As of late, I’ve been thinking quite a bit about the topic of salvation. Take a moment, if you would, to consider what images, ideas, whatever come to mind when I say the word salvation…. …Alright, do you have those images, ideas, etc. in your mind? Good. Now I would pose to you this question: Do the images, ideas, etc. that come into your mind when I say the word salvation seem to fit better with the idea of “getting out of Dodge,” or are they more akin to the image of a caterpillar’s metamorphosis into a butterfly? Are these ideas and images more like jumping into a lifeboat to escape a sinking ship, or are they something like looking in the mirror and finding a more beautiful image than you expected? When I say salvation do you picture a bodiless spirit floating up into some spiritual realm called “heaven,” or do you see a fully embodied person being re-made into the likeness of Christ?
The question can be put like this: Is salvation about saying the right words or conjuring up the right disposition so that someday, after I die, my soul can avoid hell, or is it about being re-made into the “image of God” (the imago Dei), which is the existence God always intended for us to have?
Does salvation change the now or just the future?
Does salvation make us better, or just our destination?
Does salvation mean anything to the world, or is it just a possession of the individual?
Does Christ primarily save us from something or to something?
Obviously, the question is largely one of emphasis. The standard evangelical answer in Protestant America today (as influenced heavily by the Reformed tradition) is that salvation is a lifeboat, a way of escaping this world that is surely on its way to hell. Salvation is about getting individual souls into heaven. This view is accentuated by the pessimism of contemporary dispensational apocalypticism—i.e. The Left Behind series and Hal Lindsay’s Late Great Planet Earth—and by the individualism of popular American culture. It is a worldview that firmly believes that evil is on the rise, and that it is the predetermined will of God that this should be so. However, it also awkwardly desires to propose that we can “save” some individuals from impending doom—even though this doom, and those who will be saved from it, is determined by God—by confronting them with questions like: “If the world (or your individual life) were to end tomorrow, would you go to heaven or hell?”
[Now let me answer the critics before they even speak: (1) Yes, I believe in a two-fold outcome to history: some will finally be saved, and others will finally be lost; (2) Yes, I believe the lost will eternally perish in hell—for if heaven is eternal, its antithesis must be also; (3) Yes, I believe the Gospel of Christ confronts us with choices, which have eternal implications.]
OK, hopefully I’ve already answered the main blows I’m sure to get for this blog.
I wish to continue, however, by proposing a different view concerning salvation. This is not a new view; in fact, I would argue this view is more in line with the classical Christian faith than the above-mentioned view, and it is certainly the view most consistent with the Wesleyan-Arminian tradition, of which I am a part. (Unfortunately, many of this same tradition have adopted the above-mentioned view without even realizing that it runs counter to our tradition.) The alternative view of salvation can be summarized like so: Salvation is about restoring people to the image of God (imago Dei).
This is a holistic approach. It says that salvation is about body and soul, community and individual, the moment of repentance and the process of being sanctified. John Wesley once preached that “the great end of religion is to renew our hearts in the image of God.” The lifeboat approach to salvation doesn’t really speak to the renewal of the imago Dei—the whole point of God’s saving work in Christ. The lifeboat says, “Quick! Pray this prayer! Jump in the boat and let’s get the hell out of here!” (or maybe “let’s get the here out of hell!”)
But if we view salvation in this way, what impetus is there to change our world? What point is there in challenging the systems of evil in our world that cause exploitation, famine, and dehumanization? The “lifeboat” approach to salvation says, “See! I told you the world is getting worse! Now, don’t worry about changing things, just get in and let’s get out of here!”
Viewing salvation as the renewal of the imago Dei, however, encourages us to participate in the redemption and restoration of all things. When we are made into the likeness of Christ, we are not simply concerned about getting others into heaven; we’re at least as equally concerned about bringing a foretaste of heaven into our existence here on earth. This is not universalism, or utopianism. This is simply saying that salvation is about redemption and restoration—not just of individuals, but of communities, societies, ecosystems, everything—and it is not just about getting individual butts into heaven.
