Brett Tilford

This is a rather lengthy quote taken from C.S. Lewis’ book The Last Battle, part of the wildly popular children’s series, The Chronicles of Narnia. The first time I read it as an adult it brought a tear to my eye, and profoundly challenged some of my dearly held theology.

“So I went over much grass and many flowers and among all kinds of wholesome and delectable trees till lo! in a narrow place between two rocks there came to meet me a great Lion. The speed of him was like the ostrich, and his size as an elephant’s; his hair was like pure gold and the brightness of his eyes like gold that is liquid in the furnace. He was more terrible than the Flaming Mountain of Lagour, and in beauty he surpassed all that is in the world even as the rose in bloom surpasses the dust of the desert.Then I fell at his feet and thought, Surely this is the hour of death, for the Lion (who is worthy of all honour) will know that I have served Tash all my days and not him. Nevertheless, it is better to see the Lion and die than to be Tisroc of the world and live and not to have seen him. But the Glorious One bent down his golden head and touched my forehead with his tongue and said, Son, thou art welcome. But I said, Alas Lord, I am no son of thine but the servant of Tash. He answered, Child, all the service thou hast done to Tash, I account as service done to me. Then by reasons of my great desire for wisdom and understanding, I overcame my fear and questioned the Glorious One and said, Lord, is it then true, as the Ape said, that thou and Tash are one? The Lion growled so that the earth shook (but his wrath was not against me) and said, It is false. Not because he and I are one, but because we are opposites, I take to me the services which thou hast done to him. For I and he are of such different kinds that no service which is vile can be done to me, and none which is not vile can be done to him. Therefore if any man swear by Tash and keep his oath for the oath’s sake, it is by me that he has truly sworn, though he know it not, and it is I who reward him. And if any man do a cruelty in my name, then, though he says the name Aslan, it is Tash whom he serves and by Tash his deed is accepted. Dost thou understand, Child? I said, Lord, though knowest how much I understand. But I said also (for the truth constrained me), Yet I have been seeking Tash all my days. Beloved, said the Glorious One, unless they desire had been for me thou wouldst not have sought so long and so truly. For all find what they truly seek.”

The “gospel” of Jesus. What is it?

Most of the time when we think of the gospel we think of something to this effect: Jesus died on the cross for your sins so that you can go to heaven after you die. This is pretty standard fare. Of course their are variations that include statements about the resurrection, the bridge to God, etc. But they all basically come down to “Jesus died so that you can live in heaven.”

I think that’s a pretty lame gospel.

There are a few reasons I feel this way. First, it’s selfish. It becomes this weird appeal of “Hey, so do you want to go to heaven? Great, I thought so. All you have to do is believe in Jesus!” What? Since when did this become the gospel? Second, Jesus didn’t seem to preach it. You just don’t see him going around to people saying, “Hey everyone, hope on the J train! We’re heaven bound!” Third, it doesn’t have much to do with the here and now. In fact it tends to lend itself to a sort escapism, where the thinking goes something like this. Well the world is headed to Hell in a handbasket, there’s really not much we can do except spread the word that Jesus is the way out.

As I read the gospels I just don’t see this being the good news Jesus preached.

Instead I see him talking about this mysterious thing that he called “the gospel of the Kingdom of God.” This kingdom was like the reality of God coming down and touching earth. He said this kingdom isn’t “of this world”, meaning it doesn’t come from the systems and ways of men (which tend to get twisted and evil) but instead comes from God. Maybe like the dream of God for this world: what he meant this world to be, full of love. So Jesus heals sick people, opens blind eyes, fills the hungry, and respects women.   He tells us to love God, love each other, and even love our enemies. He says that we should pray to God and give to the poor. And all the while he is telling stories and dropping hints that he is modeling the kingdom of God for us. Then one day he prays the most beautiful prayer, and this is one of the things he says, “Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.”

I believe that is the gospel. Heaven is coming to earth.

Now that is freakin good news.

If you want more info on the kingdom of God check out this video.

So today I’m in the mood to tackle some theology. Let’s jump in.

Orthodoxy is generally defined as “right belief.” So, for example you may hear someone say, “Yeah, I’m an orthodox Christian.” Which means they consider themselves to be a “normal” Christian: whatever that means exactly. I have struggled with the term “orthodox” when it’s aligned with Christianity, because it always begs the question… orthodox according to who: the Roman Catholics, Charismatics, Southern Baptists, Episcopalians, the Mormons? Orthodoxy as right belief seems to have fractured the church. Everyone keeps disagreeing, calling each other heretics, and then splitting off as the “true” church, only to have the process repeated on them some years later.

One of the truly traumatic aspects of attending Bible College, as I did, is that you realize there are an awful lot of gray areas out there, places where answers don’t come easily. You find that the clarity of Sunday School is quickly replaced by the uncertainty of a very big God, in a very big world, where very smart and sincere people really disagree with each other over some rather important things.

The more I looked around the more clearly I knew, this isn’t working. Yet, the thought nagged me. If right belief isn’t the thing to identify Christians… what is. I mean if you start throwing right belief out the window aren’t you sort of left with a mess. What else could there be other than wrong belief. I could already hear the apostle Paul scolding me for not holding onto the “true faith.”

I was left hanging.

A few months ago I came across the book “How Not To Speak of God” by Peter Rollins. In it he voices a similar dilemma and then offers a possible solution.

“Instead of following the Greek-influenced idea of orthodoxy as right belief, these chapters show that the emerging community is helping us to rediscover the more Hebraic and mystical notion of the Orthodox Christian as one who believes in the right way- that is, believing in a loving, sacrificial, and Christlike manner. The reversal from ‘right belief’ to ‘believing in the right way’ is in no way a move to some binary opposite of the first(for the opposite of right belief is simply wrong belief); rather, it is a way of transcending the binary altogether. Thus orthodoxy is no longer (mis)understood as the opposite of heresy but rather is understood as a term that signals a way of being in the world rather than a means of believing things about the world…

Orthodoxy as right belief will cost us little; indeed, it will allow us to sit back with our Pharisaic doctrines guarding the ‘truth’ with the purity of our interpretations. But orthodoxy as believing in the right way, as bringing love to the world around us and within us… that will cost us everything. For to live by that sword, as we all know, is to die by it.”

Wow.  Obviously some huge implications.  I think it’s worth wrestling with.