Friday, June 13, 2008

Similarities and differences

The question of the day is: "What are the similarities and differences between Christians and Muslims, Hindus, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Jews, etc…???"

On Sunday, Jim's approach was more doctrinal than historic (I will cover the history briefly below). He pointed out the similarities and differences in belief systems as follows:

Jews, Christians, Muslims (Monotheists) believe in:
1. Linear time
2. God as Creator at a specific point in history (though many differ on when that occurred)
3. The Golden rule - do unto others as you would have them do to you
4. We all die, then there is a judgment

Now the key difference:

Christians believe we are saved by grace through the death and resurrection of Christ - Muslims and Jews believe in a saved by works religion.

Of course, the polytheist faith systems Hinduism and Buddhism have very different views of all of these things: Time is cyclical, not linear therefore there is no single point of creation and no real need for a creator. The golden rule applies as a means of getting to the next levels of existence - approaching Nirvana, the state of perfect nothingness.


Historically, let's look at the major religions - similarities first:

Christians, Muslims, Jews, Mormons (we could argue about this one), and Jehovah's Witness folk are all monotheistic (One God) faiths. Hindus are altogether different - polytheistic (many gods). The first three are closely related to one another while the later two split out of the Christian tradition.

The oldest is Judaism. Founded by God through Abraham when God asked him to leave his country and travel to another land that he did not know. Abraham and Sarah were old (70+) and childless when God told Abe that he would be the father of many nations.

Not believing God, Sarah and Abe took matters into their own hands and Sarah sent her servant in to sleep with Abraham. This produced a son named Ishmael. Sarah then got jealous of Ishmael and his mother (Hagar) and tossed them out. God miraculously saved them and founded the Arab peoples.

Judaism really has it's religious roots in the exodus from Egypt that happened several hundred years later. When God delivered his people from Egypt he set up a system of governance and religious belief that still exists today. Many of the ceremonies and rites that orthodox Jews observe today began there. The Scripture for Jews is basically what we would call the Old Testament.

A couple of thousand years later, Jesus was born, lived a perfect life, and died - only to be raised again to new life. This is the foundation of the Christian belief system - later expounded by Paul, Peter, John, and others. Jesus was a Jew, so Christianity is descended from Judaism. Most Christians accept the New and Old Testaments as Scripture - though some would add the Apocrypha.

Shortly after the time of Christ, a man named Mohamed (prophet according to Muslims) was born, met with Angels, and had several prophetic visions. He transcribed these visions verbatim - this is the Koran, which along with the Old testament - is considered to be the Muslim Scripture. Since Christians and Muslims share the Old Testament and are both monotheistic - many consider them to be "cousins".

Most of the trouble that has arisen between the three groups has taken place because of various interpretors of the scriptures in the intervening centuries. The Jews early campaigns against the Christians, the Christian's retaliatory attacks against Jerusalem, and the Crusades back and forth between the Christians and Muslims have all been devastating to these three major and related religious belief systems.

Many of our Scriptures are similar, but the way we interpret them is quite different.

In the end, this Sunday was more like a lecture than a sermon. A good lecture, one full of information, but not the usual Lyon message full of hope, biblical teaching, and vision. I wonder sometimes if MPChoG would benefit from having another teaching pastor who really excelled at this kind of teaching - freeing Jim for even more vision casting. What do you think?

Monday, June 2, 2008

Can you lose your salvation?

Can you loose your salvation?

Frankly, I am a bit surprised that this one made it onto the sermon list. With a little room for semantic tweaking, I think most evangelical Christians believe that salvation is something that CAN be lost.

So, what is the semantic deal?

Well – died in the wool Calvinists would argue that God does the choosing and being God, he does not choose those who will end up turning their backs on him. They would say that someone who appears to be saved, but then turns his/her back on God at some later date was never saved to begin with. They may have thought they were saved at some point, but they never really were because they were not one of the elect.

Those of the more Wesleyan tradition would argue that while God knows who will accept him, he offers us a role in the process. He allows us the freedom to choose. If we can choose to follow Christ we can also choose to cease following Christ. More plainly stated, we can loose our salvation.

