Christianity Unraveled

April 27th, 2020

One topic that has been seeming to be most prevalent on our minds is salvation. While I could talk about the injustice (as well as the not-completely-Biblical foundations) I see with the terms of salvation as described by protestant Christianity, the branch that I grew up in, I find that it doesn't reach what I feel the root of the problem is: Why is salvation even necessary?

Such a phrase I could never bring myself to say in front of most of my family and friends. It seems as if this one topic is so untouchable that to even suggest an alternate view is to discredit God. It also concerns where our souls go (if we do in fact have one) after death, so it is completely understandable that an attack to the doctrine of salvation feels so personal. After all, when you make your God personal, you take everything about him (or her, or they, or even it) personally as well. Forgive me if I offended you, but I do hope that you stay to hear my reasoning for the invalidity of the necessity of salvation.

I could begin with the definition of unconditional love (agape), which we tend to attribute to God. Agape is the love that thinks only of the other and how to meet their needs. It is a sacrifice, a constant sacrifice focused on providing only goodwill to others. Above all, agape requires nothing and gives everything.

I find it impossible to say that an entity whose self is agape can refuse to bring the best option to people, which would be heaven for those of you who believe in the afterlife. Of course, it can be argued that God shows his love through giving us a choice for salvation (though, I hardly believe it is a choice at this point. . .more like a chance of luck and privilege) or that he is perfect in love, but also perfect in justice. I still find those answers unsatisfying, and I suppose I probably will for a long time.

But I digress; back to my question: why is salvation even necessary?

Why is it that God cannot allow people who are 'imperfect' to remain in his holy presence? Besides the argument that he was with us (and even is to this day), this question raises another one – if God cannot have 'imperfect' people in his presence, then there must be a higher power or rule than God himself. After all, that's the reasoning behind our human moral code, right (though, even animals such as rats and monkeys have been shown to display empathy and a sense of morality)? We must ask, if God is the Ultimate Being, shouldn't he be able to make the rules? Does God not get what he wants? If he is in fact the embodiment of selfless love, would he not work to ensure that each person receives what is best for each person? If he is powerful enough to do this, then he would be able to overthrow the classical definition of justice that we ascribe to God. But he apparently does not, letting billions of people suffer in hell (which, I must admit, definitely is not the best for each person). However, in the theology presented, it is shown that God is unable to change the definition of justice – thus, there is a higher law above God. Unless, of course, his view of love is vastly different from ours.

Hear these words: God cannot be perfect in justice while being perfect in love. God cannot be perfect in justice while being perfect in mercy. God cannot be perfect in justice while being perfect in compassion.

Is God not powerful enough to say that his love and mercy overrules his need for justice? Or is he, and we are not humble enough to admit that our view of justice may not be the divine view of justice? Is God not merciful enough to allow his compassion overpower his need for justice? Or is he, and we are not humble enough to admit that we desire retribution over restoration when we say that God demands perfection? Is God not powerful? Is God not loving?

Often times, I retreat into my mind and wonder if salvation is even necessary. If it is even real. I wonder if we were taught a lie about God since the beginning of our acknowledgement of his existence. The lie that God requires sacrifice. Maybe Jesus wasn't even a sacrifice.

These thoughts run through my head over and over, and they begin to make more sense than the thoughts I've known for twenty years of my life (or, at least fifteen of the ones I could probably remember). Perhaps God sent Jesus to stop the sacrifices of innocent animals. Perhaps God sent Jesus to change our views of "who's in and who's out." Perhaps God, in his radical way of existence, showed true agape and servant love by offering Jesus as a sacrifice to us. To extend a feeling of mutuality. To extend a radical and unprecedented move unknown by any other religion. To extend a love only God could.