In Chapter five we turn attention to the Book of Revelation as the paradigmatic text par excellance for the development of a theology of freedom for humanity. All strange imagery and apocalyptic conceptualizations aside, this narrative is a wonderfully prophetic affirmation of that graced freedom Christ came to assert as the basis for genuine anthropos. The fact that John has placed this futuristic scenario in direct relation to current issues facing a persecuted and de-humanized population and ekklēsia in his own time, is fruitful for the development of a theology of freedom that looks to the future, as well as the past and present. The Book of Revelation cannot be properly appreciated as theological proclamation of genuine freedom, as a gift of grace, so long as it remains encumbered with the silly and presumptuous forms of interpretation made popular in contemporary media; what we hope to provide is a far more faithful and profoundly hopeful engagement with this same biblical material.
Chapter six will cover, what we consider to be, novel terrain; in this chapter we will contemplate those ways in which an evangelical theology of freedom for humanity, in order to speak to the catholic ekklēsia, must be ecumenical in character—or at the very least, speak to what could reasonably be considered ecumenical concerns. We will also suggest those ways in which an evangelical theology of freedom for humanity could play a role in advancing the present impasse in the ecumenical endeavor, by revisiting the role of the ekklēsia as the free community of freed persons, seeking greater freedom for the whole of humanity.
In the Conclusion we will summarize the argument made throughout this essay and provide indications—hints, if you will—to those ways in which this particular proposal for an evangelical theology of freedom could shape and inform the services to Christ as offered by the one who is in preparation to hold, or currently holds, the pastoral office.
1. In use of the term “ontological,” we refer to that which is the fundamental and essential nature of this being as a creature created imago Dei, the complete disfigurement of that same nature subsequent to the Fall, and the redemption and restoration of that same essential nature in the God-man Jesus Christ and, subsequently, by virtue of the presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer, evidenced as a “new creation” (in the image of the “New Adam”).
2. The reader is directed to the article addressing the Greek term ekklēsia located in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 394–402. The conclusion to this extensive article is most helpful in illuminating our choice of this term: “The NT itself makes no distinction between an invisible triumphant church and a visible militant church. The church, as the individual congregation representing the whole, is always visible, and its righteousness and holiness are always imputed through faith. Luther recognizes this when he prefers the term ‘congregation’ to ‘church’ in his rendering of Scripture. Yet if the ideal is not played off against the reality, no more is the whole church against the local congregation. Every congregation represents the whole church, that at Corinth no less than at Jerusalem. The development of larger organizations does not alter this basic truth” (401–2).
3. See the article in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 59–60.
4. “The NT sees that retreat into inwardness does not in fact bring freedom. Existence is inwardly defective, so that to take oneself in hand is simply to grasp a defective existence. Faced with a lost existence, we can come to ourselves only by subjecting our own will to the will of another. We achieve self-control by letting ourselves be controlled. Concretely, eleutheria in the NT is freedom from sin (Rom. 6:18), the law (Rom. 7:3–4; Gal. 2:4), and death (Rom. 6:21–22; 8:21). It is freedom from an existence that in sin leads to the law of death. Existing in sin, we are its slaves (Rom. 6:20). The result is anarchy (Rom. 6:19). This means surrender to craving of the sárx that is triggered by the law (Rom. 6:12). The law is intended for good, expressing God’s claim, but in our sinful existence it brings sin to light by mediating sinful affections. It is an occasion for self-seeking love of life that misuses the claim of God . . . Freedom, then, means freedom from the law as well as from sin, i.e., from the need to seek justification by the law. Freedom here is freedom from attempted autonomy, not by breaking the law, but by fulfilling our own interpretation of it in following our own needs, and doing our own will, by what seems to be an honest effort to do God’s will. Freedom from the law means freedom from moralism, from self-lordship before God in the guise of serious and obedient responsibility” (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 225).
5. “How is this freedom achieved? The primary answer is: ‘By the act of Christ.’ Christ has made us free (Gal. 5:1). The reference here is to the event of the life that he offered up vicariously in obedience to God’s will (cf. Gal. 3:13; 4:4). Our freedom is not an existential return to the soul. The Son makes us free (John 8:36). The secondary answer is: ‘By the gospel call.’ We are called to freedom (Gal. 5:13). This is a call to the act of Christ which is the basis of a new life in freedom. The life-giving Spirit of Jesus is present in the call (Rom. 8:2), advancing the claim of God’s act in Christ, and making possible the true fulfillment of what the law demands as the will of God (Rom. 8:3ff.) . . . In the Spirit of Christ’s own freedom, we find our own freedom . . . How do we bring this freedom to expression? The answer is: in love, i.e., not in isolation but in a life with others. We find freedom in service, in yielding our lives to the divinely demanded righteousness of love of God and neighbor (Rom. 6:18ff.). Freedom comes to expression in righteous acts of many different kinds (Gal. 5:22). Being free, we accept civil obedience (Mt. 17:24ff.; 1 Pet. 2:13). We renounce rights for the sake of others (1 Cor. 9:19). We may forgo valid personal claims (1 Cor. 9:1)” (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 226).
1 / The Foundation and Fundamental Problem
“In the beginning . . .”
Any discussion of genuine evangelical freedom must begin at the beginning, at least in the biblical and theological sense of the term beginning (i.e., genesis). The reasoning behind this approach should be evident to anyone who holds strong conviction regarding the origin of the evangel (the good news) as having a direct and irrefutable relationship to select passages and narratives, and to the richly variegated theological reflections of the Old Testament. If, as is our position, graced freedom can only be rightly understood and appreciated as having its origin in the will of a loving, merciful, and righteous Lord God, as a revelation of the immanent Trinity, and in the purposes for which God created anthropos (as biblically represented by Adam and Eve) and the whole of the created order, then our attention must first be given to select texts in which we first receive word of this glorious and gracious event.
Our attention will be given to those portions of the Book of Genesis bearing directly on our proposal of a biblical witness to graced freedom. But we must first make clear that our task is not to write a commentary (in the traditional sense) on the Book of Genesis, as a commentary would take us into the intricacies of word study, textual variations, and so on, and would therefore distract us from the more immediate concern of our study. That is not to say that such commentary has been ignored in the process of preparing this