Category: Church Development

Here is part 2 of an essay from Gary Deddo on the nature of the church and its ministry. For other parts of the essay, click a number: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. We encourage you to add your thoughts and questions in the “comments” box at the end of each post to get a discussion going. To read the full essay in booklet form, click here. To read the related essay, “Clarifying Our Theological Vision,” click here.

---

A Brief Theology of the Church
(with a view to equipping the saints for the work of ministry)

by Dr. Gary Deddo

Part 2: Images of the Church

Last time, we noted that the church’s ministry is determined by its identity. We then began to explore that identity, asking “What is the nature of the church?” This time we’ll go deeper, looking at four primary ways the church is identified in biblical revelation.

1. Body of Christ

The church (ekklesia in Greek, meaning those called or assembled together) is most often and with greatest weight and stress identified as the Body of Christ. [1] By way of analogy to the human body with its head, this image tells us that there could be no closer created relationship than that between Jesus Christ and those who belong to him. The connection is vital—it is essential to its life. The body belongs to and has existence and direction by the head to which it is entirely joined. The body is the body of the head. You identify the body by the head to which it essentially belongs. The body does not exist or live apart from the head.

Though closely joined, the Head is not to be confused or interchanged with the Body. The Head is the source, the life, the sustenance, the authority of the Body. The Body depends upon the Head while the Head does not depend upon the Body. [2] The church belongs to Jesus in a way that exceeds the connection of human heads to human bodies. As the Body of Jesus Christ, the church belongs indivisibly to him. It has no existence, no life apart from him. Further implications of this connection between Christ and his Body are laid out in the New Testament. We’ll explore those later.

2. Cornerstone and foundation

The second image Paul offers is less organic but still pithy, pointed and in certain ways, a more comprehensive description of the relationship between Christ and his church/his Body. Making use of an analogy from the engineering of a physical temple, Paul identifies Jesus as the cornerstone of a temple of worship built in his honor. In using this analogy, Paul was drawing on an ancient practice, giving it a unique meaning that is defined by Jesus, not by the myths and temples of pagans.

This image of a cornerstone conveys the idea of the absolute beginning of a structure. Laying the cornerstone is the first step of construction, especially in building a temple. It provides the building’s meaning, its structural form and integrity. Physically, the cornerstone gave alignment to the structure’s length, width and height. All other elements of the temple were set in reference to this stone, thus finding their proper meaning and place in reference to it.

In pagan temples the cornerstone often had an inscription declaring which god the temple was dedicated to—that is, whose temple it was. In ancient myths, known in the days of the early church, the image of a cornerstone was sometimes used metaphorically to refer to the beginning point of all of creation set up by the gods.

By referring to Christ as the cornerstone of the church, Paul is emphasizing the following points:

1. That the very existence of the church is dependent upon him.
2. That the church and its worship belong to him, are dedicated to him.
3. That all that the church is and does must be arranged, ordered and structured in reference to him as the source, norm and standard of its life.

Peter makes use of the same image in his first letter. He wants to make sure his readers don’t get the wrong idea and think of Christ in impersonal, inert ways as a literal cornerstone might suggest. So he qualifies his use of the image:

As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him—you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Pet. 2:4-5)

Peter wants to make sure we see the resurrected Jesus Christ, who is eternally alive, as the cornerstone. Jesus is active, speaking, communicating and nourishing those joined to him as members of his body, as those who worship God in and through him. And we then, are also made alive. We are living stones built on him to offer our lives daily as an act of worship to God. Jesus is thus a life-giving cornerstone, not a dead block of marble. He is the Living Word of God to us.

The center of the center
To compare this to another image we often use, a cornerstone is to a building what the center point of a circle is to the circle’s circumference. It’s another way of saying Jesus is the Center of the center. Jesus being the center of the church means that he is the key to its whole meaning, structure and functioning. Everything else orbits around him and is oriented to him so that all its movements in all its parts are related to and measured and guided by staying centered on who he is and on his purposes for his church called together by him and gathered around him.

Cornerstone with a foundation of the apostles and prophets, the written Word of God
Paul brings in another element here before he talks about the church as a whole. He tells us that what is first oriented and already made to be in alignment with the cornerstone are certain foundation stones. The cornerstone first provides a reference to other foundation stones upon which the rest of the church is built. Together with the foundation stones, the cornerstone provides a foundation for the whole building. As the image is laid out by Paul, those foundation stones that are first directed and oriented to Jesus, the cornerstone, are the prophets and the apostles.

The prophets were persons appointed by God before Jesus Christ was incarnate to bear spoken and written testimony to God and prepare the people of God to ultimately identify and properly respond in faith to the incarnate Son. The apostles were persons appointed by God during and after Jesus’ earthly ministry to point back to Jesus Christ incarnate and his completed work of salvation and point forward to his return and the consummation of his rule and reign, his coming kingdom. Together, the writings of the prophets and apostles are what we call Scripture—the Old Testament and the New Testament. These persons and their messages, ordered and directed by Jesus Christ, the Living Word, point to him, providing, with him as the cornerstone, the complete foundation for anything and everything built upon it as his church.

So the foundation of the church is Scripture in service to Jesus Christ himself the eternal Word of God, who authorized both the prophets and apostles to be normative witnesses to him. We can summarize this by saying that the written Word of God serves as the revelation of God that is appointed to direct and order the life and worship of the church to Jesus Christ, who is the Living Word of God.

None of this revelation with Christ at the Center would be possible without the ministry of the Holy Spirit both before and after the incarnation of the eternal Son of God. The gracious ministry of the Holy Spirit is essential if those apostles and prophets were to hear and faithfully receive the Word of God. And we would not be able to hear or faithfully receive from Scripture were it not for the gracious work of the Holy Spirit made possible by the completed work of Jesus Christ. So God’s normative communication to us is an achievement of the whole Trinity, each person serving together with a distinct aspect of gracious ministry to us that we might know the Triune God and be reconciled to him so that we live in fellowship and communion with God.

