Theology of Redemption and the Christian Liberty - Thesis Example

?FULL PROFFESOR’S Theology of Redemption and the Christian Liberty Every religion operates a deity that advocates the principle of love and peace. Yet, there are very few religions that teach from the same doctrine or operate in the same process. Christianity, for example, may be diluted to several different religions: Baptist, Protestant, Catholics, among others (McHugh 90). All of these are grounded on the supposition that Jesus Christ is the son of God that was sent to save humanity. Yet, there are many fundamental differences between these churches that cause social and personal conflicts such as the concept of redemption and the Christian Liberty. This paper will examine those two topics comprehensively. First, this paper will examine how Christianity defines theology and how it is supposed to be achieved. Second it will examine the contextual meaning of Christian Liberty and how its concept affects contemporary social issues. Introduction to Theology of Redemption Literally, redemption means to buy back or repurchase (Wrigth 80). This is clear from the words of the Old Testament, in which the word redemption is used to refer to the ransom of slaves (Green 69). Redemption isn’t a new concept to theology. Several religions have some form of redemption practice or belief. Other religions have a broader meaning for redemption. More often, it is related with a person overcoming their shortcomings as a being in order to attain an exemplary position. In Buddhism, for example, giving up attachments to material desires is known as redemption while the Judaic belief system regards redemption as the act of bringing back of Israelites from their exile. Modern Christian theology regards redemption as a form of deliverance from sin which is an important element of salvation. However, the arrival of Jesus Christ provided a whole new meaning to the concept by providing a new context. The supposed betrayal of Adam and Eve became the all-encompassing sin and Jesus Christ was the way out of it (Hladky 108). He presented a greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves, thus obtaining eternal redemption. (Hebrews 9:12; Colossians 1:14). Upon Jesus Christ’s death, redemption went beyond slaves but it is also about salvation from sin. Origen’s Theory of Redemption When we consider the theory of redemption, it isn’t possible to have a discussion without considering the concepts of Origen Adamantius. He is often attributed to controversial notions like universal reconciliation, universal salvation and other heteroclite views but the author Fredrick W. Norris wrote a book The Westminster handbook to Origen in the year 2004 and wrote that such an attribution would be entirely erroneous (Das 157). Origen proclaimed the diversity and radical nature of views about the soul (Deeway 79). He claimed that the soul is infinite with no beginning or end. It can, however, vary in strength depending on the decisions made from the previous life. The previous life will determine one’s current life.   This concept was widely accepted until Emperor Constantine took over the church in the year 325AD. Much later, the Emperor Justinian condemned this philosophy in 553 AD and the Church has since criticized the basis of Origen’s theory. There is a great debate on whether his parents were actually pagans or Christians because his theories and completed works have always been grounded on debatable claims and concepts (Drane 84). This resulted to a lot of controversies. He became popular but he also had to face some terrible animosity from the Bishop of Alexandria named Demetrius at the time. The story of his dispute with the Valentinian doctrine follower is a well known anecdote and it took place when Origen was preaching at Caesarea Palestinae but he went to Greece to meet the follower of Valentinus Candidus. The doctrine basically indicates that salvation and damnation are independent of volition (will) and predestinate and that Satan is beyond repentance (Lenski 139). Origen argued that if Satan’s fall was an action of will, then his repentance is also possible by applying the same will. Demetrius, Bishop of Alexandria, was so infuriated at Origen’s proclamation that he even called for a condemnation by the assembly of bishops in the Roman Catholic Church. But nothing could change the acceptance of Origen in Palestine and Greece. Origen’s theology reflects on the virtues of God and the freedom man has. Origen’s theory of redemption has also been an extension of his views on free will and the freedom of God’s creature. He truly believed that no one is beyond redemption. According to him, redemption is a magnificent edification by divine intervention that has the power to restore all souls to their original blessedness. He also states that not even Satan can ever be so depraved and at a loss of freedom and rationality that he becomes beyond redemption. That God only helps with reformative intention – never compels, and even