What did we celebrate at Easter?
Tuesday, April 10, 2007 at 1:34PM I was forced to ask some tough questions about Easter this year. What exactly are we celebrating when we celebrate Easter? Of course, the answer is the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The question goes deeper, though. What does it mean?
On one hand, you have this view:
The content [of the gospel] is that man's sin is dealt with in Christ and when all of man's sin is FINALLY dealt with, ONLY then will the creation be restored. Paul never talks about a "process of restoring the creation" but a final reconciliation (Rom 8:18-25) that both God's people and the creation await. Read that passage. "...then do we with patience wait for it." We are told that the restoration of the creation will come at the end, and we are to patiently wait for it, putting our own sin to death by the power of the Spirit living within us in the meantime.
In other words, the death and resurrection of Jesus is about dealing with our sin so we can be right with God, and one day enjoy his new creation. Meanwhile it's a waiting game, while we try to influence more people to get right with God in a world that is doomed. This is probably the most common view.
But then there is another view, which seems to be gaining ground. This view agrees that the gospel deals with our sin but goes further:
The resurrection is the coming into being of a new people, recreated in the image of God. It’s about the beginning of a new world breaking into the fallen order. The biblical story is creation.. fall.. new creation. Salvation is so much more than personal, or individual.. it is literally cosmic in scope. On the Cross Jesus defeats sin and death, and when he rises He becomes Lord of all creation. In His kingdom there is no oppression, no sickness, no injustice, no death. He brings peace.. shalom.. as the Prince of Peace. We have eternal life TODAY.. not just in some future state...
In his message on Sunday morning, the old preacher spoke against “the social gospel,” opting clearly for the “spiritual” gospel of salvation. There is no such division in the mind of God NOR in the new covenant. The salvation mandate restores the original mandate to tend the garden the Lord has made, to restore all creation in right relationship to the Creator. Jesus is the second Adam, and Pentecost and the coming of the Spirit are all about the new humanity and restoring the cracked eikons.
It seems to me that the main difference between these two views is not what but when. The first view believes in the social, physical, and cosmic implications of the gospel - but believes that we'll only ever enjoy those in the new creation. The second view believes in the "already/not yet" tension. The kingdom is here; the kingdom is future. It's a present reality and a future hope at the same time.
What do you think? What did we celebrate at Easter? A gospel that's mainly about getting right with God so we can enjoy life after the resurrection, or eternal life and the arrival of the kingdom both now and in the future?
Reader Comments (14)
Darryl: I think the way you frame the question implies you are not hearing all that was said in the comment string you reference above. To paint the position that Darrin presented there as teaching a "waiting game" where we all just hunker down, watch the world get trashed, then high-five each other that we got in before it was too late (okay, I added all that stuff after the quotation marks! - but I think it is implied in your post - you can correct me!), is to miss the point of the discussion. What was at issue there was whether or not doing good works like serving the poor, etc was, in fact, the Gospel... or whether these kinds of excellent good works were the result of the Gospel being believed in a sinner's life? I would not mention this here except for the fact that you have linked to my blog and for the fact that I do not believe one can rightly answer the question you have posed above until they first answer the justification/sanctification question. Answering that question seems so utterly essential to my understanding of the Biblical witness that it is hard to think of moving on to what you have queried until it is settled. I don't want to hijack your post though, so maybe I will try to draw out that question "in my own space" and let things continue here!
Hi Paul, I think it's possible that we were talking past each other in the comment string, so it's important to try to untangle the issues. Here's where we seemed to agree: -we're saved/justified by grace through faith -we don't earn our salvation by good works like caring for the poor -caring for the poor is a response of obedience to God -Christ's work at the cross accomplished much. Through it we're justified. He won victory over death and Satan. He reconciled us relationally to God. He has been glorified and now reigns at God's right hand. It's hard for me to see where any of these are at issue, because we seem to agree on these. Where we don't seem to agree is when we are supposed to enjoy what Christ accomplished through the cross. There seemed to be real disagreement there. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think these seem to be the areas of agreement and disagreement. P.S. It's almost like when we asked, "What is the Gospel?" we heard the question differently. The first seemed to be answering the question, "How is one saved?" The second seemed to be answering the question, "What did Christ's work accomplish in its entirety?"
