A Look At The Non-Western Gospel

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:6-9, ESV)

What’s My Gospel?

There are, obviously, different gospels being taught out there. Paul called the teaching that following the Jewish custom of circumcision was a gospel different enough to suggest that those who taught this should not stop at the foreskin. Yes, he said that. Besides suggesting that they should go to hell.

But which is the proper Gospel?  As in the old TV show What’s My Line?, we should ask, “Will the Real Gospel please stand up?”  Is it the one that says we should trust in our baptism (even when we were baptized as infants)?  Is it the one that says salvation is based on our decision and our faith?  Or perhaps the one that says that however we get in, we’ve got to avoid “backsliding” or be in danger of losing our salvation?

When you look at what Paul says, choosing a gospel can be a scary proposition.

A Pre-Modern Gospel

Being a somewhat independent sort (not always a good thing, I admit), I’ve done my share of wandering, at times being sucked in by some mildly religious/superstitious forms of Christianity. Over the years, being influenced by Luther, CS Lewis, NT Wright (and a number of good Anglicans),  having spent a lot of time in Galatians, and spending 2 years teaching through the Gospel of John, I came to a number of conclusions about the Gospel.

Coincidentally, many of these conclusions are very close to the Eastern Orthodox approach to the Gospel.  I recently found a great summary of the Orthodox view of the gospel, from the Saint Justin the Philosopher Foundation for Orthodox Christian Apologetics, who seems to exist only on Facebook.  Because not everyone is on Facebook, I will reprint the article here, linking back to the original above.  I suspect they won’t mind.

I encourage you to read through it, and comment as you see fit (respectfully, of course).  I am not saying I agree with this 100%, but I think much of this is spot on.

The Gospel As Understood by the Orthodox Church

Many Protestants ask Orthodox Christians what the Orthodox understanding of the Gospel is. This is our attempt at explaining to Protestants (and others) what the gospel is:

The gospel is that the kingdom of Heaven has broken into our realm through the incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If we have an incorrect understanding of what  these things mean, this will lead to large errors of practice, which will seriously impair our entrance to the kingdom of God. For example, Calvinist theologian Sinclair Ferguson describes  his spiritual life as “dragging his sin before the Cross.” By this, he means putting penal substitution into practice. When he sins, he feels guilty because God is angry at him. At this  point, he remembers that God already punished Jesus for his sin, so he “drags it before the Cross” to rid himself of guilt. But what does this do to actually deify him? Note the word  “deify.” Ferguson has never used that word to describe salvation. But “deification” is the substance of salvation. Let me explain. Our Lord, the pre-eternal Son and Word of the Father, is fully divine. He has, from all eternity, had all the properties of deity common to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Man was created in  the Image and Likeness of God. The Holy Fathers interpret this to mean that man reflects certain properties of God, but does not reflect them fully. This is not a “shortcoming”, but rather  a statement that God is infinite, and the brightness of man’s reflection of God can increase forever and ever. So Adam was “very good.” But He was not as good as he possibly could be. If he  was, the Hebrew would say “very very good.” Adam was granted authority over the garden. As he partook of the grace of God, he himself would reflect God ever more brightly, and, as the  steward of God’s creation, the “high priest”, one might say, he would lead all Creation to more brightly reflect the grace of God. At this point we must briefly comment on the meaning of “grace” according to the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Fathers. Protestants interpret grace to mean “God’s unmerited favor.” This is an  incorrect interpretation.

