The Heretical Ramble (dead site scrolls)

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Hi Fidelity Message Board ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Jason on December 29, 1999 at 12:03:46:

Oops! Steve had asked me to post some of the text that I had saved from the BBS -- here is the continuation (and conclusion?) of the "Continued Heretical Ramble"...

From Dave---------------------------------------

Jason,
You are of course welcome here in the Deep South anytime. We will ride Jerry's racecar with much glee. Just bring your rig.

Thank you so much for providing your Computer Analogy Alert. It is so good of you to show such consideration to Luddites such as myself, so that we can know and prepare for the fact ahead of time that we will simply not get it. But despite my technophobia, I believe I know what you're saying. And don't worry about your docs on my toes. I'm a big boy.

I do think Hick's accusation that Christians are arrogant to suppose their spirituality superior to that of others is right WHEN I PUT MYSELF IN THE SHOES OF THE ADHERENT TO ANOTHER RELIGION (caps are for emphasis, though I can't continue to scream this way, as I'm already hoarse). In other words, when I put myself in the Dalai Lama's shoes, and imagine how he must feel when he's approached by an evangelical who wants to save his soul (and this does happen), the Christian position seems arrogant. Imagine someone coming up to you and saying, "That which you believe, your entire way of relating to God, is false. Now, here's the real way." And he proceeds to preach another religion. You might think him a tad arrogant, mightn't you? This is why I have so much ambivalence about this issue.

My testimony is much like yours. I would never say that your experience with God is not genuine. I know you better than that. I don't know about Paul's arrogance (or lack thereof). But Paul did live in a different time, and his spirituality was informed by Pharisaical Judaism. To him, the "idolaters" of India were unquestionably lost and in need of salvation. Our point of view is different, as we live in a society which is increasingly pluralistic. It is this pluralism which causes us as Christians to have to reevaluate our position. Hick has actually stated this outright, saying that the more Hindus one knows (or Buddhists, etc.), the harder one finds it to hold the exclusivist view (of which that of the Interesting Theologian is a shade). I hope I'm making myself clear enough. Though I have a hard time dealing with Christ's startling claims about himself, I find it hard to believe God revealed Himself to the Jews alone (and, by extention, to us), while ignoring the rest of the seeking world. My theology on this subject is not fixed. I have been wrestling with this for some time, and I at times sound like a pluralist. If my ambivalence is palpable, that's why.

I know God will judge us all. I should have used the word "condemn." Will God condemn the Dalai Lama, etc.? I have read "The Great Divorce." But it really doesn't address (that I remember) the fate of those such as Gandhi etc. who, knowing of Christ's claims, nonetheless remain Hindu etc. These are consciously rejecting not God, but another religion (in their eyes).

I am thrilled that you have found encouragement from me. For you to say I have gotten you to "think outside the box" is a great compliment.
Peace,
Dave

P.S. - If you have time, go to the library and check out "Death and Eternal Life" by John Hick.

P.P.S. - Or if you want to read something less technical (and tedious) than Hick, read Griffiths:
A New Vision of Reality: Western Science, Eastern Mysticism, and Christian Faith
Return to the Center
A Human Search: Bede Griffiths Reflects on His Life
A good biography of Griffiths is "Beyond the Darkness" by Shirley du Boulay
These should be fairly easy to find at your local library, as your libraries are good in S. Fla.

From Jason---------------------------------------

I will have to take a look at some books (just as soon as I get in touch with my good friend Greg at Hooked on Phonics...)

I guess, I am still struggling with the concept of arrogance. Let's reverse the situation for a moment. What if I was approached by an individual who was proclaiming some gospel other than Christ? What if this individual demonstrated a genuine concern for the state of my soul, and demonstrated this concern by, let's say, some charitable act. Would I think that individual arrogant? I would probably listen to what he/she had to say. Ok, now back to the Christian. The picture I carry in my mind can be likened to a used car salesman (a "he"). He comes up and offers you the proverbial cream puff that was owned by a little old lady from Pasidina (or however it's spelled!). Anyway, his "genuine concern" is demonstrated by the "charitable act" of a "great deal." I think his title is correct, because when I leave, I definitely feel "used." This is the feeling I get from so many "enlightened" Christians. I will refrain jumping on my soapbox, but suffice to say, I think many, many Christians have forgotten Christ and have allowed their own selfishness (e.g. promise of rewards in heaven) to get in the way of true love.

