Showing posts with label Theology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Theology. Show all posts

Is there an 'age of accountability'?

There is one theme which permeates the pages of Scripture from beginning to end. This theme is that of salvation. From the opening chapters of Genesis, the stage is set. God created everything, including man. Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden of Eden and God Almighty was in relationship with them. Something happened though, all of that changed. There was one rule given to Adam and Eve—do not eat fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. When this one rule was broken, so was the relationship between God and humanity. There was a punishment which had to be satisfied; for the rule also contained a consequence if broken. With the disobedience of Adam and Eve, sin entered the world and marred the relationship of the creation with the Creator.

Salvation is the plan of action God implemented in order to restore that relationship. Jesus Christ, God himself, put on the flesh of humanity and died upon the cross. His death paid the price for our sins and paved the way for the gift of salvation. The Scriptures make all of this plain. There is no person not stained from sin: “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). This creates a very real problem for us. Without forgiveness for our sins we are doomed to eternity in hell; we are unable to enter the presence of our Holy God in our present sinful state (1 Corinthians 6:9). The Bible further makes plain the way we receive this forgiveness is “if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9). Therefore, salvation is a willful participation of one’s self with the death of Christ on the cross. In doing so, we are counted as righteous before God because Christ accomplished what we are unable to do.

Anyone reading the whole of Scripture cannot, in good conscience, come away with any other understanding of salvation. It is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8) found only in Jesus Christ (John 14:6, Acts 4:12) that grants salvation to any person that would accept him as Lord and Savior (Acts 2:38, Romans 10:13).

Even though this is clear, there is a point where this causes us trepidation. It causes us to question if this is how salvation always works. Tragedy is often the source of much questioning concerning God and the Bible. So it should be no surprise that tragedy is what brings about this question. The death of a child is a tragedy, which to the grieving parents, cannot be eclipsed by many others. During this time of loss, our hearts and minds often turn to the fate of that child—to his/her eternal destiny.

While this seems at first glance a simple question to answer, it is somewhat difficult. One reason for this is that Scripture does not explicitly address the eternal destiny of the unborn, infants, and young children. Another reason is that Scripture is clear the unborn, infants, and young children are not innocent either. For example, Psalm 51:5 explains that we are sinful from conception, “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.” Psalm 58:3 also articulates this, “Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.” Romans 3:23, quoted above, as well as many other Scriptures substantiate the clear teaching that humanity is in a state of sin from conception and as such, doomed to eternal punishment in hell unless one accepts Christ. I’m sure you are beginning to see the problem at this point. How can the unborn, infants, and young children accept Christ?—they cannot talk nor can they understand their need for salvation. This is where the point of contention lies.

The answer to this question and the teaching which surrounds it is often referred to as “the age of accountability.” This phrase refers to the belief that God does not hold us morally accountable for our sins until we reach a specific age. This is not uncommon though. For Jews, this is associated with Bar mitzvah. This is when Jewish children are held accountable to Torah. When Amish children reach sixteen they enter into “Rumspringa;” a time when they are allowed to decide if they are going to remain in the Amish church or leave for the world outside their community. Once the decision is made though, the children are held accountable.

The question remains though, does God grant a continuance per se? One method of answering this is to simply assert that they are in heaven. This answer, however, is simply a sentimental attempt at resolving the problem at hand. It is born out of what we want concerning these little ones; we want them to be in heaven. It completely ignores Scripture and lacks even an attempt at seeking an answer there. A second manner of answering this is that they are doomed to eternal punishment in hell. This answer is unsettling; although it attempts at drawing in the biblical understanding of our sinful state. A third vein claims that only those children who have been baptized will enter into heaven, but this answer places too much importance of the act of baptism. So what is the answer to this question?

Considering the understanding of how salvation normally works, it is important to first look at how it might be possible for the unborn, infants, and young children to be forgiven of their sins without cognitively accepting Christ. The atonement is of premier importance. Christ’s death on the cross was the atoning sacrifice sufficient for the forgiveness of sins for all of humanity. First John 2:2 describes this succinctly, “He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world” (cf. 1 Peter 3:18; Romans 5:15; 2 Corinthians 5:19; Heb 9:26; John 1:29, 12:32-33). In other words, Christ paid the price for all sins to be forgiven; however, that forgiveness is applied to us individually as we accept Jesus as Lord and Savior recognizing that we are unable to atone for our sins as he has.

