What is your notion of Christian exclusivity?

[Big Boy Johnson]

What, precisely, is a "mediator" between God and man?

That would be Jesus Christ... nobody else

Are you capable of answering them in your own words

I don't have my own words... I've been using the same words everyone else has been using.

must you resort to yet more proof-texting?

It's sad to hear get what you believe from somewhere other than God's Word.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

But the issue is, "Who is in the flock?" I believe this is @Lambano's point - verses such as these suggest the flock may be less easily defined than many Christians believe.

Those that don't accept what the Lord says in His Word... that they claim is "proof texting".... can't know since they don't believe God's Word is... God's Word!

 

[Lizbeth]

I will add this FWIW:

Increasingly, I've had an intuition (for which I claim nothing like divine inspiration) that there is something fundamentally off-kilter with Christian thinking. Not Orthodox thinking, Catholic thinking or Protestant thinking - but Christian thinking at the most basic, 30,000-foot level. I have no specifics, just an intuition that we are all off-kilter - by how much, I don't know - in our thinking about who Jesus is, what His message was, and what He hoped to achieve. I have an uneasy sense that He is watching Christianity unfold and saying "How could it have turned into THIS?"

My intution is that the off-kilterness (is that a word?) is in the area of exclusivity. This doesn't mean I'm a Universalist or anything like one. I don't try to put meat on the bones of my intution - at least I haven't so far. I just have a strong sense that what Jesus was talking about and hoped to achieve (and eventually will achieve, of course) was fundamentally different from the way Christianity has unfolded. I don't just mean the entrenched, corporate, all-too-human institution that Christianity, Inc., has become, but rather the most basic understanding of Jesus and His message. This was why I appreciated @Episkopos' video - he is thinking in a fresh direction that seems to me to address some of my concerns.

Test all things brother. Check that intuition against the word of God.....ask Him about it and prayerfully seek the truth in His word. Because there is a way that can SEEMETH so right to us but leads to death.

 

[O'Darby]

That would be Jesus Christ... nobody else.

You should be further along in your walk with the Lord than to be asking foolish questions such as this.




I don't have my own words... I've been using the same words everyone else has been using.




It's sad to hear get what you believe from somewhere other than God's Word. View attachment 42160

Thanks for proving my point. Your continued demeaning of those who disagree with you is I believe, right on the edge of the forum rules (if not over).

I didn't ask WHO you thought the mediator is. The Bible is indeed clear on this. I asked what, in Big Boy theology, "mediation" involves. I further asked who, in Big Boy theology, Jesus mediates on behalf of - that's the critical question AND WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT. You simply ignored both questions.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

It's above your head and below your knees

 

[lforrest]

Hey...I suppose the ancient paths can appear to be fresh in a renewed way. The truth is dynamic...and cannot be boiled down to a creed like a box to be checked off.

The holy walk was there in the garden of Eden. Adam before the fall. And the righteous walk began with Abel. But the ancient paths have never been acceptable to men. These prefer a sort of hybrid... with the maximum reward of holiness for the minimum requirement in righteousness. Neither standard is met in this way.

“Thus says the LORD, Stand in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and you shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.” Jer. 6:16

That may be true for God's word because God is able to nest so many concepts. And he can draw our attention to them through the Holy Spirit.

The same can not be said for the doctrines of men. There are no hidden gems. Someone is considered a genius writer if they are able to create a story that serves as a single metaphor.

 

[Lizbeth]

But the issue is, "Who is in the flock?" I believe this is @Lambano's point - verses such as these suggest the flock may be less easily defined than many Christians believe. We all have our own notions as to who should be in the flock - US AND PEOPLE LIKE US, OF COURSE!!! - but we may be in for a surprise.

The point is that there are sheep and goats together in the same flock, but the goats don't really belong there.....goats look a lot like sheep so it may be hard to tell them apart.........and thus will be separated out in the end. This is like the wheat and tares growing together in the same field....they also look alike....but the tares don't really belong there either, and will be separated out in the end. Jesus said to let the wheat and tares grow together lest you pull up wheat along with the tares...so expect it is much the same idea with sheep and goats....leave it to the Lord to separate them out in the end lest we mistakenly try to root out those who are genuine. HE knows who is who. We may sometimes have an idea by discernment and knowing people by their fruits etc, but it is for the Lord to judge and deal with them in the end, ultimately.