I have had the opportunity, after the passing of my father, to share Christ's love with many people. Ok, maybe I haven't taken anyone by the hand and walked them down the "Roman road," but I have definitely felt the Spirit leading my conversation. I will trust Him to say when to lead someone to a decision, because I believe (and have prayed about this very thing) that the gospel has been polluted by those who would spit out God's plan without any thought or obedience. We must be submissive, even in our service - a hard concept for me to keep hold. I often feel that I should submit, and carry the gospel forth. Once I have the banner in my hand, I wave it around violently and with great zeal! The reaction one gets from such a display is less than desired, causing one (me in this example) to reject the whole idea of "evangelism." I have learned better. I have learned to submit to the direction of the Spirit when talking with people. I have learned that God wants me to be myself (please keep in mind that this is my revelation - there are those who can carry the Gospel in a more "public" way, but these individuals must submit to their calling as I). He sends me to places and puts people in my path with which I can share Truth. I am not ashamed of Him. I have learned, however, in the past, that many people can (and will) be turned off by my "arrogance."

I agree as well that Paul lived in a different time, and his arrogance was more "acceptable." I think the greatest reason for this "acceptance" is that he performed miracles. I'm sure that if I stood on the street in the middle of Ybor City screaming about God's love, people would laugh. If a car plowed into five kids standing on the corner, instantly killing them all, and I walked over and raised them up without a scratch, people might stick around to hear what I had to say. I think (speaking as myself) that it can be described as respect. If I feel that the used car salesman respects me, I'll be more attentive, and I'll feel less seedy when I leave. When I talk to people, I respect them -- unconditionally. That's not to say that there aren't people that have negative feelings about. Maybe this is wrong, but I generally avoid "getting into it" (deep Gospel discussions)(again, I am speaking as myself, a man). If, however, the Spirit is clearly leading me to someone like this, I have His supernatural support in overcoming these feelings -- which has happened. I am generally respectful of others, and I try to be obedient to God's direction. I am grateful that God has made me who I am, and I want more!

I think the arrogance we are speaking of is found in immature Christians. Our duty as mature Christians is to identify this arrogance, and help nurture the Truth behind it. We also have the responsiblity to follow those we have found and clean up any potential damage as the Spirit would lead (I only mention this because I have been in this situation as well!). We have to clean, though, in such a way that the recipient retains his/her focus on Christ. We must be sure the Spirit is burdening us with this task, because sometimes, He wants us to feel a little hurt for us to be in a place to receive Him. The point I am getting at is this: with greater understanding comes greater responsibility. This is an encouragement to any who would receive it.

Well, brother, what do you think? Is this fun or what???

Jason

From Dave---------------------------------------

Jason,
Man, this is a barrel of monkeys. :)

Maybe I wasn't clear (this often happens). You're correct that a lot of the arrogance inferred from our position by others is due to immaturity. But Hick and others claim that the traditional message of Christian exclusiveness is itself a little triumphalistic. What we are guilty of, from the pluralist's perspective, is claiming to have all the truth. I suppose if we were raising the dead now that Hick wouldn't have a leg to stand on. But the fact that there are no documented cases of anyone performing a miracle of this magnitude since the close of the apostolic age gives those such as Hick reason to believe that the early apostolic miracles found in the bible are themselves merely legend. In other words, if it really happened, why isn't it still happening? And if it's not still happening, how can we be so confident that we have all the truth? Incidentally, there have been "healers" in all religions, who have done some pretty amazing things. But I don't think anyone has been documented as having raised the dead (I'm speaking of those of whom there is no doubt they WERE dead, such as Lazarus).

The Dalai Lama, approached by an evangelical, may in his charity appreciate the Christian's sincerity. But he will not likely convert. Why? Because the Dalai Lama already HAS a relationship to "God". He feels as certain of his as we do of ours. So although he may not consider the Christian himself to be arrogant, he will likely not think much of a religion which, purporting to have all the answers, looks down on other religious traditions as unable to meet the spiritual needs of their adherents. That's what Hick means by the "arrogance" of Christian exclusiveness.

