The History Of Salvation Theology Religion Flashcard

essay A
  • Words: 5607
  • Category: History

  • Pages: 21

Get Full Essay

Get access to this section to get all the help you need with your essay and educational goals.

Get Access

The history of redemption occupies a significant part of the text. God has sent many couriers before Muhammad to steer world and the lives of a few are recounted in some item. But God ‘s couriers have been ignored, or their warnings perverted to some human terminal. Muhammad ‘s ministry and the message of the Qur’an, as the Last of the Last, now represents God ‘s concluding word, which adult male ignores at his hazard.

The brotherhood of adult male is emphasized in legion contexts. Moslems are specifically said to be brothers, beyond all other associations ( particularly tribal or cultural ) , united by their belief. Disbelievers are however to be tolerated, with Christians and Jews recognized as Peoples of the Book, or trusters sharing with Muslims a common beginning of religion, and their Prophetss are accepted as work forces of God. Those who profess religion with their lips, but non with their Black Marias ( The Medinan Hypocrites, for illustration ) are threatened with peculiarly rough penalty on the Last Day.

The message of the Qur’an was barely original, Jews and Christian had followed monotheism for centuries. But to Muhammad ‘s hearers the message was mostly new, and above all, Arab, while II, medium, the linguistic communication, was capturing, adorned with prove 11 recited with an about musical elegance, and capturing all the power of antediluvian desert traditional knowledge.

The same rules that we discussed at the get downing apply every bit to the kingdom of civilization. This word is normally used both in a wide and a narrow sense. In the first sense it means about the whole of human activity apart from biological necessity. That is to state it is about synonymous with the word ‘civilization ‘ . It is what, in a strictly outward manner, distinguishes work forces from animate beings. In the narrower sense it normally means the humanistic disciplines or humanistic disciplines, and a adult male is described as ‘cultured ‘ if he has a wide instruction in these countries. In this chapter we want to concentrate upon civilization in the narrower sense, but no clear line can be drawn between the two. Language, for case, is both an indispensable portion of civilisation and besides an art which we may cultivate.

It is indispensable, nevertheless, to do one preliminary point about civilization in the wider sense. The definition of civilization as what adult male does apart from biological necessity can take us to believe of cultural activity as non purely necessary, an optional supernumerary to be given attending if we are of a peculiar disposition. But civilization, if it is non portion of biological necessity, is portion of human necessity. We use linguistic communication, live in societies, form personal relationships, live in houses and wear apparels, etc. Biologically we need non make any of these things, but as human beings we must. One really of import portion of our human nature is concerned with the emotional, aesthetic and human relationship maps. Our attitude to all this is basically the same as our attitude to the organic structure. God made us like that -let us rejoice and be glad in it. The wealths of human life far exceed anything that animate beings can of all time cognize, The potencies are enormous. It is important that when the Bible tells us about heaven it does so in footings of this facet of life – beauty, vocalizing, music, perfect architecture, love ( `like a bride adorned ‘ ) , and joy – every bit good as in footings of seeing God face to face and worshipping and functioning Him. This basic state of affairs we take for granted in what follows. We can no more flight from civilization than we can get away from the organic structure. God who has given us these organic structures has put us in a society whose civilization we use in all our activities in relation to others.

We want chiefly to inquire inquiries about the ordinary adult male ‘s enjoyment of the humanistic disciplines and his attitude to the civilization of his society in the narrower sense. We must stress that what we have said in the earlier chapters of this book compels us to take an basically positive attitude to the organic structure and to human cultural capacities. All are first-class gifts of God ‘s creative activity and Providence. All are intended for our human this-worldly good, and all can be misused by iniquitous work forces. Artistic activity and experience are easy turned into an graven image. Men frequently speak and unrecorded as if cultural or aesthetic experience was the highest point of human accomplishment. But like all other such graven images they do non fulfill. For a short clip we may be drunk with them but after a while the katzenjammer sets in. On the other manus, we do a really unsafe thing if we try to quash all this side of our nature and it is likely to take to serious problem, as every other going from scriptural balance is bound to make in the terminal. If we repress it, it can easy split out in overdone importance, as can our gender if that is repressed. We do non function God aright by running off from what He has given us.

