But I have also thought carefully about what the Bible says about human choice, and have concluded that such membership can be forfeited--and often is. God has given his creatures many wonderful gifts, but one terrifying one--free will. It's the only gift that can't be neglected, and comes with guaranteed results.
I also believe that Hell is a metaphor for finality. While being God's child ensures eternal life--life growing into fullness over unimaginable time--forfeiting one's privilege as a son or daughter of God brings eternal death--final and complete separation from God. God's justice was satisfied by Jesus' death. He doesn't need it to be further slaked via eternal torture.
Under these circumstances, why would anyone bother to become a Christian? Or evangelize? Before I tackle that question, I guess one should ask, "Just what is a Christian?"
I have come across an interesting site recently developed by a collection of people of various faiths, including Christian. It can be accessed at http://www.religioustolerance.org/. They make the following observations about the definition of 'Christian'.
This question assumes that there is one and only one correct definition of the term "Christian." However, depending upon your understanding of the nature of truth, many definitions may be "true" to various groups:
* To conservative Protestants, a Christian is often defined according to their salvation status. Their definition is "true" to them, because it agrees with some of their foundational beliefs: that the Bible is inerrant, that salvation is by grace, and that one must be "born-again" to be saved and avoid eternal punishment in Hell.
* To Roman Catholics, a Christian is often defined according to their baptism status and the presence of any unresolved mortal sin in their lives. Their definition is "true" to them, because it agrees with their fundamental beliefs about the nature of sacraments, their understanding of the Bible, the declarations of many Church Councils, the statements of many popes, and their church's tradition.
* To many in the very early Christian movement, a Christian was defined as a person who was baptized and proclaimed "Jesus is Lord." Their definition was "true" to them because it agreed with their understanding of their religious belief at a time when the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) had not yet been written and assembled.
* And so on, with other faith groups.
Each group has their own definition of "Christian" that agrees with their own beliefs about the nature of Jesus, God, church tradition, written text, evolved theology, the cultures in which they are implanted, etc. There appears to be no way to compromise on a single definition that is acceptable to all.
I suppose they're right. I'm happy enough to use St. Paul's definition in Romans 10:9: If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Throw in the apostle James' definition of pure religion and that should do: James 1:27 Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.
So a Christian is one who identifies publicly with Jesus, accepts his sovereignty, and believes in his resurrection, practices social justice, and lives a life of virtue as biblically defined.
What would be the advantage of aligning oneself with this faith over being a Muslim, Buddhist, Jew, Hindu, Wiccan, Sikh, or atheist for that matter?
That's next.
No comments:
Post a Comment