Some Things to Think About

If there is one thing that I know about human beings it's that we love to be right. I mean...who wants to be wrong? What we believe about politics, social issues, parenting techniques, and the like are important matters. This is especially true in what we believe about God. While I'm not here to tell you that it's okay to be wrong, I do want to say that it is okay to ask questions.

Does it not bother you that a majority of people do not think of those within the Christian faith as critical thinkers? Many of them see us as the enemy of intelligence, reason, and friendly debate. Can you blame them? I mean it's one thing to have a creationist debating an evolutionist but quite another for one believer to be debating another believer. They see our finger pointing, hear our name calling, and are blown away by our lack of regard for those in the faith. Over the last few months I have been on a journey with leaders from other denominations within the Protestant faith. I have thoroughly enjoyed our discussions. Talking about our differences hasn't created division but rather has forced us to look into the things that bind us together. A practice that I wish more and more in the faith would employ.

I was reading through writings of an author that I wish to remain nameless. I read the writings not because I agreed on every point. I read him because I wanted to hear some of the things he was saying. I wanted to look at his approach to various aspects of the faith. How does he reason? What questions is he willing to ask? What are the things that are concrete for him? These things matter. I don't mention his name because some people simply turn off those they don't agree with. What I can tell you about this individual is that he fully agrees with the Nicene Creed. He holds fast to what the early church agreed to as the commonality of the faith. While at the same time he doesn't mind getting his hands dirty by questioning some of our more difficult beliefs.

Have you ever done that? Have you ever sat back and actually looked at the differences between the denominations? What about the different groups that consider themselves as a part of the Christian faith? Have you investigated the differences between Eastern and Western Christianity? For the majority of people reading this blog this may not have seemed important to you. That's okay. I would much rather people be firm in their own faith before they begin to look into other things. But with that being said, I want to pose some questions that this author asked - some conclusions that he came to when investigating our differences.

The conclusions that we arrive at (regardless of the discussion) depends upon:
1) Our View of God
- Is God primarily a God of love, justice, mercy or righteous anger? Is His primary posture towards humanity enmity or compassion? Does God's holiness allow or prevent fellowship with sinful people? Is God free to forgive or bound by righteousness to punish? Is He absolutely approachable or infinitely unapproachable?

2) Our View of the Atonement
- Was the Cross about God pouring out His wrath upon Christ or us pouring our wrath out upon God? Was God punishing Jesus in our place (ultimate justice) or were we murdering God's perfect love (ultimate injustice)? Was it about final payment for sin-debts or final forgiveness of sin-debts? Does the Cross save us from God, the devil, sin, death, or ourselves?

3) Our Approach to Scripture
- When we read the Bible, do we tend to interpret the images literally or metaphorically? Do we feel we are more faithful to the text when we take it as literally as the language allows or when we are most sensitive to the author's use of symbols? Are we more prone to ignore verses that don't fit our doctrinal presuppositions or are we more apt to bend them into our framework?

4) Our Personal Need in Regards to our View on Hell
- Do we feel the need to ignore, minimize, or do away with hell because we cannot allow that a loving God could conceive, create, or implement such a monstrosity? Or do we desperately need hell, because in this world of atrocities, God could not be considered holy, righteous, and just without it? Do we require such a place with which to threaten unbelievers into salvation and believers into faithfulness? Or, like the annihilationist, do we look for a proportionate combination of compassion and punishment in our desire to prevent God from vanquishing evil with a far greater evil?

The point that this author makes in regard to all of these things is that there is an incredible amount of tension in the Scriptures regarding various aspects of what we believe. How do we handle the tension? Maybe a better question would be, how do we handle those who come to a different conclusion after working through the tension? Can we at least agree on a few things? Could we agree that the tension creates the possiblity that people may disagree with our conclusions but that it does not negate the legitimacy of their faith?
* We cannot presume to know that all will be saved or that any will not be saved.
*The revelation of God in Christ includes real warnings about the possibility of damnation for some and also the real possibility that redemption may extend to all.
*We not only dare hope and pray that God's mercy would finally triumph over judgement; the love of God obligate us to such hope.

Are these questions and conclusions at least a great reminder that God's ways have always been higher than our ways and His thoughts higher than our thoughts. That we, seeking to be led by the Spirit, are doing our best to be fully persuaded in the right beliefs. That each of us seek to know God fully and to make Him known. If anything I pray that this type of discussion would lead us to pray for one another, to extend grace to those who are searching, and to express love to all. I believe that is the way of the Kingdom. Even if you disagree.

Be blessed.