King Jesus Questions 3

Last updated on: September 15, 2011 at 7:08 pm By Scot McKnight

Ben Witherington turned in this set of questions on points at which he wanted clarification in my The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited, and you can take it from there…

In this post Scot and I [Ben] will have a dialogue about points I want some clarification on, and points in which we mayhave some differences. Let me say from the outset, that I think this book is fundamentally right in what it objects to about the soterian Gospel, and in what it asserts is the real full Gospel, focused on Jesus, not just on his soterological benefits.

Comment and Question One: On pp. 35-36 you say that the story of the Bible is the story of Israel. I do not entirely agree with this. The story of Adam and Eve is the story of human origins and it is not merely the story of the origins of Israel. Israel doesn’t come into the story before at least Abraham. The reason this becomes important is because in the NT both Luke and Paul wanted to relate the story of Jesus not merely to the story of Israel, but to the earlier story of creation and Adam and Eve. Jesus did not come to just complete or fulfill the story and the mission of Israel. He came to bring the story of humanity in general to a conclusion, to resolve the human dilemma of all human beings, both Jew and Gentile. Thus while it is true that Jesus brings the story of Israel to a climax and some fulfillment in his ministry, he is also bringing the larger human story to a climax and some correction. I guess my question is, why subsume the story of Adam and humanity under the heading of the story of Israel? Shouldn’t it be the other way around?

Scot Responds:

This is a good and important question, and is of benefit for all of us to ponder. A few thoughts:

When I say Story of Israel, I have colonized and incorporated the story of humanity into it. I don’t do this by way of violence but by way of precedent: God, according to our Bible, chose to redeem humanity through Israel. So, the Story of Israel is the Story of God in this world, beginning with Adam and Eve but taking a new and covenant form with Israel, so that Israel is elected missionally to be a blessing to the nations. So, yes, there does appear to be a reduction in moving from humanity to Israel, but the order of the Bible now is from Israel to the world. And there’s more here: the Story of Christ is directly tied to the Story of Israel in almost every way possible. God chose to incarnate his plan through a people, Israel, and then to incarnate his Son through an Israelite son, Jesus. The incarnation itself is involved in this Story of Israel, and it is important for us to embrace God’s chosen plan – Israel, Messiah, church – as the means through which God works missionally and the locations in particular where God redeems.

I come back with this: Indeed, Luke and Paul (Jesus, too, in the divorce text) connects back to Adam, but the gravity of emphasis in the NT is not Adam but Abraham. But I don’t want to be forced to choose: Adam is in Abraham and Abraham is in David and David (and Adam and Abraham) are in Christ etc..
If my book comes off as not focusing on the world, then that is my fault, but one of the themes of The King Jesus Gospel is that Jesus is Messiah and Lord for Israel and the Gentiles. (more…)

King Jesus Questions 2

Last updated on: September 13, 2011 at 7:18 am By Scot McKnight

This is our second batch of responses to Ben Witherington’s questions about The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited…

Q. You seem to put a lot of weight on 1 Corinthians 15 as giving us clues as to what the original Gospel preaching looked like. Can you unpack this for us? In what sense does this become normative for our preaching today?

If we ask “what does gospel mean?” and we want to answer that by probing the Bible, then I suggest that the one place where someone up and “defines” gospel is 1 Corinthians 15. Everyone, so it seems to me, admits this, even if they then swarm what Paul says with a soterian approach. 1 Corinthians 15:3-5, or 15:3-8, or 15:3-28, defines the gospel. This is the outline that we find expounded in the sermons in Acts and then the outline that is developed completely in the Gospels themselves.

Well, if we want to preach the gospel today then I suggest we have to give full weight to this trajectory or matrix of meaning: 1 Corinthians 15, the sermons in Acts, and the one and only gospel in the Gospels.

Q. One of the major ways you connect all the stories in the Bible is by highlighting the fact that God created human beings to be kings and priests on the earth, beginning with Adam, then Abraham, then Israel, then Jesus, then the church. What does it mean for us to be a king or priest on this earth, especially as Christians since Christ is our heavenly high priest and our king? (more…)

King Jesus Questions 1

Last updated on: September 14, 2011 at 6:32 pm By Scot McKnight

Ben Witherington, Professor at Asbury Theological Seminary, read The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited, carefully and asked a bundle of questions: here’s the first batch. This was first posted at Ben’s site here at Patheos.

Q. Let’s start with a question I get asked a lot which usually takes the form—- ‘What! Another book by you? What prompted you to write yet another book and why this book in particular?

Yes, I get asked that question at times, and as we enter into … what do we call this part of our careers, Ben?, because we don’t want to admit we are starting to be the veterans in the circle … the writing habit has become part of how we live. But, each book has its own genesis and this began for me years back when I began to ask myself what the “gospel” would look like if I began at the beginning of the Bible and not with Paul’s letter to the Romans. I developed that into Embracing Grace but was not entirely satisfied, and a good reading of the last two chps it may have been clear that I was probing some themes for which I did not have final answers but was exploring some things. Then I wrote A Community called Atonement to explore how atonement and gospel work together.

