Rich Kao

I always had a theology of "both" not either/or, and based my thinking on Ecc. 7:18 which says "It is good that you grasp one thing and also not let go of the other; for the one who fears God comes forth with both of them."   Hence, I would tell people I'm Cal-menian.  The early formation of this perspective came from a career missionary-teacher in Japan that I respected who said "it's easier to take something to it's logical conclusion than hold something in divine tension.

Then I read GK Chesterton's classic entitled Orthodoxy.  In chapter one, he made one of the most compelling cases I've ever read for my shyly held theology of "both."  He so crystallized my thinking, that I jumped for joy.  Someone of reputation and respect had laid out a case that would really carry weight.  I didn't have to just think of my thoughts as homespun.  I felt liberated.  I also tested myself to make sure I wasn't just hunting for bias confirmation.  I felt I was being true to myself and not trying to accomodate myself.

Since then, I've seen over and over how seemingly contradictory theological doctrines are in fact just a picture of the cross - which have vertical (Godward) and horizontal (manward) dimensions.  They are not in opposition, but in tension and require us to "die" to the desire to take things to its logical conclusion so its theological tidy and clean in our heads.

Here is just a small sampling:

1. Sovereignty of God (vertical) vs. free will of man (horizontal).

2. Rest in God (vertical) vs. working out our salvation with fear and trembling (horizontal).

3. Holy in God's sight (vertical) vs. Be ye holy (horizontal).

4. The "land" is yours (vertical) vs.  go take the land (horizontal).

5. Prophetic revelation (vertical) vs. apostolic wisdom (horizontal).

6. Predestined (vertical) vs. God desires all men to be saved (horizontal).

7. "rhema" word (vertical) vs. "logos" word (horizontal).

8. Grace (vertical - book of romans) vs. "works" (horizontal - book of james).

9. Son of God (vertical) vs. Son of Man (horizontal). 

The list could go on and on.  At some point,  I'll circle back to annotate each point more with scriptures and examples. But I think you get my drift here.

Now mind you, this is not an intellectually "weak" way of approaching things, as in "Oh, with this kind of  theology, you don't need to rigorously work things out."    It's not a cop-out theology or just a theology of "balance"  that in some quarters carries the implication of lack of fire or passion.  My contention is that in fact it takes more intellectual grit to embrace both than posit that one position is exclusively correct.  I believe that's exactly what God wants, because that is the cross.  The cross not only has a theology in and of its self that is central to Christianity, but it also pictures for us how to think theologically correct.

And where the cross is, there is life.