The Epistles are Overemphasized
By Jonathan Dodson | October 14th, 2010 | Category: Gospel and Culture | 15 comments
I’m soaking my soul in the writings of Luke these days. His two-volume theological history amasses more than all the Pauline epistles put together, yet it is Paul who has dominated the minds of Western Evangelicals. In fact, Luke’s writings account for 2/5s of the entire New Testament.
Distorted by the Epistles
Could our theology and faith be distorted by a largely propositional/doctrinal shaped diet of Scripture? Have we lost our imagination, the ability to immerse ourselves into the sights, sounds, smells, and profound stories of Jesus? Reading Luke with an imagination will spark a theological reshaping that will force us to live radical lives that embrace suffering, search out the poor, invite death, hope for the resurrection.
Reshaped by the Gospels
It’s time we abandon our favor of tight arguments and divisive doctrinal debates, and run into the stories of Jesus where we can sit, repent, wonder, rejoice, and join the mission of our messiah. He’s radical but people can’t tell from looking at us. The Gospels invite us to circumscribe our stories into the larger story of Jesus. I’m realizing how distorted I’ve become by being a heavily epistle shaped disciple. The story of Jesus holds so much power for awakening a doctrinal disciple to the majesty and narrative power of the life, work, and ministry of Christ. I look forward to this journey with you Austin City Life.
Resources on Luke
Here are few resources that I’ve found helpful in working through Luke, being shaped by Jesus’ story, and moving forward in my discipleship and pastoring a missional church.
I think you’re drawing a false dichotomy for the sake of trying to make a point about the overemphasis of the church in certain areas of theology. You’re going too far in setting up the epistles against the narratives as your word picture here. The epistles teach us to do exactly what you’re asking your readers to do: namely, wrestle with what in the world has happened in the appearance of Jesus the Christ and learn to incorporate themselves in the story. I understand that your larger point is not to make the epistles the enemy, but your rhetoric of blaming a saturation of the epistles is not helpful. Teach your people that they have wrongly applied or understood the epistles, sure, but don’t set up the epistles as a rhetorical bad guy. Your plea that Christians find themselves again in the narrative of Jesus is no different than the same plea of many false teachers who have arisen in recent years. The difference I see, from my limited exposure to your idea and thoughts, is that you are committed to asking your audience to do this firmly within biblical grounds. However, this is exactly what the epistles teach us to do. Again, I get your larger point, but you are an influential dude and rhetorical devices like the way you use the epistle in this post strike me as wreckless.
Jonathan, contrary to the last commenter, I want to affirm your insight about overemphasis. Our church has also been living in Luke for about two years, ready to begin Acts next month. The effect of this journey on my faith and theological reflection has been very similar; the way in which Luke’s (and other Synoptic) material has been marginalized in favor of a systematic (surface) interpretation of Paul is well nigh a tragedy. What we need is to be immersed in the Lukan narrative again so that we can do theology – and indeed, understand Paul’s theology – in light of the grand themes of covenant and kingdom.
These themes, once grasped, are indeed radical and transformative; they deal the decisive blow to individualism in theology and challenge us once more to be the Abrahamic people of God.
Kudos, Jonathan. I look forward to listening in on your journey.
@John
Thanks for your concern that the whole of Scripture be honored. I, of course, share that sentiment. Contrary to your claim, I dont make the epistles a “rhetorical bad guy.” If I wanted to do that, then I would have said: “The Epistles are Overrated.” My language is more nuanced. Perhaps you’re smuggling in some of your own baggage or concern into your interpretation of my post?
Moreover, I have not “made a case” against the Epistles. I love them; preach them, and am grateful for them. However, the fact remains that much of Western theology is epistle-shaped to the detriment of the rest of Scripture. We neglect a whole host of genres in favor of how our minds have been conditioned to think–propositionally. Time with theologians and pastors in the Non-Western world have much to teach us from their Narrative-shaped theology. Of course, it’s not a dichotomy but it is correction.
Finally, I’d like to note that the post is largely confessional and inquisitive (not accusatory or demonizing). Thanks for weighing the post. Grace to you.
Jonathon,
Love what the Lord is doing with you and your church and had the opportunity to listen to several of your talks on Conversion to Christ, Church, Mission. Loved em man.