This view of salvation also changes the way we do “evangelism.” If we understand that salvation is about restoring the imago Dei in not only individuals, but in communities, then our evangelism might simply be this: Creating communities of faith that exhibit the imago Dei, and inviting others to participate in those communities.
We, especially those of the Wesleyan-Arminian tradition, need to reappropriate this holistic view of salvation, which includes a holistic view of evangelism, Church, and eschatology. Salvation is not about getting people to jump from the sinking ship into the lifeboat headed for heaven; it’s about allowing Christ, through His Spirit, to re-create the image of God in us.
Interested in your thoughts as always, Ian. Let me ask this: What is our motivation for becoming "Imago Dei"? Or, perhaps more appropriately, what motivation do the Biblical writers give us for becoming the "Imago Dei"?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNick, your question of motivation is interesting to me. I have to admit, I'm not sure exactly how to answer and will have to give more thought later, but here are a couple of possibilities: On the one hand, negatively speaking, our motivation is realizing our own brokenness, disfunctionality, captivity, lostness--however you want to describe this sense that we are not as we ought to be. We are broken. We look in the mirror and wish for more. Positively speaking, our motivation might be Christ Himself. We look at Christ and see One who is perfectly in-tune with the Father, and thus perfectly bears the "imago Dei." We want to be like him. There are probably better answers to your question, though. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteYour brother,
Ian
Ian,
ReplyDeleteMy question stems from a few passages that came to mind in reading your post, particularly your criticism of the fundamentalist evangelistic question, "When you die, do you think you will go to heaven?" or something like it. Here are the scriptures that came to mind:
2 Corinthians 5:9-10: So we make it our goal to please him, whether we are at home in the body or away from it. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.
Hebrews 12:2: Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
Luke 14:12: Then Jesus said to his host, "When you give a luncheon or dinner, do not invite your friends, your brothers or relatives, or your rich neighbors; if you do, they may invite you back and so you will be repaid. But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.
1 Corinthians 15:12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith...And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men."
The point of my question, I suppose is this: The very starting point for Christian love is hope. Since "God is love" (1 John 4:8), I think it is appropriate to conclude that we may only become "imago dei" by becoming one who embodies love. Every one of these passages connects our loving actions to our hope of heaven. Therefore, it does not make sense for me to say to a person, "would you like to become more like Christ?" without knowing the fullness of the work Christ has completed for me; aka, dying for me that I might spend eternity with him, rather than suffer the consequences of my sin.
Perhaps, then, we do not love like God because we do NOT hope like Jesus, rather than because we hope too much. In fact, I think that Paul makes clear in the passage in 1 Corinthians that if our emphasis is simply on living a life of love in this life, rather than living for the resurrection, "we are to be pitied above all men". I think the problem, in fact, could be just the opposite of your conclusion: no longer are Christians carving pictures of heaven on the walls of the catacombs, and treating funerals like weddings. Nor do we have an accurate picture of heaven; we typically picture a mass of disembodied souls floating about in some ethereal realm, rather than a resurrection of all the physical world God has created.
In other words, I agree with your diagnoses: we are not Imago Dei. I disagree with your treatment, however. We do not struggle with too much hope, but too little.
Actually I would totally agree with you, Nick; you have said almost exactly what I was also trying to articulate. I think much of our misunderstanding about salvation comes from our misunderstanding of "eschatology"--or the "last things," like death, resurrection, the time between death and the resurrection, the final judgment, and the new creation. The American evangelical world today has a kindergarten level theology of "the last things," and we need to reappropriate the much richer articulation that Scripture gives. Thanks for your thoughts, Nick!
ReplyDeleteIan, if you truly do agree, you may want to clarify some of these statements.
ReplyDeleteThe question can be put like this: Is salvation about saying the right words or conjuring up the right disposition so that someday, after I die, my soul can avoid hell, or is it about being re-made into the “image of God” (the imago Dei), which is the existence God always intended for us to have?