But I was still not satisfied and I’ll tell you exactly why: working out a more robust theory of salvation, which is what those two books did, does not fit as well as we might like with the sermons in Acts. So all along I kept saying to myself: “Scot, you’re OK on this salvation and atonement stuff, but you still need to think through the gospel sermons in Acts a bit more.” So when I was invited to Stellenbosch to speak to an academic conference on the Book of Acts, I gave a paper on the gospel in Acts and it pushed me beyond where I thought I would go. I realized I was part of the problem in equating gospel with salvation, and Acts said “You’re wrong.” This book is the book that sets the record straight for me on the meaning of gospel.

Q. You talk a lot in this book about the difference between the ‘soterian’ Gospel which is not a full presentation of the Gospel and what you view as the full Evangelical Gospel. Can you explain this distinction and what you are wanting to stress by making it? (more…)

Anne Graham Lotz on 9/11

Last updated on: September 12, 2011 at 8:04 am By Scot McKnight

Anne Graham Lotz, at CT:

September 11 was an alarm that penetrated my daily responsibilities and my busy ministry schedule, warning me … of what? Ten years ago, I could not have answered that question. All I knew with certainty was that God was trying to get the attention of his people, including me. Like the prophet Isaiah in the year that King Uzziah died, I looked up with the eyes of faith.

What I saw was not just a fresh vision of Jesus Christ. Like Isaiah, I also saw a humiliating vision of my own sin. I spent days on my face before God, confessing my sin and receiving his cleansing. The result was an authentic experience of personal revival. The immediate impact was a renewed vibrancy in my relationship with God, an increased fervency in prayer, clearer insight into God’s Word, and a sharpened focus in ministry.

But the alarm did not fade away. Instead, I have heard it reverberating throughout the past 10 years: from Hurricane Katrina to the record-breaking floods, forest fires, tornadoes, droughts, and snow storms; to the collapse of our major financial institutions; to the economic recession; to the inability to win the war in Afghanistan. The alarm keeps resounding because so many people have not heeded, or even heard, the warning.

And what is the warning? Simply this: It is five minutes to midnight on the clock of human history. Judgment is at the door. Jesus is coming! It’s time to wake up and get right with God! Are you listening?

Seven Days that Divide the World 1

Last updated on: September 10, 2011 at 7:26 am By Scot McKnight

John Lennox, professor in Mathematics at Oxford, in his new and wonderfully written book, Seven Days That Divide the World: The Beginning According to Genesis and Science, examines the age-old, ever divisive — and yet wintergreen in piquing our interest — issues in the science and faith/Bible debates. My sentence, the one I just wrote, is hopelessly complex. Lennox has learned to write, and that Zondervan bundled up this little book into an attractive format, makes this a delightful book both to hold and to read.

I really like this statement he makes:

The take-home message from Augustine is, rather, that, if my views on something not fundamental to the gospel, on which equally convinced Christians disagree, attract ridicule and therefore disincline my hearers to listen to anything I have to say about the Christian message, then I should be prepared to entertain the possibility that it might be my interpretation that is at fault (32).

Now I said Lennox could write, and that sentence is very complex, but it’s unlike any other I’ve seen in this book. But he’s right, and it’s important to listen to what he’s saying. And it leads me directly to a comment or two. Ah, it’s that “fundamental to the gospel” that gets us all tripped up. What one person thinks is fundamental to the gospel, another person thinks is totally unimportant. No matter that I disagree sharply with Al Mohler on the age of the earth and the intent of Genesis 1 (and 2), I give Mohler “props” for sticking to his guns in thinking that gospel matters matter greatly. He thinks surrendering Adam and Eve to the land of myth or fiction, true myth or true fiction notwithstanding, surrenders too much. As I say, I give him props for that. But Dennis Venema thinks, well, Mohler is just wrong. And Venema thinks otherwise on the Adam and Eve issues of our day.

Questions: Are ancient cosmological statements metaphors, intentional ones, or are they cosmological perceptions of that day? What does this mean for how we view the Bible?

So let me say it simply, in layperson terms: If our views are ludicrous for the scientists, maybe we are wrong. (more…)

Two Smacks Max 1

Last updated on: September 23, 2014 at 8:23 am By Scot McKnight

William Webb, in his newest book, Corporal Punishment in the Bible: A Redemptive-Movement Hermeneutic for Troubling Texts, examines what might be called the traditional view of spanking among evangelical Christians. He calls it the “two smacks max” or “two spanks max” method.

He begins with that method and examines whether it is really biblical. Thus, “Christian advocates of spanking [and he names James Dobson, Focus on the Family, Wayne Grudem, Al Mohler, Andreas Koestenberger, and Paul Wegner] generally claim that their practices have the backing of Scripture, and thus God’s approval” (25). Thus, obedience implies corporal punishment. They use some typical scriptures, and here are a few of them:

Prov 13:24: Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.

