Jefferson’s video isn’t my favorite example of Gospel translated to urban street slang and it’s not surprising that he didn’t get everything right– no one since Christ ever has. But what people call religion is often tradition + politics with a sprinkling of the real thing. Replace Jefferson’s use of “religion” with “tradition” and his video is closer to the truth. Sometimes I wonder whether God allowed so many variations in human traditions of worship so that we could distill from these the core of Christianity. But this would require communication and maybe even migration from one ‘religion’ to another. There again, humans have placed enormous barriers. When the barriers are physical such as the walls in Belfast, they eventually fall but tradition (aka. ‘religion’) can become an even higher wall which separates us from the tuth.

From my pov, Luke 24 pretty much nails the good news and in doing so, it keeps the focus on God, not man. This is not to say that even PSA should not play a role, nor original sin, the need for redemption, or the kingdom of heaven being right here, right now and how we should respond… but for many such can come into being later. I think the Gospel needs some level of contextualization relative to the person to whom one is sharing.

Man focused approaches such as the four spiritual laws can work in some situations, but often fade quickly or morph into cheap grace without followup. The Navigators approach / bridge illustration can be a very useful tool in some situations… but without background knowledge of the individual one is sharing with and followup it too often fades… but it is a more God focused approach than man focused.

Sin/Death/Atonement introductions worked well in superstitious cultures where in folks needed to appear to the gods… In today’s society, no one sacrifices an animal to appear some funky made up god somewhere, so the atonement model often makes for more questions and confusion than answers. Likewise, piling on sin after sin condemnation on a depressed individual doesnt go too far either. The scriptural truths remain, but often dont work out that well as an intro as our culture is so far removed from the Biblical era. As one grows in faith… light bulbs will come on, but initially such can be more of a stumbling block than a pointer to Christ.

As you might gather, I’m not a fan of decision theology, nor cheap grace… but more so a long walk with Christ as discipleship grows. On the other hand, I have occasionally seen many good fruits come out of such methods, so I would be very leery to dispense with such entirely.

Ultimately, I think one needs to be equipped with a multitude of tools, and then be open to the Holy Spirits leading. One size doesn’t fit all, bearing in mind our use of eloquence, or worse mind games, serve to make disciples… nor are the results of such our responsibility. It is God that does the calling part, we are just the messengers. We should strive to do well in presenting the message… but not try to game things or take the focus away from Gods actions or worse put the focus on ourselves.

Recently read Conterfeit Gods (Keller) … I briefed it on my blog … Anyway, he suggests that the first commandment (no other God’s before me) is mentioned first because we have such a tendency towards idols. It may also follow, though I don’t remember him suggesting it, that our out of sync relationship with the Creator leads to breaking all the OT laws and underlining our desperate need for grace.

I think the harlot/mirror connection resonates.

~D

As far as separation of Law and Gospel goes, I see this in the ELCA a great deal, but I’m not convinced of its causality. I tend to think this is more so a remnant of pietism, the events of syncretism 150 yrs ago, and the infiltration of pop Christianity within the leadership (outside of the ministry of word and sacrament). As far as antinominanism goes, I dont see it at all. If anything, it seems the first use of the law has near eclipsed the Gospel. A fast scan of a number of synod assembly minutes, by and large the focuses near everything towards first use. We’re addressing poverty, malaria, food, disaster aid…. all good things for sure, but such should not be the only or near only focus.

Thanks for the comment!

The trouble is twofold. First, that it’s a great deal broader than either a great many passages of Scripture (John 3:36 comes to mind) or Luther, the Confessions, or Lutheran theology historically have permitted. Where the (biblically very remote) possibility of salvation apart from faith is not simply a footnote as something to be wistfully hoped for, but made the thrust of one’s doctrine of justification as a “very large hope” or a substantial possibility, what results is a defection from the Lutheran doctrine of justification, as well as from the teachings of Jesus and Paul.

There’s another problem in practice. Where salvation is divorced from allegience to Christ in even rudementary form, the result is the seperation of Law and Gospel, practical antinomianism, and the very disasterous theology which moved Bonhoeffer to write The Cost of Discipleship. The tragedy is the degree to which that theology is, in fact, the theology of the ELCA.