punishment is a mode of reform and remedy and should not be regarded as retribution (Goudney). Origen: Atonement One of the most debated doctrines of Christian theology happens to be the Ransom View of Atonement. Origen was among the pioneers of this theory which essentially explains the ancient belief that Adam and Eve sold humanity over to the Devil at the time of the Fall. Of course since humanity has been sold to the Devil, redemption was possible only by paying the Devil. God, apparently, negotiated with the Devil that the sacrifice of Christ would be the redemption price. What the Devil didn’t know is that Christ could not be held in the bonds of death. The minute the Devil accepted the sacrifice of Christ, humanity was freed and people were salvaged. In this way, the theory states that the death of Christ was a ransom, paid to Satan (Timothy 2:5). Many saints and theologians have regarded the ‘ransom’ as something metaphorical and symbolic rather than literal. Other philosophers and theologians like Gustaf Aulen, think the ransom theory actually speaks about freedom of humanity from the bondage of death and sin. Many Catholic and Protestant denominations and evangelical theologians reject Origen and these concepts entirely. Introduction to Christian Liberty Christian Liberty is a very debatable concept in Christian theology and while some swear to its truth, others argue that there is no such liberty allowed. Some believe the notion of Christian Liberty has nothing to do with the bible, while others are keen to put forward (Galatians 5:13). So what is Christian Liberty exactly? The Bible lays down teachings that are based on the Ten Commandments, later trickled down to two commandments. However, there are some claims that some contemporary issues are not covered by the Bible and as such, no official position is taken. These issues become a prime reason of the confusion. Christian Liberty advocates that when there is an inclusion, there is an exclusion. As such, every issue not prohibited by the bible is, therefore, allowed. In other words, Christian Liberty maintains that humans have the freedom to do whatever they wish in any matter the Bible does not address (Jaeggli 78). In doing so, there should be no fear of persecution by the saints or church. Christian Liberty states that if it isn’t mentioned in the Bible, it just wasn’t important enough. (Romans 14:14, Romans 14:22) The preachers who believe in Christian Liberty also specify that the Christian Liberty is a blessing and should not be used to break Bible principles, raise arguments in Church, destroy a Saint and their reputation, compromise your conscience, harm the reputation of the gospel and to put yourself in bondage. They also hold that a person should never change what the bible states such as allowing an action that are prohibited. The idea is to use this freedom to be more open minded rather then use it for causing trouble (I Corinthians 8:9). It also allows you to be open to accepting those who are weak of faith and to not pass judgment against people for any reason. Such act of discrimination or judgment is regarded by God as shameful (Romans 14:1). Christians are also ordered to do everything that God commands and they shouldn’t question the laws and obligations or compromise them for anything. God’s words are the be all and end all of everything human. Applications & Limitations of Christian Liberty Some common applications of Christian Liberty would be drinking wine, having pets in the house, wives with outside jobs, children in sports, having a television, bungee jumping, hobbies, hours at work, cosmetic surgery, drinking beer, being a lawyer, motorcycles, dating, Thanksgiving Day, junk foods, children in daycare, breastfeeding issues, alternative medicine, marriage, pledge to the flag, coffee and tea, birth control, wedding rings, tattoos, length of hair, pants on wife, cigarettes, schooling options, interracial marriages, vaccinations, school curriculum, coarse language, spectator sports, epidurals and health foods (Dunn 45). Limitations also apply to Christian Liberty which entail that creations are not allowed to get so dependent on any thing that they are unable to leave it (Dunn 72). This means addiction in any form or shape is not acceptable including psychological disorders such as obsessive-compulsiveness, all kinds of addiction, and others. Christian liberty also prohibits any action or declaration that would argue or poke holes into the current doctrine. Such acts could become weaker in faith. The Christians should also avoid anything their conscience clearly doesn’t agree with. But despite these regulations, no one should have the right to prosecute or press charges on others or offend them in any way even if their faith or belief goes directly against the current belief(I Corinthians 6:12; I Corinthians 9:19; Romans 14:1; Phil 2:5). Christian Liberty: Disputations and Arguments Doubtful disputations regarding Christian Liberty are also not allowed. Such strife and argumentative behavior