"One Way Only" [pt. 1]
[[I'm writing basically a sermon I have spent some time thinking up. I've never actually given or even written a sermon before... maybe this would just be considered a LONG devotional. But since it's not a rant, I'll call it a sermon. It will take me a few posts to get all of this out. And I have no desire on causing people eye-strain from staring at a screen forever while trying to read this. So expect it to be divided into a few parts.]]
"One Way Only" [pt 1]
by Ryan Gill
John 14:5-6 (ESV)
Thomas said to [Jesus], "Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?" Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
I know we cannot say any verse in scripture is more important than another one, nor should we. After all, "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17). So we cannot truly say, "THIS verse is the most important one in scripture," because doing so would almost be claiming that one passage is more "God-breathed" than this other passage over here. All of scripture is breathed from God-- divinely inspired by the Creator of the universe. So we cannot say any one verse is more important than another. Growing up in the Protestant Evangelical branches of Christianity, I was pretty much taught that the #1 verse that sums up the entire gospel, and even the ENTIRE WORD OF GOD was ... John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." This, many claim, is the gospel at its core! As I stated earlier, we should not elevate one verse above another and claim it is the most authoritative verse in the Holy Bible. ... BUT... IF WE COULD...!
If it were possible to point to a specific verse as being the most important verse or passage of Scripture, I would not place John 3:16 as the foundation of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Yes, that verse is an important one (as are the rest in the Word) and is certainly a useful tool in sharing the gospel and very descriptive as to why Christ humbled himself and became a man on this planet-- to offer eternal life, the gift of salvation. However using this as the "most important verse" or even as the starting point for a gospel presentation could be a bit shaky. From this verse we learn that whoever believes in the Son will not suffer eternal death, but be given the gift of eternal life. An unregenerate person however could look at that and think, Okay that is fine for Christians. But why should I do things the Christian way? "After all, all roads lead to Rome," right? Sure Jesus is A answer to experiencing eternal life, but who is to say that Siddhartha Gautama (The Buddha) is not ANOTHER path to experience to escape eternal death?-- just in another form as Nirvana as opposed to Heaven? Many who would identify themselves as "liberal Christians" already believe this.
Just a few weeks ago I came across a clip on YouTube of Larry King Live. One this particular night, King had many "Christian men of faith" on his program, essentially involved in a forum discussion on the War in Iraq, if it was just, and what a "Christian position" on the war should be. Among those interviewed were John MacArthur, host of Grace To You and pastor of Grace Community Church, and Bishop Melvin Talbert, ecumenical officer of the United Methodist Church. When asked about the Muslim faith, MacArthur firmly states that there IS truth-- and that truth is established by the Word of God. On the other hand... when King asks Talbert about Christianity being "the right path"... look at his response:
As you can see, Talbert believes Christianity is only "for Christians" and holds the universalism view that all human beings made in God's image will be saved (Nevermind that the Holy Scriptures would strictly disagree-- Acts 4:12, Galatians 1:6-11, etc). Both Talbert and our unregenerate friend we met earlier believe there are paths to follow other than that laid out in John 3:16. Understand I am not challenging the validity or the holiness of John 3:16... only as its place as "THE MOST IMPORTANT VERSE" in scripture and the claim it is the gospel summed up in one verse-- a verse about God's love. When we turn God into a fluffy pillow, we can't imaging how a God who "loves the world" could allow anyone to spend eternity in Hell.
This is why the claim of exclusivity is SO ESSENTIAL to the Gospel and Christianity.
... to be continued...
"One Way Only" [pt 1]
by Ryan Gill
John 14:5-6 (ESV)
Thomas said to [Jesus], "Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?" Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
I know we cannot say any verse in scripture is more important than another one, nor should we. After all, "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17). So we cannot truly say, "THIS verse is the most important one in scripture," because doing so would almost be claiming that one passage is more "God-breathed" than this other passage over here. All of scripture is breathed from God-- divinely inspired by the Creator of the universe. So we cannot say any one verse is more important than another. Growing up in the Protestant Evangelical branches of Christianity, I was pretty much taught that the #1 verse that sums up the entire gospel, and even the ENTIRE WORD OF GOD was ... John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." This, many claim, is the gospel at its core! As I stated earlier, we should not elevate one verse above another and claim it is the most authoritative verse in the Holy Bible. ... BUT... IF WE COULD...!
If it were possible to point to a specific verse as being the most important verse or passage of Scripture, I would not place John 3:16 as the foundation of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Yes, that verse is an important one (as are the rest in the Word) and is certainly a useful tool in sharing the gospel and very descriptive as to why Christ humbled himself and became a man on this planet-- to offer eternal life, the gift of salvation. However using this as the "most important verse" or even as the starting point for a gospel presentation could be a bit shaky. From this verse we learn that whoever believes in the Son will not suffer eternal death, but be given the gift of eternal life. An unregenerate person however could look at that and think, Okay that is fine for Christians. But why should I do things the Christian way? "After all, all roads lead to Rome," right? Sure Jesus is A answer to experiencing eternal life, but who is to say that Siddhartha Gautama (The Buddha) is not ANOTHER path to experience to escape eternal death?-- just in another form as Nirvana as opposed to Heaven? Many who would identify themselves as "liberal Christians" already believe this.
Just a few weeks ago I came across a clip on YouTube of Larry King Live. One this particular night, King had many "Christian men of faith" on his program, essentially involved in a forum discussion on the War in Iraq, if it was just, and what a "Christian position" on the war should be. Among those interviewed were John MacArthur, host of Grace To You and pastor of Grace Community Church, and Bishop Melvin Talbert, ecumenical officer of the United Methodist Church. When asked about the Muslim faith, MacArthur firmly states that there IS truth-- and that truth is established by the Word of God. On the other hand... when King asks Talbert about Christianity being "the right path"... look at his response:
Talbert: I believe it is for Christians, but we're not here tonight settle which religion is right, that dispute belongs to God. We're here to practice what we preach.
King: But you believe your religion is right, don't you?
Talbert: Oh yes I do.
King: Or else why believe it?
Talbert: That is right.
King: Therefore the other religions have to be wrong.
Talbert: No, I don't say that at all.
King: You don't follow that?
Talbert: No I don't.
King: If you believe your religion is right, then the other religions are wrong.
Talbert: I believe my god is large enough to be inclusive enough of all human beings who are created in God's image, and that includes those religions that are not Christian.
King: But you believe your religion is right, don't you?
Talbert: Oh yes I do.
King: Or else why believe it?
Talbert: That is right.
King: Therefore the other religions have to be wrong.
Talbert: No, I don't say that at all.
King: You don't follow that?
Talbert: No I don't.
King: If you believe your religion is right, then the other religions are wrong.
Talbert: I believe my god is large enough to be inclusive enough of all human beings who are created in God's image, and that includes those religions that are not Christian.
As you can see, Talbert believes Christianity is only "for Christians" and holds the universalism view that all human beings made in God's image will be saved (Nevermind that the Holy Scriptures would strictly disagree-- Acts 4:12, Galatians 1:6-11, etc). Both Talbert and our unregenerate friend we met earlier believe there are paths to follow other than that laid out in John 3:16. Understand I am not challenging the validity or the holiness of John 3:16... only as its place as "THE MOST IMPORTANT VERSE" in scripture and the claim it is the gospel summed up in one verse-- a verse about God's love. When we turn God into a fluffy pillow, we can't imaging how a God who "loves the world" could allow anyone to spend eternity in Hell.
This is why the claim of exclusivity is SO ESSENTIAL to the Gospel and Christianity.
... to be continued...
Comments
Post a Comment