Grace is not only “God’s unmerited favor” (not to imply that the grace that we receive is earned, but rather that this idea is not contained in the word itself), but refers to the power of God actualized in the world. For example, in the first chapter of Saint John’s Gospel, Our Lord is  referred to as “full of grace and truth.” How could Christ be full of “unmerited favor?” In the third chapter of Saint Luke’s Gospel, Christ is referred to as “growing in grace and  stature.” How could Christ “grow” in unmerited favor? A reading much more in accord with the Biblical text is the understanding of grace as “God’s power actualized in the world.” This is  what Orthodox Christians mean by the “energies of God.” In essence, God cannot be known. But God’s essential power is actualized in the world through His uncreated energies. These energies are  truly and really God, and they are the means of participation in the life of the divine. Adam would grow in His reflection of God’s likeness in energies, but because no man or angel could  ever partake of the divine essence, He would never be “subsumed” into God. He would always be a deified Adam, never losing his personal existence. Anyway, this path of deification was the right path Adam was walking. Tragically, through events we all know, Adam turned away from this right path. The serpent promised him that “he would  be like God.” Wanting to be like God was not Adam’s error. (As a sidenote, the fact that many Protestants think it is reflects how completely they have lost the concept of deification) We  should all want to be like God. The Holy Apostle Peter says that we are to “be holy, as he is holy.” So why would we want to be unlike Him? No, Adam’s error was trying to be deified (which  means more fully reflecting God’s properties) APART from God. This was not the end of the Fall. The pre-incarnate Word appeared to Adam and asked him what he had done. The Fathers teach  that if Adam at this point had honestly admitted his error, repented, and promised obedience henceforth, the serpent would have been thwarted and God would have reconciled Adam to Himself.  But Adam did not. Adam lied and blamed his wife.

Thus, Adam was expelled from the Garden, and the creation over which he was set a steward fell into corruption, death, and decay. Death  itself cannot be spoken as a literal (though the imagery can be used metaphorically) “punishment” from God. God did not say to Adam, “If you eat, I will surely kill you.” God said, “If you  eat, you will surely die.” Death is simply the natural result of turning away from the only source of life.Corruption, death, decay, these now all became a part of the human experience. And, in a significant, but often overlooked passage, Moses writes, “When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered  a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.” This is the “image of Adam” described in the New Testament. It is the image of God in a state of corruption and  imperfection. The Old Testament, even in the deified Prophets and Patriarchs, is a story of how man tries to reach God and always falls short. The ideal of ever more brightly reflecting the  Divine Image could not be attained. Even the Saints of the Old Testament could not attain full glory, because humanity was enslaved.

This is where Christ comes in. The pre-eternal, infinite, uncontainable Word of God became a human being. The eternal Divine Word acquired a human nature. That is, He acquired the set of  properties common to all human persons. In assuming humanity into Himself, He deified it. The human nature was perfectly united and brought into communion with the Logos of God and so  became completely deified at the very moment of the incarnation. Christ, the perfect Image of God (Colossians 1:15) reconstructed the Image of God in man by becoming a man Himself. Christ  grew up, sanctifying every stage of life in His own Person. When Christ announced His public ministry, this was not going to be a collection of pithy moral sayings before He got to what  really mattered, the Crucifixion. No, every miracle and act that Christ did, every word that He spoke, has immense significance in the Christian life. By subjugating himself to death, Adam  subjugated himself to Satan. Satan was the “Prince of this World” and God’s people was a small resistance movement. Most of the false gods throughout pre-Christian history have been  demonic. Many pre-Christian civilizations were under the direct control of Satan’s minions. This is a frightening truth, but if one reads the Book of Daniel, one finds references to the  demonic princes and rulers of other, specific nations. So, when Christ announced “The kingdom of God is at hand!”, this was a world-shaking truth. It was a declaration that Satan’s rule was  over, that God had come at long last to set things right. The Israelites, however, expected this to be in a carnal sense. They expected the Jewish Messiah to come and lead an army to  overthrow the Romans and establish a Jewish government in the Holy Land. The evil Roman Empire was itself only a symptom of the disease, and Our Lord understood that, so He went and fought  the source- Satan. When He cast out demons, this was a statement that God was finished with them, that they were going to be driven out. When Christ healed men from diseases, this was a  statement that the reign of corruption was coming to an end. In short, these were all means of announcing that corruption, death, demonic rule, these were finished. When Christ taught, He  was giving us the true Torah, that which the Torah of Moses was only a shadow. This Torah was one of the heart. It was how man would live in the Kingdom that Christ was ushering in. This  Torah changed the heart of man, which is why the Lord said that “the Kingdom of God is within you.” So, Christ’s ministry had two closely related functions. It was first to announce the  nearness of the Kingdom of God and it was second to describe how man would live in that Kingdom through the preaching of a Torah of the heart.

