"I Think Shouting Hate Words at People Will Convert Them..."

Why is it when there is going to be a lot of people around, the "Christian protesters" come out in force? They're not doing anyone any good, and they're definitely not portraying a positive view of Christ and other Christ-followers. I saw a pack of them on 16th Street Mall with giant signs telling people they are going to hell, that homosexuals are going to hell, and that unless you follow the 10 commandments, you're going to hell too! All I could do is walk by and shake my head. No wonder people tend to keep the fact that they are a Christian/Christ-follower a secret-- look at who our representation is! I do not associate myself with those people, but if people hear I'm a Christian, they will more than likely place me in their group--ick! They have "stupid" cooties! Okay, that wasn't very nice...
Why do these people feel compelled to come out here and act/talk like they do? Has their method proven to be effective? Do they have anyone fall on their face in repentance? I would guess that that has never ever happened! So what motivates them to come out to the mall and throw fire and brimstone at people walking by? Just because Jesus said to "go and make disciples of all nations," he didn't mean to go out and make an idiot out of yourself. Telling people that they're going to hell is not a message of love. Telling homosexuals that their sin has condemned them to hell is not a message of acceptance.
Where is the sign that says "Jesus loves you for who you are, no matter what you've done"? I did see one guy holding a sign that said "Jesus is the message of hope." That at least was a positive message, but still, it begs the question: how effective is that? Are these people afraid to get close to anyone who may be at all different than them? Is that why they passively hold the sign and shout hate at the people passing by? To be missional the way Jesus was-- getting down and dirty with those who surrounded him-- makes people extremely vulnerable and also shows everyone else that they are not all high and mighty and holy; I'd venture a guess that showing their humanity is what they are trying to avoid doing.
It's no wonder why people don't like "Christians."

Don't Shove 'Jim' Out the Door, Love Him Instead

The story I'm about to tell and comment on is almost 6 months old, but for some reason has been creeping into my thoughts lately, so I thought I would share it. It is a modern-day example of how Jesus calls us to love those who are not like us, and also showed me what ancient Pharisees may have been like.

It was supposed to be a surprise birthday party for me, but I saw the email about it so it was spoiled. This was fine, because, as a matter of fact, I'm not very into surprises. Don't get me wrong, I like presents, but to have something come up unexpectedly that everyone else knew about is not my idea of a good time. (Hence the look of terror on my face during our wedding when our officiant said "Katie doesn't know about this..." Thankfully it was just that Michael sang me a song, but still...)
Anyway, Michael invited a bunch of our friends, as well as a guy he knew from work. All of our friends were from church (like us), but Michael's friend, we'll call him Jim, was a little rougher around the edges (not like us).
Jim was the last person to arrive, already well on his way to being drunk, and sat around with the women who were on the chairs and couches. The men were sitting at the table playing cards. I don't mind talking to people who are different than me, but for some, if someone says something off-color, it makes them extremely uncomfortable. Unless it's offensive to me personally, I just shrug my shoulders and let it slide. He didn't make me feel uncomfortable, but did make the rest of the women squirm. Jim then moved over to where the men were and proceeded to "flex his wallet" and brag about how much money he had, how many women he'd "had" and that he had hookers waiting at his house... Not exactly our idea of a good time, so when he invited the guys to come over, they all declined.
As the evening progressed, more alcohol was consumed by everyone, tensions started running high. Men started getting possessive of their wives, and women started getting offended by Jim's lifestyle.
Finally, someone snapped. Jim was shoved out of our home by one of our guests. He was told he was unwelcome and offended everyone. [Disclaimer: We later dealt with this situation with our friends and it was resolved, so the disagreement over how this all was handled is not the purpose of this post.]
Michael and I disagreed with how our friend handled the situation, but that was not the biggest issue we had. Our issue was how "Pharisee-like" our friends' actions and attitudes were towards our guest. Jesus ate dinner and partied with "sinners" and the Pharisees did nothing but ridicule and judge.

Then Levi held a great banquet for Jesus at his house, and a large crowd of tax collectors and others were eating with them. But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to their sect complained to his disciples, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and ‘sinners’?”

