Category Archives: Theology

The Danger of “Decision” Theology

Scot McKnight makes the comparisons of how the New Testament seems to be talking about Gospel… and how we “gospel” today. He pulls no punches.

When all we care about is bringing people to a decision, to pray a prayer, to just admit their sin and find Jesus as Savior, we are doing damage. Jesus becomes a personal Savior, but not Lord. The whole point of the Gospel is the introduction of the Messiah… the Deliverer… the Master. McKnight is not very “friendly” when he says this decision theology is “heresy” (p. 117). (Just tell us what you think, Scot!)

Anyone who can preach the gospel and not make Jesus’ exalted lordship the focal point simply isn’t preaching the apostolic gospel.

Unfortunately, I know people living in that world and they will continue to live in that world. Why? Because that world gets rewarded. Not by the Kingdom, necessarily, but by our church world. Their very straight answer will be, “Well, how many souls have you won to Jesus?” (Like numbers explain everything. And in our particular church world, numbers ARE everything.)

McKnight’s book is worth a look!

The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited

Christian Vampires

Scot McKnight in his book, The King Jesus Gospel, quotes one of my favorite writers and thinkers, Dallas Willard. He takes Willard’s “gospel of sin management” and puts it in his context of h0w our culture is missing the gospel.

We don’t want to follow Jesus. We want him to get rid of our sin problem, then we’ll see him in heaven. That is the gospel of sin management in a nutshell.

This quote is priceless:

‘Gospels of Sin Management’ presume a Christ with no serious work other than redeeming humankind… (and) they foster ‘vampire Christians,’ who only want a little blood for their sins but nothing more to do with Jesus until heaven.

The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited

Why I am a Confessing Pentecostal

The founding of the Assemblies of God (my denomination) was based on the lack of creeds in the very beginning. They believed in the Bible, bless God, and that was enough. It wasn’t long before theological controversy forced them into a statement of faith. (But it’s not a creed. ;) )

Over the years as I have studied more of Church History and spiritual formation and Pentecostal “sightings”, as I would call them, through the early church, I have grown in my appreciation for the creeds of the Church.

Scot McKnight’s book, The King Jesus Gospel, revolves around the basics of the gospel. His contention is American Christianity has more of a “salvation plan” approach rather than a “gospel” approach. The development of the gospel message in the New Testament, McKnight contends, is 1 Corinthians 15. Paul lays out the simple gospel.

McKnight then makes a bold claim. This simple gospel laid out by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 is the basis for the Nicene Creed. In essence, to be Christian is to be in agreement with the creeds. Quite honestly, he asks, what could a Christian possibly disagree with in the Nicene Creed? What about the Nicene Creed is not gospel? (And, McKnight would say, add in the fact that much of 1 Corinthians 15:1-5 is in there, how can you deny the Creed and not deny the gospel?)

For the early church, to deny the creed was to deny the gospel. It is the very essence of the gospel.

McKnight articulates what has been going on in my own life over the past few years. I am far more “confessional” in my belief than I used to be. I am still solidly Pentecostal. Both “roots” are deep within the Church. This is just something I am learning to try to articulate better.

The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited

 

The Pope and Pentecostalism

Pope Benedict made the following comments about Pentecostalism:

The geography of Christianity has changed dramatically in recent times, and is in the process of changing further. Faced with a new form of Christianity, which is spreading with overpowering missionary dynamism, sometimes in frightening ways, the mainstream Christian denominations often seem at a loss. This is a form of Christianity with little institutional depth, little rationality and even less dogmatic content, and with little stability. This worldwide phenomenon – that bishops from all over the world are constantly telling me about – poses a question to us all: what is this new form of Christianity saying to us, for better and for worse? In any event, it raises afresh the question about what has enduring validity and what can or must be changed – the question of our fundamental faith choice.

While the Pope certainly nails our weaknesses, there is the disappointment in the lack of acknowledgement to what has happened in say, oh, the last 100 years.

