OK. Let me preface this by saying I have witnessed a number of very in depth studies on religion and philosophy while lurking here. “Ask the Muslim Guy” was particularly enlightening, given recent events. So this may seem very simplistic to many of you, but I have seriously been kicking this idea around for a few days and thought maybe I would share it here…
I was watching FoxNews last Friday night and they had Jerry Falwell on as a guest. Among other things he said that the only way to Heaven was through Jesus Christ.
Now I have had my own rocky journey to, through and around Christianity over the years. My biggest beef has usually been associated with how Christian’s exclude all other’s from access to a happy after-life. I have Jewish, Muslim and Hindu friends. My friend Dave is an atheist(but I am sure he is going ot hell for other reasons). I always felt it was elitist for me to think that I am “saved” and they are not.
Which brings me to my point…I live in Hanover, VA. The ONLY way to get to the capital city of Richmond, VA is to use Route 360. I can honestly make that statement and not deny the people in Petersburg, VA that the ONLY way to Richmond, VA is via I-95.If you are in Charllottesville, the ONLY way to Richmond is via I-64. People from each location can make these statements in truth and still not deny the veracity of the other routes to the capital.
The possibility that God has revealed himself to different peoples at different times in different ways is not a new concept, certainly. But this analogy, for me at least has helped in understanding the possibility.
What are your thoughts and comments? Is my analogy an apt representation or an ill-conceived fallacy?
I’m in Charlottesville, and I can get to Richmond by driving up 29 to DC, and catching 95 to there. In fact, there are probably no two cities in the world that are connected by exactly one route. So I’d say your analogy is fundamentally flawed.
You also haven’t made any argument that the process of getting one’s soul from here to the Christian Heaven is anything like going from some part of Virginia to Richmond. That’s really important too.
…but lets abandon the Richmond analogy and say that there is a city with only 4 roads in from 4 respective cities. Using a known city was not smart. A fictional one would be more appropriate as we can make assumptions about the “one road in” aspect more readily.
From my limited knowledge there are no roads that connect Nome, Alaska to anywhere else. I had a penpal there and she said that everything had to arrive by plane.
The road analogy is an interesting one, but why would anyone want to go to heaven if there are so few ways to get there from where you currently are and so many ways to go away from it. If it was that great you would think through some ingenious function that there would be given numerous contingencies in case one way became “blocked.”
Luckily, I don’t have to worry about heaven issues as I am happily heading towards what christians likely view as hell.
Or, if folks are really having trouble with the road concept, imagine two lines in space intersecting at a point. Now you’ve got 4 spokes on a wheel. There is only 1 way to get to the intersection point from each respective spoke, but in total there are 4 ways to get there. There is one and only one way to get there from here.
However, what if not everybody wants to go to the intersection? I don’t know much about the Hindu religion, but I’m pretty sure their concept of the afterlife doesen’t jive completely with a Christian one. It’s fine if you want to imagine that I’m going to Richmond, but what if I want to go to Maryland instead? Am I actually going to Richmond with dilusions of going to another state?
The only way to Key West (by road) is US 1. That’ll take care of the highway-analogy hijack.
Now, down to brass tacks: The quote in question is:
Read it in context:
The question is not, “What’s gonna happen to all these heathens?” but “What ought a disciple to do to follow Jesus?” It’s interesting that while KJV makes the preposition “by” all modern translations use “through.”
In short, I don’t see Jesus as saying, “Take me as Lord and Savior, or you’re doomed,” as evangelicals would have us believe it means, but rather, “I’m showing you the way to live to get right with God; I’m telling you the truth about Him; I’m showing you how to have a real life in Him.”
And, because I know it’ll come up (it always does in this sort of thread), most of us regulars know a “virtuous pagan” on this board – she’s skilled at moral theology, evidently lives a virtuous life, and categorizes herself as agnostic neopagan, so she certainly fits. So the question is not abstract – I have no doubts of her “salvation.”
Well, if you say the ONLY way ( emphasis yours ) to get to richmond is 360, what you are really saying is the ONLY way to get there from here is 360. So to say it’s the ONLY way seems a bit presumptious.
It would be like me saying “the ONLY way to calculate Pi is with a sliderule”, because I had only a sliderule, but then when pressed, I explained that if you had a computer, than the ONLY way would be with a computer.
Frankly, it seems a bit weaselly to me. And, really, it doesn’t seem to answer your biggest question – what happens if you switch places? What happens if you become a muslim, or your muslim friend becomes an atheist. Do they have a new way to heaven, or do they have to backslide to their old way?
Polycarp. You’ll excuse me if I don’t see how you interpret it through context. You seem to believe that Jesus did not mean the standard explanation, which is “You cannot understand ‘The Father’ if you don’t accept Jesus”, but instead “I am a way to understand ‘The Father’”. If this is what you meant, I’m not sure why he would use “the way, the Truth, The Life”, instead of “A way, A truth, A Life”. However, I fear I may be mischaracterizing your position, and so feel free to elucidate.
Actually I was just trying to make the point that when most religions (the Judeo/Christian/Islamic ones at least) say that the true way has been revealed to them they are really reflecting that God was speaking to them telling THEM how to get there. If you ask me for directions to Richmond (I know the analogy is flawed) I would give you directions from where you are. I would not give you EACH way to Richmond, nor would I feel it necessary to qualify my directions with, “This only applies to you. If someone from D.C. asks, I will have to tell them something else…” My point is possibly with this in mind I can say my religious views are valid, but do not exclude others from being valid as well. A large part of human conflict has been due to us thinking one viewpoint is right, so the other must be wrong…
Well, since we seem to be expressing opinions or beleifs as facts, let me say mine.
