It may be a mute point now that the election's over and Perry won, but I'm still amazed at the hooplah the media (including some at my own paper) have made over Perry saying that "non-Christians are going to hell."
Isn't that exactly what Scripture tells us?
Why are politicians and celebrities slammed for having and talking about their Christian faith?
Independent Kinky Friedman said, "He doesn't think very differently than the Taliban, does he?"
I've thought about this several times since Sunday and I think it goes back to what the Apostle Paul said, "For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are dying, but to us who are saved it is the power of God."
As Christians we can't expect the rest of the world to understand our beliefs or agree with them.
When we start quoting scripture it means nothing to them. Which is why we must find other means to convey our morality and views on issues like abortion and same-sex marriage -- besides quoting scripture.
Quoting Leviticus to an unbeliever won't sway their opinion. If it's true there must be other means of going about persuading a person.
I may be rambling here, but what do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Perry's comment makes me think of these questions.
Governor, What ultimately leads a person to the change of heart necessary to follow Jesus? Can a person do anything to earn even a fraction of the cost of salvation that Christ paid on our behalf?
Would Perry consider his words and actions "worship" in the House of God?
I am Michael Robinson, and I approve this message.
A few comments not directed to you, but about the subject in general.
Scripture either is or is not authority. The cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but no where does it say that we should stop telling Truth because of that. It is balanced with the fact that God's Word does not come back void. Does this mean that we as Christians should not be engage in the sciences or subjects like philosphy or apologetics? Absolutely not! But at the same time none of the above are authoritative or infallible because again, absolutes are found in God's Word. So preach the Word! Do we need bridges to communicate the Gospel? Yes indeed. A perfect example would be Acts 17. Paul addresses philisophers, meeting his audience where they; however, never did he argue apart from the Truth of the Gospel, just used the present situation to get him to that point.
I think outside arguemnts on issues like abortion can be fine, but it seems to me that it deals with the symptons not the heart illness at hand. If we remove Scripture from our converstations, then it becomes a slippery slope of silently denying the sufficiency of the God breathed Scriptures.
Anonymous - I agree. I think Perry was right to say what he did. I wish the other candidates believed it and/or acknowledged that they did.
And I agree that nothing is infallible as Scripture but like you said I think we need to find bridges.
Standing outside an abortion clinic with the 10 commandments isn't likely to change a heart (not that God can't do that) but I think we need to have an understanding of the things around us and find those bridges to help lead people to the Gospel.
Take for example the Christian Wrestling Federation. We use wrestling as a bridge to present the Gospel. Sure we tell the Gospel at every show, but we've found something people can relate to, wrestling, and used it to share God's love.
"For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without the law: and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law; for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified:(for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves; in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them); in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ."
The unbeliever rebels against the notion that only through Christ can one obtain salvation, because they define "Christian" the narrowest sense as an exclusionary faith rather than embracing Paul's revolutionary pronouncement of a universally inclusive Church. Those unbelievers view the Christ as a wall rather than a door; wherein one is excluded rather than a door through which all who wish to be included may enter.
Post a Comment