Assuming on the way to denying

David Gibson has some perceptive thoughts on "assumed evangelicalism" (HT: Rob Wilkerson). And what is that? Gibson explains that in a given group the first generation of Christians proclaims the gospel, the next assumes it, and the third denies it. It's the "assumed" stage that's the most dangerous:

Assumed evangelicalism believes and signs up to the gospel. It certainly does not deny the gospel. But in terms of priorities, focus, and direction, assumed evangelicalism begins to give gradually increasing energy to concerns other than the gospel and key evangelical distinctives, to gradually elevate secondary issues to a primary level, to be increasingly worried about how it is perceived by others and to allow itself to be increasingly influenced both in content and method by the prevailing culture of the day.

A possible consequence of assumed evangelicalism is legalism:

One of the hallmarks of an assumed gospel in an evangelical church is that the gospel is regarded as being for the outsiders, the non-Christians who ever so rarely slip in to one of the services. When we limit the gospel in this way to unbelievers we begin to adopt extra ways of relating to God and to others, and they all fall under the label of legalism. This is the opposite of the gospel of grace - striving to be acceptable first of all to God and then to others by keeping rules and by outward behaviour. . . .

The antidote to legalism is always to recover the sheer scandal of the gospel of grace. . . . the question to ask is: when was the last time my pulse quickened because of the wonder of God's forgiveness of my sin that was so clearly being presented?

Let's keep that antidote in mind, shall we?