I’m not sure if I will have net access while I am away so I might leave you with a controversial post to chew on while I am gone. Is God present in other world religions and can people be ‘saved’ outside of Christ?

I mentioned previously that I have been reading Four Views on Salvation in a Pluralistic World. It was my holiday reading and I loved it! A very challenging read about how salvation functions, to what extent ‘Jesus is the only way’ and to what extent salvation may be possible outside of ‘Christianity’ or even Jesus.

The 4 authors, John Hick (a normative pluralist), Clark Pinnock (described as an inclusivist), Alistair McGrath (described as ‘salvation in Christ’) and R.Douglas Gievett & W Gary Phillips (Jesus alone) all present their perspectives on how people are ‘saved’.

The descriptions used above were the ones used by the book, but they don’t really suffice. Essentially, as I read him, Hick falls into a camp outside of classical orthodox Christianity. He insists that God is ‘ultimate reality’ and that he/she can be accessed in any number of ways and through any number of religions. He argues (quite confrontingly) that if Christianity really is all it claims to be then it ought to be doing a much better job of living its own teachings. Fair enough on that point, but I don’t buy Hick’s other arguments and none of the other authors did either.

Gievett & Phillips argue a very narrow view – that Jesus is the only way and those who don’t hear go to hell – probably not a view that is easily accepted these days by most evangelicals. It does seem a quite horrendous view of God, to suggest that he would condemn the innocent.

McGrath is probably the standard conservative evangelical view – where there is ‘agnosticism about those who haven’t heard the gospel’, but Jesus is still regarded as the only way to know God and experience salvation.

The one I found interesting was Clark Pinnock, a man who almost got ousted from the American Evangelical society (or whatever it is called) last year for his provocative and boundary pushing views. His argument is that God is present in all major world religions – a ‘general revelation’ concept and that people are drawn to him through their religion, but that normally salvation is only possible through Christ.

When thinking of exceptions, Pinnock cites Melchizedek as a ‘pagan saint’ in whom God was at work and argues that salvation is possible in some instances by a response to general revelation.

Here are two quotes, one from Pinnock and one from the book but by C.S Lewis:

This does not make religions salvific as such, however. The Spirit is the power of God unto salvation, not to religion. God may use elements in them as means of grace, even as God may use the moral dimension, the celestial bodies or social interaction to lead people to himself. We must be alert to the possibility that God is effectively at work in the religious dimension in a given instance, but there are no guarantees of it.

• download 51st state the movie back to the future dvd download

p. 116

There are people in other religions who are being led by God’s secret influence to concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it. P. 119

What do you think? I hold to a ‘Jesus is the only way’ position, so I will nail my colours to the mast there, but I am open to the possibility that Pinnock could be onto something and that his position is both biblically and intellectually plausible.

So…

Is God at work in Islam drawing people to himself?

Is God at work in Hinduism helping people gather some knowledge of who he is?

is it possible that people can experience salvation through general revelation?

Karl Rahner spoke of ‘anonymous Christians’ in other religions, but Pinnock prefers ‘pagan saints’ to describe those who are ‘saved’ but not aware of Jesus.

We often say God is already at work in the world (Missio Dei) so why wouldn’t it be possible that he could be at work in other religions. Don Richardson’s classic missionary text ‘Eternity in Their Hearts’ also shows the Christ stories that are present in diverse tribal religions all around the world.

Actually the more I write the less controversial it sounds…

Bugger.

Might just go watch the Footy show.

The beauty of starting church from scratch is that you get to re-invent everything. You are free to re-visit every core belief and practice and re-assess its validity or form.

Over the next few weeks at Upstream we are revisiting the whole idea of communion/the eucharist/ Lord’s Supper or whatever you choose to call it. We haven’t developed any set practices yet, or any immovable theological convictions in this area and our current expression is ad hoc at best. It seemed like time to try and nail this one down…

‘Good luck!’ I hear you say…

And that is kinda how it feels. Given that 2000 years of church history has led us to such a diversity of opinions I doubt we will be able to find the ‘right answer’, but I reckon we still need to determine what our position is and how we will express it. At the moment it is just either vague or a replica of what we have inherited, because we haven’t taken the time to explore it.

So today I began the crew on the task of asking some serious questions about communion. You might like to think them thru too, as I am guessing that many of us just take our current practice for granted and could use some deeper reflection.

Let me offer a few scenarios / issues to get you thinking. Please take some time to engage in the comments as I are trying to do some serious learning here.

