(This is the fifth of eight posts in which I’ll answers questions that come up often in our church, and the second in which I tackle this particular question.)

If God plans to “save” people who aren’t explicitly identified as Christians, he hasn’t told us. All we know is how God has purposed to bring salvation to the world – through Jesus – so until God tells us otherwise we’re going to focus on that. This brings up two other points:

1. God hasn’t told us to spend a lot of time speculating what he might do with others. (In the Bible, this is one of God’s people’s favorite ways of avoiding looking at our own problems.) And he hasn’t told us to determine with certainty who will go where and experience what when God returns to make things right.

2. Consider that God might sometimes intentionally not tell us things for our own good. You’ve probably heard of the age of accountability – the idea that children are not held responsible before God for their actions until they reach a certain point in maturity. Well, Scripture never tells us specifically when that is. But if you think about it, that’s probably a good thing. If God had said, “All children are safe from judgment until they reach the age of 10” (or whatever age), then what would happen? You’d have some crazy person going around killing all the children under a certain age in places where the message of Christianity was not present or allowed. Do you get my point? If we knew that there was some “other way” for people to be saved – not other than Jesus, but another way of being saved through Jesus – then lots of (or lots more) people would never worry about telling people the truth about Jesus. (I owe this point to my friend Nick Parsons!)

So does God save people apart from explicit faith in Jesus? We don’t know. If he does, he hasn’t told us about it, and for that we are grateful. Within this, we hold out the possibility that God may accept into “heaven” persons not explicitly identified as “Christians” (such as Ghandi or someone who never heard about Jesus). We are not saying that we’re sure this is the case; that would take us beyond the bounds of what we think God has revealed. But we are affirming that we don’t think it would contradict the character and ways of God revealed in Scripture’s witness to Jesus Christ. So does God save people apart from explicit faith in Jesus? We don’t know, but we’re not willing to say we know for sure that he doesn’t. And more importantly, we believe that God has come to us in Jesus, offering salvation in both the next life and this one. Our task is to faithfully respond to what we believe God has revealed.
...

(This is the fourth of eight posts in which I’ll answers questions that come up often in our church.)

There is a huge problem with this question, which generally assumes that the thing God is concerned about is individual persons getting to heaven when they die. But God’s goal is not to save individuals out of the world to live with him in heaven, but to redeem – and eventually re-create – the world, including the people in it. Moreover, the Bible does not teach that we will live together with God in heaven forever, but that God will come from heaven and dwell with us on a freshly created and fully healed “new earth.” Nevertheless, the question still remains as to who will “be there,” so to speak, wherever “there” is and whatever it will be like. So we continue. (For the most part, I will use the language of “saved” and “heaven” in the way they’re typically used, but keep in mind that I find this usage problematic.) I will offer my thoughts on this topic in two posts.

God can be trusted to do the right thing. It’s his call, and I’m very glad about that. Whatever God does will be right, and it will not violate his love, his grace, or his holiness.

If anyone will be in heaven, it will be because of Jesus. No one can be “good enough.” The only reason any of us can be “saved” – that is, liberated from the powers of sin and death (in the next life and/or this one) – is because Jesus both averted God’s wrath and broke the stranglehold of sin/Satan over humanity. Had Jesus not done what he did, none of us would be saved. So there is no way anyone can be saved apart from Jesus.

We want God to save as many people as possible! We never rejoice at the prospect of anyone being shut out of God’s future. If we get to heaven and out that God’s mercy and grace were wider than we imagined, we will certainly celebrate. We don’t use God as a way to make ourselves feel better than other people.
...

A while back I posted some of my assumptions about the whole issue of world religions (here), and someone from Melbourne commented rather critically. To put it simply, he took me to task for claiming that God's plan to save the world centers on Jesus (that Jesus is the "only way," so to speak). I decided to answer his concerns because while perhaps stated uniquely, they are rather common objections. His comments are in italics, and my responses follow. Feel free to agree with either of us (or both) as you see fit. Enjoy.
...

Hi, I’m from Melbourne Australia.
Hello. Welcome to my blog. I’m glad you commented, and I hope you’ll come back.

Most of what you have written above is uninformed psycho-babble (Babel) with no basis in fact or Truth or Reality with a capital T & R.
I’m eager to see why you think this is the case (the psycho-babble part), especially considering that my comments don’t have to do with what that phrase generally refers to. As for basing things in Truth and Reality, I’m eager to see why you think you have special access to these things in their “capital T & R” forms, and why you think your foundations are more secure than mine.

