Inkblots!
You may not always be able to tell a book by its cover, but occasionally a cover can say as much as a book. The most recent edition of the venerable J. Gresham Machen’s Christian Faith in the Modern World (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.) bears a cover that comments significantly on the effect that the modern world is having upon the Christian faith. Pictured on the cover is an inkblot a la Rorschach.
Hermann Rorschach was a Swiss pyschiatrist (1884–1922) who devised a test for the analysis of personality based largely on interpretations clients give to inkblots (“It looks like a butterfly,” “A man facing a mirror,” etc.). The interpretation, the theory goes, says a whole lot more about the client’s inner self than it does about the inkblot. The one responsible for this cover is apparently a perspicacious individual. He or she had recognized that the modern world clamors for, and, sorry to say, has been offered a Jesus that seems to conform to their demands. The concessions that have been made so far, especially in the Jesus of our evangelism (now there’s a Jesus for evangelism, a Jesus for discipleship, etc .), indicate that the church is too willing to jettison the biblical Jesus in order to gain wider acceptance (more “responses”). And that is cause for alarm.
How much truth can be bargained away before you are left with a lie? Toward the end of the last century we were asked to give up our antiquated notion of an infallible Bible. “Only Jesus matters,” cried the critics. We were asked to believe that Christianity would be none the worse; nay, we would be more effective in our ministry of presenting the true, historical Jesus directly to the heart of contemporary man by not asking him to swallow those hard-to–take miracles. “Only Jesus,” they said. “You’ll see. You’ll give Him greater glory by disentangling Him from that fable-filled book.” Too many found that apple irresistible. Entire denominations were destroyed.
Now, we find that the Bible wasn’t enough. We have to rework Jesus a little bit, too. “Jesus need not be Lord to be Savior,” is the latest proposed amendment from those who believe God needs to make His message more relevant. But this change is more subtle than the one brought about by higher critics. And this battle rages among those who continue to hold the Bible in high regard. Instead of casting doubt upon the written Word, we’re now asked to modify the Living Word.
“Why alienate prospective converts when Lordship is secondary to the gospel message? He could always be acknowledged as Lord later in Christian life.” Some have gone so far as to call anathema those who would “corrupt” the pure gospel by attaching “conditions” such as making clear in our evangelism that the Jesus of the Bible is the Lord who must be obeyed.
Surrender to Relativism
A partial explanation of how this disagreement arose can be found by understanding our times. We live in an age of absolute relativity. “The only thing we can know for sure is that we can’t be certain about anything,” the world says. Eternal truths are viewed as myths once prevalent in a society that has been duped into believing that the subjective views of some have an objective basis. “You do your thing, I’ll do mine. We needn’t subscribe to anyone else’s opinion about morality, verity or order. What I feel, is what is; reality is what I say it is.” That this type of thinking is antithetical to our received Biblical revelation hardly needs to be mentioned. Yet, by parceling out Messiah in stages, we are practicing those principles. It’s painful for those who love the Messiah of the Bible to find that many are attempting to make Him into another inkblot; His nature, offices and power subject to the interpretation of those to whom an uncompromising message is supposed to be given, not negotiated over. Ours is a message that declares “Jesus is Lord,” to the glory of God the Father.
Jesus Is Lord
Is there anywhere in Scripture where we are told that Jesus is or is not Lord depending upon how a person (creature, mind you!) receives or perceives Him? Perhaps I am simplistic (a charge frequently leveled against those who believe in objective truth), but it appears that we are focusing attention in this debate on the wrong question. We should not ask, “Must Jesus be Lord to be Savior?” That is a matter irrelevant to the objective state of affairs (and we are called to make known objective truth). The question, rather, is “Do the Scriptures declare Jesus the Messiah to be Lord of all, the Lord of glory, or not?” And to that, all who trust God’s Word must answer with a resounding “Yea and Amen!!” This being so, in our evangelism we must avoid giving the impression to sinners that they are to determine how far they will “allow” Jesus to rule their lives. Their only business is to repent and avoid destruction by placing their faith (still a gift of God) in the Biblical Jesus.