I really appreciate your call to get back to the gospels, and allow the narratives to teach us. In reaction to the liberal opposition to propostional truth, most evangelicals have over emphasized propositional truth from Paul’s epistles.
However, the church has also under-emphasized the epistles of Hebrews, James, John, Peter as well. These don’t emphasize justification as much, but perseverance.
An over-emphasis on of one part of the canon can potentially lead to unhealthy spiritual emphases.
An over-emphasis on the gospels to the exclusion of the epistles has led some folks to embrace para-church ministry and ignore the church. Just what I witnessed from several folks.
I think, in essence what you are trying to do, is to swing our pendulum back in the direction of the gospels, so I appreciate it brother.
Jonathon,
Loved your response. I wouldn’t have posted my thoughts if I had seen your response, but I don’t see a delete “buton” so I guess they’re stuck. Well played bro.
“Distorted by the Epistles” … “Have we been distorted by a largely propositional/doctrinal shaped diet of Scripture” (notice you didn’t say a largely propositional/doctrinal shaped interpretation or abuse of the epistle; you never nuance the epistles, but equate them with propositional theology and set them against the gospels which are narrative theology) … “I’m realizing how distorted I’ve become by being a heavily epistle shaped disciple …” These are the serious concerns I have with your rhetoric. Now if I sat down and listened to you talk about the epistles and their place in the church, then I’m sure you would qualify or maybe even rephrase each of these things, but I don’t have that luxury, nor will the vast majority of online readers, like people in my church who will take your rhetoric and do who knows what with it.
Again, I’m fine with your overall point, but I have concerns about the way you express it.
John, what sense of the word “distorted” to you take Jonathan to mean here? There are at least three to choose from.
the problem isn’t the word distorted; it’s the unqualified association of distortion with the epistles. There is no definition of the word distortion that would make this okay.
One of the senses of the term “distorted” means “mis-shapen.” I could be wrong, but one of Jonathan’s goals in this post might be for us to get re-shapened by the gospels. (It’s a play on words, which associates his goal of using one’s imagination while reading the gospels.)
We (and our faith/theology) can become mis-shapened when consuming a disproportionate amount of the epistles in comparison with the gospels (or other genres of Scripture). The language used throughout this post qualifies such meaning.
peace, bro
No, Jeff, the meaning isn’t qualified; that’s my point. None of my concerns about the rhetoric used in this post have actually been addressed; instead I’ve been dismissed as having “baggage.”
I’m one of the folks that has to deal with the consequences (good and bad) in the local church when people like Dodson or others that our generation look up to launch their rhetorical flourishes into the public forum of cyber space. And it is public. Less sophisticated thinkers/readers can take valid (if unintended) interpretations of that rhetoric and go nuts. Once again, I’m fine with the point being made here, but have very real concerns about the way it is expressed. I’m asking for careful rhetoric, not for important points like the one Dodson makes here to not be made.
My goal is not to bash or dismiss Dodson in any way, but to plead with him that, as someone to whom God seems to be giving growing influence among His people, he be more careful with his rhetoric in this particular case (I’m not even making some blanket criticism of Dodson’s communication style/abilities as a whole).
I’m done with this particular discussion. Enjoy.
Jonathan, could you help me understand more clearly what you mean by “propositional/doctrinal shaped diet of Scripture?” Specifically, I’m a little confused on your meaning of the word “propositional.” I know what the word means, but not sure about it in the context. Thx.
Argument driven genres like Romans, Galatians.
I think part of the issue is that the epistles are just easier to preach. I am preaching through Mark right now…and God is really using it, but from an ease of preaching perspective I long for Galatians, it’s hard work! None the less we there is so much of Christ to encounter in the Gospels and I owe that to my congregation.
Sola All of Scriptura,
D
john -
you have a noble concern, but it’s really not all that valid. first, dodson answered you w/ what he meant & didn’t mean. second, in light of his qualifying what he meant/didn’t mean, someone’s misinterpreted reading of this text is not the fault of its author. third, was it the fault of what jesus said that origen castrated himself? fourth, lighten up dude.
Do you know that it internet site is damaged on IE7 and IE8? Footer is in the center of your web page.