Introduction to Inescapable Issues Accountable in All Christians: Integral Theology and Practice for Viable Faith in Everyday Life

As the world observes the diversity of Christianity, we Christians are challenged to clarify the disparities in our witness displayed in our actions or inactions—as well as to correct those disparities. All Christians are accountable to distinguish a viable faith in our everyday life, or else bear the consequences of displaying a Christian witness with little or no significance to the scope of life. Christians in the U.S. also bear the additional burden of a fragmenting performance of democracy in the U.S. and the disparaging reviews it has rightly received on the global stage. As those identified as followers of Jesus Christ, we bear the responsibility to “be my witnesses in the world” (Acts 1:8). Collectively and individually today, we must account for this ongoing responsibility by directly addressing the issues inescapable for all Christians living “in the world.”

So, my sisters and brothers, what do you think of the current conditions surrounding you: political, economic, social, medical-health, environmental, cultural, family and personal? In your diverse situations and circumstances, how are you affected by them and/or do you feel about them? Perhaps you don’t give much thought to them, yet you certainly are affected by them in one way or another. Thus, does your level of awareness of these conditions become defining for your faith and determining of your witness “in the world”?

The extent of our awareness directly correlates to the spectrum of our human consciousness, thereby indicating where our individual consciousness is focused and what it revolves around. Historically and currently, Christians consistently have faced a (pre)dominance of self-consciousness, which has defined Christian identity and determined our witness. Based on this focus revolved on self, what would you imagine that world observers conclude about Christians and the significance of Christianity?

In the emerging years of Christianity, as it intruded into the ancient Roman Empire, the apostle Paul addressed Christians and churches about the evolving dynamics of competing influence; and he anticipated how they would evolve to shape Christian identity and determine Christian function. Because of the influences of the surrounding context, Paul made it imperative for Christians to “keep alert” (1 Thes 5:6; Eph 6:18) about what was going on around them; thus that would include essentially not to let their consciousness go into a fog or be dulled as if asleep (1 Thes 5:4-11; Eph 6:10-18). Staying awake and keeping alert involve the imperative that Jesus made ongoing for his followers as they journey in the big picture (Mk 13:32-37). This applies even more so for us today, given how competing influences have evolved in our expanding contexts.

Our awareness must never be assumed. Likewise, our conscious involvement with what’s happening around us must always be subject to examination and feedback, or else our consciousness may actually be engulfed in a fog or be asleep in spite of engaging in a high level of activity. King Saul assumed he was fulfilling God’s purpose for him, only to be awakened to the reality of his skewed consciousness (1 Sam 15:13-23). What escaped Saul’s consciousness was the insignificant level of relational involvement he had directly with God; this was a common condition existing among God’s people that afflicted them from the beginning.

Saul, along with a majority of others ever since Saul, failed to understand the primacy of relationship with God and the imperative relational function to “Listen” (qashab, 1 Sam 15:22)[2] carefully to the one God (Dt 6:4-6) and the Word (Mk 4:24, cf. Lk 8:18). Why a relational imperative? In order to truly know God (not mere information about God) in covenant relationship and to understand the Word’s terms for reciprocal relationship together. Listening was the pivotal key that opened the door in Job’s hermeneutic process to know his God intimately and understand God’s Word (Job 42:1-6). In fact of the truth, Jesus highlighted (in the above Scripture) the consequences of our level of paying attention to what we hear by making axiomatic the direct correlation between “the measure we use or engage will result in the measure we get back”—nothing more can be expected but less certainly can and will result.

Listening is the key essential function in relationships, foremost with God and inclusive of all others. Christian awareness rises or falls based on our conscious listening. And like Saul (cf. 1 Sam 15:12), the extent of our self-consciousness will determine the level of relational involvement we engage with God and others (cf. 1 Pet 2:19; Rom 3:20). The relational consequences have evolved through Israel’s history, church history and the contemporary global church, reverberating for the world observers to assess at God’s expense.

Living as a Christian in the 21^st Century is in principle no different than living in the 1^st Century. Of course, the surrounding contexts in contemporary life are more complex, compounding our situations and circumstances. Yet, adapting to these changes involves the same outworking of Christian principles embodied by the Word. What is problematic is that many Christians have engaged an evolutionary process of adaptation, whereby a wide diversified path is undertaken to “survive” as (or at least among) “the fittest”—inherent to evolution. Certainly, Christians need to survive. The issue, however, is how Christians define survival, and what goes into that process to achieve a fit outcome.