Jesus answered them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick.

I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”
Luke 5: 29-32

Sounds vaguely familiar, doesn't it? We wanted to show Jim the love of Christ, that Christians aren't all stuffy and legalistic (everyone was drinking, for crying out loud!), but in the end, all he saw was a house full of stuffy, legalistic, judgmental Christians.
I was ashamed.
I was embarrassed.
I knew that this is not the first time a non-Christian had been shunned from a "Christian" gathering. We were prideful, he sleeps around... both are sins, and both sets of people need forgiveness. Just because we are Christians doesn't make us better than others-- it should humble us to a level to show others how that sin can be erased, not shoved in their face. These are the people Jesus called to love and befriend.
Yes, having Christian friends, people with similar views, morals, and lifestyle is important, but we also need to reach outside of our bubbles and befriend those who are "sick." Jesus didn't "witness" to Levi and the guests at the party-- he just sat back and enjoyed their company. I'm sure they cussed and drank too much and probably told a crass joke here and there, but Jesus didn't throw them out of the house, he didn't shame them for being themselves. He lived by example and loved them and told them they were worth someones while.
That's how we should live. We need to love the sick and the poor, even if the "poor" part is only in spirit, not in regards to a bank account. You can be respectful and tell someone that a joke they said or a story they told is offensive, and if you don't tell those kinds of jokes and show respect to everyone, your influence and your presence will make a difference. People notice those who are different from them, so stand out as a difference for love. Tell someone they're worth your time, your money, your food, and your listening ear. You never know what kind of valuable friendship you could gain from someone who doesn't look and act just like you.

Promoting Religion

I'm at work, and as I've mentioned before, I read cnn.com like it's going out of style. They tend to be interesting stories, some evoking strong emotions out of me, as well as making me sit back and think. Thinking is what happened to me today. I was doing my regular reading-- clicking on each of the stories under the "Most Popular" link on the side, when a story came up that ended up taking me by surprise: "Islam subway ads cause stir in New York." The article talks about ads that Islamic group, Islamic Circle of North America, sponsored and now face resistance from people wanting the Metropolitan Transit Authority to reject the ads.
They claim that one of the head organizers of the campaign is a suspected terrorist, but the only court appearance he made was to be a character witness and has never been charged with being a co-conspirator. Maybe he is an Islamic extremist, I don't know, but just because he's behind the campaign, does that really mean something promoting (non-extremist) Islam should be banned? I realized that people's outrage over the ads made me discouraged.
I'm assuming that the people in the Islamic Circle of North America are not extremists or terrorists, but want to genuinely promote their religion. Although I will not be converting Islam, I can appreciate what they're trying to do. The ads show a phrase that is often misused in reference to Islam and state in the ad "You deserve to know." The group members want people to think about the words, to explore Islam, and, I'm assuming, convert.
It's not too different than Christianity. The question that kept going through my head while I was reading the article was "If these were Christians wanting to put up an ad, would they get this much resistance?" Christians want to promote their religion, as well as have extremists. They don't go out to other countries and blow them up, but there are people who consider themselves Christians and go and blow up abortion clinics. There are good and bad examples of people of every religion. I don't think the Metropolitan Transit Authority should ban the ads because it's not promoting terrorism or hatred, it is giving people something to think about and explore. I think it is courageous for the group to be so ambitious in choosing the location of their ads (on New York subways). The reason people are resisting the ads is the very reason the ads need to be put up-- people have stereotypes and assumptions about Islam and Muslims, and that's what feeds their resistance to the ads-- because they think Muslims are all terrorists/ extremists. I honestly hope the MTA does not reject the ads, unless there is a darn good reason to, not just because someone's anti-Islam.

It's Embarassing to Call Myself a Christian...

