Escaping the Traps of Religion and Irreligion

Have you ever noticed how much your sense of God’s love seems to rise and fall with your performance? On a day when you’ve prayed faithfully, served well, or even preached a strong sermon, you feel secure—almost as if God must be smiling down on you. But on a day when you’ve stumbled into sin, skipped prayer, or failed in ministry, you feel distant, ashamed, or even unworthy.

That quiet assumption—that God’s love for us goes up or down depending on how we’re doing spiritually—is one of the most common struggles in the Christian life. It reveals how easily we confuse justification (our standing before God) with sanctification (our growth in holiness).

When we tether God’s acceptance to our performance, we drift toward religion (legalism). When we presume on His grace and downplay His call to holiness, we drift toward irreligion (license). Both ditches distort the gospel.

But there is a better way—a third way. The gospel doesn’t swing between these extremes. It secures us in Christ’s finished work and empowers us to live in both grace and truth.

Covered in Robes We Didn’t Sew

One of the most beautiful pictures of salvation comes from Isaiah:

“I will greatly rejoice in the Lord; my soul shall exult in my God, for he has clothed me with the garments of salvation; he has covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decks himself like a priest with a beautiful headdress, and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels” (Isaiah 61:10, ESV).

Isaiah doesn’t exult in his own achievements. He rejoices because God has clothed him. The imagery is intimate and celebratory—a wedding, a covenant, a robe of righteousness that he did not create or earn.

This is the essence of justification. God has declared us righteous, not because of our good days or bad days, but because of Christ. Yet how often do we live as if the robe depends on the quality of our prayer life, our ministry fruit, or our daily obedience?

• On our best days, we quietly assume we’ve earned a little more of God’s favour.

• On our worst days, we fear we’ve lost it.

But Isaiah reminds us: our righteousness is not stitched together by our performance. It’s a gift, freely given. We are clothed in Christ Himself (Galatians 3:27).

This is why the gospel must be distinguished from its two counterfeits:

• Religion (legalism): *“I obey, therefore I am accepted.”*

• Irreligion (license): *“I’m accepted, therefore obedience doesn’t matter.”*

The gospel says something entirely different: “I am accepted in Christ, therefore I obey.”

The Two Thieves of the Christian Life

The early church father Tertullian once observed: “Just as Christ was crucified between two thieves, so this doctrine of justification is ever crucified between two opposite errors.”

Those two “thieves” are religion and irreligion, and they show up everywhere in Scripture. Take Jesus’ parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector:

“The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector…beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other” (Luke 18:11–14, ESV).

If you were sitting in the crowd that day, you would have expected Jesus to commend the Pharisee. He was respected, disciplined, and morally upright. But Jesus shocks His listeners by declaring the tax collector—the despised sinner—the one who goes home justified. Why? Because the Pharisee trusted in himself, while the tax collector cried out for mercy.

Religion is dangerous because it blinds us to our need for grace. Irreligion is dangerous because it blinds us to God’s holiness. Both are ways of avoiding God as Saviour. Both are self-salvation projects—one through self-righteousness, the other through self-indulgence.

Jesus Between the Extremes

In John 8, religious leaders drag before Jesus a woman caught in adultery. They demand judgment.

“Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her… Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more” (John 8:7-11, ESV).

To the Pharisees, Jesus exposes their hypocrisy: they too are guilty. To the woman, He extends mercy—but not license. He does not say, “You’re free to keep living as you please.” He says, “Neither do I condemn you…go, and sin no more.”

Do you see the balance? Jesus doesn’t crush her under the weight of religion, nor does He excuse her sin in the spirit of irreligion. Instead, Jesus offers the gospel: no condemnation, and a new life.

This is what John means when he says, “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us… full of grace and truth” (John 1:14, ESV). Jesus does not compromise either side. He embodies both perfectly.

The Lostness of Both Sons

Jesus makes the point even more explicit in His parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11–32).

• The younger son represents irreligion. He rejects his father, squanders his inheritance, and ends up in ruin.

• The older son represents religion. He stays home, obeys outwardly, but resents his father’s grace when his brother returns.

Both sons are lost.

Both misunderstand the father.

And both need grace.

Neither of the sons are the hero of the story. The real hero is the father. He runs to embrace the rebellious younger son. He goes out to plead with the resentful older son. He extends costly love to both.

And in doing so, Jesus shows us the true heart of God. The gospel does not affirm the younger son’s rebellion or the older son’s pride. It exposes both as dead ends and offers a third way: the way.

Author:Damian Grateley

What is contextualisation in Japan?

When a Japanese pastor had just begun his ministry, a missionary who had recently arrived in Japan asked him: ‘Why do so many churches in Japan still follow the worship style of the US from the 1970s and 80s, even now in the 2000s? Have they not contextualised to the Japanese context?’