We live in a time when all the Sacred Scriptures (plus every aspect of their cultural expressions) of the entire Great Tradition are freely available to anyone with an internet connection. Have you done a comprehensive study of any of them?
We certainly do live in such time, and in many ways I’m glad for that. It helps us all be faithful to our traditions to have to rethink them in light of others. (And we do all have traditions, yourself included! Yours just happens to be the tradition of the Enlightenment project / modernity, which, while theoretically based on the idea that we can escape our traditions, actually just becomes one more tradition, or one more ‘social construction of reality’, if you will.) As for your question, this of course depends on what you mean by comprehensive. Of course I haven’t read all of everything; have you? In fact, what I was doing with this entry (and the second one that I never posted) was admitting that I cannot come to these sacred writings with a completely blank slate. I confess that I come from somewhere, with convictions and assumptions that have been shaped by many factors. Out of love and respect for these traditions, and a sincere desire for honesty, I wanted to admit my assumptions. My hope is that I will be able to reevaluate them appropriately in the light of what I find in these other faiths.

If not, you are just displaying your own unexamined inherited dim-witted religious provincialism!
I certainly hope not. They aren’t unexamined, whatever else they may be. I could say the same thing about your comments, with the added fact that you are being mean. ☺ (No worries though! I don’t take any of it personally.)
( Read more )

Sorry I haven't been posting much at all. Life comes at you fast. As I mentioned in the last post, I'm in the middle of a seminar on "world religions" at Real Life called We Are Not Alone. Since I don't have much time to read or think about other stuff (like the books I recently promised to blog through) right now, what I post will probably have to do with world faiths and stuff. At the beginning of the seminar, I wanted to be honest and forthright about my assumptions coming in. There is much that I do not understand about this whole conversation, but like everyone else I have certain assumptions that I bring to the table. Here are some of the most important ones.

What can be known of God is best known by looking at Jesus. This is my way of affirming the uniqueness of Jesus as God's fullest and finalest revelation. Everyone looks at God from somewhere, even the people espousing the whole "all roads lead up the same mountain" (see the poem below). The funny thing about the poem below is that someone is assuming the position of the speaker / observer. And that person makes an implicit claim to know something about God that all the other "religions" miss. I make a similar claim, but I think the answer is not by acting as if we can step outside the historical faiths (which actually involves stepping into yet one more historical faith, this once going by various names: scientific, rationalism, enlightenment, modern, postmodern, etc), but by trusting in Jesus as the way God came to us.

Salvation is about more than what happens to individual humans after they die. First of all, salvation is God's plan for the entire universe. Salvation, for instance, is something creation (or "nature," if you subscribe to the new historical faith mentioned above) looks forward to and will participate in (Romans 8.19-21). Salvation is about all of God's creation being rescued from the disastrous effects of sin. So it is about more than just humans. Humans do nevertheless stand at the center of salvation. This is where the second part comes in; speaking of salvation in terms of humanity, it isn't just about "where we go when we die" (or, more precisely, when Jesus returns). That is certainly important, and I'd never want to deny that at all - like, at all! - but salvation is about freedom from the power of evil and sin and death right here and now. Please understand, I'm not trying to deny the importance of the future, but I am trying to remind us that asking whether a person is "saved" has as much to do with how free they are from sinful ways of thinking and living as it does where they'll go when they die. If anyone cares to ask me to elaborate, feel free and I'll try. (By the way, ARod, I haven't ignored your question; I'm just waiting until I can do it justice.)

God’s saving plan is both “universal” and “particular.” That is to say, everything God does is designed to reach the whole world and all the people in it. He never acts just for this or that group. His plans are as big as the world he created. This is a scandal to some "religious" people who want God to care about only their group. That is also to say, however, that God (for reasons unknown to me) always goes about reaching all people by working in and through particular people (or groups of people). He chose one man out of all the tribes of the earth - Abraham - and promised to bring his blessing through that one family's seed. He remained committed to Israel as his people through whom he would bless the whole world. Etc. So it comes as no difficulty to me to believe that God would remain committed to one person or group as the means through which he will bring salvation to all (or as many as will have it). This is a scandal to many "secular" people, primarily because they fail to recognize that their commitment to universality is but yet another particularity among others.