 

[O'Darby]

The point is that there are sheep and goats together in the same flock, but the goats don't really belong there.....goats look a lot like sheep so it may be hard to tell them apart.........and thus will be separated out in the end. This is like the wheat and tares growing together in the same field....they also look alike....but the tares don't really belong there either, and will be separated out in the end. Jesus said to let the wheat and tares grow together lest you pull up wheat along with the tares...so expect it is much the same idea with sheep and goats....leave it to the Lord to separate them out in the end lest we mistakenly try to root out those who are genuine. HE knows who is who. We may sometimes have an idea by discernment and knowing people by their fruits etc, but it is for the Lord to judge and deal with them in the end, ultimately.

Again, this was @Lambano's point as I understood it.

 

[Lizbeth]

Christian exclusivity is the core doctrine that only Christians will be saved. "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.'" John 14:6, NKJV.

The common understanding is that non-Christians are destined for eternity in hell. Is this your understanding - i.e., all Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, atheists and other non-Christians are destined for hell? Considering the widely different circumstances of people across the globe - the widely different odds of them ever hearing about Jesus in a meaningful way or turning to Him even if they do - I find this difficult if not impossible to believe.

William Lane Craig has suggested that perhaps God has "arranged things" so that those He foreknew would turn to Christ are geographically located so they will hear and respond. A kid born into a Southern Baptist family in the Bible belt and a kid born into a low-caste Hindu family in New Delhi are where they are because God foreknew the former would respond to Jesus and the latter would not. Not very convincing, at least to me.

Calvinism has less of a problem with this issue, it seems to me. All humans are depraved and deserving of hell, God's predestined elect will be saved no matter where they are because this is what God has decreed, and those who aren't saved simply weren't among the elect. All fairly neat and tidy, although perhaps not much different from what Craig suggests.

Universalism has less problem as well. All will eventually be saved, even if it takes eons in hell before some of them turn to God. Exclusivity ultimately isn't exclusive at all!

Another approach that occurred to me is that perhaps "No one comes to the Father except through me" means something different from Christian exclusivity as commonly understood. Perhaps it means Jesus is the gatekeeper - He decides who is saved, but this could include Hindis, Buddhists or anyone else. I recall Billy Graham once causing a furor by suggesting there might be "secret Christians" who didn't even know they were.

After reading a large mountain of theology and apologetics over the decades, I really don't have a satisfactory answer. (Yes, I know, God's ways are not my ways and don't have to make sense to me.)

Some 54 years ago, when I was almost a newbie, the Campus Crusade staff member at our university asked me to fill in for him one night. A girl named Sherry asked, "Do we really think all Buddhists are going to hell?" I responded, "We have to believe and trust that God will deal with Buddhists in a way worthy of who we believe Him to be." I don't think I have a better answer now. Yes, it is kind of punting on the issue - chalking it up to a divine mystery - but I find this more satisfactory than pretending I really believe God is condemning vast swaths of humanity to eternal torment in hell. (Actually, I do the same with the doctrine of hell - whatever hell is, we will see how it is worthy of the God in whom we believe.)

(The next day, the staff member smilingly said "Hey, I don't know what you told Sherry, but it really helped her!" I told him what I'd told her. "Great answer!" he said. "Of course, they ARE all going to hell." I knew then that I probably wasn't Crusade staff material.)

How do you make peace with the doctrine of exclusivity? Or perhaps it doesn't trouble you at all?

I believe the issue is eternal life or no eternal life. All have been given the gift of temporal life for the span of our days on this earth, but not all will receive immortality...and nor does God owe that to anyone. Those who have not the Spirit of Christ in them through receiving Christ will not be given eternal life.....that is what it means to perish. Whoever is not in the Lamb's book of life will be raised to be judged and then perish a second time, this time for ever, in the lake of fire.

 

[Lizbeth]

Again, this was @Lambano's point as I understood it.

It didn't seem that he was understanding that parable correctly, so I just wanted to try and clarify what it means.

Not everyone who names the name of Christ belong to Him and obey Him. Just that we are not to go on witchhunts and try to identify and root out those false brethren.....Jesus will deal with that at the judgment. But in the meantime we do need to always be diligent to test everything in order to not be led astray by them.