is entirely prohibited, especially in the confines of a Holy Church. They explain that arguments are simply subversive in nature and they can bring no good (Adams 68). This is not to say that Christians cannot ask questions. However, questions must be geared towards further understanding the doctrine not towards igniting debates or controversies. One of the most controversial points is the possibility of a conflict between what the doctrine allows and what the conscience may feel good about. What if a conscience condemns something but the doctrine allows? (Matto). Christian Liberty preachers say that if something is clearly allowed by the doctrine, man cannot interpret it any other way. Any effort to reinterpret or contradict what is written on the bible is a violation of the covenant. Churches are supposed to guide its people towards the proper interpretation. It is understood that not everyone will interpret the doctrine the same way but the church teaching is supposed to guide it (I Corinthians 8). Constant immersion to the concept of redemption, liberty and Christianity will guide a congregation in moving towards a common understanding of different concepts. Dangerous & Deadly Things Preachers of Christian Liberty believe that nothing is completely evil or completely good. Anything can be dangerous if not used properly. Then there are things which are condemned for no real reason by a group of people or cults and they begin to look like they are more dangerous and wrong than they really are (MacArthur). Christian Liberty believes that the doctrine prevails, just because your mind has been brainwashed into classifying a certain object as evil or dangerous doesn’t make it so, and so many things. For example, extreme sports are considered high risk sports. The very nature of the games put the players at risk of getting injured or dying. Recent health advocates have also been enlightening the world on the benefits of eating natural foods and the danger of eating red meat. However, such a concept cannot be applied to everyone. Some people might consider extreme sport as a catharsis while those love meat might argue that taking in meat provides people a more balanced diet. People always have the choice to take part in extreme sports and people always have the choice to go vegan or be a carnivore just as much as they have the liberty to do the sport or eat red meat. If you fall under the later, however, you cannot start riding camels just because you think cars are dangerous – camels can be just as dangerous as cars and motorcycles. There are so many things that have the potential to cause harm that it will be impossible to live with such a mindset. Many people grow up in households dysfunctional parents and an even more dysfunctional set up. However, such cannot be used as an excuse to lead a life that abuses liberties awarded to Christians. At the end of the day, people have a choice and these freedom to choose is what they should use to make the choice to follow Christian doctrines and get redemption. Christian Liberty & the Theology of Redemption The theology of redemption is the primary basis for Christian Liberty (John 8: 34; Wright 142). The idea was to free man from our old spiritual masters of before so that man could serve only God, live in Christ’s shadow and express His divine love to others. Christians are supposed to follow Christ blindly and live by His word. In exchange, Christians will enjoy a free and peaceful life with salvation waiting in the end. Freedom, however, is not immunity from institutional authorities. It is man’s right to choose a path to take, whether or not that path is towards salvation. Each path is accorded with different consequences. Whether or not the consequence is good depends entirely on the path take. However, freedom does not justify bad choices (I Peter 2: 16; Galatians 5: 13). Guilt of Original Sin & Release from Judicial Debt The assumption is that everyone is born with the original sin. The inherent corruption for man’s forefathers compromised everyone’s salvation. However, that problem was quickly fixed with the deliverance of Jesus Christ. It was the ultimate gift and God’s ultimate sacrifice to (Acts 15:9; Titus 2:14). Sins no longer dominate Christianity in the way they dominated our parents and this is why we have a better chance of making ourselves sin free and devoted to the worship of God and Christ (Hubner 169). Even if bodies may still hold some of that corruptness, one can always use it as an instrument of righteousness against all evil forces that come in the form of desires and needs. All men need to do is keep believing in God and make sure the body listens to the owner – not the inherent evil that calls out to it. Christians are also adamant that they are free from judicial debt of their sins because of their Lord’s resurrection (Gathercole 277). Both original and actual sins have been forgiven by God and there is no pending judicial debt or punishment that remains. In a way these sins have been cancelled