Jesus is the Word of God
Just so my regular readers know, you're vastly outnumbered on this blog by image searchers (so wordpress tells me).
The most popular searches are 'kebab', 'waterfall', 'puffer fish', 'fat cat' and 'ned flanders'...
.
...which, I think you'll agree, represents with eloquent simplicity the profound and far-reaching concerns of Christ the Truth..
Just so my regular readers know, you're vastly outnumbered on this blog by image searchers (so wordpress tells me).
The most popular searches are 'kebab', 'waterfall', 'puffer fish', 'fat cat' and 'ned flanders'...
.
...which, I think you'll agree, represents with eloquent simplicity the profound and far-reaching concerns of Christ the Truth..
In the last 48 hours the following has happened in my blogging world
.
I'm halfway through Mike Reeves' excellent lectures on a theology of revelation. Go and listen now if you haven't done already.
Maybe I should put them somewhere prominently and permanently on the blog because they explain much better than I can the thinking behind 'Christ the Truth'.
To be an evangelical theologian is to have your method entirely shaped by God's coming to us in Jesus. Just as we are saved through God's grace alone by Christ alone, so we know God by God's grace alone and through Christ alone. This being the case, we need to be saved from our 'wisdom' every bit as much as we need to be saved from our 'works.'
Anyway, all these sorts of thoughts were circling through my head when I came across this quote posted on Tony Reinke's blog. It's all about how we should 'restore the bridge' from classical literature to Christ!
“What then shall we say if we would restore the medieval bridge from Homer, Plato and Virgil to Christ, the Bible and the church? Shall we say that Christianity is not the only truth? Certainly not! But let us also not say that Christianity is the only truth. Let us say instead that Christianity is the only complete truth. The distinction here is vital. By saying that Christianity is the only complete truth, we leave open the possibility that other philosophies, religions and cultures have hit on certain aspects of the truth. The Christian need not reject the poetry of Homer, the teachings of Plato, or the myths of the pagans as one hundred percent false, as an amalgamation of darkness and lies (as Luther strongly suggests), but may affirm those moments when Plato and Homer leap past their human limitations and catch a glimpse of the true glory of the triune God.
I reject the all-or-nothing, darkness-or-light dualism that Luther at times embraced. But I also reject the modern relativist position that truth is like a hill and there are many ways around it. Yes, truth is like a hill, but the truth that stands atop that hill is Christ and him crucified. To arrive at the truth of Christ, the people of the world have pursued many, many different routes. Some have only scaled the bottom rim of the hill; others have made it halfway. But many have reached the top and experienced the unspeakable joy that comes only when the truth they have sought all their lives is revealed to them. …
If we are to accept these verses [Romans 2:14-15] in a manner that is in any way literal, we must confess that unregenerate pagans have an inborn capacity for grasping light and truth that was not totally depraved by the Fall. Indeed, though the pagan poets and philosophers of Greece and Rome did not have all the answers (they couldn’t, as they lacked the special revelation found only in Jesus), they knew how to ask the right questions—questions that build within the readers of their works a desire to know the higher truths about themselves and their Creator.”
—Louis Markos, From Achilles to Christ: Why Christians Should Read the Pagan Classics (IVP Academic 2007), pp. 13-14
How do you think your mild-mannered correspondent reacted?
Well - go and see. Here's a selection of my many comments!
I enjoy the blog. I hate this quote.
Christ and Him crucified does not sit atop a hill as though waiting for natural man to ascend! The Truth steps down to meet us in ignorance, just as the Life steps down to meet us in death. And besides, which natural mind has ever drawn near to the crucified God? Such truth has only ever appeared as folly to the world, yet this *is* the power and wisdom of God.
This quote is epistemological Pelagianism. Salvation and knowledge go together. We must oppose synergism in the one as strongly as we oppose it in the other. No wonder Luther shows the way. We’d do well to heed his cautions...
It is incontestably and trivially true that pagans can write meaningful novels, develop life-saving medicine, pursue world-enlightening science, make correct philosophical and moral observations. And it’s equally true that pagans can work for peace, give blood and generally be very, very nice people. No-one’s saying unbelievers can’t say true stuff, just as no-one’s saying unbelievers can’t do good stuff. The trouble comes when someone tries to co-ordinate nature and grace in either knowledge or salvation. Whenever the natural is seen as a stepping stone into grace alarm bells must go off. Whenever co-ordination, stepping-stones, bridges, spectrums, pilgrimmages, ascents up hills are discussed flags have to go up...
