169 — Too Gory?
This one came in last week at teentpegsquestion@yahoo.com and really got my attention. I think it will intrigue you, too.
A very good friend of mine announced a year or so back that — after having grown up in the Churches of Christ, attending ACU, being active in a church singles group as an adult, etc. — he had decided that he didn’t believe in God. I finally had an opportunity to ask him recently how he came to this decision.
He explained that he’d been struggling with his faith for a long time, and then he saw Mel Gibson’s movie about the crucifixion. He was quick to say that he has no doubt that crucifixions were very much like what Gibson portrayed in his film … and he walked out of the theater disturbed. He said that he had heard gruesome descriptions many times in church, and had always been horrified, but after watching it with his own eyes, he found himself thinking, ‘Do I really believe that I’ve done anything bad enough to deserve what Jesus got? Do I believe that anyone I know has done something so terrible as to deserve that? To deserve extreme torture? And from a heaven/hell perspective, do I believe that anyone deserves extreme
torture for all of eternity?’ And once he decided that he didn’t deserve
the extreme violence that Jesus received, he couldn’t help but decide that he didn’t believe in Christianity.
So my question is — how would you respond to someone in this situation?
Full disclosure: I confess that I’m not at all certain that your friend is giving you the real reason he has chosen to leave his faith. It probably has a lot more to do with other disagreements he has with God re: discipline, faithfulness, etc. Still, let’s take his reasons at face value for now.
Did Jesus suffer more than was necessary for your friend? Is it true that he hasn’t done anything bad enough to require that level of punishment inflicted on Jesus? My response to him is: who is he to know that? God has the cosmic view, your friend a myopic, limited, tunnel vision of the earth dweller. The One who declares what is righteousness and what is sin is the only One who can declare the necessary cost of our reinstatement.
Plus, remember that Jesus wasn’t just dying for your friend — he was dying for all of us. It would be horribly ego-centric to determine that Jesus didn’t need to suffer that much for you… as if you were the only human who ever lived. He didn’t die for your friend, then for me, then for Paul, etc. He died “once for all.” All of the sins of mankind were piled on him.
Gibson had some real errors in his movie, but leave that aside for now. Let’s remind ourselves that dying for us was Jesus’ idea, but crucifixion came from the hearts of men, not God. God didn’t invent it, we did. Don’t blame God for our excesses and evil.
As concerning the matter of eternal punishment, as Greg England, Edward Fudge, and I have written several times, we do not believe that the “eternity burning in flames” doctrine is a true representation of Biblical teaching. It smacks more of Plato and early medieval theology than it does scripture. I believe that only Jesus can give eternal life and that he promised to give it to those who believe. Some of the evil will perish quickly and some might perish more slowly, but they all die — physically and spiritually.
But even if I am wrong (and it has been known to happen), I am the guilty man standing in the dock, ready to be judged. I have no right or standing to tell the judge what I think would be fair punishment for the crimes I committed and those I encouraged by my behavior, money, or silence. Only God has the right to set the punishment for only He knows how much dirt is on our souls and what laws of His righteousness we have broken. I trust Him. I fear Him. And I believe in Him.
April 19th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
Usually when I read the question, I try to think of my answer before reading your. About 99% of the time, I prefer your answer over mine. On this one, we were very close in how we’d respond.
April 19th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
P. S. That should read, “before reading your response.” About 99% of the time I also type too fast.
April 20th, 2009 at 2:55 am
There is the possibility that this fellow was never really born from above at all. He might have followed some Christian teaching, been baptised and joined a local church and still the possibility exists that he never really put his whole trust in Jesus.
My hope is that he will turn to Christ in repentance and faith.
After over 40 years of Bible study I am inclined to believe more than ever that there are many “professors” mixed in with the “possesers”. Those to whom Jesus said “I never knew you” likely had the folks at their church fooled.
We should never make the mistake of trying to understand the Bible in light of human experience, rather we understand human experience in the light of scripture.
I greatly admire and respect you and bro’ England. Just offering another perspective.
Grace,
Royce
April 20th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
This vignette is part of the real problem with making penal substitutionary atonement the centerpiece of Christian teaching.
The Quentin-Tarantino-ization of the crucifixion also undermines our work. Of course crucifixions were bad, awful, hideous. But they were not uncommon, and the gospel writers hardly mention the physical torture at all. That’s why I never liked the decision in “The Passion” to portray Jesus’ scourging as especially gruesome. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the Romans expended any more energy on Jesus than they did on the thieves crucified with him. He was just another Jew.
On a related note, there is no reason to speculate that he left because he was never truly a believer. The only times that possibility is mentioned in Scripture, it is directly related to false teachers who are working to lead others astray, or those who try to wow Jesus with the greatness of their lives.
Sometimes people really do taste the heavenly gift and then turn back.
Nick, I wasn’t questioning the fact that he once was a believer. I was questioning his reasons for leaving his faith behind.
April 20th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Perhaps Nick was referring to Royce’s comment?
You’re right. I read from the top down instead of the bottom up. Rookie mistake. My bad!
TO answer the original person’s question, your sin required separation from God forever. Jesus took that away for us. The gory nature of crucifixion just serves as a reminder of what sin requires. Animal sacrifices weren’t clean, either.
Sometimes, I think we’ve just become effete, we are so separated from death in our sanitized, urban world. The chicken nuggets we order at McDonalds came from a living, breathing bird. Those shoes we wear are made from the skin of a cow. They didn’t spring from the ground in a size 8 1/2.
April 20th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Danny — you just *think* those chicken nuggets came from a living, breathing bird.
(Always question “meat” that doesn’t look like “meat”. Just don’t use harsh interrogation techniques.)
Point taken though — sacrifice is never pretty. Especially to our modern sensitivities.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:04 am
Nick, mark this on the wall. “I agree completely with Nick”
“There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the Romans expended any more energy on Jesus than they did on the thieves crucified with him.”
If anything it seems Jesus pain may have been shortened, for whatever reason. He died first and was spared the pain of both legs being broken, to finalize their death, by smothering.
a movie is just a movie!
April 21st, 2009 at 3:17 am
For a summary (at no cost to you) of Scripture evidence that those finally lost will truly perish and not suffer everlasting conscious torment,see http://www.edwardfudge.com/JETS_final_end_wicked.pdf. For more detailed examinations, see books Two Views of Hell, or The Fire That Consumes, at(www.EdwardFudge.com/books.html ).
April 21st, 2009 at 2:23 pm
and there was MUCH rejoicing! (hooray!)
I like these days, Laymond.
And I’m a little leery of saying that our sin *required* eternal separation. I think we’re on more solid ground by saying that sin *created* separation that could only be healed by God coming to get us.