Integrity requires a choice
Mark 2:10 " 'But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.' ”
The verse above is from Jesus' exchange with the teachers of the law, who were appalled at some of things he was saying and the authority with which he claimed to act. Think about what He is saying here- He is telling them that He has the authority to forgive sins. He's not saying I have the ability to forgive someone who has wronged me personally- we all have that ability. If something rises to the level of "sin", it involves God. Therefore, whoever says they have the authority to forgive a sin is saying that they are God. Who says something like that?
I am continuing to read in Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis (which I cannot recommend enough as a plain spoken, logically progressing discussion of Christianity.) He addresses something that I have heard Matt Chandler speak on before, and have written about in other blog posts. It is the dilemma Jesus presents to us all in deciding what we believe about Him. The dilemma lies in the fact that He left us no middle ground to safely land upon. Based on the things He said and the claims He made, he leaves us two and only two choices. Lewis describes this paradox in the following passages:
"Then comes the real shock. Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He has always existed. He is coming to judge the world at the end of time. Now let us get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say that he was part of God, or one with God; there would be nothing very odd about it. But this man, since He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of god. God, in their language, meant the Being outside the world, who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you grasp that, you will see that what this Man said was, quite simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been uttered by human lips.
I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg - or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."
Many people who are not believers take the more politically correct route described above when in public or in conversations with believers. It feels too confrontational or disrespectful or just plain mean to not at least say that Jesus had some very worthy ideas. But I hope we can all recognize this for what it really is- "patronising nonsense", as Lewis termed it. In their heart of hearts, I hope that a non-believer will be strong enough and have enough integrity of belief to state what their belief really is- that Jesus was a raving lunatic the likes of which the world has never seen. If they can't go so far as to make this statement, then the question they should be asking themselves is "Why can't I make this statement?" If there is something deep in their hearts that won't let them take this position, then they owe it to themselves to explore that in more depth.
I would submit that there is nothing worse than living in a place where there is no power of conviction or belief, one way or the other. Although it would grieve me to know that someone had settled on the belief that Jesus was not who He claimed to be, I would at least have more respect for the person knowing that they had confronted the issue and had chosen one of the only two options before them.
If you live in this middle ground, you owe it to yourself to move to one side or the other.
The verse above is from Jesus' exchange with the teachers of the law, who were appalled at some of things he was saying and the authority with which he claimed to act. Think about what He is saying here- He is telling them that He has the authority to forgive sins. He's not saying I have the ability to forgive someone who has wronged me personally- we all have that ability. If something rises to the level of "sin", it involves God. Therefore, whoever says they have the authority to forgive a sin is saying that they are God. Who says something like that?
I am continuing to read in Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis (which I cannot recommend enough as a plain spoken, logically progressing discussion of Christianity.) He addresses something that I have heard Matt Chandler speak on before, and have written about in other blog posts. It is the dilemma Jesus presents to us all in deciding what we believe about Him. The dilemma lies in the fact that He left us no middle ground to safely land upon. Based on the things He said and the claims He made, he leaves us two and only two choices. Lewis describes this paradox in the following passages:
"Then comes the real shock. Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He has always existed. He is coming to judge the world at the end of time. Now let us get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say that he was part of God, or one with God; there would be nothing very odd about it. But this man, since He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of god. God, in their language, meant the Being outside the world, who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you grasp that, you will see that what this Man said was, quite simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been uttered by human lips.
I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg - or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."
Many people who are not believers take the more politically correct route described above when in public or in conversations with believers. It feels too confrontational or disrespectful or just plain mean to not at least say that Jesus had some very worthy ideas. But I hope we can all recognize this for what it really is- "patronising nonsense", as Lewis termed it. In their heart of hearts, I hope that a non-believer will be strong enough and have enough integrity of belief to state what their belief really is- that Jesus was a raving lunatic the likes of which the world has never seen. If they can't go so far as to make this statement, then the question they should be asking themselves is "Why can't I make this statement?" If there is something deep in their hearts that won't let them take this position, then they owe it to themselves to explore that in more depth.
I would submit that there is nothing worse than living in a place where there is no power of conviction or belief, one way or the other. Although it would grieve me to know that someone had settled on the belief that Jesus was not who He claimed to be, I would at least have more respect for the person knowing that they had confronted the issue and had chosen one of the only two options before them.
If you live in this middle ground, you owe it to yourself to move to one side or the other.
posted by Robert Jory Allen at
4:43 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home