This week we take our next to last look at salvation. We know that salvation is central to scripture, that it is a promise of new life now and eternal life in God's coming Kingdom, and that our Reformed (Presbyterian) tradition professes that salvation is an act of God to which we are to respond through faith by loving God and neighbor. The question before us is can human beings ultimately reject the work of God in their lives and thus reject the salvation which God offers?
The answer to this question is going to center on our understanding of the balance between human freedom and divine power. As we have discussed over the past few weeks there has been an ongoing debate (for almost the last 2,000 years) between those who claim that humans have absolute freedom and those who claim that God holds all power. If we believe that humans have absolute freedom then humans can either accept or reject God. If we believe that God has all power then persons can only do what God moves them to do. Our tradition has believed far more in the power of God than in human freedom. The high water mark of this view occurred in 1618-1619 at the Synod of Dort in the Netherlands. The Synod affirmed the belief that God's grace was irresistible. In other words, if God wanted someone to be saved, then God would save them. The individual had no choice in the matter. It was all the work of God.
Over the last hundred years many in the Reformed (Presbyterian) tradition have offered alternatives to Dort by arguing that God and humanity are connected by an I-Thou relationship and not a maker-object relationship. The concept of I-Thou was given shape, interestingly enough, by a Jewish philosopher/theologian and not by a Christian theologian. Martin Buber published his Ich and Du (I and Thou) in 1923. The premise of the book was that we experience God not as an object but as a relational other. Thus, God experiences us in the same way. This relational understanding of our interaction with God meant that we were not objects that could or would be manipulated by God. Emil Brunner in his Dogmatics (published 1946-1960) was one of the Christian theologians who explored this idea.
Brunner wrote, "God wills a creature which is not…a mere object of His will…He desires from us an active and spontaneous response…He who creates through the Word, who as Spirit creates in freedom, wills to have a 'reflex' which is … a free spiritual act, a correspondence to His speaking. Only thus can His love really impart itself as love. For love can only impart itself where it is received in love. Hence the heart of the creaturely existence of man is freedom, selfhood, to be an 'I', a person. Only an 'I' can answer a 'Thou', only a Self which is self-determining can freely answer God. An automaton does not respond; "
Brunner is reinforcing the idea that while God changes our hearts (making it possible for us to love God and neighbor) and influences us through love, God will never force our hearts to believe or to follow. What God is looking for is a response to God's infinite love and self-giving in Jesus Christ. God desires a true relationship in which each party is free to love and respond. This being the case then it would appear possible for someone to reject the work of God in their lives. Someone could harden their heart and be so stubborn that they would rather choose a way of death rather than life; of aloneness rather than relationship.
My personal question however, is why would someone want to? When approached by infinite love and forgiveness why would anyone ultimately reject the relationship? My hope is that on this week following Christmas we will each reflect on the amazing love of God that God became one of us in order that we might find salvation; that God sent God's only son into the world to give his life for us that we might find life now and forever.
Next Week: The Road to Redemption: How Are We Saved – Part 8
No comments:
Post a Comment