Comments on Leonard Sweet’s “Out of the Question . . . Into the Mystery”

The following comments come from excerpts from Leonard Sweet’s Out of the Question . . . Into the Mystery.

Quote 1: “The modern church has a propositional attitude rather than a relational attitude” (30). 

Granted, no church should approach Jesus with the heart of a Pharisee that thinks one can earn one’s relationship with God. Nor can one take on a Gnostic attitude that search for a secret knowledge, propositional or otherwise, should be a means to access God. Sweet would likely agree, but here he polarizes propositional truths and relationship. How can churches have meaningful relationships within their own communities or at large apart from adherence to propositional truth? For instance, Sweet argues that churches should place primacy on relationships (relational ecclesiology). This, however, is a truth claim that is propositional in nature. Perhaps Sweet should reconsider his ecclesiology. Propositional truth informs any ecclesiology because ecclesiology can only exist if disseminated in the form of propositional truth, just as Sweet’s statement demonstrates. The question, one must ask, is where do these propositional truth claims, which make up Sweet’s ecclesiology, arise.

Quote 2: “Right thoughts and right actions are produced by right relationships” (31).
In context, Sweet seems to be arguing for the importance of right action. The Apostle James declares that “faith without action is dead”; therefore, Sweet, at first, appears to be on solid ground. But why does Sweet subjugate thoughts and actions to relationships? How can one have or maintain a meaningful and right relationship if one is not acting and thinking in a positive manner in the context of that relationship? It would seem that thoughts and actions (good or bad) inform the quality of one’s relationship with other people. While the Christian’s relationship with God is firm and secure (and therefore right because it is based on the merit of Christ), his/her temporal relationship with God, while still in the flesh, can certainly be strained. Otherwise, why do Paul and John rebuke the Christian communities? Why does God discipline His children?
Quote 3: “Now it’s time to acknowledge that faith is not a problem to be solved or a question to be answered, but a mystery to be lived—the mystery of a real, live relationship with God—the GodLife relationship” (31).
So, the foundation of faith, according to Sweet, is no less than Christ Himself. While this sounds so good, so biblical, and so orthodox, Sweet is making a critical error by disassociating propositional truths from his definition of faith. Sweet emphasizes the mystery of faith, but why does faith have to be so mysterious? Granted, one must wonder how so great a God as Jehovah God would love lost sinners like us. While the fact that He loves us is mysterious in the sense that we must (or at least should) respond in wonder, we still (by faith) believe the propositional truth claims (as recorded in Scripture) that He does indeed love us. Our faith must be informed by the claims of Scripture; otherwise, ours is a faith without any foundation and therefore no faith at all (just a meaningless, mystical, mysterious search).

Quote 4: “Faith is not something you have, but something you live. Not something you believe, but something you practice” (31-32).
Here, Sweet clearly demonstrates his adherence to what I call neoorthopraxy. Let me explain: Orthopraxy, as used in this dissertation, is right action informed by an orthodox view of Scripture. Orthodoxy can have a wide range of meanings but here it will only be referring to the traditional beliefs of conservative evangelical Christians.  Neoorthopraxy elevates orthopraxy over orthodoxy by affirming and applying a postmodern epistemology to the exegesis of Scripture which produces uncertainty concerning any meaning that may arise.  Like orthopraxy, neoorthopraxy is concerned with right action; however, that action is constantly being informed by one’s experience instead of arising solely from one’s beliefs because one’s beliefs are held with skepticism produced by a postmodern epistemological approach to Scripture. Such an approach produces theological views which are not wholly biblical because they do not arise solely from the words of Scripture. In this dissertation, the term biblical refers to any teaching derived from the study of Scripture that is held by conservative evangelicals.

James seems to acknowledge that true faith is present before works and independent of works in 2:18 where he demonstrates his faith by his action. James could not possibly demonstrate his faith by his action unless his faith was present before his action. His faith precedes the action and stands independent of the action. Though faith is independent of action because salvation is based on the action of Christ alone, it is displayed outwardly in the life of the believer.