So I brought this up a few weeks ago without much time for discussion. However, what follows is my thoughts on why the jewel analogy of the gospel should supplant the pizza analogy in the third camp catechism.
Thus sayeth the Driscoll:
"...the cross is a multi-faceted jewel. Throughout church history much ink has been spilled as various theologians and Christian traditions have debated the effects of Jesus' death...we are essentially arguing for all of the perspectives that are nourished by biblical roots in
an effort to teach the totality of what Scripture says without obscuring any faithful view of the cross. One theologian has called the cross the great jewel of the Christian faith, and like every great jewel it has many precious facets that are each worthy of examining for their brilliance and beauty. Therefore, you will be well served to see each side of this jewel shining together for the glory of God in complimentary and not contradictory fashion. Most poor teaching about the cross results from someone's denying one of these facets, ignoring one of these facets, or overemphasizing one of these facets...Such narrow and reactionary theology has tragically caused the beauty of the cross to become obscured by the various warring teams that have risen up to argue for their systematic theology rather than bowing down in humble worship of the crucified Jesus."
an effort to teach the totality of what Scripture says without obscuring any faithful view of the cross. One theologian has called the cross the great jewel of the Christian faith, and like every great jewel it has many precious facets that are each worthy of examining for their brilliance and beauty. Therefore, you will be well served to see each side of this jewel shining together for the glory of God in complimentary and not contradictory fashion. Most poor teaching about the cross results from someone's denying one of these facets, ignoring one of these facets, or overemphasizing one of these facets...Such narrow and reactionary theology has tragically caused the beauty of the cross to become obscured by the various warring teams that have risen up to argue for their systematic theology rather than bowing down in humble worship of the crucified Jesus."~Mark Driscoll, Death by Love, pg. 10.
I think this explanation of the gospel/cross is a more accurate and useful analogy for how we should view the gospel in light of evangelism. Here are two specific points as to why.
1. The nature of the gospel. The pizza analogy suggests a disjointed or changing nature of the gospel. A Turney deep dish meat lovers pizza is a fundamentally different thing than a thin crust veggie lovers pizza. Further, various toppings that people put on pizza would definitely conflict if combined onto a single pie - black olive, bbq sauce and anchovies?? Gross! In contrast, the jewel analogy maintains that all aspects or facets of the gospel are ever present, of equal importance, and of complimentary use to one another.
2. Perspective v. Preference. The pizza analogy is essentially a conversation about preference, which is essentially a man-driven discussion. It runs the danger of overlooking or downplaying other "toppings" and it has subtle similarity to the concept of buffet theology. On the other hand, the jewel analogy is essentially a conversation about perspective. My life circumstances and the resulting opinions will render me in a distinct position in relation to the jewel. Thus, when I first perceive the jewel, I will perceive its beauty through a specific facet. As I grow in Christ, I grow to understand and appreciate other facets due a) increasing knowledge of the word, b) life's inevitable changes that change my position in relation to the jewel and thus how the gospel comforts, sustains and sanctifies me, and c) through the experiences of other believers whose experiences of the jewel also serve to teach me.
What are your thoughts.
What are your thoughts.
3 comments:
First of all, I will not even consider this view unless you assure me that the jewel is conflict-free.
I think you've got some good points, but I think that it's essentially the same analogy. You're just swapping the jewel for the pizza. I feel we could make the same arguments about how your life experiences will set you up to be attracted to one particular slice of the pizza, but once you start eating it you realize that you like another flavor, also. Then another pizza lover encourages/challenges you to step out of your no-veggie comfort zone and you realize that your taste-buds have changed. Or, God has changed your perspective(s). Eventually, you get to the point where you appreciate all the different toppings.
However, I do think that a jewel is easier to define. Like you said, there are tons of different toppings that can be put on pizza, but when we get hung up on what those flavors would be (anchovies, olives, pepperoni) it ruins the analogy. The focus should be on what different parts of the gospel are represented by each slice, rather than what physical toppings would represent each part of the gospel.
So, I think the pizza is still valid. Also, since it is a thirdcamp original, I vote that it stays.
My thoughts:
1. I hate the font and background of this blog because it gives you a headache to read. Yes, Brian Turney, I am playing the hater card.
2. I agree with what Aaron said I think. In my own words, however:
a) Toppings are not a part of the original analogy, and thus cannot be used to discredit it. Thusly, Andrew's point #1 is not valid.
b) My understanding of the pizza analogy does not necessitate an actual pizza - in other words, it could be any pie-shaped food item, or even just a pie chart. The point is, what's at the center is always true, but the different pieces represent the different perspectives and life experiences people take when approaching it. I disagree that this analogy is one of "preference" because, as already mentioned, toppings are not a part of it, and thus one does not "choose" which piece they like the best.
c) All of the talk about life circumstances and perspective applies just the same to either a pie analogy or a jewel analogy. Those present at CiCi's on the night this analogy was conceived will recall that it was "perspective" that started the whole conversation in the first place.
Both theories say the same thing - one's preference for one or the other perhaps just suggests a different piece of pie (or a different angle of the jewel).
if you just sit and "look" at Christ and what He has to offer, without ever embracing and "consuming" the Gospel and letting it be a part of who are, you aren't a Christian.
I'll keep eating that pizza, thank you.
Post a Comment