In his article, entitled A Reading of John 14:6, Brian McLaren presents an alternative view on a biblical passage often used to affirm the "exclusivity of Christ." The emerging church movement has been profoundly shaped by Mr. McLaren's thinking, so understanding an article in which he speaks to a distinctive of this movement should be doubly beneficial.
Let me start by noting several points I agree with. First, the editor (Tony Jones) suggests that this article be used to "thoughtfully and deeply engage the biblical content" (p. 1). I couldn't agree more. Look at the reviews of Mr. McLaren's A Generous Orthodoxy on Amazon.com. There are plenty and they fall into two extremes. Strident rejections, on the one hand, and ringing endorsements, on the other - not much biblical interaction. So, I have picked an article that is a close reasoning of a biblical passage, a passage that concerns an important evangelical distinctive, and plan to take up the challenge to "engage the biblical content." Right on, Tony!
On pages 2-3 of his article, Mr. McLaren talks about "a kind of multiple choice examination" in which one agrees or disagrees with the idea titled the "exclusivity of Christ." Although McLaren doesn't return to this topic at the end of his article, he seems to be saying (by its end) that there is a third choice, "you don't need to know the answer to this question." Balance demands that we acknowledge that there are times when Jesus proposes just such a third choice. For example, in Acts 1:6, the disciples ask a question which solicits a yes-or-no response. Jesus' answer in Acts 1:7 is a "that-is-not-a-question-for-which-you-need-an-answer" kind of response. So, I agree that it's within the realm of possibility for Jesus to be doing something similar in John 14:6.
On pages 11 and 15, McLaren rightly emphasizes the compassionate nature of Jesus' ministry. His mission, by His own account, was to "seek and to save that which was lost" (Luke 19:10). But note that those whom Jesus seeks are "lost." "Lost" sounds like a problem. And sometimes, people feel condemned when they are told they have a problem. So, I agree that reaching out to tax-gatherers and prostitutes conforms to Jesus' mission and is His invitation for us to minister without prejudice. This does not seem to eliminate the possibility of rejection or condemnation to be felt by those who are unwilling or unable to admit that they are "lost."
I can definitely agree with Mr. McLaren (page 13) that we must honestly admit we don't have all the answers. However, admitting I don't have all the answers doesn't mean I don't have answers, answers to the really important questions. The author specifically identifies this question as one without answers: "Who is in and who is out." And I agree that this is not MY question to answer. It is the Lord's: "the Lord knows those who are His" (2 Tim. 2:19). This doesn't mean that the question of "who is in and who is out" is irrelevant to me, however. Assurance of my salvation and that of others is worth pursuing, even though, I must agree, in the final analysis, Jesus is the One who will decide who is in and who is out.
Recent Comments