|
Post by christopher on Mar 21, 2011 9:15:29 GMT -8
Kirby wrote: I don't think it's romantic, I think it's reality and that it plays itself out everyday. I'm not saying it always plays itself out that way, or even most of the time. I realize it's sometimes hard to see it because we live in such a sinful and selfish state that it seems the norm to be self-serving. That's why Paul says even of himself: Rom 7:22-23 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. NKJV
But the question is, can't you imagine any scenarios that you (and most other humans) would do the unselfish thing against self-interests or desires? Surely you can. Forget the King for a minute and let's just start with something something that is more in our own experience. Would you cheat on your wife if you knew for sure you could get away with it? Would you turn your mother out if she was destitute? Would you let your child get hit by a train if you had the chance to push them out of the way and kill yourself in the process? Why or why not? I realize many people do these things, but anyone who truly loves someone could never bring themselves to hurt them intentionally or let them come to harm if they could help it. Something else is governing those actions, it's love. Love does what "ought" to be done. Even if it is just a "romantic" sentiment as you say, why does it appeal to us so much and so universally? I would submit that it's because it's the one of the deepest longings of our own souls to be that which is portrayed in Lewis' novels and other romantic stories and arts. I believe it's how God made us in His image and instilled in us a sense of self-sacrificial love that we've perverted into merely self-love. And when it comes down to it, that's what Christian gospel is all about. God rescued humanity from the decay of sin and self-love and is in the process of restoring it to a state of pure love as it was intended all along. That is why Jesus said all commandments hang on loving others and loving God (Matt 22:40). When God is finally seen as He truly is, submitting to His will will come as naturally as submitting to our own fleshly lusts is now. The fear of hell CANNOT do that. But alas! Until then we must suffer the tension between the two polar opposites. I believe everyone from Hitler to Mother Teresa lives their lives somewhere on that spectrum and has this inner war that only God can correct. As Paul concludes: Rom 7:24-25 24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God--through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin. NKJV
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Mar 21, 2011 13:17:06 GMT -8
Chris worte:
Good clarification, and I agree to an extent, but still think it is somewhat of a romantic notion. Your extreme examples of selfessness are just that: extreme. But what about day-to-day activities where love "ought" to win? We say unkind things to our neighbors, refuse to help others, and consider our own selfish desires way more than jumping in front of trains or refusing to turn out our mothers. Self-sacrifice does not appeal to us, we do it as a last resort. And there are many who do not do these heroic things, we just do not hear about it from that perspective. We make heros out of those who self-sacrifice, and pass on those stories as legend (true or not). We don't talk about the woman who failed to save her children from a burning building.
I'm not sure it does as often as you are making it out to, but legends have a way of seeping into our subconscious. The media portrays self-sacrifice as heroic (Spock in Wrath of Khan: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one"), and I'm not saying it is not heroic, it is just not as common as self-serving decisions are, at least in my experience.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Mar 21, 2011 20:01:27 GMT -8
Kirby,
Everything you said there is true and I agree. But I also think it agrees with what I've said as well.
I don't assert that the right thing to do is necessarily the common thing done, not even in myself. That's not my point. But when I'm too weak to do the right thing, there are others around me that do, and I find inspiration when I see Jesus in them. It's contagious.
And I still think that deep down inside, people want to do what is right and good, even if they don't do it (that's what Paul refers to in Romans). I believe most people want to be remembered as being a selfless, "good" person. We hear it all over from decorating war heroes, to wedding toasts, to eulogies. And you're right that some those things are stretched to legend, but I think it's a resounding hint of what lives deep in our soul...the image of a good and loving God, so beautiful and winsome that one cannot help but love Him and want to emulate Him once He is truly seen.
Turning this full circle to the topic at hand. The fear of hell is powerless to generate a loving commitment to God and only gives a limited portrayal of Him as judge IMO.
To be honest, I've never met a Christian yet that behaves as if he/she believes in ET except those who have been tormented by the thought of it to the point of incapacitation. Even when I believed it was the only view, my behavior didn't match my belief. It seems to me that if we truly believed it, we'd be engaged in the most desperate rescue attempt that even the worse natural disaster could not provoke. But I just don't see that and it reveals the cognitive dissonance on a systemic level IMO.
I love that this conversation is taking place on a global level now and that someone as highly visible as Rob Bell is bringing these tough and honest questions to light for many to grapple with.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Mar 21, 2011 20:05:01 GMT -8
Josh wrote: Can you list a few? I'm hard pressed to recall any and I know Steve Gregg contends there are none, at least in the book of Acts where we see most (if not all) of the evangelizing taking place in the NT. Well, it's true there are very few direct appeals to pagans in the New Testament, and they don't directly address hell. But here's on that comes close: Acts 24:25 As Paul talked about righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and said, “That’s enough for now! You may leave. When I find it convenient, I will send for you.”However, there are many warnings given about hell in the New Testament (especially the gospels, such as Luke 12:5), and since Christians (those who are in Christ) are not destined for hell, the warnings must be for those who are not yet Christ-followers. It makes sense that a seeker who became acquainted with early Christians could have heard verses like this as a wake-up call to the seriousness of the stakes. Part of the gospel message was that judgment was coming on the whole world: 1 Peter 4:17
For it is time for judgment to begin with God’s household; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
Hebrews 10:26
If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.