The written Word of God is authorized by and gains its authority from the cornerstone, the Living Word of God. The Living Word of God is the living source of the written Word of God. As the Living Cornerstone, Jesus Christ himself continues even now to serve as its interpretive center. The written Word is to be interpreted in a way that points to Jesus Christ as its normative and living Center. The Living Word himself is the continuing source of the written Word. The Living Word continues to speak to us normatively or authoritatively in and through his written Word. The Living Word is not to be thought of as standing at a deistic distance from the written Word, as if the risen Lord Jesus had become mute. The Triune God remains the speaking, communicating and eloquent God who speaks in and through his written Word. And we hear it best when we listen to it with Jesus Christ as its living, speaking Cornerstone, as if it is his Word, as if that written Word belongs to him. Here are some key passages that contribute to this insight:

Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. (Eph. 2:19-22)

As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him—you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Pet. 2:4-5)

When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify about me. (John 15:26)

Brothers and sisters, the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. (Acts 1:16)

The Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent. You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. (John 5:37-40)

[Jesus] said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself…. He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” (Luke 24:25-27; 44-45)

3. Groom with bride

The third image that supplements our understanding of the relationship between Jesus and the church, his body, is one of groom with bride. This image points out a very personal, deep, life-long, intimate and fruitful relationship. Here are a few key scriptures that use this image:

The bride belongs to the bridegroom. The friend who attends the bridegroom waits and listens for him, and is full of joy when he hears the bridegroom’s voice. That joy is mine, and it is now complete. (John 3:29)

Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready. (Rev. 19:7)

The Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let the one who hears say, “Come!” Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life. (Rev. 22:17)

After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church—for we are members of his body. “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. (Eph. 5:29-32)

This image indicates a very close, even intimate and personal relationship of Jesus with his church. It also conveys a dynamic, interactive, interpersonal element of relationship. Given other such relational imagery throughout the New Testament, it conveys the idea of a history of relationship that develops and grows, especially from being unmarried, to being betrothed to having the marriage consummated. In the Old Testament there is preparation for this dimension of understanding with God’s relationship with Israel being compared to the relationship of a husband and wife. This is poignantly portrayed in Hosea where Israel’s unbelief and betrayal are compared to adultery. There are also several references in Isaiah and Jeremiah to the people of God as God’s bride. [3]

Again, this image should not be taken alone. It helps us fill out a portrait when put together with the other images. This image, along with the others, are all together illustrative of a deep and complex reality that can’t be reduced to any one word or image. The images synthesize other more literal teaching about God’s relating to his people and what we are told about the history of that relationship culminating in the metaphorical image of the marriage feast of the Lamb depicted in Revelation 19:7-9.

4. Sharing-sacrament in body and blood

A fourth image used in several passages and alluded to in yet others, involves the idea of being related to Jesus Christ by way of the image of ingestion. Our fellowship and communion with Christ is like our taking him into our bodies as our food, as sustenance for our life. We display this image when we celebrate the Lord’s Supper. As we take bread and wine, we are said to be taking and eating his body broken for us, and his blood poured out for us. This image conveys the idea of not only ingestion, but also, as interpreted by Jesus, of his giving up his life for us and establishing a renewed covenant relationship with him, the new covenant in his blood. So we can refer to this image as being sacramental, partaking of his body and blood. We are receiving a share in his resurrected and ascended life in renewed relationship with God. That’s how closely Christ is related to us and how dependent we are on him, more than even physical food.

Communion in his body and blood by way of the sign of ingestion points to a very close connection that provides sustenance (nourishment). This image suggests other New Testament images of life-giving relationship, including those between the vine and branches, and the flow of water giving life to persons, plants and animals in a parched land. Recall also how Jesus identifies himself as the Bread of Life and Living Water. The taking of another into our bodies conveys the idea of indwelling, or internalizing him. Such deep connection in the New Testament is often related to the presence and ministry of the Holy Spirit within us, working in our hearts, minds and spirits, and upon our human nature.

Here are two references to those images:

Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. (John 6:53-56)

Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation [koinonia=partaking, sharing, having communion] in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation [koinonia] in the body of Christ? (1 Corinthians 10:16)

What do we learn from these images?

In their own way, each one of these four images points to the reality of a deep relationship between Christ and his church (a relationship that involves worshiping the Father and receiving the Spirit). Many other passages speak in more literal ways concerning this relationship, using words such as follow, receive, serve, obey, learn, hope, love, trust, faith, and belief. Though these words are important and quite helpful, the spiritual depth, meaning and wholeness of the relationship we enjoy with Christ are perhaps best captured and synthesized by the images we’ve just explored. Next time we’ll look further at the implications.

______________________

[1] Romans 7:4; 1 Corinthians 6:15; 10:16; 12:12; 12:22; 12:23; 12:27; Ephesians 1:23; 2:19; 3:6; 4:12; 4:25; 5:30; Colossians 1:24; 1 Timothy 6:2; Galatians 1:2.

[2] The strict analogy with a human body breaks down here since the created human head cannot live long apart from its body. As is true in every case, you cannot work backwards from the logic of a creaturely analogy to doctrinal statements about God, who is not a creature. Knowing Jesus is Lord and the eternal Son of God blocks the misuse of this image to make it seem there is a kind of mutual dependence of the Head upon the Body. The teaching and image used is meant to tell us far more about the Body than about the Head.

[3] Isaiah 49:18; 61:10; 62:5; Jeremiah 2:2; 2:32; 7:34; 16:9; 25:10; 33:11; Joel 2:16.

Greg Williams, GCI-USA Director of Church Administration and Development, recently announced that we will continue the theme of Renewal in 2017. The December issue of GCI Equipper (with the five articles linked below) focuses on this theme, helping us understand and live into the renewal the Spirit continues to grant our fellowship.

From Greg: Our renewal continues
Greg Williams sets the GCI-USA theme for 2017, anticipating how the Spirit will continue to renew our fellowship in multiple ways.