Both groups agree that those who follow Christ to the end of life will be saved. The idea that a person can be saved as a child and then live a demented and immoral life, all while still saved is not theologically sound in either camp. The difference lies in the starting point, not the finish line.

Jim also pointed out that losing one’s salvation (Wesleyan interpretation) is not an easy thing to do. For example, he does not believe that a person who’s last mortal act is driving in excess of the speed limit will, necessary, suffer in hell for breaking the law of the land. He argues that there are certain sins – so antithetical to the nature of God – that they might preclude a person from the reward of heaven and destine them for hell. In his sermon Jim stated four such sins: sexual sin, gossip, drunkenness, and greed – but did not give a scriptural reference for any of these.

There are a couple of places in scripture where “deadly” sins are listed. The first is in Proverbs 6 and the sins are as follows:
A proud look
A lying tongue
Hands that shed innocent blood
A heart that devises wicked imaginations
Feet that run to mischief
A false witness that speaks lies
And a person that sows discord among brothers

Since three of these have lying at their root I would say that telling the truth is pretty important to God.

Galatians 5 has a pretty impressive list as well:
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. (KJV)

A careful reading of this passage certainly does include the four Jim mentioned, but it adds several others – and a few of them ill-defined in modern day English.

Finally, the Catholic Church has traditionally defined seven deadly sins – so called mortal sins – that would destroy the life of faith. In other words, cause a person to loose their salvation.

These are: lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride.

I think it is pretty easy to see where Jim came up with the four he chose to highlight, and he never implied that it was a complete list. But we must be careful not to pick and choose. We might not struggle with drunkenness, but gluttony… I think a quick post-church survey all the buffet’s in Anderson can answer that one for us.

Let’s take a look at the three lists and see where the commonalities lie.

Pride – 2/3
Lying – 1/3
Killing the innocent – 1/3
Wicked imagination – 1/3 or 3/3 depending on how you define it
Running to mischief – 2/3
Sowing discord – 2/3
Gluttony – 2/3
Drunkenness – 1/3 (you could lump this with gluttony, but American Christians would really be uncomfortable with that)
Envy – 2/3
Wrath – 2/3
Lust/sexual sin – 2/3

Nothing directly shows up on all three lists – so it is probably best to avoid all of these sins or risk losing your relationship with God.

More recently, the Vatican has compiled a new list (not exhaustive) that is more apt for the modern age. Although these are more national than personal in nature, they are still an interesting representation of the larger issues the church must now face. The so-called seven modern social sins include:
Environmental pollution
Genetic manipulation
Obscene wealth
Infliction of poverty
Drug trafficking
Morally debatable experiments
Violation of the fundamental rights of human nature.

What do you think? Is it possible to lose your salvation? Is committing these sins the key or is it something deeper? Perhaps, the only unforgivable sin, the real deal breaker that will cause a person to lose their salvation (if they ever had it to begin with) is a continuing attitude of rebellion toward God’s offer of the free gift of salvation.

Remember - I do not claim to have the answers, I am just trying to get the discussion going.

Can we hear God speak?

Can we hear God speak?

Synopsis –

Jim started the morning out with a recap of the story of Samuel as a boy – hearing the voice of God and not immediately recognizing who it was. This story is significant for a variety of reasons – Samuel heard the audible voice of God, asked for corroboration of the veracity of that voice, and then sat quietly listening to what God had to say. Jim went on to suggest that God still speaks today – sometimes in an audible voice, but more often in a sense or impression that impacts our way of thinking.
He then presented six questions that can be used as measuring sticks to understand whether or not God is speaking. I have listed the questions below – each with a few comments intended to spark deeper thinking about the questions. In general, I agree with what Jim had to say.

1. Is the voice of God telling you to do something that is outside scripture?

This is the easy one. Very few people (if they were being honest) would believe that God was telling them to do something clearly against the central tenants of scripture. Sounds pretty easy – right? But what about all the places where scripture if vague? And, let’s face it; there are quite a large number of places where this is true. God will not tell you to deny his Son and walk away from your faith. Neither will he tell you to leave your wife of 10 years for a younger, more exciting model. That’s not God – it’s lust – there is a difference.