Puzzled by how to respond, the pastor later encountered another question while interacting with pastors from other churches and missionaries, one that seemed to lead to an answer. It was this: while Japanese pastors had faithfully reproduced the worship styles inherited from overseas missionaries, had they not largely neglected the so-called trial-and-error process of “contextualisation” – adapting it to their own culture?

Generally in Japan, change occurs gradually, and dramatic paradigm shifts are rare. There tends to be a greater emphasis on the “correct way” than on exploring new ideas or methods. One can imagine this has influenced the preaching style of many pastors today to no small degree.

Yet simultaneously, the root of the problem may lie in the fact that the initial missionaries and church leaders conveyed only the “methods of evangelism” from their own church cultures, without sufficiently explaining the context in which those methods naturally emerged. This context could be described as tools such as worldview, cultural analysis, and biblical theology, or as a sound “doctrinal foundation” and “theological vision”.

No matter how modern an approach is adopted in mission or worship styles, or how the gospel is communicated in ways most modern young people can understand and accept, as time passes and eras change, it tends to drift outside the framework of the gospel, significantly reduce its elements, or become a single form of that church's particular “obsession” or “tradition”. Having experienced this, the mentioned pastor arrived at this further question: “Could it be that Japanese churches have been repeating the same pattern for decades?” That is, the suspicion that they assumed successful overseas models would function in Japan too, applying them across generations with little contextualisation. While such models might bear fruit for a time in places sharing common conditions or contexts with overseas ones, even that approach eventually becomes tradition or form. He wondered if this was simply a cycle repeating itself. It was at this time that the pastor who read ‘Center Church’ stated the following.

My first impression was, “This is probably just another Christian manual recommending overseas missionary success stories.” However, I realised my preconceptions were mistaken almost immediately upon starting to read it. What Tim Keller addressed in this book was: 1) correcting our grasp of the gospel, that is, understanding “what the gospel is”, and 2) beginning by understanding one's own culture and context through a biblical worldview. It also made me realise that everyone carries a certain bias shaped by their own cultural background and the culture they've been immersed in. Such distorted lenses influence us, causing us to lean towards our own cultural preferences and traditions even when reading Scripture. I felt the danger that unless we first become aware of and address this tendency within ourselves, we risk not only failing to contextualise correctly but even distorting the gospel itself in our communication.

With the above questions in mind, this article will introduce some steps necessary for sound contextualisation, drawing reference from Center Church.

• A Biblical Worldview Essential for Contextualisation

The first requirement, as mentioned earlier, is cultivating a solid biblical worldview. One might assume Christians naturally possess such a worldview. Regrettably, this is not the reality. The biblical worldview referred to here is a perspective for re-understanding the world's prevailing values, culture, and problems from a foundation grounded in Scripture. Naturally, this encompasses an immense scope, but let us consider one example.

Consider the question, “What is a human being?” If one cannot answer this question from a biblical worldview, it risks distorting one’s approach to nurturing and equipping people—for instance, in discipleship training.

When one pastor began planting a church, there was a missionary who held the view that “we are not born sinners”. Furthermore, she insisted, “We, having been forgiven and saved by Christ, are no longer sinners!” When asked, “When, then, do we consider ourselves sinners in our lives?”, the answer came: “From the moment we first sinned as infants”. It was clear that such a view of sin would cause problems in continuing discipleship training. That is, if sin is merely action, then the call to repentance becomes an approach that simply urges the correction of sinful behaviour.

Yet, as David clearly states in Psalm 51, we are sinners by nature. Simultaneously, Psalm 139, also by David, presents a scene of self-awareness as praise for how wonderfully we are formed and how precious we are before God. According to Scripture, we were created in God's image, yet through the Fall, we simultaneously departed from it and became broken beings (Romans 1). Thus, the Bible presents two seemingly contradictory perspectives. Viewing this tension through the lens of the Gospel allows us to confront the reality of our sin and wickedness while simultaneously holding fast to the hope that we are already redeemed and justified through Christ's cross and resurrection, and that one day Christ will return to restore all things completely. In this sense, the nurturing and growth of disciples is founded upon the understanding that we see, in everyone, a glimmer of the dignity inherent in being created in God's image, while simultaneously facing the reality of sin together. It does not end merely with correcting actions or thoughts.

Thus, our biblical understanding and judgement regarding human existence and societal problems profoundly shapes our practical actions: how we proclaim the gospel, teach, disciple, and see both ourselves and society transformed within the church.

