Apologies for the emphasis on Steve Chalke lately, but this will be the last question from his book; though once I've finished the book I may have something to say about his comments on the atonement...I just haven't gotten there yet.
Chalk claims that the Western church has become engrossed with the doctrine of Original Sin; while it seems to have forgotten the Original Goodness of humanity. He says it was Augustine who led the way for the West. Meanwhile, in the East, Irenaeus was much more influential with his teaching that humans bore the image of God and were "coaxed into full bloom by God's love."
In some ways, I think Chalke is not saying anything all that radical, he's just trying to stir things up by saying it in a controversial way - he basically says Jesus didn't believe in original sin, he believed in original goodness. I guess my question is Has the church in the West really forgotten Irenaeus?
There are two issues embeded in the question. First, is Chalke correct in his reading of Augustine and Irenaeus, and their influence on the West and East, respectively? Second, do we in the West need to rediscover the image of God in people?
In some ways, reformed theology (my heritage) is very good at remembering that people are made in the image of God. However, this understanding is usually used to draw conclusions about the nature of work and creativity, or else applied to discussions of apologetics/evangelism in the sense that people cannot run from the knowledge of God because they are made in his image. Rarely do we hear talk about being enamored with people because as people, they are beautiful. Blue Like Jazz really challenged me to see the image of God in people...to love them because of who they are. I think we could use that reminder a little more often in the reformed Western church.
2 comments:
Interesting thesis. I am not familar with Irenaeus except in his Against Gnositics. In that work, one of his differences with them is how the Gnostics think that matter is sinful and humanity's spirit is good. Of course, I read a translation of the work, so it could be just the translation choices. I think Irenaeus saw Jesus as the good of humanity in himself. But that is just a guess....
open admission of ignorance: i have no idea who irenaeus is. but is it possible that dostoevsky was influenced by him? i've been reading the brother karamozov... for, oh, about a year... but he often comes back to some sort of notion of the beauty of humanity. he also recognizes its depravity. i'm never quite sure what to do with it. here's an example:
"there are souls that in their narrowness blame the whole world. but overwhelm such a soul with mercy, give it love, and it will curse what it has done, for there are so many germs of good in it. the soul will expand and behold how merciful God is, and how beautiful and just people are. he will be horrified, he will be overwhelmed with repentance and the countless debt he must henceforth repay. and then he will not say, 'i am quits,' but will say, 'i am guilty before all people and am the least worthy of all people.'"
Post a Comment