Blog

Business development and communications for growing businesses.

A New Kind Of Christianity – Book Review Question 4 & 5

Posted Mar 9 2010 by Jonathan Brink in , with 16 Comments

Title: Brian McLaren’s A New Kind Of Christianity, Ten Questions That Are Transforming The Faith.

Overview: As Emergence Christianity progresses, it becomes critical for voices to begin offering not just critique but alternative perspectives that make sense. Brian offers ten questions that begin to frame an alternative perspective to traditional evangelical orthodoxy.

Part 1: Question 1 | Part 2: Question 2 & 3

Question 4: Who is Jesus and Why Is He Important?

What I Hear Brian Saying: This is arguably one of Brian’s strongest chapter in the first section of the book. Brian attempts to reframe the question of God using Jesus as the lens.  In other words, if we really want to know who God is, we begin with Jesus.  This approach is deeply important because it follows the question, “Is God Violent”. We need Jesus to help clarify what God is really like.

My Response: Brian’s response to this question presents a very intriguing paradox to the traditional viewpoint of an angry God. By suggesting that we can fully know what we need to know about God through Jesus begs the question, “If God is like Jesus then why does God need violence to be satisfied?”  If we assume God is being appeased, can we really make the claim that Jesus is the best reflection we have of God?  This image diverges at the cross where we historically assume we see an angry God being appeased by the blood of Jesus.  Brian’s point essentially asks how do we reconcile these two different images?

I think if this question does anything it will continue to stimulate the tension and dissonance we have with our traditional views of atonement.  It will force us to continue asking questions and search for answers.

Question 5: What is the Gospel?

What I Hear Brian Saying: This question is going to frustrate a lot of people who really like Paul’s approach to the six line narrative.  Brian suggest that we frame our understanding of the Gospel around Jesus instead of Paul.  And as strikingly obvious as that would sound, it is the exact opposite that we typically (especially as evangelicals) approach our understanding of the Gospel. Brian suggests framing it around the Jesus’ “The kingdom of God is at hand”. Brian suggests that the kingdom is a “new Genesis…a new Exodus…and becoming a citizen of a new kingdom.” (p 140)

My Response: The tension I have with Brian’s response begins in his original assumption that there is no ontological shift occurring in Genesis.  This presents a problem for the rest of the story.  What do we do with the cross.  Without a problem to solve, what is the point of the cross in light of the story?  Brian seems to suggest something very similar to moral exemplary theory of atonement, which essentially means that Jesus provided us with a grand example of obedience to follow.  Brian even explores his own tension with seeing Jesus as liberator and king under the traditional penal substitution theory, which is framed by the six line narrative.  It is here that Brian is attempting to sit in the tension of what so many hold and find something new to grasp onto.

Brian also spends substantial time reframing Romans, which the traditional theory rests on.  I really liked Brian’s approach, but at the same time I couldn’t help but wonder if Brian limited his view to only what he wanted to see.  Brian is very comfortable with his approach (assuming no ontological problem) and he assumes his reader does too in many cases.

Section 1 Summary: These first five questions make up the bulk of Brian’s attempt at reframing of Christianity. His orthodoxy essentially begins with an assumption that many are suggesting is classic liberalism.  And this brings out the tension for me.  I liked the first five questions because we need a reframing.  I still think and believe that there is a better way to reframe the story, what many would call the metanarrative.

Tags: , Categories: ,

About the Author

Jonathan BrinkI am an business development and communications consultant. I am also the senior editor and publisher for Civitas Press. I recently published, Discovering The God Imagination: Reconstructing A Whole, New Christianity. (Civitas, 2011)View all posts by Jonathan Brink →

  • MikeClawson

    Jonathan – have you seen Brian's chapter in the book Mark Baker edited, “Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross: Contemporary Images of the Atonement”? In it he suggests not necessarily a “moral exemplar” theory of the cross (though I personally don't quite see what is so bad about that theory, or why people tend to speak so dismissively of it), but the cross as “prophetic action”, i.e. it reveals something about the character of God, and that revelation itself has salvific power. (Though Brian is careful to say that this is not the only or exclusive way of looking at the cross, just one layer of meaning.)

    I find this approach of Brian's to be almost Barthian (though I don't know how familiar he is with Barth), wherein our salvation is already achieved from all eternity through the humanity of Jesus Christ (which includes, but is not limited to the cross), and what we really need, and what the life, death and resurrection of Christ does for us, is to reveal and awaken us to that reality.

  • MikeClawson

    Jonathan – have you seen Brian's chapter in the book Mark Baker edited, “Proclaiming the Scandal of the Cross: Contemporary Images of the Atonement”? In it he suggests not necessarily a “moral exemplar” theory of the cross (though I personally don't quite see what is so bad about that theory, or why people tend to speak so dismissively of it), but the cross as “prophetic action”, i.e. it reveals something about the character of God, and that revelation itself has salvific power. (Though Brian is careful to say that this is not the only or exclusive way of looking at the cross, just one layer of meaning.)