Prov 23:13-14: Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish them with the rod, they will not die. Punish them with the rod and save them from death.

How do you approach/understand these texts on corporal punishment? What is your theory of corporal punishment?

Webb admits he used to use those passages as do advocates for the “two smacks max” approach, but no longer. But he asks first whether or not the advocates are truly biblical, and Webb finds seven areas where these advocates have diminished what the Bible says, softened it in one way or another, and not been fully biblical. He says they have moved “beyond the Bible.” Here are the seven: (more…)

How to use the Bible in Politics 1

Last updated on: July 30, 2011 at 11:22 am By Scot McKnight

About ten days back we looked at someone who uses the Bible “biblicistically,” to use the terms of Christian Smith’s book, while today we want to look at one who uses the Bible in politics with hermeneutical savvy, and he is one of the world’s finest New Testament scholars, Richard Bauckham. His book is called: The Bible in Politics: How to Read the Bible Politically.

Bauckham is incapable of writing anything without finesse, but a blog post can’t capture all of what an author writes so I will merely sketch his big ideas. To begin with, when we read the Bible for politics we encounter a major issue immediately: the relationship of the Old Testament to the New Testament. That is, it’s easy to go to the Old Testament, find texts that support what we are looking for, and then announce with biblical bravado, “See, it’s right here in the Bible!” But, but, but… Bauckham says. Israel was a political entity and the New Testament Christians are a politically powerless minority.

Which means we have to deal with the problem of selectivity. “… this selection [or ours] has all too often been governed by expedience” (4). So, what to do? He speaks of “dispensational differences.”

1. One can argue, say, that the Sermon on the Mount advances our understanding of ethics and makes the old obsolete. So war is set aside.
2. One can argue a theocratic state can’t be a model for a state today. Those wars in the OT were for a theocratic state.

So Bauckham ponders some ways to approach these issues: (more…)

How to Talk about the Afterlife (if you must) 1

Last updated on: July 9, 2011 at 1:13 pm By Scot McKnight

Ten Theses to Guide Debate on the Afterlife

This post is by D. C. Cramer, who is a PhD student in religion with an emphasis in theological ethics at Baylor University, a pastor in the Missionary Church denomination, and a regular participant in the Jesus Creed community.

The following are some theses—in no particular order—that I believe should help guide discussions of the afterlife, especially those debates currently raging over universalism and hell. These thoughts are purely my own (and even I’m not sure what I think of all of them). By stating these theses, I am not advocating or endorsing any of the views of the afterlife discussed.

Which theses do you (dis)agree with? Why? Are there any theses you would add to this list?

(1) Every view of the afterlife involves some amount of speculation. True, some views might be more speculative than others, but the level of speculation doesn’t necessarily determine the truth of a view. No view, however seemingly speculative, should be dismissed or taken as a given until all arguments—biblical, theological, and philosophical—have been carefully considered. (more…)

The Cape Town Commitment 10

Last updated on: July 4, 2011 at 1:03 pm By Scot McKnight

The tenth commitment, in the first part of the Cape Town Commitment [The Cape Town Commitment: A Confession of Faith and a Call to Action (Didasko Files)], is a commitment to the robust mission of God in this world, and once again I urge you to read the CTC and also to study it. It’s a breathtaking approach to our task in this world in light of the mission of God for this world.

This sketch of the mission of God in some ways is the heart of this document, and it deserves to be seen as the fruition of three decades of very serious missional discussions and theology. There is no minimization of evangelism, nor any of social action, and it junks the debate of which is first. Both are part of what God is doing in this world.

But there are too many today who not committed to world mission, and the biblical focus on world mission is why I like the CTC so much. It unflinchingly and compassionately calls us to up our commitment to the mission of God in this world. Notice the the themes that are expounded: we participate in God’s mission and the integrity of this mission in what God does in Jesus Christ.

(more…)

Transforming the World 10 (Patrick Mitchel)

Last updated on: June 4, 2011 at 11:03 am By Scot McKnight

Transforming the World 10 (by Patrick Mitchel, at IBI)

The book is Transforming the World, edited by Dewi Hughes and Jamie Grant, published in the UK and as yet not available in the USA.

Our final post on Transforming the World?: the Gospel and Social Responsibility (edited by Dewi Hughes and Jamie Grant) is on a chapter by David Smith, ‘Evangelicals and Society: the story of an on-off relationship’.

David, recently retired from International Christian College, is an adjunct teacher at Irish Bible Institute on our MA programme, has written extensively about evangelicalism and mission and is an all round good guy – this is a fascinating chapter.

Is one way to see the tensions surrounding emerging & missional church debates between an emphasis on a ‘world transformative’ gospel versus a more ‘spiritual gospel’? One stresses the social and ethical impact of the gospel to change a broken world. The other stresses the importance of evangelism, church planting and individual transformation. Are they not so much in contradiction as focusing on different aspects of the one gospel?

Anyway, one thing David Smith does very well in this chapter is to show that this sort of tension is not new. (more…)