Kierkegaard

[candistyx]

I'm not a Christian. I am not that knowlagable about Christianity or Kierkegaard except that I find what he has written beautiful, poignent and very personally meaningful.

I recall reading something written by Kierkegaard that paraphrased said something along the lines of, if there is someone in a far off pagan land who reaches out in prayer to God with all his heart, even if he does not have the words and concepts of christianity and the Christian God and cannot therfore be reaching out to Him as a concept he is still better of than a man in Christendom who pays lipservice to Christianity, even in a sinceer manner but without that devotion, faith and grasping that the other man had.

I was wondering, from a orthadox Christian scriptural perspective a) is this true, and b) what is Gods plan, reaction to or generally what happens to the man in the pagan land?

[Shadow Phoenix]

I'm not a Christian. I am not that knowlagable about Christianity or Kierkegaard except that I find what he has written beautiful, poignent and very personally meaningful.

I recall reading something written by Kierkegaard that paraphrased said something along the lines of, if there is someone in a far off pagan land who reaches out in prayer to God with all his heart, even if he does not have the words and concepts of christianity and the Christian God and cannot therfore be reaching out to Him as a concept he is still better of than a man in Christendom who pays lipservice to Christianity, even in a sinceer manner but without that devotion, faith and grasping that the other man had.

I was wondering, from a orthadox Christian scriptural perspective a) is this true, and b) what is Gods plan, reaction to or generally what happens to the man in the pagan land?

Hi Candistyx. Thanks for your question. Whether you are a Christian or not, it deserves an answer.

First off, Kierkegaard did deal with a real need. He was concerned that the church in his land was dying and pretty much going through the motions. The view from what I understand was that if you lived there, you were a Christian automatically. That's the kind of person Kierkegaard is probably speaking of. He's saying that someone who's not saved but is going through the motions is worse off than the pagan who is seeking truth, largely because the person going through the motions thinks they're safe while the pagan does not have such certainty and is willing to pursue it.

Now what about the pagan? In all honestly, we can't say entirely God's plan, but we can say some things.

First off, Scripture tells us that God is fair and just in all things.
Secondly, we know that God desires that no one perish but all come to the knowledge of Christ.
Thirdly, we do know that in Revelation, there will be a great crowd from every tribe and nation and Jesus told the Centurion in Matthew whose servant he healed that many would come from the east, west, north, and south.
Fourthly, no one is saved apart from the atonement.

I would add in that people are often judged by the light they had. The repentance of Nineveh was enough for instance, without them probably having in-depth knowledge of Mosaic Law.

I would also point out that since you are a non-Christian, if this question concerns you, the best way to be safe is not to remain outside the camp where there is uncertainty, but to come within the camp where there is certainty. If you would like to consider this, I suggest clicking on "salvation invitation" at the bottom of your screen.

Hope this helps! I'll be glad to discuss this more if need be!

[candistyx]

Hi Candistyx. Thanks for your question. Whether you are a Christian or not, it deserves an answer.

First off, Kierkegaard did deal with a real need. He was concerned that the church in his land was dying and pretty much going through the motions. The view from what I understand was that if you lived there, you were a Christian automatically. That's the kind of person Kierkegaard is probably speaking of. He's saying that someone who's not saved but is going through the motions is worse off than the pagan who is seeking truth, largely because the person going through the motions thinks they're safe while the pagan does not have such certainty and is willing to pursue it.

Now what about the pagan? In all honestly, we can't say entirely God's plan, but we can say some things.

First off, Scripture tells us that God is fair and just in all things.
Secondly, we know that God desires that no one perish but all come to the knowledge of Christ.
Thirdly, we do know that in Revelation, there will be a great crowd from every tribe and nation and Jesus told the Centurion in Matthew whose servant he healed that many would come from the east, west, north, and south.
Fourthly, no one is saved apart from the atonement.

I would add in that people are often judged by the light they had. The repentance of Nineveh was enough for instance, without them probably having in-depth knowledge of Mosaic Law.