The role of Judge and defendant have been reversed. Modern evangelism has Jesus on trial and not humanity, as though it is we who must receive Him, we who must accept Him, we who must “make Him Lord” (a revolting concept no matter how sincere the sentiment). Listen, my friends; let us not be wise beyond what is written. Jesus IS Lord. He has been made Lord by God the Father. We were not consulted as to the propriety of such an exaltation nor can we alter it, protest as we might. It is humanity’s task to submit to the king, not redefine Him according to prevailing vagaries or preferences, as if the Holy One of Israel were one of Rorschach’s inkblots! God forgive us all!
One never hears the question, “Must a person believe Jesus to be a man in order for Him to be that person’s Savior?” Why not? Because, try as one might, the truth cannot be circumvented: the historical Jesus is a man (Luke 2:31). If someone were to claim to have trusted in a female Messiah it would not be the same One the Evangelists wrote about, “liberated” lectionaries to the contrary! Neither can the Lordship of Jesus be (conveniently) deleted from His New Testament portrait. He is not incidentally Lord. He is essentially Lord.
All this is not to say that a penitent believer will, from the first moment of new birth, recognize our Messiah in all His glory. Indeed not! Of how far short we fall of giving Him the honor, obedience and praise due His name, every saint is painfully aware. But progressive understanding of the Lord and Savior is not the same as fragmented reception. Where does this sort of thing end? “In 1978 I received Jesus as my Savior; in 1980 I made Him my Lord. In 1981 I acknowledged Him as my Messiah, and in 1982 He became my High Priest.” Oh, pshaw! If Jesus hadn’t been interceding for that person in 1978 he/she wouldn’t have made it to 1979. Our appreciation of the various offices of our blessed Lord must not be misconstrued as being the same as our installation of Him into those offices. When God enlightens our ignorant minds and brings into submission our rebellious wills, we must not take the credit!
Stop Compromising
Nor should we compromise our message because our hearers posture a stiff neck. Peter’s summary statement in his Pentecost message (that ushered in the age of the ecclesia) is cogent. “Therefore, let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus . . . both Lord and Messiah” (Acts 2:36). Let’s break that down just a little:
Therefore—in consequence of everything else I have said (see verses 14–35).
let all the house of Israel—and now the Gentiles as well; i.e., let the whole world . . .
know assuredly—what Peter is about to say is emphatic, important, undeniable and a crucial part of our message; there is no room for divergence of opinion on this matter; it is certain.
that God hath made—N.B. God hath made. Not you, not I, not the angels, not the Sanhedrin; neither seminarians nor theologians, not any pope, priest, minister or rabbi. What God hath done, who can undo? (see Eccl. 7:13).
that same Jesus—“I don‘t want you to think I’m changing ‘Jesuses’ midstream,” Peter says. (Moderns, take note!) There’s only one. And I haven’t finished saying what God wants you to hear until I tell you about the position to which God has exalted this same Jesus. “Know for sure that God has made this very Jesus . . .”
both—not either/or, take your pick.
Lord—Hallelujah!
and Messiah—Amen!!
It’s best for us to avoid falling into the error of which Enlightenment Age atheists accused us, trying to create God in man’s image. The Messianic believer with an infallible Bible has no need of an inkblot Jesus. He is not to be made over according to the spirit of the age, but to be worshiped as the Lord of all ages.
It is a lugubrious portent that many of evangelical persuasion are so willing to make accommodations to the fractured perception of Jesus entertained by sinners who refuse to bow to the Messiah King. The Jesus of the Bible is the same yesterday, today, and forever, protestation of the modern modifiers notwithstanding.
This whole controversy reminds me of something Epictetus, the great stoic philosopher, once said: “What a man says about another (in this case, Jesus) says more about the speaker than the subject.”
Hey, wait a minute! Isn’t that what Rorschach said?
Steve M. Schlissel is an elder in the Queens Christian Reformed Church and pastor of Messiah’s Congregation, 141 Neptune Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11235. This article also appeared in the July 1984 Banner of Truth.