On Great and Holy Friday, Our Lord Jesus Christ was crucified for our sins. While this phrase is acknowledged by nearly all who confess the name of Christ, what this actually means is a  subject of intense debate. Most Protestants suggest that God poured His wrath upon Christ’s head so that He did not have to pour it on our heads in hell. The Scholastics suggested that  Christ, in dying a shameful death, generated an infinite store of honorable merit, which could be accessed by the Sacraments and good works. The Church, however, through its Prophets,  Apostles, and Fathers, has an altogether different doctrine. It was mentioned above that Adam had made suffering, corruption, and death a part of human experience. Christ came to reconstruct the  Divine Image through His own incarnated Person. In order to sanctify the fullness of human experience, the terrible truth was that God had to partake of death itself. He had to descend to  the lowest state of human existence. And He did. Christ suffered greatly, and died one of the most shameful deaths known to man. He partook of all our sufferings, our sorrows, our  sicknesses, and our pains. And because it was the infinite God who entered into these things, He healed all of them. This is why the Prophet Isaiah says, “By His stripes, we are healed.”  Satan, as the one who held the power of death, believed that He had won. He had taken the Messiah of God. What He did not take into account is that Christ had never subjected Himself to  Satan’s authority. Christ had never entered into Satan’s communion. But Satan took Him nonetheless. This was his greatest mistake. As Satan had no power over death, Christ broke free of it,  and released all the spirits who communed with Him into Paradise as well. Satan was disarmed. Christ said that He would “disarm the strong man”, and that He did. In the Apocalypse, Christ  says that HE “holds the keys of death and Hades.” This is a profound and glorious truth. Christ had gone down into the lowest state of human existence. He now was bringing up human  experience to the highest points of divine experience. This is the message of the resurrection! The resurrection is the ushering of humanity into the high places. It is the deification of  the body itself. The body, while before it had been a prison of corruption, sickness, and death, was now in Christ a glorious blessing. It was renewed, deified, made incorruptible.

Man, however, still has freedom of choice. God desires all men to come into the communion of His energies, His love. But true love requires freedom. If we choose not to be deified, then  that is our choice. If we desire this wonderful state of deification, how do we do it? The first thing that we must do is have faith. Faith is the foundation of the entire Christian life.  It is the particular attitude which sees God not as a distant lawgiver, but a close father, one who is merciful and good. The one who acts consistently with his faith will undoubtedly be  saved. It must be emphasized that faith does not guarantee consistently acting with that faith. One may have faith, but if one does not act consistently with it, the faith dies.  If one DOES act consistently with the faith, one chooses to be baptized. This Baptism, St. Paul says, clothes us with Christ. It clothes us with His death and resurrection. It frees one  from the subjugation of Satan, who takes every man who sins even once. This Satanic system is the system of law. When we are baptized, we are freed from it, because we become “in Christ.”  As Satan had no authority over Christ, so also He loses authority over every man who is “in Christ.” We are now in a different system, a “system” where the goal is “partaking of the divine  nature” (2 Peter 1:4), and being “conformed to the image of His Son.” (Rom 8:29) When we are anointed with the oil of God (this is known as Chrismation and is described in the Book of Acts  as “laying on of hands), we are indwelt with the grace of the Holy Spirit. This “Chrismation” is really a part of the Mystery of Baptism. The Holy Spirit is our only hope. He is the one who indwells us,  who bestows grace on us, by whose power we do anything that is good. However, salvation still requires “work.” This is not the “work” that one does in a business setting, where one works a  particular number of hours and the boss gives you a particular payment. This is the principle of obligation condemned so forcefully by St. Paul in Romans 4:4. If we work like this, there is  no relationship with the boss. One simply works and receives due payment. But God owes us nothing. Salvation itself requires intimate COMMUNION with God, so if one does these works out of  view of Christ, the communion is not improved, and they will be burned up on the Last Day. This is why St. Seraphim teaches that only good works done for Christ’s sake give us the grace of  the Holy Spirit. NT Wright describes works that save in this fashion. The only works that benefit for salvation are those that are organically related to their result. So, when you make a  new friend, you might describe yourself as “working” for that friendship. But this is only in the sense that talking, hanging out, spending time with this person naturally produces a  friendship. If you went to his house, mowed his lawn, did not talk to him, this “work” woul do nothing to produce a friendship. It is the same with God. Praying, fasting (as fasting dulls  the passions), partaking of the true Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, these are the ways that we commune and relate with God. They naturally produce communion with God.

