| God without gospel
People
have always been comfortable with believing in a Supreme Being but not the gospel
of God as a word otherwise than our own. God is not commonly rejected but the
word of God in grace is. The issue of God without gospel also concerns “twilight
Christians” and the reality of God for Christian faith today. v The
word of God articulates what humans do not want to know about themselves. It is
only in articulating what humans resist—disclosure of self-compromise—that we
can possibly hear a word of grace that heals what is compromised. If this word
is not accepted, there is no other word by which humans can be made whole. The
phenomenon of conflicted and compromised human activities in history and society
belie any claim to self-standing righteousness. Yet any word that illuminates
this phenomenon is regarded with disdain in the presumption of human wisdom. The
word of God comes to human hearing as an initiative of love calling for response.
To believe in a Supreme Being as a focus of amenable belief is not the same as
hearing the word of truth about humanity and an overture of grace inviting our
response of faith. This is what the gospel of God distinguishes. When
the centrality of Christ has been relinquished in Christian faith, some form of
unitarianism or belief in a Supreme Being is assumed, however implicitly expressed.
Once a generous focus on New Testament Christology is diminished, Christian faith
assumes another persona. This will be some form of spirituality that is specifically
committed to not being “evangelical.” It may take a political, mystical or interfaith
form. While
there was an assumed “Christian culture,” God without gospel could survive within
the church. Now that similar options are more visible as religious variations
on a Supreme Being, an implicit unitarianism is quickly affronted by explicit
Christology. Among
twilight Christians, God without gospel, with its diminished perspective of Christ,
is whispered in dissent. An implicit unitarianism may advocate “freedom of theological perspective” as a principle
but this can be a fig leaf worn within the church, hiding a re-jigged version
of Jesus who is depicted without the presumed baggage of being “Christian” or
Christ as a mere cipher for a symbolic space of creative self-realisation. God
without gospel might be promoted within the Christian church but only for so long.
Such expressions of church eventually disintegrate around multiple conjectures
concerning the reality of God, with spiritual malaise as a consequence, despite
rear-guard attempts to reinvigorate churchly interest by various eclectic means.
By
contrast to God without gospel, the gospel of God is heard from Scripture in encounter
with God who alone justifies our existence, transforming us through the living
word that is given demonstrative expression for our humanity in Christ crucified
and risen; the gospel is tangible as we live and serve toward wholeness within
the intimacy of communion through the Holy Spirit. God
without gospel is established when twilight Christians depart from the scandalous
testimony of Christ crucified to something assumedly more plausible or when the
lure of speculation promises to conjure a supposedly more relevant perspective
than God disclosed in the folly of a cross. Yet in doing so, whether for reasons
of plausibility or relevance, some form of deity other than God disclosed in gospel
is promoted instead. Ironically,
God without gospel is invariably a tribal deity who can be named variously as
conjectured diversely according to human cultures and their associated religious
traditions. God without gospel offers a template into which almost anything can
be inserted according to some correlation with a Supreme Being. v Christian identity exists in shared commitment
to Christian testimony with its focus on the gospel of Jesus Christ. When this
focus is reshuffled and substituted for some other perceived gain toward social
acceptance or relevance, Christian identity becomes enmeshed in contradictions
as it retains a form but not the spirit of Christian commitment. For example, if religions are deemed
equal, what of the uniqueness of God’s disclosure in Jesus Christ for the wholeness
of humanity? What of particular values or ideals intrinsic to a religious tradition
that are antithetical to Christian values? What of advocating sacred demarcations
from the ordinary when in incarnation, God sanctifies all times and places of
human life? There are
further examples of becoming enmeshed in contradiction. How can God be affirmed
as creator with monotheists, while in other forums, the same people connive with
pantheism or the seamless divinity of all things? If we are merely formed from
the ground and not uniquely by the word and breath of God, why not also advocate
nature’s survival of the fittest? If truth is supposedly relative—which
is often asserted, even within the church—how can the veracity of anything, including
human dignity, be asserted without self-contradiction? Contradictions abound when
Jesus Christ as the focus of Christian testimony is substituted for other foci
in twilight Christian endorsement of God without gospel. God
of biblical testimony is known within a particular narrative of call, encounter,
disclosure, promise and faithfulness. These aspects of gospel are applicable to
all within faith and its possibilities. The gospel declares that God is creative
in bringing to be things that are not,
transforming people by the living word toward integral humanity in Jesus Christ.
This is articulated as a paradox—as good news that is only discernible in Christ
crucified, which was a scandal to imperious Jews and Greeks. Both sought to arbitrate
on what will always be a paradox within the gospel. v The
disclosure of God in the gospel generates a cleavage within its reception. The
messengers of Christ are an aroma
of life or a stench
of death (II Cor. 2). We rarely feel this sharp divide within the residue
of amenability that Christianity once experienced within our society. This can
no longer be assumed. As
the media cast about notions of the “relativity” or “equality” of religions, some
Christians accept these to the detriment of their unique faith and witness. Such
acceptance can generate a superior cynicism through a supposedly higher spirituality
that in reality is committed to perceptions of deity that are antithetical to
gospel. The
word of God is crucial, yet spiritual hubris presumes to know better than the
relay of testimony to Christ crucified and risen. This has happened many times
in asserting an essentially rational acceptance of a Supreme Being or God without
gospel as superior to the supposedly insular particularity of the gospel of Jesus
Christ. Contemporary
versions of God without gospel are loath to speak about gospel or Christ apart
from some form of benign civic symbolism for social harmony. Yet the issue for
Christian witness in the world remains the reality of Jesus Christ as
the way, truth and life—beyond heady ideals in claims to assumed
outcomes of partisan agendas for solving the perceived problems of humanity. While
the message of Christ will be pungent to some, for many others it is fragrant
with life. This has always been its reality as we are challenged to relinquish
speculation for tangible grace and truth. The gospel will always generate decision; it might just be heard anew, for igniting faith is characteristic of the gospel, yet it will also generate antagonism to grace and truth in Jesus Christ. |
