God is a Lover, not a lawyer

The classic caricature of the evangelical message for conversion seems to me to be almost entirely useless. What I mean is the idea that when we come to know Christ our past, present and future sins are in some way obliterated and we can then carry on just as we were and expect to find ourselves in heaven when the whole thing is done. Behind this is the idea that God is merely a judge. Whilst this is certainly one metaphor to employ for God there are better.

I would suggest that a better and more basic metaphor is to see God primarily as lover particularly when we are dealing with conversion. We must recognise that sin is a state before it is an action. The good news is that we can be made new, that this fractured state will be gradually but inevitably reversed as the fruits of the spirit are unveiled in our lives. This is loosely speaking a Kingdom theology.

Firstly, the problems with the God as judge position...

1) It flattens out the concept of sin, making it 2-dimensional when in fact it is 3-dimensional. In other words it treats sin as a series of actions rather than as a state that leads to the actions. Whilst I recognise that the actions and the state are linked, I believe that the link exists in the state-action direction rather than the opposite way. The irony is that those that preach this message purport to be treating sin seriously but in fact are doing just the opposite. A doctor who only treated symptoms and never bothered with the root cause would be struck off before long.

2) Secondly and perhaps more importantly, I do not believe that the evangelical position deals with reality as people experience it. Does anyone ever really observe their sin being forever removed before God? No, of course not. What someone does experience at conversion is 'falling in love' with God and life and a corresponding knowing that life is good and that they are OK. This is my experience anyway.

3) Thirdly, the Kingdom approach is far easier to communicate to people who don't understand the outdated understanding of sin pedaled by the strict evangelicals. I think it makes more sense to this generation of people.

4) Fourthly, only the second approach is able to create a rich enough understanding of salvation. Salvation, as Dallas Willard says, 'is a life'. It's about the whole of our beings finding regeneration through meeting God in mind, body and spirit. It is not about some legal transaction in a far off and distant place, which we have no control over. Salvation is always something that is happening here and now or it is not happening at all.

Generally speaking, I think the gospel that Jesus preaches has more to say to the question 'who are we' than 'what are we doing'. Both matter, but he deals with the heart before the symptoms.

Do we still sin in the sense of committing sinful acts after we meet Jesus? Yes. But we recognise that as time passes we are being converted into the increasing likeness of God in Christ. In some ways this second approach is less neat and tidy but I reckon it fits the facts of experience far better. God is a lover before a lawyer.