salvation part 2

Last night I was feeling the crush of building up emotion over my recent struggle with the concept of salvation. I think maybe the biggest result of studying history has been the historicization of many of the cultural things I always took for granted as "God-breathed." This creates a mental world in which my faith and the absolute claims it makes clash very obviously and painfully with the mainstream of my profession. Intellectual honesty requires me to confront things that make me feel like a failure to my Christian church, family, and friends even for considering them. I try to keep most of my questions to myself, because I am afraid of the result of allowing the questions the light of day. This blog absorbs much of my musings.

Last night I wrote a blog entry. It got lost right as I was posting it, and I did not attempt to rewrite it because the very process of writing the entry gave me so much clarity, but I didn't feel I could recreate it sufficiently. And I didn't really have the energy to try.

But tonight I was reading over my most recent published post, and feeling like I aired so many questions that I would hate for someone to take out of context.

I want my evangelical Christian readers to understand that most of my questions are answered on the side of evanglical Christianity. It constantly amazes me how many questions I ask only to realize that the Biblical training I received as a child was incredibly sound and that I was probably quite foolish to ask the question in the first place. But the point is that I need to ask the questions. It's no longer sufficient for me to blindly believe the faith of my youth. And so I put myself in the hands of God, trusting that His truth will prevail. Praying for wisdom, and the grace to admit when I'm wrong, and to know when I need to abandon previously held assumptions. And also to know when I must reject the worldly training (not necessarily the academic side of things... mostly just general things and ideas I'm exposed to as an indirect consequence of my historical training) I am currently receiving in favor of a world-view that at times runs in the face of everything I am currently being trained in.

I would like to quote an excerpt from the first chapter of Rob Bell's book Love Wins, which I have recently been scanning. It's written in a rather poetical style, fyi.

"In Luke 7 we read a story about a Roman centurion who sends a message to Jesus, telling him that all he has to do is say the word and the centurion’ssick servant will be healed. Jesus is amazed at the man’s confidence in him, and, turning to the crowd following him, he says, “I tell you, I have not found such great faith even in Israel.”

Then in Luke 18, Jesus tells a story about two people who go to the temple to pray. The one prays about how glad he is to not be a sinner like other people, while the other stands at a distance and says, “God, have mercy on me, a sinner.”

And then in Luke 23, the man hanging on the cross next to Jesus says to him, “Remember me when you come into your kingdom,” and Jesus assures him that they’ll be together in paradise.
So in the first story the centurion gives a speech about how authority works, in the second story the man praying asks for mercy, and in the third story the man asks to be remembered at a future date in time.

In the first case, Jesus isn’t just accepting and approving; he’s amazed.
And in the second case, he states that the man’s words put him in better
standing with God than God’s own people.
And in the third case, the man is promised that later that very day he will
be with Jesus in “paradise.”

So is it what you say that saves you?

But then in John 3 Jesus tells a man named Nicodemus that if he wants to see the “kingdom of God” he must be “born again.”
And in Luke 20, when Jesus is asked about the afterlife, he refers in his
response to “those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to
come.”

So is it about being born again or being considered worthy?
Is it what you say or what you are that saves you?

But then, in Matthew 6, Jesus is teaching his disciples how to pray, and he says that if they forgive others, then God will forgive them, and if they don’t forgive others, then God won’t forgive them.
Then in Matthew 7 Jesus explains, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom, but only those who do the will of my Father.”
And then in Matthew 10 he teaches that “those who stand firm till the end will be saved.”
So do we have to forgive others, do the will of the Father, or “stand firm” to be accepted by God?
Which is it?
Is it what we say,
or what we are,
or who we forgive,
or whether we do the will of God,
or if we “stand firm” or not?

But then in Luke 19, a man named Zacchaeus tells Jesus, “Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”
Jesus’s response? “Today salvation has come to this house.”
So is it what we say,
or is it who we are,
or is it what we do,
or is it what we say we’re going to do?