GCI’s educational strategy for renewal
Greg Williams reviews the work of GCI’s Educational Strategy Task Force that has been looking at educational support for GCI’s ongoing renewal.

A renewed understanding of evangelism
GCI associate pastor Josh McDonald writes about how Trinitarian theology renewed his understanding and practice of evangelism.

Sermon summary: A renewed understanding of discipleship
In a CT article that would make a good sermon, Wesley Hill looks at how the Gospel of Mark renewed his understanding of discipleship.

Kid’s Korner: Renew your ministry to children
Looking for ways to renew your children’s ministry in the coming year? Read this article for helpful ideas.

By Dr. Gary Deddo

Panentheism is the name of a misleading and misguided approach to thinking about the relationship between God and God’s creation. In general it confuses the being of God with the existence of creation. It also affects, often indirectly, how we approach relationships, our ethics.

Panentheism has been around a long time, taking various forms. It has most often been associated with religions other than Christianity. The Bahai faith, for example, teaches a panentheistic relationship of god with the material creation where creation is said to be “the body of god.” Its adherents believe god is more than creation, yet all of creation is seen as part of, or an extension of god, and thus has the same kind of being as god. Panentheistic teachings tend to fuse creation with god.

More recently, there has arisen a Christianized form of panentheism (we might call it Christo-panentheism). It sometimes shows up among teachers of spiritual formation or spiritual direction. Some of these teachers are aware of their divergence from biblical, evangelical and historically orthodox belief and practice. Others may have been drawn to certain teachings and inadvertently are passing on to others what they don’t fully realize undercuts the essentials of Christian faith, worship and obedience. It’s likely that most of them are well intentioned, even if mistaken. In their desire to overcome a false opposition between God and God’s creation, they blur the distinction between the two. These teachers attempt to use Jesus Christ and his incarnation to justify a confusion and fusion of God’s being with human being.

Why are some Christians attracted to panentheism?

The draw of panentheism for some Christians is that it holds out the promise (which is a false promise) that a fusion and joining of God with his creation in general, and with humans in particular, will result in ethical good. It promises that the perceived differences, disagreements, divisions and hostilities among individuals and groups (economic classes, races, genders) and between humans and the environment will all be resolved. Why? Because, in their view, these are really united (really one), thus there is no reason for the hostility and division. We can all get along. This idea of being naturally and automatically in harmony with God and with each other (and being in some way divine yourself) has strong appeal to many: all is well; all is right. What could be wrong with eliminating our differences? Such a unity and feeling of togetherness will surely bring harmony and end hostility. Or so it seems.

The problem with panentheism

The problem with panentheism is that it involves thinking and speaking as if there is some sort of natural connection (and even identification) between God and some aspect of creation. But affirming that there is a unity of being that results in an automatic and “natural” harmony and flow between God and creation fails to recognize the proper distinction between God and his creation. In the panentheistic view, creation is naturally divine or is infused with the divine. At the level of their being they naturally intermingle since they are or have become the same kind of being. But this thinking of God’s being as extending from or joined to the being of creation is a form of idolatrous thinking. Israel’s first lesson about the creator God is that God is not a creature (not a created being). God is not a material thing. Instead, God is infinitely transcendent over his creation. God made creation, and creation is entirely dependent on God, even for its very existence. God gave creation its existence. Before he spoke, it did not exist. Before God acted, nothing else existed except God. After God acted, the only things that exist other than God are what he made.

Though God is not dependent in any way on creation, all creation is entirely dependent on the action and activity of God. To think or treat any part of creation as God or as somehow divine is idolatry. Israel was given this truth early on and was thereby radically distinguished from all other ancient Near Eastern religions. God alone is to be worshipped and nothing about creation is to be worshipped. Creation can (and should) be honored and respected for what it is—the good creation of God. But creatures commit idolatry when they treat creation as divine in whole or in part—either as God, or somehow as an extension of God’s being. Jesus Christ, his apostles and the church and its Scripture consistently affirm this fundamental truth. It’s part of the bedrock of the Judeo-Christian faith.

Does God’s transcendence mean that he has no relationship with the works of his hands? Does his transcendence mean that the relationship between God and creation is one of absolute opposition? Alienation? Antagonism? Not at all. Before the fall of humanity (and even after), there was a very positive and fruitful relationship of goodness and love and even grace (undeserved favor). The creator God had no trouble interacting with his creation. God’s utter transcendence over creation created no barrier, no disharmony. Rather it was humanity’s distrust and disobedience that broke the harmonious relationship. The sin and evil that becomes a part of the story through human misuse of the good gift of their freedom is what is alien and hostile to God’s good creation and his purposes for it.

The story from Genesis on shows that the absolutely transcendent God who reigns infinitely over his creation has no problem being present to it and interacting with it. Theologians call this God’s immanence. The God of Israel interacts freely with his creation, and is in no way controlled or manipulated or contractually put under obligation by it. God is thus both transcendent over and immanent in (present to) his creation. Those who affirm a natural, automatic panentheistic connection between God and creation confuse God’s being present to things and even being involved with or in things (God’s immanence) with those created things sharing in God’s being and so being divine, or being identified with and naturally joined to God. The error of this panentheistic thinking is that its proponents end up either minimizing or neglecting God’s transcendence over creation or giving creation its own natural transcendence like God’s. With this mistaken approach, God and creation overlap in being, and creation is erroneously given a transcendence that is intrinsic to its very being, like that of God.

But the biblical revelation is clear: God has no natural relationship—no given or fixed connection with his creation, in the sense of creation sharing to some degree in the same kind of being as God. God has an entirely different kind of being (summed up in saying that he is uncreated, eternal, infinite, etc.) than his creation, which is made (and thus finite)—limited in many ways. Creation is entirely dependent on God for its very existence. God upholds everything in existence. Only God has existence in himself (theologians refer to this as God’s aseity)—God is not dependent in any way on anyone or anything. Consequently God’s relationship with his creation comes by his action, by his will (not by necessity), and as the outcome of his decision that expresses his own character and purposes.

