Showing posts with label God's character. Show all posts
Showing posts with label God's character. Show all posts
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
What to do to be saved?
So you want to be saved and inherit eternal life, and want to know what to do?
The Bad News
The fact is there is nothing you can do.
The prophet Micah also wondered what he can do:
“Wherewith shall I come before the LORD, and bow myself before the high God? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?” (Micah 6:6-8).
Burnt offerings? Thousands of rams? Ten thousands of rivers of oil? Your first born child? As if we could buy God’s favour?! We cannot bribe a perfect God with material things. The last part of the text above gives some hope. Maybe we can persuade God through good works: doing justly, loving mercy and walking humbly before God. While these things are good, they are still not enough.
The prophet Isaiah makes it clear:
“But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away” (Isaiah 64:6). Our “righteousnesses”, in other words our good works, are like “an unclean thing” before God. Even the best we have to offer is not good enough for a perfect God.
The Apostle Paul makes it very clear: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).
We have all sinned. The best we can offer is not good enough. Even if we devoted our life as did Mother Theresa, our good works are considered inept at gaining us salvation and eternal life.
The Good News
A perfect God can only accept absolute absolute perfection. Since none of us are perfect, we have nothing to offer God. Knowing this, and not wanting us to be lost, God provided the sacrifice Himself, since only a perfect God can supply a perfect propitiation.
How are we saved? We are saved when we acknowledge our helplessness at attempting to save ourselves, and then call on God to save us. This is the big difference between real Christianity and any other religion. All other religions are about the things we do. True Christianity makes it clear – there is nothing we can do that will be good enough. Our only hope is in accepting our weakness, and accepting God’s strength in our stead.
Recounts Paul: “And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me” (2 Corinthians 12:9).
This acceptance of our weakness, of our imperfections, or our sinfulness; the realization that there is nothing that we can do to be saved and that our only hope is in God is called Repentance; i.e. a change of mind. We used to think that there is something that we can do, there is some kind of contribution we can make that will help in our salvation that will somehow make us good enough. Such thinking is the thinking of other religions. Christianity requires a paradigm shift: Repentance.
Once we’ve repented (i.e. accepted that only God can provide the perfect propitiation), we move on to confession. Consider confession the actual acknowledgement of your repentance. It is during confession that you tell God about all your attempts at saving yourself and all your failures (sins), and ask God to do for you what you cannot do for yourself. Through confession we actually give God permission to do for us what He is most eager to do.
Confession is what the tax-collector did: “And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner” (Luke 18:13). In this action he acknowledged his helplessness and pleaded for God’s mercy. Jesus said about the tax-collector: “…this man went to his house justified… For every one who exalts himself shall be humbled, and he that humbles himself shall be exalted.” (Luke 18:14).
This is it. This is how we get saved – we stop trusting in ourselves and we start trusting in God; we cease having faith in ourselves and we commence having faith in God. God promised that He will save us if we believe in the provision He made for us. “In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began” (Titus 1:2).
Since God is perfect, and the propitiation is perfect (after all, the sacrifice is God-self, incarnated in human flesh, i.e. Jesus the Christ), no amount of sin can make it of ill-effect. You cannot be too sinful for Jesus’ righteousness not to cover you.
So what about the Ten Commandments and Loving God and They Neighbour as Thyself?
Clearly these things are important, as they are reflections of God’s character. God’s character is love. In fact, God is love (1 John 4:16). By living out the Ten Commandments we are demonstrating love to God (first four commandments) and we are demonstrating love to our neighbour (remaining six commandments). But wonderful as such actions might be they should never be confused as having any merit for our salvation.
When we accept God’s great gift of grace, when we allow God into our life, a steady transformation occurs:
“For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous” (1 John 5:3). Thus, keeping the commandments is not a duty, nor an attempt at going to heaven, but a natural outflow of our love to God. When we love God, we’re not following a law written on stone, but a law written on our hearts: “…saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people” (Jeremiah 31:33b).
I conclude with my favourite Bible passage: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Ephesians 2:8, 9). As one pastor so wonderfully summed it up: “By Grace alone, through Faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone.”
God is good, Jesus lives!
The Bad News
The fact is there is nothing you can do.
The prophet Micah also wondered what he can do:
“Wherewith shall I come before the LORD, and bow myself before the high God? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?” (Micah 6:6-8).
Burnt offerings? Thousands of rams? Ten thousands of rivers of oil? Your first born child? As if we could buy God’s favour?! We cannot bribe a perfect God with material things. The last part of the text above gives some hope. Maybe we can persuade God through good works: doing justly, loving mercy and walking humbly before God. While these things are good, they are still not enough.
The prophet Isaiah makes it clear:
“But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away” (Isaiah 64:6). Our “righteousnesses”, in other words our good works, are like “an unclean thing” before God. Even the best we have to offer is not good enough for a perfect God.
The Apostle Paul makes it very clear: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).
We have all sinned. The best we can offer is not good enough. Even if we devoted our life as did Mother Theresa, our good works are considered inept at gaining us salvation and eternal life.
The Good News
A perfect God can only accept absolute absolute perfection. Since none of us are perfect, we have nothing to offer God. Knowing this, and not wanting us to be lost, God provided the sacrifice Himself, since only a perfect God can supply a perfect propitiation.
“But this sacrifice was not made in order to create in the Father’s heart a love for man, not to make Him willing to save. No, no! “God so loved the world, that He gave His only-begotten Son.” John 3:16. The Father loves us, not because of the great propitiation, but He provided the propitiation because He loves us. Christ was the medium through which He could pour out His infinite love upon a fallen world. “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself.” 2 Corinthians 5:19.” – Steps to Christ.
How are we saved? We are saved when we acknowledge our helplessness at attempting to save ourselves, and then call on God to save us. This is the big difference between real Christianity and any other religion. All other religions are about the things we do. True Christianity makes it clear – there is nothing we can do that will be good enough. Our only hope is in accepting our weakness, and accepting God’s strength in our stead.
Recounts Paul: “And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me” (2 Corinthians 12:9).
This acceptance of our weakness, of our imperfections, or our sinfulness; the realization that there is nothing that we can do to be saved and that our only hope is in God is called Repentance; i.e. a change of mind. We used to think that there is something that we can do, there is some kind of contribution we can make that will help in our salvation that will somehow make us good enough. Such thinking is the thinking of other religions. Christianity requires a paradigm shift: Repentance.
Once we’ve repented (i.e. accepted that only God can provide the perfect propitiation), we move on to confession. Consider confession the actual acknowledgement of your repentance. It is during confession that you tell God about all your attempts at saving yourself and all your failures (sins), and ask God to do for you what you cannot do for yourself. Through confession we actually give God permission to do for us what He is most eager to do.
“God does not force the will of His creatures. He cannot accept an homage that is not willingly and intelligently given” – Steps to Christ.God does not force the Gift of Salvation onto us; love never forces. He offers it gladly, and we are free to accept or decline it. We are free to choose life or death; however, God pleads with us to choose the former life, not the latter (Ezekial 33:11).
