snow camp ideas
I am verbally processing on paper so I thought I would post it as a blog. I would love to know your thoughts and if you think I am off at all. Be warned, these thoughts are in rough form.
If God loves than how can Jesus be the only way to God?
This question implies another question which is; there are good people that believe in other religions, sometimes because that is all they know, so how can a loving God send them to Hell? I mean isn’t there lots of ways to God. It is the most popular understanding of salvation that exists today because it has the ethic of I will not judge you if you don’t judge me. That way we are all happy and follow the path to truth. It is like the three blind men trying to describe what an elephant is; a snake, tree or a kite. All are but part of the whole truth. So the question is, isn’t that the case with religion or God? Isn’t God so big that no one should claim the one right answer? Isn’t that just arrogant? And not only that but isn’t the pattern of people who do that one filled with incredible violence ranging from the crusades to 9/11? So I believe Christianity is true for me and that is good for me. I will respect people by letting them believe what they want to believe AND then I can know that people who never hear about Jesus are okay because as long as they really believe and are good people then they will be okay. This is how most people see religion in our country – site poll from something.
The only problem is, and getting this makes your head hurt a little, if we are wrong. What if life, salvation, hope and fixing all that is broken is found in only one place, in one person? That is what Jesus claims about himself when he says he is the way the, truth and the life, no one comes to Father except through me. So either Jesus lied OR Jesus is the only way.
Some people say this idea, doctrine is exclusive and that is not really true, to say something is exclusive is to say that it is for some people and not for others. That is not what the good news about Jesus. The good news about him is that everyone is welcome with open arms and is accepted just as they are to experience forgiveness, life and hope. There are no outsiders. No one is too good or too evil.
But then the question still remains, what about all those people who never hear, who never experience a group of Jesus followers living as Jesus followers should? Does that mean that God does not care, that he does not love, that he sends them to Hell like we throw out the trash? The answer seems to be a hard one to swallow. The bible seems clear, Jesus’ life seems clear that God loves people. He really loves them. And for some reason and sometimes this does not always seem like a good choice by God he has decided to show the world who he is and what he is like through the people that follow him. They are his body on this side of a new heaven and new earth and that puts our questions about caring for those who have not had a chance to know God squarely on us. Have we told them, shown them, cared for them, fed them, clothed them and been Jesus as best we can for them?
We have a ways to go on that one.
If God loves than how can Jesus be the only way to God?
This question implies another question which is; there are good people that believe in other religions, sometimes because that is all they know, so how can a loving God send them to Hell? I mean isn’t there lots of ways to God. It is the most popular understanding of salvation that exists today because it has the ethic of I will not judge you if you don’t judge me. That way we are all happy and follow the path to truth. It is like the three blind men trying to describe what an elephant is; a snake, tree or a kite. All are but part of the whole truth. So the question is, isn’t that the case with religion or God? Isn’t God so big that no one should claim the one right answer? Isn’t that just arrogant? And not only that but isn’t the pattern of people who do that one filled with incredible violence ranging from the crusades to 9/11? So I believe Christianity is true for me and that is good for me. I will respect people by letting them believe what they want to believe AND then I can know that people who never hear about Jesus are okay because as long as they really believe and are good people then they will be okay. This is how most people see religion in our country – site poll from something.
The only problem is, and getting this makes your head hurt a little, if we are wrong. What if life, salvation, hope and fixing all that is broken is found in only one place, in one person? That is what Jesus claims about himself when he says he is the way the, truth and the life, no one comes to Father except through me. So either Jesus lied OR Jesus is the only way.
Some people say this idea, doctrine is exclusive and that is not really true, to say something is exclusive is to say that it is for some people and not for others. That is not what the good news about Jesus. The good news about him is that everyone is welcome with open arms and is accepted just as they are to experience forgiveness, life and hope. There are no outsiders. No one is too good or too evil.
But then the question still remains, what about all those people who never hear, who never experience a group of Jesus followers living as Jesus followers should? Does that mean that God does not care, that he does not love, that he sends them to Hell like we throw out the trash? The answer seems to be a hard one to swallow. The bible seems clear, Jesus’ life seems clear that God loves people. He really loves them. And for some reason and sometimes this does not always seem like a good choice by God he has decided to show the world who he is and what he is like through the people that follow him. They are his body on this side of a new heaven and new earth and that puts our questions about caring for those who have not had a chance to know God squarely on us. Have we told them, shown them, cared for them, fed them, clothed them and been Jesus as best we can for them?