If God did not choose to relate to his creation there would be no relationship between God and his creation. The creator God’s relationship with Israel is a real relationship. It involves deliberate acting, interaction and initiative on God’s part. God’s relationship to creation is an act of pure grace! The glory of the God who is, is that he is free to create and love his creation. God does not need creation to be God. God simply is Triune, and that is all that is needed for God to be God. There is nothing about God’s relationship to his creation that is built in, automatic, mechanical, determined by impersonal forces or laws. God is sovereign in his goodness and love over his creation. So Israel was commanded to worship God alone and to repudiate idolatry. God and his creation are entirely different kinds of being. God is uncreated while creation is made—by God.

Panentheism obscures grace

A panentheistic view of the relationship between God and his creation not only misrepresents the transcendence and immanence of God and the created and dependent nature of things made by God, but obscures the free grace of God that is essential to their relationship. Grace is not nature and nature is not grace. Grace is not opposed to nature and does not destroy nature, but grace is freely given out of God’s goodness and love and it rescues, redeems, transforms and perfects his creation and creatures.

Ontologically or philosophically speaking, grace is not necessary—God’s grace is not mechanical or automatic or built into creation. If it were, it would not be grace. Out of his sheer, free grace, God does for creation what it could never do for itself. By grace, creation will be given a perfection that it could never attain out of its own potentials and possibilities. Creation reaches its God-intended end (telos) in and through a real relationship and interaction initiated and completed by God. This decision, relationship and action reached its culmination in the incarnation of the Son of God and his life, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension.

Panentheism obscures the knowledge of God

In the Old Testament and New, even the knowledge of God is not natural. Human beings have no intrinsic power to know God as God truly is. God is known because he chooses to reveal himself and make himself known. The knowledge of God is thus the result of the grace of God. If God chose not to be known, and did not act in a way to make himself known, he would not be known. God has the power to remain private, anonymous. If God did not want to be known, he would not be known! But he chooses and acts to reveal himself. Recall God’s revelation to Moses: “I am that I am.” The early church had a saying: “Only God knows God, and only God reveals God.” This reflects Jesus’ own saying: “Only the Father knows the Son and only the Son knows the Father…and those to whom he chooses to reveal him” (Matthew 11:27 NRSV). If God is known at all, it is because God, by his grace, has revealed himself, thus enabling us to know him as he is.

Those thinking panentheistically (like Christian author Richard Rohr, whose latest book is shown at right) speak as if by knowing created things one is naturally also getting to know God because God is somehow in these things and identified with them (thus if you know one, you know the other). These teachers speak of the relationship between God and some aspect of creation the way Jesus speaks exclusively of his unique relationship with God the Father and the Holy Spirit. Recall Jesus’ saying, “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). There we have true identity—Jesus, and he alone, is Immanuel, God with us. However, those thinking in a panentheistic way speak as if creation itself has a natural, built-in mediatorial power to overcome our spiritual blindness and reveal God.

Though Rohr and others who think this way can admit that there is some part or aspect of God that transcends creation, they view other parts (aspects) of creation as being an extension of God’s being. Some of these authors/teachers say creation is the body of God, though they also say there is more to God than his body (in contrast to panentheism, pantheism simply declares that all is God and God is all).

When knowledge of God and relating to God by interacting with some aspect of creation is identical to knowing God, that knowledge of creation becomes a norm for what stands as true knowledge of God. It serves as a natural source of “grace” that ends up coloring all that we think and believe about God. The knowledge of creation then becomes a normative authority that at least equals and therefore rivals Scripture and Jesus Christ as the revelation of God. In some cases, knowledge of creation sounds like it surpasses Jesus Christ the Living Word of God and his authorized Written Word. According to this mistaken view, creation as revelation crowns God’s personal and particular self-revelation by the Word of God and fulfills them. Aspects of creation are then presented as unique and even necessary in our knowing of God. Creation (and particularly the human spirit) is thereby given divine status. In this wrong-headed way of thinking, the Holy Spirit is often identified with the human spirit, so that there is no need to discern the difference between them. A continuity and natural connection is assumed. Sometimes the arts and often experiences of nature are given the highest revelatory status.

Panentheism puts a mistaken focus on experience

The net result of this panentheistic frame of thought is that the knowledge of God (and our relationship to God) starts with or concentrates on an experience of something created. It is thus focused on everyday experiences, especially ones we have some control over. Our relationship to God is thus approached from a center in ourselves, and is understood and evaluated in terms of the quality of our experiences. Such a “spirituality” can lead to seeking to have a series of certain experiences. It can lead to persons comparing experiences one to another and to feelings of superiority or inferiority. A danger arises in this preoccupation with oneself and the quality of one’s experiences. Such panentheistic thinking shares in teachings that are offered by sub-Christian forms of mysticism.

Panentheism mistakenly tries to eliminate created differences

What drives many of these teachers and followers in a panentheistic direction is a reaction to and desire to correct a view and understanding of God being at a distance, of God being opposed to or against his creation. Sometimes this problem is identified as a dualism. While it’s true that thinking of God as unapproachable (even hostile to creation) can lead to division, abuse, violence and injustice, the biblical story tells us that there are real distinctions (by God’s design) that exist between God and his creatures, which are there to bless, not curse. These created distinctions (differences) are thus good. It is evil that misuses and takes sinful advantage of them. But the solution to this evil is not to eliminate the good created differences, especially those between God and humanity. God’s solution is to redeem those created differences so that they are all used to bless, uplift and perfect—all for the purposes of love. Good created difference is what allows for the free exchange of life-giving gifts! If all were the same, there would be no reason for relationship, for life-giving gift exchange. There would be no need for or room for true God-like love, fellowship and communion.