Confession is what the tax-collector did: “And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner” (Luke 18:13). In this action he acknowledged his helplessness and pleaded for God’s mercy. Jesus said about the tax-collector: “…this man went to his house justified… For every one who exalts himself shall be humbled, and he that humbles himself shall be exalted.” (Luke 18:14).
This is it. This is how we get saved – we stop trusting in ourselves and we start trusting in God; we cease having faith in ourselves and we commence having faith in God. God promised that He will save us if we believe in the provision He made for us. “In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began” (Titus 1:2).
Since God is perfect, and the propitiation is perfect (after all, the sacrifice is God-self, incarnated in human flesh, i.e. Jesus the Christ), no amount of sin can make it of ill-effect. You cannot be too sinful for Jesus’ righteousness not to cover you.
“None are so sinful that they cannot find strength, purity, and righteousness in Jesus, who died for them. He is waiting to strip them of their garments stained and polluted in sin, and to put upon them the white robes of righteousness; He bids them live and not die.” – Steps to Christ.
So what about the Ten Commandments and Loving God and They Neighbour as Thyself?
Clearly these things are important, as they are reflections of God’s character. God’s character is love. In fact, God is love (1 John 4:16). By living out the Ten Commandments we are demonstrating love to God (first four commandments) and we are demonstrating love to our neighbour (remaining six commandments). But wonderful as such actions might be they should never be confused as having any merit for our salvation.
“There are those who profess to serve God, while they rely upon their own efforts to obey His law, to form a right character, and secure salvation. Their hearts are not moved by any deep sense of love of Christ, but they seek to perform the duties of the Christian life as that which God requires of them in order to gain heaven. Such religion is worth nothing.” – Steps to Christ.No amount of good doing contributes to what God has done for us. If it did, it would insinuate that Jesus’ sacrifice was not good enough, was not perfect. Our salvation is not Jesus’ righteousness plus some of our righteousness. It is only Jesus’ righteousness on our behalf. It is Jesus only. The only contribution we make is to accept God’s perfect salvation for us.
When we accept God’s great gift of grace, when we allow God into our life, a steady transformation occurs:
“When Christ dwells in the heart, the soul will be filled with His love, with the joy of communion with Him, that it will cleave to Him; and in the contemplation of Him, self will be forgotten. Love to Christ will be the spring of action.” – Steps to Christ.
“For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous” (1 John 5:3). Thus, keeping the commandments is not a duty, nor an attempt at going to heaven, but a natural outflow of our love to God. When we love God, we’re not following a law written on stone, but a law written on our hearts: “…saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people” (Jeremiah 31:33b).
I conclude with my favourite Bible passage: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Ephesians 2:8, 9). As one pastor so wonderfully summed it up: “By Grace alone, through Faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone.”
God is good, Jesus lives!
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
What about the people in a “wrong” church?
“…if one is, for example, a Mormon, and you believe what you're told 100%, and you're absolutely sure about it - you STILL end up in hell? …it just seems sort of unfair.”
So this is the question I received recently, and which I will try and attempt to answer. I don’t like to point fingers at specific denominations, but there are many strange denominations out there for which the question above seems relevant. In truth, I think it applies to most people in most churches – even the mainstream ones, because most churches are so far removed from true Biblical teaching that an honest Bible scholar stands confounded.
Other Sheep
I’ll start my answer by quoting Jesus: “And I have other sheep which are not of this fold: those also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one flock, one shepherd” (John 10:16).
I think the text is clear; there are other sheep in other folds (denominations, sects, even maybe religions) whom Jesus considers His sheep.
Ignorance Overlooked
My second quotations comes from Paul: “God therefore, having overlooked the times of ignorance, now enjoins men that they shall all everywhere repent, because he has set a day in which he is going to judge the habitable earth in righteousness by the man whom he has appointed, giving the proof of it to all in having raised him from among the dead” (Acts 17:30, 31).
From this text it seems that in God’s mercy, God “overlooked the times of ignorance”. It appears consistent with God’s character, as I understand God. God do not judge us unfairly. We will be judged by the light we received. In other words, we are not judged by what we do not know, but by what we do know. I think it is for this reason that it is written somewhere that the (Bible) teachers and preachers will be held more accountable (because they knew more) than the laity.
The words above by Paul suggest also that once we learned a truth, we ought to live up to that Truth. Let’s say you are in a church lacking in some Biblical Truth, and you then learn a Truth; you have come out of ignorance and moved into knowledge of that Truth. Since you are not in ignorance anymore, God “…now enjoins men that they shall all everywhere repent…” The word “repent” is from the Greek word metanoeō, which means to “think differently afterwards”. Once you’ve moved from ignorance to knowledge of aTruth, God expects us to think differently (i.e. repent); in other words, we ought to live up to the Truth we have acquired.
Receive Plagues by Association
The third text I want to quote is from the visions shown to John the Apostle by Jesus.
“And I heard another voice out of the heaven saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye have not fellowship in her sins, and that ye do not receive of her plagues: for her sins have been heaped on one another up to the heaven, and God has remembered her unrighteousnesses” (Revelation 18:4, 18:5).
The angel appeals to us living in the End Times to “come out of her”. The immediate context tells us who “she” is: “Babylon the great” (Revelation 18:2). In Bible prophecy a women represents a religious group. For instance, a pure woman is symbolic of God’s true followers, and an unchaste, adulterous woman is symbolic of God’s followers that became unfaithful. Babylon, in this passage, is symbolic of the religious systems (specifically the great Christian institutions), and her actions are described as follows: “For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies” (Revelation 18:3). A fitting description of what Christianity and world religions have become, making ties with kings (rules of countries, i.e. politicians) and merchants (corporate powers and businesses).
Well, the first text I quoted from Revelation suggests that we come out of Babylon, because she is going to receive “plagues”, and if we keep association with her, we will receive these plagues too. Although there is a period while God “overlooked the times of ignorance”, it seems that a time will come when Babylon will receive “plagues” and if we still find ourselves in Babylon, we will also receive these “plagues” with her. A time will come when we cannot continue to play the ignorance trump card; therefore the plea from the angel to "Come out of her, my people, that ye have not fellowship in her sins."
Ignorance Is Not a Cop-out
Another text, by Paul again, also suggests that ignorance is not always a cop-out.
“This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye should no longer walk as the rest of the nations walk in the vanity of their mind, being darkened in understanding, estranged from the life of God by reason of the ignorance which is in them, by reason of the hardness of their hearts, who having cast off all feeling, have given themselves up to lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greedy unsatisfied lust” (Ephesians 4:17-19).
Some people are ignorant because of the “hardness of their hearts.” In other words, they have hardened their hearts against Truth about God; they have deliberately resisted the Truth. Such “ignorance” will not be overlooked.
Short Answer
Will a sincere believer, whom lives up to the light he or she received, but whom happens to be in the wrong denomination, be lost? Probably not.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Religulous
Okay, so I saw Religulous (2008). After hearing so much bad rap about it, I was surprised by finding myself actually liking it. However, I didn’t find it funny. The only partially funny part of the documentary are the posters. Wasn't this film supposed to be humorous? It is after all hosted by comedian Bill Maher. For some reason I thought that comedy was the intention; but truly, I didn’t laugh once. Then again, I didn’t laugh watching Borat either – thought it was the stupidest film I’ve ever wasted time and money on. Why do I mention Religulous and Borat in the same sentence? Simple, they were both directed by Larry Charles.
