I have been cogitating for some time on the matter of the CBF breakout session titled “The Changing Shape of Our Salvation,” led by John Killinger during the recent CBF meeting in Memphis.
In the June 26 issue of the Herald, Lance Wallace of CBF communications, examines the opposing viewpoints of several of those in attendance. He quotes Curtis Freeman of the Baptist House at Duke University's divinity school, who defended the CBF invitation to Killinger, saying, “I would hope that we could affirm a generous orthodoxy that is clear about our confession that Jesus Christ is the incarnate son of God, fully God and fully human, but could be in conversation about what it means for us as believers in Jesus Christ.”
In your own June 26 editorial [“How generous should orthodoxy be?”, June 26], you acknowledge the shifting of orthodoxy boundaries by our conservative brethren, particularly as it relates to women. But you seem to suggest that Killinger has abused the generosity of orthodoxy when he is reported to have said, “There's an altered view of Scripture and of the role of Christ. Christ is still savior to most of us, but maybe in a slightly different way.” You say that no Baptist you know would agree with this comment and contend that salvation through Christ pretty well defines Christian orthodoxy. You conclude your editorial thusly: “In our orthodoxy there must not only be a place for generosity. There must also be a place for sanity.” Pretty strong words!
In his new book, The Changing Shape of Our Salvation, Killinger makes a couple of cogent points. I realize that I am on dangerous ground by quoting only a few of his words from the many pages of his text, but I find that these statements resonate with me: “First, God is God, and God is the arbiter of our salvation, not we. … Second, because it is God who effects our salvation, and not we ourselves, our methods of seeking salvation, sometimes natural and sometimes ingenious, don't really matter all that much. … But if God is the one who saves, and it is God who initiates and sustains the program of salvation, whatever it is, then doesn't it stand to reason that the methodology itself isn't all that important?”
I believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. I believe Christ came to reveal the true nature of God to mankind and to show us how to live, not how to die. I believe we have obsessed on the issue of an afterlife and, as Christians, have arrogantly assumed that we know how God will choose to dole out salvation. Here's a thought. It might not have crossed your mind or those of your readers, but it has been with me all my Christian life. How was salvation determined for the millions of people who lived before the Christian era, even before the father of our faith, Abraham? Even more intriguing for me: The current world population is approximately 6.7 billion people. The world population of Christians (all shapes and sizes, orthodox and unorthodox) is estimated to be 2.1 billion or approximately 33 percent of the world population.
I believe it is arrogant for Christians to believe that God will save only one person out of three alive today; that God would deny salvation to two-thirds of the world population; that he would make no provision for anyone to be saved except those calling themselves Christians. Like you, I was not there to hear his remarks, but I suspect that is the point Killinger was alluding to in his presentation to the CBF session.
I close knowing that many of your readers will question my own salvation and some even might suggest that I am not a Christian. Indeed, I may have embarrassed my pastor and some fellow church members. I hope that I might rely on the generous orthodoxy and forgiveness of you and fellow Christians if you or they feel offended by my opinions. Thank you for continuing to challenge our thinking with your fine editorials in the Herald.
Daniel A. Polk, Richmond