This is a very good point: “We wouldn’t have seen Jonah’s whiny resentful side.” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/01/27/arent-we-christians-all-jonahs/#comment-12308

The bible does not hide the ugly, crazy, beautiful, whiny, broken side of humanity, including the ugly, crazy, beautiful, whiny, broken side of the bible itself.

Surely our minds can comprehend all three kinds of thinking? First we learn binary either/or thinking, then we learn analogue both/and thinking and maybe we learn third-option/trinitarian thinking. All of these have value and wisdom comes from knowing when to use which kind of thinking.

Anyway, back to Jonah. I love this book of the Bible! My dad was recently preaching on it and he said that if it had ended at chapter 3 it would have been good. We wouldn’t have seen Jonah’s whiny resentful side. Jonah loved the plant so much and it was simply a plant! I very very often feel like Jonah. I was really mad at one of my friends and my mom started mentioning grace and forgiveness. I said, ‘No way, I am not forgiving her. I’m not going to show her grace she has to earn it!’ Then my mom just looked at me crazily and I also saw how my view of grace is screwed. This book of the Bible encourages me because I see God’s servant as a whole with all his warts and whiskers.

My favorite verse in the book is Jonah 2:9, ‘But I with shouts of grateful praise, will sacrifics to you. What I have vowed I will make good. I will say, ‘Salvation comes from the Lord.” It’s so beautiful. Salvation comes from the Lord and yet so often I forget it. Salvation comes from the Lord!

Surely the life of Jesus is not “dispensable backstory” as some may claim.

NT Wright hits hard at both extremes – “social worker Jesus” and “mystical creed-loving Jesus”. He is saying that neither the liberal nor the conservative label can comprehensively explain the life of Jesus described in the 4 Gospel Books.

Some would be happy if Jesus just was born, died and rose again, skipping his life story. Others would be happy if Jesus merely lived, with no virgin birth or resurrection.

NT Wright claims the real question to ask about the life of Jesus would be “what does it look like when this God becomes king?” Very good thoughts!

* Most people will not understand him unless they know both the OT and NT well. Perhaps this talk at Calvin College is directed toward more serious scholarly Christians, whereas he might “simplify it” or “dumb it down” for a secular or non-churched audience.

* He speaks rapidly, which means that anyone who is a foreigner or where English is not their primary language will have significant difficulty following his rapid fire pace.

* He and McKnight seem to be primarily addressing “Christians” who adopted a soterian gospel where they just accept Jesus to be saved and forgiven so that they can go to heaven. I don’t think that many in UBF think like this or believe like this, perhaps because we emphasize the study of the four gospels >60-70% of the time (at the expense of studying the epistles and the OT).

* He also seems to be targeting “liberal social activist” Christians who downplay the incarnation and the atonement and primarily emphasize social justice causes.

* He stresses that Christ is King and Lord, and that the gospel comprises of the kingdom and a cross (with hope and suffering), which I think that most in UBF will affirm as absolute truth.

* My thought is that regardless of whether one accepts a “story gospel” (of Wright/McKnight) or a “soterian gospel” (of the Reformers) or anything in between, the primary problem is not which version one accepts or affirms, but whether one is touched and transformed by the Holy Spirit until their life conforms to the image of Jesus. I don’t think UBF will deny or reject Wright or McKnight’s presentation of the gospel. But still I think that some longstanding leaders do not seem to be able to NOT lord over others.

* Though I do not deny and in fact believe that Christ comes as King and as the fulfillment of the story of Israel, it is hard for me to apply this in life and faith. I can more easily relate to Christ being my King and Lord (and Savior and Friend). And I think, so can others, without causing them to “just believe in Jesus to be saved and to go to heaven.”

* I still maintain that all people’s main problem (definitely and especially mine) is our fallen sinful nature and our innate rebellion against God which constantly requires the gospel and the Holy Spirit. I don’t quite see how the way Wright (or McKnight) presents the gospel addresses this specifically, and thereby leading their hearers to repentance and faith.

Joe, I look forward to reading your Ephesian’s lecture.

Here’s NT Wright on how we distort the gospel by neglecting parts of it. Thanks Ben for seeing us as irenic and not just tuning us out. That word is new to me too. Brian, that is interesting stuff! I’ve also been reading “Walking in the Dust of the Rabbi” to understand Jesus better in his Jewish context.

