on religious pluralism

A letter I wrote to a local newspaper (it's hard trying to keep letters to the editor as short as possible):

"Though I have little objection to much of Mr. X's letter, his third point, “that all religions, as long as they carry roughly the same ideals, such as peace, love, kindness and empathy, are a path to God”, strikes me as being implausible.

This view is commonly called religious pluralism. While it’s true that the world’s great religions share some common moral beliefs and values (kindness, love, etc.), there are fundamental and incompatible differences in their essential beliefs that separate them. For example, some religions believe in one god, others in many gods. Some believe in a personal god, others an impersonal one. Some believe god is totally distinct from the universe, others believe that the universe and god are the same.

Similarly, some religions believe in a physical afterlife, others in a purely spiritual one, while others still believe that our existence ends at death. Similar differences exist in most of the major doctrines held by these religions. These beliefs are mutually exclusive and cannot all be true at the same time.

One philosopher has pointed out that “far from teaching the same thing, the major religions have radically different perspectives on the religious ultimate, the human predicament, and the nature of salvation.” This being the case, we are faced with two options: 1) All religions are wrong; or 2) One religion is right and all others are wrong. So, the view that different religions all lead to god is wrong.

But why do some people hold to this pluralist view? One reason is that they consider espousing only one religion to be true (commonly called religious exclusivism) to be arrogant. The problem with this reason is that it is self-contradictory. The pluralist believes that his view is exclusively true and that the religious exclusivist is wrong. Thus, pluralism is just as exclusivistic as the religious exclusivism that the pluralist opposes. The pluralist, then, is left with two possibilities: 1) Live with a self-contradictory belief; or 2) Abandon pluralism.

Is it possible to know if one of the religions is the true one? Any true religion will most likely be logical and fit the facts known through experience. I follow the lead of those who think that any religion worth following will be open to (indeed, invite) critical examination of its truth claims. And any view about religion, such as pluralism, ought to do the same."

Keller on exclusivity

Here's Tim Keller's sermon on how there can only be one true religion

www.download.redeemer.com/sermons/Exclusivity_How_can_there_be.mp3

Titus chapter 1 vss 1 to 3 Part 2

1_Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ for the faith of God’s elect and the knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness –
2_A faith and knowledge resting in the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,
3_And at his appointed season he brought his word to light through the preaching entrusted to me by the command of God our Savior,
(NIV)

The word “apostle” (Greek: apostolos) has two main meanings, a narrow meaning and a wider meaning.

It can mean simply “messenger” (as in Jn 13:16; 2 Cor. 8:23; Phil. 2:25) or it can describe a particular group of specially commissioned ambassadors or missionaries who received special authority from Christ to represent Him through preaching, teaching, prayer, and healing (e.g. 1 Cor. 9:1-5; 15:7; Gal. 1:17, 19). Paul uses the word in both senses but the majority of those are of the second meaning.

The following were either specifically called apostles or had the role of an apostle:

1) Jesus is called the “the apostle and high priest whom we confess” (Heb. 3:1). This points to His special role as God the Father’s ambassador on earth. “Whoever receives me receives…him who sent me” (Mark 9:37)

2) The 12 disciples specially commissioned by Jesus. These learnt from Him, and were sent to preach and conduct a healing ministry. (Matt. 10:2; Mk. 3:14; 6:30; Lk. 6:13; 9:10; 11:49; 17:5; 22:14; 24:10). Later Matthias was added to replace Judas (Acts 1:26). The 12 were the primary witnesses of the resurrection. Their post-resurrection roles were to preach the gospel of Christ, establish churches and teach sound doctrine (Acts 4:33; 5:12; 5:29; 8:1,14-18). These were a rather motley assortment of characters – fishermen, a zealot, a tax collector. None were formally educated in the Rabbinic tradition (Acts 4:13). But it was these laymen that Christ chose to establish His church and to be the guardians of the Gospel tradition.

3) Paul, who encountered the risen Jesus and was commissioned to be the apostle to the gentiles. He calls himself an apostle (Ro. 1:1; Gal. 1:1), defends his rights as an apostle (2 Cor. 11-12; Gal 1), is described by Luke as an apostle (Acts 14:14), and believed that his apostolic role involved suffering for the gospel (1 Cor. 4:9-13; 2 Cor. 4:7-12; 11:23-29). In addition, he claimed that Christ was the chief cornerstone of the church and that the apostles’ role were as primary foundation stones (Eph. 2:20). In addition to the criterion of being witnesses to Christ’s resurrection, Paul adds the qualification of performing signs and wonders (2 Cor. 12:12). Paul’s apostleship was challenged by certain members of the Corinthian and Galatian churches.

4) Others were called apostle:

a) James (Gal. 1:19; 2:9)

b) Barnabas (Acts 14:4, 14) -

c) Silas (1 Thess. 2:6)

d) Possibly Andronicus and Junia (Rom. 16:7)

Aside from James, who was the head of the Jerusalem church, these don’t seem to be on the same footing as the 12 or Paul (who was described as THE apostle to the gentiles). Also, since the word can mean “messenger”, some believe that this sense may be in view.

5) The importance of the apostles in the formation and continued ministry of the church is that the teaching of the New Testament is apostolic. Their authority to teach is based on their relationship to Christ.

