faith-cemetery-tombstone-jesus-mysticism

Overemphasizing Christ?

In response to my work, some have argued that I tend to overemphasize Christ. In light of the claim that in Jesus we have the one and only definitive Word of God and that no previous revelation should ever be placed alongside him or allowed to qualify what he reveals about God, some allege that I am guilty of what is called “Christomonism.” This charge has been leveled against thinkers with increasing frequency these days as more modern bible interpreters and theologians have grown increasingly Christocentric in their theologizing and biblical exegesis.

The curious thing about the charge of “Christomonism” is that, as frequently as the charge is made, there is little consensus on what the term itself means. So far as I’ve been able to determine, there are eight very different theological perspectives that have been associated with this label. “Christomonism” has been used to characterize:

1) Past and present anti-Trinitarian modalism, as one finds today in the “Jesus Only” or “Oneness” Pentecostal movement;

2) Monophysitism, the ancient Christological heresy the sees Jesus as a hybrid mixture of God and humanity;

3) Schools of thought that over-emphasis Christ at the expense of the Holy Spirit;

4) “Christofascism,” a term popularized by Dorothee Sölle;

5) The tendency of some Western preachers who preach “Christ in isolation from God” and who thereby minimize the fatherhood and transcendence of God;

6) The alleged tendency of neo-orthodox theologians such as Barth to reduce all theology to Christology;

7) The view that Christ is the one and only Savior, raised by pluralists against orthodox Christians; and finally;

8) Any who espouse a theology that is more Christocentric than the accuser thinks is appropriate.

In this light, in what sense could the theology and orientation toward the OT that I’ve spelled out in Crucifixion of the Warrior God and other writings be justly labeled “Christomonism”?

I believe my various publications as well as over twenty years of archived sermons suffice in making it clear that I espouse an orthodox Christology (of the Kenotic variety), a robust social Trinitarianism, and a charismatically-inclined emphasis on the Holy Spirit that preclude the first six perspectives being applied to me.

I readily admit I’m guilty of #7, but since this has been the view of the historic-orthodox Church, I feel I’m in very good company.

I also happily confess I am guilty of #8, for I have frankly acknowledged that I believe most theologians are inadequately Christocentric, which implies that I’m more intensely Christocentric than most think is appropriate. At the same time, I have attempted to demonstrate that my Christocentric orientation, and most importantly, my conviction that the revelation of God in Christ should never be synthesized with other previous portraits of God, is reflected in the NT. This, I believe, is the ultimate court of appeal against which all charges of an aberrant theology must be assessed.

I am, in reality, simply trying to work out the hermeneutical implications of the Christocentric orientation that the Church has always confessed, especially as emphasized among the Reformers and even more so as it was embraced by the Anabaptists. As Martin Luther once suggested, we should adopt the mindset of Paul when he said he “resolved to know nothing except Christ crucified” (referring to 1 Cor. 2:2). I believe Luther has it exactly right.

Unfortunately, it seems to me that Luther found a great deal revealed about God in Scripture that wasn’t consistent with what is revealed in the cross. He developed a theology of God’s “masks,” the primary purpose of which was to express God’s action when he’s acting in ways that are inconsistent with what he reveals about himself in Christ. My work is, at its heart, simply my attempt to work out Luther’s conviction consistently and apply it to our interpretation of the OT violent portraits of God.

Photo via Visualhunt

Related Reading

God in Our Image

zen Sutherland via Compfight We came across this piece written by Jonathan Storment earlier this month and we had to share it here. The title of the piece is Everyday Idolatry: My God. He does a great job of outlining the ways that we twist God into whatever we need him to be to prop up…

What Does Spiritual Warfare Have To Do with the Cross?

Last week, we covered a few posts on the nature of the Atonement and the Christus Victor view. The following continues this theme, specifically looking the motif of spiritual warfare and how it relates to Christ’s work on the cross. This is an adaptation from Greg’s article in The Nature of the Atonement: Four Views. …

The Kingdom of God (Part 2)

The Church is called to be nothing less than “the body of Christ,” a sort of corporate extension of Jesus’ incarnate body. We are called to replicate who Jesus was by manifesting who Jesus is. And this is how we expand the dome in which God is king—the Kingdom of God. By definition, therefore, the…

Christ the Center

The center of the Christian faith is not anything we believe; it’s the person of Jesus Christ. The foundation of my faith is a person, not a book and a set of beliefs about that book. Rather than believing in Jesus because I believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God, I came…

Is Jesus Unique?

The Search for a Non-Unique Jesus Built into the naturalistic assumption that drives the liberal New Testament search for the “man behind the myth” is the notion that, whoever Jesus was, he cannot have been utterly unique. The laws that operate in the world today, including the laws of human behavior, have always operated. And…

The Extremity of God’s Love

In response to questions he has received about whether Jesus was actually separated from the Father on the cross, Greg fleshes out his perspective on this. The love that unites the Trinity is the very same love that resulted in the separation of the Father from the Son. This separation actually expresses the great love…