...when there are guys like this running around under the label "Christian":

http://www.epicurious.com/articlesguides/blogs/editor/2008/05/starbucks-drink.html?mbid=rss_epilog

Holding Signs on a Street Corner

I wrote a post recently on Jason Clark's blog about being intolerant of the intolerant. I mentioned that it is important to confront those people and love them just the same. Well, I've realized over the past few days that there is a certain group of people I actually have a very hard time finding the capacity to love. If you've read my blog, you know that loving others is a big deal to me. But I have found my weak-spot. At church on Sunday, they showed a short clip of pictures from rallies (mostly to do with anti-homosexuality), church signs, etc. about repentance, and any sort of hateful agenda. Looking at those pictures made me sick to my stomach. There was a picture of a little girl-- she couldn't have been more that 10-- holding a sign that said "Got AIDS yet?" I just about threw up. It outraged me! And the thought struck me-- I'm feeling hateful towards the hateful. I will say that the tactics of some of the churches-- like putting those clear letters up to make a statement on their church's sign-- are just ineffective and useless. But what about the people standing on the street corner with a sign full of lists of people who they think are condemned and going to hell? And then turning around and telling them that God loves them and wants to save them... I'm missing the connection. How would throwing hate towards someone want to make them convert or even consider repenting for whatever sins they have? I wouldn't want to be part of that religion, that's for sure.
My mom said a very interesting thing about the clip and the whole idea of people (meaning Christians) acting that way-- it's embarrassing and humiliating as a Christian to see others do that under the label of "Christianity." Being a "Christ follower" is a much better label for myself and others that I know. When non-Christians hear that someone is a Christian, they put them into the group with the sign-holders and hate-throwers. Our faith and religion are supposed to be about love, and yet has become labeled with hate. There is something drastically wrong with that. We have gotten so far away from what Jesus originally called us to do. But really, how do we respond to the "Christians" who do nothing but show hate and contempt towards others? I can understand not agreeing with others' lifestyles or choices, but when hate comes into the picture, what are we supposed to do? Stand on the opposing corner with signs saying "I love you"? I'm at a loss and my heart is broken for those people. I recently watched a documentary where one of the men in it said, "They're so full of hate, they don't even realize how hateful they are." What are we, as Christ followers, supposed to do? Because just saying we need to love can only go so far... what can we do?

Is it Possible to be Biblical but not Christian?

I’m officially a theologian! I tend to be the one who goes to others who are older and wiser than I am for advice and insight about different issues, topics, discussions, etc. However, I was the one who was come to! I felt so honored J So instead of running instantly to my friend who lives down the street to give me the “right” answer, I jumped in head first by myself… I am growing up! ;-) But I would still love anyone and everyone’s thoughts and insight!

So here's the scoop: I joined a group on Facebook called “The Economics of Jesus.” (If you’re on Facebook, definitely check it out!) Well, I didn’t think much about joining the group because my beliefs fell within what the group talked about. A friend of mine emailed me a few days ago asking about the group. (Without hesitation, I can say she is much more conservative than I am.) Well, here is the question and following it is my response to her:

i was checking out the group and something about it confused me. how can something be biblical, but not christian? if the bible is the inspired word of GOD, how can people meant to be CHRIST followers dismiss parts of his very word? i.e. giving a portion of your income to the church? maybe you've given this some thought and can explain how something can be biblical, but not chrisitan.

From my understanding, a lot of it comes down to one’s understanding of the definition of the word “church.” It has become a new teaching in some churches that the church is not just the building with four walls—but the people and businessesàthe community around the building of the church. The church becomes the people you encounter at the coffee shop, your fellow students in your classes, the poets, the mothers and fathers, the homeless, the poor, the single mother working 3 jobs, etc. The church is not defined by the four walls, and shouldn’t be. God says that He is the head of the church—he did not necessarily mean that he is the head of the building (just one step above the pastor).

The church dynamic is very different than what it originally was in Biblical times. Paul was the one who coined the word “Christian;” Jesus never used it or even alluded to it. He told people to follow the calling that God put in their lives and to have fellowship with one another. There of course were the teachers—because believe me, I could not function completely on my own when it comes to the Bible without good teachers—but they give insight and teach to their greatest understanding of what God wants them to teach. You don’t have to look far for the corruption of the church and the mistakes that are made within the church’s understanding of Biblical passages and laws (of the Old Testament).

