Tag Archives: tolerance

Faith Alone? Yes…and No

In my last article, I intimated that “the biblical Christian [is one] who trusts Christ alone, by grace alone, through faith alone.” The tenor of that article was about proper and improper ideas of “works” in relation to faith. Of Christ, grace and faith, these “alone” phrases make up three fifths of the Reformation’s “Five Solas” (Sola is Latin for alone or only; the other two fifths are Scripture alone, and glory to God alone). “Faith alone” became the shorthand statement for how we are justified before God, or “saved,” while still understanding the proper weight of importance for the five together as necessary to the whole formula of becoming, then living and growing as a child of God.

Today, faith is often considered “alone,” or independent of an object for that faith. Thus, faith is an entity or power in and of itself. “You just gotta have faith” say some to those suffering this conundrum or that. Like positivity, faith can be ginned up from within, and will push us past and over obstacles in our way. Outside or within any religious system (Norman Vincent Peale and his progeny have imported this idea into erstwhile Evangelical Christianity), this “having faith” or “thinking positively” can create wealth, heal illness, or bring any number of propitious outcomes to pass – all while never considering in what or whom that faith lies. This having faith-in-faith approaches fideism – that is, a belief independent of reason.

Even when objects of faith are identified, this tolerant “to each his own” theology finds plenty of common ground for an amorphous “faith community.” One can have faith in a historical (or fictional) person, in one or many gods, or in a previously known, biblical deity who’s been through “Extreme Makeover: God Edition.” Each member of the Trinity has suffered such makeovers; eviscerating all nuance and paradox such that each final product looks very much like the makeup artist!

In the end, with or without an object, this broad, welcoming and undefined faith has only one requirement – sincerity. Sincerity, or genuine belief without hypocrisy or duplicity, is unfortunately no measure of viability. Neither is the magnitude of faith a measure of its truthfulness. So, if the sincerity of faith and the strength of faith don’t ultimately matter, what does?

Consider the travelers who come to the frozen river knowing their destination is on the other side. Billy Bob is confident and begins to cross when Jimmy Joe says, frightfully, “wait!” Jimmy Joe is scared and can only cross the river on his belly inch-by-inch – his faith is minimal and doubt-filled while Billy Bob’s is strong and certain. Who will make it to the other side – one or both or neither? Will Billy Bob’s confidence save him? Are Jimmy Joe’s doubts his undoing? What ultimately determines the success of their collective effort?

Well, of course, it is neither their faith or lack, nor strength or weakness, nor confidence or fear; it’s the thickness of the ice that determines whether they’ll survive. Likewise the final arbiter of faith is its object.

We’ll all cross a river one day – the river Jordan is a metaphor for true believers into the “promised land.” Some contend that all faith is nonsense and is solipsistic (self-contained, “unsullied” by external reason). Others say God will reward sincere faith regardless of its object or its irrationality. Biblical Christians have reason to believe that the Bible is true and that God, through Christ, is knowable. Faith alone? Yes, as a God-given conduit of God-given grace in the one, particular, biblical God.

Follow the Leader?

We live in a society of changing “norms” and diminishing distinctions. The New Tolerance has popularized the idea that truth is in the eye of the beholder. Instead of Truth, there is “my truth” and “your truth.” Even in contradiction, each remains equally valid. This sort of relativism sits atop the P.C. throne, and has made inroads into discussions of religion, ethics, politics and even gender. The idea comingles harder (more objective) and softer (more subjective) sciences to muddle “truth” such that personal preferences and mitigating circumstances affect perception. Physics is one of the harder sciences, and I have as yet not seen anyone able to relativize gravity. If you and I step off the 22-story Executive Office Building of the Capitol, our feelings/beliefs about gravity will have little to do with the mess we’ll make on the plaza. My contention here is that religious/spiritual “Truth” is as similarly hard and fixed and as unforgiving as gravity.

Whatever your position is on what happens to our ethereal selves when our bodies die, it’s nonsense to believe we could all be right. The naturalist believes we cease to exist at physical death. We biblical Christians believe heaven or hell await our (temporarily) bodiless souls until Christ’s second coming. We can’t both be right. You can add reincarnation, passing into “oneness,” or the ubiquitous idea that most everyone but despots, serial killers and pedophiles go to some type of heaven. “S/He’s in a better place” may provide opiatic comfort to us as a culture as we watch everyone die, but it begs the question why we try so hard to push death days or weeks as the precipice inevitably approaches. Death is batting around a thousand, and while we could all be wrong about our destination, we can’t all be right.

I might be wrong in my beliefs, but I’m not wrong saying that whatever is, is, and our beliefs and preferences, like in the case of gravity, don’t change the facts. The New Tolerance disagrees, riding in on a white horse named “Fairness,” proclaiming Sincerity as savior. All beliefs are equally (if only subjectively) true and valid and good. Religions, even nominally “Christian” forms, join hands with all who will agree to this wide, inclusive road to a wonderful afterlife and sing. Tra-la…la-la…la?

Here’s the real question: What do YOU believe? Why?

If you’ve thought about the eternal consequences of death for even a moment and settled your position, however tenuously, you’ve trusted someone – your parents or teachers or pastors or scientists or some amalgam of the world’s views. Whether religious/spiritual or areligious/naturalist, you have placed your “faith” in someone or some idea.

Consider this – some thirty years ago, I had a friend who was a fairly new pilot in the F-111. He was flying a night, low level mission with an experienced instructor. This aircraft had terrain-following radar with a type of “auto-pilot” so the plane could fly low and fast with the pilots’ hands off the controls. The system kept forcing the plane to pitch-up and climb (a built-in safety measure) when there was no apparent obstacle, so they assumed the system wasn’t operating properly. They toggled it off. Seconds later they flew into the side of a mountain at over 500 mph. This macabre example is a cautionary tale of death’s insidiousness, ignored warnings and misplaced trust.

So, again, what do you believe and why? By grace, confirmed by study, the biblical Jesus Christ has earned my trust regarding my eternal destination. Has whoever informed your view truly earned your trust? Much is at stake.

[This article originally appeared in the Tallahassee Democrat.]