The coevals spread

The Christian attitude to civilization represents a recurrent job of the church, particularly at times when the coevals spreads are large. The coevals spread is a cultural and non a religious phenomenon. If the official church leaders do non understand the demand for new signifiers of cultural life they can easy estrange the immature by their bigotry about nonessentials. If they are less educated than the new coevals the job is acute. In states where higher instruction is a new thing, for case, the job can be solved merely by the visual aspect of a group of truly Christian and educated immature people in the church. In many states they are now looking. They must seek to understand the older leaders ( and what is instruction for but apprehension of life? ) and should be sufficiently scriptural to appreciate to the full the precedences of the older, spiritually-minded work forces. The old work forces were likely right within their cultural scene and the immature must accept this. Otherwise, all excessively frequently, an antithesis has been set up between the less educated seniors who have ne’er read a book, except possibly parts of the Bible, and the civilized immature work forces who seem to hold adopted so many of the ways of the universe. But these ways are non all bad. Some are positively contributing to physical and mental wellness. Others are necessary to good communicating and authorities. If the boies of the church rise quickly to being cabinet curates, Trade Union leaders and university instructors they need to maneuver their ain new way to unite cultural engagement with maintaining themselves unsoiled from the universe.

The older coevals can non ever enter into the new state of affairs or to the full understand what is involved. What would be evil to them is sometimes non even implicative of immorality to their kids. They can assist the immature to maintain the rules ever clear before them and to be unmerciful about via media with evil. But civilization being the basically human thing it is, each individual has to make up one’s mind for him what is good and health-giving and what toxicant is. The calamity is that the old frequently condemn new cultural forms as spiritually incorrect, when they are in fact simply a affair of altering usage. The immature in their bend feel that they have to accept an outdated civilization if they are to be Christians at all and are easy tempted to reject both together. The cultural coevals spread is so turned from being merely a inquiry of forms of societal life into a affair of religion, and that is rather unneeded. As we want to demo in this chapter, the inquiries are non easy solved by black and white replies, but there are clear rules to work with.

Moral immorality in civilization.

What, so, are we to do of the moral tone of much cultural activity? Some modern music seems aimed non merely to animate and loosen up, but to excite sex and at the same clip to loosen up our critical modules to a unsafe extent. In utmost instances it amounts about to a signifier of brain-washing. We can over-relax in a peculiar context. Equally far as communicating is concerned, we sometimes find a message that is obviously incorrect and seductive. That is non to state that we should avoid all portraiture of immorality in art. But there are some elusive differences between portraying evil as it truly is – as the Bible frequently does – and portraying it so as to do it attractive, or so that we may bask a vicarious engagement in other people ‘s wickednesss. We need to inquire ourselves why we like to read divorce proceedings or histories of slaying, force, war and immorality in the newspapers and in literature. The mistake, of class, may be in us ; but there is no justification for our reading literature or watching dramas on telecasting that we know excite our worse inclinations and appetencies. We do non hold to get at a careful analysis of how far the mistake is in us and how far it is in the book or drama to cognize that we personally must avoid it.

There is much confusion of idea here. Human nature being iniquitous, no cultural activity is wholly free of evil or of deceptive accents. Man ne’er sees or portrays a state of affairs as God sees it. All art and all civilisation are morally assorted. Even the most Christian societies we should go smug and be taken off our guard. Equally there is about ever some good at least in any work of art that has survived, and all societies and civilization have in God ‘s Providence excellent characteristics. But that does non intend that we can be self-satisfied about the evil and merely accept the immorality with the good. Action may change and will ever pull unfavorable judgment. It may, for illustration, involve the planning and usage of expurgated editions of Shakespeare ‘s dramas for the usage of kids or recommending and back uping a entire censoring prohibition on obscene publications, no affair how good written they may be. In the one instance it can barely be argued that what kids get out of reading Shakespeare is earnestly impoverished by taking what is non indispensable to the artistic unity of his work and simply reflects the corrupt manners of his age. Why as Christians should we be compelled to blend what could be positively deleterious with so much that is good? . We are told that this is good general reading because it is a great and serious work of art. The first inquiry to inquire is whether the lubricious parts are indispensable to the book ‘s message and to its artistic virtue. If they are, so the book is best non read and it would be better if it had non been written. There are plentifulness of other wholesome books of equal virtue. If they are non, so these parts of the narrative could hold been written in less erotically exciting ways without any loss of unity. In that instance there is no injury in holding an expurgated edition such as the one which circulated rather merrily for many old ages.