Back to Religulous. I liked it because it highlights some very pertinent questions that I also ask. For instance, why do Christians believe in things that are not in the Bible? An example would be the celebration of Jesus’ birth on December 25th. Or keeping Sunday holy. These observances are nowhere to be found in Scripture, but still it is practiced as Biblical truth by the majority of Christendom. And that’s, in part, why I liked Religulous. It asks some valid questions.
A theme from Religulous is how Christianity does not reflect Jesus. I think this is in part what I tried to address in a post earlier this month: Religion vs Real Christianity. Maher asks some religious figures about the example of Jesus, versus their own; comparing religious figures with rock stars, which is so contrary to Jesus. Again, good and very valid questions. Standing in front of the Vatican Maher asks: “Does that look anything, like anything Jesus Christ had in mind?” A valid question. While I don’t believe God has anything against being wealthy (there were many examples of godly and wealthy men in the Bible), it is true that many religious figures seem to be in it for the money – this is foiled sharply against the example of Jesus. If anything, the purpose of the Church is NOT to make money for itself. Instead, it ought to be a conduit of encouragement, love and grace. And money received is to be channeled into helping others, not itself.
After an interview with some Christian truckers, Maher finishes his conversation with: “Thank you for being Christ-like and not just Christian.” How sad that there should be such a clear difference between Christians and the Christ they follow; and that the real thing is the exception, rather than the norm. It is for this reason that I often do not want to call myself a Christian. I honestly find little in common with Christianity, and the vindicative hateful “God” they represent.
For instance, in Religulous, Christians are shown with posters saying “God hates fags!” One lady announced “I don’t hate them [homosexuals]; God hates them!” (So one is to believe that, a mere mortal is more loving that the God of love?!) What these depictions show me is that these Christians do not know what the Bible teaches when read cohesively. God does not hate sinners, God hates sin; and God doesn’t hate sin arbitrarily, but because of how it hurt us or those around us. Actually, the Bible teaches the opposite of what these posters say: God loves sinners (Romans 5:8)! And speaking of homosexuals, in the Bible homosexuals are listed among a group of other sinners, like drunkards and envious people (1 Corinthians 6:9, 10). Why don’t we see Christians with posters shouting God hates drunkards and God hates envious people? Probably because half of them like to take to the bottle or are jealous of their neighbors. These kinds of double standards by “Christians” is a terrible blight on the religion. Jesus clearly taught not to point the finger, and on many occasions proved by word and example that He is not judgmental. Now, if a perfect person like Jesus did not judge the “sinners” of his day, who are we – full of faults and sins – to judge anybody?
I also have to agree with an Amen, when Maher says: “Two things that are completely incompatible is Christianity, as Jesus taught it, and nationalism.” This is probably one of the main purposes of this blog – my protest against Church and State. The Kingdom of God is not of this World, let us never forget it; and not try to make it otherwise.
Maher interviewed a Catholic priest at the Vatican observatory discussing religion versus science. The priest remarked: “The Scriptures are not teaching science.” How true. And that is part of the problem – people do not know how to read the Bible. I’ve written about that before too: Who Wrote the Bible? While I agree that the Bible is not a science book, I disagree with the assumption that Science and Religion are on all things mutually exclusive. There definitely are areas of overlap. And his blanket questions, like “Do you believe in Evolution?” is very much naïve on the topic. Firstly, there are many types of evolution. For instance, cosmological evolution, macro biological evolution, micro biological evolution and here we find three further types: divergent, convergent and parallel evolution. I, for instance do not believe in macro evolution, but I do believe in micro evolution. On many occasions in the documentary Maher would ask such blanket questions, and did not allow his interviewees to explain their views in full.
He also makes big deals out of strange things. For instance, the fact that the virgin birth is not recorded in all four of the Gospels is of pivotal value to Maher. Or the fact that very little is known of Jesus' childhood is heavily troublesome for Maher. Why should this be the case? Jesus’ childhood is actually of very little consequence for the Gospels. That Jesus’ birth is covered is what ought to be surprising. The Gospels (first four books of the New Testament) are not biographies, as Maher believes. A biography covers the majority of a person life. This is not what the Gospels do or intends to do. They only substantially cover the three years of Jesus’ ministry and only touch on the highlights. His criticism of the Gospel in this regard is unfounded. It’s like criticising a news article for not reading like a good screenplay.
Further, Maher addresses the great old Question of Evil: “Why doesn’t He [God] just obliterate the Devil and therefore get rid of evil in the world?” This is an old theological / philosophical question and which I addressed on this blog before as well. It is a question that Maher, who is a champion of freedom (and freedom of speech in particular), ought to be able to figure out the answer of for himself. I’ve addressed this dilemma in parts in various posts here before, but let’s try to summarize it:
God is Love and the highest value for God is Love and God wants us all to share in that Love. A requirement for Love is the Freedom of Choice. Forced love is an
oxymoron. Bribed love is not love, it’s prostitution. Coerced love is not love, it’s harassment. Forced love is not love, it’s rape. We, therefore, have freedom of choice to love or not to love. Many people choose selfishness, i.e. not to love, and the result is pain and suffering to others and ourselves. If I rape you, I have used my freedom of choice not to love you. Shockingly, God cannot do anything about it, without taking away my freedom of choice. It is all good and well to ask God to take away all the suffering in the world, but at what cost? To do so, God has to take away our freedom of choice, in which case God would not be Love, but a Tyrant.
Religulous’ reference to Christianity being a copycat religion I well addressed in my post on the Zeitgeist film, and it would seem that Religulous did exactly the same type of ridiculously lame scholarship that Zeitgeist did. Then again, that’s what one would expect from Hollywood, isn’t it?
Religulous also addresses Faith and Maher describes it as follows: “Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking.” This is sadly, actually what most religions including the majority of Christianity does. This, of course, is not what Biblical faith involves as I explained in a recent post on "Faith". Maher praises doubt throughout the movie, saying: “Doubt is humble.” It is true in part. Admitting how little we know is humble. Not pretending to have all the answers is humble. But boasting doubt? It might be honest; I just don’t know whether it is humble.
I have a list of probably another ten points I can write about, but I think the above mentioned is enough.
To conclude, in general I liked Religulous for the simple reason that it asks some pertinent (and honest) questions. While there are some moments one could argue somewhat blasphemous, it was very clear to me that Maher actually have very high esteem for Jesus and much of his questions revolved around why Christianity are not like the "Christ" they profess. Much of the film, however, was based on the doubt of Maher (and assumingly also that of Larry Charles), and at times (deliberate?) misrepresentation of those involved. I cannot say that there was anything in this documentary that presented new questions, or facts to shake my trust in God. (It might shake one's faith in Religion, but that's nothing new -- my faith is not in Religion.)
