The Perfect Judge and Amazing Grace
In his recent post, Ubiquitous Che (surprise!) of rheroic sans pareil asked two questions. Although these questions were not the main point of his post (they were being used as a counterattack against an essay criticizing atheism), they are very common objections raised against Christian theology, and I wanted to address them in more than just a comment on his blog.
Che asks if a monk living in India, who has heard of Christianity and rejected it, yet still lives a life of compassion and charity towards his community would be condemned because he did not accept Jesus. Would a criminal on death row who confesses right before his execution go to Heaven?
In his first letter to the Christians in Corinth, the apostle Paul wrote the following words:
Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men’s hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.
It is not for the Christian to pass judgment on the monk and the criminal, for we cannot know the heart of each man. Moreover, we do not possess the wisdom to be able to render justice in this situation, as both sides have strong points. What do we do, then?
We leave the issue up to God, who is the perfect judge. We do not know the hearts of men, but He does, and He, the one who gave Solomon his wisdom, certainly is capable of administering justice in the situation. We do not know the answer to the question; we must leave it up to God.
Christians are called to preach the good news, not fire and brimstone. Although warnings may be necessary at times, we need to keep ourselves from passing judgments on others by ordering them to get saved or face hellfire. However, I know that I personally am not even close to perfect, and that I need forgiveness from my sins; I need a savior. We shouldn’t require this feeling of others, but simply spread the good news that, if they also need forgiveness from their sins, they shall find a savior in Jesus Christ the Messiah.
Che’s other question was whether it was “good” or “moral” for Jesus to be killed in the way He was. After all, even if Jesus was not divine, He was at least good, and such a cruel punishment should not be put upon anyone but the worst offenders.
The answer to this question is simple: no, it was not just for Jesus to be killed. Both Roman officials He was brought before during His trial, Pontius Pilate and Herod Antipas, found Him innocent of any charge that would warrant death. Despite this, the crowd insisted that Jesus be crucified, and Pilate gave in. I agree with Che; this was a perversion of justice.
However, looking deeper into the situation, we realize there are things happening here that aren’t immediately visible to the people involved. Jesus wasn’t being cornered into His execution- He was willingly going.
When the crowd came to arrest Him, Peter, one of the closest companions of Jesus, drew His sword and attacked the servant of the high priest. Jesus healed this man’s ear, and said to Peter:
Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and He will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?
Jesus had followers who would fight and would die for Him. Jesus could have called twelve legions of angels to save Him from His captors. However, He stilled His followers, and did not call the angels. He went, instead, to death; He went to this unjust cross. He went there, freely, to die. As the hymn goes:
He could have called ten-thousand angels
To destroy the world and set Him free
He could have called ten-thousand angels
But He died alone for you and me
That last line is important. Jesus certainly didn’t deserve the horrific execution He was given, but some do. I know I do. You might too. What I will say is that Jesus died for you, and for me, to take the punishment we deserve. It was not “just” for Him to die in our place, but He did so anyway, so that we could live.
That’s not the entire gospel though; that’s not the entire good news. There’s one more part. Jesus didn’t stay dead. After three days, He broken body rose from the tomb, and He walked in life again. He has since ascended into Heaven, and His resurrection gives us hope, that though our sins may warrant death, Jesus has washed us clean of them, and through His blood we may rise anew to be free from sin. Jesus’s willingness to go to the cross, to die this terrible death, and God’s forgiveness for us from our sins, is why Christians sing another old hymn:
Amazing grace, how sweet the sound
That saved a wretch like me
I once was lost, but now I’m found
Was blind, but now I see
August 29, 2008 at 1:04 am
Been a long time since you have posted, but good post. God is the perfect judge. I really like a version of “Amazing Grace” that adds this chorus: “My chains are gone, I’ve been set free, my God, my Savior has ransomed me. And like a flood, His mercy rains, unending love, amazing grace.” His love, His grace, His mercy and His power truly is amazing. This post is a good reminder of what He did for us, even though we didn’t deserve it. As the popular hymn goes, “He paid a debt He did not owe, I owed a debt I could not pay.”
September 2, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Question – why is it that when Christians seek biblical guidance, more often than not, y’all are quoting Paul’s letters? Shouldn’t you, then, call yourselves Paulians?