The concept of “apostle” originated before Paul. He speaks of “those who were apostles before me” (Gal. 1:17). In the creed of 1 Cor. 15, he states that Christ appeared to “all the apostles” before appearing to Paul. The creed also suggests that there were more than 12 apostles. Verses 3 to 9 say:

“For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep: then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also. For I am the least of the apostles, and not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.” (NASB)

There appears to be a distinction between the “twelve” and “all the apostles”. Paul seems to be describing a span of time that limits the time for which apostles could be appointed, beginning with Cephas (i.e. Peter) and ending with Paul (“Last of all…he appeared to me), suggesting a finality of resurrection appearances. But the exact number of apostles is not known.

Paul is explicit in most of his letters in emphasizing his apostleship due to doubts about the authenticity of his commission. He opens these letters with the self ascription of “apostles”. In 1 Cor. 9:1 he says: “Am I not an apostles? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?”

The importance of apostolic authority is important to the nature of New Testament teaching. If the writers of the New Testament documents were not commissioned by Christ, we could not know on what basis to believe and accept what was written. For Christians, the chain of authority flows from the New Testament writings, to the authors (who have apostolic authority), to Jesus Christ himself. Without that authority, the New Testament cannot be seen as authoritative for Christian belief.

Titus Chapter 1 vss 1 to 3 Part 1

1_Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ for the faith of God’s elect and the knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness –
2_A faith and knowledge resting n the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,
3_And at his appointed season he brought his word to light through the preaching entrusted to me by the command of God our Savior,
(NIV)

Paul presents himself as a “servant” (v.1), literally “slave” (Greek: doulos).
A slave was a person held in bondage to a master. He had no freedom to act or speak other than at the command of his owner.

Two related words are translated in the New Testament as “servant” or “slave”. “Servant” is diakonos. “Slave” is doulos. The first deals with table service when done as employment while the second deals with a bonded slave; but the distinction doesn’t seem all that clear cut in the Bible. In both cases there is a superior and (employer or owner/master) one who works in obedience for their benefit. One can see that this concept of human servants transfers well to the concept of servant of God.

Paul uses both terms but reserves the second one with regard to his relationship to God and to Christ. That Paul calls himself a slave of God shows his complete submission to God’s will.

He calls himself a “servant” (i.e. slave) of Christ (Rom 1:1; Gal 1:10; Php 1:1). James (Jam 1:1), Peter (1Pe 1:1) and Jude (Jude 1:1) also call themselves slaves of God and/or Christ. Other places where Paul uses the word ‘slave’ is : Php 2:7; Col 4:12; 2Tim 2:24. When talking about his relationship to God he very often uses the term for ‘slave’. In other cases he uses ‘diakonos’ to describe a relationship to the gospel or the Church, e.g. Eph 3:7; Col1:7; 1:25.

Many Greeks and Jews looked down on servants and slaves. But this usual attitude is turned on its head by Jesus’ Lordship. To be a servant of Christ is to confess Him as one’s Lord. In Matt 20:26-27, Jesus speaks of servant leadership. To be great one must become a servant. In fact, to be first one must become a slave. Jesus’ own example of this type of leadership was exemplified in his washing the feet of his disciples (Jn 13:1-17)

Titus: Introduction

Titus is mentioned a number of times in the New Testament (2 Cor. 2:13; 7:6, 13-14; 8:6, 16, 23; 12:18; Gal. 2:1, 3; 2Tim 4:10).
Paul calls him his true son in their common faith, meaning that he’s Paul’s spiritual son, just like Timothy (1Tim 1:2) and Onesimus (Phm 10). All three were converted through Paul’s ministry.

Titus might have converted during Paul’s ministry of Acts 11:25-26, but since he is never mentioned in Acts, it’s hard to know for sure. He was certainly a Christian by the time of the Jerusalem council (Acts 15) since Paul took him to the council as an example of a Greek convert who needed not to be circumcised to attain salvation.

Paul trusted Titus enough to assign him important tasks, particularly missions to Corinth and his assignment in Crete (the subject of the epistle).

Titus was not an apostle. Any authority he had was given by Paul. He could be viewed as Paul’s pastoral assistant and special apostolic representative. At the time of this letter Titus was in Crete, trying to address unfinished business from the time the churches there were first established. The conditions were not good as evidenced by the people’s low moral standards and the existence of false teachers.

The letter is commonly dated in the early 60’s AD. Since there is no reference to the persecution of Christians by Nero in 64, the letter was probably written after Paul’s house arrest (Acts 28) but before 64.

One should always read the entire work straight through before examining it more closely. Reading the letter reveals this brief outline:
1)Salutation (1:1-4)
2)Qualifications for elders (1:5-9)
3) Warnings regarding false teachers (1:10-16)
4) Instructions for teaching different groups in the Church (2:1-10)
5)Teaching about God’s grace and salvation (2:11-15)
6) Teaching regarding a believer’s obligation as a citizen of the state (3:1-2)
7)Reasons for living good lives based on God’s love (3:3-8)
8)Instructions on dealing with spiritual error (3:9-11)
9) Final instructions and greetings (3:9-11)