How Coporate Election Works

As I discussed last week, the idea of Corporate Election is that God chooses a group of people, as opposed to God directly choosing persons individually. However, an individual person who is part of God's chosen people can still be considered chosen. I'll get to that in a bit. First, I want to talk about how God forms His people.

Baresh*

Let's start at the beginning. God's people first formed around the person of Abraham. God said to him, "And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing." (Genesis 12:2 ESV) It is important to note that God chose the group before there was a group. Indeed, the group isn't formed based off of the merit of the individuals within the group, but based off of their relationship to Abraham.

Abraham is what we call a corporate head. The corporate head is chosen to be the person through whom the group is defined. Therefore, the chosen people of God are the true descendants of Abraham.

This idea of "true descendants" is treated in more detail in the prophets and is a major theme of the NT, especially John, Romans, and Ephesians. But we see it very clearly even in the very beginning, for the Abrahamites are immediately winnowed down into the Isaacites, and then the Israelites. Indeed it is this winnowing process which is being referred to in Romans 9:6b-13.

The Headship of Christ

It is this same process which is at work in Christ. Jesus fulfills the OT by being the ultimate child of Abraham, so that those who are true children of Abraham turn to Christ. Thus Christ has become the true head of the chosen people of God. Just as God had chosen those who were born by the seed of Abraham, God has chosen those who have been reborn by the seed of Christ. Just like the Jews were chosen for being in Israel, now we are chosen for being in Christ.

It is important to note that our election is not grounded in us. It is not our power, ability, or even will which saves us. It is Christ. Christ is the chosen one, and we are only chosen because of our attachment to Him. This is why it is by faith that we are saved, for it is by faith that we are united to Christ.

True faith is not intellectual acceptance. It is relational commitment and trust, i.e. fidelity. I believe in gravity; I have faith in my wife. And just as faith unites my wife and me, so does faith unite us to Christ. And like Noah's family was saved by God election of Noah, we will be saved because God chose Him.

Our Place In Christ

So, if God chose a group, does that mean I am not chosen? Of course I am chosen, for I am one of the chosen. Any quality of the group extends to the individual, and the individual adds to the whole.

The corporate election concept is a national concept. We are part of the kingdom of God, and God's kingdom is a nation. By being a Christian, we belong to the nation of Christ, which is a monarchy ruled by Christ. Individually we are citizens of this nation. We are not afraid to use such corporate language when we talk about us being Americans, but for some reason we are wary of using this language when we talk about us being Christians.

The nation of Christ is our true home. The Bible describes us as being ambassadors, which means that we are not truly Americans. We are, in the sense that we have a dual citizenship, but our real home is in Christ, and our true destiny is bound up in Christ's kingdom. It is up to us to live it out.
________________________________________
* The first word in the Bible is "Bareshit" which is the construct form of "Baresh" which can mean "In the beginning" or "At the head". I mean it here as a double entendre.

UnchristianPart II: Hypocrisy

• Introduction
• Hypocrisy
• Proselytizing
• Antihomosexual
• Sheltered
• Too Political
• Judgmental
• Conclusion

The accusation of hypocrisy is something that I've heard a lot. I've recognized a couple of different phenomena that could have caused it: some legitimate, some not. However, I found the insight in this book quite enlightening on this matter.

Outsiders' Thoughts

Probably the most surprising revelation from the book on this issue was what the heart of the accusation was. My understanding was that the charge of hypocrisy was a description of how immoral we where. In other words, the charge was that Christians can't be trusted.

According to Kinnaman, this is not the case:

Mosaics [those born between 1984 and 2002] and Busters [those born between 1965 and 1983] are not bothered by the image as much as you might think. They have learned not to care. In large part this is because they have come to the conclusion that people cannot be counted on, that one would expect to be disappointed. -pp43

Essentially, they are not charging that Christianity is immoral, but that Christianity is impotent. Christians are just like everyone else, and therefore there is no value in considering the faith at all.

Another important factor in this is that to most of the outsiders, being a good person is what being a Christian is all about. According to Kinnaman, 37% of born again Christians agree (pp. 50).

Kinnaman's Thoughts

Causes

To Kinnaman, a major cause for this accusation is simply that it is correct. There are a lot of hypocrites in the Church. But why?

First of all, we live in a society that is deeply concerned about image (pp 43). We are an accidents based culture: we are perfectly fine with a pile of feces as long as its well decorated and deodorized. The church itself, being impacted by this cultures, tends to focus more on looking Christian than being Christian. Combine this with a belief that the primary priority of a Christian is being a good person, and you get someone is trying to act like a good person without taking the time to affect their inner being (pp. 46).

Secondly, there exists a generational gap. Much of the focus on morality comes from earlier in the last century and thus is more emphasized by older generations. However, morality is less important to younger generations (pp. 53). Thus, if an outsiders perceives Christianity as it is defined by the older generations, but then primarily interacts with the younger generations, they receive a stronger vision of hypocrisy. This is more a perception issue, but it is there.

