|
|
Let me tell you a story. It's a simple story. It's missing certain details. Don't try to make too much of it. Just listen.
Once upon a time there was a king who held title to a vast kingdom. This kingdom was so vast that the people who lived in this king's lands spoke different languages and developed different cultures.
Some of these people knew the king. Some of these people thought somebody else was king, at least in their part of the world. Some of these people thought there was no king at all.
There were rumors about a certain rebellious servant of the king who was known as 'the enemy' or as the 'prince of this world'. There were disagreements about whether this rebellious servant was real or mythical, but it turned out to be mostly a matter of semantics and not all that critical to the story.
Most of the people (whether they knew the king or not) were basically pretty good-they were generally responsible; they did their best to take care of their families; they attempted to be fair in their dealings with others; and they tried to make a positive difference in the world around them. Some weren't so good-they were more interested in taking care of themselves than taking care of others. And a few were just downright mean-they would lie, cheat, steal, even kill to get what they wanted.
All of these people (whether they knew the king or not; whether they were basically pretty good, or not so good, or downright mean) eventually died. Not all at the same time, of course. Not all at the same age. Some by sickness, some by accidents, some by violent means, some for no obvious reason other than it was time. All of these people eventually died.
When a person died, one of two things happened, at least according to the people who knew the king. Either they went to live in eternal happiness in the palace of the king, or they went someplace else. There were disagreements about whether this someplace else was a place of eternal torment or something else, but-either way-this someplace else was not the palace of the king and this someplace else did not involve eternal happiness.
There were disagreements about what determined where a person ended up too. Most of the people who knew the king believed that it depended on only one thing-did the person affiliate with the king's son when he or she was still alive? Or not? If a person was affiliated with the king's son during life, then he or she went to live in eternal happiness in the king's palace after death. If a person was not affiliated with the king's son during life, then he or she went someplace else after death.
Now the people who knew the king and were affiliated with his son, being basically nice people, wanted others to know the king and become affiliated with his son too. Besides that, the king told them to go out and tell other people about him and his son. So the people who knew the king and were affiliated with the king's son tried to help other people get to know the king and become affiliated with the king's son too. They told people all about this king's amazing love. They told people how this king's son loved them so much he even gave his life for them. They invited people to love this king back, to get to know him and to affiliate with his son.
Some were gentle; some were pushy. Some devoted all their energy to the task; some mostly looked for other things to do.
The time came when some people who were affiliated with the king's son forgot why it was that they should invite other people to get to know the king's son. They began to wonder that it seemed rather arrogant and arbitrary of the king to decide people's destination after death based solely on whether or not they affiliated with his son while they were alive. They meditated on the king's love-for they were still convinced that this king's love really was amazing-and they concluded that a king who loved that much would not be that arbitrary. They couldn't be really sure how it worked for people who did not affiliate with the king's son, but they concluded that there must be other ways to end up in the king's palace after death. They began to think that affiliation with the king's son was more about a certain way of life than about where you go when you die. After further thought, they concluded that even this certain way of life didn't really require affiliation with the king's son, though it might be helpful.
Most people who knew the king and were affiliated with the king's son continued to insist that things didn't work that way. These people insisted that the only way to end up in the king's palace after death was to affiliate with the king's son during life. They also insisted that it was, indeed, about a certain way of life, but even this way of life couldn't happen apart from affiliation with the king's son. But, to other people, these people sounded strident and unloving and narrow-minded. These narrow-minded people were convinced that the king himself had told them that this is the way it worked, but other people were convinced that the narrow-minded people got the message confused.
So far, as I've told this story, one key piece of the story has been missing. So far, as I've told this story, I have mentioned something about the king's son giving his life so that others might live. What hasn't been made clear as I've told this story is why it is important that the king's son gave his life so that others might live. It turns out that the narrow-minded people in this story aren't so narrow after all. It turns out that the king's love-which really is amazing-was most fully expressed and most completely revealed in this act of self-giving by the king's son.
So why did I tell the story this way…with this key piece missing?
I told the story this way because there was a time when I didn't know any better. I didn't know the gospel story really well. There was a time when, listening to this simple story, I would have just been left scratching my head. At the end of this story, when some people were concluding that the king was too loving to decide people's fate so arbitrarily, something in my gut would have told me there was something missing in this reasoning, but my mind would have been hard-pressed to clarify what exactly was missing.
I told the story this way because I know that lots and lots of Christians are in the same boat I was. Maybe something in their gut tells them that something is missing in the reasoning, but they would be hard-pressed to pinpoint what exactly is missing.
Let me tell you the story again. This time I'm going to fill out some of the details. This time I'm going to include the death of the king's son, not as an after-thought, but as an essential piece of the story. This story bears certain resemblances to the first story, but there are a few critical details that are very different.
Once upon a time there was a king who held title to a vast kingdom.
The kingdom was for the king's people. This didn't leave anyone out. All people were the king's people. The idea was that all people would know the king and all people would live in harmony with the king. The task of the people would be to take care of the kingdom, but that wouldn't really be all that hard to do.
The king also had servants who went out into the kingdom, but who were basically headquartered at the palace with the king.
