In class, we have discussed the contradictory statement that
Luther repeats throughout his work, “Christians are both free from all, subject
to none, and perfectly dutiful, subject to all.” By saying this, over and over
again, he is trying to get across the idea that every individual is free from
every other individual through faith in God. However, through the good works
that every true Christian performs as an effect of such a true and deep faith, the
Christian is subject (i.e. servant) to his neighbors (i.e. everyone) as well as
God; the good works that Luther is referring to are works that do nothing but
benefit others and God.
However, in class we have also discussed the inevitability
of humans to commit bad works (i.e. sins) either on accident or on purpose as
an effect of poor morals (example: persecution). I believe that in performing bad works, you
are no less Christian as long as the sin was either an accident, or it was done
out of true belief that it was the most Christian thing to do. Even Luther
states in his work that “works don’t make a person a good or bad Christian.”
Keeping this in mind, it is important to remember that because humans are
natural sinners, if a person who calls himself/herself a Christian is truly
sorry, he or she will be forgiven. However, what if a Christian who is truly
faithful, sins repetitively? Is that person more qualified for Heaven than a
person who is a much more moral person but does not call him/herself a
Christian, either out of ignorance or because it is not part of his/her
culture? Why is this fair? According to the Bible, the only way to get into
Heaven is to believe in Jesus and God. But surely, if God made everyone, He
would understand the reasons as to why some do not call consciously themselves
Christian. As for those who do not know of God’s word, why would God punish
them for putting them in a life where they would have no access to knowing
about God? And, is God also not a forgiving god? Surely he would understand if
a Hindu did not convert to Christianity because it is not part of their culture
or tradition. Is God so hypocritical that He would purposely make people who
can never be forgiven and therefore never be able to reach Heaven, despite how
moral they are? Tell me what you think.
I like this. You went straight for the complicated issues. While there are many topics we could discuss from within your passage, I will attempt keep my comment brief and focused. In regards to the Christian who is truly faithful but sins repeatedly, I would have to say that he is not a true Christian. That is, if we are to go by what I have come to understand as Luther’s definition. While he does state that works do not make a person a good or bad Christian, he does not completely deny the potential power behind works. For example, he writes:
ReplyDelete“’Good works do not make a good man, but a good man does good works; evil works do not make a wicked man, but a wicked man does evil works.’” (Luther 39)
In addition, given the case that a “good Christian” has committed a sin repeatedly, it seems to me that he is not truly and completely regretful of his actions. There seems to be a distinction between regret and true regret in which the sinner will potentially find a way to reform if he is truly repentant. (Sorry for the lengthiness)
This piece is incredibly interesting! I completely agree that it is unfair to require people who, because God made them this way, were unable to discover Jesus or God. I think that your quote from Luther is incredibly good evidence that strengthens part of Luthers arguement that good or bad works don't affect how good of a Christian someone is. I believe that Luther would say that the person who sins repeatedly but has faith in God and Jesus is in fact more qualified to go to heaven than the moral person who does more good works. This conclusion can lead us further to say that in Luthers perspective being a good person is far different than being a good Christian.
ReplyDeleteA very good point was brought up in class regarding weather God will punish those who have never had the chance to know him. The point was: in today's global world where, as privileged citizens, we are able to have almost unlimited awareness of other cultures and their respective beliefs, we would indeed say it "unfair" of God to neglect those uninformed of his possible existence. However, in Luther's time, the world was much smaller, and it is unlikely his audience included all cultures (many of which were still undiscovered).
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, even if he had included other cultures, Luther would say that until they received salvation they could not enter heaven. His idea of God has nothing to do with fair or unfair, but of what the scriptures have to say about God and what he commands us to do including what the scriptures "inspire" us to do. My main problem with this view is that, taking all the scriptures at their value, one is easily "inspired" to genocidal or in modern day, terrorist, works (Exodus and Deuteronomy are full of these instances...[(Deuteronomy 13:13-19)]).