In my opinion, a much better documentary on the topic of religious fundamentalism is CNN’s three part documentary God’s Warriors.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
The Good News Tour 2009
A series of sermons about God -- the God I believe in.
In MP3-format. Right-click and "save as".
The Good News Tour 2009
1. Is There Really a God? -- Greg Boyd
2. What I Expect from God -- Marco Belmonte
3. What is God Like? -- Herb Montgomery
4. Prove to Me God is Love -- Greg Boyd
5. So Why All the Suffering? -- Herb Montgomery
6. Scary God or Scary People? -- Brad Cole
7. What Does a Christian Look Like? -- Greg Boyd
In MP3-format. Right-click and "save as".
The Good News Tour 2009
1. Is There Really a God? -- Greg Boyd
2. What I Expect from God -- Marco Belmonte
3. What is God Like? -- Herb Montgomery
4. Prove to Me God is Love -- Greg Boyd
5. So Why All the Suffering? -- Herb Montgomery
6. Scary God or Scary People? -- Brad Cole
7. What Does a Christian Look Like? -- Greg Boyd
Monday, July 20, 2009
Religion vs. (Real) Christianity
In my one native tongue, the word “religion”, when translated directly into English, means “God-service”, i.e. serving God. If we were to ask a number of people to define religion I am certain several will say something along the lines of “rituals or systems for pleasing God.” The idea of religion being the act of “serving God” seems to be core to what we understand a religion to be. There is one exception though, and that is true Christianity. In real Christianity the focus is not on us serving God, but rather on God serving us.
Does the idea of God serving us, of God being our servant, bother you? That is a normal reaction. In this world the custom is for the weak to serve the powerful. The powerful seldom serve the weak.
Keep in mind that according to Christianity, Jesus is the Incarnation of God; in other words, Jesus is God in human form. Therefore, when we study the character of Jesus, we in fact have a case study of God’s character. What do we see when we look at the ministry of Jesus? Jesus served the people. Sometimes we think that Jesus did what He did merely as an example to us. While it is true that we can learn from Jesus’ example, that is not the reason He served the sad, the hungry, the lame, the blind, the sick and sin stained souls. He served them, because that is His character – that is God’s character.
On one peculiar occasion, Jesus started to wash the feet of his disciples (John 13). Washing someone’s feet was considered the job of the lowest servant. One of Jesus’ disciples, Peter, vehemently protested. “Lord, are you going to wash my feet? You will never wash my feet!” Jesus interrupted his tangent, explaining that if He doesn’t wash Peter’s feet, the disciple cannot be part of Him. Why? Because, accepting Jesus (i.e. accepting God), is accepting this inverted role of power: God serving us, not us serving Him.
To be a Christian is first and foremost not about us serving God, it is about accepting God’s service to us. Firstly by acknowledging God’s redemptive deed at the Cross (however we understand it); and secondly, by accepting God’s continual service to us even now. That is an essential principle of true Christianity. Flowing from this is a remarkable transformation. When we comprehend how a Being of such unfathomable magnitude and power could become our “servant”, we respond with active gratitude. Because God serves us, because God demonstrated such undeserved love to us, we want to respond in loving service back to God.
This is the difference between true Christianity and other religions that worship deities. Worshipping God, serving God, is never in an attempt to appease or influence God. It is always in response to God’s goodness toward us: “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 8:5).
As Joyce Meyers like to say: Jesus did not die on the cross so that we could have a religion. He died on the cross so that we could have a relationship with Him.
Does the idea of God serving us, of God being our servant, bother you? That is a normal reaction. In this world the custom is for the weak to serve the powerful. The powerful seldom serve the weak.
Keep in mind that according to Christianity, Jesus is the Incarnation of God; in other words, Jesus is God in human form. Therefore, when we study the character of Jesus, we in fact have a case study of God’s character. What do we see when we look at the ministry of Jesus? Jesus served the people. Sometimes we think that Jesus did what He did merely as an example to us. While it is true that we can learn from Jesus’ example, that is not the reason He served the sad, the hungry, the lame, the blind, the sick and sin stained souls. He served them, because that is His character – that is God’s character.
On one peculiar occasion, Jesus started to wash the feet of his disciples (John 13). Washing someone’s feet was considered the job of the lowest servant. One of Jesus’ disciples, Peter, vehemently protested. “Lord, are you going to wash my feet? You will never wash my feet!” Jesus interrupted his tangent, explaining that if He doesn’t wash Peter’s feet, the disciple cannot be part of Him. Why? Because, accepting Jesus (i.e. accepting God), is accepting this inverted role of power: God serving us, not us serving Him.
To be a Christian is first and foremost not about us serving God, it is about accepting God’s service to us. Firstly by acknowledging God’s redemptive deed at the Cross (however we understand it); and secondly, by accepting God’s continual service to us even now. That is an essential principle of true Christianity. Flowing from this is a remarkable transformation. When we comprehend how a Being of such unfathomable magnitude and power could become our “servant”, we respond with active gratitude. Because God serves us, because God demonstrated such undeserved love to us, we want to respond in loving service back to God.
This is the difference between true Christianity and other religions that worship deities. Worshipping God, serving God, is never in an attempt to appease or influence God. It is always in response to God’s goodness toward us: “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 8:5).
As Joyce Meyers like to say: Jesus did not die on the cross so that we could have a religion. He died on the cross so that we could have a relationship with Him.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
5 Reasons People Give Up on Christianity and 5 Replies
Earlier this month, a friend sent me a link to a news article reporting on a presentation by Prof. Scott McKnight, a New Testament theologian at North Park University, Chicago. McKnight revealed the trend of numerous people leaving the Christian faith. This is something I’ve noticed amongst friends and acquaintances when I visited South Africa earlier this year as well. McKnight proposes five reasons why former Christians gave up on Christianity.
(1)
The first, he says, is the rigid doctrine of Biblical infallibility / inerrancy. When Christians actually start to read the Bible for themselves, instead of sitting back and waiting for their pastors and priests to do their reading and thinking for them, they are disillusioned when they find contradictions in the Bible. This shakes their faith and they abandon Christianity. I wrote a post on this called “Who Wrote the Bible?” on my blog, showing that there are in fact errors (contradictions) in the Bible, but that this does not lessen the inspirational quality of the Bible. Inspiration is not spirit-possession. When God inspired the Bible writers, God did not possess them like a spirit possesses a medium and literally “write through them”; nor did God always dictate. Rather, God inspired them with thoughts and they transformed these thoughts into words, using their own cultural paradigms, their own words, their own understanding. As one writer puts it: “The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God’s mode of thought and expression. God, as a writer, is not represented. Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. The writers of the Bible were God’s penmen, not His pen.” Also, the Bible is not a handbook with principles clearly spelled out in bulleted points. Instead, it is a compilation of case studies. It is our responsibility to identify the principles in these case studies. One preacher I recently listened to explained it in similar terms: “The Bible is not a codebook; it’s a casebook.”
For my post on “Who Wrote the Bible?” you can go here.