From Steve---------------------------------------
* * * * * * * * * *
To whoever (not anyone specific):

The less you continue to believe the claims of Christ and the truth of what He and His disciples did, the less triumphant (triumphalistic?) your gospel will be; the less real victory you will feel assured of in Christ as you once believed Him. It will therefore seem increasingly more arrogant to adhere to your views unyieldingly or to promote them with any urgency at all, since your urgency must of necessity be somewhat contrived and insincere. Perhaps you are a victim of some disillusionment with Christ Himself. It is easy to avoid this realization and blame our cynicism on the church's faults. But in reality it is with Christ that we have to do, and it is our estimation of who He is that we are told evidences our salvation (by Him). If that seems arrogant, oh well. But the love we display and the victory we truly believe excuses it; more than that, it redefines it - as true faith. If however, you no longer are sure of who Christ is and the victory and the miracles and all the rest of the glorious gospel, it is not Hick you should be reading. The words of Jesus would be a better choice. There is real power in His living Word to assure us and change us.

As for me, I fully commit my soul and my eternity to the man Jesus of Nazareth, because I truly believe He was God.

BTW - When we finish Colossians, we start the Gospel of John (which will be a powerful study).

Have a blessed Christmas all. We are off to Vermont.

From Dave---------------------------------------

I wouldn't exactly agree that that post was directed at no one in particular, but your point is taken. :) I think maybe I should bow out, as I don't intend to offend anyone or cause anyone to stumble. It has been fun. Have a good trip, Steve.
Peace
Dave

From Jason---------------------------------------

Me again...

The issue I would have with the "pluralist's perspective [which is] claiming to have all the truth," is that in Jesus, we do. That isn't to say that he doesn't reveal Himself to others in ways that are beyond our finite understanding, but ultimately (and triumphantly) it is He that bore our sins for us (including the Dalai Lama). It is He who is revealed to the world (not just Israel) as God's Son. As I mentioned in a previous post, I cannot speak for what happens after death (and this really *is* addressed in "The Great Divorce" - although it seems limited to the Christian experience, I believe Lewis was addressing acceptance of Christ in a much broader, and subsequently less "accepted" sense), but I can say that Christ will be known in His true form, and we will all (including the Dalai Lama) be presented with a choice to follow Him.

Why do I follow Christ, and not some other belief? Christ called me. He revealed Himself to me, and continues to do so. Sure, there have been stagnant periods in my life, but I can look back and still see one set of footprints in the sand... ;-) I'm sorry - all too easy... Maybe I'm bullheaded, but Jesus came into my life and revealed Truth to me -- this is my reason for following (upon this rock, He builds is church). I am open to hear what anyone else has to say about any other belief (organized or no), but I recognize that my God is the origin of all such ideas, and I search for Truth in everything I hear, but it is the Spirit of Christ within me that bears witness.

I'm sure this same Spirit operates in the Dalai Lama. Whether the Dalai Lama is aware of Christ working in him or not, I can't say, but I can say that it would be a good bet that he would bow at Jesus' feet if Jesus were revealed to him as He really is. I would also go so far as to say that this moment might occur even after death - in the "spirit realm" if you will. This makes sense to me because I know my God loves, and it is possible (no -- probable) that someone of apostles' day (perhaps one of "the 'idolaters' of India ") would have no chance to hear the gospel or read any of the prophecies. In this respect, I would agree that a loving God would not "unfairly" (quotes for emphasis) damn souls to hell who were not a part of the select few living near the Mediterranean. He operates on a much bigger scale than that as you (Dave) and I agree. My ideas on this matter better explain the problem of geology and the gospel better than any I've ever heard -- but it is merely a man-made theory, although inspired by that same Spirit.

I'm not sure if any of this is making sense. Dave, would you mind shooting back your interpretation of what I just said, so that I can "hear my own words," so to speak. I would greatly value your response (and appreciate it).

Thanks,

Jason

P.S. I love the (parenthetical) statement!

