The Synoptic Gospels and a Postmillennial view of the future
Present-day evangelical theology often treats good works as consequences of salvation rather than as integral to it, a distinction that can weaken Christianity’s response to material suffering. By comparing premillennial and postmillennial expectations, Dorothy Day’s social ethics, and key passages in the Synoptic Gospels, this paper argues that Jesus’ teachings give works of mercy a more central role in salvation and Christian hope than much contemporary evangelical theology acknowledges.
Eschatology: Pre- vs. Postmillennialism
This theological tension becomes clearer when viewed through two contrasting expectations for the future: premillennialism, which anticipates Christ’s return before the millennium, and postmillennialism, which expects the gospel’s influence to produce an extended period of righteousness and peace before Christ’s return. These positions can encourage different attitudes toward cultural engagement.
Within premillennialism, Christians remain separate from secular culture and wait for Christ’s return. It is highly skeptical that any real change can happen in a fallen, sinful world. Catholic authors Andrew Latham and Chris Werbos claim that 20th-century Marxist thought drastically changed the “tradition of Catholic thought” (Latham and Werbos). Personal sin did not cause war; structural sin emerged through societal institutions and cultural norms. These institutions may be political, economic, or social, but they all oppress the poor. Violence occurs when those seeking to perpetuate unjust institutions clash with those who seek to overturn them (Latham and Werbos). Latham and Werbos argue that this shift moves blame from individual sin to institutions or cultural practices, and that it is patently unbiblical. “Ending all violence and injustice in this life is impossible. Sin and suffering are part of a sinful world and will exist until Christ’s return. If the Church continues to promote peace based on the utopian belief that we can overcome this fundamental reality, it will achieve nothing.”
In contrast, postmillennialism expects the kingdom of God to advance within history through the spread of the gospel and the growing influence of Christian discipleship. This expectation can sustain engagement with political, economic, and social institutions because cultural improvement is understood as a sign of God’s redemptive work rather than a substitute for Christ’s final victory. Catholic social teaching is not postmillennial, but its account of human work as an activity that transforms the world offers a useful point of comparison. The Compendium describes work as a human activity that can and must develop the world’s latent possibilities (262), calling believers to make visible what creation should become.
Connecting eschatology and salvation requires an additional step. A hopeful account of history does not, by itself, establish that works contribute to salvation, and a pessimistic account does not, by itself, establish salvation by faith alone. The following discussion therefore shifts from expectations about history to the ethical practices those expectations can encourage, then examines the Synoptic texts that bear directly on eternal life and judgment.
Dorothy Day, founder of the Catholic Worker movement, illustrates an activist Christian hope that resembles the social implications of postmillennialism, even though her thought should not be reduced to that eschatological system. In the 1930s, the Catholic Worker combined service to the poor, Scripture study, and antiwar activism. Day defended the early church’s pacifism even during the Second World War, declaring herself “unalterably opposed to war as a means of saving civilization or democracy” (DDLW 360). For Day, the Sermon on the Mount was not an unattainable ideal but “our Christian manifesto” (DDLW 360). The same love of neighbor informed the movement’s nonviolent resistance to poverty, homelessness, hunger, and prejudice (DDLW 728).
This thinking is reflected in Marvin L. Krier Mich’s idea that “redemption of the human race includes liberation from every oppressive situation” (4). According to Day, “complete disarmament of governments is not a wild, utopian dream. (DDLW 728). As the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church states, we are “called to be the visible sign” of something that “should be” (26), and Day attempts to bring that idea into reality. Note her synthesis of pacifism and social justice: “All the attacks against the poor are Pearl Harbor incidents! Are the oppressed supposed to turn to arms in the class conflict to defend their lives and their families?” (DDLW 868). Consider the hypocrisy of Americans who denounce military pacifism but “are pacifists themselves when it comes to the class war.” (DDLW 390).
The apparent reversals of Christian teaching—the first becoming last and the humble being exalted—raise a philosophical question: does the cross represent moral weakness, or a truth that exceeds ordinary calculations of power? Nietzsche interprets Christian self-denial negatively as slave morality, whereas Søren Kierkegaard interprets faith positively as a paradox that cannot be reduced to conventional reason. This contrast clarifies what is at stake in Day’s “folly of the Cross”: Christian nonviolence may appear irrational from the standpoint of worldly power while remaining coherent within a theology of radical discipleship.
Nietzsche believes in the morality of the noble person, grounded in virtues like courage, discipline, and intelligence. Christian, or “slave morality,” as he calls it, hinders noble or master morality. Slave morality is the invention of Christian leadership envious of the rich and powerful. Christianity wants us to remain meek and nonviolent. However, once we reject God’s existence, we can replace slave morality with master morality (Beyond Good and Evil 641 to 642).