 

[APAK]

My answer to your basic question for me is found here:

Lu 12:48

But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

"...much is given...much required..."

What is it that each person does with all that God has or has not given to him? If he was born materially rich or poor; if he was born in the lowest class of what we call a third world country; if he was born to good Christian parents; if he grew up under atheistic parents; and so forth; and so then will God not judge based on the have or the have not? Will He not supply according to the heart's needs when they are directed at Him?

Will one among the "have nots" seek something better? Will God not see the hungry heart and feed it accordingly?

Mt 5:6

Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

Cannot a child born in a place where there is little or no Christianity or Bibles available and yet be hungry and thirsty after righteousness? Were not Jesus' words directed to that child as well as to those living with a Christian parent or close Christian neighbor? Is God not seeing everything in every heart in every situation? Will God not provide what is needed?

I agree John, God knows the hearts of all men and judges them accordingly, to his standards. And I believe we do not all of these standards or criteria.

 

[BlessedPeace]

Christian exclusivity is the core doctrine that only Christians will be saved. "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.'" John 14:6, NKJV.

The common understanding is that non-Christians are destined for eternity in hell. Is this your understanding - i.e., all Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, atheists and other non-Christians are destined for hell? Considering the widely different circumstances of people across the globe - the widely different odds of them ever hearing about Jesus in a meaningful way or turning to Him even if they do - I find this difficult if not impossible to believe.

William Lane Craig has suggested that perhaps God has "arranged things" so that those He foreknew would turn to Christ are geographically located so they will hear and respond. A kid born into a Southern Baptist family in the Bible belt and a kid born into a low-caste Hindu family in New Delhi are where they are because God foreknew the former would respond to Jesus and the latter would not. Not very convincing, at least to me.

Calvinism has less of a problem with this issue, it seems to me. All humans are depraved and deserving of hell, God's predestined elect will be saved no matter where they are because this is what God has decreed, and those who aren't saved simply weren't among the elect. All fairly neat and tidy, although perhaps not much different from what Craig suggests.

Universalism has less problem as well. All will eventually be saved, even if it takes eons in hell before some of them turn to God. Exclusivity ultimately isn't exclusive at all!

Another approach that occurred to me is that perhaps "No one comes to the Father except through me" means something different from Christian exclusivity as commonly understood. Perhaps it means Jesus is the gatekeeper - He decides who is saved, but this could include Hindis, Buddhists or anyone else. I recall Billy Graham once causing a furor by suggesting there might be "secret Christians" who didn't even know they were.

After reading a large mountain of theology and apologetics over the decades, I really don't have a satisfactory answer. (Yes, I know, God's ways are not my ways and don't have to make sense to me.)

Some 54 years ago, when I was almost a newbie, the Campus Crusade staff member at our university asked me to fill in for him one night. A girl named Sherry asked, "Do we really think all Buddhists are going to hell?" I responded, "We have to believe and trust that God will deal with Buddhists in a way worthy of who we believe Him to be." I don't think I have a better answer now. Yes, it is kind of punting on the issue - chalking it up to a divine mystery - but I find this more satisfactory than pretending I really believe God is condemning vast swaths of humanity to eternal torment in hell. (Actually, I do the same with the doctrine of hell - whatever hell is, we will see how it is worthy of the God in whom we believe.)

(The next day, the staff member smilingly said "Hey, I don't know what you told Sherry, but it really helped her!" I told him what I'd told her. "Great answer!" he said. "Of course, they ARE all going to hell." I knew then that I probably wasn't Crusade staff material.)

How do you make peace with the doctrine of exclusivity? Or perhaps it doesn't trouble you at all?

There's this old joke.

A missionary visited the outer most reaches of Alaska. There he happened on a small Inuit village.

The first person he saw was working on nets,because the village trade was fishing and seal hunting.

Being a young man filled with zeal for the Lord he approached the man and began sharing the Gospel.

Afterward,the Inuit,who never ceased his labors on the nets, asked the young zealous missionary, if I never heard of your Jesus, would I still go to Hell?

The missionary replied, of course not. Not if you had never heard of Jesus.

The Inuit stops working, turns to the man and asks, then why did you tell me?

Christians have asked questions about the details of the faith probably since its inception.

