
the results of which are
meaningless except to provide an
opportunity for the witnesser to
say what they intended to say all
along. But even for those of us
who eschew such techniques,
asking sensitive, creative, and
appropriately probing questions can be a
challenge. Learning to ask such questions is
part of learning to listen, and both are skills
that can be developed and practiced, by
God's grace, as we seek to live winsomely
before a watching world.
If we are to demonstrate the power and
attractiveness of the gospel, we must exhibit
a true authenticity as the people of God.
Entering into a conversation with a non-
Christian is not a signal to launch a technique,
but a God-ordained opportunity to
have a relationship with someone made in
the image of God. People made in God's
image should be loved as we desire to be
loved, by being listened to with care and
attention. And because we live in an
increasingly pluralistic world, among people
who do not necessarily share our deepest
convictions and values, asking questions
and listening takes on added importance.
"We need to learn to ask questions that
will help us understand the heart and mind
of each individual we meet," Jerram Barrs
says. "The fundamental issue here is one of
love. Do we care enough for people that we
want to get to know them, so that what we
say to them will be... a word fitly framed to
touch the inner being of the unique person
before us?"
That's all fine and good, someone
might object, but if the gospel is proclaimed,
surely we can't complain about
that. There can't be any harm in telling
someone the truth, even if it happens to be
in terms they don't fully understand or
appreciate. Not so, Barrs insists. "Evangelism
that bypasses understanding runs the
risk of offending people and turning them
away from Christ. Such evangelism makes
them feel treated without respect or discernment,
just a number on the end of a
sales pitch. Or they may sense they are
being used to assuage our sense of guilt
about not doing evangelism, or that we are
doing some spiritual good work that will
make God pleased with us but that shows
no concern for them."
There's another problem with evangelism
without understanding. It is contrary to
the example set by Christ in the Scriptures.
He didn't treat Nicodemus (John 3) and the
Samaritan woman (John 4) to identical presentations.
Neither did Paul say the same
things to the people of Antioch in Pisidia
(Acts 13) as to the people of Athens (Acts
17). Both Christ and Paul knew whom they
were talking to, and spoke accordingly. And
lest we think that Christ, because of his
divinity, and Paul because he was an apostle,
came by their insight into their audience
effortlessly, consider the text again.
Both asked questions.
Willing to learn
Here's an even more radical idea. As we ask
questions of non-Christians, we must be
prepared and eager to learn from them, not
just gain ammunition or an opportunity for
the gospel presentation that is to come. The
conversation itself should have integrity. We
are talking about having a relationship—
whether briefly as we sit beside them on a
plane or long-term as neighbors who can
become good friends—with people for
whom Christ died. And though they may
know nothing of saving grace at the
moment, they may, through God's common
grace have much to teach us about
many things.
In the 1980s, Peter and Miranda
Harris established A Rocha, a bird observatory
and conservation center in Portugal.
They welcomed strangers into their home,
inviting them to help conduct field studies,
enjoy the creation, and care for the earth.
They began A Rocha because they are
Christians and so take seriously the biblical
command to care tenderly for God's world.
John Stott calls A Rocha "an exciting, contemporary
form of Christian mission." Yet,
as we might imagine, things don't always
flow smoothly in such a setting. People
come and go, and studies of migratory
birds must follow the bird's schedule, come
what may. "Many of those who stay here
are far more impressive and seem far more
calm and coherent than we do," Peter
Harris writes. "Among our early visitors
were a couple with three small children,
unmarried Vegans with an unswerving
determination to live sensitively in the fragile
environment of the planet. It
is quite a challenge to
encounter such radical commitment.
Their serenity was
impressive, not least because at
the time we were trying to cope
with a particularly full house.
[Their] quasi-Buddhist reverence
was no path to God, although there
were many things they could teach us."
Sometimes, Harris says, Chris-tian visitors
would "almost begin a conspiracy" to influence
the non-Christians to believe in Jesus.
"We would have no part of that," he says.
"We have no option but to be honest about
him and ourselves... I can think of many
conversations with many people, and often
they are in the form of an adventure,
because genuine questions need genuine
answers. By definition, if we are going to listen
to each other, we do not know where
the conversation will lead us. Our relationships
with each other and those who stay
with us can be taken at face value, and hold
no hidden agenda."
The community lived out at A Rocha
is far from perfect, but it is a setting in
which both Christians and non-Christians
can come together, learn from one another,
work together to care for and enjoy creation,
and converse as those who bear God's
image. And because Peter and Miranda
Harris and their staff are believers, it is a
place where numerous people have come to
look at birds but leave having seen both
birds and the truth of the gospel.