That's enough for now. I have about five more, but I'll post them bit by bit. Any questions, reflections, or disagreements?

...

I'm starting a seminar on "world religions" this weekend at our church, and I want to begin by reading and reflecting on a well-known poem that best expresses current popular thought on the subject in our culture. It is printed below. What are your thoughts on it? What thoughts or questions does it raise for you? What does it settle or unsettle for you? What are some things I might do with it?

It was six men of Indostan

To learning much inclined,

Who went to see the Elephant

(Though all of them were blind),

That each by observation

Might satisfy his mind.



The First approach'd the Elephant,

And happening to fall

Against his broad and sturdy side,

At once began to bawl:

"God bless me! but the Elephant

Is very like a wall!"



The Second, feeling of the tusk,

Cried, -"Ho! what have we here

So very round and smooth and sharp?

To me 'tis mighty clear

This wonder of an Elephant

Is very like a spear!"



The Third approached the animal,

And happening to take

The squirming trunk within his hands,

Thus boldly up and spake:

"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant

Is very like a snake!"



The Fourth reached out his eager hand,

And felt about the knee.

"What most this wondrous beast is like

Is mighty plain," quoth he,
'Tis clear enough the Elephant 

Is very like a tree!"



The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,

Said: "E'en the blindest man

Can tell what this resembles most;

Deny the fact who can,

This marvel of an Elephant

Is very like a fan!"



The Sixth no sooner had begun

About the beast to grope,

Then, seizing on the swinging tail

That fell within his scope,

"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant

Is very like a rope!"



And so these men of Indostan

Disputed loud and long,

Each in his own opinion

Exceeding stiff and strong,

Though each was partly in the right,

And all were in the wrong!



MORAL:
So oft in theologic wars, 

The disputants, I ween, 

Rail on in utter ignorance 

Of what each other mean, 

And prate about an Elephant 

Not one of them has seen!

John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887)

(For an ancient version of the story in a different form, visit http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~rywang/berkeley/258/parable.html.)

I recently came across a quote I thought I'd share from Hans Kung's On Being a Christian. You'll often hear people talk about what makes Christianity unique. I think C. S. Lewis said it was grace, which isn't actually true. I've often said that what makes us unique is the resurrection. Apparently I might have been wrong, too however. Here's the quote (based on 1 Cor 2.2):

Paul succeeded more clearly than anyone in expressing what is the ultimately distinguishing feature of Christianity. . . . The distinguishing feature of Christianity as opposed to the ancient world religions and the modern humanisms is quite literally according to Paul "this Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ crucified.

It is not indeed as risen, exalted, living, divine, but as crucified, that this Jesus Christ is distinguished unmistakably from the many risen, exalted, living gods and deified founders of religion, from the Caesars, geniuses, and heroes of world history.

Now there is still something about Jesus' resurrection over against all the other ideas Kung refers to, but I found the quote very thought-provoking and worth sharing. May we embrace our most distinguishing feature in all of life!

...

Okay, I know that most of you like to remain "phantom blog readers" (ahem, A-Rod), but I'd really like your input on this. I am going to be teaching a seminar on World Religions in a few months, and as I was watching a lecture, a question occurred to me. Here it is:

Let's say that the higher-ups of a city in which you live approached you with a question about opening a new school. There are a group of Muslims who would like to open their own Islamic school, dedicated to teaching the principles of Islam to younger generations of Muslims as well as others who would like to participate. This will be a fully accredited school (let’s say, K thru 12), sort of like other private schools, but, once again, with the intent of teaching and spreading the message of Islam. So the city council comes to you and asks if you think they should allow it. The decision is riding on your opinion, they tell you, and they won’t leave you alone until you give them an answer.

So what do you say – Yes or No?

I really would like everyone to answer this one, and please tell us who you are when you do. If you would be willing, I’d also like a brief explanation for your answer. (Doesn’t have to be long or impressive, just honest.)

Then, I’d like you to answer the same question with the following twists:
- What about a Jewish school?
- What about a Catholic school?
- What about a school run by Christians who affirm evolution and homosexuality?
- What about a “multi-denominational” (Protestant) Christian school?

(Let’s assume for the sake of the discussion that there are no schools of these kinds already in your city.)

If you just want to answer the first one, that’s fine. (It’s the one I’m most interested in hearing.) But I welcome reflections about all of them. If your answers are different for any of them, why?

Here’s to hoping this works!

...