Tag: Jesus Christ

Posted on

The Love Series: God is Love

We all have ideological frameworks, which are networks of information that form our belief systems and our values. Once an ideological framework is built, it’s incredibly difficult to alter it without conscious effort. If we’re not careful, our brains may even be inclined to automatically reject information that seems to conflict with what we already believe to be true. 

Learning is the process of acquiring new, or modifying existing, knowledge, behaviors, skills, values, or preferences. Often times, learning something new is as much about unlearning old information as it is about processing or modifying your ideological framework based on new information. 

With that in mind, the first step toward TRULY understanding Godly, unconditional love is unlearning. This could mean unlearning the idea that unconditional love is weakness. It could mean unlearning the idea that unconditional love means doing whatever you want or letting other people do whatever they want, no matter who it hurts. It could mean unlearning belief in behavioral justification. Whatever it is that you have to unlearn, the goal is to level your ideological framework and rebuild it from the ground up…starting with resting your spiritual foundation on two things: one, that God IS unconditional love (meaning that love is literally the essence and most important part of who God is); and two, that love is the ultimate test of discipleship.

So let’s start with unlearning. What do you already believe? Personally, I’d been taught that God loved me, but that God hated the sinfulness that was inherent to my humanity. I was taught that sinlessness was perfection and that I was supposed to strive toward sinlessness. After all, all things are possible through Christ and His goal was to help me get to a place where I didn’t sin anymore. 

The problem with that was that God’s love wasn’t the bottom line. God’s love was an afterthought, an exception, rather than the rule. The “rule”, as it turned out, was justification, either through righteousness by works or righteousness by faith. It just depended on who you asked. 

Righteousness by works is more in line with the teachings of Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, and Methodist Christians. They distinguish between initial justification, which ordinarily is viewed to occur at baptism; and final salvation, which is accomplished after a lifetime of striving to do God’s will. Catholics believe faith as is active in charity and good works (fides caritate formata) can justify man. Forgiveness of sin exists and is infused, but justification can be lost by mortal sin.

Righteousness by faith is a Protestant doctrine, under which sin is considered to be merely “covered”, and righteousness imputed. In Lutheranism and Calvinism, righteousness from God is viewed as being credited to the sinner’s account through faith alone, without works. Protestants believe faith without works can justify man because Christ died for sinners. There’s one big “but”, though: anyone who truly has faith will produce good works as a product of faith, as a good tree produces good fruit. For Lutherans, justification can be lost with the loss of faith.

Whether by faith or by works, justification is important. To most Christians, all of that sounds perfectly logical, and the concept of righteousness isn’t the issue in itself. The problem is reconciling what we already believe about righteousness with God’s essence being unconditional love. And I mean honestly reconciling it, not twisting unconditional love to fit the pre-established narrative.  And an even more important question is whether that’s even how it works in the first place. Should I be reconciling who God is with what I already believe God wants? Or should I first take the time to discover and establish who God is and THEN use that as a basis for determining what God wants?

I believe that we have to start by establishing who God is, and I believe that the three most important Biblical truths regarding who God is are: God is omniscient, God is omnipotent, and God is unconditional love. Today, we’re talking about love.

God Is Love

Theologian A.W. Tozer once stated, “Nothing God ever does, or ever did, or ever will do, is separate from the love of God.”

1 John 4:7-12 

Agape is a Greco-Christian term referring to love, “the highest form of love, charity” and “the love of God for man and of man for God”.The word embraces a universal, unconditional love that transcends and persists regardless of circumstance. It goes beyond just the emotions to the extent of seeking the best for others. 

Within Christianity, agape is considered to be the love originating from God or Christ for humankind. In the New Testament, it refers to the covenant love of God for humans, as well as the human reciprocal love for God; the term necessarily extends to the love of one’s fellow man. 

“While the person who loves ‘is born of God and knows God,’  the person who doesn’t love doesn’t know God and has no deep and abiding relationship with God.  Love, then, is the acid test of discipleship.” – Sermon Writer Bible Commentary

1 Corinthians 13:8-13

Romans 8:31-39

It’s imperative to get the foundation right, because everything anyone believes is ultimately based on what that person believes about who God is. We should be able to ask ourselves, “Would a loving God do this?” and give an objective answer rather than trying to explain why something that intuitively contradicts love somehow still constitutes love. We should be able to examine our beliefs and their origins with integrity and objectively determine whether those beliefs align with who we say we believe God to be. 

If love is the essence of God’s character, if everything God does is out of love, if love is the greatest commandment and nothing can separate us from God’s love….love should be the foundation, not an exception. We shouldn’t be looking for any reason or excuse to conform love to something that fits what we already believe to be true. We should be willing to strip away fear and conditioning and worldliness….take a step back from what we think we know….and build from the ground up, examining our beliefs through the lens of God’s love and determining whether what we say God wants is a reflection of who we want people to believe God is. 

This week, I challenge you to ask God to break down your ideological framework and strip away what you think you know. I challenge you to ask God to reveal Himself to you in ways that only He can and to expand your mind and open your heart to allowing Him to be as big in your life as He possibly can be. I challenge you to ask God to move you out of His way and to give Him permission to do a new thing. I challenge you to ask God to remove any fear and to help you embrace the spirit of power, love, and a sound mind. 

Posted on

Does Humanity Need a Savior?

