Q: One blogger who refers to you as the godfather – not sure how you feel about that – offered another metaphor. You’re telling people there’s this great new restaurant across town, and they go there with you, only to hear on arrival that the menu won’t be printed for another twenty years
A: I can see how that’s frustrating. I think the metaphor makes the point very well. But I wonder if I could put a spin on it. Maybe that story should continue by the people saying, “Hey, let’s go in the kitchen and see if we can help create some new recipes.” If we get more people involved in the creative process, maybe it will only be ten years, not twenty. I think people need to feel empowered, like they’re contributors, not consumers buying the latest “postmodern ministry in a box” program. We’re all in this thing together.
Q: That’s exactly what was discouraging. Here I am, trying, doing my best, and you call what I’m doing ridiculous.
A: I’m so sorry. That’s not what I intended.
Q: You should be more careful.
A: Yes, I should. But I think you’ll agree, as I said in the article or whatever it was: having postmodern churches isn’t the point.
Q: I think you’re wrong about that. It is the point. You made the analogy to languages. If Spaniards move into the area, having Spanish churches is the point. It’s exactly the point.
A: I see what you mean. I’m afraid my analogy again creates confusion along with adding some clarity. Here’s the problem. We can translate our modern version of the gospel into postmodern idioms … candles, coffee, community, digital imagery, etc. But it’s still a modern version of the gospel.
Q: Hold on. That bothered me too. You wrote, “Which reminds us that none of us has a complete grasp of the gospel…. It's very dangerous to assume you've perfectly contained the gospel in your little formula.” I think with all the other change going on, one thing we’ve got to hold firm on is the gospel.
A: What do you mean when you say “the gospel?"
Q: You know, justification by grace through faith in the finished atoning work of Christ on the cross.
A: Are you sure that’s the gospel?
Q: Of course. Aren’t you?
A: I’m sure that’s a facet of the gospel, and it’s the facet that modern evangelical protestants have assumed is the whole gospel, the heart of the gospel. But what’s the point of that gospel?
Q: What do you mean? I guess it’s so that people can spend eternity with God in heaven in an intimate personal relationship as opposed to … the alternative. You don’t seem to agree.
A: Well, for Jesus, the gospel seemed to have something to do with the kingdom of God.
Q: Which is the kingdom of heaven, which is going to heaven after you die.
A: Are you sure about that?
Q: Aren’t you?
A: This is exactly the point I was trying to make in the article. Many of us are sure we’re “postmodern” now with our candles and hipness and so on, but we haven’t asked some important and hard questions – not about postmodernity, but about modernity and the degree to which our theology and understanding of the gospel have been distorted or narrowed or made “gospel lite” by modernity.
Q: If you were intending to make me feel better, you’re not succeeding.
A: Well, I hope you’ll at least think about this. And search the Scriptures, you know, to see if there’s any validity to the question I’m raising.
I appreciate McLaren's honesty in this interview, and I can understand how the interview might help to offer clarity to his view on the Emergent Church Movement. And while I may have had questions about his theology, his quoted statements have helped to clarify his position. I hope that I am being faithful to his position by paraphrasing thus:
"The Modern Gospel is incomplete; it only tells part of the Good News."
If I'm wrong, someone please tell me, but I get the impression from McLaren that he thinks there's something Christians are leaving out when they say this:
"We are sinners saved by the Grace of God. We have no ability to change this situation, and so we are on a collision course with the wrath of God, Who is holy and in His love for creation does not tolerate sin. And since we are incapable of escaping wrath, God who is rich in mercy came to Earth in the Person of Jesus Christ, the sinless Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, Who died in our place on the Cross, to receive the just punishment for our iniquity. When we repent and put our faith in the finished work of Jesus, we are spared the wrath of God and empowered to live for God, exchanging our sin for the righteousness of Christ, being daily conformed to the image of Christ. Heaven is our home, and we are adopted into the family of God, to live on this Earth and in this time in order to express this in word and deed to others, exalting Jesus, to Whom the Father draws all men by His Spirit."
Or maybe the short form:
"We are saved by Grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, for the glory of God alone, in accordance with His Word alone."
The other guy in the quote gets it right, and McLaren totally slams him for it! That's a real eye-opener for me, folks.
If we start trying to add to this we are really taking something away from it. God has made this as simple as it needs to be. It's not about what we have done, it's about what God has done.
Everything else comes out of our faith in God and our relationship with Him: any works whether personal or communal, must flow from a changed heart into a set of values which lead to action. This is integrity.
The Scriptures are so clear about this. To deny this or try to re-imagine or re-constitute this is to oppose the Grace of God. You have to abandon rationality in order to...
Oh right... that's where it starts.
Unfortunately, the Church by and large is not speaking up about this. So "Pied Pipers" like McLaren are drawing away many into heresy.
No comments:
Post a Comment