The "Emeth Question"

[This Baron of Mora]

Not to long ago I caught word of a statement by Pope Francis about how atheists to could be redeemed by God (as well as non-Catholics). At the time I didn't disagree with the former, nor exactly agree, I wasn't sure what he meant entirely, but I sort of like the sound of it (so to speak).

Then along comes today.

I was reading C.S. Lewis's The Last Battle (I had read it once before some time ago) when a man from Calormen named Emeth is introduced. To not give too much away and also be brief, Emeth has worshiped Tash (the evil demon) all his life but is nonetheless taken into 'Aslan's Country' with those who follow Aslan.

In said text I completely agreed with the idea, though one can argue that Lewis wrote it in a 'good light' so to speak. When I then recalled the Pope's statement (and searched it more in depth) I find they are highly compatible, but both are controversial.

Anyway, I am inclined to agree (without going into too much metaphysical, incomprehensible depth), I am interested in a strong and reasonable argument for the other side that is better than the one on the wikipedia page here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emeth
Warning!: Contains some small scale spoilers if this troubles you than just go read the whole book, its only 184 pages.

[This Baron of Mora]

Also: Apparently this is called "soteriology" in theology.

[Christian Soldier]

Baron,

Can you show, Biblically, how this would work? As far as I can tell, Jesus is the only way.

[Kristen]

The way Lewis tells the story, Aslan sort of takes Emeth into heaven against Emeth's will, and at first Emeth isn't sure he wants to stay.

The way I see it, Jesus (Aslan) is still the way, because it is through his action, not Emeth's, that Emeth is saved.

This is one of the more controversial things Lewis wrote, but I like it. It is full of grace and still keeps the Redeemer at the center.

[This Baron of Mora]

Well briefly, in the story Emeth walks unknowingly into 'heaven' and is spared thanks to his reverence of Tash but Aslan tells him only good is done in the name of Aslan, and only bad in the name of Tash, so Emeth was really serving him the whole time since he is good. Emeth's true loyalty is also proven by his immediate submission to Aslan seeing that he is greater and more terrible than Tash etc.

Christian Soldier: Check out the wikipedia page (scary that that would be a theology source), it goes over all the passages Lewis believed warranted it and even the one that he felt contradicted it (though not explicitly).

[Bainespal]

The doctrine of the Age of Accountability deconstructs the soteriology that holds firmly to everyone needing to be saved specifically in the name of Jesus in order to go to heaven. If it is true that when a two-month-old baby dies, that baby had faith in God without knowing anything about Jesus, it proves (to me) that it is at least hypothetically possible for people to know Jesus without knowing His name. Nothing is true in isolation. If a baby's ignorant faith is real and effective for the merit of Jesus to forgive that baby's sin, than all true faith in God is likewise effective, even if the believer doesn't know the right facts about God.

I'm not saying that all religions are equal. They are not, and Jesus is the only manifestation of truth to this world. I don't believe that everyone goes to heaven. I believe that God would forgive anyone who repents of being his or her own self-god and looks toward ultimate Truth, even if they don't understand the ultimate Truth correctly. (After all, doesn't Romans say that belief in the existence of God is instinctive?) The big question that perhaps we can't answer is whether this is ever anything more than hypothetical. Maybe everyone in this modern world who repents of his or her own self-worship will definitely hear the Gospel within his or her lifetime. However, I don't think we can say that for certain.

But Pope Francis was apparently talking about atheists. (I haven't read the Pope's statements.) I would be inclined to disagree with the Pope, but maybe atheists also instinctively believe in God without calling Him that. Still, I don't see how an atheist could repent of self-worship and accept ultimate Truth while maintaining atheism.

[rjj7]

In the interest of interesting discussion, I would like to mention that while there are many statements in the Bible regarding what will get you saved, very few add "and if you don't do this, you won't be saved." One statement that I can think of that does limit salvation (in a sense) is mentioned on the wikipedia page, when Jesus said "no man cometh to the father, but through me" (it's in John 14); wikipedia goes on to say: "Jesus could have meant (a) that he alone made salvation possible (i.e., activated it by his death), and/or that (b) as Lewis suggested, some might come to the Father through Jesus who did not at first realize that was what they were doing." The verse says that Jesus is the only way to God, but Jesus exists independent of our belief or acknowledgement, so I will not go so far as to say it is impossible that someone could be saved without belief (I won't go so far as to say it is possible either; nor will I spurn fiction that takes one view over the other).

One argument presented on wikipedia against Lewis' belief is Romans 10:14: "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?" However, if you read the entire chapter, the context changes the implication of this passage. Including verse 13, the quote reads:

"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?"

As I pointed out above, Paul is not saying "if you don't do this, you won't be saved." He is saying "if you do this, you will be saved; and they can't do it if they aren't told." Hence, we need to share the gospel because a) we are told to by Jesus and b) telling them about Jesus gives them a sure path that leads through Christ. But I don't see it as prohibiting other methods of coming through Christ. (on a side note, I think that Lewis' interpretation of I Corinthians chapter 1 is reading stuff into the passage that simply isn't there; Paul was not making a case for God being the same in different contexts, he was asserting that Christians should all have the same context: Jesus as our head, not men).

