No other week forces me to examine myself like Easter week. It has long been a habit to use this week as an opportunity for careful introspection of my life, responsibilities, priorities, ministry, etc. As we approach what we Christians call Good Friday, I am reminded evermore the great and awesome grace of God displayed in glory through the death and resurrection of Jesus.
The past few years has seen a considerable attack on the orthodox view of substitutionary atonement. What exactly did Jesus accomplish on the cross? Why did he die? These questions have eternal ramifications and their implications have far reaching consequences for followers of Christ. As a young pastor, it has been a difficult struggle for me to watch some of my counterparts drift away from an orthodox view of the cross. I am concerned that in the fight for relativity many have lost the very propositional truth which we want to make relevant for our particular culture.
As someone who has cut his teeth serving in traditional Baptist churches, I have seen firsthand the need to bring the Gospel into the 21st century. Far too many churches continue to present the Gospel as if time is frozen within the mid 20th century. Worldviews have changed, culture has shifted, and paradigms which were once accepted have been replaced. Whether we choose to live in defiance of this or we choose to accept this new reality, we live in a new world. I am thankful for many of my “missional” brothers who have presented a rational, well articulated, reasonable call to arms to the traditional church to reexamine their methodology in order to fulfill their mission. I am of one accord with them. But I do have some concerns.
I am concerned that in the whitewash of postmodern shifts, many young leaders have allowed the methodological shifts to influence proper and sound theology. Men such as Rob Bell and Brian McClaren are two examples. Note Rob Bell’s remarks,
Notice what Jesus says in the Book of Matthew: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” What he is doing here is significant. He is giving his followers the authority to make new interpretations of the Bible. He is giving them permission to say, “Hey, we think we missed it before on that verse, and we’ve recently come to the conclusion that this is what it actually means.”
In the evolution of becoming current in our methodology we must not buy wholesale the undercurrent by some of its leaders that we also evolve in our theological matrix. Now, back to the cross; I write these comments to speak to young leaders about the absolute need to fight for a proper understanding of substitutionary atonement. Jesus died as our substitute. His blood was shed for our sin. We deserved the cross, the Father poured out his wrath that we should have endured, on his Son. The cross is not just an example for us. It is not a myth. The cross is the fundamental truth that gives salvation. There is no other possibility. Jesus paid it all.
For those that know me, you are aware that I am not anti-contemporary. I have endured great scrutiny because my leadership is seen as progressive and oftentimes radical. With that said, the purpose of progressive methodology is to greater influence one’s particular culture with the timeless message of the Gospel. The danger that I see subtlety making its way into younger “emerging” leaders is the breaking down of the wall between methodology and theology. Thereby allowing the same approach to methodology, (need to be relevant, hip, cool, contemporary) to be immersed in theology ultimately changing the Gospel. I am looking forward to further debate on these issues. To God be the Glory.