(2)
The second reason McKnight believes so many people are leaving Christianity is because of the clash between faith and science. This is a sad turn of events, and not as clear cut as people would like us to believe. The pioneers of modern science saw no such dichotomy between faith and science. Isaac Newton, for instance, felt no need to give up his faith while pursuing scientific truth. There need be no “clash” between faith and science. Science, I believe, is the discovery of the marvel of God’s creation. I like how the little book Steps to Christ put it: “Nature and revelation alike testify of God’s love”; “Nature speaks to our senses without ceasing”; “The poet and naturalist have many things to say about nature, but it is the Christian who enjoys the beauty of the earth with the highest appreciation, because he recognizes his Father’s handiwork and perceives His love in flower and shrub and tree. No one can fully appreciate the significance of hill and vale, river and sea, who does not look upon them as an expression of God’s love to man.” While science and faith have areas of overlap, there are also areas where each is wholly in a sphere of its own. For instance, there is a limit to what science can say about God, in the same way there is a limit to what the art critic can say about the artist. While it is true that the artwork reveals somewhat of the artist, it only reveals a fraction. Science’s study of creation only reveals a fraction of the Creator.
(3)
McKnight’s third point for why so many people are leaving Christianity is the example of Christians; and he specifically refers to the sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church in the USA. I think there are two points that need to be made here. Firstly, the Christianity itself teaches (or should I rather say, the Bible teaches) that the Church will become utterly corrupt. The Bible’s critique of the latter day church is much worse than ours. She is called Babylon: “fallen”, “the habitation of devils” and “foul spirits”, the “Mother of harlots and abominations of the Earth” (Revelation 18:2, 17:5). The Church’s degradation should in fact strengthen our faith in the validity of the Christian religion; while at the same time it should make us highly critical of the institutions (the “Church”). We are warned, thus, to think for ourselves, to be weary of the Church – even to “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues” (Revelation 18:4). One need not be in a mainstream church to be a Christian. However, the Bible is clear that we ought to be part of a community of faith; there is thus room for “church”, but let’s be careful not to deify the church. The “church” is not the Christian goal – Jesus Christ is the goal.
This brings me to the second point I’d like to make here: The Church has never been intended to be the “example” for what a Christian is supposed to be. After all, the Church is a hospital for sick people (sick with sin) – it is not a little heaven-on-earth. The only example, the only true pattern for Christianity is the Christ, Jesus. No fallible man is to be our model, no fallible Christian our guide. Christ alone is the example for the Christian life. The moment you take your eyes of Jesus and start criticising the church, make sure that you make a clear distinction. The “Church”, is not the essence of Christianity.
(4)
The fourth point why many people are leaving the Christian faith is the (unbiblical idea) of Hell where God keeps souls alive so that He can torture them for ceaseless millennia for the sins they committed during their relatively short lives. This is, I believe, a sick doctrine rooted in pagan traditions and an honest and true study of Scripture shows that it is not Biblical.
I’ve written about this and related topics on my blog as well:
“The Shaky Pillars of Hell”
“I Don’t Have a Soul, I Am a Soul”
“Christians Wrong About Heaven, Says Bishop”
“The Hell of Heaven”
“The Comfort of Sleeping the Sleep of Death”
(5)
McKnight’s final point for why so many people are leaving the Church is the terrifying “God of the Bible”. According to McKnight the age old Question of Evil, is a prime reason for abandonment of faith. The dilemma goes something like this: If God is all-powerful, He cannot be Good, for the world would not have been so full of Evil. And if He is Good, He cannot be all-powerful, for then He would have done something about the Evil.
This argument is flawed, because God’s Goodness (or rather God’s Love) is not properly understood. The Bible is clear that God’s greatest priority is Love. In fact, the Bible says “…God is Love…” (1 John 4:16). For Love to exist there must be Freedom of Choice. For this very reason the Evil in this world should not be surprising. As I wrote in a previous update letter: “A requirement for Love is the freedom of choice. Forced love is an oxymoron. Bribed love is not love, it’s prostitution. Coerced love is not love, it’s molestation. Forced love is not love, it’s rape.” This is the reason why Evil can exist and at the same time God can be both Good and All-powerful, because Love so important that God refuses to take away people’s freedom of choice. If God did, then Love could not exist. Unfortunately, there is a price to pay – people are using their free choice, not to love, but to hurt, to pursue their own selfish desires.
I’ve written about God and this topic to some degree on my blog as well:
“God”
“Life and Death in a Nutshell”
“Christ vs. Church”
“Why I’ll Never Be a Pantheist Again”
“A Freewill Dilemma”
Another point I ought to make here, specifically with people reading the Bible and particularly their abhorrence of the God of the Old Testament, is that Christians have a reference for understanding Scripture. Jesus Christ is our example of who God is, and what God is like. “God having spoken in many parts and in many ways formerly to the fathers in the prophets, at the end of these days has spoken to us in the person of the Son…” (Heb. 1:1,2a). There is a hierarchy of the revelation of God’s character – while the prophets in the Old Testament revealed some of it, it was the Son who has “the express image” of God (Heb 1:3), who said “if you have seen Me, you have seen the Father” (Joh. 14:9), that showed us what God is really like. We understand therefore the Old Testament revelation of God filtered through the example of Jesus’ character.
(1)
The first, he says, is the rigid doctrine of Biblical infallibility / inerrancy. When Christians actually start to read the Bible for themselves, instead of sitting back and waiting for their pastors and priests to do their reading and thinking for them, they are disillusioned when they find contradictions in the Bible. This shakes their faith and they abandon Christianity. I wrote a post on this called “Who Wrote the Bible?” on my blog, showing that there are in fact errors (contradictions) in the Bible, but that this does not lessen the inspirational quality of the Bible. Inspiration is not spirit-possession. When God inspired the Bible writers, God did not possess them like a spirit possesses a medium and literally “write through them”; nor did God always dictate. Rather, God inspired them with thoughts and they transformed these thoughts into words, using their own cultural paradigms, their own words, their own understanding. As one writer puts it: “The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God’s mode of thought and expression. God, as a writer, is not represented. Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. The writers of the Bible were God’s penmen, not His pen.” Also, the Bible is not a handbook with principles clearly spelled out in bulleted points. Instead, it is a compilation of case studies. It is our responsibility to identify the principles in these case studies. One preacher I recently listened to explained it in similar terms: “The Bible is not a codebook; it’s a casebook.”
For my post on “Who Wrote the Bible?” you can go here.
(2)
The second reason McKnight believes so many people are leaving Christianity is because of the clash between faith and science. This is a sad turn of events, and not as clear cut as people would like us to believe. The pioneers of modern science saw no such dichotomy between faith and science. Isaac Newton, for instance, felt no need to give up his faith while pursuing scientific truth. There need be no “clash” between faith and science. Science, I believe, is the discovery of the marvel of God’s creation. I like how the little book Steps to Christ put it: “Nature and revelation alike testify of God’s love”; “Nature speaks to our senses without ceasing”; “The poet and naturalist have many things to say about nature, but it is the Christian who enjoys the beauty of the earth with the highest appreciation, because he recognizes his Father’s handiwork and perceives His love in flower and shrub and tree. No one can fully appreciate the significance of hill and vale, river and sea, who does not look upon them as an expression of God’s love to man.” While science and faith have areas of overlap, there are also areas where each is wholly in a sphere of its own. For instance, there is a limit to what science can say about God, in the same way there is a limit to what the art critic can say about the artist. While it is true that the artwork reveals somewhat of the artist, it only reveals a fraction. Science’s study of creation only reveals a fraction of the Creator.