In order to address the misuse of the differences, panentheists overcorrect by seeking to eliminate the thought of difference. They promote thinking that the relationship between God and creation is automatic, involving a natural identity, a fusion of being. In their way of thinking, God and creation have the same kind of being—they are coextensive. In a way, this fixes the problem they perceive, but it does so by creating another problem that is just as bad, and possibly worse. They miss the transcendence of God and the grace of God’s relationship to his creation. They miss the fact that God’s relationship to his creation and creatures is a mediated one—that God is connected directly only to Jesus Christ and we are connected by the Holy Spirit to the humanity of Jesus Christ who is the one and only Mediator between God and humanity (1 Timothy 2:5). There is thus no natural, non-mediated relationship of God with his creation. The relationship that he has established with it is based on God’s willing choice that is all about grace. And while it’s true that God’s grace reaches down to the roots of our human being, and in that sense affects our being (ontology), that grace does not give us a different kind of being. Rather, it perfects our human being.

What, if anything, can we learn about God from nature?

God may use aspects of his creation as created signs to point to him and at the same time away from themselves as objects of devotion. Recall how Paul and Barnabas, in horror, rejected the idea that anyone would worship them! Creation (apostles included) has no intrinsic power or ability to connect, relate or reconcile us to God. Nature is not divine—it cannot save. Nature is now fallen in every and all aspects—it is distorted, not even able to fulfill its natural harmonies and created goodness. All of creation needs to be reworked, re-headed up, or recapitulated, as Paul puts it in Ephesians 1:10.

Since God is not a creature and nature is not a piece or part of God, knowing God or relating to God cannot be the same as knowing some aspect of a created thing. An analogy might be the difference between knowing and being acquainted with a work of art by a certain artist on the one hand, and on the other actually meeting, conversing with and having a life-long close relationship with that artist. Some speculations about the artist based on contemplating their works of art might turn out to be true. However, one could never know the artist well without meeting him or her in person. But once you’ve met and conversed with the artist, then you can interpret and understand the artwork in the light of that knowledge. At that point you would no longer be merely speculating based on second-hand knowledge. Therein is the huge difference between knowing something about an artist compared to knowing the artist in person, face-to-face, having a relationship with him or her. A work of art can only serve as a kind of witness, or parable or sign, concerning the artist. It can never be equivalent to the being of the artist. A work of art has a different kind of being than the artist.

That is why the early Christian Nicene Creed declares that Jesus Christ was “begotten from the Father, not made.” Although the teachers and representatives of the early church who drafted the creed indicated in multiple ways that Jesus was divine in the same sense as the Father and Spirit, they used this phrase to communicate by way of analogy that what is begotten is of the identical kind of being as the begetter. Horses beget horses, humans beget humans, etc. What is made is of an entirely different kind of being. Jesus alone is of the identical kind of being as the Father (homoousios to Patri—“of one being with the Father”—is how the Greek-speaking authors of the Creed put it).

The problem of speculating about the artist when the only evidence the viewer has is the artwork, is greatly heightened when the viewer comes at the artwork with suspicion and distrust concerning the artist. An interesting crisis would ensue for such a person if the distrusted artist were to walk into the gallery and there demonstrate convincingly to the viewer that they were actually good and faithful, forgiving and loving, and wanting a good and right relationship with the viewer, and had, in fact, done everything on their part, at their own expense, to make that right relationship happen, and that’s why they had now come into the gallery! This made-up scenario is a parable of the gospel itself, and understanding it depends upon being able to recognize the decided difference between the work of art and the artist. It’s a huge difference—but one that in no way denies an indirect connection between the two. It also affirms the clear priority of knowing directly (in person), in great contrast to knowing indirectly something about a person through their creations.

It’s all about the grace of God

Our knowledge of God, and the source of our salvation, comes about through the agency of God, the choice of God, the action of God and thus the grace of God. This grace comes to us by God’s self-revelation and self-giving mediated by Jesus Christ. It’s not provided by the knowledge of nature or by the exercise of nature’s powers. The transcendence of God is no barrier to God’s being in real and intimate relationship with his creation (a relationship always achieved through the mediation of God’s grace). We have, in the end, a real relationship initiated and established between the transcendent God and his finite and contingent/dependent creation, all by his grace, by virtue of his mediation. God remains God and creation remains creation in this fellowship and communion of grace for all eternity. That is part of the glory—there is a unity that maintains the difference and distinction of being. The difference between God and humanity is not obliterated, but sustained and glorified. Creation is good—just by being God’s creation, not by being an extension of God.

Three types of union with distinctions

An orthodox understanding of Incarnational Trinitarian theology maintains the important distinctions between the three kinds of union:

1. Union that is eternal and internal in the Trinity (perichoresis)
2. The union of divine and human nature in the One Person of the Son of God (the hypostatic union)
3. Our union with Christ by the Holy Spirit (the saving union, sometimes called the economic union)

In the first union (the perichoretic, Trinitarian union of God) there is, uniquely, oneness of being. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all divine in the same way. They are united in being.

In the second union, the divine nature of the eternal Son of God, via the Incarnation, did not turn into human nature (nor vice versa). The divine Son of God did not cease being the divine Son and turn into a man called Jesus, nor is Jesus a man who turned into a divine being. The two natures (divine and human) are joined in the one Person of the divine Son in such a way that the divine nature remains what it was, and the human nature remains fully human (though sanctified and regenerated in Christ).

In the third union, which pertains to salvation, we do not become the person of Jesus when by the Holy Spirit we are joined to Jesus’ human nature and united to him in that saving way. Instead, we become sanctified human beings, sharing in Christ’s own sanctified humanity. We do not become divine, and we do not become Jesus; and he does not become any of us. Our saving union with Christ maintains the difference (distinction) of our persons.

It is thus important to note that there was not and is not a fusion of being or natures in Jesus’ incarnation or in our saving union with Jesus by the Spirit. Even though we use the word union to describe all three of the above noted relationships, there are crucial differences. In each case the union is of a different sort. Many are confused by this, or have never been taught properly (which is why some avoid the topic of our union with Christ altogether). However, this is standard, orthodox Christian teaching that does justice to the whole of biblical revelation.

