A New Kind of Christian Part 2 - Debate

Debates in the church occur on what McLaren calls the “line level.” I have found his insight into this matter to be quite helpful:

There are all kinds of positions on an issue along this line, with the most extreme positions being on the ends. The issue often is, “Where is the right point on the line?” So people pick and defend their points. Each person’s point becomes the point in his or her mind. But what if the point-defending approach is, pardon the pun, pointless? What if the position God wants us to take isn’t on that line, but somewhere up above it?

This illustration really struck a chord with me, being one who is often sucked into debates. I try to be in the middle, and see both sides of the argument. But in reality, I need to not just be in the middle, but be up above the debate. For unity to occur among our people and in our churches, we need to transcend the normal level of debate. Jesus did it all the time. Take for example the discourse with the Samaritan woman. The debate began with where people should worship. She cited two points on the line in the form of two mountains—here on Mt. Gerazim or there in Jerusalem. Back in those days, this was not some arbitrary matter of debate. The location of the very presence of God was at stake. But Jesus would not pick one or the other. The answer to such a question was on a different level, for God desires worshipers in Spirit and truth regardless of the mountain. Thus both mountains are acceptable just as both sides are acceptable. Neither is right and neither is wrong.

This sort of thinking often scares modern people who desire absolute truth, clear boxes and lines, and standards of correct and incorrect. But I ask, is that Biblical? Jesus came to fulfill the law, and by that, it seems, to take the law (and the interpretation of it and the Bible as a whole) to a higher level. The Pharisees would have made great modern believers because of their desire to pigeonhole and make a framework to work within. But even the Bible is full of exceptions, not always clearly delineated rules. I, of course, am not advocating any and every view, interpretation, or belief. But, there are so many debates that, if taken to a higher level, would be far more productive. Think how differently a conversation about Calvinism, charismatics, pacifism, inerrancy of the Bible, women in leadership, and homosexuals would go if it was not about proving someone wrong but instead focused on moving to a higher plane.

A discussion of how the Bible fits into these discussions will have to wait until tomorrow.