In the 4th - 5th century people were defined as Pelagian or Augustinian. This month, (an possibly year) a different sort of identification has risen. John Piper tweeted, "Farewell Rob Bell" last week, creating a media, blogging, and flaming frenzy as people worked to criticize and support Bell for a book that hadn't even been released yet, Love Wins.
Both Bell and Piper are respected pastors, both Bell and Piper believe in Scripture, and both seek to serve God, their hermeneutics, (the way that they study and read the Bible) however differ.
Here's a quiz to help you figure out which side you stand on.
1. When God looks at you…
P. His Holiness sees one totally depraved, a sinner deserving nothing but damnation
B. Your Creator sees a beautiful part of God’s Good world
2. We know that God is Love because…
P. The salvation of even one sinner
B. Our Redeemer continuously, freely, and faithfully pursues us through Sin, Law, and Death
3. God’s work in the Cross and Resurrection of Jesus is Good News for…
P. A limited number of people God chose before time (and not for the reprobate majority)
B. All of God’s Creation…every person, society, and all of history.
4. The Christian Gospel is persuasive because….
P. You have to! God wills your election, gives you faith, and preserves it.
B. You get to! The story in scripture, the work of God in the world, and life in the way of Jesus is eternally good, true, and beautiful.
(HomebrewedChristianity)
Hopefully by understanding which side you resonate with more, you will be more understanding and patient with those on the other side .
Saturday, March 05, 2011
Universalsm or Pluralism or ??? What??????
I believe that 2011 will bring a new schism into evangelical and popular Christianity. Being familiar with these definitions will help in the conversation:
Universalism is the general belief that all will be saved, regardless of religious beliefs. The Muslim and the Christian are on the same basic path—and for universalists all will be saved.
Universalism needs to be distinguished from pluralism (though as I have sketched “universalism” above there is precious little difference). Pluralism focuses on the legitimacy of each religion and belief system and that each of them prepares a person for final existence with God. For pluralists, there’s no unique saving place for Jesus Christ.
Christian universalism is a bit different: Christian universalism denies pluralism and balder forms of universalism by contending that all can or will be saved, but only through the saving work of Jesus Christ. While many who advocate this fail to recognize that those in other religions simply don’t believe such a thing, and in fact may say they don’t want to be saved through Christ, the Christian universalist confidently trots out the idea that whether they know it or not, God saves through Jesus Christ. But the big point here is that all can and will be saved through Christ.
Evangelical universalism is newer on the block and argues that God saves exclusively through Christ and that those who deny Christ, or who have not heard of Christ, or who have rejected God’s natural revelation to them, will be judged and will experience hell. In other words, these folks believe in hell—though they believe “less” (or as they might say “more”) than the traditionalist. But they believe hell is not eternal but instead temporary and once one has experienced judgment for one’s sins one will have, by the grace of God and through the merits of Christ, the opportunity to respond to the Gospel—and this news is so good and God’s offer so gracious that eventually hell will be emptied and all will find redemption in Christ to enjoy God’s salvation forever.
There is yet another version: annihilationism or conditional immortality. This view is traditional in its appeal to evangelism and to the gospel of salvation through Christ alone—it is an exclusive claim—and that those who don’t respond to the Gospel will be judged and will experience hell, but that eventually their punishment will run out and they will be utterly destroyed and annihilated and cease from existence. Here one has both a traditional view of hell and, at the same time, some kind of correlation between temporary sins—say 75 years of utter rejection of all things pertaining to what they know of God and Christ—and the experience of justice. When that justice runs its course that person will be utterly extinguished. Instead of an eternal consciousness of separation from God, these folks believe only in eternal consequences.
Then there’s the traditional view: those who reject Christ, and some believe God’s mercy will be wide enough to include those who have never heard of Christ but have responded to the light they have comprehended (inclusivism)—and there’s latitude here for variations of several sorts—will be judged on the basis of that light. For traditionalists and some inclusivists their number is few so that billions who have not responded to Christ will suffer eternal and conscious separation from God. Some inclusivists would contend that many, if not most, humans will be finally saved.
(Definitions from Scott McKnight from an article in Relevant Magazine)
Universalism is the general belief that all will be saved, regardless of religious beliefs. The Muslim and the Christian are on the same basic path—and for universalists all will be saved.
Universalism needs to be distinguished from pluralism (though as I have sketched “universalism” above there is precious little difference). Pluralism focuses on the legitimacy of each religion and belief system and that each of them prepares a person for final existence with God. For pluralists, there’s no unique saving place for Jesus Christ.