The serious error of Christo-panentheism

Some have tried to use either the perichoretic union of the Trinity (#1, above), or the union of the Incarnation (#2) to make a case for panentheism. The result is what we might refer to as Christo-panentheism. The problem with this approach is that it obliterates the differences among the three aforementioned kinds of union. Trading on that confusion, Christo-panentheism turns the idea of the unity or union that applies to Jesus Christ alone into a generic principle that applies to all relationships within creation and between creation and God. It takes the one-of-a-kind and different unions that apply only to the Trinity and only to the incarnation of the Son of God, and makes them out to be simply particular instances of a generic category of relationship, a unity-oneness, that applies as a built-in given to all of creation.

From this (false) perspective, unity is taken to mean a kind of ontological fusion of God with creation that becomes a general feature of all creation because somehow creation is mystically related to the “cosmic Christ” (the mistake made, for example, in the book shown at right). In order to move from a particular and one-of-a-kind understanding of Jesus to him being merely exemplary of what is true everywhere and all the time, a radical distinction is made between Jesus and the “cosmic Christ.”

Taking the absolutely unique relationships found in God and in Jesus Christ and applying them in the same way to creaturely existence in general makes a serious error. But further, none of the three relationships mentioned above, as depicted in biblical revelation, indicate a kind of union that amounts to an identity of those related, so that there is no difference, so that the things in relationship are interchangeable, so that our knowing and relating to one is the same as knowing and relating to the other.

The perichoretic relationship that applies only to the Triunity still maintains the difference (distinction) of the divine Persons for all eternity. There never was a time when God was not Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Divine unity does not undo the difference or fuse the Persons. They do not become identical and/or interchangeable. But in the eternal life of God they so indwell one another that while remaining distinct in Person they are united in being. This is standard, historically orthodox Christian understanding.

Likewise, in the union of the divine and human natures in the one person of the Son, the two natures are not “divided, separated, confused or changed into one another” (as stated in the Chalcedon Creed or Definition so as to avoid error in speaking of Christ). The two natures remain distinct even while being together in the Person of the Son. But these two natures are not related in a perichoretic way like the Persons in the Trinity are related. The divine nature is eternal and divine. The human nature is creaturely and limited and not eternal and remains human even if sanctified and made immortal (glorified). The human nature is not intrinsic to the eternal existence of the Son’s divine nature. Human nature is joined by an act of grace to the Person of the Son. So the unity of the natures in Jesus Christ does not result in their fusion or confusion.

Finally, our union with Christ by the Holy Spirit does not mean we are Jesus or that Jesus is us. We remain distinct and “other” as persons in this saving unity. Jesus remains Lord, and we are not (and never will be). Jesus is to be worshiped and we are not. And in that saving union with the humanity of Christ, we do not become so united to him that we become additional persons of the Trinity! No, our humanity is maintained and our distinct personhood as creatures is upheld even as we share in the life of Christ and in him we will share in the life of the Trinity, forever. The glory of this sharing is that such fellowship and communion in Christ by the Spirit sustains the difference at the level of our being. That unity-in-difference beautifully displays the glory and grace of the triune God.

Jesus Christ does not represent a generic principle of the union of all things being of the same kind of being and joined in that way. The truth he reveals about the Trinity and about who he is as the Son of God tells us of absolutely unique, one-of-a-kind relationships. Our relationship with God through Christ upholds the very important difference between us and God, between God and creation. He remains Lord over us and all creation. He remains Savior. But that does not mean we cannot share in all that he has for us, even having fellowship (koinonia, sharing in) with his divine nature by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:4).

The nature of sin and evil

Panentheistic thinking concerning the union of all things by virtue of having the same kind of being, badly obscures the nature of sin and evil. Contrary to panentheism, the Bible teaches that all things are not holy. Indeed, God stands implacably opposed to evil. Evil is not a part of God. God will judge all evil—he will sort out good from evil and bring all evil to an end. He will do so to rescue and save his good creation from evil. Because he loves his good creation, God remains vehemently opposed to all that opposes his creation and his good and glorious ends for it. Evil is not overlooked by God. He will never change his mind about it or excuse it.

Contrary to panentheistic reasoning concerning the intrinsic union of all things, evil is not necessary to God or to God’s good creation, nor is it needed for his ultimate purposes. The Bible reveals that evil has been judged and condemned in Jesus Christ while rescuing us from it to bring about a new heaven and earth. God can use evil when that is what we give him, but he uses it against its nature and will. God makes evil do forced labor to serve his holy purposes. And what cannot be redeemed, God eradicates in the end. Evil itself has no future.

Panentheism seems to wrap all differences, even the difference between good and evil, into one giant synthesis so that good and evil work naturally together (perhaps with God’s or Christ’s assistance) to contribute to some greater end. Evil, then, is less than evil because it contributes to a greater good. And in that case, evil is not alien to God and his good creation but rather a necessary means for God to bring about his “higher” ends. And then, good is not entirely good either. For good needs some evil to reach the higher “good.” If that is the case, then God is both good and evil and we should not expect evil to ever be fully eradicated since it is needed as an ingredient in the greater good to come.

Panentheism diminishes the radical difference between God’s good and evil and eliminates the need for both judgment and salvation from evil by an act of God. “Grace” then simply makes sure that all evil ends up contributing in a natural way to good. Notice then, that there is no need for forgiveness. If evil naturally serves good, then evil is justified! In that case, there is no need for the cross of Jesus Christ and his justification of the sinner and deliverance from evil. Evil doesn’t need to be overcome and done away with. It is not the final enemy. It is a friend, perhaps in disguise. It is self-justifying since it is needed to bring about greater good. But that view is not the biblical picture of God’s good, of evil, and of God’s judgment and salvation brought about by the incarnate Son of God who conquered death and evil in his death, resurrection and ascension.