entirely so they don’t apply anymore. This mean true Christians will not suffer from divine wrath or any kind of everlasting separation from God in the form of Hell (Ephesians 1:4; Colossians 2:13; Revelations 1:5). Liberalization Feminism is one of the most debated topics in every religion. Somehow, the position of women in society remains a struggle. Women are always assumed to make family and child-bearing a priority and these two are considered an inferior endeavor than working and having a professional career. Feminism is no different. Mainstream media have been active in reshaping this image. However, the efforts are still jaded. Even in movies where women are supposed to take a position of power, the end would still show the woman choosing to stay home to support the career of the husband or juggle both but keep family as the priority. Female may have expanded its reach but is has not been removed as the beacon of domesticity. The Bible is said to contribute to this belief with many passages affording women the primary responsibility of staying home to take care of families. However, true feminism isn’t about careers or power. It simply means equal opportunity. How anyone ever makes good on those opportunities should be based on performance. But if one was to simply follow the ways of Christ – there lies the greatest proof that Christianity is the first strict supporter of feminism. Jesus Christ afforded women the same opportunities, respect and trust as he did men. He made Magdalene a part of his trusted entourage. In fact, he refused to judge Magdalene even in the fact of social disgust towards Magdalene’s liberal ways. Further, he encountered many women whose opinions he respected and listened to. Scholars have also already proven that Jesus Christs’ entourage may actually be bigger than what is conventionally known and that women were a part of his missions. Jesus is known to never speak to a woman in a degrading or insulting way and he never considered their thoughts and ideas no different in terms of superiority to the thoughts and ideas of his male apostles. His message was always about spreading love and respect – never coercion. No wonder women were always by his side and never found reason to hate him. They loved and respected him with their hearts. Jesus Christ as a Feminist Jesus Christ always made sure women received as much love and attention as the males. In that time, women who were on their menstrual cycle were considered to be impure and unclean. They weren’t even allowed to live with normal people. They were also not allowed to carry scriptures and Holy items. They were considered “dirty” and were to be avoided all times. Jesus Christ went against the norm by interacting with women regardless of their menstrual cycle. Jesus Christ effectively changed the essence of a woman. Before His coming, women were never considered important or competent enough to be an eyewitness or legal witnesses. They were never allowed to give testimony but Jesus never followed that norm. The story of Jesus Appearing to Mary Magdalene’s and making her eyewitness of the resurrection proves that point exactly. The bible told the story of Mary standing outside the tomb while she was crying. She look at the tomb while she was crying. She saw two figures in white and later realized those were angels. They were by Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot. On that note, if someone argues that Feminism, which requires that women have an equal importance and opportunity as do men, is against the proposed Christian theology, then there are so many examples from the lives of Jesus himself and from the Bible that will prove otherwise. Jesus Christ did everything to imply that women are just as important as men and they have a respected place in society similar to men. He also made sure that his followers knew that both men and women were equal in the eyes of God. He broke many of the Judaic laws that were practices before him and which put the position of women in an inferior place compared to men (Carson 84). Jesus Christ also famously gave the world to a woman, his mother. This is also a proof that Jesus Christ sees women as an equal with men, able to lead the world with competence and compassion. Christianity and Other Religions One critical point of conflict that causes others to develop distaste towards Christian Liberty is Christians’ constant proclamation on how other religions come in conflict with the belief of Christians. Islam is one that immediately comes into mind because of recent events. On the other hand, Christian liberty not only understands the faith of others but also support it. