If Faith Brings Salvation Then Why Should Believers Care About Morality?
A former team member here at DC, DagoodS, asks this important question.
Be sure to read the link before commenting.
If one’s own personal belief was enough—-what would it matter if Adam and Steve were married? If one’s own personal belief was enough—-who cares whether there was a strip club down the street? Or liquor is sold on Sunday? Or people wear certain clothes or say certain prayers or do certain acts?Evangelical Christians claim God saves all who believe but that he rewards them differently in heaven based upon their subsequent obedience. Does God forgive all of the sins of a believer or not? Yes, or no? If he does, then all believers should be rewarded the same in heaven. And there is no good reason for them to be concerned about moral obedience, since that is not what saves them.
By their nature, religions control. Christianity (despite its protests otherwise) is no exception.
Link.
Be sure to read the link before commenting.
5 comments:
Excellent point about God not being completely satisfied with the believer's faith alone. However, I think a response to that could be that the believer fully has God's love and support, even if God is not completely happy with them all the time, like an earthly father and son relationship. This of course is a step up from having God's wrath and well, hatred.
When I was a Christian, my friends and I did talk about how morality was not the focus of the faith, but in practice I suppose that our morality was a mirror of our faith. I'm not sure that faith and works are incompatable ideas, but I would agree that works are usually not stressed, at least superficially. But of course pleasing God with actions causes much anxiety for many believers.
Faith is the beginning of our relationship with God. But there is no such thing as faith that doesn't involve following Jesus, ie obeying him and growing in that relationship.
You cannot defend from scripture or history (Josephus' example in using the phrase "believe in me") that belief merely means that one accepts certain propositions are true. You are to believe with your life, not just with passive internal thoughts.
Furthermore, this whole faith vs. works business has greately been enlightened by the new perspective on Paul. Paul didn't intend to convey that faith didn't entail action in his repudiation of works. Works that he argues against are specifically using the works of the law to establish one's identity and membership amongst God's chosen people.
Rob R -
That's a fine sentiment, but I don't agree with you that most American Christians see it that way. Because if they did then the question John quoted above couldn't be asked:
"If one’s own personal belief was enough—-what would it matter if Adam and Steve were married? If one’s own personal belief was enough—-who cares whether there was a strip club down the street?"
Replace that with "if one's own personal belief and works were enough" and the question remains - what does it matter to a believer if non-believers do things they don't agree with? Why should the devout Baptist care if I want to have a beer with my dinner, or the devout Methodist care if I want to spend some money on the slot machines?
And yet they do - the religious interfere with the "moral" choices of others every single day. It isn't enough for them to make the "correct" moral choices for themselves - why not? Why is it so important that the whole world conform to their moral code? Isn't personal salvation enough? And if not, isn't it enough to evangelize? Why not?
The question is posed, "If faith brings salvation then why should believers care about morality?"
By experience, salvation by faith has infused a perspective of sin and morality that I was blind to as a nonbeliever.
By faith, I am becoming delivered from "behaving myself" and "blind obedience" -these being foundational compulsions which came out of a deep seated fear of reproach and punishment from empowered authority. Egotistical pursuits are no as desirable as they once were.
Instead, I am now seeing sin as 'suffering' instead of a gratifying temptation. I do not desire to see others entrenched in the world to continue to suffer, but faith breeds compassion, (not condescension or conceit).
As for morality as a set standard for acceptable behavior, I am beginning to see how that can be corrupted by conceit and ego.
Faith does not seek to exploit, enable, or abuse human fallibility but rather, grows and matures to be expressed in humane acts of caring ('expression' is a pivotal benchmark of faith that reveals that the constraints of fear have been lowered).
take care,
3M
Jer,
That's a fine sentiment, but I don't agree with you that most American Christians see it that way.
That's their problem. My main concern is to be faithful to the scriptures. But they share the same concern for biblical faithfulness that I do and many will be receptive to the new perspective on paul as religion students promote it. I know it's being pushed in my church... by me of course.
Of course the view I point out here isn't completely different from what many Christians have articulated from James. Faith without works is dead.
Because if they did then the question John quoted above couldn't be asked
Well that's an odd thing to say. Of course the question can be asked and of course it can be answered as I did.
what does it matter to a believer if non-believers do things they don't agree with?
you are quite mistaken about the topic. The question is about the relevance of what believers do who believe that believing and not doing is what really matters. And my answer to that is sufficient that it is a misunderstanding of the purpose of the faith/works dichotomy of Paul to begin with (as well as Jesus' statements on belief) which was not about simple belief vs. merit but is about how we gain covenant identity, via faith, or following very specifically the law of Moses.
Post a Comment