Things don't make sense,we tell ourselves it is because God knows we're not ready to understand that yet. Whatever that happens to be.
(1 Corinthians 2)

God tells us he's the only God,and besides him there is no Savior. Jesus was God.

I guess one question as far as exclusivity is concerned is, when there is only one God can anyone worship other than God by other names and faith practices.

And why ask God to save us from the condition , sin, that he created us in? Only to have a group of those to be elected for Salvation. While Omniscience insured those not elected to be saved perish and suffer for eternity. Because they were born with a God ordained human nature.

 

[Lambano]

It didn't seem that he was understanding that parable correctly, so I just wanted to try and clarify what it means.

We call it the "Parable of the Sheep and Goats", but that understanding of the discourse is based on interpreting Jesus's statement, "He will separate them from one another, just as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats" as the literary genre of "simile" rather than "metaphor" or "parable". Simile in English typically uses "like" or "as"; I remember that little tidbit from a long-ago high school English class. That interpretation (which is more common on the Catholic side of the family as opposed to the Protestant side, for obvious reasons) assumes Jesus is telling us pretty much straight-out how He intends to judge the world. Prophecy, not parable.

I suppose my high school English teacher did a laudable job if I remembered her lesson forty-mumble years later while forgetting her name.

 

[Lambano]

Those that don't accept what the Lord says in His Word... that they claim is "proof texting".... can't know since they don't believe God's Word is... God's Word! View attachment 42161

I find it ironic that this statement comes from the same person who accused another of "reading into the scriptures" when presented with an understanding of Jesus's words in Matthew 25:31-46 that was very straight-forward and completely literal. Are you sure you REALLY believe God's word?

But Wisdom is vindicated by her children.

 

[Spyder]

One of the dangers that believers face is the danger of believing what man has said is true.

We are so fortunate now that we have no excuse for not searching scripture and asking God to clarify his truth while we examine the things we are to understand. We really have no need to have anyone "teach us," but we do need people to cause us to search the scriptures.

Many fail to do that, because they believe that they already know the truth - except what they know is what man has taught them.

Each of we followers will one day be accountable for both what we have taught and what we have believed. Out of our hearts will come those things that we have believed.

 

[Lizbeth]

But Christianity is still a "religion," even if it is the "true religion." And although you're right that a "Christian" is someone who follows Christ, there are those who begin by following Christ and end by not following him.

So the question is, Will people be saved who don't know the truths of Christianity because they were never adequately told? They certainly won't have the spiritual life of a Christian now, not being one. But can they obtain Eternal Life after death when Christ returns? I believe that was the question.

There are people who begin as Christians but end as pagans. Most of these will not be saved, in my opinion. On the other hand, some who have lived their lives as pagans, may soften over the course of their lives and would receive Christ if given the opportunity. I don't think God will hold it against people if nobody properly tells them.

God's arm is not too short to save. He will make sure that anyone foreknown by Him and appointed unto salvation will receive Christ even if He has to appear to them in a dream or vision without the agency of man...which I'm sure we've all heard testimony of, and there are examples in the bible of the Lord revealing Himself to folks (eg Abraham) without the agency of man.

My testimony is that the Lord drew me to a church one Sunday out of the blue.....they happened to be having a "crusade" and preaching an evangelistic message that day. No person had invited me there, and if God hadn't drawn me that day, I wouldn't have heard the gospel when and where there was an anointing for salvation, and wouldn't have believed. It makes me tremble.....there but for the grace of God go I.....by the skin of my teeth.

 

[Lizbeth]

Christian exclusivity is the core doctrine that only Christians will be saved. "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.'" John 14:6, NKJV.

The common understanding is that non-Christians are destined for eternity in hell. Is this your understanding - i.e., all Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, atheists and other non-Christians are destined for hell? Considering the widely different circumstances of people across the globe - the widely different odds of them ever hearing about Jesus in a meaningful way or turning to Him even if they do - I find this difficult if not impossible to believe.

William Lane Craig has suggested that perhaps God has "arranged things" so that those He foreknew would turn to Christ are geographically located so they will hear and respond. A kid born into a Southern Baptist family in the Bible belt and a kid born into a low-caste Hindu family in New Delhi are where they are because God foreknew the former would respond to Jesus and the latter would not. Not very convincing, at least to me.