Comfortable with unbelievers
There is an offense to the cross, but a gracefull
life and manner of conversing is both
warmly personal and profoundly attractive.
"Do we care enough for people that we want
to get to know them, so that what we say
will be a word fitly framed to touch the
inner being of the unique person before us?"
www.RansomFellowship.org 3
That is why sinners flocked to Jesus.
Yet, too often followers of Christ are
uncomfortable around non-Christians. We
feel ill at ease, and unable to simply enjoy a
conversation with them that is relaxed and
personal. "Not only did he come from
heaven to earth to make contact with
mankind," Stott says of Christ, "but during
his public ministry he mixed freely with
the world. He attracted sinners. They knew
that he had come to call them to repentance
and that his message proclaimed
righteousness. Yet, far from being repelled,
‘tax collectors and sinners were all drawing
near to hear him.' He befriended them. He
did not seem to be at all embarrassed by
them; he was at ease in their company. His
viewpoint was radically different from that
of the Pharisees. ‘Pharisee' means separatist.
They would gather up their robes
and recoil in self-righteous horror from the
prostitute; Jesus allowed a prostitute
to wash his feet with her tears
and wipe them with her hair. The
Pharisees had no dealings with
publicans, regarding them as politically
and morally despicable; Jesus
entered publicans' homes and ate
with them. The Pharisees threw stones at
lepers to make them keep their distance;
Jesus stretched out his hand and touched a
leper into health." Christ never for a
moment compromised nor did he ever
withdraw. In fact, he was on comfortably
intimate terms with the sort of people
many Christians feel uneasy being around.
"Are we like Jesus or the Pharisees?" Stott
asks. "We find the company of Christians
congenial and are uncomfortable in the
presence of non-Christians. And in this we
are poles apart from Jesus Christ."
Though it is true that I might have
more in common with a fellow Christian
than with an unbeliever, discomfort and
unease should not loom between me and
my unbelieving friends. They too are
made in God's image, and like me, are
sinners in need of grace. They are creative
and significant, have much to teach me,
and wrestle with similar questions,
doubts, and fears. We would do well to
become better conversationalists—and
something good conversationalists all have
in common is the ability to ask questions,
a willingness to listen, and an eagerness to
learn. Becoming more comfortable with
these simple skills may make us more
comfortable with people. Comfortable
with conversations that are allowed to be
natural and holy spirited. Including conversations
with people who do not share
our deepest values and convictions.
Skill in asking questions
By God's grace all of us can develop skill in
asking questions. Not as a technique, but as
a true desire to listen, to understand, and to
befriend. There are a number of ways we
can begin to do so.
First, we should pray for grace that
we might grow in the skill. And remember
as we pray that we are addressing the
Lord who asked questions and listened
with care to the answers. Not because he
was clueless about things, but because he
showed love by conversing with people in
a way that demonstrated his care for
them.
Related to that, we could spend time
meditating on the biblical texts in which
God (in the Old Testament) and Christ
(in the New) ask questions. What were
the questions like, why were they asked,
and how did they probe the inner recesses
of hearts and minds? Helpful in this study
is Dick Keyes' lecture, "Jesus the Questioner"
given as a workshop at the 2002
Rochester L'Abri Conference—an audio
tape can be ordered online (www.sound
word.com).
We can also learn from people who
are good at it. Some have written books
in which their giftedness in asking keenly-
crafted questions is evident. Though as
a postmodern philosopher he believes
that the question, rather than any final
answer is all that we have, Christopher
Phillips has dedicated his life to leading
thoughtful discussions. His Socrates Café
is a lively exchange of questions and ideas
about things that matter. Sharon Parks is
similarly helpful in her book Big
Questions, Worthy Dreams: Mentoring
Young Adults in Their Search for Meaning,
Purpose, and Faith. And don't miss Steven
Garber's book The Fabric of Faithfulness.
The product of a mind and heart deeply
immersed in the truth of God's word,
Fabric not only teaches us about knowing
and doing, it also demonstrates how a
master teacher asks questions that uncover
truth.
Better yet, begin to pray for a mentor
who can demonstrate the skill. Attend a
seminar led by Steven Garber or Donald
Guthrie—two godly teachers who are especially
gifted in asking questions. Seek to
come alongside someone who is a comfortable
conversationalist and learn from them.