Rebellion broke out in the palace and in the kingdom.
Some of the king's servants rebelled. One of them came to be known as 'the enemy' or the 'prince of this world.' Day-to-day rule of the kingdom fell to this rebellious servant. The king still held title, but the world became enemy-occupied territory.
Seduced by the lies of the 'prince of this world', people rebelled too. Because people rebelled, they no longer knew the king; they no longer lived in harmony with the king; and it was no longer easy to take care of the kingdom but really, really hard. People lived their lives in enemy-occupied territory, and they died in enemy-occupied territory.
People lived and died apart from the king, and there wasn't a darn thing they could do about it. They couldn't even know the king, unless the king found a way to show himself to them.
Most of these people (whether they knew the king or not) were basically pretty good-they were generally responsible; they did their best to take care of their families; they attempted to be fair in their dealings with others; and they tried to make a positive difference in the world around them. Some weren't so good-they were more interested in taking care of themselves than taking care of others. And a few were just downright mean-they would lie, cheat, steal, even kill to get what they wanted.
All were rebels. All lived in enemy-occupied territory. All died in enemy-occupied territory. All stood condemned, and there wasn't a darn thing they could do about it.
The wages of sin is death...physical death, yes, but even more importantly, spiritual death…alienation from the king.
This could have been the end of the story. The king existed before the kingdom ever did. The king didn't need the kingdom. Even after the rebellion, the king continued to live a full life in the company of those servants who had not rebelled. The king could have said, "To hell with all my rebellious servants and to hell with this rebellious kingdom too."
This could be the end of the story. But it isn't.
It turns out that this king's love really is amazing. He loved his kingdom and all the people in it, and he wasn't about to leave it forever under the rule of 'the enemy'. That's why this story is a love story.
Now the king could have taken the kingdom back by the overwhelming force of his power. 'The enemy', powerful as he was compared to the people of the kingdom, was nothing compared to the king. The king could have simply crushed 'the enemy' and taken the kingdom back by force of his power.
The king didn't do that. He didn't do that because he didn't want his people back as defeated rebels, held under his rule by his powerful gaze. He wanted them back as loyal subjects, who loved him as he had meant them to at the beginning-like beloved children with a loving father. The king didn't want the people still broken by their rebellion. The king wanted the people made whole again.
There was only one way to do that. The king himself would have to do it. So the king did. That's what makes this story a love story.
First, the king sent messengers into enemy-occupied territory and called one people to be his own. Like all people, they couldn't know the king unless he found a way to show himself to them, so that's what the king did. He revealed himself to this people through prophets and through providence. For generations upon generations, the king worked with this people in enemy territory to give them some understanding of who he was and what it meant to live as his people.
Then, in the fullness of time, the king sent his very own son, his only son, to these people, to be born as one of these people, to reveal himself to the whole of his vast territory. This son was the exact image of the king. He had been with the king since before the rebellion. He had been with the king since even before the kingdom came into being at all. In fact, it was for this son and through this son that the kingdom had been brought into being. Since the very beginning, this son was the rightful prince, the only real prince.
In the fullness of time, the king sent his son to infiltrate the enemy-occupied territory. The king didn't send his son in force with an army of servants. The king didn't want to defeat already broken people, he wanted to make them whole. He didn't want to condemn already condemned people, he wanted to set them free. The king sent his son, not in power, but in weakness, to be one of the people. The son came as a baby, born in poverty, born to this people that the king had been working with for so very long.
The son revealed the fullness of the king. He walked through the very heart of enemy-occupied territory bringing healing and hope and truth wherever he went.
There was no way for rebellious people in enemy-occupied territory to know the king unless he found a way to show himself to them. So he found a way. He sent his son.
The king didn't stop there. He not only wanted to reveal himself, he wanted to reconcile people to himself. The only way for death to be defeated was for the son to die and to be raised again. The only way for 'the prince of this world' to be utterly defeated was for the true prince to take the very worst 'the enemy' could dish out-death on a cross-and be raised to new life. So the son laid down his life, so that others might live.
The life the son gave was life in him. The only life there is, is life in the son.
After his death, the son was raised to new life, and returned to his father.
The son promised that he would return again and then 'the enemy' who had already been defeated would be cast out forever.
In the meantime, the son left behind a new community of people-an outpost of the king's people in enemy-occupied territory. These people knew all about condemnation because they had been rebels just like the rest. The people of this new community were no longer condemned because the only life they had was life in relationship with the king's son; they stood in the righteousness of the son; they were not condemned because the son was obedient. People in this new community, wrapped up as they were in the life of the king's son, still experienced physical death, but instead of the eternal death that they deserved as condemned rebels, they received new life in the presence of the king and in harmony with the king.
While they still lived in enemy-occupied territory, the people of this new community lived a life that was all about the king's son, a life that was made possible only because the king's son lived in them through his spirit. While they still lived in enemy-occupied territory, this new community had good news to tell of a king who loved his kingdom so much that he did not leave it to 'the enemy' but he redeemed it through his only son-the true prince-the one who was given all authority by his father such that it is right to call him the king.
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."
|
|
