From time to time our lovely Christian Union, fine upstanding kind people, of their kindness, ferry toasties to students in college in return for questions relation to Christianity. Tonight is one such night. Being the debt laden, poverty stricken student that I am, free food is a rarity not to be passed up. Thus I chose at random a paragraph from their "
doctrinal basis" and happened by chance to fall upon a particularly heretical tenant of their organisation: imputed righteousness. The paragraph reads
"Those who believe in Christ are pardoned all their sins and accepted in
God's sight only because of the righteousness of Christ credited to
them; this justification is God's act of undeserved mercy, received
solely by trust in him and not by their own efforts."
This, I thought, is too good an opportunity to pass up. I thus fired off my toastie winning question:
"Does the doctrine of imputed righteousness preclude the concept of a just god? Considering that the conventional Christian understanding of forgiveness requires reparation for sins, does it also preclude the possibility of a merciful god? If imputed righteousness is true, why did Jesus bother dying?"
Call it the New Evangelisation. The workers wages being a toastie...
 |
| Veniat ad me, fra |
What was the toastie answer, once you'd finished grilling them?
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't so much of a grilling. The person who came round with the toastie (very pleasant toastie it was too) was a lovely guy. He couldn't defend it and said it was something he would need to think about further. I admitted that I was using it as an example of how the Christian Unions in this country have been taken over by some fairly problematic people.
ReplyDelete