Saying something is Biblical and not Christian is an interesting idea, even for me. After giving this a lot of thought, my main conclusion is that when the group talked about the tithe as Biblical and not Christian is that the Old Testament is no longer followed as law in the Christian church. Because Christians don’t follow the Old Testament law, even though it is in the Bible, the idea of tithing is not “Christian.” Tithing is also defined as giving a certain portion of (all of) your income and possessions to God. Today, churches use the words "tithing" and "giving" interchangeably, even though they are completely different concepts. I believe that the creator of the group meant to get rid of the use of the word "tithing" as an obligation instead of a personal calling.

There are ideas that Christians have put into their interpretations of the Bible—therefore, making an idea “Christian” but not necessarily Biblical. God intended a lot of things that may not be lived out in the modern church. Specifically, you asked about giving to the church. The idea of giving to the church is a modern idea. In the Bible, God calls His followers to give to the poor, the hungry, and the needy. In Matthew 19:21, Jesus told the rich man to “sell your possessions and give to the poor…” Giving to the poor is not code for “give to the church.” Jesus cared about the poor and the outcasts, and he calls his followers to do the same. Any mention of tithing is mentioned in the Old Testament. It was in Leviticus and Numbers, but in both of those passages, they talked about tithing your possessions (and everything else… See Lev. 27:30) and giving them to God. It does not say the church, because there was no such thing as the church back then. God called His people to tithe to Him, sacrificing yourself and your possessions for God.

In regards to the fact that the commands about tithing are all in the Old Testament, one must not ignore that. When Jesus came, he got rid of the old covenant. In Luke 22:20, 1 Corinthians 11:25, and Hebrews 9:25 and 12:24, they all talk about Jesus being the new covenant. We are no longer under the old law. I’m not saying that you shouldn’t give to the church or the poor or whomever else God calls you to give to. I am saying that we are no longer required to. Our relationship with God became very personal when Jesus came and died for us. We no longer had to do anything, but could choose and listen to see where God was taking us and directing us individually instead of as an entire community. By saying that Jesus is the new covenant (and not following the old covenant and laws) is not dismissing the Bible. It is the history and there are many things to be learned through the Old Testament laws, but they do not direct our life any more. If God did not want us to learn something from the Old Testament, it wouldn’t be in the Bible. But it shouldn’t be taken as laws, and should definitely not be used to pick and choose which laws we should still be following. It’s an all or nothing kind of thing. God called His people to tithe—no longer a law, but a choice and a calling. Personally, I have rarely tithed to a church. I use it to give where I hear God calling me to give—World Vision, Unitus, lunch with a friend who is short on cash, coffee for the stranger behind me in line, etc. That is God’s church, not necessarily the building.

The Bible does talk about giving to support pastors (or leaders, I’m not really sure where that passage is…) so if that is what God has called you to do, that’s awesome! There is nothing wrong or unbiblical about that. Do what God has called you to do. A lot of pastors are solely supported financially by the giving of the church members, so I am not disregarding the need for giving to the church. However, one cannot discount that other’s calling may be to give to the poor (and not the church as a building). Both are Biblical. Although, one is not always considered “Christian” because most churches teach that the only way to give is to give to the church. It all comes down to interpretation and personal conviction and calling on your life.

Who wants to be doormat... Anyone? Anyone?

