Spiritual (v.) Physical
After a 7-month break - here we go.
"Are spiritual problems or physical problems more important?"
This question is asked in many ways by people in various fields who have given their lives to causes in which they believe strongly.
For some the answer is easy - though they disagree.
Some say "spiritual" problems are more important. Spiritual problems include "sins" of selfishness, pride, dishonesty, irreverence, etc. Jesus himself said "What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?" (Mat 16:26 NIV) Obviously, the sins that separate us from God (Isaiah 59:1-2) have eternal, not just temporary consequences. The Apostle Paul said, "So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal." (2 Cor 4:18 NIV) According to this view if you starve to death, but are able to be saved for eternity you are better off than if you lived a well-fed life and die and are subsequently condemned for eternity. Who would argue with that?
Others say "physical" problems are more important. Physical problems include disease, war, poverty, hunger, etc. Jesus himself said, "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'" (Mat 25:45 NIV) So Jesus confirms his expectation that his followers respond to physical problems. Obviously, justice is important to God. Matthew attributed the prophecy of Isaiah 42:1-4 to be of Jesus in Matthew 12:18-21. In it God's servant "...will proclaim justices to the nations," and will lead "justice to victory." Social justice is at the heart of physical problem in our world that are very near and dear to the heart of God.
So which is more important?
I wonder this - "Why must the two be in competition?" The Bible says that "faith without deeds is dead." (James 2:26) Jesus follows his statement in Mat 25:45 by saying that those who do not care for the physical ailments of those in need "...will go away to eternal punishment..." (Mat. 25:46) It seems like our response to physical problems carries heavy spiritual consequences.
I'm interested in dialogue.
Why have these two choices been pitted against each other?
Should they be separated? Why or why not?
Grace and Peace!
"Are spiritual problems or physical problems more important?"
This question is asked in many ways by people in various fields who have given their lives to causes in which they believe strongly.
For some the answer is easy - though they disagree.
Some say "spiritual" problems are more important. Spiritual problems include "sins" of selfishness, pride, dishonesty, irreverence, etc. Jesus himself said "What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?" (Mat 16:26 NIV) Obviously, the sins that separate us from God (Isaiah 59:1-2) have eternal, not just temporary consequences. The Apostle Paul said, "So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal." (2 Cor 4:18 NIV) According to this view if you starve to death, but are able to be saved for eternity you are better off than if you lived a well-fed life and die and are subsequently condemned for eternity. Who would argue with that?
Others say "physical" problems are more important. Physical problems include disease, war, poverty, hunger, etc. Jesus himself said, "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'" (Mat 25:45 NIV) So Jesus confirms his expectation that his followers respond to physical problems. Obviously, justice is important to God. Matthew attributed the prophecy of Isaiah 42:1-4 to be of Jesus in Matthew 12:18-21. In it God's servant "...will proclaim justices to the nations," and will lead "justice to victory." Social justice is at the heart of physical problem in our world that are very near and dear to the heart of God.
So which is more important?
I wonder this - "Why must the two be in competition?" The Bible says that "faith without deeds is dead." (James 2:26) Jesus follows his statement in Mat 25:45 by saying that those who do not care for the physical ailments of those in need "...will go away to eternal punishment..." (Mat. 25:46) It seems like our response to physical problems carries heavy spiritual consequences.
I'm interested in dialogue.
Why have these two choices been pitted against each other?
Should they be separated? Why or why not?
Grace and Peace!
posted by Daniel Cherry at 1:37 PM
4 Comments:
I take the moderate view...
;) j/k
I think it's the nature of polarities. They exist in tension. And since we're uncomfortable trying to live with tension, we pick one element to champion & pick fights with those who choose the other side. That seems easier to us many times than living with the tension.
I do tend to think one is slightly more important than the other, though. They aren't equally important. Jesus at least generally seemed to prioritize spiritual matters over physical matters (Mk. 1:38).
Glad to see you blogging again! I just decided I needed to get back into it, too.
Thanks Philip,
How does one, then, "live with the tension?"
Can they exist in harmony rather than tension?
After all, it seems like some of the most proactive philantrhopists are motivated by Christian (spiritual)compassion.
Also, can one affectively choose to give his/her life to one or the other while supporting and appreciating the other?
Sure, that's a good way to put it. They can exist in harmony.
However, they are two different ways that over time engender two different mindsets that tend to clash as those mindsets prioritize things in different ways. Whenever resources become scarce (time, money, energy, etc.), how does one (or an organization) prioritize? There will be friction, or tension, it occurs to me. And that tension must be managed.
Hey man, glad that you are back on the world wide web. I like the way Dallas Willard talks about this, he says if we remove one side from the other we only have two anemic, incomplete gospels. We have in America the gospel of getting one to heaven, and then we have the social gospel. But both, Willard argues, are only gospels of sin management. Thanks for the thoughts Daniel!
Post a Comment
<< Home