• Understanding and Engaging with Culture

Such a biblically comprehensive perspective also fosters a healthier understanding and engagement with the surrounding culture, viewed through the lens of the gospel. For example, according to Romans 1-2, culture too, through the innate conscience given by God and His common grace, manifests elements of the Kingdom's values to some degree in every culture. That is, when we engage with culture, we can discern elements worthy of praise, reflecting God's image. Yet simultaneously, completely distorted elements, far removed from biblical values, are also present. Recognising these dual aspects is vital, yet if leaders lean excessively towards either extreme, their approach to ministry and church formation tends to become equally extreme. 

One church might deem all worldly cultural values utterly evil and attempt to build a church completely isolated from society. Conversely, a church that merely praises the positive aspects of culture, aligning too closely with worldly values and diluting the truth of the gospel, risks becoming indistinguishable from the world itself. Indeed, we have witnessed both extremes, and it is precisely for this reason that we recognise the temptation and struggle to either over-contextualise or under-contextualise. Furthermore, we should understand that these two extremes ultimately lead to the same problem: neither fulfils the calling to be “the light of the world and the salt of the earth” (Matthew 5:13-16).

This is precisely why we prioritise standing on the Gospel first. We then aim for contextualisation in a way that does not lose the Gospel itself. For the very person of Jesus is the embodiment of contextualisation. Tim Keller explains it thus:

‘And the most compelling example of all is that the Incarnation itself was contextualisation. God did not merely become human; He became a specific kind of human, a Galilean Jew with particular cultural baggage. In doing so, He made it possible for us to understand and receive who He is. Jesus is the “Word” (John 1:14) made “flesh”.’

Steps of Contextualisation

Following this model of Christ, Centre Church proposes the following steps for contextualisation.

Entering the Culture: First, just as Jesus entered our world, we too must first “enter the culture”. As mentioned earlier, rather than overtly rejecting the surrounding culture, we need to understand the position, mindset, suffering, conflicts, or stories of the people living within that culture. We should use elements worthy of praise or those we can empathise with as an “entry point”.

Challenging the Culture: Next, we must not merely praise certain aspects of the culture. Just as Jesus taught on earth, explained the Kingdom of God, and demonstrated the reality of our sin through the cross, we must also point out—with love and truth—those parts of the culture that have strayed from or distorted the Kingdom of God. We must identify the areas where it fails to provide solutions to people's life problems, true fulfilment, or joy; where it malfunctions; and where its values are contradictory. For example, in Japan, while there is a desire for peace and harmony, there is also a tendency to avoid speaking honest opinions or truth out of fear of disrupting harmony or of what others might think. 

Appealing to the Culture (Audience): Within such broken values, what solution does the gospel truth—which values both harmony and individuality—offer?　In Japan, which seeks peace and harmony, we can show the hope that only in Christ can both harmony and individuality be respected, thus preserving true peace and harmony. Conversely, if the fear of others' judgement prevents speaking truth honestly, there is comfort in knowing that only in Christ are we truly liberated from all bondage. Even if criticised for speaking truth, our identity – loved and accepted by God in Christ – remains unshaken. After the process of entering, challenging, and confronting a culture, it is essential to present this comfort found in Christ.

How might this step manifest concretely in your church, community, or daily life? Addressing this question is the primary responsibility for us as Christians, pastors, and leaders in the modern world as we contextualise the gospel. To do so, it is vital to reaffirm what the gospel is and what a worldview grounded in the gospel entails.

For further reflection:

For instance, when an outsider moves into a community with a very strong sense of local cohesion, what reactions might occur? They adapt by oscillating between various responses: surprise, criticism, questioning, interest, accommodation, resistance, and agreement. The process of entering a culture through the gospel, challenging it, and making an appeal varies by time and circumstance, but it does not happen overnight. One pastor joined the fathers' group at his child's primary school in such a community. What everyone looked forward to more than helping with events was the drinks gathering afterwards. Initially, he wasn't keen as it seemed to take up so much time, but gradually he became friends with them and eventually volunteered to take on the role of organiser. This was because he built a relationship of trust as a regular friend – some confided in him personally about family or marriage troubles, while others expressed appreciation for his work as a pastor. On one occasion, one of them said, ‘Well, it's all about family safety and business prosperity, isn't it?’ Without thinking, the pastor replied, ‘Yes, but what comes after that?’ Having already established trust as friends, the pastor continued, ‘You know, I look forward to meeting God.’ His friend looked utterly bewildered. Later, that same friend sent a LINE message saying, ‘Tell me a bit more about that,’ so they arranged to meet at a café near the station.

Author:CTCJ Collaborative Writing Team

In 2025, CTCJ set out a new vision to become a thought leader in the field of urban church planting in Japan. The Collaborative Writing Team (Co-writing Team) is one of the ways we are working towards this goal. The team is made up of a core group of staff members, as well as a number of writers and editors from diverse backgrounds, who work together to produce articles on topics that are useful for church planters, with the gospel as the foundation and focus.