John 20:19-22
I know someone who likes to explain to
me his philosophy of religion every chance he gets. This is how he looks at it,
he says. It’s better to believe in God than not believe in God. If God is real,
you win! And if it turns out there is no God, what have you lost? Nothing. On
the other hand, if you choose not to believe and it turns out you should have,
then God might be pretty ticked off at you somewhere down the road. So, you
should believe in God, because – really, what have you got to lose? It’s as
safe as a bet can be.
My friend likes this argument and
maybe even thinks he invented it. He didn’t. It’s called Pascal’s Wager, named
after the 17th century philosopher. So it’s been around for a while.
And it probably appeals to lots of people – including, maybe, you.
What I need to confess to you is that
… this theory? it offends me. And I have never said that before, because it
seems inappropriate for me to be offended by it.
All I can say is that it feels like a
weird way for humans to convince themselves they have it all under control.
Like you can choose to believe if you decide it’s in your best interest to
believe. I find so many things about that troubling. And opposed to what I read
in the scriptures. And the readings today from the Gospel of John and the first
epistle of John really emphasize that for me. I will try to explain why that
is, but first let me take a minute to talk about the books that go by the name
John.
People used to assume that the gospel
of John and the epistles of John were written by the same guy called John. When
you look at them closely, you can see that the writings share some of the same
ideas, language, and style. So it was reasonable to assume they were all written
by the same hand. But scholars today tend to think this is unlikely. More
likely, they think, that they are a part of something we call the Johannine
community.
The story of the Johannine community
is that it was made up of people who were originally Jewish Christians. They
were a part of a Jewish synagogue and they believed that Christianity was
continuous with Judaism. They believed there was nothing inconsistent with
their beliefs about Jesus and their Jewish traditions. They felt perfectly at
home within the Jewish community. Even though there were differences between
them and their non-Christian Jewish brothers and sisters, they felt at home –
for a while.
But then tension began to rise.
Gradually everyone began to feel those differences as being more important than
the similarities. And eventually the Christians were pushed out of the
community – which was painful and traumatic. And maybe you see some of that
pain reflected in the way John’s gospel has a tendency to disparage the Jews.
I suppose as a result of a traumatic
rejection like that, you could become a person who decides that you just can’t
trust anyone, that the most important thing is to be self-reliant. You could
decide that your highest value is to make sure you are doing what serves you
best. Take care of yourself and don’t worry about the rest.
But in reality, it seems like what
really happened as a result of the break, was they became aware of how
important community was to them. So they cherished it and nurtured it. They
loved it, and all the people in it. This comes through very clearly in the epistles
of John.
Notice in the few verses from the beginning of 1 John how many times the author uses the
first-person plural: We, us, our. This pattern continues throughout this set of
epistles. The person holding the pen is always conscious of the whole community
standing with him. You get the sense that the whole community has made the
decision that this is who they are, that their lives individually are all
dependent on one another. The community is essential to them.
And to us as well. This is a
foundational belief of the church – that we are followers of Christ together. That one cannot really be a
Christian alone. It is not an independent pursuit; it is something we do
together if we do it at all.
And this gets back to the fundamental
problem I have with the “Pascal’s Wager” school of faith. It has underlying it
an essential belief that faith is self-benefitting, that it is something you do
out of self-interest. That the primary reason for believing is to take care of yourself.
And that you simply choose to believe,
the same as you might choose to put on lipstick or go to the gym. Because, it
can’t hurt and it might help.
And while faith surely is beneficial
to one’s well-being, Pascal’s Wager misses out on the reason why. It is
beneficial because it is community. We need one another, and in the church, we
are there for one another.
The Holy Spirit, that parting gift
that Jesus gave his disciples before he left them, is how we receive the power
to be together as a community. That first evening of the first Easter, when the
resurrected Jesus looked in on a frightened and confused little group of
disciples, he loved them and gave them what they needed – the Spirit – which
would give them the power to love as he loved them – and would give them the
power to remain together.
The power of the Spirit is still with
us today and it is what enables us to keep on dancing this dance of faith
together and making a difference in the world. Pascal’s Wager would have us
choose the safe bet, but real Christian faith is about taking chances for the
sake of the world God loves.
No comments:
Post a Comment