———-

Last year when I was a guest speaker at the Anglican Training in Ministry intensive, a seminar for soon to be ordained clergy. I was there presenting ‘Forgey’ stuff, but over dinner the conversation turned to ‘the eucharist’ and I listened with curiosity. For some reason the folks were discussing how you estimate accurately the number of bits of bread and the amount of wine.

After a few minutes it dawned on me…

I thought out loud, ‘Oh of course, you guys believe the priest has to eat/drink whatever’s left don’t you?!’

‘And what about you?’ one woman asked…

‘Oh we just toss it out’, I said much to her horror.

‘But how can you?’ she asked genuinely concerned.

I went on to explain that we don’t see it as anything special, and she explained to me that once it had been ‘consecrated’, to her it was very special. I realised I was on touchy ground on this topic with Anglicans and my Baptist ‘remembrance/ordinance’ position was not ringing any bells for her.

————-

I remember growing up in my traditional Baptist church, where communion was always at the end of the service, so that those who ‘love and serve the Lord’ could be involved… but those who didn’t

fanboys movie download

practical magic dvd download

were free to leave, or to observe.

I always felt for people who left. They seemed like second class citizens in that environment.

Either that or (like me) they were too young to take communion…

————-

Which leads to another question of when is a person old enough to take communion?

I have allowed my children to take communion ever since they have told me that they love Jesus. I think 3 was the age they were first able to verbalise that.

We explain it to them each time as the bread and wine come around, and while they dont get it all, they know they are considered ok to partake.

This would not have happened in the world I grew up in.

————-

So that’s the kids…

They have christian parents and a childlike faith… and in my opinion they qualify, but what about adults who are not Christians… Can they take communion if they want to remember Jesus?

At our Easter camp we went to Busselton with 5 families who would not see themselves as believers and we held a remembrance service on Good Friday. They joined us for it and as part it there was opportunity to take communion (bread and wine)

Around half of those who aren’t Christians took the bread and the wine.

Is that ok?…

————-

Of course if you see communion as a meal then it gets even trickier, especially if you don’t believe that non-believers should be able to take part. Do you then exclude them from the meal?

On what basis do you decide their worthiness of communion?

Are ‘strays’ allowed communion – those who have lost their way with faith?

Is this what Paul meant about eating in an unworthy manner?

————-

Of course this raises another question of when we are actually doing communion and when we are just having a feed together. Is every meal a communion meal? Or do we need to declare it as such?

Is it only communion if we use wine and unleavened bread – or grape juice and wafers in our ‘Baptist’ case?

Is pizza and beer legitimate for communion?

————-

Then there are the really tricky aspects, like should only men be allowed to serve communion (there has been plenty of church biffo over this one) and if they are serving then should they have to wear ties?!

Okay, so that was the 80’s but I’ll bet there are some places around today where you’d need to be wearing trousers and a tie to be able to serve communion… Some churches even insist that you have to be an ordained priest…

Then there’s the Salvos… who just don’t bother.

————-

I could go on, but the you get the idea. This is very shaky ground for making categorical statements, yet over the years thousands have died for their beliefs on this subject.

Hopefully we will get thru the next few weeks without any unnecessary deaths, but let’s not underestimate the significance of the topic. For some people this is critical and for others it somewhat peripheral.

As a Baptist by heritage I struggle to see the sacramental aspect of communion, in fact for me communion has often been a time of fairly strained boredom as I have zoned out and felt guilty about my disinterest. I doubt this was what Jesus intends, but I also doubt he intended for it to be the place for a second sermon and a ‘symbolic’ feast. As a kid I always wondered if the minister was a bit whacked when he spoke of the feast and we finished up with a smidgeon of a Jatz cracker and a little thimble of raspberry cordial. A feast?!…

The aim of today’s learning was to de-stabilise the views that we have inherited and to plant questions in the minds of those present, ultimately with a very practical objective – to figure out what we will do at Upstream.

Anyway if you’re interested in the learning exercise here’s what we did:

1.We began by choosing a picture card to depict our experience of communion and then we shared why we chose that card.

2. From there I gave a short history of how communion has developed in the various traditions and what the different threads of belief are. We each reflected on our heritage and how we had been shaped.

3. We then turned to the gospel and 1 Cor to look at some biblical material.

The water grew murkier and murkier… This was the plan however!