Kierkegaard sees it differently. Filling our lives only with self-affirmation leaves us empty. Yes, faith is ridiculous, but it is precisely through the practice of the absurd that our faith finds meaning (Fear and Trembling 90). Abraham’s act of attempting to sacrifice his son is beyond reason. Logic tells us, “He should be taken to court and tried for attempted murder” (Fear and Trembling 94). In his willingness to kill his son, “Abraham acts by virtue of the absurd” (Fear and Trembling 95). This kind of faith is a “paradox that cannot be mediated; it is and remains for all eternity impervious to thought” (Fear and Trembling 95).
Scripture comparisons
The Synoptics
Several passages in the Synoptic Gospels connect eternal life, salvation, or final judgment with concrete acts of obedience and mercy. The rich young ruler, the lawyer who prompts the parable of the Good Samaritan, Zacchaeus, and the judgment of the sheep and the goats all place moral action near the center of the narrative. These passages do not, by themselves, settle the relationship among grace, faith, and works, but they pose a substantial challenge for readings that treat works as merely incidental to salvation.
The Rich Young Ruler Matthew 19:16-21
A man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?” Jesus replied, Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself.” All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?” Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
The Good Samaritan Luke 10:25-37
On one occasion, an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?” He answered: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.'” “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this, and you will live.”
Zacchaeus Luke 19: 1-10
Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now, I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”
Jesus said to him, “Today, salvation has come to this house.”
The Sheep and the Goats Matthew25: 31-46
“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ “He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Taken together, these passages use different narrative forms but share a common emphasis. The rich young ruler is directed from keeping the commandments to costly dispossession; the lawyer is told to enact love of neighbor; Zacchaeus’s restitution accompanies Jesus’ declaration of salvation; and the sheep and goats are judged by how they treat vulnerable people. The texts therefore make embodied mercy indispensable to discipleship. The remaining interpretive question is whether these works are conditions of salvation, evidence of transformed faith, or inseparable expressions of grace—a question the paper must address rather than assume.
Contrast the Synoptics with the Gospel of John, Acts, and Paul’s letters:
John 5: 24 “I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.
John 6:24 For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
John11: 25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.
14:6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
Other verses: John 3:16; 3:18, 6:29; 6:35, 6:40; 6:47; 17:3
Acts 16:30-31 He then brought them out and asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved–you and your household.”
Romans 1:16-17 I am not ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.
Romans 10:9 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.
Ephesians 2:8-9 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God– 9not by works, so that no one can boast.
The Synoptic Gospels repeatedly connect eternal life with obedience, mercy, repentance, and discipleship, whereas the passages cited from John, Acts, Romans, and Ephesians explicitly emphasize belief, faith, and grace. This difference in emphasis should not be reduced too quickly to a contradiction: the Synoptics also speak positively about faith, and the wider New Testament often joins faith to transformed conduct. Nevertheless, the comparison shows that any adequate theology of salvation must account for the Synoptic insistence that the treatment of one’s neighbor bears directly on judgment and life.
Conclusion
The evidence considered here suggests that the New Testament contains distinct but potentially complementary emphases: Paul and John articulate salvation through faith and grace, while the Synoptic Gospels repeatedly portray obedience, mercy, and restitution as matters of eternal consequence. Disagreements among early Christian leaders show that the church debated the demands of the gospel, though those disagreements do not, by themselves, prove incompatible doctrines of salvation. A responsible interpretation must therefore examine each text on its own terms while asking how faith, grace, and works belong together.
Evangelicals can situate their theology in a broader historical context by examining traditions that give works a more explicit role in the Christian life and salvation. Such comparison need not dismiss evangelical convictions; it can reveal where inherited formulations illuminate Scripture and where they may prevent readers from hearing the full force of Jesus’ commands.
Rigid inerrancy can hinder interpretation when readers start with a settled theological system and force apparently divergent passages into it before considering each author’s distinctive emphasis. Inspiration need not erase the diversity of biblical voices. The interpretive task is to take that diversity seriously while still asking whether the texts bear witness to shared theological truths.
Eschatological expectations can shape Christian political and cultural engagement because beliefs about history affect what kinds of change believers consider possible. Evangelicals who emphasize the persistence of sin may nevertheless participate vigorously in politics and social reform, creating a tension between theological pessimism and practical activism. A more hopeful account of God’s work in history could make that activism more coherent, provided it remains grounded in the Synoptic demands of mercy, justice, and love of neighbor.
