Categories
Apologetics Evangelism Morality

Moral obedience to a tradition as a learning strategy when uncertain which is best

Many people—perhaps everyone—sometimes has their doubts about the existence of the supernatural. However, many also sense there is something to the concepts of justice, love, compassion, and morality—that these are not just made-up conventions that people pretend matter.

Many people admire people like Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Mandela, Mother Teresa, Lincoln, and Harriet Tubman for their selflessness, love, and courage. Many people align their lives with a moral tradition: Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Atheism, etc.

Many people feel they should not follow one of these moral examples or try to adhere to one of these religions because they are not sure they believe 100% in the tenets of the religion or ideology. “I still have my doubts. I am not sure about all it claims.”

Alasdair MacIntyre says that there is no agreed-upon common assumptions for analyzing which is right.
“There seems to be no rational way of securing moral agreement in our culture.” After Virtue, 6.
“There are just too many alternative ways to begin.” Three Rival Versions, 75.

So, Alasdair MacIntyre recommends trying one of the moral systems. Pick the one that seems best to you and try practicing it. Evaluate it and other systems by its principles. (Three Rival Versions, 61, 5).

Dietrich Bonhoeffer makes a similar point in “Discipleship” (1937). “’I can believe no longer.’ … You complain that you cannot believe? … You believe—so take the first step! … You do not believe—take the same step … only the believers obey, and only the obedient believe.”

So my advice to the adherent with doubts is to practice their religion. Does that religion really demand an absence of doubts?
And to the nonaffiliated who is stuck by their doubts, try adhering to a religion and see if the practice makes the pieces come together better.
And⬇️

And if one finds themselves wounded by the practice of a religion, that it is failing based on its own principles, then that is significant and one should move on to something else. If Jesus or Muhammad or Joseph Smith or Money, sour in your eyes as self-contradictory, move on.

Originally tweeted by Andy Rowell (@AndyRowell) on September 14, 2022.

Categories
Evangelism

Faith is not passivity so as to honor sheer pure grace

Tim Keller quotes J. Gresham Machen—that seeking “obedience to the commands of Christ” is “works-righteousness” and “legalism.” That is outdated Pauline scholarship since E.P. Sanders’s book in 1978. No, faith is allegiance and obedience to Jesus, not absence of effort.

John Barclay says in Galatians "Paul is not attacking a life-hermeneutic that looks to works to secure the favor of God, he is not countering an erroneous soteriology dependent on the good works of the devout. Thus his foil in this letter is not works-righteousness." P&TG, 326.

"throughout this book, we have been suspicious of the modern (Western) ideal of the 'pure' gift … Paul emphasizes the incongruity of grace and the expectation that those who are 'under grace' … will be reoriented in the 'obedience of faith.'" John Barclay, Paul & the Gift, 412.

Matthew Bates argues that faith is best understood as allegiance, which involves obedience. Consistent with this, "The Bible consistently teaches that we will be judged by works" (Gospel Allegiance, 113).

Tim Keller's quote is from:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/tim-keller-american-church/
And the correct spelling is J. Gresham Machen.

If someone prioritizes loving God and others—saying those are "more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices," they are on the right track, "not far from the kingdom of God,” says Jesus (Mark 12:33-34). They are to be encouraged, not denounced.

I am just critiquing that one small paragraph of Keller's essay which emphasizes faith as belief ("I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast" Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass) over against faith as trying to obey Jesus. I think that is wrong-headed.

I generally agree with Tim Keller's long rambling reflection on the American church's plight. I can't help but like people who think historically and practically and creatively about big important contemporary problems.

Originally tweeted by Andy Rowell (@AndyRowell) on September 13, 2022.

The problem with faith as believing hard-to-believe ideas is that long-time followers of Jesus find themselves paralyzed by doubt and people interested in Jesus think that they must believe before they obey. People who are trying to follow Jesus for many years will have moments where they ask whether they believe in the resurrection and will be embarrassed and afraid of their doubts but they still admire and love Jesus and realize their sinfulness. They are still dedicated to following Jesus. They have faith in terms of allegiance. Their spiritual or religious life need not come to a halt in crisis. They can continue to try to follow Jesus. They have the faith of a mustard seed. And in a similar way, the seeker, the person interested in Christianity, need not wait until they believe more confidently before they begin following Jesus. If they admire Jesus, they can begin to demonstrate allegiance to his way—to him. They should not be dissuaded from trying out his way because they don’t believe the whole theological scheme yet.

Categories
Evangelism Theology

Who is elected and chosen by God?

Brief thread with a few quotes because someone asked whether individuals are chosen by God to be saved or damned (according to Christianity). (This is an issue that most Christians agonize rarely about because the concepts below are quite commonly held today).

"In fact, there is not a single passage in the Bible that explicitly affirms that specific individuals (apart from God’s Son) have been chosen before creation for either eternal life or eternal damnation."
— @MatthewWBates, Gospel Allegiance (Brazos Press, 2019), 84.

Oliver Crisp on Karl Barth's view:
"All human agents are elect only in the derivative sense of having a saving relation to the set of the elect and its single member, Christ."

On Barth’s Denial of Universalism

“For God’s eternal election of grace is concretely the election of Jesus Christ . . . And we in the world … are elected and willed by God in Him.”
– Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, IV/2 (1958), p. 31, 33.

Limited atonement (double predestination) or universalism (all are saved)? “If God told us the answer to the problem in advance of the eschaton, we would harm ourselves on one side or the other.”
— Bruce McCormack, “So That He May Be Merciful to All,” 240.

"churches need to be responsible for all … And for that reason, I would say, neither limited atonement nor universalism should ever be made church dogma."
— Bruce McCormack, "So That He May Be Merciful to All: Karl Barth and the Problem of Universalism," (2011), 241.

Timing of salvation is inexact because "Jesus Christ is not only the one who has come (in the incarnation); He is also the One who comes (in the power of the eschatological Spirit); and the One who will come (in His visible return)."
— Bruce McCormack, "So That He …", 247-248.

Jesus on people trying to figure out who is and who is not a child of God.
“The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’
“‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may uproot the wheat with them."
— Matthew 13:28-29.

Originally tweeted by Andy Rowell (@AndyRowell) on September 10, 2022.