Alternative Evangelism

[Earth Wind and Fire]

And w/o throwing rocks at any given theological group, I don’t see any emphasis at studying supernatural thinking. In the Synoptic gospels ( Matthew, Mark & Luke) we get Jesus the man, Jesus the Prophet with The Kingdom being the constant theme. In the gospel of John we get a Jesus that announces himself in his major proclamations... He is the Christ, the cosmic creation. Also there is no birth or infancy narrative.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/would-jesus-have-become-human-had-man-not-fallen

I can appreciate their hypothesizing and sympathize with their point, it just falls so far short of what God actually planned, carried out, and is still carrying out that there is no comparison. To put it mundanely, saying, “They were happy, and then they lived happily ever after,” hardly makes for a great story.

The article does not even come close to presenting an alternate but equal demonstration of God’s love. Don’t forget not only John 15:13 (dying for friends), but also Romans 5:10 (dying for enemies). Again, to say that sin is the focus is to entirely miss the Good News; it’s more like Bad News. Declaring God’s love is not alternative evangelism to the Gospel; it’s at the heart of it.

 

[Yeshua1]

I can appreciate their hypothesizing and sympathize with their point, it just falls so far short of what God actually planned, carried out, and is still carrying out that there is no comparison. To put it mundanely, saying, “They were happy, and then they lived happily ever after,” hardly makes for a great story.

The article does not even come close to presenting an alternate but equal demonstration of God’s love. Don’t forget not only John 15:13 (dying for friends), but also Romans 5:10 (dying for enemies). Again, to say that sin is the focus is to entirely miss the Good News; it’s more like Bad News. Declaring God’s love is not alternative evangelism to the Gospel; it’s at the heart of it.

We declare that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, already are judged as sinners, and then the good news is really good news, as they have to be convicted of their sins first, and then get the Good news!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I can appreciate their hypothesizing and sympathize with their point, it just falls so far short of what God actually planned, carried out, and is still carrying out that there is no comparison. To put it mundanely, saying, “They were happy, and then they lived happily ever after,” hardly makes for a great story.

The article does not even come close to presenting an alternate but equal demonstration of God’s love. Don’t forget not only John 15:13 (dying for friends), but also Romans 5:10 (dying for enemies). Again, to say that sin is the focus is to entirely miss the Good News; it’s more like Bad News. Declaring God’s love is not alternative evangelism to the Gospel; it’s at the heart of it.

So from your prospective, Christ would not have been needed if sin was not in the world. He was simply as substitution for humans having sinned.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

We declare that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, already are judged as sinners, and then the good news is really good news, as they have to be convicted of their sins first, and then get the Good news!

Whats the Good News, that when we die, we can go to heaven? (If we are good little boys and girls)

 

[Deadworm]

Earth, Wind, and Fire,

Your point about Augustine derives support from the insight that the story of Adam and Eve is not primarily about original sin, but rather about the birth of conscience through discernment of the psychodynamics of evil. I will defend this claim in my next planned post.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

So from your prospective, Christ would not have been needed if sin was not in the world. He was simply as substitution for humans having sinned.

The Incarnation is essential to God’s plan for man. It’s just that all hypotheticals fall far short of God’s actual plan incorporating the Incarnation.

 

[Yeshua1]

Whats the Good News, that when we die, we can go to heaven? (If we are good little boys and girls)

We only go to heaven ONLY because jesus died in our stead for our sins, and we must receive Him thru faith!

 

[Yeshua1]

Earth, Wind, and Fire,

Your point about Augustine derives support from the insight that the story of Adam and Eve is not primarily about original sin, but rather about the birth of conscience through discernment of the psychodynamics of evil. I will defend this claim in my next planned post.

They became self aware due to them now having the sin nature!

 

[Yeshua1]

The Incarnation is essential to God’s plan for man. It’s just that all hypotheticals fall far short of God’s actual plan incorporating the Incarnation.

The SEcond person of the trinity became fully man and walked among us, save that he was sinless humanity, and still fully God!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

We only go to heaven ONLY because jesus died in our stead for our sins, and we must receive Him thru faith!

You haven't answered my question, what if there was no sin.....would Christ be necessary?