The Christian can ne’er disregard the moral and philosophical content of a work of art. He must talk out against evil no affair how attractive the signifier in which it comes. An creative person is limited by his medium, for illustration the grain and texture of the wood in a carving. This brings out some of the best from the creative person. It gives portion of the signifier to his art. No designer should kick if the edifice he designs has to set as its first precedence its usefulness to work forces. His accomplishment is demonstrated both in a better usage of infinite, etc. and in making it in a beautiful manner. In merely the same manner a poet ought to be limited by the moral texture of human nature. An creative person who has no regard for the manner people really are is every bit bad as an designer who builds his ceilings excessively low for comfort merely because he thinks it looks nicer. If creative persons would merely train themselves to bring forth what is wholesome for others so there would be no demand for society to protect itself from their work. Society has to believe of those who are most vulnerable. It is non necessary to state that a adult male is intentionally seeking to score us in order to make up one’s mind that his work should non be disseminated. Such censoring is non all loss. Much art has been artistically improved by accepting the sort of moral restrictions we are here suggesting.

The adult male who has a gift as a author, painter, musician or sermonizer has therefore to be peculiarly careful how he uses it. The speechmaker has a really unsafe gift which can be easy used to sell mistake or to do truth look silly and his greatest danger is when his usage of words runs off with him and he is fascinated by his ain prowess and the enjoyment of artistic creative activity. The ironist is in the same unsafe place, as certain telecasting programmes make field. Because we are iniquitous, evil easy intrudes, and if it is put over in an artistically superb manner the toxicant may be hidden. The first enticement to Eve was facilitated by the fact that the out fruit was ‘a delectation to the eyes ‘ .

Christians have found it hard to be at the same clip rigorous about evil and positively appreciative of the artistic good in the same work of art. It has frequently seemed easier to shun the humanistic disciplines wholly. But we are human and we can non make that systematically without running into sedate dangers of going less than homo. Sometimes, like Eve, we have to look up to the beauty of the fruit, but unlike her, because we know we can non feed on it without rational and moral danger, we have to go through on and give our attending to other first-class fruits in the aesthetic garden. Eve had plentifulness of other fruits to eat. This, after all, is our state of affairs. There is much good to take from. It is non an option of morally corrupt art or nil at all.

The professional has to be careful here lest he forgets the different place of the amateur. A instructor who is a hard-boiled reader of Gallic literature, for illustration, frequently becomes degage and clinical in his reading in a manner that his students are non. Merely some of them are of all time traveling to read plenty to go detached like him. These few will necessitate in clip to larn to devour and bask such composing without the immorality in it lodging to them. But for most the few brushs with good authorship may hold a detrimental moral influence out of all proportion to their worth. Their influence will be at the same time aesthetic and philosophical or moral. The writer remembers really small of Marlowe except some soiled gags and this was non because he wanted to brood on them, but because they stuck when read as a susceptible schoolboy. The witting impact of the remainder was nil. Possibly he had an unduly susceptible head and as preparation in literary unfavorable judgment it may hold done good ; but was it necessary? There are options.

This is non a supplication for reading merely pious and moral narratives in which right ever triumphs and the bad are ever unattractive. It is a supplication that moral, theological and religious factors should come foremost and should be judged independently of aesthetic or proficient virtue. The place is like that of the jock who has to inquire about a repast non merely whether it is wholesome in general, but besides whether it is allowed by the preparation programme. It could be good nutrient, but forbidden because it contains elements that are the enemy of excellent wellness. Moral factors are of ageless significance to us and to our influence on others. If artistic virtue is put above them it is an graven image which must be smashed. It is non a catastrophe if we restrict our artistic enjoyment. We can non in any instance do everything, and everyone restricts himself to some extent for the interest of what is more of import.

