Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Really?
Over the years I've heard the argument that basically goes something like this, "If you were born in an ______________ then you would be a person of that particular religion." You can fill in the blank with whatever you desire (such as "an Islalmic home", "a Latter Day Saints home", "a Christian home"). The basic idea of the argument is that we are people of a particular faith by chance. On the surface this is a perfectly rational argument. From a Biblical perspective however, it is a specious one. Over and over again the Bible points out that God is a God of covenant putting people in families of faith so that they are led toward faith. People don't end up in families by "chance" rather they are there by God's design. The book of Malachi says that God brings covenant parents together because he is seeking godly offspring (Malachi 2.15). From a Biblical perspective I could not have ended up in another family, I am where God wants me to be.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
AMAZING! How wonderfully comforting, and what a cool way to look at my kids, knowing they were placed in a covenant family, b/c "that's where God wanted them". Huge challenge too, however.
Does that mean God doesn't want kids he places in homes of the other faiths to follow him?
I'm not disagreeing with what and the Bible are saying, it's just a question I have.
Covenant theology as applied post Jesus may miss the mark altogether since He is the fulfillment of the "law and the prophets". If the covenant promise or obligation is met at the cross then we no longer have "innies" and outties" which seems to be the driving force behind Paul's work during the common era and beyond. To "dismiss" those "outside" the current prescribed covenant, while singing the praises of our blessing, may be a way to feel comforted about the ills of the world but sound strikingly like the worldview of Judaism born out of an elitism that Jesus came to confront. I hope it is ok to disagree on this.
That seem's to imply that God loves some of his creation more than others. The grand puppet master putting some in misery and some in bliss. I always stuggle with that view.
Here's a bit more. Just because God uses his covenant as a means to bring people into the faith does not mean others are excluded. We know that from the "God-fearers" of Jesus' day. We are told in Peter that God longs for all to be saved. But to ignore the idea that God does place children in a covenant setting and uses that to spread the faith from generation to generation strikes me as missing a main way God nutures people to faith.
As to the idea that covenant theology may miss the mark altogether post-Jesus since he fulfilled the law and the prophets--the reality is that we still live under covenant, albeit the new covenant. The question, I think, is "does the new covenant work differently than the old in terms of God spreading faith through families and households?" The book of Acts would seem to indicate that God continues to work through households as those who come to faith are often spoken of in terms of the entire household becoming people of faith. Whether there are "innies" and "outties" takes on a different angle in this new covenant. It is no longer Jew and Gentile because God has brought down the dividing wall of hostility (see Ephesians 2). But there are still those who are part of God's kingdom and those who are not (see Luke 6, "not all who call me 'Lord, Lord..." and Revelation 20). In 2 Corinthians 5 Paul tells us that he no longer views people from a worldly point of view i.e. as Jew and Gentile, but now he sees them from God's perspective where anyone who is in Christ is a new creation. But Paul is also clear here that not everyone is in Christ.
The puppet master deal with God loving some in his creation more than others, some in bliss, others in misery. This is indeed the hardest idea to come to terms with. How does this work that not all are saved? If God puts people in families so that they can hear the gospel, be people of the covenant, and nurtured toward faith--why doesn't he do that for all? Paul struggles with that very question in Romans 9-11 and ends up not answering the question, but instead "singing" a doxology to God and his mysterious ways. Perhaps the best we can do is to imitate Paul and very humbly give thanks if we know God, continue to seek to spread the gospel to all who will listen, and know that because God is a God of justice that one day when all is revealed we will stop and say, "Ah, so that's how this all worked."
Okay, someone can steer me in the right direction if I am wrong here.....
Thinking about God placing some in good Christian homes and some, well, not.... has never made me think of God as unfair, unjust, or elitist. I always understood it as the covenant (post Jesus) covers all no matter where you have been "placed" in life.
Don't get me wrong here, living under God's new covenant is great and all, but isn't living in covenant with him what he desires.
In my life, I have seen it many times where individuals from "covenant" families seem to be the farthest thing from living "in" covenant with God. And, funny enough, neighbors who I know come from non-Christian upbringings seem to know His heart better than myself. Sadly true.
I think the idea of God as the puppet master is an idea we all struggle with. However, to me there is a good way to lessen the sting of that idea. It involves "covenant" families striving for community with those we think of as outside of it. We shouldn't think in terms of "outside". The covenant promise extends to all. Unfortunatley, many who are from Godly families (and many who are not) live under the covenant of God but not in covenant with God. Fortunately, on the other hand, there are many who do.
Post a Comment