But what about God telling you to protect the liberty of immigrants from Central America? It would be pretty easy to defend that one scripturally. Rational, reasonable Christians read the scriptures and come to some very different conclusions about what the church should do in that context. So, Scripture is a good guide – but not quite all-inclusive.

2. Do you have a sense of peace about the experience?

This is a more difficult one. Sometimes it is easy to do what I think God is telling me to do. Other times it is very difficult. Usually, what God is telling me to do makes me downright uncomfortable. Not exactly peaceful. There have even been times that God has asked me to make very difficult decisions which I labored over in prayer and fasting. No peace there – just turmoil.

In my experience, peace is the afterglow of doing what God asks us to do. We often do not experience that sense of peace that Jim spoke of until we obey. Peace is the confirmation of doing the will of God, not necessarily in discerning the veracity of his voice in the moment.

3. Is there corroboration of what the voice of God is telling you to do from within the church (body of Christ)?

Confirmation within the body of Christ is crucial – especially for big decisions. This is why we have a board of elders at the Madison Park church. It is also the reason that we have church-wide votes on the larger decisions. We believe that God’s will can be best discerned by listening to the will of the body. Some traditions take this even further. Folks in the Quaker tradition do not vote – they talk through issues until they reach unanimity. Sometimes this takes years, but it certainly promotes peaceful (albeit, slow) movement on the will of God.

This does raise an interesting point – there are many times we are called to act on what we believe God is saying without having the luxury of confirmation of the Church. In those cases questions 4 and 5 (below) are more important that what the church has to say. Indeed, many of us may worry too much about what people in the church will think – and are hampered in out pursuit of the will of God.

Later in this sermon series I will suggest that the Church serves another important function related to the voice of God – but more on that later.

4. Is what you believe God to be saying a loving message?

Jim has this one exactly correct (in my view). Far too many of our brothers and sisters spend too much time sending out messages of condemnation and not affirmation. Gossip, rumor, innuendo, news, slander, and outright condemnation of other people have, so very unfortunately, become what the body of Christ is known for in America. God is not in the business of telling his people to write signs “God Hates … “ you fill in the blank: gays, abortionists, prostitutes, Arabs. If the object of the sign is a person – God does not hate them. To be certain, God hates sin – but he LOVES sinners. We must be very careful in how we promote our political agendas using the powerful rhetoric of “God told me…”

5. Is your conscience seared by any sin in your life?

Ouch! This is a tough one! Recognizing a seared conscience is one of the toughest things a person can do introspectively. A peaceful soul is a good indicator, however, a badly seared conscience may seem to be at peace. Here is another place that we need to place ourselves under the authority of the body of Christ. Accountability within the body is the best insurance against a seared conscience.

6. Do you believe God is telling you to do something that will be detrimental to your relationship with Him?

In this last point Jim sums up much of what the previous five points are getting at. God will never tell you to do something that will place your relationship with him at risk. The danger for us is in the flipside – God will ask us to do things for him. If we neglect them, if we choose not to respond – WE are placing our relationship with God at risk, and hampering our ability to hear his voice.

Herein lies the real danger.

So many of us, called by the name of our master, have ignored his voice for so long that we cannot hear it any longer. Let me illustrate: As I write this I am sitting in Starbucks. Around me there is a cacophony of noise. The baristas are talking, the cleaning guy is working, customers are gabbing and networking, there is music playing, coffee brewing, and papers rustling. Up until the last 30 seconds I did not listen to any of it. I was absorbed in writing this little note – my brain is very effective at filtering out the background noise of life. And yet – as I listen closely – the music is about lost love and the search for meaning, at least one of the conversations is about a relationship going bad, there is a business deal (possibly worth millions) taking place inches from my table, and somewhere, amidst the clamor, is a still small voice. Wait – I think I can almost hear it…