Monday, December 01, 2008
Discipleship VS? The Gospel!?
Justin Taylor recently posted a summary of a Don Carson talk at a Desiring God conferenece. Jollyblogger loooked at one of the summary points in specific.
I refuse to believe that Christ's death and resurrection was merely so that I could continue to be a jerk.
I think David and I agree to a point here. The key phrase is this, "When I go in a gospel direction some will say "that's not the issue." Others will say 'I already know that, but what I really need to know is what to do.'"
The transformation offered by the gospel is not something we do, it is something done to us, provided we allow it. And yet in one of those strange, seemingly-paradoxical ways it is something we participate in, we have a role.
The problem is, I think, linguistic. Not unlike trying to describe the dual nature of Christ or the unity of the Trinity, we are confronted with trying to find a way to tell people that they must actively participate in letting God do something to them - both act and be passive simultaneously.
Discipleship and the gospel are not two different things. They are not separate or different. Either one absent the other is neither. (Go ahead, figure THAT sentence out) Any time we have a discussion that separates them, we have a problem.
Technorati Tags:gospel, discipleship, language
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator
...I'll call attention to the fifth trend he spoke of:David then goes on to makes his case this way:5. There is a trend in our churches to emphasize discipleship over the gospelIn other words the trend is to see the gospel not as something that transforms - the gospel brings salvation but not transformation.
Carson emphasized teaching the whole council of God centering on Christ crucified as the power of the gospel and salvation. If we see the gospel as what "saves" us and if we see discipleship as the actual place where real transformation takes place, it is not a biblical approach. Carson said this trend has a tendency to lead us to see discipleship as legalism; as what pleases God.
But if I turn the conversation in a gospel direction that often throws people. It's often as if someone asked me "what is 2 + 2?" and I answered "rutebega." When I go in a gospel direction some will say "that's not the issue." Others will say "I already know that, but what I really need to know is what to do." Some simply disconnect. If we can frame the problem in terms of mistakes or lack of effort and frame the solution in terms of corrective actions and harder work and frame the outcome in terms of improved performance then people can understand and engage with that. But if sin is the problem, repentance and faith are the solution and forgiveness is the outcome, that's very hard for most Christians to deal with.I'm not sure I get this. I am one of those people that would say, "I am forgiven, now what?" Now, having said that, I am not a person that would necessarily be "looking for something to do," but I am a person who thinks that if Christ's forgiveness has not radically transformed me, then I have not sufficiently appropriated that forgiveness. I celebrate the forgiveness Christ has given me, but I need it in sufficient quantity and quality that I be somehow stop being the kind of person that that needs it.
Curiously I find that most Christians I talk to see forgiveness in Christ as the consolation prize of life. Yes, it's nice that Christ has forgiven me but they just can't grasp that He'll keep on forgiving them. Or, maybe forgiveness is a nice first step but what Christ wants most is improved performance. Forgiveness doesn't merit a celebration, it's a nice consolation prize for those who just can't get their act together.
I refuse to believe that Christ's death and resurrection was merely so that I could continue to be a jerk.
I think David and I agree to a point here. The key phrase is this, "When I go in a gospel direction some will say "that's not the issue." Others will say 'I already know that, but what I really need to know is what to do.'"
The transformation offered by the gospel is not something we do, it is something done to us, provided we allow it. And yet in one of those strange, seemingly-paradoxical ways it is something we participate in, we have a role.
The problem is, I think, linguistic. Not unlike trying to describe the dual nature of Christ or the unity of the Trinity, we are confronted with trying to find a way to tell people that they must actively participate in letting God do something to them - both act and be passive simultaneously.
Discipleship and the gospel are not two different things. They are not separate or different. Either one absent the other is neither. (Go ahead, figure THAT sentence out) Any time we have a discussion that separates them, we have a problem.
Technorati Tags:gospel, discipleship, language
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator