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you Luke 6:31 is one of the most popular verses in the bible. The others include the Muslims. The bible does not mention the Muslim. Thus, they are to be afforded the same understanding afforded to others. Muslims, like other religion, advocate love and peace and the sins of the few should never be held up against the majority who practice their faith in peace (Cummin 31). Why Do Muslims Look Like Enemies? Ten years ago, on September 11, two planes landed on the Twin Towers taking with them thousands of lives. More than the building, something more important was lost, the guarantee of security and peace that Americans and New Yorkers, especially, are used to. The worse came when the media started calling the perpetrators “Muslim Terrorists”. This connoted that Islam has a terrorist side and that there is an aspect of Islam that condones terrorism. The mass media played it out and even mainstream art participated. The documentary maker Michael Moore made a documentary out of it, short films and television specials popped out, each with a different theory and each with a unique insight that makes that painted the whole incident as a religious war (Hammon 171). Soon after the 9/11, came the cataclysmic reactions that resulted in many more deaths than we can imagine. Even though Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda took responsibility for the act, Osama was killed after ten years but thousands of Muslims die every day because of residual hate from 9/11. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization that neither represents nor supports the Muslim populations of the world. Most of the Muslim world only heard about them after the 9/11 attacks. Muslims think of the United States as an urbanized country, a place where they can get education and find solace. But on 9/11, every Muslim living in the US or any other European country, felt like they were on trial (Smith). An entirely new concept of religion, one that is attached to violence suddenly came about. Suddenly, all Muslims were violent or at least living a religion that advocates violence. Muslim was the new face of terrorism. No one seemed to remember that dozens of Muslims died in the 9/11 attack too and their relatives weren’t even allowed to attend their relatives memorial services – not because they were terrorists but because they were Muslims (Wright 78). Needless to say, that simply provoked the Muslims because they were constantly being targeted in investigations even if they had no criminal records. All over the world, Muslim parents were praying for their children’s well-being if they had any kids studying or working in the States. Racial Profiling is Against Christian Liberty Teachings That incident has started a new phase of racial profiling. Today, Muslims are being frisked harder on airports and other establishments. Turbans, Quran and Hajib are associated with crime and violence. This practice is, understandably, frowned upon and many establishments have taken great efforts to deny that they profile anyone based on race or colour of their skin. Yet, there is still continuous report of Muslims experiencing more difficulty in getting jobs and getting into different establishments. They also experience discrimination in their daily life. What people don’t realize is that Muslims are just as diverse in thinking and opinions as people belonging to any religion or sect. Even two people living in the same household cannot see eye to eye with one another – how can you expect an entire nation or an entire population of people to be the same? Terrorists have and will continue to ruin the lives of people. It doesn’t matter what religion or sect a terrorist belongs – they are psychopaths and sociopaths out for revenge. But there is another side to that revenge cycle. Abid used to be a well-meaning shopkeeper in the Northern Areas of Pakistan. My husband remembers sitting with him a few years back, when he was recently engaged to a girl he fell in love with. The girl was from Bajaur, an area constantly under strife. So while her family couldn’t stay there the whole time, they used to travel back and forth when they needed something from the homes they had left alone back there. Abid kept talking about taking his wife and moving to a bigger city in a year or two because he wanted their kids to have a better future. He also used to say how ridiculous it was for someone to side with those Al Qaeda terrorists or Bin Laden. A month after the engagement, his fiance traveled to Bajaur with her family and they became victims of a drone attack. Years later, Abid was seen wearing the typical Al Qaeda attire – a lengthy beard and the checkered scarf. He had joined the force to become a ‘militant’ – a terrorist in laymen terms. A person, who couldn’t imagine inflicting harm on a fly, was seen constantly talking about killing ‘unholy people’ – which, by the way includes Muslims too. Muslims who they don’t think are ‘good enough’ Muslims. Now that’s called brainwashing – and it works fabulously when a person you love is murdered. People like Abid are all around and they are being used because of all the hate that is being targeted at them. Decades of the black revolution and they are still being profiled. The stigma of blacks being associated with violence and crime has been so strongly engrained. Its influence is