Missiology, spiritual families, and the confrontation type

Missiology, the essay says, is an important field for relations with other religions or cultures. Because it deals with religious and cultural diversity, it helps one understand how Christianity interacts with other cultures and religions and is joined to them, how it spreads and is changed, and, through comparison, what is distinctive in Christian faith. It can offer inspiration for a life of faith and for theological models. In the correlation of Christ and culture, it can also be used to look at ethical beliefs alongside sociological or psychological variables, and to find or design various types of ethics based on Christian faith, which raises the question that Christian morality may be expressed in more than one way.

In the medieval period it looks at spiritual-cultural families it names as important: Tertullian, Augustine, the family the source names Abe East, and Thomas, with types named as new law, natural law, a synthetic or formative type, a dualistic or reciprocating type, and a conversion type. The Tertullian family sets revelation against reason and regards revelation as the source of all the knowledge needed for salvation. The Augustine family moves from revelation toward reason, emphasizes faith in order to know, and gives change rather than improving cultural wisdom. Gilson’s dividing of spiritual families in relation to revelation and reason is placed as having paved a useful road for classifying Christian ethical types theologically. The Christian life moves between God known in Christ through faith and Scripture, and God known in nature through what is inherent in culture. The confrontation type takes as given that Christ alone is the authority, and that Jesus Christ came to redeem sin. Tertullian argued that when Christians are entangled with a pagan culture they should stay away from philosophy, music, art, and literature, put Christ at the center, and obey his commandments strictly, with an ethics of action that includes brotherly love, non-resistance, and staying away from a lustful gaze. Tolstoy is placed as opposing a church that, in his view, is hostile to humility, repentance, meekness, enterprise, and life, and values violence, self-assertion, rigidity, and death, over against the church of Christ. He condemned science as not improving human life, and used his literary gift for parable tales, including Master and Man. Despite great diversity among groups that share this confrontation, a common point is that all acknowledge Christ’s authority and reject the existing culture.

Adaptation, synthesis, and a paradoxical dualism

The adaptation type is illustrated by the Gnostics, who understood Christianity also as a philosophical system, saw Christ mainly as savior of the soul, not as creator or as lord of the social world, and relatively set aside ethical teaching about the whole of life. Christianity emerged in the midst of Jewish society and, through Paul and various missionaries, entered the Greco-Roman world; Jewish Christians wrestled with Christ and culture, and conflict with Judaizers, and later with the Nazarenes and the Ebionites, is placed as suggesting groups with more Jewish coloring, while loyalty to Jesus Christ was maintained. Among figures of a cultural Christianity the essay names Lactantius, who in Constantine’s settlement period tried to join Roman thought and Christianity. By separating religion and ethics, Gnosticism came to develop very differently from the church’s original appearance, and the problems it raised became sharper with what is called Christian civilization. Medieval society, the essay says, was very religious, and that religion was Christianity.

Synthesis wants a both/and, not an either/or, yet, as the essay places it, cannot affirm both a cultural Christ and culture, because it tries to harmonize Christ’s spirit and the opinion of the day by simplifying the Lord’s nature without warrant from the New Testament. It holds that Jesus is God and at the same time a human being, one person with two natures that cannot be confused or separated, keeps a strong distinctiveness between Christ and culture, evaluates culture positively, and does not completely merge the two. Paradoxical dualism arises in the encounter with God: the person is on the human side, yet tries to hear and interpret the Word that comes, and so cannot but speak, in that tension, of revelation and reason, law and grace, Creator and Redeemer. Attempts at synthesis have been fiercely attacked: by radicals as a disguised joining of the gospel to culture, by cultural Christians as old-fashioned, and most strongly by dualists who orient toward both. Dualists see all culture and all human effort as affected by a deep, wide fall, and, with Paul, place salvation not in a religious or cultural institution or in human effort, but in God’s grace through Jesus Christ. The first paradox is of law and grace; the second, of God’s wrath and mercy, described also in the meeting of what is good and what is fearsome in nature. This page stays with these four placements as the essay sets them out, and does not add later official theological positions. The same Korean report, at fuller length, is on CampusDown.