Faith alone is one influential account of salvation within the Christian tradition, but the Synoptic Gospels resist any account that makes mercy, restitution, and sacrificial love optional. The challenge is not to replace faith with works as a competing mechanism of salvation, but to recover a vision in which trust in Christ becomes visible in costly love of neighbor. Such a theology speaks to suffering because it joins proclamation to concrete acts of justice and compassion.
Works Cited:
Wogaman, J. Phillip, and Douglas M. Strong. Readings in Christian Ethics. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996.
“Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World- Gaudium et Spes.” Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html.
Forest, Jim. Catholic Worker Movement, https://www.catholicworker.org/forest-history.html
Catholic Worker Movement, https://www.catholicworker.org/communities/houses/va-norfolk-norfolk-catholic-worker.html.
Catholic Worker Movement https://catholicworker.org/728-html/
Mich, Marvin L. Krier. The Challenge and Spirituality of Catholic Social Teaching. Orbis Books, 2011.
Catholic Worker Movement https://catholicworker.org/868-html/
Catholic Worker Movement https://catholicworker.org/390-html/
Latham, Andrew Latham, and York University. “On War: The Strange Death of Catholic International Thought.” OnePeterFive, 23 Sept. 2019, https://onepeterfive.com/death-catholic-war/.
“Four Views on the Millennium – Study Resources.” Blue Letter Bible, https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/mill.cfm.
Catholic Worker Movement https://catholicworker.org//306-html/
[/striphtml][/trim] Read More
January 2004
Sports and suffering: A theology of sports and the meaning of life
I know it’s old news, but I needed time to talk about it. After yet another year of excruciating losses by the Boston Red Sox and the Minnesota Vikings, I now feel the need to vent. I grew up in Brooklyn, NY, but I am a Red Sox fan and a Vikings fan. By some cruel twist of fate, I became a Vikings fan after their loss to the Miami Dolphins in the 1974 Superbowl and a Red Sox fan after their loss to the Cincinnati Reds in the 1975 World Series. Since that time, I have been rooting passionately for both teams to win a championship. Not simply “rooting for the underdog” (the way someone outside of Chicago might root for the Cubs) but passionate, intense, uncontrollable rooting. Why do I root for these teams? Why do I care so much? I tell myself there are so many more important things in life. Why do I suffer the loss of a championship as if it were some real-life tragedy? I have never even lived in Boston or Minnesota! Why am I so desperate to see these teams win? Is it some deep psychological problem that was never resolved in my childhood? Too many drugs as a teenager?
I have no idea. But when someone on the HBO special “The Curse of the Bambino” was quoted as saying that Buckner’s error in 1986 was “the darkest day in Boston since the assassination of President Kennedy,” I could relate. Don’t get me wrong: logically, I see the absurdity of the statement, but passionately, I know exactly what he means. This is the paradox. I am both repelled and drawn to the concept of real suffering over something so seemingly meaningless. The more these teams lose, the deeper the scar grows. The most recent disasters for both teams in the same year hold especially deep wounds.
After the Red Sox blew it again last October, I could not watch the World Series. It’s like watching the woman you love in another man’s arms. It just hurts too much. But like so many others, I break down. I suffer such emotional agony in October, but there I am again at her door in April. This is one of the true signs of a real Red Sox fan: endless hope in the face of impending disaster. You think, “How are they gonna blow it this time?” Yet you keep watching, hoping you are wrong. Last year’s Game 7 loss to the Yankees is a classic example. With the pain of 1946, 1948, 1967, 1975, 1978, 1986, and other brutal losses under their belts, true Red Sox fans watched the series with dread and hope at the same time. Here is my personal nightmare of that game: Well, here we are…game 7, the bottom of the 8th, up 5-2. We have 2 pitchers in the bullpen who have pitched very well against the Yankees throughout the series, so I’m feeling pretty good about their chances. Wait… why is Little still letting Martinez pitch? He’s one of the best pitchers in baseball, so maybe let him go until he gets into trouble. One out, fine, next batter …a double…ok, time to take Martinez out…no??? What is he doing…You have 2 pitchers in the bullpen who have pitched very well against the Yankees all series… next batter… base hit, 5-3… ok, that’s enough…YOU HAVE TWO PITCHERS IN THE BULLPEN THAT HAVE PITCHED VERY WELL AGAINST THE YANKEES !! Next batter, double… 5- 4. Please God, it’s happening again… Somebody stop the madness… Maybe it can’t be stopped… Wait…he is not really going to pitch to another batter, is? But… YOU HAVE TWO PITCHERS IN THE BULLPEN THAT HAVE PITCHED VERY WELL AGAINST THE YANKEES!!! AARRGGHH!!! Base hit, 5-5 …now he takes him out!!! ?? Oh, come on… why not just leave him in and lose right away? Why prolong the agony? Why…?
