One of the major critiques of White Christianity (in the West at least) has been its emphasis on the death of Jesus over and above the life that led to the cross. Some are guilty of "vampire Christianity" (Dallas Willard's phrase)--we only want Jesus for his blood, ignoring the way he teaches his followers to live.
Parting the Waters is one of the most insightful and carefully constructed narratives capturing the heart of America during the King years. Here's an excerpt:
In Baltimore, after nearly a decade of persistent negotiations, the city’s white and Negro Baptist preachers came together to discuss the role of the church in a time of racial tension. The meeting itself was a historic event, a gathering of uneasy strangers, and for the occasion the preachers of each race selected a representative to speak about their common religious heritage…
Vernon Johns reacted to a sermon by a white preacher which primarily emphasized the death of Jesus, the forgiveness of sins and promise of heaven. Here's what Johns said in response to the sermon.
“The things that disappoints me about the Southern white church is that it spends all of its time dealing with Jesus after the cross, instead of dealing with Jesus before the cross,” he growled and a number of the Negro preachers already were sinking inwardly toward oblivion.
Johns turned to the white preacher who had just sat down. “You didn’t do a thing but preach about the death of Jesus,” he said. If that were the heart of Christianity, all God had to do was drop him down on Friday, and let them kill him, and then yank him up again on Easter Sunday. That’s all you hear. You don’t hear so much about his three years of teaching that man’s religion is revealed in the love of his fellow man. He who says he loves God and hates his fellow man is a liar, and the truth is not in him. That is what offended the leaders of Jesus’s own established church as well as the colonial authorities from Rome. That’s why they put him up there.”
Telling the whole story of Jesus is not easy. But if we are to be faithful to the message of God revealed in scripture, one must deal with Jesus' life, not simply one understanding of his death.
Please wait one moment . . .
About the Book (The Feast)
About Me
- Josh Graves
- Nashville, TN, United States
- I'm the best friend of Kara, father of Lucas, minister, author (The Feast), life-long Piston fan . . . I am the Preaching and Teaching Minister for the Otter Creek Church (Nashville) and I am working on a doctorate degree (second year) at Columbia Seminary studying the relationship of postmodernism and Christianity.
Some of Josh's Published Work (essays, books, articles, reviews)
Links
- Barbara Brown Taylor
- Brian D. McLaren
- Bronx Fellowship of Christ
- Chris Lindsey
- Columbia Seminary
- Donald Miller
- Doug Sanders
- Dry Bones--Denver
- Duke Chapel
- Focus: HOPE
- Greg Boyd
- Greg Stevenson
- Greg Taylor
- Jason Steckel
- Jesus Creed
- Jinja Mission Team
- John Mark Hicks
- John York
- Jonathan Storment
- Josh Ross
- Kara Graves (My wife and best friend)
- Kibo Group
- Larry James Urban Daily
- Lauren Winner
- Lee Camp
- Luke Norsworthy
- Mark and Lori Manry
- Mark Love (Missional Church)
- Mike Cope
- My Twitter Page
- New Wineskins Magazine
- Otter Creek Church
- Patrick Mead
- Randy Speck
- Rochester Church
- Rochester College
- Rubel Shelly
- Sean Palmer
- Stockman Family
- The One Campaign
- TOKENS (Lee Camp and the Arts)
- Wade Hodges
- Walter Surdacki
- Will Willimon
13 comments:
Not only is it true that if the story was only about Jesus' death, God could have dropped him down just in time for the crucifixion-resurrection sequence, but also, if our salvation was only about what happens when we die (heaven, hell, other), we would be taken directly to that place after we're saved (whatever that "point of salvation" may be, if there is only one point...) so the focus on death doesn't tell our whole story either.
Good point, Naomi. I'd never thought of that.
Naomi,
That's an excellent point. Our understanding of Christ is linked with our understanding of ourselves (vocation).
Good call.
JG
Naomi, The Gospel is more than merely "one understanding" of Christianity. Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures.
1 Corinthians 15:2-4 lays out this Gospel pretty clearly.
If Jesus Christ had not conquered sin for us, he would be our Judge not our Savior, and all the moral teaching, or good feeling theology in this world could not serve to allay the inevitable conclusion of our transgressions.
Josh, I absolutely agree that Christ calls us to ministry to the poor, and to the marginalized, as well as to unity, but not at the expense of the Gospel itself. Christ modeled for us the life we could never live, the perfect life. As Christians, we worship and bring glory to Christ by imitating his example, but to that end, we cannot allow ourselves to forget the very deed that provides us this hope in the first place. The Gospel of Christ is not a political movement. We can obsess about how wealth is or is not equally distributed, and whether this or that Christian group tends to support some ideology, but if we forsake the Gospel in the name of material justice, or good deeds, then we have cheated a lost and dying world out of its only hope, we have cheated them out of Christ.
Aquinas,
Thanks for writing. Thanks for engaging an important discussion.
Of course Jesus is judge and savior...but that is one element of the atonement...not the whole picture of atonement in the NT.
I fundamentally believe the gospel is political. By "poliical" I refer to the classic sense of the word and NOT the co-opted phrase associated with Republican, Democrat, or other "party's".
