DISQUS

Danny · 2 years ago

I searched for "kingdom of God" on google blogs and your site was the first one on the list. I was drawn to your site because of your name. Forgive me if you have covered some of my questions in your other posts (this is the only one I have read).

You suggested that one principle we should live by is "turning from the law" and be guided by Jesus, but didn't Jesus say he came to fulfill the law?

I am interested to hear your thoughts on hell. Is there another post where you deal with hell more fully? You can drop me a line on my e-mail if you want to discuss this more fully.

Mostly, I just wanted to say thanks for your thoughts. I really appreciated them. What do you do outside the blog world (i.e. your job, family, etc.)?

daniel.t · 2 years ago

Danny,

Thanks for the comment. I'm glad you found the site. If you get the chance take a look around, Mark is doing some cool stuff with the new format.

I think your first question about the law comes from my sentence, "We are to turn away from the legalism of the law and allow our lives to be guided by Jesus’ principles. "

What I am trying to get at with this is that the law is not annihilated, but instead it is intensified. We go from legalism to principled living as Christ transforms our hearts. So much of legalism is about getting absolution for sins, when God has already dealt with our sin through grace. Principled living then is something that comes out of honestly and humbly walking in communion with God and allowing God to transform us from the inside out.

As far as my thoughts on hell go... that's a great question. I haven't posted on hell because I don't necessarily know what to think about hell. I plan on dealing with that topic a little more fully on my own site at some point in the future. But feel free to search the site and see what Mark or some of the others might have said about it in their posts.

Peace,
daniel.t

Michael Cline · 2 years ago

Daniel,

Great read, thank you for your posts. I agree with much of your thoughts on Hell (before you even know what those thoughts are haha). The demonology that has been such a large part of mainstream Christian teaching is more from bad exegesis of the book of Revelation and Dante's writings (I think without realizing it). There is a decent chunk of inter-testamental literature that is much more established along the lines of angels, demons, etc...but even they do not point to a place called "Hell" as we have often painted it. I believe Hell exists, and is a real place in real time (what does that mean?), but not as we often teach it.

I am curious as to your comments about Paul's writings. Why are you so hesitant? I'm currently working on a project dealing with the rise of "Jesus-only" praxis resulting from poor hermeneutics and awareness of the historical church. Phrases like "it's not religion, it's a relationship" seem to get played into this stream of thought. Many of those espousing such ideas are also hesitant to move outside the four gospels. I was curious as to your explanation. Not saying you fit into these categories of course.

daniel.t · 2 years ago

Michael,

I hesitate on Paul because, in my experience of Evengelicalism, Paul was lauded far more than Christ when it came to the praxis of the church. I think this is a travesty. Not only that but (what I would hope is a far better theological stance) I tend to have a high view of the incarnation. I would certainly assert that the incarnation of Jesus Christ was God's initial plan from the beginning, and not a second option after "the fall." I understand God as existing in trinity. This trinity extends relationship to humanity. I believe that the same core of who God is, out of which God creates, God also incarnates as a way of drawing us into relationship with God. Out of this understanding of the incarnation as the primary revelation of God, I am compelled to believe that the incarnate Christ is our primary interpretive lens for reading scripture, determining doctrine, and guiding praxis. Therefore, I place priority on the gospels over other parts of scripture. I recognize the canonical gospels as our best insight into who the church has understood Jesus to be when he was literally here among us.

I hope that this doesn't sound like I am discounting Paul or any other part of the Bible. Because I am not. I think they are really useful, and as it is likely that Paul was writing at least as early as the gospel writers, if not quite a bit earlier, then I do esteem what he had to say. But I don't think that Paul's doctrinal and dialectical approach and content should by any means replace or displace the words and actions of Jesus as the primary guide to the Christian life. I worship God who self-revealed through Jesus Christ. I do not worship Paul. Therefore, I must read the words of Paul and Jesus quite differently. I must allow Jesus to shape the way I read Paul, not vice versa.

I feel like there are other nuances I would like to articulate right now, but I have to finish up a final paper for one of my last classes of the semester. I'd love to hear back about what you think of these ideas.

Peace,
daniel.t