 

[Yeshua1]

You haven't answered my question, what if there was no sin.....would Christ be necessary?

If there was no Fall, no need for a Savior?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

If there was no Fall, no need for a Savior?

So sin is the necessary ingredient. So did God set Adam up for the Fall (as you identify it)?

 

[Aaron]

Taken from an article by William Short, OFM. I find his prospective (actually the view of the Franciscans, both interesting and provocative.

Christ at the Heart of Reality

“We thank You for as through Your Son You created us, so through Your holy love . . . You brought about His birth.”

At every hour of the day Christian preachers on radio and television send a constant message into thousands of American cars, living rooms, and workplaces: “It’s all about sin!” God sent Jesus Christ into the world because we sinned; he had to suffer because we sinned; the world is a passing theater scene on which the drama of human sin is played out.

At the end, the sinners will be punished. It would seem that sin is the center of the universe; and both evangelical Protestant and Catholic preachers repeat that message. Does the Franciscan tradition say anything different?

The Franciscan view, rather than focusing on sin, emphasizes the love of God, enfleshed in Christ, as the center of reality. In the 14th century John Duns Scotus was asked, “Would Christ have come if Adam had not sinned?”

Contradicting the predominant thinking of his age (and ours), he answered: “Yes.” Christ came because the divine Trinitarian communion of persons wished to express divine life and goodness. For that reason the whole universe was made in the image of the divine Word, and that Word came to participate in the life of the universe as a created being, a creature, to show in a concrete, material way the form and model of all creation, made in the divine image.

The Incarnation, the fact of Jesus, not the fact of sin, is at the heart of reality. The circumstances of that Incarnation included suffering and death, caused by human sin, and Jesus’s generous giving of life for others reversed the effects of sin. But salvation from sin is a consequence of the Incarnation, not its motivating cause.

How might this view express itself in practice? It demands the difficult belief that goodness, not evil, lies at the heart of human experience, and that religious institutions have a role in expressing that belief. It would require of us an “alternative evangelism,” one which, in word and action, portrays a God in solidarity with human suffering out of love, rather than a God who demands the sacrifice of victims. The focus is not on “fighting sin” but on “giving life.” Such an approach could find eloquent expression in campus ministry programs; in the way Catholic doctrine is presented, in the public expressions of religious faith organized on a campus, whether for students or the wider community

The reality is that judgment is coming, God is going to destroy this earth and the people in it because of their sins. It will be a day of wrath.

The preaching of John and Jesus and of the Apostles was to "flee the wrath to come," and here is the Way.

That's the message. Anything that mitigates the certainty and finality and fearfulness of that day is diabolical.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The reality is that judgment is coming, God is going to destroy this earth and the people in it because of their sins. It will be a day of wrath.

The preaching of John and Jesus and of the Apostles was to "flee the wrath to come," and here is the Way.

That's the message. Anything that mitigates the certainty and finality and fearfulness of that day is diabolical.

The message is more than that. Jesus daily taught that right relationship is the ultimate and daily criterion. So tell me what the Reign of God actually is.

 

[Aaron]

The message is more than that. Jesus daily taught that right relationship is the ultimate and daily criterion. So tell me what the Reign of God actually is.

God is our Father. Christ is our brother. That's the relationship and nothing changes that. Our fellowship begins with obedience. When we obey our Father is pleased. When we disobey, He chastises us. The relationship is right either way.

The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit. It's all His work, and He first loved us.

But that's just for those who shall be heirs of salvation.

The earth and the people will not be saved because we have fellowship with God or one another, and even if the Gospel fills the whole earth, it will not delay the day of wrath and nor abate the fiery indignation of God.

Some will respond to compassion. Others to fear. Either way, it's right. Jude 1:22-23.

 

[Aaron]

But, sin reigns in the earth, and all men are sinners. There is no one in the earth with whom God will walk and talk because of that one's goodness. It's always and anon because of God's response to sin.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The Reign of God my friend is the foundation for our hope and our optimism, but it is also the source of our deepest alienation for the world as it is. It will leave you a stranger and a nomad on this earth... see Hebrews 11:13. It is the task of Christians to learn how to live in both worlds until they become one world—at least in us.