I find this anticipation of impending doom to be true for Minnesota Vikings fans, too. Red Sox fans may disagree, but with 4 Superbowl defeats and some excruciating playoff losses in the past, the Vikings fan is no slouch at suffering. Ask any fan who watched the 1998 NFC Championship against Atlanta, where the Vikings were minutes away from a Super Bowl berth. Field goal kicker Gary Anderson (who was literally perfect for the season) missed a chip-shot 38-yarder to ice the game, and the Vikings began another last-minute collapse.
This past December, the Vikings played the Cardinals in the season finale. The Vikings are playing a 3-12 team. They are winning 17-6 with less than 5 minutes to go. The next five minutes leave room for belief in the unbelievable. After a Cardinal touchdown, a successful onside kick, and a 30-yard interference call, they drive close to the goal line, but two back-to-back sacks by the Vikings give you false hope. Fourth and 24 with four seconds left in the game… that’s right, FOUR SECONDS! The quarterback scrambles out of the pocket; time runs out; he throws into the end zone between two defenders and makes the catch, but he is out of bounds. No problem, the referee will call a force-out and end the game with an 18-17 Cardinal win. Did that sequence of events just happen?
Why is it always something with certain teams? If it’s not an error or fumble, it’s the ref’s call; if not, it’s an unbelievable decision by the manager or coach. It’s always something! Why do these teams always lose? I have no answer. Sometimes teams break their curse: the Dodgers could never beat the Yankees, then finally did in 1955; Dallas endured a row of heartbreaking championship losses but won it all in 71; Denver lost four Super Bowls in the 70s and 80s but finally won 2 in the 9 s. But some teams….” Ohh that this too, too solid flesh would melt” before I suffer another year in sports like 20 3. It’s just not fair.
To reconcile my passion for sports with real-life tragedy, I have concluded that this is at least one area where life and sports are truly consistent. Life is also incredibly unfair. People steal millions of dollars and get away with it, innocent people go to jail, innocent children are raped and murdered, and on and on. Yastrzemski pops up to Nettles to end the game…the ball goes through Buckner’s legs…of all the field goals Anderson has to miss, it has to be that one?
I work with a humanitarian aid organization that delivers basic needs to orphan children in foreign countries, so I often see life’s unfairness firsthand. One summer evening, I was at the local train station in Odesa, Ukraine. A little girl called out, “Vini,” with a heavy Russian accent. It was Diana, a runaway who knew me from when she lived in one of the orphanages I worked with. My friend and I spent the next 2 hours trying to convince her to come back to the orphanage. No, she would rather live in the basement of the train station, selling her little 10-year-old body to old men for survival. What do I do? Grab her and force her to return to the orphanage? She’ll run away again the minute she gets the chance…
It’s 10:00 at night, and my car is stopped at an intersection in downtown Managua, Nicaragua. 5-year-old girl approaches my car and stretches to wash my windshield with a dirty rag for 1 Córdoba (7 cents). Her mother has sent her out to beg. What do I do? Give her money and perpetuate the problem, or don’t give her money and have her stand out there until 3 am or later until she gets something? Difficult questions I do not have answers to. Yes, life is unfair. But how do I deal with the frustration? Maybe I vent it vicariously through sports.
Some argue that sports events are to our contemporary society what popular dramatic tragedies were to ancient societies. In his analysis of tragedy, Aristotle points to its ritual function as catharsis: spectators purge their own emotions of pity and fear through vicarious participation in the drama. In contemporary sports, spectators purge their own emotions of success or fear of failure through vicarious participation in the game. Sport offers me a cathartic way to express real-life suffering and failure. My passion for the underdog releases the suffering of the poor and my failure to help them all. Because in sports, there is always hope. There is always a next year. Maybe I need that vision of hope to keep fighting real suffering. Some people are born into a wealthy home in Pennsylvania, and others are born in a wooden shack in downtown Managua, where poverty defies imagination. The Yankees have 26 championships, and the Minnesota Vikings have none. But if there’s hope for the Red Sox, there’s hope for the destitute…or so my subconscious logic goes.
I have been traveling to orphanages in Nicaragua and Ukraine since 1991, and over the years, I have developed close relationships with the children I have watched grow up. In my efforts to meet their needs, I have experienced a few successes and many overwhelming failures. One such failure often comes to mind. In March of 2000, I had just returned from a trip to Odessa. Two weeks after my return, I heard that one of the kids I knew, Alla Lisunova, had been admitted to a hospital and had died suddenly overnight. Alla was just one of many wonderful, vivacious kids I knew at the orphanage. She was happy and full of life despite her circumstances. One Monday morning, she woke up with severe pain and was sent to the hospital. On Tuesday morning, she was dead. I heard a report that she begged the nurse on duty all night long to stop the pain. Officially, she died of a viral infection brought about by inadequate heating at the orphanage. We visited her grave when I went back in the summer, and all I could think of was: “If only I had been there, I could have paid for some kind of special treatment; I could have helped her somehow”…if only…but there is no next year for Alla… she’s gone, and I live with guilt and frustration. I need a release for that kind of experience, and I find it in sports.