We can also simply begin to actively
trust God by asking more questions in conversations,
whether with individuals or in
groups. Over the years Margie and I have
often covenanted together to "proclaim" less
at the Bible study we were about to lead,
and to teach primarily through asking questions.
We've worked hard to develop questions
ahead of time, and then tried to be
sensitive listeners during the study so we
could ask questions that prompt further
reflection and discussion. And we've evaluated
afterwards, seeking to learn from our
mistakes and giving
thanks when by grace
we've been used to stimulate
people to think in
new ways. When we have
someone over for supper,
we try to ask questions to
learn something of their spiritual pilgrimage,
their doubts and ideas and hopes.
These are small steps, perhaps, but they've
helped us treat people as if they were truly
made in God's image. Be willing to be
pushed outside your comfort zone. If someone's
answer to a question takes the conversation
into an area about which you know
nothing, relax. It's a God-ordained opportunity
to learn, to walk by faith, and when
necessary, to say, "I haven't got a clue."
A few things are certain. It's amazing
how much you learn when you listen. It's
also amazing how cared for we feel when
someone asks us a question and then really
listens to the answer. And it's amazing how
the gospel is so rich and so deep that it
addresses the reality of every person with
their own ideas and values and yearnings.
Not just in some general way, like a mortar
shell lobbed in their vicinity, but like a
sword piercing down into the recesses of
their darkest secrets. They may reject that
piercing, of course, but at least they won't be
able to dismiss it like they can the mortar
shell, which is so impersonal and unspecific.
They may even imagine the mortar wasn't
meant for them.
Learning to ask questions and listen,
instead of simply issuing proclamations,
doesn't guarantee that the world will
Something good conversationalists all have in
common is the ability to ask questions, a willingness
to listen, and an eagerness to learn.
4
believe. It may make us believers less argumentative
and more winsome, however.
And for those of us who wish to be like
Christ, that would certainly be a step in the
right direction. !
~Denis Haack
Sources:
Church on Sunday, Work on Monday: The Challenge of
Fusing Christian Values with Business Life by Laura
Nash and Scotty McLennan (San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass; 2001) p. 130. The Heart of Evangelism by
Jerram Barrs (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books; 2001) p.
234, 237. Evangelism: Why & How by John R. W.
Stott (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press; 1962)
pp. 23-25. Under the Bright Wings by Peter Harris
(London: Hodder & Stoughton; 1993) pp. 90-91, 95.
www.RansomFellowship.org
"#$%&'()% *(+,+$ * - $.&'() !)/,/'%.#%%'()
1. Can you think of a time you were taught something important by being asked questions instead of simply being told about it? How
did it make you feel? How effective was the learning? Why do we find it difficult to ask questions? To listen?
2. Have you known anyone that was a gifted conversationalist? What was their impact?
3. Consider the quote by Peter Harris about learning from the Vegan couple that stayed with them at A Rocha. What is your response?
Why? Also consider the quote about how they pursued conversations with those who came. What is your response? Why? Should
we never have "an agenda" or "strategy" when talking to non-Christians? Why or why not? If you think an agenda permissible, are
there any limits to this agenda? What would they be?
4. Several reasons were listed as to why we may feel uncomfortable in conversations with non-Christians. Can you think of others?
5. A Christian argues that in a conversation with an unbeliever, we should use the time when they speak not primarily to listen, but as
an opportunity to prayerfully consider what we should say next, and how we can turn the conversation towards the gospel. Another
argues that we don't really have much to listen to, since at root everything is simple: everyone is a sinner and needs forgiveness. Just
get the conversation around to that and present Christ. How would you respond? Why?
6. Do you agree with the notion that our faith will not be winsome to unbelievers if we are uncomfortable with them, or ashamed of
being seen with them, or uncomfortable conversing with them? Why or why not? Consider the quote by John R. W. Stott on the
example of Christ. Do you agree? Why or why not?
7. What plans should you make to develop skill in asking questions?
Ransom Fellowship is a writing and speaking ministry designed to help
Christians develop skill in discernment—by which we mean skill in studying the
Scriptures and applying the truth of God's Word to all of life and culture.
For more information or to receive a sample copy of Ransom's newsletters,
Critique and Notes from Toad Hall, please log on to our website at:
www.RansomFellowship.org
Ransom Fellowship
1150 West Center Street
Rochester, MN 55902
Fax: 507.280.9535
Email: info@ransomfellowship.org
- 1 -
The Weight of Glory
by C.S. Lewis
Preached originally as a sermon in