This is actually a comment I wrote in response to a post by Pastor Donnie Miller (”No Perfect People Allowed – Chapter 2“). It was getting long winded enough that I decided to use up my own space instead of his. Of course – conservationally speaking – I failed since I used both.
Anyway, he is blogging his way through a book entitled No Perfect People Allowed: Creating a Come As You Are Culture in the Church and recently wrote about some of the material in chapter two.
Also, I’m nearly ready to post a book report of my own – likely the first of many – though I’m just going to go ahead and do the entire thing in one shot 
It’ll help if you take a minute to read the original post. Here is what I wrote:
I’m having some trouble reconciling
“How do we best contextualize the unchanging truths of Scripture in ways they can understand and live out in their culture?”
with
“Truth is relational.”
I’m not sure how exactly how “relational” is being used here, but the way it comes off on the surface seems a little hazardous.
It seems to say that what is necessary to reach a person and bring them into the church community is relative – changing based on the person and their circumstances.
I don’t think that is a very good way to define the Truth. The approach, as far as evangelism, would do well to adhere to that interpretation, but the core has to remain the same.
Jesus did indeed say “I am the truth.” He said, in fact “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” and then said “No one comes to the Father except through me.”
He didn’t say “No one comes to the Father except by a custom built path tailored for each individual relative to their experiences.”
I agree that a church should have wide open arms. None should ever be turned away, and it does disturb me when I see it happen. That said, it is a slippery slope to “reinterpret” too much when representing the Truth to someone.
A friend of ours says this on his blog page entitled “Emerging Me”:
“What if truth is a constant pursuit? What if it changes as we understand God’s love better? God does not change. And TRUTH does not change, but MY understanding of what I thought truth is changes.”
“What if [truth] changes…”
“…TRUTH does not change”That doesn’t work. The truth isn’t a constant pursuit, though your understanding may be. You might, though, have been right the first time. Then you aren’t being progressive. You’re falling away.
If one has truly misunderstood, and has come closer to God by working through this misunderstanding, I think that is great!
That line of thinking; however, can be abused by rationalizing a denial of difficult truth by simply “understanding” it away. It seems like a pretty patronizing attitude to take with the King of Kings.
I think it is a matter of balance. On the cultural side, there are many ways to bring people to the Son. On the Truth side lies only one way to get to the Father.
I once asked a relative how she felt about someone dying and really not being sure if they were in heaven or not.
She said that she believes that regardless of life on earth, everyone gets a chance to accept or deny Jesus once they have died.
It isn’t true. No matter how good it makes you feel, or how much it motivates you to get up and get to church – it isn’t true.
11:52 pm on January 20th, 2008 1
I can’t tell you how happy I am that you are entering into this type of discussion-very cool!
I think you made a very good clarification when you said that there are many ways to bring people to the Son-to Christ, but that Christ is the only way to the Father-God. I think that the point is this: how do we bring people to the Christ who can bring us to God? It isn’t a question of what it means to be saved (reconciled to God) as much as what it means to enter into a relationship with Christ.
I think the way people accept Christ as The Way changes with each person. Some are “born into it” in the sense that they have always believed and some have death-bed conversions and then there is everything in between! From the sermon today the fishermen that Jesus called just left their nets behind and followed (but even they may have had a history/culture that allowed them to easily respond to Jesus’ method of calling-as today’s sermon also talked about). But then we hear all kinds of different stories and methods-The Samaritan woman had to have her life story told to her and then be offered living water. Paul had to be blinded. Thomas had to see the scars. And the stories and their details go on and on.
The question is what does our American culture need from Christ in 2008? What history do we have that needs to be revealed? What hurts need to be healed? What needs do we have that we need to understand that we have that only Jesus can meet (we’re so messed up we don’t even know! But Christ knows!)? And how can we convince them that Christ is The Way (or what environment can we create where people may be better receptive to the whisperings of the Holy Spirit)?
On one hand it is the same ‘ol, same ‘ol… The “it” in people’s lives: broken hearts, unhealthy relationships, hurts, ailments, disease, anger, selfish desires, greed, lying, and the list goes on; ‘it” can be summed up as Human sinfulness and our sinful nature. The method is also not too different, the preaching of the Gospel.
So to someone who has lost a child the story of Christ healing a child resonates with them. And hopefully they can find comfort in Christ and enter into a relationship.
But what about someone who is addicted to porn? Or sex? Or is hurting because their father walked out on them? or is going through a divorce? Or someone who is in debt up to their eyeballs? Or is sick because they are stressed? Or have cancer or AIDS? Or whatever our modern American culture struggles with.
The fact is that the culture of the Bible and what ailed them-what sins they wrestled with (not the motivation for those sins) is extremely different than our American culture and what ails us today and what sins we wrestle with. And the fact is also that the truth for those in the Bible is the same truth for us today. And the fact is that we all have the same sinful nature that drives us all to satisfy the self-then and now.
The trick is finding the truth in the implications of what we read in the Bible.
Another thing is the delivery of the message. The Bible tells stories (parables). A few years ago it was all about proofs and science (apologetics). Now what? We want to relate to stories where people where transformed for the better. And we also know that science doesn’t tell us much about God and the supernatural.
So it also helps to step back and analyze our culture and understand what sin looks like in our culture. And what communication looks like in our culture. And what methods work and do not work. And to understand the differences between scientific truths versus the truths of human nature and the truths of the supernatural.
One thing that I am not too sure if you are interpreting correctly (because Donnie nor the author as quoted elaborates) is the idea of relational truth. You assume that the meaning is relativity. I would suggest that the meaning is relationship. Not relational in the sense of comparisons, but relational in the sense of relating to another human being (being in relationship). Truth changes not in relation to something else, but indeed, our understanding of truth changes as we are in a relationship with Christ-as things are revealed, as experiences that Christ and us have together and how those experiences shape us and transform us.
Those are my thoughts anyway (I know-a lot of wordy thoughts)! Or my attempt to get my thoughts out.
-Derin Beechner-
http://durkniblick.wordpress.com
12:46 am on January 21st, 2008 2
Man, you overpowered the gray box!
I’m giving the benefit of the doubt (overall) in that “relational” referred to relationships. To say that truth is relative is completely counter to God who is absolute.
But – crazier things have happened, and if the church is going to go and decide that “relative” truth is just easier because it doesn’t require people to change, well, you’re changing the core not just the coat of paint.
Me for example: I need to lose weight. In this case, Caloric Deficit is the TRUTH. Nothing else is going to work. Now, if you just start screaming and berating me every time I overeat, I will definitely reject your message – even though it is TRUE – and will probably descend into behavior that is even MORE destructive.
So I educate myself… learn about nutrition, about what has worked for people, about what hasn’t worked at all and what is dangerous, and I come up with a plan that I think will get me where I want to go.
But – regardless of my ideas and machinations, the TRUTH remains. If I don’t eat less and sacrifice to the Caloric Deficit, I’m not going to lose weight. Whether the successful path for me is to be brow-beaten or coddled, I still have to ultimately make the same change. There is no other way.
12:57 pm on January 22nd, 2008 3
Yeah I wasn’t sure who the first responder was but once I noticed it was over 10 paragraphs, surely it was Derin!