This catharsis, though, can vary drastically from person to person. I could never be a Dallas Cowboys fan or a Los Angeles Lakers fan because these teams are synonymous with winning dynasties. I need to be a fan of the unluckiest teams, the real losers, because that is what I experience: unbelievable suffering and insurmountable poverty. Some teams embody true tragedy. The Red Sox and Vikings give new meaning to the greatest ancient tragedies. Oedipus unwittingly murders his father and marries his mother, but there are so many “if onlys” along the path to his destruction. If only Oedipus had not met his father on the road to Thebes. If only he hadn’t asked questions; if only the old shepherd hadn’t told him the truth. Similar tragedies are played out in Fenway and the Metrodo e. If only the manager had taken Martinez out in time, or Anderson hadn’t missed that field goal… what a tragedy that such a great season is all for naught. My frustrations with the inability to help the needs of so many disenfranchised children are expressed in the passionate desire to see the unluckiest of teams win.
The Hebrew Scriptures include a book called Habakkuk. In it, the prophet Habakkuk complains to God, “Why is life so unfair?” Why do the evil flourish and the good suffer? The only answer he gets is that he must live by faith. The believer is asked to live by faith, even though it is difficult amid so much suffering in the world. The fan who lives by faith is the same, ever in the hope that next year will be the year they win it all. The just shall live by faith…the fan shall wait till next year.
Drama and sports are similar in that no one really suffers. After all the death and destruction in a tragedy, the actors get up, go home, and have a chicken sandwich. Similarly, in sports, the tragedy isn’t absolute: the players suffer loss, but go home to their million-dollar houses and come back the next day or next year to do it again.
Not so for real human tragedies.
The Viking-Atlanta NFC Championship game fell on January 17, 1999, a day when I was scheduled to be in Nicaragua for our annual Christmas gift program. When I realized there was a scheduling conflict, I was desperate. I wasn’t going to miss that game. I called a friend and begged him to find a place with a satellite dish. That Sunday afternoon, I brought 70 orphan kids to King Arthur’s Pizza in Managua to watch a football game that meant everything to me but nothing to them. As the kids sat there and ate Pizza, I watched another hope for a championship crumble away.
Sports mirror life in one very profound sense. We all struggle with insecurity and failure. We fall, but we get up and struggle n. When life hands us a tragedy, we refuse to give up hope and look to the future, just as the fans do. Like the last line of Alexandre Dumas’ novel, The Count of Monte Christo: “Has not the Count just told us that all human wisdom is summed up in two words: ‘Wait and hope.'”
If countries were sports teams, the Yankees would be America, and the Red Sox would be Nicaragua. But Nicaragua is not a sport. That day, I watched the Vikings lose in overtime, another unbelievably hard loss, and I was devastated. The kids were just glad to get away from the orphanage and eat Pizza. At the end of the game, I took the kids home to no family, terrible living conditions, lice in their hair, rats nibbling at their feet when they sleep, and no real future. Later that week, I went home to a comfortable house in America and said, “Wait till next year.” Life is tragic. The Vikings’ tragedy is something I can do nothing about except wait till next year. But the kids’…their tragedy I can and will do something about, not only next year but also every year for the rest of my li e. But please God let the Red Sox and Vikings win a championship!
Postscript
The Red Sox are probably the #1 cursed team because of the simply unbelievable ways they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. In 1946 they lost to the Cardinals in 7 gam s. In September of 1947, the Red Sox went into Yankee Stadium needing 1 of 2 games to win the division…they lost both… In 1967, they lost the World Series in 7 games to St. Lou s. In 1972, Detroit nipped Boston on the last day of the regular season, denying the Sox an AL East title. I didn’t see those games, but I saw what happened after.
