1. "In Christ" is a Pauline catchphrase, but what does it mean? Commentators aren't very helpful. They say things like it means "in union" with Christ, but that just substitutes one spacial metaphor for another. Or they say it means "in the sphere" of Christ," which again, substitutes one spacial metaphor for another. They are paraphrasing the catchphrase rather than defining it.
2. Just considered as a spatial metaphor, the metaphor implies a point of contrast between inside and outside. These are mutually definable. What it means to be inside depends in part on what it means to be outside. Let's consider some generic associations for people in the ancient world:
i) It was dangerous to be outside at night. You could get hopelessly lost. You could be attacked by nocturnal predators (e.g. the Asiatic lion). They can see you but you can't see them. You could step on a venomous snake. Crime was higher at night (that's still the case).
ii) You didn't want to get caught in a storm (e.g. Ecclesiastes 13). You seek shelter.
iii) If an army invaded, you needed to take refuge inside a fortified city. You didn't want to be left outside the defensive walls.
3. Let's consider biblical connotations of the inside/outside dichotomy:
i) Inside the garden of Eden, with the river, fruit trees, tame animals, and tree of life. Expulsion from Eden: an inhospitable wilderness. Thirst, mortality, vulnerability.
ii) Safe inside Noah's ark, doomed to die in the flood if stranded outside the ark.
iii) Hell as outer darkness
iv) The new Jerusalem. The damned are barred from entering (Rev 21:27).
ii) The parable of the wise and foolish virgins. The foolish virgins are shut out. Find themselves on the wrong side of the door.
ii) The plagues of Egypt:
• The plague of hail. Better dive for cover lest you be struck dead by hailstones.
• Plague of darkness. Sunlight in Goshen, pitch black outside Goshen.
• Plague of the firstborn. Israelites inside their huts, with blood on the door jam, are safe from the angel of death. Outside the angel of death strikes the firstborn Egyptians.
4. However, the point of contrast isn't merely negative, where to be inside simply shields you from what lies outside. What lies inside can be good. A home that contain food and drink, a bed, a fireplace, and companionship.
Take Paul's adoptive metaphor (e.g. Eph 1:5). Consider an orphan who's adopted. Who suddenly has all the benefits of an "instant" family by virtue of his adoption. His condition instantly changes for the better by virtue of his relationship to his adoptive father (in the ancient world) or adoptive mother and father.
Consider if the most popular student in school befriends a loner. He befriends a low-status student whom other students have shunned. He brings the classmate into his social circle. That instantly elevates the standing of the loner. The friendship brings perks. He now has access to the same things. So long as he is with his popular benefactor, he can do the same things.The benefactor shares his good fortune with the unfortunate classmate.
By the same token, to be "in Christ" is to enjoy all the blessings that flow from the atonement. Because the atonement is vicarious, the benefits are made available to the redeemed by means of their relationship with the Redeemer.
Have you read either of Grant Macaskill's works on union/participation? Incredible works. I consider his Union with Christ to be one of the most important books I've ever read....
ReplyDeleteNice to hear from you after such a long time. I don't object to the concept of union with Christ. My immediate point is that just using that phrase to explain "in Christ" doesn't explain anything, but just relocates the question, since the question then is: "Okay, so what does 'union with Christ mean."? So that, too, has to be unpacked. Sometimes commentators think they are explaining something when they've done nothing to advance understanding. They can suffer from blind spots in that regard.
DeleteThank you! I still always read the blog but haven't had much of an online presence myself these days. I agree with you on the need for unpacking and it's also possible that the phrase means different things in different contexts. I really just wanted to draw your attention to those books. Would love to read your thoughts on them if you ever get the chance. It seems to be a very popular topic right now. I have Constantine Campbell's book on the concept in Paul but haven't read it yet. If I remember correctly he deals with each usage of 'in Christ' individually. Carl Mosser is working on a book on the subject as well. He has a bunch of interesting papers on it up on Academia.edu, some in particular arguing for the importance of the concept for the reformers.
Delete