I came across this in Ross Clifford and Philip Johnson’s book The Cross Is Not Enough: Living as Witnesses to the Resurrection…
Here is an incident that the non-Christian photojournalist George Gittoes witnessed. He was with a United Nations medical team providing emergency relief to people displaced by civil strife in Rwanda. He describes a memorable incident:
It was horrific; we saw thousands of women and children killed before our eyes. We were going in and getting the wounded out as the the people were machining and shooting and killing. Suddenly there was this guy standing in the middle of the people who were dying all around him. He just began giving this sermon in one of those melodious African voices, mingling English and French and Rwandan, quoting sections of the New Testament, those bits which give hope…passages to do with the resurrection.
Gittoes took a photograph of this man dubbed “The Preacher,” but he did not see the man again and has no idea if he survived. He goes on: “‘The Preacher’ …represents what I think religion should do, raise people up, make people feel human and spiritually alive and give them courage and faith.” The medical team could offer nothing despite all their skills and technology, but with the risen Christ there was hope for eternity. (pg 48)
(The photograph became the basis for a painting that won the Blake Prize for religious art in Australia. For more on the story behind it see: https://www.commontheology.com/vol1no1july2002/thepreacher.htm [link no longer alive].)
I find it encouraging how non-believers are being increasingly drawn to resurrection themes and expressions. It is equally encouraging and also intriguing how Ross and Johnson, believers in an eternal hell, confess a hope beyond what they are allowed to believe all throughout this book as they did in this context: “with the risen Christ there was hope for eternity.”
This book I believe is a pivotal work for our understanding of the place, significance and application of the resurrection. Here is what I think the crux is and why it is such an important book. Ross and Philips state:
“We are not calling just for a refocus on the resurrection; we are calling for an understanding of the resurrection as the lynchpin of Christianity.” (p 35)
“By our lack of clarity and our failure to positively share the truth of the resurrection we actually help to create the cultural space into which alternative afterlife views now pour.” (p 48)
The growing attention on the resurrection by the Church is very encouraging. It is the only authentic hope we can give to one another in the Body and to the world. Social justice is vital as in the medical teams that were there in Rwanda but it simply points to what it represents, the Shalom of God that is coming through Christ’s resurrection power to redeem and restore His lost and broken creation!
Hallelujah! Christ has risen…He has risen indeed!
4/16/2014 Here are stories of new life following the restorative justice of forgiveness and reconciliation in Rwanda.
2 comments
Philip Johnson
As the co-author of The Cross Is Not Enough, it is encouraging to see that it is being discussed and reflected on in forums like this blog. That readers are finding it thought provoking and invigorating is very rewarding to know.
I feel though that a clarifying word is warranted concerning this excerpt about the Rwandan massacre. We did not give a detailed account of the incident as (a) we previously said a bit more about it in a 1998 book and (b) it is a story that has a life of its own as regards press reports, George Gittoes’ own website, and the subsequent story behind the award-winning painting “The Preacher”.
The refugees who were slaughtered at the place where Gittoes was present were mostly from the Tutsi people. Many Tutsi people participate in the Roman Catholic Church, and of course various Protestant churches included people who were victims of the Rwandan genocide.
The incident Gittoes saw where “the Preacher” stood up should be seen in context. First, the refugees knew they were going to die as the Hutu militia were approaching. Second, most of the refugees were probably affiliated with the churches. The Preacher made a pastoral response in the crisis by calling to mind the New Testament passages about Christ’s resurrection, the comforting hope of everlasting life via Christ’s resurrection and the hope of the resurrection of the dead.
The most one can say is that the Preacher spoke of hope to people who were about to die. Those who already trusted in Christ were being pastorally reassured by what the Preacher said. Perhaps others there who had no commitment to Christ may have acted in faith in immediate response to the Preacher’s words. However that is conjecture as we do not know if anyone on that day responded in faith to God from hearing the Preacher.
Our comments on the story need to be read and understood in a specific context. The context concerns two essential points. One is that The Preacher offered words of comforting hope to those who already believed in Christ’s resurrection, and to those who may have responded in faith to Christ via The Preacher’s words. Hence for those persons who believed in the resurrection there was indeed “hope for eternity”. The second point is our final sentence. The UN medical team and Gittoes as photographer could do no more for these people facing death. Gittoes as a non-Christian was impressed that a preacher could stand up and reaffirm the resurrection hope just a massacre was about to occur. Hence our sentence: “The medical team could offer nothing despite all their skills and technology, but with the risen Christ there was hope for eternity.” The hope for eternity comment is not being applied by us as authors to hint at universal soteriology for everyone who perished in that massacre.
This blogpost does helpfully acknowledge that neither Clifford nor I hold to a universalist soteriology. However it seems as if in the blogosphere parts of our book are being discussed and then construed by a few readers as possibly allowing for a universalist soteriology; or that our theology has implications that lends support for a universalist soteriology. The thought seems to be, if I am understanding the various blogs correctly, that our words about Christ’s resurrection have implications that presumably ought to take us (as authors) and presumably us (the church generally) into advocating a broader soteriology.
One of the basic points which we make in this book is that God’s judgment is not about whether someone has heard the gospel message about Christ. God’s “last judgment” is on the basis of our human response to God by what is already present in the creation and in our very being (or hearts). The moral law is written in our hearts and is embedded in creation. That is the point Paul makes in Romans 10:14-18, which is alluded to in a sidebar on page 128 of our book about general and special revelation. The “last judgment” criterion is not about did we hear the gospel of Christ preached?
One of the powerful effects of Christ’s resurrection does concern the ultimate transformation of the earth and the inclusion of animals in the new earth (that’s the subject of another book to come). The cosmic effect about the creation and animals is often a theological blindspot and hence an “unpaid bill of the resurrection” as far as Christians living and applying biblical teaching. So Christ’s resurrection involves the victory of God over chaos, sin and death, and involves creation’s renewal and animals being raised to life on the new earth.
However, the cosmic effect of Christ’s resurrection, as we discuss the theology of it in The Cross Is Not Enough, is not suggesting or implying the salvation or redemption of all human beings. Also, while images and ideas about resurrection are scattered throughout popular culture today, the basic point is that Christians have a missiological, dialogical, theological opportunity to engage people who are not followers of Christ to consider the lynchpin of Christianity: Christ resurrected. In this respect we have also posed the question for Christians to reflect upon (page 107): “Dare we contemplate that maybe people desire the resurrection but without the baggage of Christianity?” This is but one of several clarion calls in the book for Christians to wake up: we may be part of the problem in creating stumbling blocks for non-Christians but clearly the call is for us to be positive Christ-centred agents of transformation.
Blessings as you read the book.
glwadmin
Thank you Mr. Johnson for your gracious and detailed response. We very much appreciate that you have taken the time to give the context of your passage on Gittoes and explain further the intention of your book. (Also your book on the nature of animals and their place in the kingdom looks intriguing!)
The points you made in regard to the message given by the pastor ie., that it was for the not yet slain believers as well as a way to evangelize those who needed the gospel for the first time at that moment are understood. I did not mean to imply that you intended anything more than your overall context of evangelicalism allowed. But my point was that we evangelicals do indeed make statements and hear statements that deep inside we as believers hope are what God has promised to be “far above all we can ever ask or imagine.”
I wanted to say though that whether I held to a “wider hope” theology or not your book would remain in my mind one of the most important books for the 21 century church. I bought quantity and have been giving them away. Thank you for this outstanding and practical treatise on the resurrection.
Comments are closed.