(3)
McKnight’s third point for why so many people are leaving Christianity is the example of Christians; and he specifically refers to the sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church in the USA. I think there are two points that need to be made here. Firstly, the Christianity itself teaches (or should I rather say, the Bible teaches) that the Church will become utterly corrupt. The Bible’s critique of the latter day church is much worse than ours. She is called Babylon: “fallen”, “the habitation of devils” and “foul spirits”, the “Mother of harlots and abominations of the Earth” (Revelation 18:2, 17:5). The Church’s degradation should in fact strengthen our faith in the validity of the Christian religion; while at the same time it should make us highly critical of the institutions (the “Church”). We are warned, thus, to think for ourselves, to be weary of the Church – even to “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues” (Revelation 18:4). One need not be in a mainstream church to be a Christian. However, the Bible is clear that we ought to be part of a community of faith; there is thus room for “church”, but let’s be careful not to deify the church. The “church” is not the Christian goal – Jesus Christ is the goal.
This brings me to the second point I’d like to make here: The Church has never been intended to be the “example” for what a Christian is supposed to be. After all, the Church is a hospital for sick people (sick with sin) – it is not a little heaven-on-earth. The only example, the only true pattern for Christianity is the Christ, Jesus. No fallible man is to be our model, no fallible Christian our guide. Christ alone is the example for the Christian life. The moment you take your eyes of Jesus and start criticising the church, make sure that you make a clear distinction. The “Church”, is not the essence of Christianity.
(4)
The fourth point why many people are leaving the Christian faith is the (unbiblical idea) of Hell where God keeps souls alive so that He can torture them for ceaseless millennia for the sins they committed during their relatively short lives. This is, I believe, a sick doctrine rooted in pagan traditions and an honest and true study of Scripture shows that it is not Biblical.
I’ve written about this and related topics on my blog as well:
“The Shaky Pillars of Hell”
“I Don’t Have a Soul, I Am a Soul”
“Christians Wrong About Heaven, Says Bishop”
“The Hell of Heaven”
“The Comfort of Sleeping the Sleep of Death”
(5)
McKnight’s final point for why so many people are leaving the Church is the terrifying “God of the Bible”. According to McKnight the age old Question of Evil, is a prime reason for abandonment of faith. The dilemma goes something like this: If God is all-powerful, He cannot be Good, for the world would not have been so full of Evil. And if He is Good, He cannot be all-powerful, for then He would have done something about the Evil.
This argument is flawed, because God’s Goodness (or rather God’s Love) is not properly understood. The Bible is clear that God’s greatest priority is Love. In fact, the Bible says “…God is Love…” (1 John 4:16). For Love to exist there must be Freedom of Choice. For this very reason the Evil in this world should not be surprising. As I wrote in a previous update letter: “A requirement for Love is the freedom of choice. Forced love is an oxymoron. Bribed love is not love, it’s prostitution. Coerced love is not love, it’s molestation. Forced love is not love, it’s rape.” This is the reason why Evil can exist and at the same time God can be both Good and All-powerful, because Love so important that God refuses to take away people’s freedom of choice. If God did, then Love could not exist. Unfortunately, there is a price to pay – people are using their free choice, not to love, but to hurt, to pursue their own selfish desires.
I’ve written about God and this topic to some degree on my blog as well:
“God”
“Life and Death in a Nutshell”
“Christ vs. Church”
“Why I’ll Never Be a Pantheist Again”
“A Freewill Dilemma”
Another point I ought to make here, specifically with people reading the Bible and particularly their abhorrence of the God of the Old Testament, is that Christians have a reference for understanding Scripture. Jesus Christ is our example of who God is, and what God is like. “God having spoken in many parts and in many ways formerly to the fathers in the prophets, at the end of these days has spoken to us in the person of the Son…” (Heb. 1:1,2a). There is a hierarchy of the revelation of God’s character – while the prophets in the Old Testament revealed some of it, it was the Son who has “the express image” of God (Heb 1:3), who said “if you have seen Me, you have seen the Father” (Joh. 14:9), that showed us what God is really like. We understand therefore the Old Testament revelation of God filtered through the example of Jesus’ character.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Requirement for Love
A requirement for Love is the freedom of choice. Forced love is an oxymoron. Bribed love is not love, it’s prostitution. Coerced love is not love, it’s molestation. Forced love is not love, it’s rape.
Monday, November 10, 2008
It's in His Message, not His Tomb
Photo by APIn Jerusalem Christian monks brawled yesterday at the supposed sight of Jesus’ tomb, and the supposed cross that was used to crucify Jesus and discovered in the 4th Century. The brawl broke out between monks from the Armenian and Greek Orthodox churches.
The New York Daily News has as its story headline: “Not Very Christian!”
These claims to holy sites and religious artefacts are very much outside of Jesus Christ’s legacy. Jesus did not leave any tangible stuff behind – knowing fully well that man would be tempted to worship such earthly things. He did not even write anything down. There are no manuscripts written by him. The one occasion He wrote, he wrote in the sand. We are not to be tempted to worship things or places. What Jesus left us was a message, which we call the Good News – the Gospel. Jesus is not to be found in objects or special holy sites. It is in his message that we can find him, and nobody (and no church) has a monopoly over that message.
The Daily News is correct. Such emphasis on things and places are not very Christian.
Monday, November 3, 2008
God
One of my favourite topics of contemplation is God. My musings are somewhat theological, or rather philosophical with theological implications.
Recently I’ve been pondering God’s perfection. God is perfect (this idea includes God’s self-sufficiency; i.e. God has no external needs but is completely fulfilled within God-self). Assuming this is so, then God does not require anything from us. We often hear people say that God requires us to love Him, or God requires us to be good. Although these things might be true, in the sense that God prefers love (a perfect ideal) over hate (imperfect), or goodness (perfect ideal) over evil (imperfect), whatever we do will never affect God’s self-sufficiency. Unlike the gods in fantasy books and computer games that wither away when they are not worshipped, God does not need our worship. (God may appreciate it, but definitely do not need it in any intrinsic sense.)
Such thoughts must sound strange coming from a Christian, but then again, I consider my Christianity founded on philosophical understandings, more than religious traditions.
I think it is because Christians sometimes forget these basic truths about God’s essence (such as God’s self-sufficiency) that they come up with all kinds of strange dogmas. Some people think that if they do certain things, or if they don’t do other things, God will love them more (or conversely like them less). Can you see the problem with this type of thinking? God doesn’t need anything and therefore your doing or not doing will not influence how God feels about you. As a Christian I believe that God is Love, and as such God loves all people unconditionally, regardless of their doings and non-doings.