Yet there is all the difference between cutting down on the clip we spend on the humanistic disciplines because of our Christian precedences ( or the new babe for that affair ) , and cutting down because we feel it is more Christian to travel without for the interest of traveling without, or because we think the humanistic disciplines are evil in themselves. The former is inevitable and right ; no-one can develop all his artistic possibilities to the full, for there is non clip. The latter is an unbiblical attitude which will catch us out in other ways subsequently on. It may be that some Christians are unnecessarily deprived artistically, but there are greater catastrophes in life than that. It is extraordinary how some people speak about the narrowness of the Christian life or the possible ‘freedom ‘ of a heathen manner of life as if it were deserving any monetary value to increase a small our aesthetic capacity or our psychological or societal wellness. On the contrary, Christ frequently stressed that there may be a painful monetary value to pay in the little hard currency of affairs of comparatively small importance, for the interest of the solid gold of what is of existent value in this life, every bit good as in the life to come. Let it be said one time more, nevertheless, that this is non to contemn the cultural facets of life or to be negative about civilisation. It is simply to cut them down to their proper graduated table. They are positively good and first-class gifts of God, but far from being His greatest gifts. We need them for our wellness, but wellness is non the most of import thing in life. They are none of them perfect and some looks are positively disgusting ; therefore we must be selective in our usage of them. Time is besides short and other things are at least every bit needed.

The culturally Liberated.

The state of affairs is good illustrated by two subjects in some recent authorship. One is the narrative, repeated in a figure of autobiographies, of people who were brought up in a rigorous Christian community and who have rebelled against it. There are, of class, a figure of grounds for such rebellion, but in some instances it starts with a cultural job. For person culturally gifted the community of the church may look really petty. Why does no-one else bask some of these good things? A small dabbling in cultural chases non normally approved by the church seems to convey no immediate injury. It may convey a certain release and artistic bang ( like the first instead irresponsible buss ) . Gradually the Rebel moves into a whole form of life which is moulded by non-Christians and it seems to hold some first-class characteristics and to convey some deep aesthetic experiences which were ne’er found in the life of the church. It begins to look an either/or. Either, it seems, we can hold a ‘fully human ‘ cultural life or a religious but culturally deprived one. Here is the existent trial. If the Rebel has deep religious roots he will last it, declining to accept it as and either/or. If his roots are shallow he is likely to be swallowed up in what may be a moderately healthy cultural unit of ammunition, but one which comes to govern his life and squash out all else. T. Howard ‘s Christ the Tigers is a recent autobiography of this sort.

The mistake lies both in the church and in the Rebel. The church could hold done more to develop a positive and healthy attitude to cultural life, coupled with a sense of values as to what is good and what is toxicant in civilization. The Rebel should hold kept his precedences, and one hopes will retrieve them before long. God has given us so many fantastic experiences to bask ; we merely can non trail them all or bask a fraction of them. It is good to prosecute cognition and experience, but they can non be terminals in themselves. They are meant to be portion of a wider whole. Like most such Rebels Howard ends up by stating that he must follow cognition, but at the same clip he admits that life has lost its intent. That is the terminal point of all devotion, non least cultural devotion. It becomes about irrationally unprompted, trusting against hope that it will stop in a satisfaction which for of all time eludes us.

The 2nd subject is that of those who were brought up in one or other of the stricter Christian groups ( normally High Church ‘Catholic ‘ or Evangelical ) and who, because of its negative attitude to civilization, have reacted into a theological liberalism which puts cultural enrichment above religious life. Such critics seldom discern the fact that, though they may hold a valid point in assailing cultural negativity, this should non take them to assail the whole theological model of their church. J. King, for case, in his book The Evangelicals writes: ‘If I thought that being an Evangelical automatically involved accepting male domination, bodily penalty, businessperson biass, fiddling positions, hapless gustatory sensation, a yen after organizing other people ‘s lives, a refusal to look facts in the face, and a persecution composite, I should drop Evangelicalism like a hot brick. ‘ This expresses a hapless confusion and loss of precedences. We should non be ashamed to stand with true Christians, nevertheless nescient and unenlightened by our superior Grecian civilization. This is portion of the issue Paul is debating in 1 Playboies: 18-31. Our contention is that all civilization must stand under the standards of disclosure. Here it can and should turn strong and healthy and be genuinely health-giving. Equally shortly as it tries to go itself the justice, it becomes capable to futility and is in fact controlled by other concealed presuppositions of which it is frequently non cognizant

Indirect Evil.