so strong that even the generation that didn’t live through the era of “black crimes” know of it. The election of Barack Obama to the White House is clearly a proof that society has come far and so did African Americans. There is more consciousness of the fact that crimes are committed by different people and their color or religion has nothing to do with. Crimes take place in Muslims countries just as they do in any country in the World – people get murdered and mugged every day. Conclusion Redemption is a universal concept and so is liberty but like any other concept, it is a volatile subject as a result of the differences in the way people choose to interpret it. It is also the very subjectivity of the people that allows for a more dynamic interpretation, one that evolves along with the socio-cultural norms. Many Christians nowadays don’t look at redemption as a gift that is to be accepted or a goal to be achieved. Some believe that redemption is an ideology, no more believable than communism. Many Christians also have a more evolved idea of Christianity, Jesus Christ and God. It is ironic considering the fundamentals of Christian teachings were supposedly came from one source. Unfortunately, there is hardly anything anyone can ever do to inch Christian Redemption and Liberty closer to a universal interpretation. Social and psychological variables play an important part on how concepts are going to be interpreted. For as long as the freedom to form their own opinions remain present, the dynamic interpretation of redemption, liberty and Christianity in general will remain. This is not to say that religions will not have any commonality when it comes to redemption and liberty. It is important to remember that redemption is based on fundamental truths: love and peace. On the other hand, liberty is based on free will. For as long as those two concepts remain, so will the commonality of many religions. References Adams, Jay. Theology of Christian Counseling. New York: Zondervan. 1986. Print Adams, Jay. Christ and Your Problems. New York: P & R Publishing. 1999. Print Akyol, Mustafa. “The Islamic Case for Religious Liberty.” Project Syndicate. 28 January 2010. Print Carson, D.A., O’Brien, Peter, and Seifrid, Mark (eds.). The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism, i. Justification and Variegated Nomism. WUNT 2.140; Tubingen: Mohr-Siebeck; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 2001. Print Cumming, Joseph. “Christians Should Defend Muslim Liberty.” Village Green. 11 November 2010. Das, Andrew. Paul, the Law, and the Covenant. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2001. Print Dewaay, Bob. “God’s Will and Christian Liberty.” Critical Issues Commentary March 2003: CIC Ministry, Print. Drane, John. Paul, Libertine or Legalist? A Study in the Theology of the Major Epistles, London: SPCK, 1975, Print. Dunn, James. Jesus, Paul. and the Law: Studies in Mark and Galatians. Louisville. Ky.: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1990. Print. Dunn, James. Christian Liberty: A New Testament Perspective. London: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2005. Print. Jaeggli, Randy. Love, Liberty, and Christian Conscience (Biblical Discernment for Difficult Issues). Mass.:Bob Jones University Press. Print. Gathercole, Simon. Where is Boasting? Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul’s Response in Romans 1-5. Grand Rapids. Mich.: Eerdmans, 2002. Print. Goudey, June Christine. Theologians Re-Imaging Redemption. Web. 1 November 2011. Green, Roger. “William Booth’s Theology of Redemption.” Christian History. 1 April 1990. Print. Hammond, Peter. Slavery, Terrorism & Islam. New York: Christian Liberty Books, 2005. Print. Hladky, Stephen. “Creation Theology: The Good News of Redemption.” Creation Theology. N.d. Web. 8 November 2011. Hubner, Hans. Law in Paul’s Thought, ET, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1984. Print. Lenski, RCH. Hebrews and James in Commentary on the New Testament, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998; reprint, Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1966, 529. Print. Luther, Martin. Concerning Christian Liberty. Vol. XXXVI, Part 6. The Harvard Classics. New York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1909–14; Bartleby.com, 2001. MacArthur, John. Beer, Bohemianism, and True Christian Liberty. GTY. 9 August 2011. Web. 15 November 2011. Matto, Ken. “What is Christian Liberty.” Scion of Zion. n.d. Web. 10 November 2011 McHugh, Michale. Christian Liberty Nature Reader Book 5. Los Angeles: Worthington, 1992. Print Smith, George. “Religion and Liberty.” Acton Institute, n.d. Web. 10 November 2011 Wright, N.T. Redemption from the New Perspective? Towards a Multi-Layered Pauline Theology of the Cross. Oxford: OUP, 2006. Print. N. T. Wright, ‘A Fresh Perspective on Paul?’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library. 83 (2002), 21-39 N. T. Wright, The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1991. Print. Read More