I‘ve come to feel that bad theology is unbalanced theology and
that unbalanced theology is bad theology. Much of the challenge of practical
theology is holding two or more apparently contradictory beliefs in dynamic
tension; the true doctrine being the totality of both beliefs rather than the
compromise between them.
Let me give a non-controversial example. Christians believe that
Jesus was fully God and fully human. These statements are apparently (though
not actually) contradictory. The tendency when struggling with such seeming contradictions
is to come down on the side of one half of the equation and minimise, if not
ignore, the other. However both statements are true. Jesus is not less than
fully divine (He's not half a God) and he's not less than fully human (If he
was he could have been the sinless second Adam). To preach one and not the
other is false doctrine.
None of this is controversial theology, at least among
evangelicals. I'm using it to illustrate what I think is a more universal
truth, that true doctrine is often the product of balancing two different (or
even contradictory) beliefs, and biblical error, even heresy, almost always the
consequence of getting this balance wrong.
I've been reminded of this point this week. Yesterday I listened
to a good Reformed sermon entitled The
World is not our Place on the
text; Therefore let us go
forth to Him, outside the camp, bearing His reproach. For here we have no
continuing city, but we seek the one to come. (Hebrews 13:13-14 NKJV)
The gist of the sermon was that we are not of this world because
we follow Jesus and Jesus was not of this world; he was, and continues to be,
rejected by it. The sermon refuted the idea that the role of Christians is to
'restore' society, arguing that in the face of sin, society won't be properly
restored until after Jesus returns. The sermon didn't condemn Christian charity
or compassion, indeed it argued that most public provision of health care,
education and social care had roots in eighteenth and nineteenth century
Christianity (and particularly evangelical or non-conformist Christianity at
that), but it also argued the result of these good works wasn’t a restored
‘Godly’ society, built on Christian principles, but a society in many ways more
godless than the one that had gone before.
All of this I thoroughly agreed with. It leaves me deeply
uncomfortable when churches put more emphasis on, say, the world’s ‘green’
agenda than preaching about sin, redemption and the shed blood of Jesus Christ.
However I was still left feeling uncomfortable about the sermon. There seemed
to be a missing 'application' in there somewhere. The sermon didn't give any practical
examples of practical Christian compassion that were more recent than the
nineteenth century and the emphasis of the sermon seemed to be on the need to
withdraw from the world rather than engage with it.
What I wanted from the sermon was an application which helps me
live in the world without being ruled by it. Reflecting on this, I was reminded
that Jesus is, as always, our great teacher. If Jesus had been overly worried
about being compromised by the world he would never have been born into it, and
we would still be lost in our sins. The world rejects Jesus; Jesus doesn't
reject it, and he doesn't turn his back on those that walk upon in.
So how did Jesus keep himself from being contaminated by the
world? Firstly I think by always being clear that his relationship with the
Father came first. This was reflected in his values and his habits. we can see
in the teaching he gave his disciples about prioritising the seeking of the
kingdom of God[i],
we can see that in the forty days he spent in the wilderness[ii] and we can see it by the
cross, where he was obedient to his Father, even to the point of death. His
wasn't a spirit of fear; he trusted his father to keep him safe.
The life of Jesus wasn't a life rejecting the world. The shortest
verse in the bible is Jesus
wept[iii],
when he wept for his dead friend Lazarus. Jesus compassion to those around him
was real, and deep, and painful to him. He was a man of grief, acquainted with
sorrow[iv], and I don't imagine it
was the grief and sorrow of self-pity. He met and ate with sinners and reached
out to them in love.
When asked what the greatest commandment was he replied,
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind[v]….., and the second is like it; Love your neighbour as yourself[vi]"[vii].
We need to do both to be
followers of Jesus.
No comments:
Post a Comment