While perhaps a Wesleyan viewpoint would see salvation as “saying the right words”, certainly those of the reformed position would reject this notion.
Also, your words “the existence God intended us to have” would seem to indicate that we ought to emphasize an existence that we possess here and now. Practically speaking, I cannot present the gospel to an individual by saying “Would you like to be all God made you to be?” and then proceed to teach him to be that person WITHOUT addressing the redemptive eschatology of Jesus. Therefore, yes, “getting out of Dodge” is where we begin; nothing else could cause such glorious transformations that you speak of! We become in the imago dei BECAUSE of “the hope that is set before us”, not in spite of it.
“Obviously, the question is largely one of emphasis. The standard evangelical answer in Protestant America today (as influenced heavily by the Reformed tradition) is that salvation is a lifeboat, a way of escaping this world that is surely on its way to hell. Salvation is about getting individual souls into heaven.”
Again, you present the idea of “getting individual souls into heaven” as a contradiction to emphasizing transformation into the Imago Dei. Again, this is our starting point for transformation; without it, we cannot be transformed.
However, it also awkwardly desires to propose that we can “save” some individuals from impending doom—even though this doom, and those who will be saved from it, is determined by God—by confronting them with questions like: “If the world (or your individual life) were to end tomorrow, would you go to heaven or hell?”
Once again, perhaps a Wesleyan position would emphasize that “we” can save individuals, but certainly a reformed position would not. And once again, addressing the issue of eternal punishment is the beginning point for individual transformation. Here, it seems, you directly contradict this idea.
But if we view salvation in this way, what impetus is there to change our world? What point is there in challenging the systems of evil in our world that cause exploitation, famine, and dehumanization? The “lifeboat” approach to salvation says, “See! I told you the world is getting worse! Now, don’t worry about changing things, just get in and let’s get out of here!”
C.S. Lewis once said,
“If you read history, you will find that the Christians who did most for the present world were just those who thought most of the next. The Apostles themselves, who set on foot the conversion of the Roman Empire, the great men who built up the Middle Ages, the English Evangelicals who abolished the Slave Trade, all left their mark on Earth, precisely because their minds were occupied with Heaven”
Though I agree that there is certainly a lack of “Imago Dei” here on earth, I reject the idea that emphasizing transformation here and now without first addressing eternity will be effective. In light of the passages above, it’s simply not biblical.
There are three alternative theological solutions to the problem you present.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I believe that the Wesleyan idea that we are saved because we believe the right things and conjure up the right feelings must be rejected. In its place, I believe we must have reformed theology. Otherwise, salvation is dependent upon our tricks, techniques and persuasive abilities (since God nearly exclusive uses men to draw men to Him).
Second, I believe that we must embrace a future, worldwide redemption of earth, heaven, and humanity, IN THE FUTURE. In other words, as you say, we are not a bunch of souls floating around in heaven. Rather, God calls us to hope in the future redemption of the world.
Finally, I believe that in order for eternity to motivate us towards earthly action, we must re-embrace the idea that BELIEVERS will be judged. By rejecting the idea that believers will not be judged for the sinful deeds, we have forgotten the very crucial idea that we will be judged for our good ones. Emphasis on THIS hope is what produces Imago Dei.
Nick,
ReplyDeleteAs I have responded personally to you already, I will only resubmit a small portion of my response here.
Essentially, I believe you are not taking into account the eschatological tension of the "already / not yet" present in the New Testament. Jesus, Paul, and the other NT writers speak of both the future AND the present kingdom of God. Jesus speaks of both the futureness AND presentness of salvation: He often says in John's Gospel, "You HAVE [present tense] eternal life. Eternal life, salvation, sanctification, the kingdom of God--all of these biblical themes have an ALREADY and a NOT YET dimension to them. Thus, we do not ony wait for a future kingdom; we acknowledge that the future has already broken into the present in Christ and the outpouring of His Holy Spirit into the Church.