What about the spiritually weak believers in Christ? What about the disabled believers? What about Senior Citizens or Shut-Ins? According to Chan’s definitions in his own words, their lives look “lukewarm” and according to him anyone who is “lukewarm” is not even a true Christian to begin with. I’m sorry, but I just see this new wave of “Are You Radical Enough For Jesus?” being a dangerous new form of Legalism that carries too much spiritual risk along with it. I’m not saying for a single second that a Christian should not have evidence of fruit in their lives (i.e., “good works” like we read about most notably in James 1), or that when we do them they shouldn’t be for God’s glory because we all know they should be, but ultimately it’s NEVER about our works at all. “What you do is not nearly as important as why you do it and how you do it.” I have to judge him righteously based on what he believes and teaches as pure Biblical truth (Acts 17:11). I think Chan’s heart and intentions are noble - we should be examining ourselves regularly (2 Corinthians 13:5) - but I cannot judge him righteously based on what I believe his heart and intentions to be. Are we to believe that we can only get there though by being a “Super Christian” though? Absolutely not.

Are there rewards for us in Heaven? Yes, of course. With all due respect, isn’t that an un-Biblical qualifier though? I mean, I think Todd’s point was that his mere Christian faithfulness as a Church Bookkeeper or Dutiful Manager ALONE in this day and age should be “risky” and/or “radical” enough, shouldn’t it? He’s not to be viewed as some “Lower Level Christian” simply because he didn’t do something that Chan identifies as being the kind of “sure thing” that will lead to him feeling “uncomfortable” and/or as though he was even “more generous” than he already is. “A church bookkeeper or dutiful manager still have opportunities in their day to day life to risk their comfort and resources by loving radically and generously.”

Francis chan video book of james