So I'm writing this blog because I've discovered another of my least favorite words. Some people have favorite words, like... um... I don't know cuz I don't have favorite words (well, besides the words, "ice" and "cream" and "chocolate," of course!). However, I do have some least favorite words-- either because of their meaning, connotations, and sometimes just how the word sounds.
Here's how I discovered what the word was:
I'm in a Bible study with the on-campus ministry called Navigators (Navs for short). They tend to lean on the very conservative side of the spectrum and as you can already guess, it's caused a few issues for me. I've become more and more liberal in my thinking over the last year or so. As a result, I've come to disagree a lot with some of my closest friends on theoretical issues. We still love each other dearly, but we disagree about almost everything concerning the Bible and theology. It makes for interesting discussions, that's for sure-- all respectful discussions and debates-- no yelling matches yet...
Anyway, back to what I was talking about. We're doing a Bible study called, "Becoming a Woman of Excellence." I was very hesitant about it cuz in my experience, books on how to be a Godly woman never turns out well for me, but I gave this one a try. It's definitely not the best study I've done but it wasn't too bad... until I got to chapter 8: "Made Precious by a Quiet and Gentle Spirit." Let's just say I was already pissed off before I even started the chapter. But, because I was interested in what the author would say, and also cuz it's the chapter for the week, I did it. Every question was answered first with a "I don't know! This is dumb! I hate this! F*** this!" Needless to say, I was not doing the study with a quiet, and definitely not gentle, spirit.
What the word is:
It was through this study, however, that I discovered my new least favorite word. Are you ready for it? The word is: meek. UGH! I just typing that word puts a bad taste in my mouth. So for the study we had to look up a bunch of words (gentle, quiet, meek, calm--there's no agenda there!), which are fine on their own, but when put in this context made me furious! The connotations and message that was being told through those definitions were totally overbearing and degrading to women. It was all about "submit! submit! submit!" Why is that always the focus? Anyway, I looked up the definition of meek, cuz at first, I didn't really know the true definition of it. All I can picture when I hear that word is a woman with her hands palm-to-palm in front of her chest with a robotic smile on her face.
So here's the definition from dictionary.com:
meek /mik/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[meek] Pronunciation Key
–adjective, -er, -est.

1.	humbly patient or docile, as under provocation (something that incites, instigates, angers, or irritates... I'm not very good in the vocab arena!) from others.

2.	overly submissive or compliant; spiritless; tame.

3.	Obsolete (no longer in general use; effaced by wearing down or away). gentle; kind.

No wonder I didn't like that word! overly submissive? Spiritless? Tame? Obsolete?? BLECK! It just makes me so angry!!! I understand that a woman, or a man for that matter, should be respectful and loving towards people and not aggressive or violent in how they interact, but really, is that how to teach people to not do so? I know that is the idea that they are trying to convey, but that is not what the definition says! By telling women to be meek they are telling them to be compliant, not care about anything, easily manipulated, overworked, and unappreciated. Sounds like so much fun! I can't wait to become a meek woman! Jesus, make me meek! (If you can't catch the sarcasm, I'm telling you now!) I know I'm taking a pretty liberal stance on this issue, because talking to my conservative roommate about the chapter, she kept using my least-favorite word over and over again as something women should be. (I was grinding my teeth the whole time she was talking!)
Why do women need to be meek? Being gentle and not too aggressive is a good trait. But meek? Why choose that word? At the prompting from my much more gracious and understanding sister, I looked up meek in the Strong's Bible dictionary... here's the definitions it gave (any italicized words were that way in the dictionary-- I'm not trying to make a point with it!):

- depressed, in mind (gentle) or circumstances (needy, espec. saintly):-- humble, lowly, meek, poor, afflicted
- gentle, humble:--meek, mild

Well, that didn't help. But there was more emphasis on being humble and gentle, which I can understand more. But they all still involved the word meek... I don't know what to think. I'm just frustrated I guess. I never like people, the "church" especially, telling me what to do, what to wear, how to act, etc. It just makes me want to rip off my clothes, run around the sanctuary in the middle of a church service, and start cussing... it'd definitely make a few people uncomfortable! Thankfully I go to a church where clothing is optional... juuuust kidding! I'm done with my rant. I'm glad I could get that off my chest (and keep my shirt on)!

Can a Christian believe a non-Christian can be saved?

So I finally wrote my paper for my religions class that I talked about in a previous post. I decided to write about whether or not a Christian can believe a non-Christian can get to heaven-- that one seemed to be the most interesting, by far! So I'll copy and paste my paper here. Let me know what you think. It's an "academic essay" (whatever the hell that means) so it's really formal and not how I usually write on here! Enjoy!

Christianity and Salvation in Regards to Other Religions

There are many different views in regard to salvation. Salvation is an extremely complex issue and cannot be discussed in one theology. In my essay, I will discuss what salvation is and specifically what Christians believe it is. I will also discuss the different views of who Christians believe are saved. Finally, I will talk about Christians believing that people of other religions can be saved.