Finally, a major way that Christianity interacts with the culture is by a call to morality. Many Christians view the Christian life as more moral without actually viewing what the surrounding culture is like. We've closed ourselves off. The result is that we think we are more moral than we actually are, and we think they are less moral than they actually are. Apparently, many Christians believe that the primary reason why most outsiders aren't Christian is because of the high moral standard (pp. 51). But life should tell you that such a cliche answer cannot account for the vast number of outsiders which exist. Different people have different reasons, and this rationalization apparently ranked very low on the reasons outsiders actually give.

Solution

Kinnaman's basic solution is transparency. Part of Christian theology is that all have fallen short of the kingdom of God and when we become Christians, we still wrestle with the flesh. Stop projecting Christianity as a solution to immorality. First it is much more than ethics. Second, it instead is gives you a paradigm through which you deal with your immorality. Christianity isn't about being perfect, but being forgiven.

If we project this, and show outsiders that we are flawed, then they'll drop their guard around us, and be more willing to here what we have to say.

My Thoughts

Though I agree with Kinnaman's thoughts, I believe there is a second aspect of this that he hasn't looked at. That is the concept of holiness.

If you ask most what holiness means, if they can give you an answer they'll probably say it has to do with being a perfect person (morally that is). This is rooted in the Holiness Movement, which itself is based off of an exaggeration of the Wesleyan doctrine of perfection (Wesley's teaching on the matter was more pastoral than theological, and was taking to an extreme that I do not believe he would have approved of). However, this is not what holiness means.

To be holy means to be reserved, or set aside for something. More specifically, it is something reserved for God Himself. The essence of living a holy life isn't to live a moral life, but to live a life devoted to God. The true call to holiness is a reassignment of priority, that is making God your first priority. I do not mean making the will of God, or making the word of God, or making the worship of God your first priority. I mean God. Just God. Not any attribute or aspect of Him. I mean Him. He's first.

One can see then that the criticism that we are hypocrites is that we are not holy, i.e. we are just like everyone else. We shouldn't be. We should be different. There is a great deal of importance to actually cultivate that within the church, and do it in a way that is purely focused on ethics.

I agree with Kinnaman that or strategy in dealing with the Buster and Mosaic generations should be grounded in transparency, but we also need to make sure than when they look in at us, that they see something desirable. Thus, there should be a two part strategy: be open about our flaws and our mistakes, and strive to live a life devoted to God. These two things need to be working in unison if we are going to get out from under the hypocrisy label.

The Decline of Christianity in America

I found a link to this article over at Ben Witherington's site. I agree that this is a monumental shift in the American climate. I am sure that I am less surprised by Dr. Mohler in regards to the unbelief in the Northeast, seeing as I live in New York. I often wonder as to the fate of America, a land I love very much, as well as the Western Church.

It is helpful here to consider the thoughts of Loren B. Mead in his work The Once and Future Church. This work was originally written in 1991, though my edition is from 1994, but it seems to anticipate much of what is currently going on in our culture. Mead recognizes two classic paradigms in Christian ecclesiology, and what we are witnesses now is the immersion of a third.

The first paradigm he calls the Apostolic Paradigm (p. 11). In this paradigm, the context of the world was the hostile socio-political environment. Within this environment, the church was a separate "called out" entity that gathered together for mutual support and mission. Their mission was to reach out to their environment and draw people into the congregation.

He calls the second paradigm the Christendom Paradigm (p. 19). I have also heard this called imperial theology, and you may hear me use that terms else where. When Constantine converted to Christianity, and turned the empire "Christian", it did much to damage this former viewpoint. The context of the world shifted to a benevolent simpatico environment that claimed to be a part of the church. Indeed, it began to claim to be the church, and that is the fundamental shift. The process of evangelism shifted to bringing forth the reign of Christ, to spreading our particular culture. This paradigm has been maintained in the West up until this point, when our culture is beginning to turn its back to the church.

The new paradigm that Mead sees immerging (p. 26) he does not name, but so far he is dead on about the description. In many ways, it is the combination of the two paradigms, and sadly it is caused more by the change of the environment than a change in theological perspective (though that is also happening). The new context is ambigous, in that it is not entirely hostile, but it is also no longer part of the church. The mission of the Apostalic Paradigm has returned in full force, though there is still a tendancy to try and make the world Christian, rather than simply trying to proclaim Christ in the world. The inner structure of the church is equally confused, containing much of the rigidity of Christendom Paradigm, while reclaiming some of the more personal aspects of Apostalic.

I am fascinated to see what the future has in store for the Church. I am not truly worried, since I know that God is at the head of the whole thing. Instead, I am more honored to be part of the church at this crucial point in history and the world.