Jesus: The First Emergent Leader- Part 5
Nov 17th, 2007 by John
Kiss the Son. –Psalm 2.
The emergent conversation believes that Truth is a Person. “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” Without an intimate relationship with the Person Who is Truth, you can make all the “truth claims” you want, but they will be hollow claims, pieces of cold fish laying on the ice. Just words. Shells of sound with no substance. Only the Living Person makes the written Book virile and powerful and transforming.Where do we meet this Person? Where does He live (”dwell”) these days? Words are intended to be carriers of meaning. For example, the word “gospel” is read or said. What meaning does it have to the writer, to the reader, to the speaker and to the listener?The “emergent conversation” is about meanings and the changes in meanings assigned to high impact words like “gospel,” “community,” “church,” “heaven,” and in some instances “God.” Many people think words and meanings are always static, unchanging and unchangable. When someone or group “messes” with the meanings, they get jumpy or irritated or hostile. Words do change. For example, does anybody remember the biblical phrase “superfluity of naughtiness”? You’ll discover it in the old King James Version in the Book of James. We still use that phrase a lot these days, don’t we?
Paul said that God was about “new creation” and Jesus in Revelation says, “Pay real close attention, I’m redefining all of reality. I make all things new!” New names for us included.
Did you know that Homer Simpson’s “Doh!” is now in the New Oxford English Dictionary? Some words are birthed, some words come and go and some words change and grow, expanding, deepening, becoming like, in the Narnia Tales’ wardrobe, doorways into whole new worlds.
I read Edward P. Jones’ Pulitzer Prize winning novel The Known World. It’s about ante-bellum slavery in the U.S.A. The term “property” was a legal term at the time for human beings–fathers, mothers and children–who were bought and sold and treated like farm equipment and livestock. An innocent word like “property” takes on all the contours of evil. It is unsettling to read about how God’s Word was used by “conservative Christians” to perpetuate that definition of “property.”
A lot of Christians say, “Well, God’s Word never changes.” That is 100% correct. And by God’s gracious and sometimes stunning providence, we have a history and record of manuscript evidence that gives us great confidence in the Bible’s integrity, veracity and trustworthiness. Yet, the “conversation” these days is not about the Bible’s words as much as it is about our understanding of those treasured words. Some Christians seem to assign inerrancy not to the Bible, but to their own understandings of the Bible. I think that is arrogant. For example, “gospel.” Google “gospel” and you will find a lot of “meanings” to that one fascinating word. The word “gospel” has been there in the New Testament for millenia and we are still probing the wonder and depth and expanse of that beautiful God-word. And like I mentioned, there are some who criticize the conversation as they sit smuggly with their take on the term “gospel,” as if their understanding and meaning is equal to God’s. That’s why I appreciate skilled New Testament scholars who, with genuine humility, sit in awe as they continue to explore the meanings of the text. When I said “I do” to Julie over 38 years ago, the name “Julie” carried a lot of meaning for me. That’s a given. But what was not true on August 23, 1969 was my ability to define “Julie” based on 38 years with her. Julie is a person; alive; she speaks and feels and thinks and we experience life together. I did not marry the word “Julie” or a picture of 21 year old Julie.
The Word of God is alive. If we reduce it to a book of words, to static meanings carried in our puny minds, we lose the wonder of growing with truth. I want to live with truth, allowing it to continually expand my limited understanding of its beauty and depth and wisdom and surprises.Definitions. I know the definition of “lips.” Yet that definition will never cause me to experience a kiss. Julie and kiss are not just words to me. Do we really want to be satisifed with the “definition” of the gospel? Or would we rather be kissed by it? Live with it? Interact with it? “Behold, I am making all things new!” Why not join the emerging conversation? It is quite stimulating.
Popularity: 4% [?]
I agree that Jesus was a radical pastor, John, but what would Jesus think of the pharasees and saducees for false accusations? Would it be radical to assume guilt without proof, or would He be the more radical one to stand accused and ask where is your proof?
You pursecuted, along with members of your staff at Bella Vista Church, several men with domestic problems with their wives. I met Dr. Charles Olson at a lecture he was giving in Europe, on this same subject. He supported his claims with hard evidence that the Church today has been infiltrated with anti-family, anti-Christian philosophies which are targeting the American family and those worldwide. The fact that your church supported the National Organization of Women and their attacks on him demonstrates the ignorance or contempt of today’s pastors.If deliberate, this blasphemy is a sin against the Holy Spirit. I personally am very angry at you and other pastors that claim to be protecting their flocks, only to actually be preserving them for their own agendas. The shame is on you and your kind; not the Church. Mr Olson related how you said that if someone is angry and shows their anger, they are “guilty of sexual impropriety.” Getting angry? I am d I’m not guilty of a thing except believing the person on the pulpit and not the literal Word of God…or is that left open for your own interpretation, too? The factsare that you and your conspirators destroyed several families in the Name of “Your Miistry” rather than being radical and doing what Jesus Christ would really do…Love, correct, and Love again. How radical…
Paolo,
God’s Word in Proverbs exhorts us to not make final judgments on anyone until you hear both sides of the story. The first person that you hear sounds “right” until the other speaks. Since you have only heard Charles’ side of the story about pastoral intervention issues at Bella Vista Church, as evidenced by your vitriolic words and very incorrect information, I suggest that we defer to the judgment seat of Christ where I am ready to stand eye to eye with the Lord Jesus Christ, with Charles and with you and give an account of my ministry. Don’t let the sun go down on your anger. May God bless you.
I really really like the way you’ve analogized marriage to the meanings of the text. It really is a lot like asking if your wife is the same person you married back in 1969 - yes, and no. But you’ve been along for the ride, and saying “I do” was saying yes to the uncertain, to the possibility of the future.
I’ve been reading What Would Jesus Deconstruct by John D. Caputo and he actually uses a rather similar image.