![\"\"](\"https:\/\/thomasjayoord.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/04\/img_0004_small1.jpg\")
<\/p>\nOne of the more positive developments in contemporary theology is the renewed focus on mission. Missional theology comes in many forms, but I want to offer a form I think captures consistently the implications of saying God is on a mission.<\/p>\n
In Luke\u2019s Gospel, Jesus says the following: \u201cToday, salvation has come to this household. For the Son of Man came to seek and save the lost\u201d (19:9-10).<\/p>\n
Jesus says these words to the rich man, Zacchaeus. But we find the message repeatedly in the Bible: God seeks and saves. The missional adventure these words inspire prompts me to wonder:<\/p>\n
This question may seem boring. But upon closer examination, I think we\u2019ll find it\u2019s revolutionary!<\/p>\n
In fact, the missional theology emerging from believing God lovingly pursues creation radically alters the status quo.[1]<\/a>\u00a0The God who seeks and saves is a God on a mission!<\/p>\n \u201cOf course, God wants to save us all,\u201d someone might say. \u201cWho would argue otherwise?\u201d<\/p>\n Unfortunately, a host of theological voices in the past and present argue this way. The theology supporting these voices is sometimes hidden or unconscious. But sometimes the not-really-wanting-to-save-all God is explicitly preached.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s start with the easy pickings.<\/p>\n Those who believe God\u2019s sovereignty and election means God predestines some to hell say God doesn\u2019t want to save everyone. At least they would say God\u2019s effective will doesn\u2019t offer salvation to all. They argue for predestination, despite St. Peter\u2019s claim that God is not willing that any should perish but all should come to repentance (2 Pt. 3:9).<\/p>\n Their peculiar interpretation of this verse, in my opinion, undermines their own doctrine of divine sovereignty. I wonder, why isn\u2019t a sovereign God supposedly capable of anything also able to save all?<\/p>\n Those in the Wesleyan tradition walk in step with theologians who reject this view of predestination. Wesleyans, instead, affirm genuine creaturely freedom. In philosophical terms, Wesleyans affirm \u201clibertarian\u201d freedom. [2]<\/a> The God on a mission is not interested in predestinarian status quo.<\/p>\n John Wesley stressed the Apostle Paul\u2019s admonition to \u201cwork out your own salvation, with fear and trembling, for God is at work in you both to will and to work for God\u2019s good pleasure\u201d (Phil. 2:12). Wesley believes passages such as this one argue God\u2019s loving action (\u201cprevenient grace\u201d) precedes and makes possible free creaturely responses. He advocates a theology of freedom, not predestination. This freedom has limits, of course. But it is genuine freedom nonetheless.<\/p>\n The God who wants to save all, however, may not actually save all out of respect for creaturely freedom. Wesleyans can affirm a missional theology that says God\u2019s intent is universal salvation. Yet they can also say universal salvation may not occur. After all, free creatures may choose to reject God\u2019s loving invitation. And God respects such decisions, despite their devastating consequences.<\/p>\n An important step toward a consistent missional theology, then, is to argue that the God on a mission does not predestine some to hell. God\u2019s intention is for all to find salvation. And free creatures play some role in the fulfillment of God\u2019s intentions.<\/p>\n Other steps must also be taken if missional theology is to be robust. I intend to take those steps in future essays. I intend to flesh out an answer to my previous question: \u201cWhat would it mean to believe Jesus\u2019 loving pursuit of the lost \u2013 which seems to include you, me, everyone, and everything \u2013 tells us something essential about who God is?\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\nOvercoming the Status Quo<\/strong><\/h3>\n
Conclusion<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n