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: Oops! Steve had asked me to post some of the text that I had saved from the BBS -- here is the continuation (and conclusion?) of the "Continued Heretical Ramble"... : From Dave--------------------------------------- : Jason, : You are of course welcome here in the Deep South anytime. We will ride Jerry's racecar with much glee. Just bring your rig. : Thank you so much for providing your Computer Analogy Alert. It is so good of you to show such consideration to Luddites such as myself, so that we can know and prepare for the fact ahead of time that we will simply not get it. But despite my technophobia, I believe I know what you're saying. And don't worry about your docs on my toes. I'm a big boy. : I do think Hick's accusation that Christians are arrogant to suppose their spirituality superior to that of others is right WHEN I PUT MYSELF IN THE SHOES OF THE ADHERENT TO ANOTHER RELIGION (caps are for emphasis, though I can't continue to scream this way, as I'm already hoarse). In other words, when I put myself in the Dalai Lama's shoes, and imagine how he must feel when he's approached by an evangelical who wants to save his soul (and this does happen), the Christian position seems arrogant. Imagine someone coming up to you and saying, "That which you believe, your entire way of relating to God, is false. Now, here's the real way." And he proceeds to preach another religion. You might think him a tad arrogant, mightn't you? This is why I have so much ambivalence about this issue. : My testimony is much like yours. I would never say that your experience with God is not genuine. I know you better than that. I don't know about Paul's arrogance (or lack thereof). But Paul did live in a different time, and his spirituality was informed by Pharisaical Judaism. To him, the "idolaters" of India were unquestionably lost and in need of salvation. Our point of view is different, as we live in a society which is increasingly pluralistic. It is this pluralism which causes us as Christians to have to reevaluate our position. Hick has actually stated this outright, saying that the more Hindus one knows (or Buddhists, etc.), the harder one finds it to hold the exclusivist view (of which that of the Interesting Theologian is a shade). I hope I'm making myself clear enough. Though I have a hard time dealing with Christ's startling claims about himself, I find it hard to believe God revealed Himself to the Jews alone (and, by extention, to us), while ignoring the rest of the seeking world. My theology on this subject is not fixed. I have been wrestling with this for some time, and I at times sound like a pluralist. If my ambivalence is palpable, that's why. : I know God will judge us all. I should have used the word "condemn." Will God condemn the Dalai Lama, etc.? I have read "The Great Divorce." But it really doesn't address (that I remember) the fate of those such as Gandhi etc. who, knowing of Christ's claims, nonetheless remain Hindu etc. These are consciously rejecting not God, but another religion (in their eyes). : I am thrilled that you have found encouragement from me. For you to say I have gotten you to "think outside the box" is a great compliment. : Peace, : Dave : : P.S. - If you have time, go to the library and check out "Death and Eternal Life" by John Hick. : P.P.S. - Or if you want to read something less technical (and tedious) than Hick, read Griffiths: : A New Vision of Reality: Western Science, Eastern Mysticism, and Christian Faith : Return to the Center : A Human Search: Bede Griffiths Reflects on His Life : A good biography of Griffiths is "Beyond the Darkness" by Shirley du Boulay : These should be fairly easy to find at your local library, as your libraries are good in S. Fla. : From Jason--------------------------------------- : I will have to take a look at some books (just as soon as I get in touch with my good friend Greg at Hooked on Phonics...) : I guess, I am still struggling with the concept of arrogance. Let's reverse the situation for a moment. What if I was approached by an individual who was proclaiming some gospel other than Christ? What if this individual demonstrated a genuine concern for the state of my soul, and demonstrated this concern by, let's say, some charitable act. Would I think that individual arrogant? I would probably listen to what he/she had to say. Ok, now back to the Christian. The picture I carry in my mind can be likened to a used car salesman (a "he"). He comes up and offers you the proverbial cream puff that was owned by a little old lady from Pasidina (or however it's spelled!). Anyway, his "genuine concern" is demonstrated by the "charitable act" of a "great deal." I think his title is correct, because when I leave, I definitely feel "used." This is the feeling I get from so many "enlightened" Christians. I will refrain jumping on my soapbox, but suffice to say, I think many, many Christians have forgotten Christ and have allowed their own selfishness (e.g. promise of rewards