Leave it up to god, eh? In other words, do nothing. Hmm. That’s one way, I suppose. But I say that reason and logic are the perfect judges, not some supposedly-benevolent divine father-figure surveillance camera in “heaven”. Headline: god answers crippled boy’s prayer: “NO!” says god.
September 2, 2008 at 1:18 pm
First of all, let me say hello, and welcome to the blog.
I’m actually surprised I haven’t heard your first question more often from people. Granted, Jesus, not Paul, is the son of God. Moreover, he wasn’t even involved with Jesus while he was on earth, and even persecuted Christians before his conversion. So why do we take him as an authority?
First of all, let’s make sure we understand who Paul is. Paul was a Jewish Pharisee, a sect that tried to strictly adhere to the Jewish law. They, for the most part, didn’t like Jesus, and always were looking for ways to trap and expose Him. Eventually they ended up killing Him. Paul himself persecuted the remaining followers of Christ who claimed Jesus had rose from the dead.
While on the way to the Damascus with a letter authorizing the arrest of Christians in the city, Paul was confronted by the ascended Jesus, and ultimately ended up a Christian. Although mistrusted at first (due to the persecution he led), Paul became a major part of the early church, and planted many congregations around the region.
Unfortunately, many of these congregations encountered problems, such as falling back to their old ways or letting divisions break out among their numbers. Paul wrote letters to these churches, to strengthen, encourage, and instruct them. These are the letters we often quote.
So now, given Paul’s involvement with the early church, including close interaction with many who actually knew Jesus and learned from Him during the three years of His ministry, it is reasonable to suppose that Paul knew authentic Christian doctrine very well. Additionally, in general his letters can be dated to before, or at least up to, the general dates the Gospels were written, so they could be taken to show an accurate view of the early church. Finally, according to classical Christian doctrine, the letters, like the rest of the canonical Bible, are taken to be inspired by the Holy Spirit. Although some Christians do not affirm this inspiration, some do, and it explains why they often quote Paul.
Even if the letters of Paul aren’t definite, inspired words of God, they should at least be taken to be from a good authority on Christian doctrine.
As for calling ourselves “Paulians” instead of Christians, Paul himself was a Christian, and his letters reflect Christian themes and ideas, so even if we only quoted him, it is reasonable to call ourselves Christians. However, our name doesn’t really matter, but our message.
So now your on to your second paragraph. Reason and logic certainly are what we should base our judgments on, but they are tools, not actual entities capable of judging, and I do not trust myself to use them in such a situation where eternity is on the line. I only trust one who knows all to render judgments with reason and logic.
Regarding your statement about the crippled boy, I would only say that I do not know why God does not heal the boy, but I trust Him to know all things, and if there’s some reason that boy must be crippled, then I weep with him. Moreover, God weeps with Him too, for the Christian God knows what pain is like. He sent His only son to earth, knowing He would die. But just as Jesus rose from the dead, that crippled boy will also reach an eternal glory that far outweighs his suffering on earth.
September 4, 2008 at 8:48 am
Um… thanks for the history lesson of sorts. Christianity seems to be a cafeteria-style religion. With so many denominations and biblical interpretations available – many of them opposing each other – the devout seem to just, like a 12 step meeting, “take what they like and leave the rest”. Seems rather illogical and willy-nilly to my mind.
Personally, I don’t and can’t trust in a god that doesn’t heal a crippled boy, or perform any number of compassionate and humane acts for that matter, when all “claims” state that he/she/it is a benevolent, all-powerful entity with the ability to do as much. Reason and logic – tools, yes, but the sharpest ones we mammals have – tell me that just because the existence of such a god is *desirable* doesn’t make it so.
September 4, 2008 at 11:18 am
I have to agree with mindserased about the crippled boy, and about the unnecessary deaths of children in general. And I agree too that Christianity is a cafeteria-style religion. That’s because there is so much ambiguity involved with the bible saying so many different things, Jesus saying so many different things, one can throw together many different interpretations/denominations.
But in no way can I accept that there will be a reward in heaven for the crippled boy and that this somehow justifies his pain. In fact it’s irrelevant what happens in “heaven”! The boy is crippled NOW, is suffering NOW. We must do whatever it takes to end his suffering NOW, not wash our hands of it and say he’ll get his reward in heaven.
I support the philosophy of Albert Camus in whose book, The Plague, the Dr. Rioux goes on helping the sick because he is driven by his own compassion, as a thoroughly secular person, and has no time for explanations and prayer when people are dying. Prayer does nothing!
