Questions on Christianity

The Christian doctrine of salvation states we must believe in Jesus and his death for our sins to be saved and go to heaven.  In this blog and in my book we have asked three questions about this doctrine.  One of these questions is:

• What kind of a God would condemn to hell those who have never heard of Jesus or who have a distorted view of Jesus?

This question has been asked for centuries but no one has developed answers that are logical and Biblical based.  Having no answer for this question creates serious problems concerning the validity of our Christian faith.  As David Trueblood, a Christian philosopher, states:

What kind of God is it who consigns men and women and children to eternal torment, in spite of the fact that they have not had even a remote chance of knowing the saving truth?. . .A God who would thus play favorites with His children, condemning some to eternal separation from Himself while admitting others, and distinguishing between them wholly or chiefly on the basis of the accidents of history or geography, over which they had no control, would be more devil than God.  In any case He would not even remotely resemble Jesus Christ, and thus there is a contradiction at the heart of the system. [1]

If we have a contradiction at the heart of our faith, how can we justify adhering to our faith?  Now I understand that we are finite and will not understand why God does everything the way he does.  As a result we will need to take some things on faith.  But I have a hard time believing that God would place a contradiction at the heart of our faith and expect us to essentially ignore it.

There must be a solution to this problem.  So why have we not resolved it?

_____________________________

[1]   David Elton Trueblood, Philosophy of Religion, New York:  Harper & Row, 1957, pp. 221-222.

In an article on the impact black holes have on galaxies and the various theories scientists have about that subject, John Kormendy notes that “Scientists get very sure of things that they think they’re very sure of.  And sometimes they’ve been wrong—and when they are, it’s a hell of a job to change the folklore”. [1]

We are no different than the scientists.  In his Curious Cat blog, John Hunter notes that it is difficult for all of us to change.  Part of the problem is that once we invest so much in a particular way of thinking, to change that way of things means what we have done in the past is wasted. [2]  And none of us like to think we have wasted a considerable part of our lives. But regardless of what it costs us we should follow the advice of a Turkish proverb:  “No matter how long you have been on the wrong road, turn back.”

Now Christians can use what is stated above to convince someone to become a Christian.  In fact that is what Christianity is all about—admitting our failures and resolving to take a new direction.  However, we should also follow this Turkish proverb when we encounter problems with our beliefs.  For example, in this blog and in my book we have raised three questions about the Christian doctrine of salvation.  For centuries, Christianity has not addressed those questions.  In this blog we have proposed a solution but accepting that solution requires that we change some of our beliefs about our doctrine of salvation.  Will we continue down the wrong road on which Christianity has been or will we turn back?

_____________________________

[1]   John Kormendy as quoted in Camille M. Carlisle, “Of Black Holes and Galaxies”, Sky & Telescope, February 2017, p. 20.

[2]   Gerald Suarez as quoted by John Hunter, http://management.CuriousCatblog.net, June 25, 2014.

In this blog (see the posts of 08-24-2014 and 08-31-2015) and in my book, we have noted the curiosity that while Christ’s resurrection is one of the most celebrated Christian events, it is hardly mentioned in our theology.  Why?  Several other Christians have recognized this and one is H. A. Williams.  He states that if the concept of the resurrection is just an historical event as in Christ’s resurrection or if it is just a future event as when we will be raised from the dead, then the idea of the resurrection is merely theoretical and therefore meaningless to us.  In other words, it has no impact on our current lives. [1]

Williams asserts that the resurrection should have an impact on our lives because only if we experience resurrection in the present can we expect to experience it in the future. [2]  Additionally, the Bible teaches us in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 that Jesus’ resurrection (which is described in the perfect tense) is a past event with present consequences which is the new life God wants us to live.  The only way we will experience true resurrection after we die will be if we experience true resurrection while we are alive.  We must become a new creation if we expect to experience the presence of God when we die.  Why is that not part of our doctrine of salvation?

Also in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, the past tense is used to describe Jesus’ death for our sins.  There is nothing more we need to do about our sins; Jesus paid the penalty and that is final.  It is so strange that in our doctrine we Christians focus on what happened in the past, on what is already been accomplished, while ignoring what God has planned for us today.  Why?

____________________________

[1]   H. A. Williams, True Resurrection, Springfield, IL:  Templegate Publishers, 1972, pp. 3-5.

[2]  Ibid., p. 13

I’m reading Backgrounds of Early Christianity by Everett Perguson.  In this book Perguson notes that morality was not associated with religion in Greco-Roman paganism.  Rather, morality was taught by philosophers and teachers or was the result of one’s national customs.  Perguson also notes that this distinction between religion and morality is strange to those of us of the Judeo-Christian heritage. [1]

But is this separation between religion and morality really that strange to us Christians?  Our doctrine of salvation states all we need to do to be saved is to believe and nothing else.  Our ethics or morality has nothing to do with our salvation.

However, this blog and my book reference multiple Biblical passages that contradict the notion that our ethics have nothing to do with our salvation.  One example is in Galatians 6 where Paul is talking about Christians and Christian problems; he is not talking about unbelievers.  He says:

Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. (Galatians 6:7-9 ESV)

Religious rules for Greco-Roman paganism were largely ceremonial and not ethical.  Major events in a family’s life were celebrated by offering gifts to various idols and gods. [2]  Is that much different from salvation being just a matter of belief?  Is God satisfied, are we saved, just because we say the right words at one point in our lives?  Is God satisfied if we have a ceremony of professing belief and baptism?  If you answered “yes” then it appears that the practices of the Greco-Roman pagans were not much different from our practices as Christians today.  If you answered “no” then we need to change our doctrine of salvation.

__________________________

[1]   Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Grand Rapids, MI:  William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993, pp. 65 and 165.

[2]   Ibid., p. 165.

In the last blog we briefly mentioned the Great or Divine Commission which is contained in Matthew 28. It is Jesus’ final instructions to his followers.

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.  Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18-20 ESV)

What is of interest is that all of Jesus’ commands contained in the Great Commission are action words—things we are to do.  Nothing is said about belief.  Jesus did not say to make believers of all nations; he said to make disciples.  So why is not our doctrine of salvation the same?  Why does our doctrine of salvation only concern itself with our belief in Jesus and his death for our sins and say nothing about the actions the Bible says we are to take?

Now before someone will be a disciple of Jesus or follow Jesus’ command they undoubtedly would first believe in Jesus.  However, that still does not negate the emphasis Jesus places on actions in the Great Commission.  And as we have shown in this blog and in my book, the entire Bible has the same emphasis; our actions are necessary for our salvation.