Sources

1. Missiology is seen as one important field that deals with relations with other religions or cultures. For example, Christians sometimes receive help, by using a dualistic way of thinking, in understanding and dealing with relations with other cultures and religions. Because missiology is a study that deals with religious diversity and cultural diversity, it plays an important role in understanding how Christianity interacts with other cultures and religions and is integrated with them. This helps in understanding how Christianity spreads and is transformed in various cultures and regions. Also, through interaction and comparison with other religions, missiology helps in understanding more clearly the distinctive faith principles and values of Christianity. This is helping in grasping more plainly the essential features of Christianity. In this way, missiology shows how, through dialogue with other cultures or religions, Christianity can understand its own faith in depth and develop it. This can be seen as able to offer important inspiration for a life of faith and for theological models. Looking at it in the correlation of Christ and culture, it can be used to examine the interaction and influence between ethical beliefs and sociological and psychological variables, and can be applied to discovering or designing various types of ethics based on Christian faith. This raises the question that the forms and beliefs of Christian morality may be expressed in various ways. In the medieval period, important spiritual-cultural groups, the family of Tertullian, the family of Augustine, the family the source names Abe East, and the family of Thomas, can also be looked at. An explanation of the groups’ interpretation of revelation and of their approaches is included, and there are “new law,” “natural law,” a “synthetic or formative type,” a “dualistic or reciprocating type,” and a “conversion type.” These types offer various approaches to ethics based on Christian faith, and each type has its features and meaning. The Tertullian family can be seen as an otherworldly type that sets revelation against reason and regards revelation as the source of all knowledge needed for salvation, and the Augustine family can be seen as moving from revelation in the direction of reason, emphasizing faith in order to know, and giving change rather than improving cultural wisdom. To understand the essence of these various systems of classification, typological correlations must be brought out, and more comprehensive models can be approached. Therefore, in order to find out and discover how they interact, an understanding of essence and traits is essential. In this way, Gilson’s dividing of spiritual families in relation to the use of revelation and reason can be seen as having paved a good road for classifying Christian ethical types theologically. This is because the Christian life moves between two poles: “God in Christ,” known through faith and Scripture, and “God in nature,” known through the nature inherent in culture. The confrontation type takes as given “Christ alone is the authority,” that Jesus Christ came to redeem the sin of the world, that is, in a somewhat personal sense, of a person. This position indicates a position in which Christians acknowledge only Christ as Christ and firmly reject the authority of culture. Christians acknowledge the teaching of Jesus Christ and the authority of Christ as the foundation of Christianity. Hence Christians tend not to acknowledge any authority other than Christ. The uncompromising position seems to indicate a position in which Christians acknowledge only Christ as Christ and firmly reject the authority of culture. Tertullian spoke of opposition between culture and Christian faith, and argued that when Christians are entangled with a pagan culture and with that culture’s conduct and language, they should stay away from cultural activities such as philosophy, music, art, literature, and the like. Tertullian said that Jesus Christ should be put at the center and that his commandments should be obeyed strictly. He emphasized the importance of an ethics of action in Christian faith, and explained brotherly love, non-resistance toward anger and sin, and staying away from a lustful gaze. He argued that original sin is transferred through society, and looked at it that if there had been no evil culture and way of upbringing that a child meets from birth, the soul would have stayed in a good state. Mentioning the opposition of Christian faith and culture, he spoke negatively of cultural aspects such as the rites of pagan religion, idol worship, worldly greed, commercialism, and the like. It is an opposition between the church and the church of Christ. This opposition occurs between a position that regards the church as an organization that claims itself to be without error and defends the state and privilege (the church), and a position that the church of Christ values meekness, enterprise, and life (the church of Christ). One of the oppositions Tolstoy and his viewpoint deal with is the claim that the church is hostile to “Christian humility, repentance, meekness, enterprise, life,” and is an anti-Christian