Christian witness today makes evident that we are journeying on multiple lanes of a widening freeway with an undesignated speed limit wandering through the human context. It’s as if our formative GPS defining for Christians has been reprogrammed, or simply turned off. Younger generations of Christians also need to account for the algorithms that permeate their GPS to structure their daily journey, define their epistemic process, and determine their multi-tasking function. Younger or older, all Christians urgently need to become significantly more alert to the surrounding human context and pay attention to inescapable issues that must not be passed by regardless of our situations and circumstances. This awareness, however, will depend on our journey taking a narrowing path through the human context at the appropriate speed limit in order to be openly accountable to a distinctly integral theology and practice for the essential purpose of the viability of our faith in everyday life.

It is critical for the integrity of the Christian journey that all Christians not pass by but exit, stop and address the following issues. This list is not exhaustive but it is inclusive of what we are all accountable to God and each other for, and thus the issues are inescapable.

1. Understanding the surrounding context, cultures and infrastructures—initially locally, then regionally, and eventually globally—and their influence in shaping or forming our beliefs and values.

Gaining this understanding requires understanding interconnected issues that are unavoidable: (1a) the breadth and depth of the human condition; (1b) the limits, constraints and opportunities of free will; and then integrating this understanding to implement (1c) getting to the heart of life issues in our awareness in order to address them at their core.

2. Within the context and dynamics intrinsic to issue (1), examining our identity formation that has emerged both as an individual and as a group, whether as Christian identity or secular identity and gaining an awareness of any identity theft of the former by the latter. A question, for example, to pursue is how skin-ny or able our identity might be. To enhance our examination, a related issue is necessary to broaden and deepen our understanding of what needs to be addressed: (2a) knowing the history, heritage and origins of those who preceded us, thus better delineating the identity of who we are and whose we are.

3. Knowing the Word and understanding the Bible—an inescapable issue that has been widely assumed to be indistinguishable, interchangeable, or simply misinterpreted and misapplied. Underlying this issue is the pervading problem of language: (3a) distinguishing between God’s language and human language, that is, between God’s relational language for the sole purpose of communication, and human referential language for the primary purpose to transmit information, even with wording about God rather than the words of God. The Word was embodied in order to communicate “the Way, the Truth and the Life” as the integral theology and practice for our viable faith in everyday life, the integrity of which is diminished and compromised by referential language. Unavoidably, we don’t know the Word apart from the relational language he communicates in direct relational connection with us, no matter the extent of the referential knowledge we possess in our so-called understanding of the Bible. In effect, the Word’s relational language becomes a foreign language to many Christians. This issue encompasses inescapably all Christians at all levels, notably including in the global church and related academy. Furthermore, Christians need to know the calculations we use for the Bible—the math of God’s Word critical to understand.

4. Given God’s relational language silencing the noise of human referential language, the inescapable issue taking on the highest priority for all Christians is:

Listening in the vulnerable context foremost within our relationship with God in order to be aware of, respond to and heed the Word’s ongoing communication in the primacy of reciprocal relationship together (cf. Dt 31:12-13); this requires being involved in the relational context and process of the uncommon, which irreducibly distinguishes God from the common inherent to humans.

This begs the questions, do we simply have some contact with God—as prayer or time in the Bible could indicate—or do we indeed experience relational connection with the Word? This now pivotal issue of listening to reciprocate in the communication process makes unavoidable the core issue of (4a): the nature of relationships and persons either as created by God or as evolved in human development.

5. Issue 4 leads us directly into the most fundamental human dynamic unfolding or evolving since the beginning of human life. How we live in everyday life depends on the following:

Our person functioning either from inner out or from outer in—that is, either as the whole person from the inner qualitative heart of the person created in the qualitative image of God, integrated with the outer person incorporating the relational likeness of God; or as a person reduced or fragmented to the quantitative outer self with its comparative differences, without including much of the qualitative deeper inner.