2 Peter 2:9
if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment.
2 Peter 3:7
By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.Judgment strongly correlates with punishment, and eschatological judgment with eschatological punishment.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Mar 22, 2011 21:03:29 GMT -8
Right, I think everyone is aware of the judgment passages, and they're not in dispute (except maybe the nature and duration of them).
But the question on the table was whether the NT had examples of evangelism including a discussion of hell or not as you were suggesting. I generally don't count Jesus' evangelism in this consideration because he rarely spoke to pagans, his warning was to Jews (mainly) and I'm not convinced his use of Gehenna wasn't a reference to the 70AD judgment either (we've spoke about this at length before, no need to rehash).
Steve Gregg acknowledges the Acts passage when Paul is talking to Felix, but also points out that Paul doesn't mention hell there either, only a judgment. This, of course, would be implied when talking about a new Kingdom and King (Jesus), and probably didn't even need to be mentioned to a culture who would naturally assume that it's in my best interest to be on the side of the present administration having jurisdiction. But it is interesting that it's left out of the few examples we do have and that there's no command (or even encouragement) to include it, and so I would say Robin is more than justified to leave it out as well.
That's all I'm sayin'.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Mar 23, 2011 14:55:20 GMT -8
Would you guys agree at least that the theme of "judgment" does have a place in evangelism?
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Mar 23, 2011 15:03:44 GMT -8
My point here is that Jesus words in the gospels themselves may have been intended and used for evangelism.
Warnings about the afterlife would not have been foreign to a Greco-Roman audience. That's why, I think, we find the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man in the most Gentile-oriented Gospel, Luke. (Regardless of what you think the main meaning of that parable is, it's a parable that makes sense to someone who knows about Hades)
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Mar 23, 2011 17:37:06 GMT -8
Josh wrote: Of course it does...I think it's kind of implied whether expressed or not. When Peter said: Acts 2:36 36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ." NKJV ...I think most could deduce that there's gonna be a reckoning (hence why they were "cut to the heart") I just don't think we necessarily need to bring it up. Different people respond to different things and frankly I've never felt the need to appeal to fear. I know evangelist types that bring it up every time and it seems to resonate with a certain type of person they speak to (but certainly not all). Personally, I'm not an evangelist so all my conversations take place over time within the context of a relationship I already have with someone. Judgment may or may not ever come up.
|
|
|
Post by robin on Mar 23, 2011 20:21:31 GMT -8
My point here is that Jesus words in the gospels themselves may have been intended and used for evangelism. Warnings about the afterlife would not have been foreign to a Greco-Roman audience. That's why, I think, we find the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man in the most Gentile-oriented Gospel, Luke. (Regardless of what you think the main meaning of that parable is, it's a parable that makes sense to someone who knows about Hades) Regardless of what Gospel the parable is found in, Jesus was still speaking to a Jewish audience. As for including judgment in evangelism, I still don't think its necessary. I generally find that those who are open to the gospel are already experiencing some form of internal judgment from their own conscience. As for judgment in the next life, I think that there is plenty of time after conversion to dwell on those kind of theological issues. Consider the amount of time you, Chris, and I have spent discussing the topic, and there is still no agreement except that eternal torment has the least amount of scriptural support. Unless hell is a sticking point for a potential convert, I would rather focus on Jesus and what he did for us. I must be careful when talking about hell to those who are either not yet Christians, or are young in their faith. unless they have a deeper understand on the alternative views of hell, they may think that I'm spewing some kind of heresy, and dismiss me all together.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Mar 23, 2011 21:36:19 GMT -8
And it's use in Luke is a strong indication that Luke felt it was also applicable to a Gentile audience.
Well, we're all agreed that there is such a thing as hell and that those who die apart from Christ go there. And saving us from hell is one of the [many] things Jesus did for us.
It's not a subject for any of us to be cavalier about... agreed!
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Mar 24, 2011 17:01:10 GMT -8
IF that's the case, then I'd say it would be for more of an encouragement to the Gentiles, rather than a warning IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Kirby on Dec 14, 2011 20:51:50 GMT -8
I got my copy of Multnomah magazine the other day, and its cover story is a critique/response to Bell's Love Wins by Dr. Dan Lockwood, President of Multnomah University. It presents a traditional evangelical response. I found the article interesting, and wanted to link to it here as food for thought. It is a PDF of the whole magazine, so scroll down to the story. www.multnomah.edu/Common/pdf/Magazine/MultMag_Fall2011_Web.pdf
|
|