Acts 10:34-43
34Then Peter began to speak to them: “I truly understand that God shows no partiality, 35but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. 36You know the message he sent to the people of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ—he is Lord of all. 37That message spread throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John announced: 38how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him. 39We are witnesses to all that he did both in Judea and in Jerusalem. They put him to death by hanging him on a tree; 40but God raised him on the third day and allowed him to appear, 41not to all the people but to us who were chosen by God as witnesses, and who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. 42He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead. 43All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”
Peter is speaking to Cornelius, a Gentile, and his household. It took quite a bit for Peter to get over his prejudice and understand that God might be willing to accept non-Jews. I wonder if he ever decided that those who don’t fear God and do what is wrong are acceptable to God – at least as acceptable as anyone else! I hear a message behind his message – that none of us fully fear God and do what is right, that all of us need to be, and can be, forgiven.
Note that Peter (or Luke, putting words in his mouth) doesn’t boldly proclaim that Jesus is God. Jesus is “anointed by God,” “God was with him,” he was “ordained by God.” Unlike Luke & Peter, I believe (and proclaim!) that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh – but I wonder if the Church is too hard on those who hold a lower Christology, who believe that Jesus is special, unique, but not God. As I read the New Testament, John seems to be the only one who regularly and clearly claims Jesus as divine – and even John insists that “the Son is below the Father.”
The Church has argued that the Crucifixion only “works” if Jesus is both human and divine. But think through what you believe about the cross, about forgiveness of sin, about what Jesus actually came here to do. Is it possible for you to embrace some who deny the divinity of Jesus as “Christian”? For readers who don’t think Jesus is divine – are you able to put up with us who hold on to a higher Christology?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
How does one define "Christian?" If one uses the words "follower of Christ," we still have a wide range of possibilities. One who followed the teachings of Jesus could be considered a Christian, in which case, I would argue that Muhammad of Islam was, in fact, Christian.
ReplyDeleteThere is that well-known quote of Gandhi: "If I ever met a Christian I would become one." This view of a Christian as one who follows the teachings of Jesus doesn't require Jesus to BE God.
Where am I? I'm at "I don't fully know." And I don't think I can. And I've come to a place where I'm okay with that, because:
1. Jesus said some good stuff.
2. If I follow Jesus' teachings to the best of my abilities, I think I'll be living a pretty good life.
3. I don't think a God who loves us (the only God I believe in!) isn't going to be so worried about our figuring out the exact truth while we're here on earth.
OK, O student of Islam, explain to me how Muhammad followed the teachings of Jesus?
ReplyDeleteMore specifically around (1) forgiveness, which is quite explicit in Jesus' teachings and I did not think was a key part of the Quran, and (2) non-violence, which is not as explicit in Jesus' teachings but still pretty clear, and is not a tenet of the Muhammad I know from history. (I understand that the Church has mostly ignored this tenet. But if you're choosing to define Christian as follower of Christ...)
I see the concept of grace as a primary characteristic of God to be a central difference between Islam and Christianity. But my knowledge of Islam is pretty limited (some comparative religion classes, reading of some of the Quran, a Muslim colleague, attendance at occasional lectures).
Also, though I agree with Becca's (1), (2), and (3), I don't think they have anything to do with whether or not those who reject Jesus' divinity should be considered Christian.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Muhammed and Ghandi were Christians. I doubt they would want to be considered Christians. "Christian" is not a value judgement - it's a description of someone who follows a specific religion.
Here's the broadest definition I find useful:
"We define 'Christian' as including any individual or group who devoutly, thoughtfully, seriously, and prayerfully regards themselves to be Christian." This is from http://www.religioustolerance.org/chrdefnresp.htm, which has a list of over 40 other definitions from a wide variety of perspectives...
1. Forgiveness - talked about quite a bit, actually. Famous jurists and hadith (sayings of and stories about Muhammad) include things like "God loves forgiveness," "God forgives all sins," etc. I would agree that Jesus is more explicit about it in the Gospels than Muhammad is in actual Qur'an.
ReplyDelete2. Non-violence - yes, Muhammad fought politically. Hadith condemn violence quite frequently, though. Sometimes it has very explicit tenets under which it's acceptable or not, sometimes it's flat-out condemned.
There are certainly Muslims who "throw out" a lot of the focus Muhammad has on Jesus' teachings of social justice, etc. But there are a lot of Christians who do so as well...
Perhaps this is also me simply being too liberal and Islam-loving. But there's an incredible number of interpretations of the Qur'an and Islamic law out there, and I, of course, have my favorite. I have my favorite interpretation of Christianity's teachings, as well, though.