Chris Seay

It is no secret that Americans are not very well-versed about Christian doctrine and theology anymore, and such may shed some light about why profession of Christianity is far more prevalent than the practice thereof.

Chris Seay's particular concern, as expressed in The Gospel According to Jesus: A Faith that Restores All Things, is in regard to how people understand the concept of righteousness. His argument, expressed through his own discussion, discussion with a "who's who" list of trendy show more young Evangelicals, and through exposition of Genesis and Romans, is that righteousness is primarily the concept of "restorative justice," with other aspects being understood in that light.

There is much that is commendable in this book. The idea of having discussions among different people with their different perspectives is refreshing and thought-provoking. The author's emphasis on the need to live the life of faith is handled well, and the principles he establishes for right living (using the more trendy Evangelical term, shalom) are Biblically rooted and beneficial. The use of art in the middle of the book is intriguing and is probably more meaningful for people who are more inclined toward art than I am.

There were some doctrinal/theological matters in the book with which I had to wrestle, and I did appreciate the opportunity to do so. Seay advances the notion that sin (and, for that matter, righteousness) really should be understood more relationally than legalistically. He draws on Romans 7 to indicate that focus on sin leads to sin and, ultimately, not to doing righteousness. His points have some validity but are not absolutely true. There is benefit in understanding sin and righteousness in relational terms and the emphasis on the relationship with God; nevertheless, there are too many times where sin is discussed in judicial imagery for it to have nothing substantively "legalistic" about it. I was a little surprised that in a discussion about Christian focus that the author did not advance Philippians 4:8 in the discussion. While it is true that obsessively focusing on sin is ultimately destructive, never addressing the topic is no better-- the same Paul who tells believers to focus on the positive was not against explicit warning against sin (cf. Galatians 5:19-21, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Ephesians 5:3-5, etc.).

Ultimately, though, I must take theological issue with the ultimate theme of the book and especially as it relates to the title (The Gospel According to Jesus). It is evident, throughout the book, that Seay is wrestling with understanding the emphases prevalent in the "emergent" or "missional" strands of modern Evangelicalism in terms of the traditions of Christianity, and particularly in the Protestant tradition. Seay's main concern is that the Protestant understanding of justification by faith alone has not received the emphasis that he feels it deserves. Much of the book-- and his exposition of Romans-- is based in this theme.

He constantly addresses or refers to Luther and seems to want to place modern discussions of faith, justice, and righteousness in terms of the "500 year discussion" that he imagines is begun by Luther.

I do not adhere to the premises of justification by faith alone or of Christ's imputed righteousness, and the author does. As to imputed righteousness, such is an unnecessary concept-- as N.T. Wright ably demonstrates, righteousness is not a gas or some transferable property. Even with a view toward "restorative justice," such ends in a standing, not a property, and thus the idea of "imputed righteousness" is unnecessary. Yes, we are reconciled to God through Christ's work on the cross, and through Jesus' redemption we are reckoned as righteous, which is far different from having righteousness imputed to us (Romans 5:6-11, etc.).

The problem is not justification by faith, which Paul most eminently demonstrates is true in Romans, Ephesians, Galatians, and the like; the problem is with justification by faith alone, which the Bible itself repudiates (James 2:24). The difficulty comes from Seay's reliance on Luther and by presuming the discussion to be 500 years old. Interestingly, one of Seay's conversation companions speaks of Luther's imbalance in many things, and this is the major downfall of the book: while the discussion over the past 500 years has been directed by Luther's and Calvin's presentations, they were continuing the discussion prompted by the Scholastics before them, who were trying to reconcile and make sense of the body of tradition and belief bestowed upon them by Greek philosophy and the Western Christian tradition as understood through the Augustinian lens, itself dominated by the presence of Augustine, who is codifying the traditions that had accrued for the 400 years before him, and often at variance with that tradition and with the understanding of, say, Eastern Christendom.

The discussion, therefore, is really 2,000 years old, and in that light, Luther's emphases stand in stark contrast with Paul's purposes in the New Testament. Luther is over-reacting to works-based Roman Catholicism, indeed; Paul is opposing an ethnically-based view of salvation. It does not surprise me that Seay never tackles Romans 6 in his examination; the same Paul who speaks of justification by faith and says that no one is saved by keeping law speaks of dying to sin in baptism and being a slave of Christ. That image of the Christian-- the slave of Christ-- is conspicuously absent, and emphasis is placed in the book on the image of Jesus as the "Liberating King," but the nature of the "liberation" is never addressed. This is too bad, considering that liberation in American understanding is antithetical to the Biblical understanding of liberation-- not freedom to, but freedom from.

In the end, The Gospel According to Jesus is not the "Gospel According to Jesus". It is an over-emphasis of one aspect of the Gospel of Christ as elaborated upon by Paul at the expense of other aspects. Seay is right to say that too many Americans accept a works-based Gospel, and too many are convinced that good people are saved by virtue of being "good" and that "bad" can be counteracted by "good," which is false. However, to set forth a Gospel that goes too far the other way, one that has never comfortably handled the tension between man's inability to save himself with God's imperative for humans to live in a holy way, is not the solution. Shane Claiborne, in one of the conversations, speaks to the need for balance, and that is appreciated-- and that is exactly what is needed when talking about the Gospel of Christ. Human beings are redeemed, not on the basis of works or anything they could have done in "righteousness," but through the grace of God manifest through the death of Christ, indeed, as Titus 3:3-5 indicates. But they are saved by the washing of regeneration of washing (baptism) and the renewal of the Holy Spirit, in order to become heirs in hope and live lives of submission to the will of God in Christ, as Paul demonstrates in Titus 3:6-8.