4. So as we finished today I sent everyone off with a question to research and then report back on (5 mins max) next time we meet. The questions we are exploring are below:

1. When is communion ‘legitimate’ and when is it not?

2. What actually happens during communion? Is it a sacrament or an ordinance?

3. What is the main purpose/s of communion? How do we achieve them in what we do?

4. What form should communion take? Should it be a meal or a small cup of juice and a wafer of bread? Why?

5. Who is allowed to take communion? What guidelines are there?

6. Who can serve communion? Why do churches differ on this?

7. How often should a group celebrate communion?

8. Why has the form changed so much over the years? (meal – symbols)

9. What does it mean to take communion in an unworthy manner?

I love this kind of learning that really takes us back to some serious research and engagement with scripture and church history.

What does it mean to be ‘unequally yoked’?

Historically this term has been used to disallow Christians either marrying or forming significant partnerships (eg business) with non-Christians. I have always seen this as a fairly stock standard evangelical idea in regard to marriage. I would hold it less tightly in regard to business partnerships and other relationships.

However the other day I met someone who asked a question that has me pondering…

After a marriage to a Christian that ended badly, this person would now seriously consider marrying a person who is not a Christian, but does have some genuine sympathy for who Jesus is and who is living a life that resembles Jesus’.

This person would say that in their first marriage they actually were unequally yoked despite the partner being a professing Christian. The partner did not live a life that took the teachings of Jesus seriously and actually lived contrary to scripture in many ways.

The person would argue that they would be more ‘equally yoked’ with a Jesus-like non-Christian than with a non-Jesus-like ‘Christian’ (and we all know there are plenty of them around!) It would be better to be married to a muslim who lives like Jesus or a buddhist who embraces Jesus teachings than a Christian who doesn’t…

What do you think?

I won’t give any details on the person’s situation as I want to protect their identity, but I’m interested in your opinion. I will say that I have no doubt as to the integrity of the person’s faith or to their commitment to living in the way of Jesus.

So…Is it always ‘wrong’ for a real deal, Jesus following, ‘card carrying’ Christian to marry a person who lives like Jesus, but would definitely not regard themselves as a Christian?

And… Can you be unequally yoked with a Christian?…

Here is the relevant passage from 2 Cor 6

14Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.”

17″Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord.

Touch no unclean thing,and I will receive you.”

18″I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.”

We buggered it up plenty in the past by insisting that Christians ‘come out and be separate’ from the world and creating Christian sub-cultures rather than being integrated in the world. Is this concept also a mistake that we should throw out?…

I was reading Romans 12 yesterday and reflecting on the words bolded below. I read them to our missionary team last night as we had our monthly team meeting. Normally we are challenged by Romans 12:2, but it was v 5 that stood out to me yesterday.

…4Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, 5so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others…

We ‘belong’ to each other.

That’s both a beautiful concept because it binds us together yet also a challenging one!sydney aka hard eight download free

• last exit divx movie online

What happens to those who have never heard of Jesus and had an opportunity to respond?

Given the currents of the age we live in this is a critical question for those of us in mission work. Scot McKnight is opening it up on his blog. If you like some challenging theological thinking then head on over get stuck in.

Is it a question that perplexes you or is the answer simple?…

* Note – this is now ‘sold out’ so don’t just roll up and expect to get in. I’m told there is a ‘wait list’ for people keen to attend.

• download lost city raiders divx

Theologian Don Carson is coming to town next week and as part of his time here we are having a meeting focused on the emerging church.

Carson is well known worldwide for many of his excellent biblical commentaries and is regarded as a world class theologian. He is also known more recently for his Becoming Conversant with The Emerging Church, a book that critiques those of us seeking to experiment with new forms of mission and church.

He does say some good things in the book, but sadly he paints with a very broad brush and makes generalisations about the EC worldwide based on very limited observation and interaction. As one who seems to fit that category whether I like it or not, I was disappointed with the way he described us.

In my reading I am yet to find anyone who has been able to get a response from Carson to emerging churchers who felt misrepresented (is that still the case folks) so this event may be a bit of a first. I am looking forward to it and hope it will be a profitable time for everyone.

I have read his book and listened to his online talks re the EC but I’m not sure exactly where he sits today.

The event is at the Baptist Theological College in Bentley on Wed Sept 6th from 10.00-12.20 and its $10.00 to get in.

The proposed schedule is below:

10:00 – 10:10am – Welcome (Brian Harris)

10:10 – 11:00am – Don Carson

11:00 – 11:20am – Morning Tea

11:20 – 11:35am – Response (Andrew Hamilton)

11:35 – 11:50am – Response (Geoff Westlake)

11:50 – 12:00pm – Response (Don Carson)

12:00 – 12:20pm – Open discussion

12:30 – 1:30pm – Lunch

Might see you there!