Christian universalism is a bit different: Christian universalism denies pluralism and balder forms of universalism by contending that all can or will be saved, but only through the saving work of Jesus Christ. While many who advocate this fail to recognize that those in other religions simply don’t believe such a thing, and in fact may say they don’t want to be saved through Christ, the Christian universalist confidently trots out the idea that whether they know it or not, God saves through Jesus Christ. But the big point here is that all can and will be saved through Christ.
Evangelical universalism is newer on the block and argues that God saves exclusively through Christ and that those who deny Christ, or who have not heard of Christ, or who have rejected God’s natural revelation to them, will be judged and will experience hell. In other words, these folks believe in hell—though they believe “less” (or as they might say “more”) than the traditionalist. But they believe hell is not eternal but instead temporary and once one has experienced judgment for one’s sins one will have, by the grace of God and through the merits of Christ, the opportunity to respond to the Gospel—and this news is so good and God’s offer so gracious that eventually hell will be emptied and all will find redemption in Christ to enjoy God’s salvation forever.
There is yet another version: annihilationism or conditional immortality. This view is traditional in its appeal to evangelism and to the gospel of salvation through Christ alone—it is an exclusive claim—and that those who don’t respond to the Gospel will be judged and will experience hell, but that eventually their punishment will run out and they will be utterly destroyed and annihilated and cease from existence. Here one has both a traditional view of hell and, at the same time, some kind of correlation between temporary sins—say 75 years of utter rejection of all things pertaining to what they know of God and Christ—and the experience of justice. When that justice runs its course that person will be utterly extinguished. Instead of an eternal consciousness of separation from God, these folks believe only in eternal consequences.
Then there’s the traditional view: those who reject Christ, and some believe God’s mercy will be wide enough to include those who have never heard of Christ but have responded to the light they have comprehended (inclusivism)—and there’s latitude here for variations of several sorts—will be judged on the basis of that light. For traditionalists and some inclusivists their number is few so that billions who have not responded to Christ will suffer eternal and conscious separation from God. Some inclusivists would contend that many, if not most, humans will be finally saved.
(Definitions from Scott McKnight from an article in Relevant Magazine)
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
Serving as a Family
I made the decision long ago to serve the youth as a family, rather than to serve the youth with a family.
Looks like I wasn't the only one.
Andrew Jones, Tall Skinny Kiwi, recently posted this as a major game changer in his life:
BONUS GAME CHANGER: To minister as a family instead of a trying to minister as a man with a family. My kids and my wife, and even our dog, are all an integral part of what God has called us to do. That game changer has been great for all of us and has opened up more doors than you could imagine.
Looks like I wasn't the only one.
Andrew Jones, Tall Skinny Kiwi, recently posted this as a major game changer in his life:
BONUS GAME CHANGER: To minister as a family instead of a trying to minister as a man with a family. My kids and my wife, and even our dog, are all an integral part of what God has called us to do. That game changer has been great for all of us and has opened up more doors than you could imagine.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Naked Religion
I haven't read Richard Rohr's The Naked Now, but after reading this excerpt posted by Zach of Jimmy Eat World, I'm tempted to.
If certitude, predictability, and perfect order were so important, Jesus would have come in a time of digital recorders and cameras, and he would have at least written his ideas down somewhere–and more clearly! He would have described his task as the establishing of archives instead of a sprawling banquet of rich food and wine, as he consistently did. He said, “I have come that you might have life, and a very abundant life at that” (John 10:10). How did we ever get correct rational ideas confused with an abundant life? This happens perhaps to folks who are unwilling to let got of their attachment to their images of themselves, the world, and God. They will not let go of their attachments for a living relationship. “The old wine is good enough,” they say (Luke 5:39), and so they miss out on the great banquet that all the mystics, the prophets, and Jesus describe.
Surely God does not exist so that we can think correctly about Him — or Her. Amazingly and wonderfully, like all good parents, God desires instead the flourishing of what God created and what God loves — us ourselves. Ironically, we flourish more by learning from our mistakes and changing than by a straight course that teaches us nothing.
Thursday, December 03, 2009
Qualities for work force
Posted in the class I am subbing:
"The two most important qualities for students seeking permanent places in the work force inthe 21st century are:
Flexible thinking.
Getting along with people who are different from you.
SCANS Report - US Department of Labor"
"The two most important qualities for students seeking permanent places in the work force inthe 21st century are:
Flexible thinking.
Getting along with people who are different from you.
SCANS Report - US Department of Labor"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