We have a ways to go on that one.
posted by Jon at
5:46 PM
30 Comments:
These thoughts encompass much of the reasons I left the church and don't know what I believe after years of being a very dedicated "Christian."
In fact, when I think about it, I can work myself into an actual physical headache, and so I don't think about it anymore. I read any excellent book about two years ago called, "If Grace Is True," by Phillip Gulley, which I suppose helped me continue the path I was already on toward a more universalist view of things.
Many Christians would call those views backslidden or heretic I suppose, because we are supposed to believe in the Bible literally -- But who really believes in the Bible literally anyway?? I think we just read it and interpret in a way that seems holiest, and at times, most convenient; we don't really read it literally.
Otherwise, women wouldn't talk (at all) in church and we'd all be socialists and all sorts of other things that most Christians wouldn't even consider plausible. Those are poor examples, but there are lots of things we interpret in different ways for different reasons, and there are lots of things in the Bible that contradict one another, and the average Christian just doesn't confront those things, at least I know I didn't when I was one...
Re: salvation et al, there is no way that everyone in the world, for all of history has gotten/gets an opportunity to hear about Jesus, and that's just the act of hearing. What about the immense, I mean, IMMENSE cultural differences, political and social issues and a host of other factors that prevent MANY people in many parts of the world from ever hearing a clear "gospel" teaching, whatever that even means.
So then, for me anyway, I am left not with Jesus lied or he didn't, but with God creates people for destruction, or he doesn't. And if he does, well, maybe that is true. Certainly a whole lot of people believe that. I just can't. I can't. I can't. I'd rather not believe in God than be "special," more special than my neighbor in China or the jungle of Ecuador or even another cynical person from the West. I can't believe that with all America has, God has also given us a cutting edge on salvation.
Before I get started, let me say that this is Matt talking, lest Sara be accused of saying what will undoubtedly offend someone.
I used to think that people who never heard the evangelical gospel were not saved, but my thinking on the topic changed when I considered folks with cognitive and developmental disabilities and mental illness. Basically, salvation in this paradigm is the willful intellectual acceptance of a series of propositions. That's all well and good in a platonic view of reality in which the mind is nearly completely divorced from the body, but that just isn't reality. Most of the students I work with are incapable of understanding something as theoretical as "The Four Spiritual Laws," let alone accepting it. Sure, I could train them to pray (although I'd lose my job), but their lip service would not amount to the internal "repentance" an evangelical would believe to be the basis for salvation from hell. Then there is the case of the mentally ill. A person with depression, bipolar, or any number of physiologically-based mood or thought disorders does not have total freedom over their beliefs. From what I understand from folks I've known with depression and bipolar, to believe in a forgiving God while in the deepest affliction is impossible. Shall someone be damned because their brain functioning impairs their ability to "believe the good news."
I am unable to accept that. If God is truly loving, then there can be no room for someone to be held accountable for something beyond their control. Of course, a staunch Calvinist would say that if someone has not heard the gospel or is unable to accept it, it shows that they've been predestined to damnation. If someone wants to believe that, I can't stop them. But I see it as inconsistent to claim that God is love, but only loves certain people, the saved.
To go in a different direction, I have to agree with Laura that the bible is inconsistent in a lot of ways, and can be interpreted in so many ways. For instance, in the Christian Scriptures, Christians are told to evangelize the "lost." In one of the books of the Pentetuch, I forget which one, it says to kill any family member who worships a different god. And we have the stories like when Aaron and the priests slay all the people who worshipped the calf and so forth. There is a deep inconsistency there. Just compare Ezra/Nehemiah and Jonah. Ezra/Nehemiah is a very xenophobic work, in which all the Hebrew men are told to throw out their foreign wives and children of mixed blood. The parable of Jonah, on the other hand, proclaims that nobody is unloved by God, even the Ninevites, who represented the most hated fierce enemies of Israel.
I better stop now. Maybe I should blog about this on our blog. Or maybe not.
Matt - you know, I have never thought much about what you discussed regarding people with cognitive or other types of disabilities. Really, it's an amazing point.
In a similar way, my experience overseas and also with having close relationships with people from other cultures has changed the way I think about how universal the "gospel" is, yours has changed through relationships with people with disabilities.
I think particularly as white Americans, it's possible to feel as though anyone in the world would be foolish not to accept Jesus as many of us have at one time or over time in our lives. But this is America, the so-called "Christian" nation, and whatever that means, we are surrounded by churches, many of us grow up with some experience with Christianity and are much more likely to eventually become Christians.