I would also point out that since you are a non-Christian, if this question concerns you, the best way to be safe is not to remain outside the camp where there is uncertainty, but to come within the camp where there is certainty. If you would like to consider this, I suggest clicking on "salvation invitation" at the bottom of your screen.

Hope this helps! I'll be glad to discuss this more if need be!
Thank you for your answer.
With regard to myself, I cannot pick and choose what I beleive, I can only go by what I know. I could give a long winded explination of my reasoning but it basically comes down to a weakness with regard to abstract thought. I can beleive there is a god as much as I can beleive there are neutron stars, which is not to say I don't beleive in neutron stars, but that neutron stars are so beyond the realm of my actual experience they are simply abstractions without real meaning to me. Just a word, attached to other words.

[Nanny]

I'm not a Christian. I am not that knowlagable about Christianity or Kierkegaard except that I find what he has written beautiful, poignent and very personally meaningful.

I recall reading something written by Kierkegaard that paraphrased said something along the lines of, if there is someone in a far off pagan land who reaches out in prayer to God with all his heart, even if he does not have the words and concepts of christianity and the Christian God and cannot therfore be reaching out to Him as a concept he is still better of than a man in Christendom who pays lipservice to Christianity, even in a sinceer manner but without that devotion, faith and grasping that the other man had.

I was wondering, from a orthadox Christian scriptural perspective a) is this true, and b) what is Gods plan, reaction to or generally what happens to the man in the pagan land?

Hi, Candi...
I'm not educated in philosophy; most of my knowledge is second-hand, but thought I'd add this from Francis Schaeffer Trilogy, The God Who is There, Escape from Reason, and He is There and He is Not Silent, pp.14-15.

Schaeffer considers S.K. to be the father of modern existential thinking, both secular and theological. Kierkegaard led to the conclusion that you could not arrive at synthesis by reason. Instead, you achieve everything of real importance by a leap of faith (total separation of the rational and faith). Schaeffer also says, "Kierkegaard was a complex man, and his writings, especially his devotional writings, are often very helpful....We can also be totally sympathetic to his outcry about the deadness of much of the Church in his day." (as stated in the previous post)

My only contribution here is to say that I believe we have, as Schaeffer likes to say, "good and sufficient reason" to place our faith in the Jesus of the Bible. God has given revelation to all people on the various levels of nature, the conscience within, the written Word of God, and ultimately, in the Incarnation. Those who truly seek Him will recognize the truth at some level which will lead to further revelation. Keep searching!

Blessings, N.

[Shadow Phoenix]

Thank you for your answer.
With regard to myself, I cannot pick and choose what I beleive, I can only go by what I know. I could give a long winded explination of my reasoning but it basically comes down to a weakness with regard to abstract thought. I can beleive there is a god as much as I can beleive there are neutron stars, which is not to say I don't beleive in neutron stars, but that neutron stars are so beyond the realm of my actual experience they are simply abstractions without real meaning to me. Just a word, attached to other words.

This sounds like the God of total agnosticism really Candi. It's the God who's so far out there that we cannot know and if he exists, he certainly doesn't care that we exist.

I'll contend that this is not the God of the Bible who is not only personal but multi-personal within the Trinity itself. Now you can say that God is a word without real meaning, but I'm sure you know which kind of God it is you believe doesn't exist. (I probably don't believe in that God either)

We do have several forums here where we can discuss the nature of God. I'd also be happy to go to the basketball court with you and discuss God's nature.

[searsdp]

I am working through Kierkegaard Works of Love slowly for my Christian Ethics class. Any suggestions. It was spoused to be done 2 weeks ago. Any suggestions? :tongue:

[Shadow Phoenix]

I am working through Kierkegaard Works of Love slowly for my Christian Ethics class. Any suggestions. It was spoused to be done 2 weeks ago. Any suggestions? :tongue:

You might want to ask in biblical ethics. I personally haven't read Kierkegaard yet myself. I've just read what has been said about him.