Truth is relative – relative to Christ, the Truth (good name for a blog I reckon). His subjectivity is the one objectivity. There are therefore whole worlds of understanding that make some kind of sense within their own terms of reference and which make some kind of sense of the world but are falsely related to the true Logos. Therefore in toto and at root they are utterly false. And there can be no bridge between these worlds and the world in which Christ crucified is central. There can only be redemption from these worlds. Such a redemption will require wholesale rethinking (metanoia – change of mind)... 2 Cor 10:5!...
I’m happy to call any number of pagan statements ‘true’ – just as I’m happy to call any number of pagan actions ‘good’. (For me this parallel between knowledge and salvation is key.)
It allows me to say:
1) such ‘truth’ or ‘goodness’ is of great benefit to the world.
2) such ‘truth’ or ‘goodness’ can be truly seen by the regenerate as evidences of common grace.
but,
3) such ‘truth’ or ‘goodness’, viewed from the pagan themselves, does not lead towards but away from Christ and Him crucified.
A pagan’s goodness leads them away from the grace of Christ, a pagan’s wisdom leads them away from the revelation of Christ...
I could tell you all sorts of propositions that surrounded my saving faith in Christ, but I’d be reflecting back on a miracle. I wouldn’t be telling you the natural steps that secured salvation any more than the servants at Cana would be telling you how *they* drew wine out of those stone jars.
Just as there are no discrete human deeds that add up to divine righteousness, so there are no discrete human understandings that add up to divine knowledge. All must be of grace, all must be of revelation.
So there. I also discuss Acts 17 and Romans 2 a bit. And there's even some good points made by other bloggers! Common grace really is astounding ;-)
.
.
As I began this week, the prospect of blogging struck me as a foul burden. For some reason the phrase 'feeding the monster' flashed across my semi-wakened consciousness.
Has it come to this? Blogging is now a beast to be placated?
I have over 60 draft posts in some state of readiness for publication. One of them is an outline for a 50 part series. There's stuff from my website I could post. There are many sermons I've yet to upload. There are quotes that have blown me away recently. But I can't be bothered with any of it. Who knows if this will see the light of day.
Blahhhh.
And blogging is freely entered into. It should not be like a career ladder whose first rung we eagerly grasped but whose upper reaches ensnare us. Blogging doesn't pay the bills. And it's not some covenanted relationship I've undertaken before the Lord or His people. Still - at times it feels like feeding the monster.
We are not held captive by foreign overlords. Our own desires enslave us.
.
Those two things aren't the same you know. But often we forget that. Especially as we try to live in community. I mean, think about it - what helps our Christian communities function?
Surely we get along because we all play nice, right? Empowered by the gospel of course. We have to add that caveat. But now that it's added we settle down to the real glue for any community: being nice. When people are nice, communities flourish. When people are not nice communities fall apart. This is obvious.
Just look at Colossians 3:12
Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.
Yep. See? Be nice. Be nice and everyone will get along. Cover over all that nastiness with sweetness. Or polite reserve. Or effusive flattery. Whatever you do, don't be nasty. The minute someone's nasty, it's over.
Really?
Well that would be the case if we were a part of any natural community. What did Jesus say? Pagans love those who love them. (Matt 5:46-47). You don't need the Holy Spirit to do that. You don't need the supernatural grace of God. You don't need a new heart of flesh to be nice.
So what's going to mark supernatural communities?
Look at how Colossians 3 continues...
Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. (Col 3:13)
Natural communities don't have this. At the first hint of nastiness, natural community fractures. But for Christians nastiness is an opportunity. Here's where we truly show ourselves to be the people of Jesus. We forgive.
Many people think nastiness ends Christian community. The gospel says nastiness is where Christian community begins.
What about blogging? A million blogs can be nice. It doesn't make them Christian. Now may Jesus deliver us from nasty Christian blogs. Please Lord! But niceness is not the cure. Many may think they have a Christian blog because everyone is nice. That doesn't make it Christian. It's Christian if it answers nastiness with cruciform love.
We must bear with each other. Forgive. Show mercy towards opponents. Die to self. Crucify our own need to prove ourselves. Answer harsh words with gentleness (Prov 15:1). That's where Christian community begins.
.
Yet another conversation containing the names Goldsworthy and Blackham has collapsed under the weight of pointed comments that got out of hand. And I was the chief commenter.
[deep exhale]
And this is precisely why people hate the issue being brought up.
It aggravates old wounds.
Wrong response 1: We should be able to discuss such things dispassionately.