Ah well, I’m sure you will have an answer to all this. But you’re dealing with a thoroughly secular person here in me, and I imagine in mindserased as well. Thanks for raising the issues and I accept you sincerity completely.
September 4, 2008 at 12:03 pm
[Note: Mardé's comment came in during the writing of this comment]
Granted, there are different Biblical interpretations, but dismissing Christianity purely on that basis is a logical fallacy. There are many different views on politics, for example, but one doesn’t say we should have anarchy simply because people disagree on health care systems.
More importantly, though, is that we don’t just pick “what we like” and ignore what we don’t. I’ll acknowledge that some Christians do (such as the stereotypical prosperity gospel televangelist), but if we desire to be Godly Christians, we should strive to follow what the Bible says, not what we want it to say.
This process isn’t illogical or “willy-nilly” as you described it. An entire field of study called “hermeneutics” exists to develop different theories and methods of interpretation. This is very different from simply picking and choosing verses.
The most important thing, though, is that while Christians may have different interpretations of some things, effectively all of us agree on the central and most important issue: the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, upon which all other Christian doctrine is based.
I’m sorry that you are not capable of putting that much trust in something. Actually, trust is something that most Christians struggle with. Christians don’t find it easy to trust God either, at least at first. However, slowly but surely as we live a prayerful Christian life, asking God to give us faith, we find it easier and easier to trust Him.
I never questioned reason or logic’s sharpness, but simply mankind’s skill in wielding them.
I agree that just because the existence of the Christian God is desirable doesn’t make it so (although some philosophical theories would argue otherwise or that belief is still the better option). I have logical reasons to believe, but that moves into the oft-debated field of Christian apologetics, and a discussion of that is for a different time. Right now my goal is to explain my current view of Christian theology.
Mardé, your comment came in as I was finishing writing this. The topic of your first paragraph is addressed above, and now I’ll address the rest below.
You brought up a very good point, which I neglected to mention earlier. As Christians, we cannot simply stand aside and pray while failing to help those who are suffering.
Jesus once told a parable about a man who was attacked by bandits. He was left for dead along the side of the road. A priest came by, and when he saw the man, passed on the other side of the road. A Levite (another holy man) did likewise. Finally, a Samaritan, a member of a race despised and hated by the Jews at the time, came by, and he helped the man, took him to an inn, and told the innkeeper to charge him whatever it would cost to take care of the man. Jesus ends by saying we should do as the Samaritan did.
We certainly should not pray in lieu of helping the suffering. Perhaps God may use us to answer our own prayer.
For example, missionaries (at least missionaries I know within my Christian community) do not go to a small country in Africa to simply preach the gospel. The first thing they do is help them. They teach them safer ways of making cooking fires, and ways to obtain and purify water. They help them build houses and teach in schools. I have friends who, in addition to training to become Biblical scholars, are also studying to become physicians, so that they may get into foreign countries as doctors, and better help the people there.
Perhaps it’s not God’s fault there is so much suffering in the world. Perhaps it’s the fault of His people, who seem content to simply pray and wait for God to do something instead of doing it themselves, which is what God wants them to do.
Both you and mindserased do seem to be very secular people (as does Ubiquitous Che). I am thankful that you all seem very reasonable though, and are not like the mindlessly and illogically attacking, never understanding atheists I’ve seen elsewhere. I hope you keep an open mind, and acknowledge that everyone here seems to be fairly intelligent and educated, with a well-thought-through worldview.
September 4, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Actually, I consider myself more of an agnostic than an outright atheist. That’s because I believe in the overwhelming mystery that is the world and my being in it, a mystery which could even be consistent with some kind of conscious force or play in this strange universe. But still I can’t bring myself to accept the central Christian tenet: the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. That to me goes way too far. But I appreciate your discussion of the moral dimensions of things. In our old Unitarian Universalist (UU) church, originally just Universalist, one of our stain glass windows shows the good Samaritan helping the injured man. This is something we’re proud of and I’m sure we can make common ground with you except for that troublesome (to some of us UUs) Christian tenet that keeps coming up.
September 28, 2008 at 11:36 pm
[...] I’ve wrote about can be summed up in this quote from a post I wrote a month ago titled “The Perfect Judge and Amazing Grace”: Christians are called to preach the good news, not fire and brimstone. Although warnings may be [...]