Conclusion

The kind of unity envisioned by panentheism, even if Christianized, comes at a very high cost. The nature of God, the nature of Christ, and the nature of human beings and creation itself are all misrepresented. By blurring the God-ordained distinctions between creature and Creator, panentheistic thinking contributes to a form of idolatry. Along with that, it makes unnecessary the atoning, reconciling and saving work of Christ and his victory over evil on behalf of his good but fallen creation. Panentheism provides a justification for evil while obscuring the free grace of God who chose us and then acted in our place and on our behalf to restore us to fellowship and communion with him as his beloved creaturely and human children. It is for these reasons that GCI does not endorse any teaching that promotes a panentheistic view of the relationship between God and his creation (including human creatures). This view is a false gospel.

In an article titled Programs, Paths and Healthy Church Growth, Terry Morgan notes that it’s easy for churches to get bogged down running ministry programs. He advises them to shift to a focus on providing a discipleship “path” that helps people follow the Spirit on a journey toward maturity in Christ. Programs are then selected to serve that journey. To read Morgan’s article, click here.

With this post, we begin an essay from Gary Deddo on the nature of the church and its ministry. To read each part of the essay, click a number: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. We encourage you to add your thoughts and questions in the “comments” box at the end of each post to get a discussion going. To read the full essay in booklet form, click here. To read the related essay, “Clarifying Our Theological Vision,” click here.

---

A Brief Theology of the Church
(with a view to equipping the saints for the work of ministry)

by Dr. Gary Deddo

Introduction

Christian ministry and a theology of the church belong to and need each other. When separated, both are undermined. Ministry in the church of Jesus Christ is enriched by a robust theology of the church because the central activities of Christian ministry have always taken place in the context of a particular group of persons who gather in Christ’s name. Christian ministry is an integral aspect of what the church is, and what it is was instituted by its Lord and Savior to accomplish. The nature of the church, which comes first, informs the nature of the church’s ministry. In that way, Christian ministry serves the church, the Body of Christ, not vice versa.

Christian ministry exists for the sake of the Body of Christ in the name of its Head, Jesus. Ministry is a means to God’s great purposes for his people, and as we will see in this essay (being published in several parts), Christian ministry, in one way or another, involves not just pastors and elders or other “leaders,” but all members of the church gathered in congregations for worship and service.

GCI’s journey of renewal

It has seemed good and right that as a denomination of the Christian church, GCI should give concentrated time and effort to filling out its theological understanding of the church (ecclesiology). Over the last 20 years or so we have not given ecclesiology as much attention, study and teaching as other doctrines of the Christian faith. We have spent more effort understanding and learning how to communicate the core doctrines of the faith.

The doctrinal renewal that has transformed (and continues to transform) GCI from top to bottom, focused initially on the most fundamental or central truths of biblical revelation regarding who God is as revealed in Jesus Christ according to Scripture. The Spirit focused our hearts and minds on the person and work of Jesus who reveals the true nature, character, heart, mind and purpose of God. In Jesus, God made himself known in person, in time and space, in flesh and blood. As a denomination, GCI was arrested, then re-centered by that self-revelation of God, which focused our faith, hope, love and worship of God through him.

As we were renewed around this “Center of the center,” Jesus Christ, by the Word and Spirit, we were directed to take account of the grace of God in the new covenant fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Legal and contractual understandings of our relationship with God were left behind and we discovered life in Christ under his freely given grace, and with that a life of peace, joy and love in a relationship with God that had been more or less obscured under our former teachings. We discovered that God was entirely for us and with us in Jesus because God is a good and gracious God from beginning to end. Our own renewal was itself an unforgettable sign of God’s grace, since we had not earned or deserved his renewing, regenerating grace.

Inseparably connected to God revealed in Jesus Christ, and living in the grace of the covenant fulfilled in him, we came to see and to be captured by the biblical revelation that God is not a lonely God, but from all eternity the Triune God of holy fellowship, communion and love. In coming to see and believe in Jesus as the one who reveals and reconciles us to God, we came to comprehend that this Jesus identified himself as one with the Father and one with the Holy Spirit. He takes us to the Father and he sends us his Holy Spirit. Through Jesus, we came to recognize the divinity of the Son and the Spirit. The one whole Triune God is our Savior. The oneness of God’s being was a unity of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. So Jesus directs us to make disciples and baptize in the one (singular) name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:16-20).

Consequently, it makes sense why the writers of the New Testament assume the identity of all three of the divine persons as being Lord and God. As a result, the first creeds of the one church of Jesus Christ that summarized the teachings of the apostles were all Trinitarian in structure as was its worship and teaching. As a denomination, renewed by the Spirit, we came to see that is why the early church was moved under the Word and Spirit to develop a more formal doctrine of the Trinity to address confusion and mixed messages arising in the church to make explicit what was already implicit in the apostolic biblical revelation and in the faith statements and practices of the New Testament and early church (see our article on the Nicene Creed).

Reformed theology gives birth to reformed ministry

The renewing work of God by his Word and Spirit among us can be described (and is best described) in theological terms. We became Christ-centered, grace-filled and Trinitarian. Ever since, we have been learning more about these realities and how to communicate them to others. We continue to live within God’s renewing work, learning how to more faithfully participate with God’s ongoing ministry to share that renewing work with others.

So now, out of a desire to live in the saving grace of our Triune God as revealed in Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit and according to Scripture, we want to take time to consider how we best share in Christ’s ministry as his church. We want to grow in learning how to most faithfully be witnesses to the renewing grace of God of which we have been the beneficiaries so that others may join in and share in the gift of our renewal. We want to pass on to others what we have received in and through the congregations and ministries of our denomination. In order to move in that direction, it seems good and right to explore as best we can what it means to be the church (our ecclesiology), and how we might share in Christ’s ministry as a church (our missiology). We turn now to that task in the rest of this series by first exploring the theology of the church.

---

Part 1: The Theology of the Church

Since we cannot attempt here to put forth an entire doctrine of the church, we will endeavor to present aspects of a theology of the church (ecclesiology) that bear most directly upon discerning the nature and form of Christian ministry by all who participate in a local congregation. A more complete theology of the church will have to remain in the background, although never forgotten even if not explicitly referenced.

