There are some apologies that are easy to make, others that are difficult but one that is absolutely necessary. First, I want to apologize for not keeping with my previously stated blogging rhythm and so quickly at that. Now that was easy. I had a very full week that brought me in touch with some really good stuff. This past week, the law of unintended consequences, especially how they relate to addressing major social ills of our world, was a major topic of discussion. There is much that Christians need to make an apology for. Apologizing for some of the things we have done as Christians is necessary but may not be easy. Dr. Metzger turns to this subject in Chapter 4 of Connecting Christ. This chapter isn't about that kind of an apology.
The kind of apology that is absolutely necessary is bearing witness to the Good News of Jesus Christ. The Apostle Peter instructs us to, "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have." (1 Peter 3:15). Metzger asks and will offer an answer to the question, "what is the Good News and why is it so good?"
How do you define the Gospel? There is much discussion these days about what the Gospel is and how we should define it. Many seem to have an answer - from some emerging ideas, to the idea that love wins, to the old stalwart of the 4 Spiritual Laws, to justice and social engagement - there are more than a few ideas of what the Gospel is. It's been more than a decade since I was an Evangelism Explosion trainer teaching a scripted method of presenting the Gospel and leading someone into a decision. These are all propositional ideas that while they communicate our understanding of the gospel can still miss the cosmic expanse of the good news. Metzger responds:
If we are not careful, we can easily turn the good news into a position paper about the faith. While robust confessions of the faith are vital, the good news is much more than a statement of faith. It is a personal relationship with the living God, about whom we confess certain statements. The propositions about personal relationship with God have their place, as long as they don't replace the relationship with God to which we bear witness.I would go further than Dr. Metzger on this point. I don't believe this idea of a personal relationship goes far enough in our understanding of the gospel and may present some culturally infused definitions about relationship that need consideration. In a culture of individualism and materialism we need to make sure that we are defining "relationship" right. In Chapter 1, Dr. Metzger warns against the "Market-Driven" approach but an appeal to a personal relationship with Jesus is usually at the center of this approach - "come to Jesus and have all your needs met." There are many different kinds of relationships so we need to define our terms. Dr. Metzger will use the Biblical metaphor of the Bride and Bridegroom, but even here we need to understand our definitions and they may be tainted by culture, especially when our definitions of marriage are under siege. I would argue that there is much more to the good news than access to a personal relationship.
Yes, the gospel is about the availability of a personal relationship with God. Yes, Jesus has made a way for you and I and everyone who believes to enter a personal relationship that reconnects us with the one true and living God. But the gospel is more than that. Jesus is more than the bridge providing a way to cross over the chasm that separates us from God. Jesus, all that he is, all he has done, all he is doing and all he will do is the very good news. Paul put it simply but profoundly - "Christ is all." (Col 3:11). Our personal relationship to Christ is one element, and a vital one, but we need to grasp the universality of the whole gospel in Christ. I blog about this more at my Living Sent Today blog. But I digress.
Metzger does point out that when we approach the good news from propositions about God, even the proposition I am purporting, we can counter two dangers.
The first is reducing personal relationship with God to a series of propositions, missing the forest (personal relationship with God) while looking at the trees (statements about God). The second is rejecting propositions about God in favor of personal relationship, failing to see that even talk about personal relationship with God involves certain propositional claims, such as there is a God, I am not this God, and God is personal...and wants to have a relationship with you and me.I would argue that God wants more than a relationship. God wants our complete allegiance, our full trust and confidence, our very lives are to be "hidden" in his life (Col 3:3).That is more than a relationship, since the idea of a relationship is of give and take. God may accept what we give him of our lives, for he is gracious and merciful, but he desires to be everything to us, for us, through us. Our concept of a personal relationship with God is an incomplete apologetic when it is based on a Greek influenced dualism that divides our life from God's life in us. The Apostle Paul understood that in Christ we have "been crucified with Christ and (we) no longer live, but Christ lives in (us). The life (we) now live in the body, (we) live by faith in the Son of God, who loved (us) and gave himself for (all)." (Gal 2:20). That's more than a personal relationship. How does that which has been crucified have a personal relationship?
As a new creation, our new identity, once coming to Christ, is to be fully in Christ, or at least it should be. Paul reaches for this ultimate reality of our oneness relationship with Christ by using the marriage metaphor but concludes it is a "profound mystery" (Eph 5:32). Our dualistic thinking however has compartmentalized our spiritual life and material life into two distinct spheres which then gives rise to the idea of a personal relationship so entrenched in Evangelical thinking. Then we struggle even more with this mystery. It also gives permission, or so we think it does, to live our lives anyway we want, just like most married couples, as long as one of the components is to maintain this personal relationship. But Paul says, "You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God..." (1 Cor 6:19b-20) with your whole life.
Dr. Metzger does discuss this mystery of the good news quoting Calvin who said,"For my own part, I am overwhelmed by the depth of his mystery, and am not ashamed to join Paul in acknowledging at once my ignorance and my admiration." Calvin is giving us permission, as did Paul, to be satisfied with not having all the answers but knowing there is much we don't understand. Metzger adds, "I find myself repenting and apologizing for how I often fail to live into this vision of ultimate reality involving relational intimacy." Jesus himself adds to this mystery when he prays that all who believe would be one in him, with the Father, and together (John 17:20-23).
This is far more than identificational but is in fact our "ultimate reality" - as Paul understood, as Calvin acknowledged, as Metzger sees it. That reality is where "Christ is all," our everything, which is more than propositional but very much our daily lives, even if not lived out perfectly on this side of eternity. As Christ lives out his life in us and through us, incarnate, we move into this ultimate reality - unshakeable, unstoppable, unswerving. At the end of the 2nd Chapter, Metzger is moving beyond the simple understanding of a personal relationship and into the profound mystery of the good news. He says,
"I am banking everything on Jesus becoming flesh, becoming one flesh, with his people...This book is an apology for the enfleshed Word of the triune God and all that his incarnate life entails for the world and various relationships. As such it is an apology not only for the incarnate God but for humanity and creation as a whole. This holistic reality to which I point entails holistic witness. Just as the Word became flesh to love this world we must be enfleshed through words and deeds of love."Our apology is not simply ideas about Jesus but the incarnate life of Jesus lived out in us. One proposition toward this end is what my friend David Bryant calls a consequential Christology - which can be boiled down to this - all that matters is Jesus since Christ is all. Then all that we do must reflect Jesus since Christ is all. Here's video of David discussing his apology:
Excellent! Christ is the Gospel!
ReplyDelete