We can’t have dialogue until we agree on basis point

Milton Lewis
Northern Hills
UMC, San Antonio

I appreciate the kinder, gentler tone of recent offerings on the Viewpoint page.
I agree with Dan Adams (“We should be able to discuss differences like brothers,” Feb. 20) that “we should be able to discuss differences like brothers” (and sisters, Dan; don’t forget sisters).
I agree with J. David Trawick (“Can we agree on boundaries for UM dialogue?” Feb. 20) that we need to agree on some boundaries for dialogue, and I especially respond to his suggestion that maybe we don’t so much need to identify the outer fences as a “core theology.”
The problem is that I don’t think we can do that.
Mr. Adams says, “I accept that Jesus was the ‘word made flesh,’ but we are called to be that.”
Really?
Christianity and the church are based on the simple proposition that Jesus is Lord, that Jesus is God’s unique, decisive and ultimate (Paul Tillich says “final”) self-revelation. Jesus as the Christ thus becomes the basis and judge of all other claims of revelation.
This point is not about doctrine, or orthodoxy, or liberal and conservative. This point is about “core theology” in its simplest and most radical expression.
Mr. Adams may think of himself, like Jesus, as “both human and divine.” That may be true in the sense of saying that we are created in the image of God.
But Mr. Adams is not the Christ, as Jesus is. Mr. Adams is not Lord, as Jesus is. Mr. Adams does not have authority to forgive my sin or to say, “Come, follow me,” as Jesus does.
Mr. Adams cannot make me a new creation, as Jesus Christ can. Mr. Adams was not the one with God from the beginning, as is Jesus. If Mr. Adams died on the cross, it would not reconcile me to God, as Jesus’ death on the cross reconciled me to God.
My point: I am skeptical of any authentic Christian dialogue when we cannot agree on the most basic assumption of Christianity, namely that Jesus is Lord.