This involves the essential life issue of wholeness or partialness, whole or fragmentary. Understanding how we function in daily life is the basic awareness that opens the functional door to consciousness. The consciousness that unfolds from the inner-out person functions primarily in a distinct person-consciousness, while the consciousness unraveling from the outer-in self revolves consistently in an unmistakable self-consciousness. What results from each fundamental dynamic makes this the constitutive issue on the list—defining the extent of how the previous issues are perceived, addressed and concluded, and then becoming definitive for the following issues, thereby determining the extent of how they will function. The existing reality staring in our face, however, is that too many Christians make assumptions about how they function and thus never address this constitutive issue.

Therefore, implied directly with God’s explicit trajectory of wholeness is the competing trajectory of reductionism, whose narrative ongoingly counters the whole of God. The existential consequences have been and continue to increasingly be the subtle and not-so-subtle compromise of Christian faith and its witness—which evolve in the next issue.

6. The inseparable issue of knowing our neighbor and understanding whose witness we project:

How we see our neighbor will determine the distinctions we ascribe to them and how we compare those differences; or our lens will define the likeness perceived in our neighbor’s diversity. This will expose any biases that distort our perception, which God always holds us accountable to address. Moreover, in order to love our neighbor we have to be openly aware of them; in order to be openly aware of them we have to be involved with them in our consciousness. Our witness in loving them has to go beyond merely having contact with them but must go deeper to involve having relational connection. The Word clearly directs and expects us to love God no differently, such that when we love our neighbor they will experience the essential source of that love. Thus, we are always faced with whose witness we project to our neighbor.

7. For Christians, all of the above converge in the last issue on our list to address—again issues not exhaustive but inclusive. This issue incorporates:

The theology and practice of both discipleship and the church, each of which has a strategic and a tactical dimension that must be integrated in order for wholeness to unfold in this theology and practice.

Without their integration we can only expect fragmentation to evolve—a fragmentary theology and practice diminishing us in a reductionist faith and witness. The existential reality currently pervading our discipleship and our churches makes it critically essential for all Christians (whatever their development and role) to address: (7a) the ins and outs of discipleship, examining the reality (not ideal) of whom we truthfully follow as well as understanding the path of how we follow; combined with (7b) assessing the state of our church(-es) as an institution, a gathering or as an existential family, while examining its strategic trajectory as the kingdom of God. Then we need to openly reflect on the strategic and tactical bearings that our discipleship and our church(-es) have on the identity implied in our witness and on the viability rendered to our faith.

Each of the following chapters will discuss one of the inescapable issues as outlined above. Their discussion will clarify the path ahead essential for all Christians and correct any misunderstanding or ambiguity for those following Jesus, whereby the Christian status quo will be challenged, confronted and held accountable to narrow down the path of options ahead for the journey of Christian faith. To be sure, this discussion before us will be a limited discussion of these issues. A more complete discussion of each issue is found in my other studies. If you want to study more of the theology and practice involved in any or all of the issues, please undertake my corresponding study(-ies) listed in the bibliography.

The challenge before us is not between conservatives and progressives, or evangelicals and liberals. The unavoidable scope of the challenge makes it urgently inclusive of all Christians, on the one hand. On the other hand, the challenge facing us is encompassing of the whole of each person—not merely part, such as a mental exercise—which likely will make it confronting for many Christians and tension elevating for most Christians. Why? If you haven’t already felt the tension or been confronted, you probably will as you continue this study.

The challenge before us keeps widening, and thus requires it to also increasingly deepen to the heart of these life issues. That necessitates also penetrating into each of our hearts. But the challenge alone is unable to penetrate to our deeper heart level, that is, unless we willfully open our hearts as well as our minds to these issues. Initially and ongoing, this requires each of us to become vulnerable with our heart, so that we will be affected, stirred, moved by the issues. Yet, the challenge also necessitates the humility of each Christian, in order that we can acknowledge our biases, face up to our assumptions, and avoid making premature judgments, and thereby be open to listening to the heart of these life issues and learning in the process.

Unfortunately, being vulnerable from inner out is not the norm for most Christians, no matter how much reference is made of the heart or how broadly simulated to function as a new normal. This raises a critical question that makes the challenge before us boundless: How vulnerable has God become to us? In response to God’s vulnerable presence, then, how vulnerable are we to God?