While many believe the Scriptures do not have much to say on this topic, there is much to glean from the pages of the Bible. The starting point is Jeremiah 31:29-30, “In those days people will no longer say, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.’ Instead, everyone will die for his own sin; whoever eats sour grapes—his own teeth will be set on edge.” The prophet Jeremiah was writing about the new covenant. This is different from the old covenant God made with the Jews. In that covenant, the Law was the mediating factor in the relationship between God and his people. The new covenant is different because it was to be a law written on the hearts and minds of the people rather than stone tablets and parchment. It was to be a relationship. That our hearts desire is to please the God whom we love, not to follow a set of rules. We enjoy the new covenant and under this new covenant every individual is responsible for their actions before the Lord—whether that be for good or for bad. A lengthy passage in Ezekiel expounds upon this understanding, but ends with a clear point that is salient to the discussion at hand. “Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked?” declares the Sovereign LORD. “Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?” (Ezekiel 18:23). God does not derive any pleasure from sending the wicked to hell; instead, he finds pleasure in people repenting and placing their trust in Jesus. The problem still remains though as this passage bolsters the position that there must be an acceptance of salvation, a willful repenting from one’s sins.

The Old Testament book of 2 Samuel contains much of David’s life as the king of Israel. It also contains one of David’s biggest failures as king. He commits adultery with Bathsheba and has her husband murdered to cover up the resulting pregnancy. Part of David’s punishment is the death of that child conceived by the adulterous relationship. When the child becomes ill and during the entire time of the child’s illness, David fasts, weeps, and prays for the child. However, when the child dies, he gets up and goes on with life. This bewilders his attendants and advisers. David explained his actions by stating,
“While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, ‘Who knows? The LORD may be gracious to me and let the child live.’ But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me” (2 Samuel 12:22-23, emphasis added).
David clearly believed that he would be reunited with his child in the presence of the Lord. He doesn’t go into detail about why he believes this, there is just a simple trust in the Lord at this point.

Jesus, however, is not so silent on the matter. The parable contained in Matthew 18:10-14 is very illuminating:
“See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven. “What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off? And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he is happier about that one sheep than about the ninety-nine that did not wander off. In the same way your Father in heaven is not willing that any of these little ones should be lost”
Immediately preceding this parable, Jesus has a young child come and stand among he and the disciples (as a visual aid if you will). In his words to the disciples he makes it clear that God does is not willing that any of these should be lost. A similar passage, Mark 10:13-16, explains that the disciples were actually attempting to prevent children from “bothering” Jesus. This upsets Jesus and prompts him to chastise the disciples with his statement in verses 14-15, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” So we have two statements by Jesus Christ. The first is that God is not willing for any child to be lost. The second is that the kingdom of God belongs to children. Combining these two statements by Jesus with David’s statement, it becomes clear that God makes a way for the unborn, infants, and young children to enter heaven.

This is clearly an act of God’s grace (Romans 5:15, Ephesians 2:1-10), because the child has not done anything to deserve it. What then does this mean in terms of judgment? That is an important question because Scripture is clear that mankind will face the judgment of God. It means that there has to come a point in one’s life where God does hold us accountable for our sin. Otherwise, we quickly fall into the heresy that everyone will eventually make it into heaven. This is a teaching that is refuted by an overwhelming tide of Scripture which explains there is an eternal punishment for the wicked and eternal life for the righteous.

Where does this point exists? At what age do we become accountable? The Bible does not establish a specific age. Rather, one’s ability to understand the basic problem of sin and the need for salvation determines accountability before God (Romans 1:19-20; Acts 28:23-31). Therefore, a specific age cannot be established. This is especially true considering that every person mentally matures at a different rate. Likewise, I think this gift of God’s grace also extends to the mentally handicapped (at least those unable to reach this stage of understanding). Since there is no specific age established in Scripture nor is there any passage which expounds upon this matter in depth, we must be careful not to make this a dogmatic doctrine upon which we judge one’s position to be heretical or orthodox. Rather, we must simply trust God. For as Abraham exclaimed, “Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Genesis 18:25). Consider Psalm 116:5 as well, “The Lord is gracious and righteous; our God is full of compassion.” The evidence from Scripture indicates that God extends his grace and mercy to the unborn, the infant, the young child, and the mentally handicap in order to bring them into eternal life—and we must trust God as the righteous judge, the Creator of the universe.

1+1+1=1 The Trinity, Part 2

In my previous post I outlined the trinity in as basic and succinct fashion as possible. At the end of that post, however, I explained that I would tackle the big question—why is the trinity such a big deal? When one looks at the history of the Christian church, this is one of the subjects which have caused considerable debate and division among the ranks of Christendom. So why is everyone so vehement about their position concerning the trinity? It is important for a couple of reasons.

It is how God revealed himself
This may seem to be an understatement at first glance. This couldn’t be further from the truth though. It strikes at the very core of who God is—his very being. God is the creator of all things and made us with a purpose. He made us to be in relationship to him. So understanding God is not unimportant. When getting to know another person, it would be rather offensive to them for us to say, “Oh, I don’t need to know whether you are white, blue-eyed, or male.” These are all facts of who that person is—their very being. God has revealed his very nature to humanity and the picture with which one draws is important to how they will interact with him.