A possible problem with this focus on God’s self-sufficiency is that one can easily find oneself on a logical slippery-slope resulting in an aloof deistic god. Because all of its needs are met within itself, it is completely inward focussed (self-centred) and as some philosophers of old thought, such a god, dazed in its self-generated ecstasy, would be completely oblivious to anything outside of itself; completely inward-focussed.
This is not at all what I think of God. I think that God’s self-sufficiency is creating exactly the opposite effect; God is completely outward-focussed. It is precisely because all God’s needs are met within God-self, that God can act perfectly unselfishly. God’s actions towards us are without any hidden agendas or selfish pursuits. God’s actions towards us are an immanent outflow of God’s unselfish character.
It is because of God’s self-sufficiency that God can truly love us unconditionally. Humans almost (or probably) never love unconditionally. We usually love other people because of what they do for us, or how they make us feel, or because of their love towards us, or how the act of loving makes us feel, or other such variables. God, on the other hand, does not love us because what we do for God or how we make God feel, and so on; rather, God loves us purely because that is who God is. God is love. God has no need that we can fulfil in God; therefore God’s love towards us is perfect. No strings attached. Unlike us, God does not need to love something, or be loved in return. God is self-fulfilled. But still God loves us because that is God’s character. Just as the sun do not need to shine, it merely shine because that is it’s nature, so God loves, because that is who God is.
Many Christians believe that God loves humanity because of the price paid by Jesus Christ on the cross. This notion implies that God had a (vengeful / retributive) need to be fulfilled and so Jesus supplied that need by being tortured and killed. But this is a completely wrong concept of what happened at the Cross. As one writer puts it: “The Father loves us, not because of the great propitiation, but He provided the propitiation because He loves us. Christ was the medium through which He could pour out His infinite love upon a fallen world. ‘God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself’, 2 Corinthians 5:19.” [“Propitiation” means something that appeases a Deity.]
Jesus Christ did many things at the Cross, one of them we can understand to be a type of payment [“propitiation”] for the sins of humanity, but whatever happened at the Cross it was not intended to change God’s attitude towards us. God is a constant. God is perfect. And God loves us perfectly.
The idea of God’s perfection and self-sufficiency should also rid us of all our attempts at saving ourselves; rid us of all our self-righteousness. If God is perfect, then what on earth can we give as sacrifice that could satisfy a self-sufficient, perfect God? Not even our love can add to God’s self-sufficiency. There is nothing that God needs from us. That is why Christianity believes, that if propitiation is needed, only God can supply such a sacrifice. And only something innately perfect can be such an offer. Only God-self could be such an offer (as only God is innately perfect) – and that is, what we understand Christ, as God-Incarnate, to be.
The text quoted above, “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself”, says that it is not God that is in enmity towards us, but we are enemies with God and through the ministry of Christ, God could reconcile us to “Himself”. In other words, through Christ, God could help us change, from being enemies with God, to being friends with God.
Whatever God requests from us, is not for God’s good, but for our good. If God requires us to love God, it is not because God needs to be loved, but it is because we need to love God. If God requires us not to steel or kill or any such moral principle, it is not because our wrong doing is going to deduct from God in some mystical way. Rather, wrong doing will negatively affect our lives, or the lives of other people. God’s commandments are not arbitrary rules by a spoilsport grandfather in the sky that wants to ruin our fun; instead, God’s commandments are for our good, and for the good of our fellow men and women. They are precepts for a life of unselfishness.
Understanding this, a theologian might ask: “If God doesn’t need anything from us, how then can anybody be lost? Aren’t you advocating some kind of universalism where everyone is saved?”
This too, would be a misunderstanding of God’s essence. If God is love, then God will never force Himself onto us. Forced loved is not real love – it is a selfish act, which we call “rape”. No, in God’s love, God will always allow us freedom of choice. Therefore we are always free not to choose God. Unfortunately this choice also means damnation. Not because God arbitrarily damns us, but because God is the Source of Life, love and all creative and regenerative power. Only when we choose God do we have access to these sustaining and restorative forces. So only in a relationship with God can we have salvation. Apart from God there is no salvation.
Recently I’ve been pondering God’s perfection. God is perfect (this idea includes God’s self-sufficiency; i.e. God has no external needs but is completely fulfilled within God-self). Assuming this is so, then God does not require anything from us. We often hear people say that God requires us to love Him, or God requires us to be good. Although these things might be true, in the sense that God prefers love (a perfect ideal) over hate (imperfect), or goodness (perfect ideal) over evil (imperfect), whatever we do will never affect God’s self-sufficiency. Unlike the gods in fantasy books and computer games that wither away when they are not worshipped, God does not need our worship. (God may appreciate it, but definitely do not need it in any intrinsic sense.)
Such thoughts must sound strange coming from a Christian, but then again, I consider my Christianity founded on philosophical understandings, more than religious traditions.
I think it is because Christians sometimes forget these basic truths about God’s essence (such as God’s self-sufficiency) that they come up with all kinds of strange dogmas. Some people think that if they do certain things, or if they don’t do other things, God will love them more (or conversely like them less). Can you see the problem with this type of thinking? God doesn’t need anything and therefore your doing or not doing will not influence how God feels about you. As a Christian I believe that God is Love, and as such God loves all people unconditionally, regardless of their doings and non-doings.
A possible problem with this focus on God’s self-sufficiency is that one can easily find oneself on a logical slippery-slope resulting in an aloof deistic god. Because all of its needs are met within itself, it is completely inward focussed (self-centred) and as some philosophers of old thought, such a god, dazed in its self-generated ecstasy, would be completely oblivious to anything outside of itself; completely inward-focussed.
This is not at all what I think of God. I think that God’s self-sufficiency is creating exactly the opposite effect; God is completely outward-focussed. It is precisely because all God’s needs are met within God-self, that God can act perfectly unselfishly. God’s actions towards us are without any hidden agendas or selfish pursuits. God’s actions towards us are an immanent outflow of God’s unselfish character.
It is because of God’s self-sufficiency that God can truly love us unconditionally. Humans almost (or probably) never love unconditionally. We usually love other people because of what they do for us, or how they make us feel, or because of their love towards us, or how the act of loving makes us feel, or other such variables. God, on the other hand, does not love us because what we do for God or how we make God feel, and so on; rather, God loves us purely because that is who God is. God is love. God has no need that we can fulfil in God; therefore God’s love towards us is perfect. No strings attached. Unlike us, God does not need to love something, or be loved in return. God is self-fulfilled. But still God loves us because that is God’s character. Just as the sun do not need to shine, it merely shine because that is it’s nature, so God loves, because that is who God is.
Many Christians believe that God loves humanity because of the price paid by Jesus Christ on the cross. This notion implies that God had a (vengeful / retributive) need to be fulfilled and so Jesus supplied that need by being tortured and killed. But this is a completely wrong concept of what happened at the Cross. As one writer puts it: “The Father loves us, not because of the great propitiation, but He provided the propitiation because He loves us. Christ was the medium through which He could pour out His infinite love upon a fallen world. ‘God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself’, 2 Corinthians 5:19.” [“Propitiation” means something that appeases a Deity.]
