“There are multiple problems with King’s theology as well as Padgitt’s…the kingdom of God and not the cross of Jesus Christ stands at the center of the liberal theological system.”
Mark Driscoll in response to Doug Padgitt in Listening to the Voices of the Emergent Church, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), 145.
Robert Dugan makes fun of my overuse of the words “ontological” and “epistemological.” This is probably warranted, but my defense is that they are useful categories for understanding the relationship between many things in life including the “two legs” (to borrow a term that Doug Padgitt used this weekend) of soteriology.
I grew up with a one leg understanding. I know about the epistemological leg. The leg that rightly informs us that we need to confess Jesus as our savior in order to be saved. It is the leg that is steeped in Paul, knows all about justification by faith alone as well as Paul’s claim to know nothing but Christ and Him crucified.
But something happens. Children die around the world because of aids. Economic and social inequality widens in our communities. There is talk of water shortage around the world and food for everyone is a glaring problem. Suddenly I find myself engaging the social work students who sit across from me in my seminary class rooms and feel as though I haven’t really been embracing the whole picture of salvation.
Why does the whole creation long for redemption? Why is there no talk about belief in the sheep and goats passage? Why does Jesus spend so much time restoring if we all die in the end anyway?
I learned of my need for two legs…and so I discovered the ontological leg of salvation. The leg that has dire need of seeing salvation participate in the now. It’s the leg of salvation that asks you not just to receive something, but to participate in something. It is the leg that people stand on when who they have become is laid against the backdrop of God’s all consuming reality at the end of the Lewis’s The Last Battle.
The best thing I learned this weekend was this. Someone asked if we can separate Jesus from the Kingdom of God? I’m still not entirely sure what was meant by that, but Doug pointed out this verse in Acts 28:31 “proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance.”
In our journey towards God there is this beautiful interplay between taking one step on the epistemological leg and meditating on the person and work of Jesus and then letting that reality empower your stride with the alternative, ontological leg. The leg that participates in the Kingdom and experiences the KOG today and finds eternal life today.
My response to Marc Driscoll is that I understand the logical priority of the epistemological leg, but not the theological priority. Though the liberal protestants have pushed the ontological leg to the distorted forefront of the picture picture, I don’t think the right backlash is to pit the epistemological leg against and push for the priority of the same.
My thoughts.
Carney