All Roads Lead to Heaven? — Kathleen Parker Does Theology
The column by
Kathleen Parker is yet another signpost of the current age and the worldview of
the secularized classes. In their view, what evangelicals believe about the
Gospel of Jesus Christ is just out of bounds and embarrassing.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
What catches the attention of a columnist
for The Washington Post? A recent column by Kathleen Parker indicates
that theology has become a focus of national attention. Kathleen Parker used
her column in The Washington Post to take on Franklin Graham and his
belief that belief in Jesus Christ is the only way of salvation.
Parker began
her column with the fact that Franklin Graham prayed outside the Pentagon last
Thursday, rather than inside, having been dis-invited by the Pentagon as the
speaker for its scheduled National Day of Prayer service. Graham, you will
remember, was dis-invited because of statements he made about Islam —
statements directly referenced by the Army spokesman as “not appropriate.”
Those
statements made clear reference to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the only message
of salvation, to Christ as the only Savior, and to Islam as an evil belief
system that pulls millions away from faith in Christ and delivers no hope of
salvation. In a later interview, Graham made his point about the uniqueness of
the Christian Gospel, adding Hinduism as another example of a false religion.
All this was
too much for Kathleen Parker, who asked: “Oh well, it doesn’t matter where one
prays, right? All prayers lead to heaven. Or do they?”
She took
direct aim at Franklin Graham’s theology, arguing that “Graham’s views didn’t
sit very well with secular Americans or even non-evangelical Christians.” Well,
probably not — and that serves to indicate what makes evangelical Christianity
distinct from secular Americans and secularized Christianity.
But, Parker
advised her readers, evangelicals are not likely to hold onto this belief for
long. In her words:
Graham
isn’t alone in his views. A survey of 1,000 Protestant pastors, conducted by an
evangelical polling firm, found that 47 percent agree that Islam is “a very
evil and a very wicked religion.” But such opinions may be confined mostly to
an older generation. Evangelicals under 30 believe that there are many ways to
God, not just through Jesus.
In essence,
Kathleen Parker was advising secular America that the distinctive evangelical
belief in the necessity of belief in Christ for salvation has a generational
expiration date stamped on it. She then cites research by David Campbell of
Notre Dame and Robert Putman of Harvard indicating that “nearly two-thirds of
evangelicals under 35 believe non-Christians can go to heaven, vs. 39 percent
of those over 65.”
So, even as
secular Americans are expected to recoil in horror at the idea that there are
Christians who still believe that faith in Jesus is the only way of salvation,
they are given the hope that the coming generation of younger evangelicals will
abandon that conviction and follow the path set by (God-hating) Liberalism. There are signs she may be right, but this
would mean the surrender of the Gospel.
But Kathleen
Parker is not finished with her argument. She then turns to Fingerprints of
God, a recent book by Barbara Bradley Hagerty of National Public Radio.
Hagerty cites neuroscience as giving evidence of a “God-spot” in the brain that
supposedly indicates that all religious beliefs are the same:
Her
research led to some startling conclusions that have caused no small amount of
Sturm und Drang among those who believe theirs is the one true way. She found
that whether one is a Sikh, a Catholic nun, a Buddhist monk or a Sufi Muslim,
the brain reacts to focused prayer and meditation much in the same way. The
same parts light up and the same parts go dark during deep meditation.
Well, no Sturm
und Drang here, Mrs. Parker. This neuroscience may tell us something
about the operation of the brain, but it tells us nothing of theological
importance. It might indicate that certain religious practices have similar
effects in the brain, but it tells us nothing about which theological beliefs
are true. The evidence from neuroscience is of interest in this respect
only to those who believe that all religious experience is merely a reflection
of biology — and if you believe this, you are not concerned about heaven or
hell at all.
Kathleen Parker’s column is indeed
revealing. But the most revelatory aspect of her essay is its unmasked
hostility toward any belief that there is only one way of salvation. This is
the so-called “scandal of particularity” that causes so much secular offense.
In recent years, the Roman Catholic Church has officially embraced forms of
inclusivism in order to reduce this burden, and Liberalism has embraced just
about every relativistic alternative, from outright universalism to various
forms of inclusivism, in which people are believed to be saved through Christ,
but not through any conscious knowledge of Him. The universalists argue that
all religions lead to the same truth. Inclusivists argue that all faiths
eventually lead to Christ, even if He is not known. Both are repudiations of
the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
The column by
Kathleen Parker is yet another signpost of the current age and the worldview of
the secularized classes. In their view, what evangelicals believe about the
Gospel of Jesus Christ is just out of bounds and embarrassing.
But, she tells
her readers, don’t worry — younger evangelicals are going to put that belief
far behind them.
Is she right?
I am always
glad to hear from readers. Write me at mail@albertmohler.com. Follow regular
updates on Twitter at www.twitter.com/AlbertMohler.
Kathleen
Parker, “The Quest to Sort Out Competing and Comparable Religions,”
The Washington Post, Sunday, May 9, 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment