How Does Jesus Say We Are Saved?
Mike Clawson writes in his blog about an assignment given by a professor to freshman classes ..
He says, "There are four different things Jesus tells people about what they must do to be saved:
1. To Nicodemus he says "You must be born again". (John 3:3)
2. To the Rich Young Ruler he says "Sell everything you have and give it to the poor." (Luke 18:22)
3. To Zacchaeus he says "Sell half of everything you have, and pay back those you've cheated as well." (Luke 19:8-10)
4. To the paralyzed man he says "Because of the faith of your friends your sins are forgiven." (Mark 2:5)
The professor then tells his students: "Write a paper explaining why Jesus gave four very different answers to the question 'What must I do to be saved?' And why does only one of them (sort of - depending on what you think "born again" means) match up with the typical evangelical answer?"
Great question! How would you answer?
I've included a couple of the responses to Mike's blog below, followed by my brief response (interestingly, coincidentally, I was reflecting & talking with my daughter about this very topic yesterday)
From Miko
I would say he actually gives at least nine different answers (or ten, if you want to split John 3:3-18 in two). Off the top of my head, Mark 2:5; Matthew 5:17-20; Matthew 18:1-3; Luke 10:25-28; Luke 14:26-33; Luke 18:18-22; Luke 19:8-10; John 3:3-18; John 6:45-59.
From M James
[Before I respond to this question I need to clear two things up:
First, I believe that to properly understand the Bible, you need to first understand the history and culture that was prevalent when it was written. Also, I would say you need to understand a little bit about how Greek, Hebrew and Aramic was written and spoken. (For instance: I do not believe the "hell" mentioned in the Bible was written or meant to be a "literal hell". In most cases it is refering to an absence of God.)
Secondly, I believe that there are parts of the Bible, specifically the New Testament, that are a later interpolation.]
I would respectfully disagree with the first poster and say that Jesus is not giving one way to salvation, being born again, and then elucidating on that ideal.
There is an underlying theme in the works and stories of Jesus, that he was sent to Earth to show people the correct way to live their life. I do no think that being "born again" literallly means getting down on your knees and saying the phrase "I accept Jesus Christ as my personal saviour", as the evangelicals will have you believe.
I think in every instance you mentioned, Jesus is asking the questioner to look at their own life, and the decisions they make and change theirselves for the betterment of the people around them. Live your life in a way that glorifies God and his works. What were his works? Creating man, and creating this world.
By caring for his creation, instead of uttering some mystical catchphrase that gives you a magical passport to the pearly gates, that is truly the way to find favor with God.
As an aside, I think the end of Jesus' story - the empty tomb - was also the most powerful of it. After showing the people how they could find favor with God, I believe he was also telling them not to idolize himself. That's why the tomb was empty. So the people would focus on the lessons he taught, not hold his dead body up as some sort of empty husk to be worshipped. Unfortunately, that didn't happen.
I can understand why the church doesn't agree with what I said above. It's hard to pack pews and get donations when all you have to do to gain God's favor is just be a good person and take care of his creation.
From myself
Good question. I was reflecting on this yesterday ... particularly the contrast between the suggestion to Nicodemus re being born again, in contrast to the Rich Young Ruler.
Interestingly, the location of John ch3 indicates that Jesus is suposed to have told Nicodemus about being born again very early on in Jesus' ministry. Yet, this concept of being born again isn't mentioned in the synoptic gospels, in the sermons (or anywhere else) in Acts, and nowehere in Paul's writings or the rest of the NT ... John 3 is the only reference to it. Yet evangelicals make a HUGE deal of it. This is STRANGE.
Maybe a little light is shed on it by realising that the gospel called John was written very late cf other NT books ... probably written around AD90 or later.
My conclusion ... we have narrowed down on a formula which has little biblical basis, and is too narrow / simple / prescriptive about how individuals should respond to God.
David Allis. (down under in new Zealand)
He says, "There are four different things Jesus tells people about what they must do to be saved:
1. To Nicodemus he says "You must be born again". (John 3:3)
2. To the Rich Young Ruler he says "Sell everything you have and give it to the poor." (Luke 18:22)
3. To Zacchaeus he says "Sell half of everything you have, and pay back those you've cheated as well." (Luke 19:8-10)
4. To the paralyzed man he says "Because of the faith of your friends your sins are forgiven." (Mark 2:5)
The professor then tells his students: "Write a paper explaining why Jesus gave four very different answers to the question 'What must I do to be saved?' And why does only one of them (sort of - depending on what you think "born again" means) match up with the typical evangelical answer?"