The result, in many aspects, is similar despite the difference in paths: believers are to conform to the will of God. But the ends do not justify the means, and we must maintain a balanced, Biblical theology. The same Paul who says that no man is justified by works also says that everyone will be judged on the basis of what they have done in the flesh and must become obedient to God in Christ and conform to Him (cf. Romans 2:5-10, 6:1-23, 12:1-2). He does not sense a contradiction there, and neither do Peter (1 Peter 1:3-9, 22), John (1 John 2:1-6, 2 John 1:6-8), the Hebrew author (Hebrews 11), James (James 2:14-26), or especially Jesus (Matthew 7:13-14, 21-23)! Merely because Augustine or Luther could not reconcile the tension without finding reconciliation between faith and obedience manifest in works does not mean that there really is contradiction!

A final word about Seay's choice of "translation," one upon which he worked, The Voice. Personally, I fail to see the need for yet another dynamic equivalent "translation" that is as much exposition as a rendering of the relevant texts into English. The challenge I continue to have with such works is that the very people who are most liable to distort and abuse such "translations" are the ones to whom they are marketed-- those who otherwise do not understand much about the Bible and its message. Perhaps we should learn from those before us who understood that you leave the text alone and explain it in conversation, preaching, and teaching so that the full dimensions of God's Word-- not just the basic meaning, but all of its flavor, implications, and even its vagaries-- can be hallowed and respected.

The Gospel According to Jesus has the right spirit-- trying to get to a better understanding of the core doctrines of Christianity and helping people recover a truly Biblical way of looking at themselves and the world-- but suffers greatly from directing that spirit toward a resurgence of a doctrine that never really squared properly with the Scriptures. Justification by faith alone is not the true Gospel but is a perversion thereof, in the same category as the "works-based" salvation message condemned as its foil. Instead, we should promote and advance God's true Gospel-- justification by a faith that in all things submits to its Author and Perfector (Romans 1:16-17, Romans 6:1-23, 8:1-10, 12:1-2, Hebrews 12:1-2)!

*-- book received as part of an early review program. show less

A few months back I was able to pick a book to review from some recent releases from Thomas Nelson. And there it was. My book. The book that was written just for me. The Gospel According to Lost by Chris Seay.

So of course it was my choice for the review and they shipped it to me. I just finished it and if you love the show or even if you just “put up with” the show, this is a great book. It helps you put together the pieces of the story and the characters better because this outlines show more each of them and helps you to understand their underlying motives, backgrounds and personalities.

But the book does more than just outline the characters, it helps put their role and the role of the island in a perspective parallel with salvation, God’s love, and how we make choices in this journey. I enjoyed the parallels and how the writer elaborates on grace and it’s manifestation in “Jacob’s” acceptance and encouragement of our beloved “Lost” characters regardless of their spicy backgrounds. And I won’t even tell you the “couple” he chooses from the story as the true example of “love”.

Chris Seay’s writing is well done as he portrays each character and points out their purpose or his observed purpose for them in the show. So be sure and check out the book and see if you agree, as we all wait to see just how our questions will be answered and exactly how this is all going to turn out for Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Sayid, Hurley, and all the others in the series finale.

Find yourself… keeping it real. show less

"The Gospel According to Lost" is not normally a book I would blindly pick up. I am not a major fan of any of the "Gospel According to" books. To say that Chris Seay pleasantly surprised me would be and understatment. As an avid viewer of LOST, I generally enjoyed this spin on the show.

The book begins by explaining how LOST is different from other shows and why it has become an import influence to the people who watch it every week. After this introduction, each chapter examines a specific show more character by looking at the main philosophical theme they represent and how their character changes throughout the show in regard to their theme. He then compares the LOST narrative to stories found in the Bible.


I often found myself making the same connections that Seay did:


* Eko with his bible-stick of scripture
* Sawyer's bad-boy-seeking-redemption story
* Locke with his insistence on faith
* Shephard's stubborn anti-supernatural stance




On the negative side, Seay often took the easy road when reflecting on the characters--there are a lot of deeper connections that could have been plumbed. Also, the structure of the book was quite scattered. There was no unifying arc to the book as a whole. This book provides a great review of certain characters and mysteries the show has created, which is especially useful before the final season this spring. show less

To say that Lost is a phenomenon would be an understatement. Over the last 6 seasons, I've watched and listened as viewers have followed the trials of their favorite island castaways and with the final season just beginning, it seemed appropriate for me to review The Gospel According to Lost by Chris Seay.

As many viewers are aware, Lost is more than a story about a group of people who get stranded on an island, it's a multi~layered story that explores fate, reason, faith, guilt, salvation show more and a host of other philosophical and religious tenents. And it's within this framework that Seay seeks to explore the relationship between the television series and the Judeo~Christian beliefs in redemption and salvation. Although he acknowledges the show's exploration of other religious beliefs, his analysis is grounded in the teachings of Jesus Christ with reference to the Holy Bible.

One of the strongest points in Seay's analysis relate to the power of words and the belief that they can shape a person's future. As an example, Seay talks about the names of the characters and how their names influence their personalities. The writers, he believes, put a lot of thought into the naming of the characters much like Jewish parents put serious thought into the names of their children because they knew there was power (or failure) in a name.

Seay also examines the story of Hurley, who believes he is cursed. This curse, Seay writes, can be traced back to the casual utterance of Hurley's father: "Having hope is never stupid. You gotta believe good things will happen; then they will. In this world, son, you've gotta make your own luck." With those words, Hurley's father abandoned him, leaving a young boy (and, ultimately, a grown man) feeling "lost" and worthless. Therefore, the question arises, did Hurley allow his father's abandoment and fruitless words to bury him in hopelessness or could he have escaped the "curse" and made his own luck?

Whether you are a Christian or not, this book offers and interesting analysis of a television series that has offered so much to so many people. show less