Is the "Social Gospel" Replacing the Gospel?

Seems like everywhere I turn I keep hearing and seeing preachers and ministries referring to the gospel as a partnership between the message of salvation and feeding the poor and social activism. I see it popping up all over the place. The Emergents are obsessed with it. Rick Warren wants to save the world from physical suffering with his P.E.A.C.E. plan and tell you how to live with his S.H.A.P.E. plan. Guys like Shane Claiborne are going to take us back to the hippie movement where everyone lives in a commune and who knows maybe you'll see a photograph of him inserting daisies in the rifles of our soldiers in Iraq. The church I left last year recently did a sermon series on the Kingdom of God being about feeding the poor and how we have been neglecting the "other half of the gospel". Strange, I have never seen this much passion and excitement when talking about saving souls from hell. But boy when you talk about meeting people's physical needs WOW now you're talking. This is something we can get excited about!!! This is something people can understand, unlike the gospel which might make people mad at us and makes us look unlikable, undesirable and like social rejects--not cool, not cool.

Are these two methods of evangelism really the same thing? I am very reluctant to draw that conclusion. Have we really lost that much confidence in the power of God through the gospel to change lives? To really change lives? I know every time someone brings up an issue like this there is a long line of people hurling questions such as "don't you care about the poor?" You mean to tell me you are just going to go up to some poor starving person and give them a tract without doing anything about their physical condition?"----and my (obvious) answer....NO! I 'm not going to do that.

Here is the distinction I am trying to make. I see christians getting excited when challenged to help the needy and see the potential of the physical good a social justice movement can achieve (I am not including Jim Wallis' and Tony Campolo's version of social justice which I believe is very politically liberal movement and spiritually deceptive). I also see christians being very apathetic when encouraged to speak of Jesus Christ to their friends and neighbors. I am concerned because I see christian leaders in churches so reluctant to verbally explain the gospel message to the lost and ministers unwilling to speak of the offensive portions of the gospel for fear of appearing intolerant and judgmental but very willing to do something for others which anybody can do. Let's keep in mind that Muslims, Jews, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Politicians, the Red Cross, and the United Nations can all feed the poor and provide physical aid. These can also and do get involved in social justice movements. They can be generous, compassionate, and self-sacrificing to the poor and downtrodden. So I would like someone to answer me-what is the difference between them and us? Do we need to be reminded that the one thing we christians can do which the false religions and social justice organizations cannot do is offer salvation from an eternity in hell - God's redemption through the blood of Christ's crucifixion on the cross and his resurrection. That is what makes us unique. That is what will make them not like us at some point. They will love us if we keep feeding them. Just like they would love anyone who is so generous. Shouldn't the proclamation of the gospel message be highest on the priority list for christians? Shouldn't this be our primary concern and addressing physical needs secondary? Shouldn't this be our motive for evangelism? Shouldn't this be the subject of our earnest and desperate praying? Have we lost confidence in the gospel and in God to raise the spiritually dead?

I don't think you will find too many martyrs dying for the cause of feeding the hungry--who would kill someone for that? But upset the apple cart by preaching the WHOLE council of God and you may (will) ruffle some feathers along the way.

There is a whole lot more which could be said about this. One thing is for certain--this "social gospel" trend is not going away, it will only intensify. It fits very well in our humanistic, politically correct, man-applauding, man-pleasing, felt needs postmodern, be whoever YOU want to be context.

For further reading this article from Crossroads website sheds some light on some aspects of how the social gospel movement has influenced and infiltrated christianity through the years.

Here is an excerpt:

Rauschenbusch introduced Jesus "not as one who would come to save sinners from their sins but as one who had a 'social passion' for society." He and his comrades established the "Brotherhood of the Kingdom," which unified like-minded church leaders under a common socialist quest for an earthly "Kingdom of God."

Their plan would have fit our times! It called for political reform, ecumenical unity, "social justice" (ending poverty), and global peace. To justify its place in "Christian" theology, words like redemption and regeneration were redefined to fit their socialist ideals.

Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Popular church leaders use the same strategy today! Pastor Brian McLaren's recent book, The Secret Message of Jesus, twists God's Word into an endorsement of an earthly, interfaith Kingdom. Likewise, Tony Campolo's hope of earthly perfection mocks the Biblical promise of eternal life:

"The gospel is not about... pie-in-the-sky when they die.... It is imperative that the up and coming generation recognize that the biblical Jesus was committed to the realization of a new social order in this world.... Becoming a Christian, therefore, is a call to social action."