|
VOW |
But They Loved Darkness: A Review
of
The Editors of the latest issue of the Presbyterian Women’s magazine, Horizons, attempt, in the various articles, to explain the relationship of Christianity to other religions. This issue entitled, “Beloved Strangers—Christian Faith in a Pluralistic World,” rather than offering suggestions for evangelizing contextually or simply offering ways to befriend and care about women and men of other faiths, destroys the biblical meaning of the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Many authors in this particular issue imply that adherents of other faiths do not need Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. Although Jesus states in John 14:6 “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me,” the author of the very first article writes, “Many Christians have understood these words to indicate that faith in Jesus is the only way to have a living relationship with God. But that is not what was intended by John’s words in their original setting (6).” Although there are no articles in this particular edition of Horizons that truly upholds the importance of Jesus Christ as the only Savior of humanity, because of the seriousness of the biblical doctrine of the Lordship and person of Jesus Christ, I will focus on two extremely flawed articles. They are, “The Bible and Our Non-Christian Neighbors,” by W. Eugene March, and “How Do We Relate to people of other Faiths?” by Ann Bedford. March is A.B. Rhodes Professor Emeritus and the former Dean of Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary. Surprisingly, his article, “The Bible and Our Non-Christian Neighbors,” is full of both flawed biblical information and flawed historical information. At the center of the article’s theme, as well as, in many of the other articles in this installment, is a straw man; it is the suggestion that if people of other faiths are only provided salvation through Jesus Christ and not their own revelation, God doesn’t love them. And it is inferred that those who believe that Jesus Christ is the only way, when teaching and proclaiming that others must come to God through Jesus Christ, are saying God does not love them. But the very basic biblical view is “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life (John 3:16). God’s love and the redemption of humanity in Christ are so entwined that it is surprising that any theologian could miss the connection. In the same way that March misunderstands the connection between God’s love and God’s gift of salvation in Jesus Christ, he misunderstands the urgency of the early church’s desire to evangelize the world. He writes, “In the earliest period, there was intent to spread the word whenever and wherever possible, but there was no compulsion to convert the world because, among other reasons, the end of history was thought to be imminently at hand (5).” He goes on to imply that a “compulsion to convert the world” came about by the politicizing of Christianity at the time of Constantine’s rule. A better viewpoint is that of F.F. Bruce, who writing of the various Christians at Corinth states, “We have the couple from Rome, the rabbi of Tarsus, the scholar from Alexandria, and the visitors from Palestine. From all directions they came to Corinth, between the years 50 and 54, and all of them were already connected with the new movement which was turning the Jewish communities throughout the Roman Empire upside down and was beginning to make its revolutionary impact on the pagan world as well.”1 Church historian Kenneth Scott Latourette writes that “Well before the end of the third century [before the time of Constantine] Christianity had begun to gain adherents among the peoples beyond the Roman Empire,” and then goes on to list the various nations that were impacted by the gospel during the third century.2 Latourette also writes about the question of Constantine and political motivation for conversion. After listing a great many reasons for the conversions of various people, none of them by forced conversion, he writes, “One of the factors to which is attributed the triumph of Christianity is the endorsement of Constantine. But, as we have suggested, the faith was already so strong by the time when Constantine espoused it that it would probably have won without him. Indeed, one of the motives sometimes ascribed to his support is his supposed desire to enlist the cooperation of what had become the strongest element in the Empire, the Christian community.”3 More importantly Jesus commands his followers to make disciples, (Matt. 28:18-20; Mark 16:15, 16; Acts 1:7, 8, 9: 15, 16) and the New Testament writers emphasize the importance of proclaiming the gospel. In fact, Paul writes “For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for I am under compulsion; for woe is me if I do not preach the gospel (1 Cor. 9: 16).” In his exegesis of the passage John 14:6, the statement by Jesus that he is “the truth the life and the way,” March explains that there were no other religions being addressed by these words, but rather Christians needed assurance that they, like the Jews, were also loved by God. March writes, “There were those among the congregation and from outside the congregation who were questioning whether, in fact, God loved the Christians as well as the Jews. Relationships with Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims and others were simply not the subject of John’s Gospel (6).” But that isn’t even the point. Jesus was making a claim about himself that holds through all the centuries. Further more, there were many differing religions in the many places the gospel was being preached at the time the Gospel of John was written. March seems unaware of the outcry the Christians faced in Ephesus by those who provided shrines of the Roman goddess Diana/Artemis? (Acts 19) The mystery religions were another factor among the many religions of the Roman Empire. The Magi who came to worship Jesus probably belonged to Zoroastrianism, a