| |
Some years ago, when my daughters were much younger, I built a small "Play House" for them. It still stands in our backyard, and now has become the center of activity when our granddaughters come to "Papa's house." The nicer summer weather prompted us to clean it up a bit, and I noticed that the floor was uneven. Upon further investigation, I realized that one of the side gutters had be removed, and that as a result, a large pool of water from the winter rains had cause the pier blocks on one side house to sink. Our little "Play House" is going the way of the "house built upon the sand" in the parable of Yeshua. Fortunately, it won't take much work to put it back on the plumb and make sure the foundations are well secured again. Of course, I'll need to fix that gutter or the same problem will occur again.
When Yeshua gave His parable of the wise man who built his house on the rock and the foolish man who built his house on the sand (Matt 7:24–27; Luke 6:47–49), He began like this: "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man…." The words to which He refers are those commonly called "The Sermon on the Mount." Many interpretations have been offered for Yeshua's parable, but all agree that primarily the issue He is emphasizing is living one's life according to God's wisdom. It is clear that a wise man not only recognizes that today's actions impact tomorrow's consequences, but knowing this to be the case, he does what is right today in order to be ready for tomorrow.
What caught my attention as I pondered this parable, however, was Yeshua's emphasis upon His "words" – "everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them…." In our postmodern era, we are being told that one can never be certain about exactly what an author meant when he or she communicated via words. "Language," we are being told, "is a container for meaning which must be supplied in some measure by the listener." In other words, what the author meant to convey in his or her words is often lost because the language container itself gets emptied of the meaning during the communication process. Thus, the postmodern hermeneutic (method of interpreting language) insists that the listener, or the reader, must imbue the language of the author with meaning. This also means that there is a very possible disconnect between the author and the reader. Or to say it simply: one can never be sure that the words he or she is hearing or reading actually convey the author's original intention. In such a hermeneutic, the best we can hope for is: "what does it mean for me?" Moreover, "what it means for me" may be somewhat different (or even entirely different) than "what it means for you." In short, the postmodern hermeneutic has determined that "meaning" conveyed by verbal communication is constantly changing—it's like the shifting sands upon which the foolish man built his house.
Now when such a hermeneutic is applied to the Scriptures, the result is that one's house falls, and its fall is very great. Some of you might think I have in mind liberal, neo-orthodox theology or mainline Christian denominations that have found a way for the Bible to mean exactly opposite of what it says. No one, for instance, could think that Moses or Paul approved of homosexuality, but we're being told that they did. But actually, I didn't have liberal Christianity in mind—I had Messianic Judaism in my focus.
I recently received the Spring/Summer 2008 issue of "Kesher," a Journal of Messianic Judaism. This issue is devoted entirely to the doctrine of Soteriology, or the manner in which God saves sinners. I took it along with me as I traveled to Canada recently, and the hours on the airplane both going and returning afforded me time to read its pages. Usually articles in Kesher affect me in a number of ways: sometimes they pique my interest and offer interesting insights. Other times they disgust me and leave me shaking my head. But that was not my reaction as I read the current issue: this time I wanted to weep. Sadness was the result, a deep weariness of soul, a feeling of despair. As I read a number of the articles, written by some of the primary leaders in Messianic Judaism, I realized that in some very significant ways, the theological foundation upon which they are seeking to build a lasting legacy for the truth is not rock but sand. They may succeed in convincing many that the edifice they are building will last, but when the storm winds come, it will topple.
It is not my purpose in this short Newsletter essay to give a response to the various articles in the recent issue of "Kesher." That will have to await a future endeavor. But I would like to point out what it was in these articles on "Salvation" that caused such sadness to me.
Daniel Juster – "The Narrow Wider Hope"
The Journal opens with a short but very good essay on how to "listen" in theological dialog (written by David Rudolph). But the first essay on topic is one by Daniel Juster entitled, "The Narrow Wider Hope." In this article Juster seeks to convince the reader that the Scriptures are not as clear as one might have thought on the issue of whether or not conscious, deliberate faith in Yeshua is the only means of eternal salvation. Briefly explaining the theological options under the headings 1) Narrow Hope, 2) Wider Hope (including Universalism), 3) Wider Wider Hope (excluding Universalism), and 4) Narrow Wider Hope, he adopts the Narrow Wider Hope as his own position. If you're a little bewildered by this nomenclature, let me explain: "Hope" stands for confidence that one will abide in the shalom of the world to come. The Narrow Hope view offers such confidence only to those who have definitely and consciously placed their faith in the person and work of Yeshua. The Wider Hope view holds that not only those who have definite and conscious faith in Yeshua will be saved, but also those who strive for and accept a "God-consciousness" or a "consciousness of ultimate Good." This conveniently overcomes the thorny theological problem regarding people who have never heard the Gospel. Thus, the Wider Hope means that there will be far more saved than have confessed faith in the person of Yeshua, and some who hold this view would opt for Universalism, i.e., that eventually everyone will enjoy shalom in the world to come (even if they spend sometime in Purgatory paying for their sins). The Wider Wider Hope is much like the Wider Hope, but excludes Universalism. This view teaches that many more will enjoy shalom in the world to come than simply the relatively few who place their faith in Yeshua. Still, there will be those who reject the natural revelation of God in the created world, and will therefore be excluded. The Narrow Wider Hope (which is Juster's view) holds that only those who have put their faith in Yeshua can be assured of shalom in the world to come, but that the possibility exists that many more than these will be eternally saved. In Juster's own words:
"I put forth the case for the importance of both Jew and Gentile explicitly embracing Yeshua for assurance concerning their eternal destiny after [t]his life, yet holding to the possibility of God's wider mercy (which may in fact include others in his grace who have not made an explicit confession of faith." (p. 40)
One of the reasons that Juster holds this view is because he considers the Scriptures to be less than explicit about exactly who is saved and who is not. (Click here to read the rest of this article – it will download in as a pdf file)
|