in heaven) to get in the way of true love. : I have had the opportunity, after the passing of my father, to share Christ's love with many people. Ok, maybe I haven't taken anyone by the hand and walked them down the "Roman road," but I have definitely felt the Spirit leading my conversation. I will trust Him to say when to lead someone to a decision, because I believe (and have prayed about this very thing) that the gospel has been polluted by those who would spit out God's plan without any thought or obedience. We must be submissive, even in our service - a hard concept for me to keep hold. I often feel that I should submit, and carry the gospel forth. Once I have the banner in my hand, I wave it around violently and with great zeal! The reaction one gets from such a display is less than desired, causing one (me in this example) to reject the whole idea of "evangelism." I have learned better. I have learned to submit to the direction of the Spirit when talking with people. I have learned that God wants me to be myself (please keep in mind that this is my revelation - there are those who can carry the Gospel in a more "public" way, but these individuals must submit to their calling as I). He sends me to places and puts people in my path with which I can share Truth. I am not ashamed of Him. I have learned, however, in the past, that many people can (and will) be turned off by my "arrogance." : I agree as well that Paul lived in a different time, and his arrogance was more "acceptable." I think the greatest reason for this "acceptance" is that he performed miracles. I'm sure that if I stood on the street in the middle of Ybor City screaming about God's love, people would laugh. If a car plowed into five kids standing on the corner, instantly killing them all, and I walked over and raised them up without a scratch, people might stick around to hear what I had to say. I think (speaking as myself) that it can be described as respect. If I feel that the used car salesman respects me, I'll be more attentive, and I'll feel less seedy when I leave. When I talk to people, I respect them -- unconditionally. That's not to say that there aren't people that have negative feelings about. Maybe this is wrong, but I generally avoid "getting into it" (deep Gospel discussions)(again, I am speaking as myself, a man). If, however, the Spirit is clearly leading me to someone like this, I have His supernatural support in overcoming these feelings -- which has happened. I am generally respectful of others, and I try to be obedient to God's direction. I am grateful that God has made me who I am, and I want more! : I think the arrogance we are speaking of is found in immature Christians. Our duty as mature Christians is to identify this arrogance, and help nurture the Truth behind it. We also have the responsiblity to follow those we have found and clean up any potential damage as the Spirit would lead (I only mention this because I have been in this situation as well!). We have to clean, though, in such a way that the recipient retains his/her focus on Christ. We must be sure the Spirit is burdening us with this task, because sometimes, He wants us to feel a little hurt for us to be in a place to receive Him. The point I am getting at is this: with greater understanding comes greater responsibility. This is an encouragement to any who would receive it. : Well, brother, what do you think? Is this fun or what??? : Jason : From Dave--------------------------------------- : Jason, : Man, this is a barrel of monkeys. :) : Maybe I wasn't clear (this often happens). You're correct that a lot of the arrogance inferred from our position by others is due to immaturity. But Hick and others claim that the traditional message of Christian exclusiveness is itself a little triumphalistic. What we are guilty of, from the pluralist's perspective, is claiming to have all the truth. I suppose if we were raising the dead now that Hick wouldn't have a leg to stand on. But the fact that there are no documented cases of anyone performing a miracle of this magnitude since the close of the apostolic age gives those such as Hick reason to believe that the early apostolic miracles found in the bible are themselves merely legend. In other words, if it really happened, why isn't it still happening? And if it's not still happening, how can we be so confident that we have all the truth? Incidentally, there have been "healers" in all religions, who have done some pretty amazing things. But I don't think anyone has been documented as having raised the dead (I'm speaking of those of whom there is no doubt they WERE dead, such as Lazarus). : The Dalai Lama, approached by an evangelical, may in his charity appreciate the Christian's sincerity. But he will not likely convert. Why? Because the Dalai Lama already HAS a relationship to "God". He feels as certain of his as we do of ours. So although he may not consider the Christian himself to be arrogant, he will likely not think much of a religion which, purporting to have all the