The relational dynamics of this vital vulnerability process are signified, distinguished and embodied only in the gospel. The gospel underlies and undergirds all that is stated above and will be stated hereafter. Therefore, the overriding challenge facing us is the defining essential issue: What is the truth of the gospel? And is the gospel that Christians claim indeed the identical experiential truth vulnerably embodied by the Word? Relatedly, what do Christians experience in existential life directly as a result of the gospel they claim? Is our experience congruent with the relational outcome that Jesus made the relational reality for all those who follow him vulnerably with their whole person from inner out?

Ongoing throughout this study, confronting all Christians is the gospel’s intrinsic relational message communicating this implied challenge:

To know the gospel face to face according to its relational language, and thereby to understand the gospel heart to heart solely as the Word embodied.

Jesus embodied the whole of God for reciprocal relationship together in wholeness, with nothing less and no substitutes to constitute his gospel and its relational outcome for those who claim it by vulnerably being relationally involved with him in reciprocal response.

We will never complete this challenge without the humble vulnerableness of our person from inner out, regardless of how outspoken we may be about the gospel we claim. Likewise, our witness will lack the full substantive significance of his gospel until our theology is congruent with the relational language of the Word and our practice is compatible with the relational path of the Way, the Truth and the Life. This could require some deconstruction in our theology and certainly necessitates transformation in our practice. For example, the soteriology prevailing among Christians centers on what Christ saves us from without the primary significance of what he saves us to. This truncated soteriology may gain converts, but it doesn’t embody the new creation rooted in the heart of his gospel—the new creation in the essential practice transforming the church into his family by relationships together according to the whole of God’s (i.e. the Trinity’s) relational likeness, not human likeness. Furthermore, the gospelspeak commonly heard from pulpits, in evangelism, and on the mission field is usually not composed by God’s relational language; and thus, while it may transmit information about a gospel, it doesn’t communicate the relational substance of his whole gospel—the relational substance that first must be embodied from inner out in the daily lives of those who claim to have the gospel.

No doubt, the watchful world observing Christian witness will continue to be bewildered by the so-called gospel claimed and proclaimed by Christian disparity. And they will remain without substantive hope until this challenge of the gospel is first completed by Christians, individually and corporately. Urgently, then, this needs to challenge all Christians with God’s intimate question, “Where are you?” (as in Gen 3:9), as well as must confront us with God’s humbling query, “What are you doing here?” (as in 1 Kg 19:9,13)—always communicated in God’s relational language for relationship together only according to the wholeness of God’s relational terms, not by our fragmentary terms even with good intentions.

As the challenge before us widens and the path ahead narrows, we must by necessity (not obligation) always carefully pay close attention to what Jesus made axiomatic about the methods we use that effectively become our modus operandi (MO) and/or modus vivendi. The Word declares unequivocally in this definitive paradigm:

“The measure you give will be the measure you get” (Mk 4:24); that is to say, the measure, method, means, lens, involvement, and so forth, that we give, use or access to address a matter, then that will determine the resulting level, degree or significance of what we get back—and nothing more can be expected, though what we thought we’ve gained could be rendered insignificant, having no substantive basis.

In the Word’s paradigm, insert your own specific replacement for “measure”. Then, pay attention and take to heart what the Word makes axiomatic, and thereby anticipate that that will be the results of what you get back from the issues you address. Again, nothing more can be expected and what you think you’ve gained could merely be insignificant.

The Word’s axiom is inescapable. And any attempt to avoid it simply implements his paradigm with a different replacement for “measure”. Therefore, clearly the challenge before us widens and the path ahead narrows, both of which also unmistakably deepen to the heart of life’s issues and hopefully to each of our hearts called to be humbly vulnerable.

Listen carefully and pay close attention! And don’t let the noise diminish your involvement.

[1] Unless indicated differently, all Scripture quoted are from the NRSV; any italics in the Scripture quoted throughout this study signify emphasis or further rendering of terms.

[2] Hebrew and Greek word studies used in this study are taken from the following sources: Horst Balz, Gerhard Schreider, eds., Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, 3 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990); Colin Brown, ed., The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, 3 vols. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975); R. Laid Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., Bruce Waitke, eds., Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 2 vols. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980); Ernst Jenni, Claus Westermann, Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, trans. Mark E. Biddle, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997); Gerhard Kittel, ed., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 10 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974); Harold K. Moulton, ed., The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978); W.E. Vine, Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1981); Spiros Zodhiates, ed., Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible (Chattanooga: AMG Publ., 1996).