I was planning to post more from Landon Saunders, however, today's post at PreacherMike has me sidetracked. Mike Cope posts a sample of recent work by John G. Stackhouse, Jr. I have pasted the sample below.
If you read this sample, I hope you will be interested enough to follow the link to the entire post. More than all, I hope we can all consider the real possibility that despite the many years many of us have been Christians, we still do not have a very good idea of what God is doing. Stackhouse and others (e.g. N.T. Wright) have noted that many Christians have a too simplistic, narrow view of salvation. As a result, we lack the scope of vision needed to understand what our (the Church) role is. A better understanding of what God is doing will lead to a better understanding of how God might be interested in using us.
A Bigger--and Smaller--View of Mission (<- click for entire post) John G. Stackhouse, Jr.
I am a professional theologian, so of course I think theology matters. Theology can help us live better or worse, depending on its quality. But theological accuracy is not the heart of the gospel. Encountering God's Spirit and responding in faith to him in that encounter is what finally matters. And how God meets people, through whatever theology they might have, in whatever circumstances, is ultimately not visible to us. ...
... Furthermore, we must beware of a second problem that lies nearby. And that is the idea that missions is all about getting people saved, and particularly about rescuing their souls from hell so that they can go to heaven. Multiple theological errors, in fact, attend this view of salvation.
God is not interested in saving merely human souls. He wants human beings, body and soul. Furthermore, he does not settle for saving human beings, but the whole earth. He made it in the first place, pronounced it "very good," and he wants it all back. So he is saving us, the lords he put over creation, as part of his global agenda to rescue, indeed, the globe.
What God rescues us to, furthermore, is the original agenda he set out for us in Genesis 1, namely, to "fill the earth and subdue it." He planted a garden for us to tend (Gen. 2) and commanded our first parents to raise up generations of gardeners to fan out across the earth to till the rest of it. This is what it means to bear the image of God. We, too, are to improve the situation, to cultivate what we encounter, to make shalom in every sector of life. And such work is our ultimate destiny as well, as we are to "reign with him" over the new earth he promises (2 Tim. 2:12). Thus we are not going back to Eden, nor up to a (spiritual) heaven, but forward to the New Jerusalem, which comes down from heaven to earth as our proper home (Rev. 21).
The Christian gospel therefore is not a narrowly spiritual one, but literally embraces everything, everywhere, at every moment. Every action that brings shalom—that preserves or enhances the flourishing of things, people, and relationships—is the primary will of God for humanity.
What are your thoughts?
3 comments:
Jason, just some quick reaction to the post. Regardless of how broad the total mission may be, it must have some focus or we become overwhelmed and ineffective. Instead of tackling every need spiritual and physical all at once we need to put first things first. My observation about the old line denominations to which NT Wright and Stackhouse belong is that they have stagnated and become ineffective because of the very thing which they are promoting. To paraphrase and adapt something Jesus said, What would it profit a man if he were to make the whole world a better place and not address the needs of the soul--his own and that of his fellow man? The eternal destiny of each and every soul is the main concern that God has and it must be the main concern for us. Everything else is peripheral. If we have to make a choice, then souls will be the choice. If somehow our good works of redeeming the created world helps us in God's work of redeeming souls, then good, but too many churches have drifted into becoming social welfare organizations and have forgotten the primary need of the soul. Steve.
I see the point you are making about having too broad of focus. However, in Stackhouse's post, he makes the point that a more comprehensive understanding of God's work can lead to greater effectiveness in evangelization.
I think of it as being tangible and relevant to those we seek to evangelize. By addressing issues and needs that are not inherently spiritual, we can build connections that make the important matters possible.
As a congregation, a broader understanding would enable us to work at many things without judging them strictly on the basis of evangelistic statistics.
What intrigues me about this "reversal of the curse" thinking is how it opens new avenues of thinking about Paul's writings.
An interesting Bible study would be to contrast Paul's understanding about the significance of the physical creation with our notion of the earth being destroying (taken from Peter). Do we misunderstand Peter reference to the "elements"?
Jason, Maybe the "redemption" that Paul mentions requires the "destruction" in Peter's epistle. Jesus refers to this as "the regeneration". Remember unless the grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains a seed and alone. But if it falls to the ground and dies, it bears much fruit--becomes something greater. Jn 12:24. Death and destruction precede regeneration and redemption. Just thinking outloud. No real thought invested here. Steve.
Post a Comment