Christ, through His incarnation, death, and resurrection,  ushered the People of God (who already existed in the form of Israel) to the highest and most advanced state possible, that of being His own Body, which we call the Church. The Church is the People of God that have  partaken of the Divine Nature in Jesus Christ and through the Holy Spirit. The Church is “necessary for salvation” only because Christ is necessary for salvation. It is through Christ alone  that man can be saved, and the Church is Christ’s Presence in the world. This is meant this in more than a symbolic sense. The Church is a Eucharistic Community. It is the Eucharist which creates  the Church. St. Paul says, “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?  Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” (1 Corinthians 10:16-17) The Church is Christ’s Presence to the world because of the Holy Eucharist. We become “one body in Christ” by partaking of Christ’s body in the Holy Eucharist. This is the People of God as it has been transformed by the new covenant. The Prophets and Patriarchs of Israel and the Old Covenant are also members of the Church, because the Church is not an organization that exists in this world, it is a heavenly reality, containing ALL the People of God, made manifest and visible to this world in the form of Eucharistic Communities.While man experiences a foretaste of his eternal destiny when he dies and his body is separated from his soul, this is still an unnatural state. On the Last Day, the Lord will return to Earth to Judge all mankind. This “Judgement” is simply the placing of every person in the place where the condition of their soul requires. Christ will deify the New Creation. The grace of God will be in all and through all. For the person oriented towards God, this means they will continue on their journey of deification forever. For the person oriented away from God, the energies of God only inspire further resistance to God. Thus, the person who reposed while walking the wrong path will forever walk that path. His Divine Image will be deconstructed eternally as they become more and more evil and selfish. The state of living eternally without any love for others, and living with others who are like that- this is hell. The state of living eternally, in a deified and glorified body, in a condition of ever-increasing love and bliss, and living under the direct rule of Christ the King, with others who lovingly serve Christ the King- this is Heaven. This is not to say that we won’t have something to do on the New Earth. No, we, as the Image-Bearing representatives of God to all Creation, together with Jesus Christ, the ultimate Image of God, will forever work on our mission of deifying all Creation. This is eternal joy.

 

 

Posted in Good News, Theological Musings | 3 Comments

Some Interesting Thoughts on Atonement

I have a confession to make.  I have a hard time with much of the evangelical thinking on the issue of the atonement.   My own thoughts are not important at this point, mostly because I know more about what I don’t believe than what I do.

Today I read the following, in a blog post by James McGrath on Hebrews 9.  While I can’t say that I agree with his assessment of the “biggest problem” (there are a number of problems with “contemporary Christian talk about the atonement”), I do tend to agree that we are saved from sin rather than from God, and that God wants to transform us rather than punish us:

The biggest problem I have with a lot of contemporary Christian talk about the atonement is that it depicts God as the problem, one whose hands are tied for this or that reason, with Jesus’ death as the only way to get God to forgive us.

The New Testament emphasis is thoroughly different. It focuses on human injustice, lack of compassion, hatred, mercilessness, ruthlessness, jealousy, and all the other things that we know we are capable of and which make us ashamed. And it focuses on God as wanting to free us from those things and transform our lives.