institution (the church) that values violence, self-assertion, rigidity, and death, and the position of the church of Christ. Tolstoy and his philosophical position condemn science, and claim that the truths and knowledge science is said to hold do not improve human life. Tolstoy’s position is that the ordinary farmer and the wise person are ignorant, and that science’s special ability and attraction may be falsehood and decoration. Tolstoy used his great literary ability not to write collections of sermons and pamphlets on non-resistance and true religion, but to write parable tale stories, including Master and Man and a tale the essay titles with the line that God is there where that quality is. A very diverse set of groups is included: Eastern Catholics and Western Catholics, the Orthodox and sectarian Protestants, millenarians and mystics, and others. Despite such diversity, a common point could be found in that all acknowledge the authority of Jesus Christ and reject the existing culture. As for the adaptation type, the Gnostics are a subgroup among Christian believers who interpret the interaction between Christ and culture differently. This movement understood Christianity not only as religious belief but also as a philosophical system, and defined the relation with culture metaphysically. They recognized Christ mainly as savior of the soul, and did not regard him as creator of all things or as lord of the social world. They were regarded as a gathering that resolved the tension between Christ and culture and abandoned a personal interest in culture. The Gnostics set aside ethical teaching about not only religious worship but all sides of life, and raised important questions about the relations between religion and culture, and between religion and ethics. This attitude formed an understanding of the relations between religion and culture, and between religion and ethics, and influenced the medieval period and later Christian history. The Gnostic movement, while interpreting the relation between Christ and culture from a new angle, tried to keep a core part of Christ and of religion, and this appeared as an important aspect of talking about the interaction between Christ and culture. This interaction can be viewed as the adaptation type. Christianity emerged in the midst of Jewish society. Through Paul and various missionaries it entered the Greco-Roman world, and exchanged a complex interaction with various cultural elements contained in the Mediterranean melting pot of that time. As a result, Jewish Christians, wrestling with the problem of Christ and culture, took various positions. The passage that mentions conflict between Paul and the Judaizers, and later conflict between Paul and the Nazarenes and the Ebionites, suggests that there were groups or movements that had more Jewish coloring than Christian coloring. Loyalty to Jesus Christ was maintained. The Gnostic movement is an important movement that influenced Christian history. This movement interpreted the church as a religious association, and looked at Christianity as an independent religion. Also, this movement regarded Christ as revealer of religious truth, and regarded him only as an object of religious worship, not as lord of the whole of life or as creator of all things. Gnosticism emphasized the religious aspect and relatively did not emphasize the ethical aspect, and this can be understood as part of accepting the cultural aspect of a pluralistic Christianity. Among representative figures of this cultural Christianity are various theologians and politicians, such as Lactantius, who in the settlement period of the emperor Constantine tried to combine Roman thought and Christianity. However, Gnosticism, by separating religion and ethics, came to develop very differently from the church’s original appearance. Religion became a metaphysical or mystical sect such as “gnosis,” and the separation of religion and ethics brought religious change. The problems Gnosticism raised in relation to the relation of Christ and religion, and of religion and culture, became still sharper together with the development of so-called Christian civilization. There is no room for doubt that medieval society was very religious, and that that religion was Christianity. As for synthesis, there have always been Christians who, when dealing with the problem of Christ and culture, think they stand in a “both/and” relation, not an “either/or” relation. But for these people, they cannot affirm both a cultural Christ and culture. This is because they try to harmonize the spirit of Jesus Christ and the opinion of the day with each other by simplifying the Lord’s nature without warrant from the New Testament. In synthesis, along with maintaining that distinctiveness, they hold the paradoxical belief that Jesus, as their Lord, is God and at the same time a human being, that is, one person who has two “natures” that cannot be confused or separated. In the case of cultural Christians, they believe that a harmony of the gospel and the spirit of the age is possible, because the gospel was revealed in the form of speculative truth or value and of practical knowledge about Christ and culture. Synthesis