The idea of salvation is not solely a Christian concept. Most religions have some concept of salvation, and it does not always involve the idea of a heaven. Christians believe in the saving power of the cross. They believe Jesus was perfect, died on the cross for everyone’s sins, and was resurrected 3 days after he died. Christians tend to believe that the way to be saved is through “church rituals (particularly baptism and -- in the Catholic churches -- confession), good works; Belief in: Jesus' resurrection, Jesus’ status as the only begotten Son of God, Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior; Or by some combination of the above.”[1] The debate comes from the fact that there are numerous other religions that believe in a higher power, in the person of Jesus, and the existence of people in remote areas of the world who never have and never will hear the name of Jesus. The following paragraphs will explain different beliefs about who is saved and the support each belief has.

The first belief is universalism. They believe that everyone, because of the sacrifice of Jesus, is saved. Because, according to Romans 3:23, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” Jesus redeemed everyone of their sins. As a result, all are saved and going to heaven. Origen argued that there is no such thing as dualism. He believed that “God will overcome evil and restore creation to its original form.”[2] He did not believe that God, who is perfect and holy, could coexist with Satan, who is evil. Robinson argued that God’s love is stronger than the evil and will eventually conquer evil, which makes “the existence of hell an impossibility.”[3] However, this theory does not take into account the need for faith in any higher power. With this theory, it does not matter what kind of person someone is—they could be a murderer or rapist who is unrepentant of what they did, and they could still get into heaven. Universalists could argue that all people are sinners, one sin is not greater than another, and because of God’s grace, and we are all saved: “For it is by grace that we have been saved… not by works, so that no one can boast” Ephesians 2:8-9.

Another belief of salvation is that only elect people can get into heaven. This theory rests heavily on the idea of pre-destination—that God chose only a few people to be saved. This theory comes from the idea that Jesus came and died for all people, but only a select few will be saved. They argue that because Jesus came and died only to save those who God had already chosen to be saved. However, those who follow this theory do not give any solid Biblical references for their beliefs and dismiss the “universality of God’s love and redemption.”[4]

The last, and most popular, belief is that only believers can get into heaven and be saved. In John 14:6, Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” This is the most popular belief among churches today. Jesus is believed to be central to someone’s salvation. If someone does not believe in, and “confess” the name of Jesus, and that he came down to earth and died for our sins, they cannot get into heaven. This belief emphasizes the importance of faith in Jesus and God in order to be saved. Augustine was a strong force behind promoting this idea originally. During the Middle Ages and the Reformation it was further supported. The writers of the time started the idea, that continues to be popular today, that nonbelievers cannot be saved. Calvin stated: “All the more vile is the stupidity of those people who open heaven to all the impious unbelieving, without the grace of him who Scripture teaches to be the only door by which we enter heaven.”[5]

In contrast to the earlier theologians, there have been others who believe that a non-Christian can be saved. In John Wesley’s sermon, “On Faith,” he “argued the need for faith in God in order to be saved—but affirmed that this faith need not be explicitly Christian in character.”[6] In the twentieth-century, C.S. Lewis wrote on the subject of who is saved. In his book, Mere Christianity, he argued that “those who commit themselves to the pursuit of goodness and truth will be saved, even if they have no formal knowledge of Christ.”[7] In regards to other religions, those who are saved are more complicated. Lewis states: “There are people in other religions who are being led by God’s secret influence top concentrate on those parts of their religion which are in agreement with Christianity, and who thus belong to Christ without knowing it.”[8] This idea supports the fact that God is present in everything.

People who have never heard of the name of Jesus or God can still acknowledge the presence of a higher being. In Romans 1:20, Paul states: “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.” God is omnipresent, so God is in remote areas of the world where people who have not heard of the name of Jesus would be able to experience Him. If Augustine were to argue this point he would most likely use John 14:6, referencing Jesus saying that he is the only way to be saved. One could state that a person does not necessarily have to acknowledge the person of Jesus to be saved. He came, died, was resurrected and left the Holy Spirit on the earth, so it is through the Holy Spirit that Jesus and God are revealed. Because Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are one entity, acknowledging the presence of one acknowledges the presence of all three.

