Questions on Christianity

What beliefs does one need to hold to be considered a Christian?  As we saw in this blog of last week, the Christian community has very profound differences in their beliefs.

One of the first record Christian creeds was given to us by Paul.

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,  that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, (1 Corinthians 15:3-5 ESV).

Is adhering to this creed (believing that Jesus died for our sins and rose again from the dead) sufficient to be called a Christian or are other beliefs necessary?  Most Christian doctrinal statements takes up pages and are not limited to the one sentence Paul gives us.

The word “Christian” was coined because others saw people who were Christ like.  So must we actually follow the teachings of Christ to be called a Christian or is just having the correct beliefs sufficient?

“God does not bodily descend into the world without changing it forever.” [1]  This is most certainly the case in the person of Jesus.  The almighty God does not do anything without a reason and without the ability to make it happen.

God is still very involved in our world.  When we are saved, the Bible teaches us, God sends us the Holy Spirit (who is part of the Godhead) to indwell us (Romans 5:5, 1 Corinthians 6:19).  The mission of the Holy Spirit is to “. . .convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment” (John 16:8 ESV).  So how can we claim to be saved if our lives are not changed?  If our lives are not changed, is not that thwarting the will of God?  If we oppose God’s will, can we claim to be a Christian?  Does not that make a changed life a very important part of salvation?

______________________________

[1]   Janie B. Cheaney, “Cheap knockoffs”, World Magazine, July 185, 2020, p. 20.

A friend of mine recently sent me an article about Pascal’s wager.  Pascal’s wager was his argument for believing in God even though, as he acknowledged, our reason cannot prove God’s existence.  In spite of this lack of proof, we must decide whether to believe in God or not.  How do we decide?

Pascal states this decision is like a wager where we consider the probability of something happening.  If we wager not to believe and God does not exist, we might gain a few more earthly pleasures for 70 some years.  However, if God does exist, we will suffer eternal torment.  If we wager to believe in God and God does not exist we might lose a few years of earthly pleasure.  However if God does exist, then we gain an eternity of pleasure.  Which wager will we make?  Pascal maintains it would not be rational to risk losing an eternity of gain when there is just a finite chance of being in error or in losing a finite amount of pleasure in our life here on earth.

Now I believe Pascal’s wager has some merit.  However, I see five problems with it.

First, in his wager, Pascal assumes the Christian God is the God who created this universe.  If you are a Christian, you believe this to be true.  However, one can believe in a creator God, a Supreme Being, without believing in the Christian God.  Will God sent people to heaven who just believe in the Supreme Being?

Second, Pascal maintains that because we are finite, “we are incapable of knowing . . . whether [God] is”. [1]  However, Romans 1:18-22 tells us all of us have some knowledge of God.  What can be known of God is revealed to us through nature namely God’s “eternal power and divine nature”.

The problem is that while nature tells us there is a Supreme Being, nature does not tell us what kind of person he is.  As Pascal admits:  “Therefore we may well know that God exists without knowing what he is.” [2]  If we do not know what kind of person God is, how do we know that he will keep his promise that if we believe in him we will go heaven?

Third, why would a God of love and justice set up this world so that our decision of whether we believe in him or not determines our eternal fate particularly when he hides himself from us (Isaiah 45:15)?

Fourth, why would God set up our world so that we need to use the language and techniques of the gambling table as our main argument for why people should believe in God?  Is our argument for our belief in him that weak?

Fifth, what do we need to do  to go to heaven?  Is it just to believe in God?  Or is it, as we maintain in this blog, that we must change so our soul becomes more like God?

_______________________________

[1]   A. J. Krailsheimer, translator.  Pascal Pensées.  Baltimore, MD:  Penguin Books, 1966, p. 150.

[2]   Ibid., p. 149.

A few days ago I was reading in 1 Timothy and came across the following verse:  “But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” (1 Timothy 5:1 ESV)

Paul is saying that failure to take an action (providing for relatives) is equivalent to denying our Christian faith.  Even more, failure to take such action makes us worse than unbelievers.  If you deny your faith, are you still saved?  If you are worse than an unbeliever, are you still saved?

How can Christianity continue to maintain our salvation is a one-time event; that salvation involves one action which is professing faith in Jesus?  In the above passage, Paul says that actions other than to profess belief in Jesus are necessary.

Christian doctrine teaches salvation is a one-time event—it occurs when one accepts Jesus as one’s personal savior.  However my book lists three passages which state salvation is a process over time, not an event:  “For we are to God the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing” (2 Corinthians 2:15), “. . .continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12), and “because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy” (Hebrews 10:14).

Our pastor recently preached a sermon on the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32) and referenced another passage that indicates sometimes it takes grief to change us.  This passage is in II Corinthians 7:7-13 in which Paul is talking to Christians, not the unsaved.  He was referring to a past event where Paul reproved the Corinthians which had caused them some grief but as a result the Corinthians had changed their ways.  It it within this context that Paul says:  “For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation” (2 Corinthians 7:10 ESV).  So how can “godly grief” produce repentance which leads to salvation for those who are already saved?  So maybe salvation is not a one-time event.  Maybe it is a process.