appears as a group or an individual that wants to approach Christ and culture in a harmonizing way. These people explore a positive relation between faith as Christians and culture, and try to combine these two values harmoniously. Synthesis tries to find a balance among Christ’s teaching, Christ’s life, and culture. They try to harmonize effectively the religious and the secular sides. Some Christians regard Christ and culture as either/or, and give priority to one of the two. Other people take a position that affirms both. Synthesis is the position that acknowledges both in the relation between Christ and culture. It sees the nature of Jesus Christ as the core of faith, and believes that Christ possesses the nature of God and the nature of a human being at the same time. This means that synthesis, while maintaining a strong distinctiveness between Christ and culture, has Christ as the center of faith and evaluates culture positively. Synthesis recognizes the duality between Christ and culture and does not completely merge the two. They understand that Christ’s nature and humanity, faith and culture, are different domains. A Christian’s faith and cultural practice may feel similar, but synthesis acknowledges the separation between the two. This is because, by doing so, they regard it as possible to see Jesus Christ and his teaching as the center of faith and still come into harmony with the cultural situation. Synthesis is an approach that values highly the Christian’s nature and faith while also treasuring culture. This interest is one of the important aspects of Christian history and doctrine, and refers to the approach of Christians who want to combine faith and practice through a harmony of Christ and culture. This synthetic viewpoint reflects a continuing effort to find harmony between Christ and culture, and tries to find a connecting point between faith and everyday life. They largely agreed with other types belonging to a neutral zone. The point of difference from them arises when one analyzes the dual character that the Christian life has and tries to bind elements that differ from each other into a single structure. Paradoxical dualism: in the encounter with God, the person is on the human side, but on the other side tries to hear with the ear the Word of God that comes and to interpret it, and so, in the midst of this tension, cannot but speak about revelation and reason, law and grace, Creator and Redeemer. This is called paradoxical dualism. Attempts to synthesize Christ and culture have received fierce attack throughout Christian history. Radicals criticized it as a disguised strategy to integrate the gospel effectively into culture, and cultural Christians criticized the synthesists as trying to maintain an old-fashioned way of thinking. But the most powerful opposition came from among dualists who orient toward both Christ and culture. Dualism, in dealing with the relation of Christ and culture, unlike the synthesists, faced a more complex problem. This problem is related to the relation between God and human beings, and is not a question one asks oneself but a question God throws to human beings. Dualists regarded as important the viewpoint on God’s grace and human sin. They understood deeply how deep and wide human fall and sin have spread, and saw that all culture and all human effort are affected by the essence of this fall. This fall affects human nature and culture, and even all domains of religion and ethics. Paul argued that no religious or cultural institution can save a human being placed in sin, and explained that the law condemns all human beings and that God’s grace and glory can be obtained only through Jesus Christ. Paul said that in Christ, through the face of Jesus Christ, one comes to know God’s glory and wisdom, and that through this it is a faith independent from all religious and cultural institutions. Through this, Paul emphasized Christ and His saving role, and presented Christ as the central element that saves all human beings from sin. Dualism emphasizes that through God’s grace a human being can receive salvation from sin, and believed that this salvation is accomplished not through human effort but through God’s grace and love. They said that a human being cannot overcome sin alone and needs God’s help and love. The first paradox is about the paradox of law and grace. The dualist claims that, while seeing Christ’s law as a norm for ordinary human beings, human beings cannot follow that law and fall into the dilemma of sin. And when the sinner clings to divine mercy, that law is restored again in some form. The second paradox is about the paradox of God’s wrath and mercy. The dualist describes the encounter of God and the human soul, and God’s victory and human defeat, in paradoxical language, and claims that God is Trinity and is the One who is mercy and wrath. Also, human beings meet what is good and what is fearsome in nature, witness God’s power, and understand God’s mercy and wrath. This page stays with confrontation, adaptation, synthesis, and paradoxical dualism as the essay places them, and does not add later official theological positions.

Last updated: 14 November 2026