So far we have discussed merely moral immorality in art. The jobs of class are far wider. Possibly the philosophical subject of modern play is even more of import, if less obvious. If the indispensable purpose of a work of art is to convey the nonsense of life, for case, what are we to make? Probably the first thing is to be certain that we do non allow such influences make full our heads and by continual suggestion unobtrusively switch our ain attitudes, and this requires above all critical apprehension. If a Christian is to pass clip on modern play, for illustration, he must do certain that he knows what it is truly approximately and that he is capable of knocking and replying its insidious influences. Some critically gifted Christians speak as if all of us should be soaking ourselves in modern ‘culture ‘ . They forget that, although they themselves are no more influenced by it than by taking portion in a argument, others are non capable of seeing their manner through the message and are likely to be influenced about subliminally. They may bit by bit absorb the mentality of what they enjoy artistically but can non knock. If we do non cognize what powerful messages we are absorbing, we had better be abstemious until we have understood the medium better and hold some standards to travel on. For it must be repeated that the grounds we have given for come ining into the humanistic disciplines do non warrant making so if we can non avoid being spiritually injured.

When Jesus said, ‘If your right oculus causes you to transgress, tweak it out and throw it off ; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole organic structure be thrown into snake pit ‘ ( Mt. 5: 29 ) , He was speaking about the demand to cover perfectly drastically with even the beginnings of extramarital ideas. But the rule is of wider application. We must non let even necessary relaxation to wound our relationship to God or our populating a consistent Christian life. If we had to take we should take to be Christian but artless know nothings instead than cultured but compromised semi-pagans. Of class the pick is seldom an either/or, but we may good hold to restrict our usage of the humanistic disciplines in some waies until we are able to digest what they are stating without injury and with existent net income. The Grecian ideal of the absolutely cultured and healthy adult male is a fatally abbreviated ideal. In a iniquitous universe this is a luxury which we can non achieve without the loss of more indispensable things. It may be good every bit far as it goes, but it is non the Christian ideal and it easy becomes a rival to the Christian ideal.

A Christian Culture.

The position we have taken about God ‘s creative activity and heaven-sent gifts, nevertheless, makes it really hard to believe that we should swing over to seek to develop a specifically Christian civilization in a assorted society. We should surely seek to act upon the whole of civilization for good and Western society is without uncertainty a good trade Christianized still, for which we are grateful. But to seek to develop a separate Christian civilization with our ain specifically Christian cultural establishments today is necessarily to disregard much of the good in the civilization of the non-Christian community around us, and historically it has ever had grave failings. It could win merely if there were a generous acknowledgment of good in non-Christian civilization. In any instance, the saving of a specifically Christian political party or day-to-day newspaper, etc. seems otiose unless the options are truly barbarous. When Tertullian exploded with the comment, ‘What has Athinais to make with Jerusalem cubic decimeter ‘ he was voicing an extreme, but at least partially justified, reaction against the paganization of the church ‘s life and idea. In the history of the church there have been times when its sensitive leaders have felt, like Tertullian, that the civilization is so contaminated and the province so diabolic that the Christian can merely seek to choose out and reject both as now positively evil. It is non for us who live in comparatively Christianized societies to roast them, but in the long tally such a policy is about ever a catastrophe. Even if backdown was necessary for a clip, those concerned should hold been alert of every chance of re-entering positively into the civilization of their times. We can non wholly get away its influence. Far less can we insulate our kids? Besides if we should win in choosing out, it would necessarily go harder and harder to pass on the Gospel to others. For this ground it has frequently been literary work forces who have truly communicated the Gospel to non- Christians better than theologists ( C. S. Lewis, for illustration, in our century ) .