October 1975: Red Sox vs. Cincinnati. The Giants’ shutout, the Armbrister incident, the Fisk home run, and ultimately the loss- and what a loss- after an incredible Game 6 win, the Red Sox were up 3-0 in the 6th inning. The Reds got 2 in the 6th, 1 in the 7th, and 1 in the 9th to win the series. That was hard, but it was nothing compared to what was in store later. In October 1978, the Red Sox blew a 141/2-game lead (including a four-game sweep by the Yankees in September known as the “Boston Massacre”) and finished tied with the Yankees at the end of the regular season. The division title came down to a one-game playoff at Fenway Pa k. Although I was a Yankee fan, I rooted for the Red S x. When free agency first came up, Steinbrenner bought all these Oakland A’s players, and I couldn’t root for a team with players I had rooted against for so long. With the Red Sox up 3-0 in the 6th inning, Bucky Dent, the Yankee shortstop, hits a 3-run homer to tie the game. Of all people to hit a home run, the shortstop? Of course, they go on to lose by one run,5- 44. Then the nightmare in 1986.
October 25, 1986: The coup de grace of all sports disasters occurred in the bottom of the 9th inning at Shea Stadium. Buckner’s error that lost the game was just one cog in a wheel of unbelievable events the Mets had to pull off to w n. Two outs, two strikes, nobody on base, the Red Sox up 5-3 and one strike away from the win. It looks like the curse is finally over… 1 strike away… somehow, someway, the Red Sox found a way to lose the game. How many times did Red Sox pitchers have 2 strikes on batters only to give up a base hit, walk, or wild pitch? How many times did it have to be so close before losing it all? Then comes the 2003 debacle.
Black Sunday: January 17, 1999, the Vikings vs. the Falcons in the NFC Championship Game. The Vikings lose 30-27 in overtime. “The curse” reared its ugly head once again. It took a while before I could talk about it- right after it happened, I told a friend that watching football now would be like watching the woman I love in the arms of another man. It was a travesty…Atlanta vs. Denver in the Superbo l? o! It should have been the Vikings; they were 15-1 in the regular season; no team ever lost with a record like th t. The offense broke the record for points scored. They had an incredible kicker, punter, offensive line, runner, and 3 of the best receivers in football, plus a good, if not great, defense.
These teams had what it took to win, but they lost. W y? Plain and simple: “the curse.” Some don’t believe in “the curse,” but I apply nothing mystical to the term; for lack of a better word, I define “the curse” as the “inability to win.” Once you win, you beat the curse
But heartbreaking losses do hold a special place for certain teams. In my opinion, the top three cursed teams, in order, are the Boston Red Sox. The Chicago Cubs and the Minnesota Vikings. Some may argue the Cubs should be first since they have the longest dry spell without a championship (1906) compared to the Red Sox (1918), but I argue it’s not simply about losing… It’s the WAY you lose.
Consider what team brings more suffering to a fan: A perennial loser year after year with no hope of winning, or a team that gives you great hope throughout the regular season only to see that hope destroyed in the playoffs or the championship. I am from New York and a big NY Giants fan. In the 70s, when the Giants were terrible, it was disappointing but not heartbreaking because they gave you no hope. It was much worse when, in the early 80s, they started getting better, made the playoffs, then lost and crushed all the anticipation you built up during the season. But the Giants won it all in 1986 and again in 1990.
The Viking fan is left to ponder: How could the Vikings lose the 1998 NFC Championship Game to Atlanta? How could it happen? Why did Robert Smith keep going out of bounds on that last drive of regulation? How could Anderson miss such a chip-shot field goal, his first miss of the entire season, after such a great drive? How could he miss that interception right in his chest? nd how could Cunningham underthrow a wide-open Moss, letting the defender tip the ball away at the last second? How many times have I replayed it in my head?
[/striphtml][/trim] Read More
Social Justice as a necessary aspect of the Christian Faith
Christian Existentialism
Modernism: There is a stable, coherent, knowable self. The mode of knowing produced by the objective, rational self is “science,” which can provide universal truths about the world, regardless of the knower’s status. The knowledge science produces is “truth” and is eternal.
Postmodernism: Embraces fluid, multiple perspectives, typically refusing to privilege any one truth claim over another. Ideals of universally applicable truths give way to various truths within one’s local social context which, rather than referencing some underlying universal reality, point only to other ideas and cultural artifacts. We interpret knowledge according to our own “local” experiences, not against all-encompassing universal structures.
Christian Existentialism combines these two ideas. Absolute truth exists but cannot be ‘known” by the subjective self. All we have are belief and faith.
(Some might find the idea of a Christian existentialist contradictory, but this is not a novel view. Jean-Paul Sartre made a similar distinction between the types of existentialists when he stated “…there are two kinds of existentialists; first those who are Christian, among whom I would include [Karl] Jaspers and Gabriel Marcel, both Catholic; and on the other hand the atheistic existentialist among whom I class [Martin] Heidegger…and myself”. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Existentialism is a Humanism. In: The Fabric of Existentialism. Gill, Richard & Sherman, Ernest P. 520 Prentice-Hall, Inc. New Jersey. 1973).