 

[Deadworm]

So sin is the necessary ingredient. So did God set Adam up for the Fall (as you identify it)?

Karl Barth was the most famous Protestant theologian of the 20th century. Once a literally-minded fundamentalist asked him, "Dr. Barth, was there really a snake in the garden of Eden or not?" Barth's witty but profound reply was this: "It's not important whether there was a snake there; what's important is what the snake said!" Your question nicely sets up my case for the story of Adam and Eve as primarily as the story of the birth of conscience rather than just the story of the origin of sin. Among other things, my case is based on these 3 points:

If Adam and Eve had not succumbed to the Serpent's temptation,
(1) they would not have become godlike
(2) and they would not know how to discern the difference between good and evil:
"Then the Lord God said, "See, now the man has become like one of us, knowing good from evil (3:22)."

(3) But God created us "in our image (1:26)" or "in the image of God (1:28)" and there always wanted us to become godlike; and surely God always wanted us to develop moral discernment, so that we could be morally responsible. Therefore, a key point implicit in the of Adam and Eve story is that it was God's will all along for humanity to eat the forbidden fruit. Paul recognizes this point in Romans 11:32:
"For God has imprisoned all in disobedience so that He might be merciful to all."
Here humanity has no viable choice but to "fall" because they don't "imprison" themselves, but rather ut is God imprisons them. Why? So that our relationship with God will be based on His grace and mercy rather than on our merit.

In my view, (1)-(3) imply that Genesis 2-3 is primarily the story of the birth of conscience rather than of original sin. With this in mind, consider Adam's "curse," his need to work to survive (3:19). Surely it was God's plan from the beginning that humanity be would serve as custodians of the earth (so 1:28) and would therefore devote themselves to creative work to survive. The alternative is an eternal life of indolent leisure.

And why does God set up such a grueling earth testing system in which humanity is vulnerable to the subtle principles of evil? The value of our worship and service to God is a function of our free capacity with God's help to choose to overcome contrary inclinations that displease God.

 

[Revmitchell]

Taken from an article by William Short, OFM. I find his prospective (actually the view of the Franciscans, both interesting and provocative.

Christ at the Heart of Reality

“We thank You for as through Your Son You created us, so through Your holy love . . . You brought about His birth.”

At every hour of the day Christian preachers on radio and television send a constant message into thousands of American cars, living rooms, and workplaces: “It’s all about sin!” God sent Jesus Christ into the world because we sinned; he had to suffer because we sinned; the world is a passing theater scene on which the drama of human sin is played out.

At the end, the sinners will be punished. It would seem that sin is the center of the universe; and both evangelical Protestant and Catholic preachers repeat that message. Does the Franciscan tradition say anything different?

The Franciscan view, rather than focusing on sin, emphasizes the love of God, enfleshed in Christ, as the center of reality. In the 14th century John Duns Scotus was asked, “Would Christ have come if Adam had not sinned?”

Contradicting the predominant thinking of his age (and ours), he answered: “Yes.” Christ came because the divine Trinitarian communion of persons wished to express divine life and goodness. For that reason the whole universe was made in the image of the divine Word, and that Word came to participate in the life of the universe as a created being, a creature, to show in a concrete, material way the form and model of all creation, made in the divine image.

The Incarnation, the fact of Jesus, not the fact of sin, is at the heart of reality. The circumstances of that Incarnation included suffering and death, caused by human sin, and Jesus’s generous giving of life for others reversed the effects of sin. But salvation from sin is a consequence of the Incarnation, not its motivating cause.

How might this view express itself in practice? It demands the difficult belief that goodness, not evil, lies at the heart of human experience, and that religious institutions have a role in expressing that belief. It would require of us an “alternative evangelism,” one which, in word and action, portrays a God in solidarity with human suffering out of love, rather than a God who demands the sacrifice of victims. The focus is not on “fighting sin” but on “giving life.” Such an approach could find eloquent expression in campus ministry programs; in the way Catholic doctrine is presented, in the public expressions of religious faith organized on a campus, whether for students or the wider community

The problem here is the over emphasis of one over the other. Doing this only presents a partial gospel.