This Thursday (November 16th) we're looking at the age old issue - Do all paths lead to God?.If so, why did Christ have to die, suffer and rise again?
If not does Christianity end up being a 'Christo-facist' faith where all other beliefs are 'false religions'?
If so, what happens to the imperative to get out there and share the Good News?
If so, does that mean that evil dictators get in to heaven as easily as Mother Teresa?
Lots of complicated issues and wrangling - but so important to think about.
If you aren't confident on these issues, do still please come along for the exploration; I am quite confident about a friendly and vigorous exchange of opinions while thinking these things through - who knows - we may even get some new insights!
13 comments:
Can't be there obviously (still not brave enough to leave the Kitt-ster - I'll get there one day) but wanted to throw in a thought, see if we can get the topic rolling here, in advance of Thursday.
I'd personally feel very uncomfortable telling anyone that their religion was 'wrong' and headed nowhere. I think that however we interpret the idea of Jesus being 'the only way', it's incredibly arrogant to assume that we are the only right ones.
I've always liked the idea of different religions as looking at the same mountain from different angles.
I find it hard to believe that all those folk who are so devout and peace-loving and, let's be honest, work so much harder at their faiths than we Christian-slackers do, are actually on paths to hell.
Because that's what we're telling them if we really claim that only Christians can be saved, isn't it? Kind of harsh and implies that we know something they don't, when surprise! it's all about faith for all of us. It's about having more questions than answers and exploring what we hope for but is currently unseen.
That's interesting - didn't realise I felt quite so strongly about that one!
I'm with you on this Suse, BUT I am not content with how it doesn't answer the necessity of Christ's suffering.
If there is salvation outside of explicit confession of Christ, then why his suffering? Why, even the Incarnation?
If Buddha, Confucius, Zoroaster could do the trick, or the worldwide pantheons of lesser and greater Gods, Goddesses, spirits and supernatural beings predating the Revelation of Christ lead to a knowledge of God, then why Christ?
Or does Christ do something for other religions and people which they don't know?
Is there a need for Salvation? If so, Salvation from what? Is there a Heaven and Hell? Is anyone actually checking our credentials when we pass on to see if we've said the right prayers or not been too naughty?
Questions Questions!
Great points, Tim, and as usual, I have no answers!
Can you summarise for us what was said last night? (roughly?) Just for all us e-SofaChurchers and those who couldn't make it.
Here is my attempt at a summary...
We started by asking about people who have no chance of hearing 'the gospel' - children, people in remote places, people in a culture dominated by another faith, or even people in abusive churches. We discussed the idea that salvation might be something that you have to opt-out of, that unless you make a conscious to reject Jesus, you are okay with God. But that would mean that evangelism would be doing people a disservice, if it brought them the chance of rejecting Jesus that would damn them.
We discussed the idea of Jesus working in people of other faith, even though they don't recognise or name him. CS Lewis wrote:
There are people who do not accept the full Christian doctrine about Christ but who are so strongly attracted by Him that they are His in a much deeper sense than they themselves understand. There are people in other religions who are being led by God’s secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. For example, a Buddhist of good will may be led to concentrate more and more on the Buddhist teaching about mercy and to leave in the background (though he might still say he believed) the Buddhist teaching on certain other points.
We agreed that this could well happen, all faiths (and perhaps atheism too) have this potential for Jesus to work through them with this secret influence. So all faiths have the potential to lead people to God in this way, with Jesus as the 'way'. We didn't think it was necessarily the case that being in another faith automatically meant that you follow Jesus secretly, in the same way that being in a church doesn't automatically make you a follower of Jesus.
For example, the door you entered through to get into your office building. Did you kiss it, acknowledge it, or ask it to let you enter through it? Thousands of people may walk through that door and not pay any attention to it at all; in fact, most don't. But because the door is unlocked and open, they simply go through to gain access to the inside of the building.Jesus is the open door through which all of humanity accesses God, including Buddha and Muhammad or Gandhi. We all go through the same door to access God and Him us. Carlton Pearson
Really wish I'd been there for this one... Sounds as though it was a really robust but healthy discussion... Looking forward to seeing you all this week. I m making sure I leave work on time, and planning to have recovered from dentist (appointment 2 of 7!) in the morning
GeoffE
OK... what about this:
Jesus says "I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father except by me."
