It occurred to me today that Two Ways to Live, if it describes a philosophy of ministry, provides a solid basis for partnership in the gospel. If our brothers and sisters are convinced of "the choice we all face", the seriousness of sin, the need for conversion, the work of Christ as the only hope for humanity and the urgency of getting this gospel out to the nations in a clear and biblical presentation... well great!
But if Two Ways to Live describes a person's theology then there may be problems. Not least of these is the entrance of Jesus half way through the presentation, entering a situation He's apparently had nothing to do with.
Tim Keller also points out that the whole "now submit to *God*" thing could easily present a legalistic gospel. There are, he says, three ways to live not two for there are two different ways you can be your own lord and saviour. License or legalism are both rebellions but 2WTL only hits the former.
Now in a simplified presentation, problems are inevitable. It's just unfortunate that what was always meant to be a quick tract for unbelievers has turned into a foundational theology for a generation. And for all those people trinity and christology are very clearly extra to the basic gospel message. Because the basic gospel message is about God, us, sin, redemption (through this Jesus thing - btw isn't box 4 always really hard to explain!!), choice.
But what I really struggle with is when Two Ways to Live describes a person's spirituality! Every sermon is "sin is bad, thank God for Jesus, now choose to follow Him." All issues in the Christian life become matters of 'bending the knee', learning humility, suffering now - glory later, not long till heaven now. And that becomes very wearying...
So thank God for such a philosophy of ministry, beware it if it becomes your basic theology, and run from anyone who's embraced it as their spirituality!
Have you met such people? They walk among us you know...
6 comments:
Formatting is much easier on Blogger! Still haven't figured out Wordpress!
hahha
i totally agree... four spiritual laws had its glory days but the more one relies on it, the less it destroys the idols in people's mind when coming to know the Trinity...
I'm assuming you mean by spirituality that 2WTL progresses from becoming an evangelistic tool to becoming the full content of a Christian's knowledge of God
and I have never heard 2WTL used as a philosophy of ministry!
well, I guess I mean that if the basics of 2WTL inform a philosophy of ministry then that's not the worst thing in the world (i.e. the need for conversion, the drive to explain the gospel plainly and biblically,...) I guess it's not used *as* a philosophy of ministry but it pretty much grows out of those ministry desires (just has a Christ-lite theology that's all).
To a certain extent I can see what you mean, but I think I disagree with this being problematic as a basic theology.
It seems to me that when you read say Peter's sermon at Pentecost or the other basic gospel presentations made, this is exactly how it is presented. 'God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ'. Jesus is presented as the God-man. And the message is 'Repent and be baptized, every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.'
This is the basic gospel message; they are the things of first importance. Should we run away from such people (who may even be among us...)? No, we must embrace them as brothers and sisters in Christ.
The centrality of Christ is not THAT central....
Hi Stooge,
Don't think we've met have we? How do you know Dev?
I might not have been very clear about what I was saying, sorry if there's been a misunderstanding. I am saying that as the embodiment of a philosophy of ministry I'm heartily for 2WTL. I happily minister shoulder to shoulder with many for whom this has been an important gospel tool. I do think though that to consider it as your basic theology is to make it do what it was never intended to do. It would be reductionistic to consider 2WTL to be your "theology" don't you think? And the people I jokingly said we should run from are those who make this wee gospel presentation into the sum and substance of their spirituality. I hope you agree that this would be profoundly reductionistic. And perhaps you haven't met Christians for whom this is true but I have met many *solid* conservative evangelical Christians for whom 2WTL has been crucial and who also seem to lack in their Christian experience exactly those things that I find lacking in the presentation (which is not to blame the presentation but *them*). But "submission to God" and His "sovereignty over us" seem to form the entire atmosphere of their walk and phrases like "love for Jesus" and His love for us are markedly absent. Also absent is an understanding of adoption, union with Christ, filling with the Spirit (in fact "the Spirit" full stop) participation in the triune life, Christan community etc etc. Now 2WTL doesn't cover this and it shouldn't have to. The error is not with the presentation, the error is with people who make it into the paradigm of their Christian walk. Wouldn't you say that that represents a serious deficiency? Or do you still think I'm off base?
I must say the phrase "The centrality of Christ is not THAT central" is intriguing to say the least! Perhaps I am missing a deeper critique which you're trying to make?
Post a Comment