It serves as an example to us
There is a perfect love that exists between the members of the trinity, which is the example of how our relationships should be characterized between one another. Jesus speaks to this very point in John 15:9—“As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love.” Several other Scriptures address this as well. 1 John 4:21 reads, “And he has given us this command: Whoever loves God must also love his brother.” Similarly, John 17:22-23explains that we are to be exhibiting the unity and love that exists among the Father, the Son, and (implicit in the passage) the Spirit—“I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

What if any of these points are neglected or denied?
While some would attempt to state their agreement with one or two points, one cannot be a quasi-trinitarian. It is a doctrine where one must agree with all three points or else they come away with a greatly distorted image. For example, if someone denies the first point (there is one God), then they become polytheistic, pluralistic, or the like. It would be denying one of the foundational tenants of Christianity. It would be leaving the realm of monotheism and entering another.

The second point also must be maintained. When this is denied, it puts got in an awkward position as it then forces him to take on different “roles.” There are clearly three main characters when speaking to God in the Scriptures. When one denies that God is three persons, it follows that there is one person fulfilling three different roles. Does this mean that God left the throne room unattended while in the physical person of Jesus Christ? Was he performing one big magic trick at the baptism of Christ in order to make us think there is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit? Lastly, what would God truly gain in having three different roles to fulfill? It seems that this only serves to complicate things. Would it not be easier for God to simply be God? Trying to balance three different “hats” unquestionably muddles up the picture God is trying to paint of himself to humanity. I imagine it would be like trying to have a relationship with someone who has a multiple personality disorder; you would constantly have to ask yourself with which personality you are currently relating before being able to proceed forward.

When denying the third point, it leads to having a hierarchy and essentially denies deity to one or members of the trinity. What do I mean by that? Viewing the members of the trinity as not being equal in deity inevitably leads to one member of the trinity being exalted over another. This is actually all too common among Christians. While they do not overtly or explicitly promote this position, they inadvertently advocate it by their actions. For example, the salvific work of Christ on the cross is certainly an important part of our daily life as Christians. However, this usually leads us to making all of our prayers about him, to him, and through him even though Romans 8:26 makes it clear that it is the Holy Spirit who intercedes for us and makes our prayers effective (especially when we are spiritually week). Likewise, there are groups who focus on being “led by the Spirit” and end up neglecting the very work which the Holy Spirit helped produce to guide men—it’s called the Bible.

All three points regarding the doctrine of the trinity are essential to the complete understanding of God and how we relate to him in our faith, both daily and for eternity. While I hope that I have been able to bring some clarity about this doctrine, I also want to remind you that it is a subject which is beyond our complete comprehension. So even after reading this post and even if you began an exhaustive theological study concerning this doctrine, you will always find yourself coming away confused and not concrete in your understanding.

1+1+1=1 The Trinity, Part 1

“‘For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways,’ declares the LORD. ‘As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.’” Isaiah 55:8-9

That is an appropriate verse to begin this discussion on the doctrine of the trinity. Why is that such an appropriate verse? Because it explains a very important point to remember when it comes to God and the study of him (theology). We can learn a lot about God and who he is, but we will never be able to fully comprehend him this side of eternity. Biblical scholars have been debating the doctrine of the trinity for centuries. This is because it is a difficult teaching to understand. Some would like to nail it down and put God in a box while others don’t even attempt to understand it all. I hope that after reading this post, you will be able to walk away with a much better grasp of what the doctrine of the trinity is. However, I also know you will still be left scratching your head. Just know that is okay—see Isaiah 55:8-9 above.

In general, the first objection people make against the trinity is that those who hold to this teaching are making something out of nothing because the word “trinity” is never used in the Bible. How should one respond to that? By stating that they are correct of course; the word trinity itself is never used in the Bible. The word was originally coined by a third century theologian, Tertullian, who used the Latin term trinitas, when translated to English becomes trinity. It was a compound word taken from the two root words trinus (meaning three-fold) and unus (meaning one); forming the understanding of a three in one or tri-unity. However, just because the word trinity is never found in the Scriptures does not automatically preclude the doctrine from being biblical. The understanding of the trinity is found throughout the Bible in both the Old and New Testaments.

What does the Bible teach about the Trinity?

The Bible presents three facts or points concerning the trinity. The first fact which the Bible presents is that there is only one God. A concept that few would claim is not made by the Scriptures. The second fact is that God is three persons. This idea is debated among differing sects of Christianity to exactly what that means. The final and third fact is that each person is fully God. Nearly every Christian would agree intellectually to this statement, but do not express it as such when living out their beliefs in everyday life.