Problems with American Evangelical Christian Faith
The Bible and Evangelical Faith hold two different systems of belief. Social justice, compassion, and love for your fellow man are not optional parts of the Christian faith; they are its essence.
Evangelical Christian priorities:
This view reverses Biblical priorities:
Matt 23:23 (Luke 11:42) “Woe to you Pharisees, you tithe 10% of your garden herbs, but you neglect the more important matters of the law: justice, mercy, faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter without neglecting the former.”
Evangelical theology states that faith and holiness are a Christian’s priority, while Scripture indicates that loving your neighbor should be our priority.
Most important command in Scripture: Matt. 22:36, Mark 12:29, Luke 10:25 (Good Samaritan)
Matthew 22: 35- An expert in the law tested Jesus with this question: “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
Jesus replied: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and soul and mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
What does it mean to love God? 1 John 4: 20- 21: If anyone says, “I love God” and hates his brother, he is a liar… Whoever loves God must also love his brother.
Galatians 5: 14- The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
James 2: 8- If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right.
Romans 13:10- The commandments, “Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not covet,” “nd whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
Matthew 7: 12- Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do to them also, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
If the Bible states that the most important command is to “love God and your neighbor,” then what in God’s name are we doing?
Different methods of interpretation.
Evangelical Christianity emphasizes the writings of John and Paul.
No one can deny John defends the idea of faith without works:
5:24 “I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.
11: 25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.
14:6 Jesus answered, I”am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
Other verses: John 3:16; 3:18, 6, 24; 6:29; 6:35, 6:40; 6:47; 17:3
The letters of Paul have similar verses:
Acts 16:30-31 He then brought them out and asked, “S” rs, what must I do to be saved?” They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved–you and your household.”
Romans 10:9 …if you confess with your mouth, “J” sus is Lord,” “nd believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Ephesians 2:8-9 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God– 9not by works, so that no one can boast.
However, the Synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) contain verses that suggest faith alone is not the only way to heaven. More importantly, none of the three Synoptic gospels contains a verse indicating that salvation comes by faith in Christ alone. In fact, when Jesus is asked about eternal life in the Synoptics, he indicates that either faith and works or works alone can lead to eternal life.
The Rich Young Ruler
Matthew 19:16/Mark 10:17/Luke 18:18
Matthew 19:16-21
16Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, ” Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”
“7” W Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.”
“8” W “Which ones?” the man inquired.
19Jesus replied,” “D’ not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother, and ‘l’ve your neighbor as yourself.”
“0“A “l these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”
“1Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
“uke 10:25-37
25On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
“6” W “at is written in the Law?He”e replied. How do you read it?”
“7He answered: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and love your neighbor as yoursel’.'”8” 8 “u have answered correctly, “Jesus replied. Do” this and you will live.”Luke 19: 1-10
1Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through. 2A man was there by the name of Zacchaeus; he was a chief tax collector and was wealthy. 3He wanted to see who Jesus was, but being a short man he could not, because of the crowd. 4So he ran ahead and climbed a sycamore-fig tree to see him, since Jesus was coming that way.
5When Jesus reached the spot, he looked up and said to him, “Z”cchaeus, come down immediately. I must stay at your house today.” “So he came down at once and welcomed him gladly.
7All the people saw this and began to mutter, “H” has gone to be the guest of a ‘s’nner.’ ‘
“But Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”
“Jesus said to him, Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham. 10For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.”
TSheepheep and the Goats Matthew25: 31-46
31Whenn the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates Sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 Then the King will say to those on his right, Come, you who my Father blesses; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry, and you gave me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited me in; 36 I needed clothes, es and you clothed me; I was sick, and you looked after me; I was in prison, and you came to visit me.’
‘7 Then the righteous will answer him, ‘L’rd, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
‘0” The King will reply, I’ll tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’
‘1” Then he will say to those on his left, Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry, and you gave me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me nothing to drink; 43 I was a stranger, and you did not invite me in; I needed clothes, and you did not clothe me; I was sick and in prison, and you did not look after me.’
‘4” They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you ”’5“H ” will repI’ll tell’tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
‘6 Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Conservative Christians argue that the Synoptics need to be interpreted within the larger context of the Bible as a whole. Undoubtedly, many can offer intelligent, well-meaning interpretations. However, the problem is not the interpretation itself, but deciding what needs to be interpreted. Why do the Synoptic verses need “interpretation” when the verses in John do not? Evangelical Christians would not say John 14:6 or Romans 10:9 need interpretation. They should be taken for what they say. What rule is used to say that John and Paul are to be taken at face value, but the Synoptics (and other verses such as James 2:14-17) do need interpretation? The only reason is tradition; evangelicals were taught that way. The very thing Jesus condemns in the Pharisees. The theology of faith alone is one of many different theologies throughout the history of the Christian faith. It just happens to be the dominant one in church history right now. That doesn’t make it wrong, but it also doesn’t make it absolute! Evangelical Christianity needs to face the mystery of biblical interpretation (Now I know in part… I Corinthians 13:12).