Back when I was a student-missionary type, I had to confront these issues all the time. When your "job" is essentially to lead people toward conversion, you are faced with all sorts of questions such as "my dad died last year, he had certainly never heard the name of 'Jesus,' what happened to him?"
Part of me had to believe that, aw, that's so sad, he's in hell. But at the same time, how is that possible??!!!! Any sense of Calvinism or believing Christ was "the" one way probably never recovered from those conversations, even though I sort of just put them out of my mind for a few years.
I hope more of you comment... I really long to know how people with infinitely stronger faiths in God, in Jesus, in the Bible reconcile these issues, and I don't mean that in a snotty way - I really long to know.
Something to throw in the mix-
Have you ever heard the idea that everyone comes to the Father through Christ but does not necessarily need to be Christian? That Jesus only way to salvation and eternal life but that Jesus can chose to "save" you even if you had never heard the gospel?
This idea is very very interesting to me and I haven't really spent any time wrestling through the NT to see if it is biblical or not, but couldn't it be possible? I believe Christ is the only true way- but what if Christ was bigger than Christianity and chose to save more than just Christians? Very interesting, and possibly very heretical idea, but I think a good one to wrestle with...
Maria,
Your idea that people can be unknowingly saved through Christ is not unique. Many famous theologians have believed it, probably the most prominent of which was the great swiss theologian Karl Barth. When asked about predestination once, he said something like all are predestined to damnation through sin AND predestined to salvation through Christ's sacrifice.
Just something to consider.
-Matt
nice light topic for a snowy day jonny boy.
unfortunately, i don't have the answer for anyone here, but i would like to offer up the idea of the false dichotomy: namely that jesus is the only way or he's a liar. i love cs lewis too, but maybe we just don't quite get what jesus means when he says "no one comes to the father but through me."
so much of our understanding of everything is shaped by our western enlightment thinking, which we are hard-pressed to rise above. if, then, therefore... man, i just don't know.
jon, if this is a talk topic may i suggest you not wrap it up in a neat little package with a bow (not that you would do that) that says "here's the easily palatable answer!" i know you're dealing with middle school, largely concrete thinkers, but i think there is an invitation to wrestle that can be made that still emboldens your charges to witness like crazy to their friends. they just might not use the little green books.
i know this guy ruffles feathers, but i love b. mclarens "more ready than your realize" on this topic. i guess i've always sort of seen evangelism as believers consistently inviting everyone (from the "mature" christian to the atheist) one step closer to christ. it allows us to leave behind the "us/them" mentality that causes so much harm to people.
i know none of this answers the "who's saved, who's not?" questions, but i guess i just don't care anymore, and i don't think i need to be able to answer them. but i'm open to being proven wrong...
"Amen" to scattered badgers -- whoever you are. =)
that was me, cory, but i screwed up my profile somehow. i am not smart.
well cory, you'd be proud. jon actually started the weekend with something like, "we're going to ask questions here this weekend, and sometimes, the answers won't come like you expect. surprise, surprise, your leaders don't know everything." (only jon said it way better - that's why he's the speaker in the family)
it's fun to encourage kids to ask tough questions and to really think on them.
i've been asking some tough questions in my head lately, too, and i think i'm really happy for all the insightful people in my life. i've found some weak arguments that i default to to be bunk, and that's encouraged me to keep thinking on them and not give up because something else is easier to accept and helps relieve my mind.
i feel like people make talking about truth to be this horribly judgmental thing. but i like the idea of truth. and i like talking about it. i think it's something worth thinking on.
anyway, i'm getting distracted by my environment at this coffeeshop, so i must go. adios.
Now when we talk about truth, that is an entirely different matter. I don't know how I feel about the issue of truth. I do believe that an objective, absolute reality exists. I have a hard time believing that we can perceive, interpret, and understand it completely. Our senses are flawed, and our use of logic and reason is influenced by our prejudices and other wishes and desires. Not that I think we can know nothing of reality. I just mean that our beliefs must always be accompanied with a healthy amount of skepticism.
I like debating what is truthful, too. I just know myself, and that I need to always examine and reexamine what I believe for the reasons given above.
-Matt
I think the Bible and God are much bigger than our understanding and being tied up in a neat box - that's what makes God God.
I do think the Bible indicates that those who never hear about Christ are given salvation - take Romans 2, for example. I think the Bible does make it clear that God doesn't send people to hell who have never heard about Jesus.