Western Christianity is very western-centric and we do not have a clear understanding of other religions, and even the beliefs and practices of Christians in other parts of the world. Other religions believe in a higher being and some even believe in the existence of Jesus. (Islam—Allah and Jesus as a prophet, Judaism—believe in God who is Jesus) God is truth, and if another religion or person lives in a truth, it is following God’s way. In Rob Bell’s book, Velvet Elvis, he talks about all truth being God’s truth, no matter where the truth is found. He references Paul’s writings in the book of Acts where Paul quotes one of the poets of the place he is staying. The poet spoke truth. If all truth is God’s truth then the poet unknowingly spoke God’s truth.[9] Bell states, “as a Christian, I am free to claim the good, the true, the holy, wherever and whenever I find it. I live with the understanding that truth is bigger than any religion and the world is God’s and everything in it.”[10] As a Christian, it is possible to believe that other religions can speak truth and God is present in that truth. Other religions acknowledge the person of Jesus, not always saying he is the Messiah, but a prophet or just a man. It could be argued that because they believe he existed, people who follow other religions are saved. Along with that, if another religion follows a deity, they could be following God, but giving Him a different name. Especially because Jews follow the God of Abraham, as do Christians, they all believe in the same God who is also Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

It is possible, although not always accepted, that Christians can believe that people of other religions can be saved. Christians tend to be very exclusive and intolerant of other religions, not accepting the idea of God’s truth being present in everything, including other religions’ beliefs and doctrines. Although Jesus said he is the way to be saved, it is not defined how exactly that is seen or decided. People can live a life for Christ and not consider themselves Christians.

In conclusion, Christians believe in the saving power of the cross of Christ. However, Christians can also believe that non-Christians, who do not believe in the cross, can be saved. In this essay, I explained the different views about who is saved and who is not. I also explained that it is possible for Christians to believe that nonbelievers and people of other religions can be saved.

---

[1]B.A. Robinson, Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, Religioustolerance.org, http://www.religioustolerance.org/salvatio.htm, 2007

[2] Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 357

[3] Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 357

[4] Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 359

[5] Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 357-358

[6] Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 358

[7] Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 358

[8] Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 358

[9] Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis,, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 79

[10] Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis,, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 80

Behind Closed Doors

It's amazing the conversations you have late at night when everyone's dead tired. Tonight's topic between my sister, my roommate, and I was about purity and physical boundaries in a relationship. Since we're all involved in relationships (all of us to wonderful guys!), it was a very pertinent and applicable discussion. The topic of purity came up and I was quick to point out that there is no single definition of purity in a relationship. Some people see no kissing ever to be the only way to have a pure relationship. Others see wandering hands as the limit, others (religious and non-religious alike) don't see the need for purity or don't see anything wrong with going "all the way" (aka SEX!). People seem quick to judge others' boundaries and limits, especially those that make people blush to talk about. But why is that anyone else's business? God convicts people of different things, which was talked about well in Michael's blog (it's from a while ago), and people can give their input, but telling others how to live their lives and conduct their romantic relationships is not what God tells us to do!
My sister has been dealing with this through the group she's involved in on campus. They hold up and praise the people who are not kissing until they're married... why? That's actually unnatural. Yes, it's important to know and understand your own power and boundaries, but not having that connection can be dangerous to a relationship. What if you never kiss that person until you're married and realize you have no physical chemistry? What then? And what is so wrong with kissing? Or holding hands? My friend's sister is dating a guy and they didn't hold hands until their 6th month of dating! WHAT!?! Why not? What is so wrong with physical intimacy and physical expression of affection/love? If one couple's way of expressing it is through a kiss, that's great. If it's through sex, that's fine. They risk the emotional repercussions and physical dangers of doing it, but even then... that's their choice. It's not my place, or anyone else's, to judge. I need to be careful, of course, of not judging those who choose to not express themselves through physical means and understand that that is the conviction that God has put in their lives/relationship. But because God has given me and them our own convictions, we do not have any room or right to judge one another.
I believe strongly in communication and boundaries and respect. If people have those three things, they can do whatever they want. As long as one person is not taking advantage of, abusing, or manipulating another, whatever is done behind closed doors is their business, not mine. It's time to take the taboo subjects out of the dark and talk about them and agree to disagree. The church teaches that God gave us free will, and yet forces us to believe and act certain ways, within certain guidelines instead of saying, "This is a good idea, but do with it what you want. Explore it, research it, talk about it, wrestle with it, and figure out what you believe and act accordingly." I'm learning to do so, and it's been interesting how many times my thinking does not usually coincide with the traditional teachings of the church and conservative Christians, including my roommate! More times than not, we've disagreed in theological ideas and what is right and wrong. It's actually good that we don't agree on everything because it causes both of us to think about our own and each other's views and why we believe it. Our discussions are always respectful and insightful. I am very thankful for the discussions we have, usually late at night while we're brushing our teeth! And for my sister for asking very thought-provoking questions and being open to all ideas and being respectful to the answers she receives. I love both of them dearly! If we're willing to stretch our comfort zone and ask and answer the difficult questions--no matter what the topic-- we can all grow and sharpen our beliefs more through it. Engage in conversation-- it could change your life!