And then in Mark 2, Jesus is teaching in a house and some men cut a hole in the roof and lower down their sick friend for Jesus to heal. When Jesus sees their faith, he says to the paralyzed man, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”
His sins are forgiven because of their faith?
Is it what you say,
or who you are,
or what you do,
or what you say you’re going to do,
or is it who your friends are or what your friends do?

But then in 1 Corinthians 7 it’s written: “How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?” And then Paul writes in his first letter to Timothy that women “will be saved through childbearing” (chap. 2).
So is it what you say,
or who you are,
or what you do,
or what you say you’re going to do,
or who your friends are,
or who you’re married to,
or whether you give birth to children?

These questions bring us to one of the first “conversion” stories of the early church. We read in Acts 22 about a man named Saul (later, Paul) who is traveling to the city of Damascus to persecute Christians when he hears a voice ask him, “Why do you persecute me?” He responds, “Who are you, Lord?” The voice then replies: “I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting. . . . Get up and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all that you have been assigned to do.”
That’s his “conversion” experience?
Paul is asked a question.
Paul then asks a question in response to the question he’s just been asked.
He’s then told it’s Jesus and he should go into the city and he’ll know what to do.
Is it what you say,
or who you are,
or what you do,
or what you say you’re going to do,
or who your friends are,
or who you’re married to,
or whether you give birth to children?
Or is it what questions you’re asked?
Or is it what questions you ask in return?
Or is it whether you do what you’re told and go into the city?
And then in Romans 11, Paul writes, “And in this way all Israel will be saved.”
All of Israel?
So is it the tribe, or family, or ethnic group you’re born into?"

~

He goes on.

That, in essence, though, is the question I was asking. WHY THE CRAP ARE THERE SO MANY WAYS OF BEING SAVED PRESENTED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT? And, last night, I was pretty emotional about it. After all, it's a weighty question, especially given Protestant Christianity's emphasis on grace and simple acceptance of Christ's gift of salvation. What are we to do with passages such as the rich man who comes to Jesus and asks how to be saved and Jesus tells him to sell everything he has? What about that? What about 1 John and the command to love if indeed we can be considered children of light?

At this point, I want to be clear: I do not agree with the conclusions Bell comes to as a result of posing the above question. He basically argues for universalism, and not only that, a hell that is very this-worldly. In addition, often he allows his argument to be purely rhetorical, and often he does not consider verses that would not lend themselves well to his argument. But, can we please stop screaming "Heresy!!" when we hear about his book? Because a) most of the people who scream heresy have not read it and b) his questions are valid - they are a result of living in this world. A result of loving people and not being able to bear the thought of eternal damnation. They are a result of real issues that Christians cannot afford to tiptoe around. Can we not wrestle with the apparent contradictions in the New Testament? Because when we do, I believe THAT is when we will come to a truth that we can live with. That we can live for. That we can give our lives for and die for.

John 3:16-19 - "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. [at this point last night, I was ready to throw this in the box of evidence for Rob Bell's conclusions. But then I kept reading.] Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil."
John 3:36 - "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."

As a sinner, as a child of God, and as a person, I am called to love everyone as God does. Whereas God's wrath is real, and His wrath is just, I am called simply to love. To forgive, and to extend mercy. If I truly love my neighbors, my heart will break for them. As God's heart breaks when one lamb is lost. But He goes after the lamb until He finds it.

That, I think, is where I find my hope. That maybe, just maybe, I don't know the whole story...that maybe, just maybe (and this is where I think Bell's greatest strength lies), God's love and mercy and election is wider and more powerful than I had ever imagined. That maybe, just maybe there's more to the story than I know.

Because this I do know: "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin." Exodus 34:6-7a [to be fair, the latter part of verse 7 refers to God's wrath and punishment - that's my biggest pet peeve, when people leave the inconvenient parts out for the sake of rhetoric.]