The New Testament has much to say about the nature of the church, the assembly of those called together, and about the ministry that took place in those first years of its life. We have examples and teaching in the New Testament about both. The book of Acts is indispensable for examples of the functioning of the church with some explicit teaching also included. However, it is the apostle Paul who offers significant and relatively extensive teaching related to the nature, purpose and functioning of the members of the body of Christ. The book of Ephesians is especially important. Paul not only talked about the church, but referenced his own ministry and its relationship to Jesus Christ in the context of the church, the Body of Christ. He also commented on the ministries of others and how his was related to theirs, whether in alignment or opposition. Appointed by the resurrected Jesus Christ, Paul serves as an example and source of information about the church and Christian ministry.

A theology of the church for the sake of ministry will take account of the New Testament revelation—not to create a blueprint for reduplicating the New Testament church (which is impossible), but to assimilate what we learn there and synthesize it to see what kind of core understanding we can make use of to inform and shape our being members of the Body of Christ and participating in Christ’s continuing ministry on behalf of the Father and by the Holy Spirit. Our understanding and practice of ministry must be firmly rooted in our understanding and participation in the church, the Body of Christ.

Jesus Christ, his church and his ministry

If God’s revelation and redemptive work culminates, as we have come to believe, in Jesus Christ who is God’s only self-revelation and self-giving, we would assume that any answer to our questions about the church and its ministry must be founded in Jesus Christ, God’s own answer and revelation of who he is and what he has done, is doing, and will do for us and our salvation. This is how the biblical revelation approaches any description of the church and its ministry. As we discover in biblical revelation who Jesus is in relationship to the Father and Spirit, and who he is in relationship to us, we discover that the church is identified by its relationship to Christ. The church belongs to Jesus Christ. It is his church. It is his ministry that takes place in the church and overflows from it. The most important thing about the church is recognizing whose church it is. All else about it flows from that.

Our questions and God’s revelation in Jesus Christ

As we seek to minister in Christ’s name in his church, we come with many questions about ministry. It will be unlikely that all of our questions will be directly answered. We may discover that some of them are not relevant or actually are the wrong questions (or at least the wrong place to begin looking for answers). But we can ask: Are we given the basics? The fundamentals? The foundations? Are we provided sufficient information to strengthen and encourage us and give us direction? Set priorities? Arrange and organize ourselves, to cooperate, communicate, coordinate? And is any insight provided to do all this in a wide range of differing socio-cultural and, within these, even differing local contexts?

Down through the ages the church has looked to the revelation God has graciously given to provide what is central, what is foundational, what is essential for his people to faithfully participate in what the Father has done, is doing, and will do through Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit in this “evil age”—the time between the times, in history, in the world. We too, along with the assistance of those who have gone before us, can do no less.

What questions are answered by the biblical revelation centered around Jesus Christ? The most fundamental answer given to us is unmistakable—the center or core of the being and identity of the church is clear biblically, theologically and ontologically (that is, in reality, in essence, in actuality). In turn, this answers our questions about the core of Christian ministry by those who belong to the church of Jesus Christ. Biblical revelation addresses the questions of: What constitutes the church? What is the nature of the church? What is it for? How does it live out its life? What directs the church in its calling or vocation, mission or purpose? Who is involved and in what way? We discover that the nature, purpose and design of the church aligns perfectly with the core of our faith and worship of God through Jesus Christ in the Spirit.

Once we answer the question Who is Jesus Christ? and see who he is, it becomes clear what the church is and what its purpose is, for the church has its being and vocation on the basis of who it belongs to. We understand and participate in the church by knowing who it belongs to. If we know whose it is, we know where it comes from, what sustains it, what directs it, what it is for, and where it is headed. Simply put: the Church is the Church of Jesus Christ. Since we know that Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of the Father in fellowship and communion with the Holy Spirit, then as his church, the church belongs to the Father, through the Son and in the Holy Spirit. Through Christ, the church belongs to the whole Triune God.

It’s vital that church leaders not only practice thanks-living in their own lives but that they work to build a “culture of thankfulness” within their congregations. How is that done? Rob Hurtgen, in a Lifeway Pastors article, offers three essential habits. To read his helpful article, click here.

The November edition of GCI Equipper provides resources to help congregations and ministries prepare for the upcoming Advent-Christmas season. Here are links to the five articles in that issue:

From Greg: Humanizing humanity
Greg Williams reminds us of a central truth of the Advent-Christmas season: Jesus, the incarnate Son of God, has humanized our humanity.

Advent-Christmas celebration resources
Here is a series of GCI-produced Advent videos and other resources to enhance your worship in the upcoming Advent-Christmas season.

Use Christmas for outreach
Heber Ticas offers tips about how a congregation can use Advent-Christmas as an opportunity to connect with unchurched people.

Sermon summary: God’s “one and only”
Lance McKinnon’s sermon celebrates the Incarnation of God’s “one and only” Son, who has included us with him in the “bosom” of the Father.

Kids Korner: Use Christmas to teach kids about Christ
Ted Johnston notes how children’s ministers can use Christmas as a “teachable moment” for showing kids how much God loves them.

Many pastors and ministry leaders use social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.) as a tool for communicating with members and the general public. Though doing so can be effective, there is need for caution, as noted in a recent blog post from Ron Edmondson. To read the post, click here.

In a recent post on the “Developing Church Leaders” blog, Dan Reiland made this statement:

The vast majority of churches grow by layers, not by leaps. Step by step, family by family, person by person rather than jumping by hundreds at a time. Because this is true, momentum is strengthened by the longevity of the pastor.

To read more about this and other advantages of pastoral longevity, and ways to enhance it, click here.

Are small churches too small to make a difference for the kingdom? According to Karl Vater, the answer is a resounding, “No!”—small churches have astonishing power. Click here to learn more.