Prayer Warriors

Recently, the discussion of homosexuality has been very prevalent in the conversation I've been having, articles I've been reading, blogs I've read, podcasts I listened to, etc. All of a sudden I have realized I don't know what I believe and why I believe it. The two major issues that the churches of my past have shoved down my throat is that of homosexuality being a sin and abortion being wrong. (Relax, this post is not about abortion... I don't even want to go there!) Anyway, I decided I should make my own mind up about what I believe and be knowledgeable enough to tell others about what I believe and why. I'm usually not very strongly opinionated, but I feel that I should have a strong, solid, educated opinion on the issue of homosexuality.
Coming from a Christian, yet open-minded, family, I have heard both sides of the issue. I have heard what my churches had to say and what my parents had to say. We had long discussions over dinner and in the car about homosexuality. I know what my stance is, but I want to be more educated when I state what it is! I want to be able to engage people in a discussion about it and be able to give them answers and possibly a different perspective on the issue.
Anyway, on the start of my knowledge-journey, I went to the library to look at what books they had in stock to read about Christianity and homosexuality. You'd actually be surprised how many books there are! So I checked out a bunch and here's a little blurb on what I just finished reading:

I just finished reading a book today called, Prayer Warriors: The true story of a gay son, his fundamentalist Christian family, and their battle for his soul. I was really excited to read it because, for one, I enjoy stories and novel-like books as compared to textbook, history-like books (I have two sitting on my shelf waiting to be opened...), and two, I was really interested in what I would learn from this book, through one man's life and struggle with acceptance from his family.
Anyway, the hate and disappointment that came from the parents made me want to scream and yell and punch them in the face. And the more I thought about it, the more I realized that that is how Christians and the church tend to treat homosexuals. When Stuart (the author) came out to his parents, they got angry and told him to never come back home because he was no longer welcome. What kind of parent does that to their kid? How could love and acceptance ride on only one issue? How can people say, "I love you...what? you're gay? Never mind!"? Isn't love supposed to be unconditional? When we treat people like that, not just homosexuals, it's no wonder that people don't like Christians. How can people treat others, like one of my pastors says, like issues, not people? How can people not see beyond the issue and embrace the person behind it? My mom informed me of a woman she knows who went through this exact same thing and it took the siblings of the woman had to go against what the parents thought and said to embrace her and love her despite what they believed or thought. That's what we're supposed to do-- put aside our own agendas and love people for who they are and not focus on the baggage they're bringing along. We all have baggage and issues and sin, so no one has the right to look down on others, no matter what they believe. No one is better than another. That's what Jesus did-- he loved everyone and didn't focus on their issues or problems-- he loved them for their hearts and who they were as people.
That's when I am so excited that I am in a church where one of the pastors and one of the worship guys went to the GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender) office on campus to establish a relationship with them and apologise to them for how the church and Christians treat them. What a relief!
I am still researching (I'm going to crack open the history books... it'll be a long process) and becoming solidified in my viewpoints. It's only been a few weeks in this journey of knowledge, and I've learned so much! Who knows what else I'm going to learn!!! I'll end with a quote from my pastors: "Love God and love people. That's all you have to do."