Jesus the Christ – The Way, The Truth, The Life

Hi

It seems that there has become a grand cleavage between Dr Sweet and B McLaren. And I am glad that Dr Sweet has stepped up to clarify the difference in his article submitted here.

Thanks

Dr Bryan F Hagerman
Dartmouth
NS
canada

I do not think that Brian McLaren would necessarily disagree with anything Dr. Sweet said here, though he probably would have said it in a different way, and I’m not sure if the solution to the problem is quite that simple, but maybe (and hopefully?) it is!

I agree with Bill W. this seems to be a simplistic answer. In my view, the third way recommended does not seem to be a third way at all and actually I would prefer more nuancing and room for discussion. This article seems to shut down any additional input.

intersting article and intersting responses. as someone who in my own writing and sspeaking might also be seen as advocating a third way – in the UK where i am BTW that is the name of a Christian magazine which is trying to do that too, and perhaps over here there are so many folks talking about third way i actually wouldn’t use the term. anyway i think there may be more here than the comments above suggest. my personal analogy isd about moving from bounded set thinking to centred set in the church, bounded set is about the in or out issues, defining our edges so we can then judge things accordingly, centred set is about seeking to go on a journey in which by God’s grace i become like Christ, so i look to him and seek to follow him but realize i have a way to go, and so i actually wouldn’t know what the boundaries are, just where the centre is. for me the old distinctions between liberal and tradtional forms of Christianity are too foten a debate about boundaries, i think we need to move on from that debate and seek Christ not try to decide who is and is not on the journey. i also think that a renewd Christian vision is certinaly what my country needs, but it certainly doesn’t need a return to Christendom, again a new way

The key phrase in this article is ”...the only begotten Son of God is the draw.” But there is another phrase too, ”...He will draw all people to Himself.” It is not our job to do the drawing. Our job is to build God’s Upside Down Kingdom here and now and that starts with us being drawn in without reservation. If that “lifts Him up” so be it.

Just a comment on Mr.Fishers post : I would propose that Jesus NEVER talks about US building the kingdom. It draws near, it insinuates itself into the world, it is revealed and we are to sell all that we have for a stake in it… but we are never told we can build it. Our job is to tell the story, of the Biblical narrative and of our own faith journey in light of that story. I am to be the witness to the Kingdom that already is, and is breaking into the world even as we watch.

I couldn’t have said it better; we do need another view of who Christ is to cut through all the “stuff” (I was thinking of another word here) that goes around the true issues. There is too much “church building” which I suppose would be construed a building the Kingdom of God on earth. Getting to the heart of who Christ is, both spiritually divine and human and His call to love one another both as we love ourselves and as He has loved us gives us the impetise to follow in His footsteps. Anything else is soulish and an some way self-serving. To follow in His footsteps will cost you in whatever way you do surrender to His Lordship. He spoke very clearly about this, “count the costs” in his gospel message.

The Christology most appealing to me, when all is said and done, is that Jesus is “the human face of God.” When we look at Jesus, we see God. “Philip said to him, ‘Lord, show us the Father, and we will be satisfied.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you still do not know me? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.’” (John 14:8-9)

When you suggest lifting Jesus high, which Jesus are you referring to? I would argue that the problem you referred to as a left/right split is exactly the problem of lifting two different Jesuses high.

It sounds good to say, “Ignore everything else and just focus on Jesus!” But the reality is that I think most of us are trying to do that. The problem isn’t the lack of respect for Jesus. Maybe we have a really hard time seeing clearly the Christ.

I lift Jesus high (when I’m at my best), but even then I must admit it is only the best Jesus I can see as of now.

I agree with the comments so far that speak of the post as attractive, but not very helpful.

Most people on the theological left and right are very committed to following Jesus as the way, truth, and light. I would argue that basic ideological foundations lead people to express that common commitment in divergent ways.At issue is not that we are to follow Jesus, but how we go about doing just that. Proposing that a renewed commitment to a Christ centered faith would resolve things misses the mark. The rub is in our practice, not in our basic and shared Christian commitment.

When I first grew weary of being caught in a conservative/liberal gridlock I started reading John Howard Yoder. I sought a third way in the radical reformation.

But the real issue is not should we commit to following Jesus. That is self evident. The real issue is how do we interpret and practice discipleship in this global, 21st century context. What content do we pour into the words which we believe to be self-evident, but are not?

@Bill, I would have to disagree that the divergence is over practice. I think the issue is fundamentally with who we understand Jesus to be. Our practice is not atheological, ever. It is built on and maintained by our vision of God. The emergent “conversation” (though I think it’s pretty disengenuous to call it that) is built on a reworking of theology, especially who we understand Jesus to be. In a conversation a friend of mind had with B Mclaren, he asked if Ghandi brought the kingdom. Mclaren answered, “yes.” Then he asked how we bring the kingdom and keep the king at the center. Mclaren answered, “I haven’t thought that way in a long time.” Is this not a theological divergence?