Jesus Christ did many things at the Cross, one of them we can understand to be a type of payment [“propitiation”] for the sins of humanity, but whatever happened at the Cross it was not intended to change God’s attitude towards us. God is a constant. God is perfect. And God loves us perfectly.
The idea of God’s perfection and self-sufficiency should also rid us of all our attempts at saving ourselves; rid us of all our self-righteousness. If God is perfect, then what on earth can we give as sacrifice that could satisfy a self-sufficient, perfect God? Not even our love can add to God’s self-sufficiency. There is nothing that God needs from us. That is why Christianity believes, that if propitiation is needed, only God can supply such a sacrifice. And only something innately perfect can be such an offer. Only God-self could be such an offer (as only God is innately perfect) – and that is, what we understand Christ, as God-Incarnate, to be.
The text quoted above, “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself”, says that it is not God that is in enmity towards us, but we are enemies with God and through the ministry of Christ, God could reconcile us to “Himself”. In other words, through Christ, God could help us change, from being enemies with God, to being friends with God.
Whatever God requests from us, is not for God’s good, but for our good. If God requires us to love God, it is not because God needs to be loved, but it is because we need to love God. If God requires us not to steel or kill or any such moral principle, it is not because our wrong doing is going to deduct from God in some mystical way. Rather, wrong doing will negatively affect our lives, or the lives of other people. God’s commandments are not arbitrary rules by a spoilsport grandfather in the sky that wants to ruin our fun; instead, God’s commandments are for our good, and for the good of our fellow men and women. They are precepts for a life of unselfishness.
Understanding this, a theologian might ask: “If God doesn’t need anything from us, how then can anybody be lost? Aren’t you advocating some kind of universalism where everyone is saved?”
This too, would be a misunderstanding of God’s essence. If God is love, then God will never force Himself onto us. Forced loved is not real love – it is a selfish act, which we call “rape”. No, in God’s love, God will always allow us freedom of choice. Therefore we are always free not to choose God. Unfortunately this choice also means damnation. Not because God arbitrarily damns us, but because God is the Source of Life, love and all creative and regenerative power. Only when we choose God do we have access to these sustaining and restorative forces. So only in a relationship with God can we have salvation. Apart from God there is no salvation.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
The Grass is not Greener in Iceland
“When reading your blog, I’m wondering if it would not be better to move somewhere else,” writes a friend. He lives in South Africa. His motivation is in part also to protect his wife and children from the high crime rate in the country.
My suggestion to him was to consider Northern Europe: Very low crime rate; prosperous; high on freedom of speech and religion.
And then, this morning another friend sent me the link to a blogpost by someone in Iceland. And suddenly Northern Europe doesn’t seem like such a good suggestion anymore. The blogger writes: “It’s like we know the system is broken, we know it’s gone, but we can’t see it. We can’t tell what’s real, what’s still there, and what are just the ghosts of yesterday, when Iceland was one of the richest countries in the world. A pale reflection of the golden age in Icelandic economy which is now going up in flames. Where’s the smoke?”
I don’t know how to end off this post. What does one say before the brink of disaster? I cannot even say God have mercy, ‘cause that will insinuate that God is somehow to blame and that I don’t believe for a minute. We are to blame. We humans, and our greed and selfishness, are to blame.
My suggestion to him was to consider Northern Europe: Very low crime rate; prosperous; high on freedom of speech and religion.
And then, this morning another friend sent me the link to a blogpost by someone in Iceland. And suddenly Northern Europe doesn’t seem like such a good suggestion anymore. The blogger writes: “It’s like we know the system is broken, we know it’s gone, but we can’t see it. We can’t tell what’s real, what’s still there, and what are just the ghosts of yesterday, when Iceland was one of the richest countries in the world. A pale reflection of the golden age in Icelandic economy which is now going up in flames. Where’s the smoke?”
I don’t know how to end off this post. What does one say before the brink of disaster? I cannot even say God have mercy, ‘cause that will insinuate that God is somehow to blame and that I don’t believe for a minute. We are to blame. We humans, and our greed and selfishness, are to blame.
Friday, August 15, 2008
Christ vs Church
"Christ does not drive but draws men unto Him. The only compulsion which He employs is the constraint of love. When the church begins to seek for the support of secular power, it is evident that she is devoid of the power of Christ--the constraint of divine love."
How fittingly the above quotation describes what's happening in Croatia and other parts of the world where the church "seek[s] for the support of secular power" in the form of national laws and so on.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Ashamed of "Christians"
I see this photo* and I shudder. It is an anti-gay sign saying that Jesus’ plan for the lives of gays is hell. I see this and I’m disgusted with how we have perverted Christianity and how we misrepresent Christ. Hell is not the plan Jesus has for anyone – and don’t go add “love” as sarcasm.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Agreeing with an atheist
I’m reading the book “The God Delusion” (2006) by famous (and somewhat self-acclaimed “aggressive”) atheist Richard Dawkins, known for his activism against religions.
- You will survive your own death. [If, by this, Dawkins means the innate immortality of the soul, I also disagree with the statement.]
- If you die a martyr, you will go to an especially wonderful part of paradise where you will enjoy seventy-two virgins (spare a thought for the unfortunate virgins). [Okay, not a Christian doctrine, but of Abrahamic religious origin. I do not believe in this. Whether God has pleasantries installed for martyrs I don’t know, but I disagree with the idea that militant “holy war”-martyrs is looked upon favourably by God. I disagree with the statement.]
- Belief in God is a supreme virtue. If you find your belief wavering, work hard at restoring it, and beg God to help your unbelief. [Belief, Hope and Love are listed as priority virtues. So I do agree with this statement. However, Dawkins’ understanding of “belief” and mine differ as we will see with the next point. But for the sake of arbitrariness let’s say agree fully with this statement.]
- Faith (belief without evidence) is a virtue. The more your beliefs defy the evidence, the more virtuous you are. Virtuoso believers who can manage to believe something really weird, unsupported and insupportable, in the teeth of evidence and reason, are especially highly rewarded. [My understanding, from the Bible, of what faith differs greatly from Dawkins understanding of the term. Faith, as I understand it, is “trust” and not blind-faith. I don’t think that God is an adherent supported of blind-faith. So I disagree with the statement.]
- Everybody, even those who do not hold religious beliefs, must respect them with a higher level of automatic and unquestioned respect than that accorded to other kinds of belief. [I think we should allow people their differences in opinion. We do not have to agree, but we can respect such differences and even engage in dialogue. So I only halfway disagree with this statement.
- There are some weird things (such as the Trinity, transubstantiation, incarnation) that we are not meant to understand. Don’t even try to understand one of these, for the attempt might destroy it. Learn how to gain fulfilment in calling it s mystery. [To start with, I do not belief in the doctrine of transubstantiation. Neither do I think we are barred from contemplating the other two, or similar, “mysteries” mentioned. Our musings over such concepts cannot destroy them, just as little as our musings over the number “0” can destroy this mysterious icon of “nothingness”. I mean, what is “nothing”. It is not something I can mentally grasp, yet mathematics claims it to exist. So, although I believe in the inspired concept of the incarnation, for instance, I disagree with the statement.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)