For an excellent breakdown of all the verses referring to salvation in the Bible, check out this website:
www.religioustolerance.org/chr_savc.htm
www.religioustolerance.org/salvatio.htm
Evangelicals need to examine their theology within a larger historical context to see the potential truth in other systems of belief. Many early church fathers saw works as a necessary aspect of the Christian faith. Luther’s attack on the Catholic Church had many valid points. All these theologies may have a place in God’s plan. We know Paul had major disagreements with other disciples (Acts 15:36-39, Acts 21:17-26, Romans 14, Galatians 2:1-14). Why isisn’tt possible they disagreed on other issues?
Conclusion
Christians are trapped by a theology of inerrancy that hinders their process of interpretation. Because the Bible is consistent, they create needless interpretations of verses that disagree with their previously formed theological position. They start with the presupposition that their theology is absolutely correct, and then interpret the Bible accordingly. The Bible does not have to be perfect to be inspired. It can contain universal truths yet also include divergent views from its writers.
(For an excellent review of what the Early Church Fathers said, read”Ill the Real Heretics Please Stand Up? by David W. Bercot. Scroll Publishing, Tyler, TX 1989).
[/striphtml][/trim] Read More
I wrote this extended Mission Statement back when FH was first created. A lot of unrealized dreams here, but not all. I love the last line, and it still holds true: We take Paul’s admonishment seriously: the only thing that really matters is “faith expressing itself through love” (Galatians 5:6). Our paramount goal is to imitate Christ’s unconditional love toward others and show that actions speak louder than words ever could.
FRONTIER HORIZON MISSIONS STATEMENT
Frontier Horizon is an interfaith organization established to meet the immediate and long-term needs of orphans and destitute people worldwide. We endeavor to accomplish this task in the following ways:
A) Supply food, shelter, medicine, and other basic assistance to orphans, homeless children, the neglected elderly, and impoverished families throughout the world. The organization will actively seek out needs caused by economic instability, political crisis, war, or natural disaster and meet them to the best of its ability. From poor children in the mountains of West Virginia to the massive orphanages in Odesa, Ukraine, to the homeless child or elderly woman on the streets of Managua, Nicaragua, wherever privation exists, we will be.
B) Establish and cultivate working relationships with local third-world government officials to enact long-term improvements in the lives of the poor. This would include easing adoption laws, rebuilding or renovating orphanages and elderly housing, providing proper medical attention, monitoring school attendance, enhancing social activities, and developing relationships with individuals locally and abroad who care about the needy.
C) Forge a vital network with American adoption agencies, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and third-world government adoption agencies to expand opportunities for American families seeking to adopt. Our role would be to connect interested American agencies and families with orphanages worldwide and provide contact information for the proper foreign authorities in each country.
D) Organize mission conferences at churches, synagogues, or community centers across the nation. A major aspect of these events would focus on developing mission trips to third-world countries to provide a firsthand look at the problems these countries face and to encourage adoption possibilities.
E) Although Frontier Horizon is founded on basic Judeo-Christian tenets, we will never base our criteria for assistance on religious beliefs. Our willingness to offer assistance is based solely on the plight of the needy, not their religious affiliation. Likewise, there are no religious demands placed upon potential adoptive families; all we can hope for is a loving, accepting environment in which the child can grow. We take the apostle Paul’s admonishment seriously: the only thing that really matters is “faith expressing itself through love” (Galatians 5:6). Our paramount goal is to imitate Christ’s unconditional love toward others and show that actions speak louder than words ever could.
[/striphtml][/trim] Read More
Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur? At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere
[/striphtml][/trim] Read More
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut et massa mi. Aliquam in hendrerit urna. Pellentesque sit amet sapien fringilla, mattis ligula consectetur, ultrices mauris. Maecenas vitae mattis tellus. Nullam quis imperdiet augue.
Vestibulum auctor ornare leo, non suscipit magna interdum eu. Curabitur pellentesque nibh nibh, at maximus ante fermentum sit amet. Pellentesque commodo lacus at sodales sodales. Quisque sagittis orci ut diam condimentum, vel euismod erat placerat. In iaculis arcu eros, eget tempus orci facilisis id.
Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing!
[/striphtml][/trim] Read More