Posted by
Ron on Sunday, July 16, 2006 1:23:50 AM
I had several classes with Dr. Ray Anderson when I was at Fuller. He is
an able theologian who gets to the heart of the matter. Anderson is
heavily influenced by Barth and Boenhoffer so it is no surprise that he
takes a strong Christiological approach to an emergent theology. He
brings out a very relevant point, if we strive to be post modern and
culturally relevant but lose sight of who Christ is have we developed
another gospel?
Timely questions, and important in light of where some of the emergent ideas seem to be heading.
Ray S. AndersonThe
modern attempt to integrate the secular academy with a religious
worldview took the form of the question--What has Jerusalem to do with
Athens? Tertullian (160-225 A.D) was the first one to use the formula,
in a negative way, and it has been replicated in a hundred different
ways in our modern quest for assimilation, if not integration, of faith
and reason. In my recent book,
An Emergent Theology for Emerging Churches,
I argue that, for the apostle Paul, the seminal issue was not the
debate at Athens but the debacle with the leaders of the church at
Jerusalem. The geographical distance between Jerusalem and Antioch
could be measured in miles; the theological distance was, as
Kierkegaard once put it, and a point that Barth later adopted, the
'infinite, qualitative distinction between God and man.' The church at
Jerusalem was held captive by the religion of Moses (Ishmael); the
church at Antioch under Paul's leadership was inspired by the creative
and eschatological vision of Abraham (Isaac). Thus, for Paul, the
question became--What has Antioch to do with Jerusalem?
In
arguing my thesis I do not intend to disparage the Christian community
at Jerusalem. It was the source of an incredible spiritual force that
resisted attempts to suppress and even destroy it. When those who were
dispersed due to persecution fled to other cities, including Antioch,
they carried with them the gift and power of the Spirit along with the
message of a crucified and risen Messiah. When I contrast Antioch and
Jerusalem it is for the purpose of sharpening the focus on the content
and direction of the emergent theology uniquely envisioned and
proclaimed by the apostle Paul. In reading the growing body of
literature coming out of the emerging church movement, I worry that a
postmodern philosophy has too easily become a hermeneutical criterion
in which attempts to make the message if the gospel culturally relevant
is in danger of presenting 'another gospel.' I argue, instead, that the
contemporaneity of Christ is not established by attempts to make the
historical Jesus relevant to our culture, but is the result of the
eschatological 'moment' (
chairos) of the resurrected Christ
occurring through the Holy Spirit in our time as a proleptic
manifestation of the Kingdom of God. While Barth held that the Word of
God becomes contemporary through the preaching event, Bonhoeffer argued
that it is Christ himself who is contemporary through the
church--'Christ exists as community.' I take this to be more in line
with Paul's view of the emerging church at Antioch and through the
mission out of Antioch, that Christ, not merely the message about
Christ, is the essential content of the gospel and the formative
character of the church.
Read More.Ray AndersonKarl Barthemergent churchemergent theology