Probably the most popular passage to use when talking of the oneness of God is Deuteronomy 6:4-5, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.” This passage of Scripture is one of great importance to Jews and became known as the Shema (pronounced: sh•mā), which is translated to “hear” in English and begins this passage. As we know the rest of the story, it is clear that God wanted the Israelites to truly “listen up” and take to heart that he was the only God since they would spend much of their time as a nation worshiping other deities. There is a verse in the gospel of John that has been deemed as the New Testament Shema, if you will. It is John 10:30 when Jesus is debating with the Pharisees and makes the statement, “I and the Father are one.” Thus, indicating that he thought himself equal to God.

There is a vast range of Scriptures one could cite to demonstrate that God is one person. So in the interest of maximizing the limited nature of a blog post, I am not going to spend time going through the Scriptures on this point. Especially since this is not a huge point of debate concerning God. However, the next point is one which has brought about much debate.

The Bible teaches that God is in fact three persons. Genesis gives several instances of the plurality of God. In the opening verses of the Bible, it is clear that there are at least two persons in the Godhead. Genesis 1:1-2—“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.” So right away we see “God” and the “Spirit of God.” Later in the opening chapter, God speaks of himself in the plural tense. Genesis 1:26—“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over…’” And again in Genesis 3:22—“The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.”

If that’s not enough from the Old Testament, even Deuteronomy 6:4-5 mentioned above speaks to the plurality of God. The Hebrew words have a meaning that is richer than the English translation exhibits. When we read, “the LORD our God, the LORD is one” there are very specific words used, which betray the strict understanding most take away from this verse. The "LORD" is the Hebrew word Yahweh. This is the covenant name of God used only to describe the Living God; the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the God of the nation Israel; and the creator of the universe.

Elohim is the second major word used and is translated as "God" in English. This word is a less specific word to describe God. Where “LORD” was very specific as to whom it was referring, Elohim was a broader term that could have been used in reference to other gods as well. However, the important thing to note about this word is its conjugation. It is in the plural conjugation of the word. This is difficult for many people who only speak English because there is no equivalent construction when conjugating words. An example from Spanish may help some people to understand what I am talking about. When using a word in Spanish, such as caminar (to walk), it can be constructed in the first person singular—camino (I walk), second person singular—caminas (you walk), third person singular—camina (he/she walks), first person plural—caminamos (we walk), or third person plural—caminan (they walk). This word spoke directly to the plural nature of God, the LORD.

The third important word to make note of is “one.” In the Hebrew it is echad and it expresses the understanding of a plurality of things coming together as a singular unit. Let me give you an illustration of what this means. It is similar to using the word “automobile.” Anyone hearing that word understands the person to be speaking of a singular thing—a pickup truck, sedan, van, etc. However, an automobile is actually made up of thousands of parts: tires, rims, pistons, lights, seats, etc. No one would try to describe it in that fashion though—“I have four tires and rims, eight pistons, a windshield, two headlights, etc.” It is simply easier to tell someone you have an automobile and they know that you are talking about a singular item which has all of those individual parts as well. Deuteronomy 6:4 expresses that Yahweh, the covenant God of Israel and creator of the universe, is a plurality coming together as a singularity.

Genesis 18 contains an illusion to the Godhead being comprised of three persons. When the LORD visited Abraham at the great trees of Mamre, there were three visitors. In the New Testament, Jesus’ baptism marks the appearance of God the Father, God the Holy Spirit, and God the Son at the same time (Matt. 3:16-17, Mark 1:10-11, Luke 3:21-22). Likewise, we find Trinitarian statements in the Scriptures as well (Matt. 28:18-20).

When it comes to the three person of the trinity, each is person 100% equal and 100% deity. What do I mean by that? Most Christians impose a hierarchy upon the trinity. They place God the Father at the top of the ladder, so to speak. Then the Son is the next on the totem pole followed by the Holy Spirit bringing up the rear. The Scriptures are clear on this point. The Father is called God throughout the Scriptures (2 Peter 1:17, Malachi 2:10). Not only does Jesus make the claim himself, but he is called God as well (Philippians 2:5-11, Colossians 2:9). Scripture does not leave the Holy Spirit out of this line-up either. In Acts 5, the apostle Peter places the Holy Spirit on equal footing with God the Father in his statements to Ananias. John 16:8-11 also clearly places the Holy Spirit on par with the rest of the Godhead as it credits him with being able to perform things only reserved for the LORD.

The briefest way to explain the trinity is summed up in these three points:
  • There is one God
  • God is three persons
  • Each person is fully God
In the next post, I will begin to tackle the question of why the trinity is such a big deal? What does it truly matter? And what happens if any of these three points are neglected?