I am just finishing up zooms with the first three books and last night we threw around a question that hangs around. Let me try and present the scenario first. The books present a shift in emphasis that might be summarised along these lines:
- We move from everything being personalised, personal salvation to a bigger concept of salvation of a people. (Oh and why do we pick out the required path to one person ‘you must be born again’ over and above the required path to another person ‘go and sell all you have’?)
- We shift from a salvation ‘from‘ to a salvation ‘for‘. (And, if like me, on reading the Scriptures there is a conviction that eternal punishing is not taught, that can be seen as one more element to slow down the urgency in our proclamation.)
- The cross is not an event in history that deals with God’s ‘wrath’; the cross being essential for us, but perhaps not essential for God (in the sense of forgiveness), though given the kenotic Being that God is, the necessity in God is due to that kenoticism, not issues centred around ‘righteousness’.
- An older and established paradigm is ‘all guilty, under judgement / wrath… only one path of escape… hence personal forgiveness and salvation.’ If that shifts with the nature of the Gospel being a universal proclamation regarding the birth of new creation, what does this mean at a personal level… ‘and how do we present the Gospel?’
This is certainly a journey I am on, and have been on for a while, so here are my very few pointers.
There is a core that has not changed. To bring someone to faith is not something we can do. That is done by the Holy Spirit. So shouting louder ‘you are a guilty sinner’ does not do that work! However, a lack of integrity in our lives might well make the probability of a person we know coming to faith less likely.
Guilt is not the only door that people come through (more on forgiveness below). The eastern world view would emphasise shame much more than guilt, and I guess the Orthodox world would highlight inner sickness that needs healing. In adding these elements to the scene does not change the core issue: there still is the need for connection, in the sense of the person has to connect with whatever ‘door’ as a very real need that cannot be self-solved, and for that the conviction of the Spirit is still necessary.
Jesus’ teaching, and the outworking in the Pauline Gospel, remain ‘politically’ world transforming. We cannot and should not short-change people on being exposed to that content, although I for one cannot claim to have a handle on the fullness of that! The content can be received at that level (as per the Asiarchs in Acts 19?), but there is a dimension that goes beyond the teaching, that takes us beyond the most remarkable earthly wisdom and world-view to experience the transcendent heavenly aspect in the context of relationship. That is where our personal testimony kicks in.
Yes people can follow the teachings of Jesus, but on ‘offer’ is the promise of the Spirit, to empower, transform and open up the heavens to us.
Now to forgiveness. I am considering that in the same way as we wrongly interpret wrath through a projection of human anger on to God, maybe we do the same with forgiveness. (On wrath: human anger is never described as righteous, even the term ‘righteous indignation’ does not occur in Scripture. We have an anger issue we have to learn to deal with; God’s anger is not personal, hence we make a mistake when we extrapolate from the human side to the divine and then suggest that Jesus’ bore the wrath of God for us…) With forgiveness we have all experienced it from both sides. I have done wrong to someone; I go apologise and they then have a choice to release me or not. The term ‘release’ being the underlying significance of the ‘forgiveness’ words. Those words certainly can carry that legal sense of being released from an obligation, but it can also be used of (e.g.) releasing a ship to its journey, and Josephus even uses it of (the release of) death. The root is ‘release’, but the point I am considering is not simply to do with the root meaning, but concerning the danger of simply projecting on to God our human experience. Until I am forgiven I am ‘held’ by the person I have wronged. Perhaps forgiveness should carry a broader range of meanings and that God’s forgiveness might primarily be a release from whatever could be holding us. That could be ‘guilt’, past / family bondages, mind-sets, and that overarching power known as ‘sin’ (in the singular, not being a collection of all my ‘sins, but a corporate, cosmic power). Certainly ‘forgiveness of sins’ for the Jews of the NT era was a promise of release from their captivity, and as they experienced that they would experience God’s favour.
So putting all this together, I suggest that our presentation is bigger but continues to be personal. And what an invitation, to be saved for a purpose, a purpose that connects us to our true core being, causes us to interact with heaven, and become in greater measure agents for transformation. I do not think we have ‘lost’ the Gospel but are on a process to discovering what it might be. Deeply relevant to the former worlds of Jew and Gentile, and the only lasting hope for the world(s) that exist(s) today.