However one may think about God, or the death of Jesus, in the present day, there is no reason that we cannot preserve the core emphasis on our need for inner transformation and the genuine possibility of experiencing it. And for Christians, we often find the inspiration and challenge to experience those things in our contemplation of a crucified Messiah, one who overcomes evil not by destroying and punishing but by seeking reconciliation, even at the cost of his own life.

Thoughts?

Posted in Theological Musings | 4 Comments

My Top 12 Classic Albums

Just for fun, here is my list of the best albums of the last 50 years. My criteria are:

  • The album must first be excellent (more than just good) from 1st song to the last, with no “throw-away” tracks (which disqualifies classics such as Iron Butterfly’s In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida and the Beatles’ Let It Be and Abbey Road (which rocks on side one, but falls apart on side 2).
  • They are albums that I will listen to in their entirety, to the extent that even the order of the songs is important.
  • I will have owned the album on more than one medium, including vinyl, 8-track, cassette, CD and mp3.
  • I am listing only one album per artist.
  • I must have first owned it over 10 years ago
  • Finally, I still like these albums just as much today as when they were first released.

The list is not necessarily ranked. Many of my favorite CDs didn’t make this list for one reason or another, even though overall they were great albums. But, I tried to keep this list to the truly outstanding.

  1. Dark Side of the Moon – Pink Floyd.  No explanation necessary here.
  2. Aja – Steely Dan. I own or have owned this on cassette tape, vinyl, CD and mp3; perhaps the only album I can say this about.  It is simply a top-notch album, one that Steely Dan feared they could never come close to again, and they were right.
  3. The Stranger – Billy Joel.  This is one killer album; pure genius, demonstrating that Joel really understood the types of people he sang about.
  4. Dancing in the Dragon’s Jaws – Bruce Cockburn. This one always leaves me with a sense of eternity, like I’ve somehow had a glimpse of heaven.
  5. Poetic Champion Compose – Van Morrison. While I’d been a Van Morrison fan for a long time, this CD blew me away. It’s one of the few VM albums were Morrison actually sounds happy, and you just can’t help but be happy with him.
  6. Silk Degrees – Boz Scaggs. Every song a potential hit, with perfect arrangements. Great open road music.
  7. Joshua Tree – U2. Perhaps the last album I bought new on vinyl. In my opinion, U2 has never come close to topping this record.
  8. Rumors – Fleetwood Mac. Having given up on popular music in the mid-70’s, this is the album that got me back to top-40 rock. And I’ve never heard anything quite as perfect as Mick Fleetwood’s drumming on this album.
  9. So – Peter Gabriel. 1986 was a great year, partly due to this.
  10. Icarus – The Paul Winter Project. I saw Paul Winter in concert in 1973, and bought this album at the concert. It was their transition from “ordinary” world folk music to what would eventually be called new age. It needs to be listened to in one sitting, at least 2 or 3 times.
  11. Horrendous Disc – Daniel Amos.  I heard these songs in concert about 2 years before the CD was available due to legal issues with the label. DA’s transition from country-folk to rock was amazing; among other things, it served as inspiration for Collective Soul (the influences, especially on CS’s early CDs are obvious).
  12. Déjà vu – Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young. A unique collection of songs reflecting the 4 individuals that somehow all fits well together.

So, there you have it.  If I were including newer music, I would probably include albums like Toad the Wet Sprocket’s Coil, The Avett Brother’s The Carpenter or perhaps a Gillian Welch. I had initially included Seal, by Seal, but I usually skip the first cut when I listen to it; otherwise it’s stellar. Other albums I considered included NGDB’s Uncle Charlie, but “Rave On” always kind of annoyed me.  So, I held pretty closely to my criteria.

If you think I’ve erred either in commission or omission, feel free to let me know.

Posted in Random Thoughts | 2 Comments

The Evangelical Divide

This is a test: Define the term “evangelical.”

Chances are, you can’t do it.  In fact, I haven’t found anyone yet who can.  Even Wikipedia is completely wrong. In fact, theirs is actually ridiculous.