"Political" in the this way: how a community arranges itself, values, practices, etc. In that older and classic sense of political, Jesus could not be more political. He addresses everything from marriage, life with the poor, sabbath, children, discipline, etc.
You wrote: "Christ modeled for us the life we could never live, the perfect life."
While I understand your point (I think) this is where we disagree (which is ok). I believe that Jesus called his disciples to live his life and mission once he "left".
Our baptism is the clearest example of this. The baptism of Jesus in NOT about forgiveness of sins only, it is about empowerment of the holy spirit to be the second incarnation; the body of Christ.
Baptism for the "forgivness of sins" only (which is tied to the particular view of the atonement undergirding some of your comments aka "substitutionary") is John's baptism, important but incomplete.
I don't think this clears things up completely but I wanted to clarify what I wrote.
“Of course Jesus is judge and savior...but that is one element of the atonement...not the whole picture of atonement in the NT.”
What is the other element to atonement in the NT? It is nothing but Jesus Christ acting on our behalf that reconciles us to God. Without the death, and resurrection of Christ, Christ’s moral teaching is merely another high standard that we do not have the ability to live up to, and none of our moral performances can add or alter this one iota. Our salvation is by grace, not works, as scripture makes abundantly clear. What exactly do you feel must be added to that for our atonement?
“While I understand your point (I think) this is where we disagree (which is ok). I believe that Jesus called his disciples to live his life and mission once he "left".”
No, it seems to me this is where we are in complete agreement. As I mentioned earlier we are to imitate Christ. Paul says it clearly “follow me as I follow Christ”.
“Baptism for the "forgivness of sins" only (which is tied to the particular view of the atonement undergirding some of your comments aka "substitutionary") is John's baptism, important but incomplete.”
In the sense that the transformation into the image of Christ is not complete in us, yes. While the Holy Spirit will be continually working in our lives on this earth to mold us into Christ’s image, it will never be complete until we are in Glory.
Based on your advocations, I have been led to the conclusion that the alternative view of atonement that (presumably) you ascribe to is the Moral Influence Theory. Is this correct?
I have to say I am more than a little surprised that a generally outspoken student, who is a campus ministry intern no less, would know so little about something as fundamental as why Jesus died. (and furthermore to treat it as irrelevant) What concerns me at an entirely deeper level, is until I appeared, no one bothered to explain it.
Josh,
I forgot to address my last post, glad to be discussing with you.
Aquinas,
Thanks for discussing. I think we're at a dead end. A couple of suggestions (written with humility).
1. Avoid calling out other people on this blog. Naomi is one of the finest students to come out RC. To insult her intelligence is not only unbecoming, it says more about you than her.
2. There are a wide array of understandings of the death of Jesus in NT and scattered throughout church history.
I guess I'm a little surprised with your lack of humility for those who've seriously studied theology, etc. I am not suggesting that you have to swallow everything you are fed but there are people at RC who are speaking from years of practice and study. You might want to ask yourself, "How is God calling me to become more" instead of a posture of continual defense.
Having said that, I do appreciate your spirit of conversation, argumentation (a good thing in the Jewish world), etc.
Blessings.
Hakin,
Thanks for your honest feedback. I wish you would identify yourself, but that's your choice. That's one thing I respect about Mark, he puts his name out there, regardless.
I've got zero concerns about my theology, or the direction of RC's Religion Dept. etc.
I am sorry you don't realize the amount of experience, study and serious reflection represented at RC.
I'll write no more about this, I'm done.
Thanks Hakin, I would like to let this thread go for the moment, but I cannot help but feel that I must respond to Josh’s insinuation that I have insulted Naomi.
This is wholly fictitious. I have not I called her out. I merely stated that I was surprised that she did not know a fundamental aspect of Christianity. I genuinely believe a little more thought and care should be given before such accusations are made. It is, as you say, unbecoming.
Josh,
It's not an issue of "not realizing" the amount of study, experience, and reflection that goes into the religion department at RC. I do realize it, but what you don't realize is that there are many other college's and Seminaries that have far more experience and knowledge than RC's staff and they disagree with much that you and many other people in this college believe. I'm always up for a change in theology if there is a good case for it. I'm definitely no where near intelligent enough to have all the answers, but there are things that I do know for a fact, through intense study and reflection of my own, along with backing from both the Master's Theological Seminary, and Dallas Theological Seminary. My theology isn't just drawn up from a hat, or without ecumenical backing. I guess what I'm saying that none of us can be too arrogant to believe that we have all the right answers because we don't. There are a few things that I know but there is a lot more that I don't. I never speak on anything I haven't studied for myself, nor do I give my opinion on them. Now I'm not saying that you haven't studied this topic, because its very obvious to me that you have, but expect questions from me in the near future as to where you got the information you did or why you feel that what you wrote was accurate.
Hakin
Hakin,
I would rather we email some of this discussion rather than posting on this blog.
If that's ok. Please email me at jgraves32@yahoo.com or jgraves@rochestercoc.org and we can continue this discussion.
Just for the record. The view of the atonement I teach and believe the most is "Christus Victor"--Jesus's victory over the powers of darkness (including death, sin,institutional evil, etc.). It's probably the oldest view, even older than subsitutionary/penal law code views that dominate conservative Christianit. The foundational work is Gustaf Aulen's Christus Victor.
Post a Comment