religion that still exists today. There is no textual or historical basis for March’s comments on Jesus’ claim to be the only way to the Father. Often the person or group who fails to understand the biblical teaching that in Jesus Christ alone is salvation misunderstands the biblical teaching about the person of Jesus Christ. The person, or group, does not acknowledge the truthfulness of either the biblical text or the confessions of the church which teach that Jesus is the unique Christ and that he is God. Many other faiths, such as many forms of Buddhism and Hinduism, view Jesus Christ as simply one more manifestation of God. Many New Age adherents and those in the Mind Science groups such as Unity School of Christianity and Religious Science see Jesus as someone who better realizes the Christ, separating Jesus from Christ. This is a gnostic way of understanding Jesus. And March holds this kind of view of Jesus! In the book, The Wide, Wide Circle of Divine Love: A biblical Case for Religious Diversity, written by March and recommended by the Editors of Horizons, the author writes: Further, though not a subject that will be developed to any great extent in this volume, my Christology, or my theological understanding of who Jesus Christ is and what he has done, is assumed as the basis for my reflections. In Jesus of Nazareth the very Logos (or Word) of God became incarnate and worked divine reconciliation. But the work of the second person of the Trinity is not identical to the work of Jesus of Nazareth. (Emphasis mine)4When one believes, as does March, that Jesus is somehow separate from the second person of the Trinity, that he was not fully God and fully human, but only a man who showed God’s love and died on the cross it is easier to say that he is not the only way to God. It is also easier to suggest that Jesus is just another way that God revealed himself to humanity; that Krishna, or Shiva or Kali or Buddha or the great mother goddess will do just as well. Then the “Word” becomes important as a spiritual principle or force that works in all religions and Jesus is downgraded to an example of how to live a good life. And, in fact, then Christianity becomes merely an ethnic religion focused on how deity reveals itself to differing cultures. But, the truth is, the first confession of the Church was (and is) Jesus is Lord and for that the early Christians endured horrible deaths in their faithfulness to their Lord. Anna Bedford, in her article “How Do We Relate to people of other Faiths?” twists the Christian understanding of the Trinity in order to promote her understanding of diversity. Focusing on the relational aspects of the Trinity she writes, “As Christians, we believe that God’s self is multiple, a Trinity. It takes all three to be God because God is, in the deepest sense, relational. Therefore, we are called to embrace God’s function in creating a pluralistic world. A wasteful abundance is God’s intention, so we can relax and enjoy the variety God has created (15).” If Bedford had meant that God created many different ethnic groups, many different personalities, many different traits and gifts among peoples she might have been edging toward the truth. However, to suggest that the differing religions are intentional because God is a Trinity is religious nonsense and has nothing to do with any person’s relationship with God. Within the Trinity there is a relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but there is simply only one way of entering into that fellowship. That is in our union with Jesus Christ. Andrew Purves and Charles Partee write of this union in their book, Encountering God: Christian Faith in Turbulent Times. They write: Joined to Jesus Christ we share in the communion and mission of the Holy Trinity. We stand before God in his name alone. And we serve in his name alone. The real meaning of the Christian’s faith is the trust that for Christ’s sake we are enfolded into the inner life of the Holy Trinity, to share in our Lord’s communion with the Father and in his mission from the Father.5 (Emphasis the authors)Adding to this revision of God’s purposes in the world is the suggestion that we re-vision “our understanding of mission,” and “dismantle all absolute claims (15).” Additionally Bedford offers a new interpretation of the story in Genesis of God’s dealings with the people in their attempt to build a tower to heaven. The author sees the possibility that the confusion of languages was meant as a blessing; God’s method of “pushing mankind into creation.” (It may have been a blessing in that it kept them from continuing in their sin.) Bedford concludes that, “True theology, after all, is not so much what you think, but how you act. Belief is about behavior; we are judged by the passion by which we love. (16).” But perfect love, agape love, self giving love, only comes from the Father through Jesus Christ. We know from the scriptures that rejection of Jesus Christ, his love and his saving work on the cross comes because humanity loves darkness: For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. This is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light, for their deeds were evil (John 3: 17-19).Without union in Jesus Christ, through his atoning death on the cross, humanity is left wandering in a post-modern maze without any absolutes and without mercy. Because of this we are called, with love and compassion, to speak of Jesus Christ and the salvation he offers. We are called like Paul, to be determined to know nothing and preach nothing to others “except Jesus Christ and Him Crucified (1 Cor. 1:23; 2:2).” The editors and authors of the May/June Horizons have failed to be faithful; they have chosen darkness because they have not lifted up Jesus Christ as the Savior. _____________________ 1 F.F. Bruce, The Spreading Flame: The Rise and Progress
of Christianity from its First Beginnings to the Conversion of the English,
reprint, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1973) 23.
|