There are 2 possibilities as to how we may view this statement:
1. Jesus is correct. Therefore all religions save for genuine, biblical Christianity are false.
2. Jesus is wrong. Therefore, we can't trust him on anything.
Surely there can't be any "middle ground?"
Either Christianity is THE way or it is NO WAY.
I know where I stand! How about you?
Gunkle - with regards to the "No-one comes to the Father except through me" quote, you said:
"There are 2 possibilities as to how we may view this statement..." I presume you mean that you can only think of two possibilities, which is fine, but I and many others can think of several other ways to interpret it. Of course, I agree that Jesus was right, but you have to admit that the phrase he used is pretty vague and open ended; he didn't say 'No-one comes to the Father unless they believe that the whole of the Bible is literally true and say a special prayer to me' or any other specific formula that people have since concocted. What does it mean to come through Jesus? We batted around that people of other faiths might be able to come to the Father through Jesus in some way, possibly not even recognising him by name. There are many hints to this in the Bible, including Romans 5:18, 1 Corinthians 15:22, 1 Timothy 4, Philippians 2:9-10.
I'm not sure what that verse means, to be honest, but I think it's good to try and find out.
Andy, dear fellow, I may be thick but I can't possibly see how the words Jesus used can in any way be construed as "pretty vague and open ended" as you put it. They're as clear as crystal!
With regards to the verses you have quoted, these have to be taken in context. Not only in their immediate context but also with the message of Scripture as a whole.
Coming to Jesus in a true, biblical sense involves nothing short of a realisation of our own sinfulness before a holy God, asking his forgiveness, turning from our sin and believing that Christ bore our punishment on Calvary's Cross.
This is the message of Scripture as a whole. The OT points forward to the coming into the world, of Christ, the Gospels deal with his life and ministry on earth and the remainder of the NT deals with the establishment of his people - the chuch of Jesus Christ - and looks forward to His return in glory.
Carlton Pearson's quote above is another way of interpreting Jesus' words - what you wrote is another way of interpreting them. They might be 'crystal clear' but they aren't very specific in my opinion. Jesus could have defined things a lot more tightly if he wanted to.
I agree with interpreting Bible verses in line with the whole narrative of the Bible. But this is also another valid broad narrative:
The world was made good, but fell under the power of Satan. God wants to restore all things to their correct state. Jesus' resurrection broke the power of death. When Jesus returns again the world will be restored, and in the meantime we are called to spread the Kingdom of God in the middle of the fallen world.
This salvation narrative is far less individualistic than the one you described (the salvation is for the world), and completely Biblical.
The theological term for this narrative is, I believe, 'Christus Victor', and it was the dominant theology in the early church until around AD1000 when Roman Catholic St. Anselm devised the 'Penal Substitution' theology you described which is far more legalistic, and arguably not very well supported in the scriptures. If you have the time and want to look into this further I can recommend this website for a very thorough analysis.
Andy, if your understanding is correct then...
What role do repentance and faith have in salvation?
Or are you saying that you believe that all will be saved at the end of the age?
You know - I don't really have an answer to that at the moment. I know the standard stuff back to front, but there are so many glimpses in the Bible of universalism that I just don't know.
I think of repentance as deciding to stop following your own path and starting to follow Jesus. That, after all, was what he asked the disciples to do - leave everything and follow him.
I think that it is more to do with choosing to live according to the kingdom of God rather than a one-off prayer. If you think of the parable of the Sheep and the goats (Matthew 25) it seems that judgment is to be based on our social actions. And Matthew 7 says that "‘Not everyone who says to me, “Lord, Lord”, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only one who does the will of my Father in heaven.' "
Post a Comment