A person that I greatly admire recently wrote to me an e-mail telling me that when death looms in the horizon the best thing to do is to live your life to the fullest. This person is a self-admitted agnostic that I care for and have known for a long time. His e-mail came to me as a respond to a video he forwarded to me about a certain professor's last lecture months before his death. This professor spoke of living life to the fullest, forgiving those that hurt you, not harboring grudges, forsaking materialism, enjoying life. As the man spoke he revealed that he had been diagnosed with cancer and the doctors told him he had a few more months to live. Naturally, I asked my friend, 'though these things are beautiful, how much of a difference does it make after we die?'
He sent me a touching, well-thought out, lengthy e-mail. He recounted the lives of two close friends of his that he admired. They both faced life threatening illnesses. One helped countless people overcome addiction through AA; the other denied the counsel of a priest/pastor in preference to a doctor that would be able to cure him. The former committed suicide; the latter lived. Then he reiterated his point, "the way we live our lives, no matter how long we have left, is much more important...And that means living the best life we can live, acomplishing the most things we can as long as we are in this world."
Those words sound so right and so wrong. Why is this so? I mean, in many ways they're not wrong and I would agree, but something about that philosophy bugs me. Why? Before I met Christ I would have hopped right on that boat without reservations. How do you respond to someone that says that there is an order to the Universe and there may be a 'God,' but none of the gods of this world have 'convinced him intellectually' of their existence and truth? Should I respond at all? As a follower of Christ, how do you reply to someone that has searched for meaning and life after death, but came up empty and in the face of that emptiness decided to live the best life he could while he was on earth?
4/16/08
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Man! I can see this turning out to be a great edifying discussion.
"It is this drive for self-justification; this drive for self-righteousness that lurks beneath the surface of any unregenerate person's moral actions...Yet even the persons who seem completely together, the persons who experience no great moral failing of any sort--even these persons seek to justify themselves and to rid their minds of God. Their morality isn't driven by a desire to glorify God, but by a desire to perpetuate their unrepentance."
Berny, thank you for giving us such an insightful response on Romans 1. I couldn't agree with you any more.
Remy, in regards to your question on how should we as Christians respond to someone who believes there may be a "god" but that none of the ones of this world convince him intellectually, I can say the following.
First, I believe we must take into account the truth of Romans 1. Secondly, it seems like your friend is truly seeking an answer to one of man's greatest questions, which is "what is the meaning of life?"
Your friend wrote, "the way we live our lives, no matter how long we have left, is much more important...And that means living the best life we can live, accomplishing the most things we can as long as we are in this world." - My question to your friend would be, "what exactly constitutes 'the best life'? Does the 'best life' mean material satisfaction? Does the 'best life' mean achieving personal accolades? The point I am trying to make is that no matter what we define 'best life' to mean, it will always be meaningless apart from God. In Ecclesiastes, we see how Solomon literally tried to live that 'best life' in every sense of the term; only to realize that apart from the true and living God it was all meaninglessness under the sun. A vanity of vanities. I am sure there is more that can be said regarding this topic so please feel free to add to this.
In reference to him not finding a "god" that can convince him intellectually, I would like to include a quote from Alistair Begg:
"We may think to examine Christ intellectually, but He comes to examine us morally and spiritually"
Often times I find myself trying to question Christ but the truth of the matter is that no one has ever rejected Christ only on an intellectual ground. Yet, when I stop and think the problem isn't an intellectual one, but a moral one. In other words, I have found most people reject Christ on a moral level. Why is this? Because most people are not after truth. Some people think they are after "truth", but only the truth that will, as Berny said, be self-justifying and convenient.
Anyway, these are some initial thoughts that came to mind as I read your post. I hope to add more to this later.
I have been so blessed by both of your posts. Thank you so much Berny and Freddy. I would retype the words you wrote that Freddy quoted because they they impacted me so by God's Grace, but I don't want to be too redundant.
So it seems here like there really is a problem of morality. A man's morality in living is only a cover that allows them to perpetuate their immorality and desire to reject God. This is what I understood from Berny. And from Freddy I understood that people reject God intellectually due to the "hardness of their heart," their inherent immorality.
But can an unbeliever seek God (honestly and without prejudice) and begin on an intellectual level that can lead him to the moral level? I know that sounds unclear. Let me reiterate it. I think of C.S. Lewis and especially G.K. Chesterton. G.K. Chesterton recounts in his autobiographical book, "Orthodoxy" that as he philosophized on spirituality and morality he began discovering something he thought was completely new. Eventually he came to realize that his thoughts were nothing new, but very old. That his ideas and thoughts had already been revealed by God through Christ and in Christianity. This led him to his conversion.
Now here is an instance where an unbeliever's intellect drew him to the Lord as he sought Him with a seeking, humble heart. Now granted, coming to know Christ intimately cannot happen outside of morality. The whole point of the Cross is the problem of sin. When Christ comes into us it is not a mental enlightenment, it is a spiritual cleansing and revival. As Jesus says, "you must be born again."
So, can indeed an unbeliever be drawn to Christ with the help of intellect, someone that is sincerely seeking? Or does Romans 1bind all thought as leading unbelievers to become "fools?" As Berny stated, we are made in the image of God and that image hasn't been completely obliterated. Can't the Lord use our mentality, which we have becase He is immensely bright and we have been made in His image, to lead us to the Pilgrim's path?
Post a Comment