Last week, we addressed the concept of “original sin”, so this week, we’ll be discussing “atonement” and the idea that humanity needs “salvation.” Atonement is “satisfaction or reparation for a wrong or injury; amends.” Atonement within Western Christian Theology generally “refers to the forgiving or pardoning of sin through the death by crucifixion of Jesus Christ which made possible the reconciliation between God and creation.” However, in Judaism and Islam, atonement is the process of causing a transgression to be forgiven or pardoned directly by God (rather than through Jesus Christ’s death) through true repentance, fasting, prayer, and good works. So what’s true? Does God have the prerogative and authority to simply forgive sin? Or is forgiveness only possible through the blood of Jesus Christ?

Here’s what we know:

  1. Within Christianity, there are several theories regarding how atonement might work, including:
    • Ransom Theory of Atonement – this theory teaches that the death of Christ was a ransom sacrifice, usually said to have been paid to Satan, in satisfaction for the bondage and debt on the souls of humanity as a result of inherited sin.
    • Satisfaction Theory of Atonement– a theory in Catholic theology that holds Jesus Christ redeemed humanity through making satisfaction (restitution) for man’s disobedience through his own supererogatory (the performance of more than what is asked for) obedience. This view acknowledges that God cannot freely forgive sins without any sort of punishment or satisfaction being exacted.
    • Moral Influence Theory of Atonement – an alternative to the satisfaction theory of atonement. Developed by Abelard, this theory focuses on changing man’s perception of God as not offended, harsh, and judgemental, but as loving. According to Abelard, “Jesus died as the demonstration of God’s love,” a demonstration that can change the hearts and minds of the sinners, turning back to God
    • Penal Substitution Theory – teaches that Jesus suffered the penalty for mankind’s sins. Penal substitution derives from the idea that divine forgiveness must satisfy divine justice, that is, that God is not willing or able to simply forgive sin without first requiring satisfaction (restitution) for it. It states that God gave himself in the person of his Son, Jesus Christ, to suffer the death, punishment, and curse due to fallen humanity as the penalty for our sin.
    • Unlimited Atonement Theory – states that Jesus died as a propitiation for the benefit of mankind without exception. A doctrinal issue that divides Christians is the question of the extent of the atonement. This question typically goes as follows: “Did Christ bear the sins of the elect alone on the cross, or did his death expiate the sins of all human beings?” Those who take this view read scriptures such as John 3:16; 1 Timothy 2:6; 4:10; Hebrews 2:9; 1 John 2:2 to say that the Bible teaches unlimited atonement.
  2. According to Islam, one can be forgiven of sins through genuine tawbah (repentance) which literally means “to return.”
    • Unlike the Catholic concept of atonement, tawbah does not entail formal, ecclesiastical confession to a religious leader. Like Protestantism, Islam allows followers to repent directly to God. In addition, while Christianity and Islam considers humans as prone to sin, Islam ultimately views them as responsible for their actions and refutes the Christian concept of original sin.
    • In Islam, Muslims are discouraged from confessing their sins and sharing the wrongdoings of others. 
    • Also, according to Islam, Blood sacrifice cannot add to Divine Grace nor replace the necessity of repentance. However, sacrifice is done to help the poor and to remember Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son at God’s command (It is not their meat nor their blood that reaches Allah. it is your piety that reaches Him…”— Qur’an, sura 22, ayat 37).
    • When a human has offended or disobeyed God, ḥuqūq Allāh, penitence, remorse, and resolution are necessary in order to show that one is sincere, and will not repeat the wrongdoing in the future.
    • Repentance for sin can be accomplished through acts such as, “fasting, giving charity, sacrificing an animal, and freeing a slave.” In addition, going on the hajj can serve as a form of repentance.
    • However, regardless of one’s outward deeds, God does not accept the forgiveness of those who are insincere in their repentance and only do so in order to avoid Jahannam (similar to the concept of Hell within Christianity).
  3. In Rabbinic Judaism, atonement is achieved through repentance, which can be followed by some combination of the following:
    • confession
    • restitution
    • the occurrence of Yom Kippur (the day itself, as distinct from the Temple service performed on it)
    • tribulations (unpleasant life experiences)
    • the experience of dying.
    • the carrying out of a sentence of lashes or execution imposed by an ordained court (not now in existence)
    • Temple service (not now in existence, e.g. bringing a sacrifice).
      • Note: Which of these additions are required varies according to the severity of the sin, whether it was done willfully, in error, or under duress, whether it was against God alone or also against a fellow person, and whether the Temple service and ordained law courts are in existence or not. Repentance is needed in all cases of willful sin, and restitution is always required in the case of sin against a fellow person, unless the wronged party waives it.

While most religions included animal sacrifices as a part of their religious practices, only western Christianity teaches that those animal sacrifices represent Jesus Christ’s substitutionary death to atone for the sins of humanity. Even within Judaism, the sacrificial system only provided atonement for sins that were committed unintentionally. Intentional sin could only be forgiven by God through “a broken and contrite spirit (Psalm 51:16,17).”

The focus here should perhaps be less about whether or not humanity needs a savior and more about why God would set things up that way, if that’s actually what God did. Remember, everything we believe is ultimately a reflection of who we say God is and what characteristics we attribute to God. Does God make the rules? Or have principles been set in place that God is required to abide by? If God does make the rules, why would/did God create a scenario in which forgiveness can only be given and received through Jesus Christ’s sacrifice? And what does that mean for those who lived and died before Jesus Christ’s death or for those who lived and died without ever coming into a knowledge of Christ? Why would/did God allow the existence of something God knew humanity would ultimately need to be saved from?

What do you think? Does humanity need a savior? Is atonement for sin necessary? Let us know what you think in the comments below!