Something I've been thinking about lately (actually for a few months now) is how some people who don't know God can be so very loving and life-giving. I'm reading through Matthew right now (possibly my favorite book in the Bible... Definitely the one I read the most...) and I came across a verse in chapter 5 that says, "Let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven." My problem with this concept of Christians loving others and through that people seeing the love of God, is that many non-christians and strong atheists live amazing lives, sacrificing of themselves for a better world. Why do they do it? Is it truly my love for God that drives me to do the good that I do, or would I still do those things if I didn't believe in God, because that's just in my nature?
I do believe that we are inherently not good people. We have the tug to do wrong, to sin, to hurt others, to curse God. But what is it in non-Christians that pulls them to do good? Why are there so may in the Peace Corps, in Teach for America, in food banks, heading up amazing and good organizations and causes for the betterment of the world? It's true that there are plenty of Christians in these organizations. I'm not arguing that Christians are not very present in the movement to better the world and bring the kingdom, but I just want to focus a bit on the motivation of others in their pursuit of a better world.
Could it be that God can use people who do not believe in him, to bring in his kingdom? But what about when God does not get praise for that work ("..that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father..")? Is it that while those good deeds are good right now, they're not good for reward in the next life (a whole other concept that I won't get into right now but that has puzzled me forever)?
Why do people who don't love God do good things, if all we are without God is depraved, purely sinful, bad, people? I reject the idea that they do good for bad, perverse motives. Many do it because they just love people. But I thought all love comes from God....?
What's up with that?
I have no idea.
So talk to me. What do you think?
5 comments:
I disagree with you on one thing, I strongly believe that humans are inherently good. People are not predisposed to do harm or "sin".
As an atheist and with all due respect to you and all Christians, I believe morals / empathy do not come from any deity but are a direct result from an evolutionary process. Simply put, morality and the predisposition to do good are a social construct designed to enhance the survivability of the species.
I'm glad you are putting this up to question, most Christians would just say morality and goodness come exclusively from God. End of story.
Open-mindedness never hurt anyone... :)
Um abraço de São Miguel, =)
André
Hey Juliana,
I really like the way your thoughts always get my brain going. :) I would like to give this some more thought, but I don't know if I'll have time so I have to get this down:
I believe the division between Christians and non-Christians is based not on our love for others, but on God's (totally unmerited) love for us.
God's love for us should make Christians a people full of love for others. All human love, Christian or non-Christian, is still an extremely imperfect shadow of God's. None of our love is perfect this side of heaven. But I am sure that non-Christians are not incapable of loving, or loving well in some human sense. They're not incapable of doing good, it's just flawed good. There's a restraining grace of God that keeps depravity from running its full course. Depravity is a systemic evil, but the creation was originally good. That's why, for instance, Christians believe in the value of all human life.
All good deeds done without the gospel are flawed because 1. They are performed by people who, however wonderful they are, have never submitted themselves to God, and 2. They are not done for the sake of God's eternal kingdom.
You say you reject the idea that they have bad motives. I say, first of all, do any of us ever have perfect motives? And two, as great as their motives may be, they are incorrect. They miss the best motive, the completely perfect motive, which is Jesus Christ.
I think it probably depends. I suspect that everyday good deeds--being kind to a stranger, caring for a sick friend, that kind of thing--are done for substantially the same reasons by both Christians and non-Christians--sympathy, primarily, and a concern for others. I suspect that religious and ideological motivations become more important in acts involving greater commitment--such as joining the Peace Corp--or in acts aimed not at helping an individual or two, but in changing society in some way (political campaigning, civil disobedience, etc.). I would guess, although of course I do not know, that most of the non-religious who involve themselves in these things do have some sort of a sense of something bigger than themselves that is worth fighting for--whether that's some sort of secular utopia, a political ideology, a sense of justice, or whatever--and these things bear a lot of similarity to Christian notions of the kingdom of God. Of course, it cuts both ways--people with this kind of a sense, religious or non-religious, not only fight for justice but also perpetrate acts of terrorism.
If there's anything unique that religion can provide, I suspect that it's in convincing people that their work is worth doing, and in helping them persevere through difficult times. I think I would find it much easier to get discouraged about the state of the world, and see attempts to change it as futile, were it not for my faith in the ultimate triumph of good.
Those musings were more psychological than theological, I suppose. As for issues in the latter that you bring up, personally I see no problem in God working through non-Christians in all sorts of ways. I find some so-called "secular" music much more spiritually edifying than much of what passes for worship music nowadays, for example. Similarly, I don't know why God can't work to bring about his kingdom through people who don't consciously express belief in him. I would also note that, as I said, many such people probably believe in *something* that is playing the role of God in their life, and in some cases that may count, in my mind, as a sort of tacit awareness of the God whom they do not expressly affirm (or even explicitly deny).
I would also wonder, in response to Katie, what it means for "Jesus Christ" to be a motive. A motive is one's reason for doing something. How can a person, rather than an intended state of affairs, or a value or something, stand as a motive? Perhaps you had something along the lines of pleasing Jesus, or bringing him glory, as a motive. Fair enough, but then I don't see why that's any better of a motive than wanting to help others. It's certainly not bad to want to please Jesus, but I don't think that one must have such a motive to genuinely do good things. To return to one of my initial examples, when anyone, Christian or non-Christian, helps take care of a sick friend or relative, I highly doubt that their motive is to bring glory to God or bring about his kingdom, or anything like that. Their motive is to help the sick person. And I think that's just fine, personally.
These are good questions you are asking, Juliana. It does not really matter what I think, but what God thinks; therefore, I will try to concisely share my understanding of Scripture on this topic.
As far as I can see, the Bible would not call what unbelievers do "good" even though it may seem so to us. "Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin" (Romans 14:23). Before the Holy Spirit causes a person to be born again, he is "dead in trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1). I think we would both agree that a dead person cannot do anything good. That is what unbelievers are to God.
I think the problem comes when our view of good and God's view conflict. Sin exists mainly in relation to God, so even if a man is doing "good" to another man, if he is not doing it for God, he is sinning.
Not to get into (too much of) a theological dispute with you, Heath, but as far as I can tell, all Paul's saying in Romans 14 is that you shouldn't act against your conscience, and in Ephesians 2 he's speaking of the changed lives of those in the church he's writing to since they converted. In neither case is he making a statement about the goodness (or not) of the actions of nonbelievers. The Holy Spirit changing the lives of people who come to faith in Christ is wholly compatible with non-Christians doing good things (whether you want to say that the Holy Spirit is implicitly working through them I leave up to you).
Moreover, were I to attribute the view you're putting forward to Jesus, I'd have a great deal of difficulty understanding the Parable of the Good Samaritan. The Samaritans were a despised religious minority, because they worshiped (according to the Jews) on the "wrong" mountain; and yet, according to Jesus, this Samaritan was a much better "neighbor" than the two highly religious Jews preceding him in the story. Jesus' picking a Samaritan as the hero of the parable is rather like a modern-day preacher in the Bible Belt telling a story about the local atheist helping someone neglected by Christians. The point of the story, in either case, is not to think that you're good just because you've got the right religious beliefs; for even those of different religions can be better people than you.
Post a Comment