Yes that’s so good thank you Martin. I am really drawn to the theology of the saving act of the cross, descent and resurrection being about the overturning/annihilation of death itself and reconciliation and restoration of all things through the resurrection – we follow him out of the grave in ‘triumphant procession’ and in every place he treads life is restored. The Eastern Orthodox Paschal Homily of St John Chrysostom is so powerful on this. We are supposed to be as he is on this earth so therefore this life giving restoration should follow us too wherever we go whether it be healing of our own hearts, people we know and the land itself. Peter’s shadow healed people so that is our ultimate commission I suppose to be conduits of physical, spiritual or any other kind of healing. Therefore not just rescue from human death but the death of the planet and the universe and all things. Big responsibility and commission but as you say there is time and the Holy Spirit is the one who reveals these things as truth to people not us though we may plant some of the seeds. I remember in the Zooms you talking about ‘great patience’ and I think that’s the key – I’m not so good at being patient!!
Thanks Joanna also for putting in the larger issue of healing and reconciliation.
As ever, with you on this! The phrase “full gospel” takes on a new meaning, to say the least!
I think our narrow view of ‘salvation’ and the gospel means that most of us haven’t a clue about any of it. Lots of assumptions, little understanding.
If we see the gospel as promoting a ‘new creation’ one in which we humans finally care for creation and one another then Jesus must be the model of that. At least that’s the claim isn’t it? If so, then how are we to work together to both model and promote this new creation? And what does that new creation look like?
There are groups of people all over this planet who claim the answer to that. A fair number of new creations being promoted embrace right wing authoritarianism in some form or other. Not something that attracts me, even those with some sort of church or christian gloss on them. So what are we looking for? How will we know when we get there?
For me, it comes down to right connection first with the earth. And I am fairly literal about that, the soil beneath our feet. So much of what we do – grow food, develop cities, create transportation networks, deforest acres involves soil and the earth. Many times I have felt the need just to lay down on the ground, embrace it and ask forgiveness. We have been so utterly destructive and mostly for no good reason.
The Kingdom or new creation for me is intensely local. I can love the whole planet in the abstract but only a wee part of it in the particular. I can love my global neighbors in the abstract and certainly promote policies that do so, but I can only really, day to day, down to earth, in concrete actions, love people I am with and where I am. The call of a new creation is leading me to a smaller city with a connection to the soil to find out what it means to love the earth I stand on and the neighbors I stand with. Small and particular, hopefully with larger implications.
Ann you raise (for me) a huge question, regarding ‘new creations’ and authoritarianism, oppressiveness, abuse of planet etc. Oxymorons?
I’m currently studying the usefulness of theosis (deification) as salvation for environmental theology so really heartened by the comments here. If salvation is more about ‘becoming’ it opens up both now and the future along with our responsibility. Is there a reciprocal relationship between our salvation and the salvation of the planet human and non-human? In other words do we get to understand the depth of salvation through our part in the the process of salvation/liberation of humanity and planet? Not to say salvation is only liberation from social oppression etc (saved to the extent that we save), but surely it is in there. Interestingly so many writers on eco-theology are women and those that make much sense to me.- feminisation of the future as suggested by you and others Martin? Instatement of women? Many pointing to kenosis and other motifs for salvation away from traditional doctrines etc. I’d say dots are joining, but that doesn’t encompass the dimensions required for the future!
I love the reminder of being saved “for” a purpose. Having lived for some time with the thoughts that “God loves me as I am” and “regardless of what I do God cannot love me any more or less than he does now” it’s refreshing to understand the profound desire I have to be more than than I am right now. That desire extends further than the personal to the known around me and the unknown currently beyond my influence. Finding and working with others who share that dissatisfaction with the way things are has been both a stepping stone and, at times, a stumbling block. I am not satisfied to remain as I am (even though that’s been pretty good at times!). As always, thank you, Martin.