No, actually. If we're not emotionally engaged it's obviously not an issue close to the heart of the gospel. Dispassionate disagreements are not worth having at all. But I think this is an issue touching on the nature of faith, our doctrine of God, the supremacy of Christ. If those things don't tug on heart strings there's something wrong. Dispassionate engagement is not an option. But Christian engagement is a necessity. Dying to self. Crucifying the flesh with its desires. Giving our lives up for others. Paul said he'd go veggie for life if it protected non-meat-eating brothers. (1 Cor 8:13) That's not dispassionate engagement, it's a costly love for those with whom we disagree. We should feel strongly and make the conscious effort to swallow pride, to abandon the need to be right, to look on people we feel are mistaken and love them (Mark 10:21). Such disagreements among believers should be prime opportunities to give and receive grace.
Wrong response 2: Given the aggro that attends it, it's always wrong to raise this issue.
Well - maybe on the Paul-going-veggie example, we should just go vegan! And Paul says he'd do it for life. There will be seasons when we just have to go veggie. And this must not be with the thought of regrouping for our next assault. It must be with the thought, "I will shut my mouth indefinitely on this issue if that is in their best interests." But then of course Paul did actually side with the strong and taught accordingly. There must be ways of raising the issue while at the same time making every effort to serve those with whom we disagree. We have to find ways of doing that.
What we really need to do is go on mission together. Like in the best buddy movies, we need to go into the front lines as a rag-tag bunch of awkward, mistrustful rejects. But as the heat of the battle presses us together, as we start sticking up for each other, as we see each other's gifts serve the common good, then we'll have that common love and respect for each other that is the ground not the goal of such discussions.
But we're very sick at heart you know...
.
Alongside the usual rants about trinity, OT, Christ-centredness and preaching I'm planning on writing about:
Pastoral care (in particular mental illness)
Pornography
Apologetics
Islam
Marriage
Mission
What will you be blogging about in 2009?
.
Let me take this end-of-year opportunity to sum up what this blog has been about...
Christ the Truth means Jesus is not just the one Way or one Life, but the one Truth of God. Truth - all truth - is in Jesus. This means all our thinking about God must begin with Him. Not some Christ-principle but Jesus of Nazareth. Not some divinized ideal but the actual Jesus of the Gospels.
When we do this we realize the cruciformity of the Christian God. The Lamb is at the very centre of the throne. His glory is the glory of self-giving and not the glory of self-centredness.
How can this be? Our God is trinity. He is One and Three. God's One-ness and Three-ness are not un-coordinated perspectives. Rather the Oneness of God simply is the communion of these concrete and particular Persons. To approach God's oneness in this way guards against many errors and brings many benefits.
Of course this christocentric, trinitarian approach is not a New Testament novelty. Christ has always been the object of faith and hope for Old Testament believers. Revelation has always been on a trinitarian dynamic. The Hebrew Scriptures themselves give us a trinitarian witness on their own terms and in their own context.
From this it becomes obvious that there are no true understandings of God that are not Christ-centred, trinitarian revelations. Neither reason, nor creation, nor religion (be it biblical or unbiblical) can offer us stepping stones towards true knowledge. We either begin with the Christ, the Son of God or we don't begin at all. Yet from Christ we can reason truly and understand the wealth of God's revelation in all the universe. This is faith seeking understanding and is the proper method for all enquiry.
All of this is to say that the God with Whom we have to deal is never an abstract deity but always the very concrete Jesus with His Father and Spirit - He is always and at all times irreducibly the God of the Gospel. And His being is unfolded and expressed precisely in the gospel economy.
From the Father has come His Son to lay hold of our humanity in incarnation, and to die our death in crucifixion. This has always been the way of the LORD. He rose again as Head over creation and ascended to the Father's right hand in glory.
Humanity is not free to choose participation in this life. Rather we are freed by the Son to enjoy His status. We find ourselves as those already embraced by this triune God. We find ourselves participating in this divine nature - loved with the eternal love of the trinity.
Faith is not a thing we contribute to this salvation. It is a looking unto Jesus - the very opposite of self-regard.
In this we find our identity - not in personality types but in Jesus. We find our assurance - not in personal piety but in our perfect Priest. We find our encouragement - far above and beyond ourselves, in Christ who is our righteousness. Since this is so, sinning really isn't the worst thing - refusing His forgiveness is. We respond to sin by looking away from self to our Champion. This is not cheap grace, but the true grace of God.
Such a gospel overflows in our hearts with singing. And with proclamation - we believe therefore we speak. Preaching is basically the heralding of our Champion's victory. This proclamation is itself the Word of God. And it is our sole task as we await the return of Jesus - not the moral, social or political reformation of society (or even ourselves), but the proclamation of King Jesus. And its point (it's application if you will) is not moralism but always to look to Him.
That's basically what I'm on about.
.