answers, looks down on other religious traditions as unable to meet the spiritual needs of their adherents. That's what Hick means by the "arrogance" of Christian exclusiveness. : : From Steve--------------------------------------- : * * * * * * * * * * : To whoever (not anyone specific): : The less you continue to believe the claims of Christ and the truth of what He and His disciples did, the less triumphant (triumphalistic?) your gospel will be; the less real victory you will feel assured of in Christ as you once believed Him. It will therefore seem increasingly more arrogant to adhere to your views unyieldingly or to promote them with any urgency at all, since your urgency must of necessity be somewhat contrived and insincere. Perhaps you are a victim of some disillusionment with Christ Himself. It is easy to avoid this realization and blame our cynicism on the church's faults. But in reality it is with Christ that we have to do, and it is our estimation of who He is that we are told evidences our salvation (by Him). If that seems arrogant, oh well. But the love we display and the victory we truly believe excuses it; more than that, it redefines it - as true faith. If however, you no longer are sure of who Christ is and the victory and the miracles and all the rest of the glorious gospel, it is not Hick you should be reading. The words of Jesus would be a better choice. There is real power in His living Word to assure us and change us. : As for me, I fully commit my soul and my eternity to the man Jesus of Nazareth, because I truly believe He was God. : BTW - When we finish Colossians, we start the Gospel of John (which will be a powerful study). : Have a blessed Christmas all. We are off to Vermont. : From Dave--------------------------------------- : I wouldn't exactly agree that that post was directed at no one in particular, but your point is taken. :) I think maybe I should bow out, as I don't intend to offend anyone or cause anyone to stumble. It has been fun. Have a good trip, Steve. : Peace : Dave : : From Jason--------------------------------------- : Me again... : The issue I would have with the "pluralist's perspective [which is] claiming to have all the truth," is that in Jesus, we do. That isn't to say that he doesn't reveal Himself to others in ways that are beyond our finite understanding, but ultimately (and triumphantly) it is He that bore our sins for us (including the Dalai Lama). It is He who is revealed to the world (not just Israel) as God's Son. As I mentioned in a previous post, I cannot speak for what happens after death (and this really *is* addressed in "The Great Divorce" - although it seems limited to the Christian experience, I believe Lewis was addressing acceptance of Christ in a much broader, and subsequently less "accepted" sense), but I can say that Christ will be known in His true form, and we will all (including the Dalai Lama) be presented with a choice to follow Him. : Why do I follow Christ, and not some other belief? Christ called me. He revealed Himself to me, and continues to do so. Sure, there have been stagnant periods in my life, but I can look back and still see one set of footprints in the sand... ;-) I'm sorry - all too easy... Maybe I'm bullheaded, but Jesus came into my life and revealed Truth to me -- this is my reason for following (upon this rock, He builds is church). I am open to hear what anyone else has to say about any other belief (organized or no), but I recognize that my God is the origin of all such ideas, and I search for Truth in everything I hear, but it is the Spirit of Christ within me that bears witness. : I'm sure this same Spirit operates in the Dalai Lama. Whether the Dalai Lama is aware of Christ working in him or not, I can't say, but I can say that it would be a good bet that he would bow at Jesus' feet if Jesus were revealed to him as He really is. I would also go so far as to say that this moment might occur even after death - in the "spirit realm" if you will. This makes sense to me because I know my God loves, and it is possible (no -- probable) that someone of apostles' day (perhaps one of "the 'idolaters' of India ") would have no chance to hear the gospel or read any of the prophecies. In this respect, I would agree that a loving God would not "unfairly" (quotes for emphasis) damn souls to hell who were not a part of the select few living near the Mediterranean. He operates on a much bigger scale than that as you (Dave) and I agree. My ideas on this matter better explain the problem of geology and the gospel better than any I've ever heard -- but it is merely a man-made theory, although inspired by that same Spirit. : I'm not sure if any of this is making sense. Dave, would you mind shooting back your interpretation of what I just said, so that I can "hear my own words," so to speak. I would greatly value your response (and appreciate it). : Thanks, : Jason : P.S. I love the (parenthetical) statement!

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Hi Fidelity Message Board ] [ FAQ ]