We, as Pentecostals, need to do far better in our dogmatics and our stability. There are gifts we bring to the Body of Christ, and we need to partake of the gifts other parts of the Body bring to us!

The King Jesus Gospel — Messing Up the Message

I am beginning to work my way through The King Jesus Gospel by Scot McKnight. My church staff will be making our way through it the next several weeks as well.

The diagnosis of the “evangelical problem” resonates with me. The struggle over “decisions” and “disciples” has been something I’ve felt for all my years in ministry. McKnight lays out his take on why this isn’t working.

As evangelicals, we come up with ways to explain “the plan of salvation” to people. We want to lead them to a decision. The problem is that it doesn’t capture the gospel.

The Plan of Salvation, to put it crudely, isn’t discipleship or justice or obedience. The Plan of Salvation leads to one thing and to one thing only: salvation. Justification leads to a declaration by God that we are in the right, that we are the people of God; it doesn’t lead inexorably to a life of justice or goodness or lovingkindess. If it did, all Christians would be more just and more filled with goodnes and drenched in love.

The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited

The King Jesus Gospel

I follow Scot McKnight on the Jesus Creed blog quite a bit, but other than that, I’m not familiar with his teaching. When The King Jesus Gospel was announced, the one thing that sold me on getting this book right away was there was a forward by Dallas Willard. I have a high regard for Willard, even taking myself back through The Divine Conspiracy this past summer.

Dallas Willard resonates with McKnight in his foreword, and it’s a statement I find true:

(McKnight) works from a basis of profound biblical understanding and of insight into history and into the contemporary misunderstandings that produce gospels that do not naturally produce disciples, but only consumers of religious goods and services.

We need to reconnect again with the fact that we can’t keep separating a salvation decision from spiritual transformation.

I am looking forward to reading this book!

The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited

It Should Still Be TILL DEATH Do Us Part

A lot is being made of Pat Robertson’s horrifying comments (HERE) about a man divorcing his wife who is stricken with Alzheimer’s. (I find it highly ironic the MEDIA is shocked by someone in the church advocating divorce, but that’s another story.)

A column (HERE) really hits hard on Robertson’s statement. These words are really pointed:

Pat Robertson’s cruel marriage statement is no anomaly. He and his cohorts have given us for years a prosperity gospel with more in common with an Asherah pole than a cross. They have given us a politicized Christianity that uses churches to “mobilize” voters rather than to stand prophetically outside the power structures as a witness for the gospel.

But Jesus didn’t die for a Christian Coalition; he died for a church. And the church, across the ages, isn’t significant because of her size or influence. She is weak, helpless, and spattered in blood. He is faithful to us anyway.

Walter Brueggemann and the Disruption God Brings

This interview with Old Testament scholar Walter Brueggemann is well worth your time. In this interview he is asked to unpack some words used in the Old Testament, or some concepts used.

In particular, around minute 25, he gets after how we, as preachers or believers, leave a lot of things unsaid because we are so bound up by our god of consumerism. Liberals or conservatives, these words are worth hearing.

Is the Creation Account Our New “Shibboleth”?

“Shibboleth” comes from a story in Judges. When one tribe was asked how to pronounce the word, they would miss the “h”, thus the enemy tribe could pick out their enemy and kill them when asking them that word.

We look for those places of differentiation and we choose places to “make our stand.”

I am wondering if we are doing that with the Creation account as evangelicals and conservatives. This story on NPR is interesting. (I love these stores in the media. They always treat it like “breaking news,” when it’s something that’s been discussed for a LONG time.)

This quote is interesting:

“From my viewpoint, a historical Adam and Eve is absolutely central to the truth claims of the Christian faith,” says Fazale Rana, vice president of Reasons To Believe, an evangelical think tank that questions evolution.

So, the question is this: Is belief in a historical Adam and Eve absolutely central to the truth claims of the Christian faith? What IS essential? If Creation IS essential, why?

Let me hear from you. And be nice.