Despite the fact that you probably can’t clearly define the term, I’m sure you either claim to be one, or know one or more of them.

The correct definition that we won’t use

Historically speaking (ignoring what Wikipedia says), the term was first coined by Martin Luther (in Latin) to refer to his reform movement within (and without) the Roman Catholic Church. It derives from the Latin word for “good news” or gospel. When the Romans began referring to the movement as “Lutheran,” Luther rejected the name, preferring “Evangelical,” which is still the name of the Lutheran church in Germany.

The term refers to those who hold that salvation is by grace alone, apart from works. The Roman Church taught that works (including at the time, buying “indulgences”) could save you.

Considering that many so-called evangelicals today believe that works contribute to our salvation (or at least keeping our salvation), I do not believe Luther’s definition is applicable to many who currently use the term.

The popular but incorrect definitions

Today, in America, evangelical typically refers to churches that believe in the need for a personal relationship with Christ in order to be saved, even if that requires a certain effort on the part of the individual. In a general sense, many would include all Protestants under this umbrella. However, in recent years a more narrow understanding of “evangelical” has developed, referring to a conservative segment of the protestant church that would exclude the original Lutherans (at least the ELCA) and other denominations who practice infant baptism and hold sacramental beliefs.

According to the Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals at Wheaton  College, “…the modern term usually describes the religious movements and denominations which sprung forth from a series of revivals that swept the North Atlantic Anglo-American world in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.” This is probably as good a definition as any for the popular use of the term, coming from within the movement. These revivals were led by people like Charles Finney, who rejected the notion of original sin and believed completely in man’s ability to save himself through his choices. While not all of the revivalists were heretics to this extreme, the teachings of grace that were prevalent in the original evangelical movement were often lost, or at least downsized.

Matt Richard, writing about what the original reformers would say about modern evangelicals, says

Mark Noll in his book, America’s God, states that if the Reformers were alive today they would find themselves further removed from modern day Evangelicalism than they were removed from the Catholic Church of the 1500′s.

Is evangelicalism a uniquely American religion?

Scot McKnight, who writes the blog Jesus Creed, recently discussed the thoughts of author Randall Balmer, suggesting that what we know as American evangelicalism is as much American as it is Christian, and is evolving with American ideology and politics. He begins,

American evangelicalism, Randy Balmer observes, is perculiarly American, and emerged out of three P’s: Scots-Irish Presbyterianism, Continental Pietism, and New England Puritanism. But Balmer’s burden is that evangelicalism in America mutates, even if it is connected always to the Bible as inspired, the centrality of a born-again experience, and the impulse to evangelize others.

Balmer believes American revivalism morphed (my word) in the 2nd Great Awakening due to Finney’s anthropology along with the growing American self-deterministic attitude, that “American evangelicalism has a revivalist, self-determined core.” Balmer believes it has continued to evolve, it seems to me that over the past couple of decades has become almost indistinguishable from the political right.  Even many evangelicals who would distance themselves from conservative politics (yes, they do exist) still share that same self-determinist core that qualifies them as being uniquely American.

Post-evangelicalism

Lately various people have began to refer to themselves as “post-evangelicals,” those who have left (or are trying to distance themselves) from this American-evangelical mentality.  Some, unfortunately, have merely left historic Christianity altogether. Others will only think they’re leaving.  Personally, I think it’s useless to label oneself as post-anything, as that only talks about where you’ve been, not where you are.

Old school evangelicalism

I am fortunate, I guess, in that I ever was able to connect with this American evangelicalism. I tried, believe me, I tried. I even switched from the RSV to the NIV (I’ve now switched back), but it just never felt comfortable to me, and for many of those around me.  Being raised Lutheran, I was, and guess I still am, an old-school pre-revivalist, evangelical.

The terms are confusing, especially for us old-schoolers. Labels always create problems. I guess I’ll just have to stick with Paul and choose to know nothing but Christ and him crucified.  I think that’s something most of us can agree on.

 

 

 

 

Posted in Church | 2 Comments