    I find this approach of Brian's to be almost Barthian (though I don't know how familiar he is with Barth), wherein our salvation is already achieved from all eternity through the humanity of Jesus Christ (which includes, but is not limited to the cross), and what we really need, and what the life, death and resurrection of Christ does for us, is to reveal and awaken us to that reality.

  • http://jonathanbrink.com Jonathan Brink

    I haven't read Mark's book. Looks interesting. I also realize that Brian might not be saying its moral exemplary. It just seemed that way. I think the cross has a moral exemplary quality to it.

    This is my tension with this specific book. It just didn't read well for me. I so wanted to like it, but just didn't follow him this time.

  • http://jonathanbrink.com Jonathan Brink

    I haven't read Mark's book. Looks interesting. I also realize that Brian might not be saying its moral exemplary. It just seemed that way. I think the cross has a moral exemplary quality to it.

    This is my tension with this specific book. It just didn't read well for me. I so wanted to like it, but just didn't follow him this time.

  • Chadholtz

    Mike,
    I sensed a Barthian thread throughout the book as well. I just posted my thoughts on question 4 (it's in 2 parts on my blog) and while I like what he had to say and feel that what he said is correct and important I felt as though he could say more or say it differently. There are moments where I feel like he is saying all the right things but in a way that I would not quite put it. Maybe I just want my cake and be able to eat it, too – as in, I love what appears to be a Barthian influence but he doesn't say it like Barth :)

  • Chadholtz

    Mike,
    I sensed a Barthian thread throughout the book as well. I just posted my thoughts on question 4 (it's in 2 parts on my blog) and while I like what he had to say and feel that what he said is correct and important I felt as though he could say more or say it differently. There are moments where I feel like he is saying all the right things but in a way that I would not quite put it. Maybe I just want my cake and be able to eat it, too – as in, I love what appears to be a Barthian influence but he doesn't say it like Barth :)

  • http://jonathanbrink.com Jonathan Brink

    Chad, I think you are saying what I was trying to say, but better. I kept feeling like he was saying something valuable but I couldn't quite connect with it.

  • http://jonathanbrink.com Jonathan Brink

    Chad, I think you are saying what I was trying to say, but better. I kept feeling like he was saying something valuable but I couldn't quite connect with it.

  • Anonymous

    Mike,rnI sensed a Barthian thread throughout the book as well. I just posted my thoughts on question 4 (it’s in 2 parts on my blog) and while I like what he had to say and feel that what he said is correct and important I felt as though he could say more or say it differently. There are moments where I feel like he is saying all the right things but in a way that I would not quite put it. Maybe I just want my cake and be able to eat it, too – as in, I love what appears to be a Barthian influence but he doesn’t say it like Barth :) rnrnrn

  • Daniel

    What do we do with the cross indeed? From McLaren's approach, we are ultimately left with this macabre event, standing embarrassingly in the middle of the scriptures, with no real reason for it to be there! Jesus is just hangs there, for some unclear reason, suffering without purpose, and we are supposed to be able to look upon all that he endures and convince ourselves that God doesn't really think the wages of sin is death…. Maybe Jesus is just participating in some kind of extreme performance art….

  • Daniel

    What do we do with the cross indeed? From McLaren's approach, we are ultimately left with this macabre event, standing embarrassingly in the middle of the scriptures, with no real reason for it to be there! Jesus is just hangs there, for some unclear reason, suffering without purpose, and we are supposed to be able to look upon all that he endures and convince ourselves that God doesn't really think the wages of sin is death…. Maybe Jesus is just participating in some kind of extreme performance art….

  • http://jonathanbrink.com Jonathan Brink

    Chad, I think you are saying what I was trying to say, but better. I kept feeling like he was saying something valuable but I couldn’t quite connect with it.

  • http://jonathanbrink.com Jonathan Brink

    It's the big problem for me in seeing that the shift is merely a downward progress. It strips the cross of meaning.

  • http://jonathanbrink.com Jonathan Brink

    It's the big problem for me in seeing that the shift is merely a downward progress. It strips the cross of meaning.

  • Daniel

    What do we do with the cross indeed? From McLaren’s approach, we are ultimately left with this macabre event, standing embarrassingly in the middle of the scriptures, with no real reason for it to be there! Jesus is just hangs there, for some unclear reason, suffering without purpose, and we are supposed to be able to look upon all that he endures and convince ourselves that God doesn’t really think the wages of sin is death…. Maybe Jesus is just participating in some kind of extreme performance art….

  • http://jonathanbrink.com Jonathan Brink

    It’s the big problem for me in seeing that the shift is merely a downward progress. It strips the cross of meaning.

Business development and communications for growing businesses.