To echo Darryl's excellent thoughts - I think the primary difference between the two views is connected to the way Paul frames the question. Paul, you describe it as the "justification/sanctification" question. I don't think that anyone in the thread was suggesting that one is justified through doing good works. What was under discussion was the contention that the message of the gospel is only about justification - that how one is justified exhausts the content of the gospel. The question that must be answered, as I see it, is this: Is the Gospel a) concerned solely with the justification of believers or b) concerned with the reign of Christ over all creation (which includes but is greater than justification). I don't know if that distinction was clearly understood or articulated, but that is the difference as I see it. I think, Darryl, your thoughts are another way of getting at that same distinction.
Darryl - You wrote: "Here's where we seemed to agree: -we're saved/justified by grace through faith -we don't earn our salvation by good works like caring for the poor -caring for the poor is a response of obedience to God -Christ's work at the cross accomplished much. Through it we're justified. He won victory over death and Satan. He reconciled us relationally to God. He has been glorified and now reigns at God's right hand." I am glad you have listed these things out in this way - it avoids confusion. Part of the problem in the comment string we refer to is that there were those on "your side" of that issue who would certainly not sign off on all the doctrines you have just now listed. (I think that leant itself to a lot of confusion there.) I still need more help though in understanding what you mean by this statement: "Where we don't seem to agree is when we are supposed to enjoy what Christ accomplished through the cross." The way you defined this in your next paragraph just doesn't make sense to me. This is not a critique of your communication skills, just obtuseness. Can you flesh this out more? What do you mean by what we are "to enjoy?" In what sense? Enjoy in Him? Enjoy in creation? Enjoy internally? Do see what I am asking? And then, is the main part of this statement the "when" or the "what" we are to enjoy? My puny brain is stuck on that so I don't feel I can adequately reply to the question until I understand what it is asking.
ScottB - Sorry, I did not see your post until after I had added mine. I am heading out now but will try to get back to what you wrote first thing tomorrow! -Paul
Hi Paul, It's not your puny brain. Your brain is just fine. That one paragraph ("It's almost like when we asked...") didn't really fit belong where I put it. I just moved it. I think we all agree in Jesus' reign and that he will put things right on earth. The question is when. Some of us expect that this will take place in eternity. Others would say yes, this will happen in eternity, but we will also see God's reign break out here and now sometimes, transforming not only lives but sometimes also communities - as Plantinga says, "social systems and economic structures too." When some pray "Your kingdom come," they are praying for Jesus to return. When others pray this, they are not only praying for Christ's return; they are praying for God's reign to break in here and now, at least in part, knowing there is much more to come. Hope this makes sense.
"Others would say yes, this will happen in eternity, but we will also see God's reign break out here and now sometimes, transforming not only lives but sometimes also communities - as Plantinga says, "social systems and economic structures too." Darryl, does God change social systems and economic structures without changing the people within them? If so can you give an example? If it is a work of God doesn't He always start with a transformed life?
Yes, George, for sure - God uses transformed people within his kingdom. There are some examples of such drastic transformation that it would be hard to give all the credit to people, even though people were involved. I'm thinking of revivals, the end of apartheid, perhaps the Wilberforce story as well. In praying "Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven," it isn't that people won't be involved. Perhaps the prayer is that God's reign will show itself in a way that can't only be explained by human influence.
Darryl, You are the bravest man on the planet! Some of the comments have brought the following analogy to MY puny little mind. In terms of personal salvation we are, positionally, perfectly sanctified in Christ. But practically we still sin and we make progress toward greater holiness while looking forward to that day when we will be perfectly sanctified both positionally and practically. The fact that we are not completely holy yet and will never be this side of glory, does not deter us from persevering toward greater holiness now. Likewise, in the social issues that have been the subject of discussion lately, we know there will always be poverty, oppression, abuse, environmental problems etc. . But their inevitability does not deter us from seeking to reduce them as much as we can while waiting for that day when poverty, abuse and environmental issues will all be done away. "Waiting" in biblical terms is not a matter of hiding away until things get better. We prepare our minds for action while we set our hope fully on the grace that will be brought to us when Jesus is revealed. (I Peter 1:13).
Darryl: I was going to respond, but I think Ken (perish the thought!) says what I wanted to say... so I will wait to hear your reply to him.
Ken: "You are the bravest man on the planet!" Or maybe we can say I'm just not the brightest. Paul: If you agree with Ken, and I agree with Ken, then it looks like we didn't need many of those 92 comments at the thread at your site! It may also be evidence that God's reign is a present reality. I'm going to hire Ken as my resident theologian and interpreter from now on. ;)
Darryl, What does "resident theologian and interpreter" pay?
You get the odd lunch at an Indian restaurant of your choosing in Rexdale.
Ken - Probably pays double what you get for leaving comments on a blog!