I once adjusted my computer’s screen saver to scroll through Romans 8:1 – “There is no now condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” As one whose inner critic can work overtime, that’s how badly I needed to be reminded of God’s affirming love. I consider this the heart of the Good News Jesus came to convey – that God has transformed the judgment we so fear into love: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.”
Lest we doubt this message of affirmation, Jesus doubles down in the next sentence:
“Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.”
Why did Jesus need to clarify this matter? Was it to counter a message being conveyed by the religious leaders, that God was not pleased, that people were in trouble? Living under the tyranny of the Romans, the latest in a string of conquerors, could lead to such a conclusion. In a culture that saw prosperity as a sign of blessing and misfortune as the result of sin, people might be quick to see in their circumstances God’s punishment for unfaithfulness. Thus the idea that God’s representative, his very own son, should have arrived on the scene in person – could feel like, “Uh oh, we’re in trouble now….” Hence the importance of these words to soothe and open hearts: “God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.”
Jesus isn’t saying there is no condemnation anywhere – his next words suggest it is possible, even likely, for those who have been presented with the truth about Jesus Christ and have chosen not to believe: “Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”
Is this “condemnation” for those who do not believe in the name of the only Son of God a punishment – or is it simply the consequence of their choice? God may not have sent his Son into the world for condemnation – but he didn’t say he would remove the consequences of our choices. People are free to draw near to God’s love, or to turn away.
Are those who have no interest in Jesus’ salvation still covered by it? What do we mean when we say Jesus took on all the sin of all the world on the cross? Did he redeem even those who choose not to believe in his power to redeem, who deny any need for it? Those who believe in universal salvation would say so. Those who believe each person has to say “yes” are left wondering.
All this “on the one hand,” “on the other hand” makes my head hurt. It can get in the way of our receiving the gift I believe Jesus offers us – to accept his grace, to allow him to take us off all the hooks we have ourselves dangling from, that we’re not good enough, smart enough, wise enough, compassionate enough.
Enough! The Son of God did not come into the world to condemn the world. The Son of God came to fulfill his father’s mission to reclaim, restore and renew all things and all people to wholeness in Christ. I’m taking that deal.
Why did Jesus need to clarify this matter? Was it to counter a message being conveyed by the religious leaders, that God was not pleased, that people were in trouble? Living under the tyranny of the Romans, the latest in a string of conquerors, could lead to such a conclusion. In a culture that saw prosperity as a sign of blessing and misfortune as the result of sin, people might be quick to see in their circumstances God’s punishment for unfaithfulness. Thus the idea that God’s representative, his very own son, should have arrived on the scene in person – could feel like, “Uh oh, we’re in trouble now….” Hence the importance of these words to soothe and open hearts: “God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.”
Jesus isn’t saying there is no condemnation anywhere – his next words suggest it is possible, even likely, for those who have been presented with the truth about Jesus Christ and have chosen not to believe: “Those who believe in him are not condemned; but those who do not believe are condemned already, because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”
Is this “condemnation” for those who do not believe in the name of the only Son of God a punishment – or is it simply the consequence of their choice? God may not have sent his Son into the world for condemnation – but he didn’t say he would remove the consequences of our choices. People are free to draw near to God’s love, or to turn away.
Are those who have no interest in Jesus’ salvation still covered by it? What do we mean when we say Jesus took on all the sin of all the world on the cross? Did he redeem even those who choose not to believe in his power to redeem, who deny any need for it? Those who believe in universal salvation would say so. Those who believe each person has to say “yes” are left wondering.
All this “on the one hand,” “on the other hand” makes my head hurt. It can get in the way of our receiving the gift I believe Jesus offers us – to accept his grace, to allow him to take us off all the hooks we have ourselves dangling from, that we’re not good enough, smart enough, wise enough, compassionate enough.
Enough! The Son of God did not come into the world to condemn the world. The Son of God came to fulfill his father’s mission to reclaim, restore and renew all things and all people to wholeness in Christ. I’m taking that deal.
No comments:
Post a Comment