Great question! How would you answer?
I've included a couple of the responses to Mike's blog below, followed by my brief response (interestingly, coincidentally, I was reflecting & talking with my daughter about this very topic yesterday)
From Miko
I would say he actually gives at least nine different answers (or ten, if you want to split John 3:3-18 in two). Off the top of my head, Mark 2:5; Matthew 5:17-20; Matthew 18:1-3; Luke 10:25-28; Luke 14:26-33; Luke 18:18-22; Luke 19:8-10; John 3:3-18; John 6:45-59.
From M James
[Before I respond to this question I need to clear two things up:
First, I believe that to properly understand the Bible, you need to first understand the history and culture that was prevalent when it was written. Also, I would say you need to understand a little bit about how Greek, Hebrew and Aramic was written and spoken. (For instance: I do not believe the "hell" mentioned in the Bible was written or meant to be a "literal hell". In most cases it is refering to an absence of God.)
Secondly, I believe that there are parts of the Bible, specifically the New Testament, that are a later interpolation.]
I would respectfully disagree with the first poster and say that Jesus is not giving one way to salvation, being born again, and then elucidating on that ideal.
There is an underlying theme in the works and stories of Jesus, that he was sent to Earth to show people the correct way to live their life. I do no think that being "born again" literallly means getting down on your knees and saying the phrase "I accept Jesus Christ as my personal saviour", as the evangelicals will have you believe.
I think in every instance you mentioned, Jesus is asking the questioner to look at their own life, and the decisions they make and change theirselves for the betterment of the people around them. Live your life in a way that glorifies God and his works. What were his works? Creating man, and creating this world.
By caring for his creation, instead of uttering some mystical catchphrase that gives you a magical passport to the pearly gates, that is truly the way to find favor with God.
As an aside, I think the end of Jesus' story - the empty tomb - was also the most powerful of it. After showing the people how they could find favor with God, I believe he was also telling them not to idolize himself. That's why the tomb was empty. So the people would focus on the lessons he taught, not hold his dead body up as some sort of empty husk to be worshipped. Unfortunately, that didn't happen.
I can understand why the church doesn't agree with what I said above. It's hard to pack pews and get donations when all you have to do to gain God's favor is just be a good person and take care of his creation.
From myself
Good question. I was reflecting on this yesterday ... particularly the contrast between the suggestion to Nicodemus re being born again, in contrast to the Rich Young Ruler.
Interestingly, the location of John ch3 indicates that Jesus is suposed to have told Nicodemus about being born again very early on in Jesus' ministry. Yet, this concept of being born again isn't mentioned in the synoptic gospels, in the sermons (or anywhere else) in Acts, and nowehere in Paul's writings or the rest of the NT ... John 3 is the only reference to it. Yet evangelicals make a HUGE deal of it. This is STRANGE.
Maybe a little light is shed on it by realising that the gospel called John was written very late cf other NT books ... probably written around AD90 or later.
My conclusion ... we have narrowed down on a formula which has little biblical basis, and is too narrow / simple / prescriptive about how individuals should respond to God.
David Allis. (down under in new Zealand)
posted by David Allis @ 9:44 AM
2 Comments:
At August 10, 2007 5:44 PM ,
fraz the red shark said...
I think the formula is easier to deal with than the call to "be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect". I see the word perfect and the concept of compassion as identical. I don't think the church yet loves it's nieghbours "as I have loved you". Born again makes a club. Compassion makes a terrible loving challenge.
Even to 'bad' folks... in fact especially really.
At August 13, 2007 11:03 AM ,
howard said...
Actually, I must disagree that the imagery of being 'born again' is used only by Jesus in the context of being saved.
Paul uses it in 1 Corinthians 15:8 and in Galatians 4:23,29.
Peter uses it in 1 Peter 1:23.
And John uses it not only in his Gospel but throughout 1 John -- see 1 John 2:29, 3:9, 4:7, 5:1,4,18
Surely being 'born of the Spirit' means that you start cooperating with the Spirit instead of resisting Him -- He 'causes us to will and to act according to His purpose', which entails caring for the poor and the planet too. It's all one seamless whole to me, I fail to see the dilemma :-)!
Post a Comment
<< Home