I really enjoy the 4th of July and love the United States.
However, I am very clear that my first allegiance is to God and that my primary identity is as a child of God, disciple of Jesus Christ, and enlivened by the Holy Spirit.
Let’s celebrate.
I was asked this question recently and my initial response was “yes.” However, now I am thinking maybe the answer is “no.” I never believe that divorce should be a first choice or seem like an easy option.
I think that there are circumstances where divorce makes the most sense and is perhaps the best option for two people - abuse being a clear example to me. There may be other reasons as well. My first thought was that these circumstances happen to faithful and unfaithful people alike and that being a deeply committed Christian would not preclude divorce.
As I think more about it though, it becomes a little less clear. If two people were practicing their faith and took seriously their vows of marriage then I am not sure that divorce would make sense. I would suggest that if one is living out their faith that abuse would not be a possibility and that in the case of infidelity (which is not something to which anyone is immune) a commitment to the marriage vows should make some difference.
I am still not quite sure on this question. What do you think?
I got another great question from Nelson who had previously asked about Sex, Gender and the Bible. I must say some good questions all around. So here goes.
How do you respond to someone who asserts that it is impossible to believe in both evolution and creation?
First, let me define terms. By evolution, I am referring to the belief that species adapt and change over time and according to natural selection may become different species. By creation, I am referring to the belief that God created all things from nothing.
Both non-believers and deeply committed Christians may believe that evolution and creation are compatible or that they are incompatible. There is certainly not consensus among Christians on this issue.
I do not believe that creation and evolution are incompatible. I believe that God created all things, but do not rule out the possibility that God may have also created evolution as a part of the goodness of creation. I think that the beauty of creation is evidence of God’s work with or without evolution.
For me the question of compatibility or incompatibility of evolution and creation is not the core of my Christian faith. I would suggest that you first engage people in conversation around the life, death and resurrection of Jesus and what this means for your life as a way of shifting the conversation from the the perceived conflict of evolution and creation
God is big. Bigger than the boxes that we construct.
I have had the opportunity to lead the Builders Sunday Morning Small Group for three weeks studying the gospel according to Mark. This question was from the final class meeting.
Is Christianity the only missionary religion? The answer is no.
From the Wikipedia entry for missionary - “A missionary is a member of a religion who works to convert those who do not share the missionary’s faith; someone who proselytizes.”
From this entry and others, I was able to find a few a little more information on particular religions.
Religions that have missionary efforts
Religions that do not have missionary efforts
This is certainly not a comprehensive list of religions, but perhaps gives an idea about the division. Some religions are more comfortable with pluralism, which has a direct impact on whether they carry out missionary efforts. This was an interesting question for me to research as I had not really thought about this question before. Thanks for the question!
Citation - Wikipedia contributors, “Missionary,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Missionary&oldid=209656492 (accessed May 5, 2008).
I received a few great questions from Jan via email last week and wanted to share my responses with you as well.
The first question had to do with Christianity and other religions and I referred Jan to what I had previously posted:
The next question was one to which I had not responded before - Does hell exist?
To start, I think that people have many different conceptions of hell. An eternal place of punishment, a lake of fire, and separation from God are just a few of the ideas that someone may have when thinking about hell. I best understand hell as a place of separation from God. God’s free and unmerited love for us and the incarnation, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ makes it possible for us to live in relationship with God.
I believe that we can choose to receive God’s freely given love and live our lives in response to this good news. Alternatively, we have the opportunity to choose (either actively or passively) not to be in relationship with God. I believe that God does not force us to be in relationship. If we refuse this relationship, the alternative is living in a way in which we are separated and moving away from God. Eternal separation from God would be hell.
I believe one may experience hell on earth, in the sense that we can live in isolation from God and other people. This may be a result of our actions and it may be a result of the actions of others. I think of circumstances of divorce, suicide, unexpected death, the death of a child and many other circumstances may elicit these feelings. Our way out is the hope that we have in Jesus Christ.
Jan followed up this response with a clarifying question about specific mention of hell in the Bible.
There is a discrepancy about how exactly such passages should be interpreted. I do not know the word that is translated as hell in English to be able to speak to the nuances of the original language.
How would you respond to Jan’s question? What did I miss in my response? Where could it be improved? What do you think?
Last week I posted on Christianity and Other Religions and included my thoughts about how to best respond to someone of another faith. I want to follow up on some of the conversation that I have had via the comments and emails on my assertion that it is more important to share the good news of Christ with non and nominally religious persons rather than persons of other religions.
I have received some excellent critiques that it is the responsibility of all Christians to share the good news with others - regardless of whether they adhere to a particular faith tradition. I agree. I do think that it is important to tell the story of Jesus to all persons in a way that tells of life transformation and gives the opportunity and calls for a response.
I did not intend to assert that Christians should not share their faith with those of other religions. I do believe that this is important. In regard to a relationship with Christ I do not make a distinction between someone who is non-religious and someone with who is faithful to another religion. In the collective, it is important to share the good news with all.
I would like to stay with my original assertion that given the choice of sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ with an individual of faith and with someone without any faith I believe that I would pursue the relationship with the person without faith. However, I recognize the validity of the counterpoint that someone with some sort of faith structure may have a familiarity with shaping her or his life around a life of faith and thus may be more willing to shift
As you can likely tell, I am still working this out and have appreciated the comments which help sharpen my thoughts. So here is a question about which I am not clear - Which of the following do you think would be someone that would be more willing to respond to the good news of Jesus Christ?
Or
I am clear that it is important for Christians to share their faith with each of these groups. What do you think?
I had a great breakfast at First Watch with Scott on Tuesday morning. He wanted to talk about an experience in which he felt that a church leader depreciated Christianity in relationship to other religions of the world. The relationship between Christianity and other religions is a topic that I find to be quite complex. Here is some of my response.
Christianity and world religions
Judaism has a distinct relationship with Christianity among all other world religions. The God to whom Jesus prays and speaks to as Father is the God of the Hebrew scriptures. God remains faithful to the covenant that was made with the people of Israel. Paul wrestles with this relationship in several chapters in the book of Romans.
Will persons of other faith traditions be saved? I am not sure. I do believe that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. I believe that the Christian hope is that all things will be made new in the second coming of Christ. I do not think that anything will remain that is old. I believe that Christ’s incarnation, life, death and resurrection is a part of God’s work for all of creation. What exactly this means for persons of other religions, I do not know.
As a pastor, it is part of my responsibility to be concerned with how it is with others’ souls. I believe that this is the responsibility of all Christians - to watch over one another in love (as Wesley would say). However, I believe that it is more important to first be concerned with the state of my own soul and my journey of discipleship. I believe that one should be more concerned for the state of one’s own soul than with making judgments on the state of others.
Thoughts about conversations with those of other religions
I recognize that this is a broad topic and that this response does not even come close to touching all areas that would be needed. What would you add to this conversation? How do you understand the relationship between Christianity and other religions? What thoughts do you have about interfaith conversations?
Recent Comments