Calvinism has less of a problem with this issue, it seems to me. All humans are depraved and deserving of hell, God's predestined elect will be saved no matter where they are because this is what God has decreed, and those who aren't saved simply weren't among the elect. All fairly neat and tidy, although perhaps not much different from what Craig suggests.

Universalism has less problem as well. All will eventually be saved, even if it takes eons in hell before some of them turn to God. Exclusivity ultimately isn't exclusive at all!

Another approach that occurred to me is that perhaps "No one comes to the Father except through me" means something different from Christian exclusivity as commonly understood. Perhaps it means Jesus is the gatekeeper - He decides who is saved, but this could include Hindis, Buddhists or anyone else. I recall Billy Graham once causing a furor by suggesting there might be "secret Christians" who didn't even know they were.

After reading a large mountain of theology and apologetics over the decades, I really don't have a satisfactory answer. (Yes, I know, God's ways are not my ways and don't have to make sense to me.)

Some 54 years ago, when I was almost a newbie, the Campus Crusade staff member at our university asked me to fill in for him one night. A girl named Sherry asked, "Do we really think all Buddhists are going to hell?" I responded, "We have to believe and trust that God will deal with Buddhists in a way worthy of who we believe Him to be." I don't think I have a better answer now. Yes, it is kind of punting on the issue - chalking it up to a divine mystery - but I find this more satisfactory than pretending I really believe God is condemning vast swaths of humanity to eternal torment in hell. (Actually, I do the same with the doctrine of hell - whatever hell is, we will see how it is worthy of the God in whom we believe.)

(The next day, the staff member smilingly said "Hey, I don't know what you told Sherry, but it really helped her!" I told him what I'd told her. "Great answer!" he said. "Of course, they ARE all going to hell." I knew then that I probably wasn't Crusade staff material.)

How do you make peace with the doctrine of exclusivity? Or perhaps it doesn't trouble you at all?

I don't really like that term "exclusivity"....I don't know the official definition or whether we can apply it to the gospel.....but to me it has an association of a wrong attitude of snobbishness and superiority and that not all are invited, as if knowing Jesus is a club for the cream of the crop. Whereas anyone can come to Christ if they will receive Him.....and it isn't usually the cream of society but the poor in spirit. As the bible says, not many of us were something great in this world when we were called. Jesus isn't the one rejecting, at least not without trying to save the person first....a humble and contrite heart He will not despise....and He says if you knock the door will be opened to you.....but He is the one who gets rejected by many.

 

[Lizbeth]

Yes, it violates sola fide, but not sola Christus. The key principle is that Christ IS Lord (does anyone want to contend that?), Christ is sovereign over His Kingdom, and Christ can let into His kingdom anyone He bloody well pleases. If anyone wants to tell Him, "Lord, you can't do that!", you go right ahead.

By the same token then He is certainly allowed to keep out or root out of His kingdom whoever He wants. Fortunately He doesnt' turn away sincere hearts that are seeking Him. And Jesus said He will root out of His kingdom the unbelieving and those who do wickedly in the end. Which He has every right to do.

 

[Lambano]

Fortunately He doesnt' turn away sincere hearts that are seeking Him.

I trust that this is true - but it doesn't say the Sheep were seeking Him. Neither they nor the Goats recognized Him. ("When did we see you hungry, or....?) What DID Jesus say the Son of Man would look for here?

 

[Lizbeth]

The common understanding is that non-Christians are destined for eternity in hell. Is this your understanding - i.e., all Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, atheists and other non-Christians are destined for hell? Considering the widely different circumstances of people across the globe - the widely different odds of them ever hearing about Jesus in a meaningful way or turning to Him even if they do - I find this difficult if not impossible to believe.

We must not look at the fallen human race with rose coloured glasses, but realistically, as God sees. We typically only know and see people superficially when they are on their best behaviour, or through propaganda PR reports, or the trappings of tourism, etc. But God knows and sees the truth about everyone. There is none righteous, no not one. No man is good, but God. Fallen human nature is not inherently good as is so often wrongly believed today....and it can be very very bad. For example, there is an old saying that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely...as history and the bible bears the truth of that out. Why is that...because that is the nature of fallen man. Which proves the need for a new nature, a new heart....which can only come through Christ, receiving His nature/spirit within.