I do think that it's not fair to say that no one reads the Bible literally - it depends on how you interpret literally. You can believe the Bible is the word of God, but still understand that interpretation includes context and understanding of culture and the way the message is being said. Is that literal?
Anonymous,
The point you make is well taken. It all comes down to believing that God is good, loving, etc., so much that He sent Christ to die and rise again for us. It seems to be the cases that many people hide behind a counterfeit veil of skepticism, not because they can’t, but because they don’t want to believe.
"It seems to be the cases that many people hide behind a counterfeit veil of skepticism, not because they can’t, but because they don’t want to believe."
Wow, anonymous2 -- who is the one "hiding" here? Maybe you should post your name before you accuse someone else of not "wanting" to believe.
I know I am not being personally attacked, but I want to defend myself anyway, or maybe I want to defend the skeptic(s) in and among us.
I believed for a long time. I tried so hard to believe everything I was taught, I believed all the way to being a student missionary type in China.
And I wasn't being dishonest -- I really wanted to believe everything. I prayed to believe everything. I cried out to God to believe. I worshipped to feel something true. I did everything a good Christian is supposed to do, and I think most of my friends here can attest that I am a generally honest person, and was a faithful Christ follower.
But inside, deep inside, it was never that simple. I put my doubts on the backburner. I hid my gut feelings, because I knew they pointed somewhere else. I struggled and struggled, and just avoided some of my deep, fundamentals with the unique solo truth of Jesus being "the only" way. Over time, the struggle was too much.
I never stopped believing in God, or that Jesus was a fundamentally amazing teacher, perhaps the best one ever, but as far as believing in one Truth, I just didn't. I didn't not want to, I always wanted to.
What's wrong with choosing not to believe?
-Matt
Interesting question. I guess I look at it like this: Choosing not to believe is like saying, for example, it's actually true that Jesus is the only way, or accepting some "truth" statement like that, but then "choosing not to believe it," even though perhaps deep down you really believe it. For me, I always wanted to believe the basic doctrines of the evangelical church for example, but just found myself not actually believing some of them (important ones), so, I suppose, my brain made the choice anyway, but it's not as though deep down I really believe Jesus is the only way, and I'm choosing to not believe, or at least I don't see it that way. Does that make any sense?
Like, were I to say I were an athiest, I feel I would be choosing that, because deep down in my gut I actually believe there is some sort of God being or something. I'm just not at all convinced that everything happened randomly, and that the intellect, feeling and emotion of humans developed as a result of purely scientific, logical, rational events. So, that for me would be choosing not to believe in some higher power, because it might be convenient or something.
I mean, I suppose it's kind of ridiculous, because my sole standard for these declarations is my gut instinct about something, but sometimes I think that's all I have. I am not convinced that a person can read the bible literally and not go crazy. Even as anonymous1 mentioned, context and culture and whatnot, I find that a very pat answer that just leads to all sorts of VERY subjective judgments. For example, "most" Christian teachers/denominations etc, have decided that women having (some) leadership in church is a good idea (even though some of Paul's statements appear to expressly forbid it), yet why haven't most of the same churches/Christians taken a similarly progressive roll on homosexuality -- I don't personally see the difference. That's a stretch, but my point I guess is that many Christians say they take the Bible literally, but they don't know what that means, some things are taken "literally" -- like statements about homosexuality, and others are taken "in context of culture" like women in leadership, or Jesus' teachings about the poor -- I mean, how many mega-rich Christians are there in this country believing that God has blessed them (financially), consuming everything American society has to offer, despite Jesus saying that it is extremely difficult for a rich man to get into heaven...
You bring up an interesting point, Laura: which comes first, the willful decision not to believe, or the unwillful inability to feel belief. I'm not sure which was first for me? Did I make a decision not to believe that led to me losing faith in my heart, or did my disbelief start in my heart, and then I decided to let go of it with my head as well?
-Matt
Actually, rather than interesting, the initial question imposes a value judgment on the statement: no one said it was right or wrong to not believe.
It’s interesting that people here are trying to conflate faith with certainty. If someone was certain, it would not be faith.
Someone who truly believed in The loving God/Christ/Spirt would understand this. The rest is just making a mockery.
I can't agree with you, anonymous3, when you say that Christian faith does not require certainty. In the book of Hebrews, faith DOES have to do with certainty. In the NRSV, Hebrews 11:1 says "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." In the NIV it says "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." All this talk of assurance, conviction, sureness, and certainty would seem to negate your point.