But it is besides a painful fact that an stray Christian civilization has repeatedly gone rancid or lapsed into pettiness, legalism or formalism. Again and once more the alleged Christian civilization has earlier long become foremost unfertile and fiddling and so bit by bit has been infiltrated by the now exhaustively non-Christian civilization around without anyone recognizing what has happened. The pettiness of societal life and temper in many theological colleges, for case, can be a life-long disadvantage to curates. The small-mindedness of many clannish churches and Christian establishments easy leads to party spirit and legalism and quibbling approximately issues that ought non to split Christians. This can eventually devolve into a exhaustively `worldly ‘ spirit of status-seeking, and so on. The problem is partially that so much of civilization is fundamentally merely populating healthily and creatively as we were meant to populate. It is non long before the instead restricted ‘Christian civilization ‘ discovers that it has something to larn on a strictly human degree from secular civilization outside the ghetto. There are first-class characteristics which the Christian can non but admire and so the cat is out of the bag. This wicked secular civilization is found non to be wholly bad after all, and immature people in peculiar tend to get down it whole because they have been so stray from it that they can non knock it intelligently and separate the good from the immorality.

Neither is it now any good yen after an idealised mediaeval civilisation. Christians, with really rare exclusions, are non in a place to rule civilization as they were so and in any instance many of its characteristics were non at all Christian. Today in most states the options are a minority Christian ghetto in a secular society or a Christian infiltration of a assorted society. In the latter instance the Christian should be dying, non so much to bring forth peculiarly Christian art ( good though that would be ) , but distinctively good art, that is, art that genuinely expresses the manner God ‘s creative activity is and genuinely serves the originative maps that it is meant to function. The medieval partisans ever want Christian art and architecture, etc. , but normally end up with second-rate art with a spiritual subject. We advocate ‘good ‘ art and architecture which justly relates to God ‘s creative activity. This will carefully avoid being morally evil but its subject may be mostly merely human, as, for illustration, was most Dutch Genevan picture. In the same manner Christians should assist to guarantee that scientific discipline is true every bit good as that it is seen in its Christian position. We would keep that at that place ought non to be a clearly Christian architecture ( except for a Christian spiritual edifice ) or music ( except for Christian subjects ) or economic sciences or scientific discipline. Nevertheless we shall desire to contend for all that is good and true in these domains, and when it comes to philosophy or other countries ( possibly some facets of psychological science ) where thought has to be straight related to either theistic or non-theistic premise, so Christian thought and pattern will be clearly different and radically opposed to much other idea. in which they lived because there was no Christian civilisation and virtually no Christian artistic production to believe about. If so, this implies a whole attitude to the civilization of our clip. We are to pick out and brood on whatever is true, merely, pure, beautiful, etc. At least this transition proves that our attitude to society should be non lone denouncement of what is evil, but positive enthusiasm for what is good in the life of heathens and misbelievers. It is natural to believe, as we have argued on other evidences, that we should seek to promote and develop whatever is good. Merely if certain facets of the civilization in which we live are oppressively evil and baneful could we seek to choose out of them and so merely so that, given a stronger base, we should every bit shortly as possible seek once more to step into and reform them.

It is difficult for those who live in states with a long history of Christian influence ( particularly Protestant influence ) to recognize that much of the good we take for granted had to be fought for with great doggedness. Aspects such as justness ( the independency of the bench ) , truth, freedom from graft and corruptness, public decency and regard for the old and infirm, the tradition of professional service, freedom of address and worship, and so on, all guarantee that we can populate comparatively wholesome and free lives and are able to bask cultural activity and contribute to the common good. These are, of class, a affair of grade, but the powerful Christian influences on society have brought a wealth in our cultural life for which we should be most thankful. It will be a changeless conflict to keep these. But whereas for the early church it was even impossible at times to eat meat in a non-Christian friend ‘s house ( though they were encouraged to make so whenever it was possible without via media, 1 Cor. 27-30 ) , for us there is a huge country of societal and cultural life which we can come in with unqualified enthusiasm, and much good follows from these both to us and to our non-Christian friends. If our civilization alterations for the worse, or if we move to another state, we shall hold to believe out afresh what is good and healthy and to be enthusiastically enjoyed by the Christian, and what is so corrupt that we are called upon to be culturally deprived from the stand-point of society. If we are wise, that grade of want will be balanced by positively healthy cultural activity of other sorts.

We must non hunger ourselves culturally any more than we starve ourselves physically. But both nutrient and civilization call for subject so that we may bask the best and go stronger by it

Get instant access to
all materials

Become a Member