Hello again, fellow bloggers! I must apologize for my absence as i have been somewhere between Canada and lake Huron on the very tip of the U.P. for InterVarsity training camp. During the camp i took my student leadership team through a week-long study of James. It's a great book. We especially enjoyed the context of the writing of James, how he is addressing a schism between Jewish social classes and oppression of the lower classes. James was well known as a friend of the down-trodden in society. Partly in response to this, we decided to engage our campus next semester with the question "Where is God?" in response to social injustices, like slavery, poverty, sex trafficking, etc... We want to show God's desires for these areas through our words and actions, but also proclaiming a Christ-centered and justification-centered gospel. I had to stress that last point because often it seems that recently we have put so much emphasis on how we should act as Christians in "reconciling all things" that reconciling them to Jesus gets lost in simply trying to make things right. By that i mean we try to make life better for everyone because we think that is our duty and that is why Christ died and rose again.
There are many books written, many by my own beloved IVP, proclaiming what we know as the social gospel, and it seems that sometimes Jesus is thrown in as an afterthought, if at all. There is a huge emphasis on this thing called a "spiritual journey" that "everyone is on together." Part of that spiritual journey is doing good things for people because Jesus came to set the captives free and heal the blind and help the oppressed. So that is what we should do.
Before i get too far here i want to ask if anyone else has noticed this trend, and if so, what do you think? Is it good? Bad? Just misguided? A step in the right direction? Must we line up on a side, chosing to emphasize only either personal justification or declaring Christ through merciful acts? I hope a few people are still reading this blog and can comment. I'd like to look at the newer Belhar confession in this discussion as well, since it addresses this and my denomination has adopted it as an additon to the 3 forms of unity for anyone who knows what that means (Kyle). Let's get the discussion started!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Doing and believing are what the book of James is all about. (I just read it on the way home on the bus tonight... before I saw your blog!). I think this fact becomes important, especially when sharing the gospel. We shouldn't just say it, we should show it. I'm also realizing that the Lord often works in small ways, yet we tend to search for big ways to make an impact. The social gospel may be the "big way" approach. Quietly and diligently working for what is right can be a powerful means by which the Holy Spirit impresses the truth upon people. Incidentally, I've been reading a book by James Boice on the parables of Jesus. Remember the parable about the righteous Pharisee and the tax collector? Interestingly, Jesus said that the tax collector was JUSTIFIED because of his prayer for God's mercy on account of his sin. We always need to remember and proclaim the truth of justification because it holds true as much for us as those we are trying to reach. Finally, our message should always be one of reconciliation. We will never change the world, but we will reach people by showing them the more righteous way, in spite of everything else.
It's not the church's job to cure social injustices, "the poor you will always have with you" (Matthew 26:11). Social injustices should be dealt with by the government which bears the sword for a purpose (Romans 13:4). The church (namely the elders) is given the keys to the kingdom (Matthew 16:19); and therefore should preach the gospel in accordance with the Great Commission. To confuse these two "kingdoms" (state/church) is unbiblical (and unreformed). Granted individual Christians must bear testimony to their faith by observing the second table of the law, which is what James is encouraging (James 2:8), he is not encouraging social reform, that does injustice to the text and is a product of 19th century liberalism.
In response to the Belhar confession being "added;" I think it is a crying shame that it has gained equal status with the Heidelberg. But what can we expect from a denomination which is not confessionally Reformed? (That wasn't sarcastic or meant to be a low blow, just the truth)...hey you asked for my opinion.
Monika,
Speaking of the "truth of justification" can you explain your comment on the Pharisee and tax collector a little more. In what sense is "justified" being used in the text, and does the text actually say "he was justified because of his prayer?" I know you're reading Boice, which is good, and I would love to hear what he says on that...cause something in that statement just sounded strange to me. Thanks!
Grace.
Kyle,
Yes, the text actually says "justified": "I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." -Luke18:14. Boice emphasized that Jesus did not say that the man had his prayer answered (even though he did), but that he was justified. By the way, your comments were good. I haven't yet reached a conclusion about the Belhar confession because I really haven't taken the time to study and think about it, but I can say I've been a little wary of its status as a confession. What else could it be considered as, if not a confession of faith (i.e. based on what that really means or is suppose to mean)?
Monika,
I agree the text says he was justified, but that's not the substance of my question. In your first comment you said he was justified "because of his prayer." The text doesn't say that, it merely says he went home justified. So why is that justification founded upon his prayer? Is this a salvific justification (i.e. declaration).
Grace.
Kyle,
I understand where you're coming from. Of course, the tax collector's prayer is not the focal point of salvation because that would imply "works" on his part. I can't really get into all the points made by Boice in this chapter because this post would get too long. I recommend the book because he goes through the parables in great detail. Here's a quote that I hope sums up what I'm trying to say. (By the way, these theological discussions sure get difficult when wording isn't precise!)
"The second remarkable thing about this prayer - and the point to which all this is leading- is that the tax collector was not only aware of his sin, deep and penetrating as that awareness was. He was also aware of what God had done to deal with his sin problem. He was a sinner alienated from God by that sin. But God had bridged the gap, making reconciliation. Consequently, between the beginning and end of his prayer ('God' and 'me, a sinner') come the words 'have mercy on me'. It is because of the acts of God's mercy, and only because of those acts, that this man or any other sinner can approach the Almighty." ..."It is a plea for mercy on the basis of what God has done." I think the salvation process is interactive, but it is completely in God's hands.
Post a Comment