There is no God. You and all the other people who beleive in one are just afraid of death and the real world. YOu use him to explain things you can’t explain, rather than just be patient and wait for an answer, or take some initiative and find it yourself. There is a heaven, but it is a temporary state. It can be reached with good karma. Therefore, there is only one way to heaven, good karma. But then when that life ends you will probably be born into this world again.
Or, if folks are really having trouble with the road concept, imagine two lines in space intersecting at a point. Now you’ve got 4 spokes on a wheel. There is only 1 way to get to the intersection point from each respective spoke, but in total there are 4 ways to get there. There is one and only one way to get there from here.**
I disagree. Why, if your intention is to get to the intersection point, do you need to follow the “spokes”? Can’t one simply follow whatever path generally leads from your starting point to the intersection point (the Origin for all you De Cartes fans out there! :D) It may not be the quickest path or most direct, but it will get you there. There are an infinite variety of curves, paraboles, hyperboles and other curves and non-straight paths that lead from your starting point to the Origin. Why stick with only straight lines?
If we accept the Judeo-Christian concept of heaven, as written in the Bible, then we know that it’s not whether you’re good or not, but whether you got your last apology in to Jesus or not.
Assuming that getting into Heaven or not is based on a human morality is groundless, really. If you accept Christianity as true, then it’s letting Jesus wash away your sins (whether it be thinking impure thoughts or wearing clothing with two different kinds of thread). If you believe in the afterlife of another religion, then you follow their rules. How you think you ought to go about getting into Heaven is irrelevant, it’s what the guy(girl) in charge thinks.
My point is, if you don’t believe in the parts of the BIble that say you need Jesus to forgive your sins to get into Heaven, why not just pitch the whole thing?
Personally, looking at the behavior of God as portrayed in the OT, I don’t WANT to spend eternity with him. If I thought he existed, I would live my days in horrible and unrelenting fear, because I could not possibly continue to live a moral life while still being a good, heavenbound Christian.
The thing is, most people don’t realize that we are in charge. We are in charge of where we go, as dictated by karma. Man is responsible for everything he does and doesn’t do.
the premise in the OP is flawed because while there are many cities, there is supposed to be only one heaven. Religions don’t make money if they allow you to get to their heaven if you are not a member of their religion. Free-rider problem. So, each religion can only allow one way to get into heaven, and of course each religion can only believe in one heaven, with its god, for its members only. There are many cities and many roads in america, so you just can’t compare the ‘routes’ here.
Here’s a story that I remember reading somewhere a couple years ago (upon a Google search, I found out I read the quote by Dale Turner in Reader’s Digest):
As for me, I don’t have any cotton. I’m an atheist.
I ain’t got near the theological, or biblical, knowledge and patience that Polycarp has, but I’ll take a shot at this. He quoted the bible, then expanded the quote:
But even this expansion must be read in the larger context of Christ’s teachings and actions throughout the New Testament. What did Christ mostly do? Asked people to do as he did; to treat each other gently and with respect, and not to allow persons perceived to be in positions of authority to take advantage of the weak. He could and did act harshly when he believed he needed to.
So, MeCorva, I think this is the way, the truth, and the life Christ refers to in the quote; it’s a practical social lubricant, if you will. And it’s never been needed more than it is now in this age of overcrowded urban centres.
Newcrasher, I think I like you. I agree how much conflict has been because of people misunderstanding other peoples viewpoints. And, I think that you and I agree, in many ways – that (if there is a heaven and god/gods/goddess/goddesses) there are many ways to heaven (nirvana, enlightenment).
And, I’m glad that you don’t believe the fundamentalist interpretation of Jesus’s words – which seems to be that if you don’t believe in Jesus, you are damned to hell for all eternity.
I do think, however, that talking about “The way” is going to confuse and alienate many of your friends/listeners, and you might try a slightly different analogy. The concept of people being in different places and needing different directions tends to be missed during the fundamentalist rallies of “Jesus is THE WAY”.
I guess, if you were trying to figure a way to describe how you feel, your meaning shines through even without an analogy, and if you are worried about how to reconcile Jesus’s words with the concepts you believe he would support – well, I fear I’m no help there – but Polycarp and Nothamlet seem to be doing well.
True, but I was sort of working on the original premise that you have to stay on the road. If you’re going to be mathematical about it, you can only be on a point within the function of the line. No jumping off to another line, no swerving for a nice detour and a quick bite to eat.
And, I think an important thing to remember here is that we’re talking about (I think) how a Christian perceives other people. A Christian who believes in heaven and that people are either on a path towards it or away from it. The question is that, from a Christian standpoint, can a person believe that there is more than one way to skin the proverbial cat?
Sorry Freyr, I did not really complete my thought process when I hit submit. To finish my response to the quote there, also remember that there are an infinite number of lines that will all converge on the same point. If the concept of a straight line is too restrictive we could imagine an infinite number of parabolas or something like that. Doesn’t matter really. Actually maybe that works better, 'cause then some of the parabolas may intersect other parabolas, but still cross through the origin.
I just complained about this in another thread, but this is such a blatant example that I feel compelled to repeat myself. Please do not confuse Jewish views with Christian views just because one religion had its original roots in the other.
The Jewish concept of heaven has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus.
Getting into heaven is not something that Jews are particularly concerned about anyway.
Regardless of their views about heaven, for Jews it’s all about whether you’re good or not.
newcrasher – I agree with your concept, even if your analogy is flawed. I do believe that there is more than one way to find God. Incidentally, this is also a Jewish concept. Jews do not believe that they have the only right answers. In Jewish tradition it is perfectly possible to be a righteous gentile.