“Jesus completes the story of Israel (that is, the story of what God was up to within the Jewish nation) and brings all of humanity and the whole earth into that story.”

Another way to explain it is this:

“The four gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) when rightly read in their first-century Jewish context are the gospel.”

Two recent books that explain this well are The King Jesus Gospel by Scot McKnight and How God Became King by N.T. Wright. Reading those books helped me to deeply appreciate the Bible once again. Given your expressed interest in Jewish thought, I think they would resonate with you as well.

If you don’t have time to read those books but have one hour to spare, you can get an excellent overview of this perspective by listening to this lecture:

http://www.calvin.edu/january/2012/NTWright.htm

If there is one question that has driven me since 2003 (our move to Detroit), that question has been: What is the gospel?

I asked that in 2010/2011 to the leaders in Toledo ubf, and was told “That is a question that takes too long to answer” and “Answer it yourself” and “What does it matter? We have to get back to the ubf heritage.” (I’m paraphrasing somewhat).

My writings have been based on the backbone of this question, and the gospel has been a thread throughout all my blogs. I’m actually frustrated with my own paradigm of using the “problem/solution” approach.

We need a gospel buoy not a moral compass to navigate today’s waters.

The gospel is about surpassing glory, power, grace, revelations and greatness.

The gospel includes an unpayable debt, a debt we cannot repay.

I guess UBF does teach the Bible with a Reformed bent (but with strongly tribal, sectarian, cultural, ethnic and imperialistic elements that are quite unpleasant and unpalatable).

Joe, regarding the Superbowl, I believe God, who is omniscient, knows who wins (I hope it’s Denver!). But yes, he is not manipulative nor a control freak. I love this sentence of yours!: “(God) sets up wide parameters but then gives real, non-illusory freedom to us because without freedom there can be no love.” – See at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/01/27/arent-we-christians-all-jonahs/#sthash.i0LvaH70.dpuf

I also agree that presenting God as primarily punitive, retributive and holy in his divine judgments and wrath somehow diminishes or obscures the God whose love is perhaps beyond our human comprehension. And yes, as Chris has repeatedly pointed out, the things SL spoke and wrote about those who were “severely punished” for leaving UBF or for not doing what he wanted is horrible beyond words to even describe. (I was present at the worship service when he preached this.)

This truly distorts our glorious, gracious God and our glorious gospel of grace. It also guilt-trips with the intent to control and manipulate “UBF people to do UBF stuff in the UBF way.” This might be the single foremost reason why so many people have left UBF over the decades.

From my own personal sentiment and experience of grace and redemption, the aspects of sovereignty, sin and holiness presented here somehow still resonates deeply with me to realize and appreciate just how great the love of God for me is.

My singular desire is that people who know me and who hear me preach and teach will realize just how great the love of God is by the work of the Holy Spirit.

I understand that God’s sovereignty can be explained in ways that just sounds horrible (like John Piper when he explains tsunamis and tornadoes). Sin and holiness can also be easily presented in ways that guilt-trip, control and manipulate people. I consciously and proactively do not want to ever do this ever again.

Thanks again for your comments which I believe are very helpful for me to hear and read.

For example, I watched a History Channel show called “The Curse of Oak Island“. Someone actually used the Jewish Tree of Life diagram to find stone markers on the island.

I am more and more convinced that a deeper, richer understanding of what Jesus said and did lies in knowing something about the Jewish thought fabric, for example the “Tree of Life diagram“.

Surely the gospel Jesus preached relates somehow to Keter (the crown), Chokhmah (wisdom), Binah (intuition, understanding), Chesed (mercy) or Gedulah (greatness), Gevurah (strength), Tiferet (glory), Netzach (victory), Hod (majesty), Yesod (foundation) and Malkut (sovereignty)?

Apparently I’ve been healed enough that I don’t feel the need to react to your article with a litany of swear words and PTSD-like spasms of righteous indignation :)) I will simply say that from an ex-member viewpoint this articles sends the clear message: “God will bless ubf whether you like it or not. So stop being like Jonah and get over your anger.”

In any case, your raise some important points to discuss. Here are my responses to your questions.

Are we not often like Jonah?

Perhaps we human beings have a tendency to not be happy when other people are blessed, especially people we think should not be blessed. So in terms of recognizing our human jealousy, envy and self-righteousness, I would say yes, we are like Jonah. Yet there are some deeper points here.

When God blesses those (like Ninevah) who have hurt you and others, are you angry?

Was Jonah hurt by the Ninevites? I don’t recall anything but maybe I missed something in the story. So your question Ben is a loaded one. I don’t recall that Jonah was angry because God *blessed* the Ninevites, but because the Ninevites repented when they heard of God’s judgment. So I don’t care for your phrasing of this question.

So to put things bluntly, if ubfers repent, like you and Joe have, I would certainly rejoice! But do I want to see ubf be destroyed, come to an end and cease to exist as it did in the past? Yes I do want to see that. Am I angry if God in His sovereignty allows ubf to continue its harmful practices? Yes I am a little, but I now have much peace that God knows what He is doing.

Do you have a right to be angry (Jon 4:4)?

This is also an odd question. Taken point blank, the answer is sometimes yes we have a right to be angry, and sometimes no we do not have a right to be angry.

Is there anything that God does that you consider inappropriate or unjust?

As I mentioned it is sometimes hard to accept why God would allow arrogant abusers to go unpunished in this life. But I’ve come to accept that they are in God’s hand. I have accepted this to the point where I am no longer angry at the thought that Slee and ubfers will meet me in heaven (I just trust that I won’t bow down to them :)

One sentence that troubles me, Ben is this:

“Before we understand the magnitude of God’s grace we need to understand the greatness of his anger and the weight of our own sins.”

This is only one of five major ways to present the gospel, the conscience/sin/morals way. There are four other paradigms that I long for someone to articulate but rarely do I find such thinking.

There are five great human problems (at least)… shame, sin, law, curse and death. And I believe the gospel found in the bible addresses all five problems comprehensively. But we cannot possibly know which problem(s) will lead someone to the good news.

First, about God’s sovereignty. You wrote:

“It is impossible to escape from God because God rules over all, including the forces of nature… Nature does not act on its own… There is no situation over which God does not have control.”

Most Christians agree that God is sovereign in the sense that he could control everything if he wanted to. But from the earliest times, many Christians have believed that God restrains himself and grants considerable autonomy to the created beings in the heavens (angels) and to the natural world and especially to human beings. He doesn’t manipulate the weather every single day. Not every natural disaster was directly caused by him. He doesn’t necessarily decide ahead of time which team will win the Superbowl. He sets up wide parameters but then gives real, non-illusory freedom to us because without freedom there can be no love. God doesn’t always get what he wants. He doesn’t want us to sin and yet we do. He wants to save all people but some don’t want his salvation. It seems to me that, out of a desire to maintain a high view of God as all-powerful and all-glorious, some theologians mischaracterize God as a control freak. Our views about God have real consequences, because whatever image of God we worship, we eventually become like that image. If we see God as excessively controlling and manipulative, then guess what? We begin to think it’s good and godly to excessively control and manipulate people. If we see God as excessively punitive and retributive, then we begin to think it’s okay to punish and apply force to advance God’s plans. (I think this was/is a serious problem in SL’s theology, as Chris has recently pointed out. SL’s messages were full of stories of people who didn’t do what SL wanted and then suffered terrible consequences.)

Second, about the need to feel the weight of our sins as a prelude to receiving God’s grace. You wrote:

“This is a fundamental gospel principle–recognition of sin and of the fact that our guilt renders us liable to punishment. Though this is an incomplete view of the gospel, it is often a necessary one at the beginning of our journey toward Christ. Before we understand the magnitude of God’s grace we need to understand the greatness of his anger and the weight of our own sins. Learning to recognize our sins is how God works in all of our hearts to lead us to know the depth of his love and grace for us.”

This is the basic script of American evangelical revivalism. Preachers like Dwight Moody presented the gospel in this way. But not everyone comes to God in the same way. For example, Brother Lawrence was converted by simply looking at a tree. During the winter, he saw a dead tree and somehow understood that the tree had a sure hope of resurrection in the spring, and he needed that hope too. Eastern Orthodox Christians take sin very seriously, and yet when they present the gospel, they begin with the fundamental problem of death rather than sin and guilt. God has many, many ways of reaching people; he approaches us in our own context and doesn’t always follow the same script.

The speculation of what happened at the end of the book is that Jonah likely repented, since he exposed just how hideously horrible he was throughout the book.

Nick, I think you just perfectly articulated my sentiment exactly: “I may be one of those who are shown the grace of God that is the source of consternation for others!” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2014/01/27/arent-we-christians-all-jonahs/#sthash.7m8q05zw.dpuf