-Matt
I have to disagree with you, Matt. Those verses talk about being certain, but arriving at that certainty through faith. The faith itself doesn't necessarily come through certainty, more certainty comes through faith... does that make sense? That's how I read what anonymous3 said - that the only way we have that assurance of things hoped through and the conviction of things not seen is through faith - not 100% understanding.
Shelly
What, then, is faith?
-Matt
faith is believing without all the answers.
shelly
Why is there value in a faith-based approach to life? I mean, is it beneficial to believe something in spite of a lack of evidence ore even evidence to the contary?
-Matt
Why is that question interesting? Why is it relevant? What is the purpose of asking it?
Matt -
I'm not claiming to have all the answers - quite the contrary actually, but I do think there is a lot of value in having faith. Just because I have faith doesn't mean that I don't question and try to learn more, but it's believing in the midst of asking those things. My best friend died of cancer last year and my faith gave me, and her faith gave her, great value during that time. When I witness the miracles of life from children to sunsets to love to weddings to funerals to friendships, my faith gives me value. When my dad continues to drink, my faith gives me value. When I am so lonely that I feel homesick at home, my faith gives me value. When I am so happy that I want to burst, my faith gives me value. When I take a deep breath and remember there is more than just measly me out there, my faith gives me value. If faith makes Mary practice hospitality and me practice patience and Jon love on junior high kids and my husband build houses in Mexico and my little sister give all her babysitting money to save my starving children, then our faith has value.
I don't think your questions or my questions or any questions are bad or irrelavant. I think that you or I are not the first Christians to ask these things and I think that God can handle our questions. I don't know what your faith is or where your heart is or if believing has value for you, but it does for me and it does for a lot of other people. I think that's beautiful, regardless of where it brings us.
Shelly
"Why is that question interesting? Why is it relevant? What is the purpose of asking it?"
The question is relevant because it is a real question, from a real, thinking person, who has real doubts. What is the purpose of not asking it? I suppose for some, ignorance is bliss, but not for all.
Shelly - love your thoughts. Despite not being a "practicing" Christian or part of a church, so many of the things that I value point to or stem from what I have learned from the bible, church, god, whatever.
If there is no God, I'm pretty sure there is no point in morality of any kind. It's every man/woman for himself, and we might as well just take everything and not give a damn about anyone else.
But that feels wrong. Deep inside, I feel that there must be some sort of creative force in the universe, because I do not believe the soul, our emotions and intelligence, could possibly be derived from water and blood and cells and atoms. Not a scientific argument in any sense, but that's not how I think anyway.
I think a lot of atheists and agnostics would disagree with you that morality depends inextricably on theism. I mean, just look at the way people around you act. Many people of faith do great things like help others and save the environment, but people of faith also lynch people of different races, send our country to war, fly planes into buildings, and promote a libertarian worldview in chich the Earth and the poor are exploited as God's plan. If theism is a tool for ethics, it performs rather inconsistently.
-Matt
Matt -- I agree that the "religious" do as much bad as good. Most terrorism can be linked to religious fervor. Fundamentalists and evangelists (for any religion) often claim to be *the* messengers of God, then when they screw up for whatever reason, God is blamed and religious people are scorned. At the same time, faith leads many to do good, as Shelly said. It's impossible to know whether the good outweighs the bad or vice versa, and probably also inconsequential.
Still, I guess my problem with a no-God view of the world is that I don't know how it's possible that emotion and intellect "evolved" from physical nature... I'm not saying I would become an atheist were that possible, I simply cannot fathom that the workings of the mind and the human spirit and emotions can be attributed to atoms and molecules.
Many, many scientists argue that human emotion, intellect, consciousness, and morality all are products of evolution. I can't really represent their theories very well here, and this string of comments has gone on for a while now, so I think I'm going to excuse myself from it so Jon can tell us what's happened in his life since getting these snow camp ideas.
-Matt
Wait, this is Jon's blog?
I swear this is my last post. =)
“I suppose for some, ignorance is bliss, but not for all.”
A person recognizing and accepting the limits of human understanding (and builds their faith accordingly) is anything but ignorant. The overwhelming theme here has been a scientific search for what is beyond nature. God, by definition, is beyond nature. Humanity, by definition, is confined to nature. Accordingly, a finite natural mind cannot intuit the infinite supernatural. This is a simple fact touched on in the most elementary of liberal arts educations. From understanding this it becomes abundantly clear that any doubt expressed above by skeptics is not out of a search for God or truth, but to undermine belief and morality.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home