[Bethany J.]

Personally, I find a lot of evidence in the Bible that unbelief results in damnation.

John 3:17-19 says, "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil."

If atheism - denying the existence of the amazing, loving, powerful Creator of all things - isn't loving the darkness rather than the light, what is? :/

Dec 10, 2013 11:04:13 GMT -5 rjj7 said:

As I pointed out above, Paul is not saying "if you don't do this, you won't be saved." He is saying "if you do this, you will be saved; and they can't do it if they aren't told." Hence, we need to share the gospel because a) we are told to by Jesus and b) telling them about Jesus gives them a sure path that leads through Christ. But I don't see it as prohibiting other methods of coming through Christ.

What other method would there be except trusting in His saving work on the cross? (And as you pointed out, no one can do this unless they are told about Jesus!)

[Bainespal]

Dec 10, 2013 14:08:10 GMT -5 Bethany J. said:

What other method would there be except trusting in His saving work on the cross? (And as you pointed out, no one can do this unless they are told about Jesus!)

Calling salvation a "method" in any sense is troubling and confusing.

Even among Christians who believe in Jesus and know about His historical life, many different "methods" of identifying the invisible spiritual truth of personal redemption have been used. Some Christians have used sacraments administered by clergy. Some have used prayers addressed to God, verbal acts of repentance, or outward confession of belief.

Salvation comes through faith but by grace. So, the question that I think is most important is, what is faith? How much does real faith involve correct knowledge? How wrong can your knowledge about Jesus be while still having faith in Him?

Jesus was a real man who walked on this earth in a specific country in a specific span of years, but we also believe that Jesus is God. The specific is also the universal. The universal was revealed to us specifically. So, is faith in the universal truth of God ultimately the same as faith in Jesus Christ, for those who can't come to knowledge about the specific incarnation of God in literal human history?

[Bethany J.]

Dec 10, 2013 20:47:23 GMT -5 Bainespal said:

Calling salvation a "method" in any sense is troubling and confusing.
...
Jesus was a real man who walked on this earth in a specific country in a specific span of years, but we also believe that Jesus is God. The specific is also the universal. The universal was revealed to us specifically. So, is faith in the universal truth of God ultimately the same as faith in Jesus Christ, for those who can't come to knowledge about the specific incarnation of God in literal human history?

"Method" was the word used in the quote from rjj7, so I just used the same word. I agree, other terminology might be more accurate, because salvation is not a "method" in the sense we usually use that word. Jesus referred to Himself as "the Way," and he goes on to say He is, "the Truth, and the Life...no one comes to the Father except through Me." I don't think a general admission that God exists is going to save anyone, and neither can any kind of theological head-knowledge or good works (which includes sacraments or outward actions)...the Pharisees were great at these outward works and had tons of Biblical knowledge, but Jesus condemned them roundly for their pride!

James 2:19: "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe - and shudder!"

Mark 16:16: "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." [Although, as we see from the thief on the cross, being unbaptized won't prevent us from joining Christ in paradise - but the point being made here, I think, is that we must live as new creations, forsaking our sins, and become part of the Body of Christ, the Church.]

Romans 10:9-10: "Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved."

From my understanding of Scripture, it seems to me that someone's knowledge of Jesus could be pretty wrong while they still have saving faith - but they must at least KNOW Jesus, to the point of understanding that He is Lord. The thief on the cross merely pleaded for Jesus to remember him when He came into His kingdom. As far as we're told, this sinner didn't have any extensive knowledge about the Messiah or even an understanding that Christ died specifically for *his* sins, but he DID acknowledge Jesus as Lord, and pleaded with Him to save him.

Could a pagan from a remote island, who has never heard the gospel or any Scripture, recognize one day that there IS a God, and plead with Him for salvation? - and in this case would God save them despite their ignorance of Christ? I don't pretend to know. BUT, I also think that scenario extremely unlikely. As sinners we tend toward self-idolatry and cling desperately to our blindness. "How shall they believe in Him who have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?"

[This Baron of Mora]

An excellent discussion, now I'll add:

-Emeth does, all things considered, accept Aslan once he sees him, that makes it conditional, Emeth's love for the good and the Truth (hence not a person who loves darkness) conditions him to accept Aslan, he just dies first before he sees him. Warning: this may touch on purgatory (which Lewis believed in)! But seriously, Aslan is still the way to salvation for him.

Dec 10, 2013 11:04:13 GMT -5 rjj7 said:

...(on a side note, I think that Lewis' interpretation of I Corinthians chapter 1 is reading stuff into the passage that simply isn't there; Paul was not making a case for God being the same in different contexts, he was asserting that Christians should all have the same context: Jesus as our head, not men).

-Concerning this, I actually think Lewis is right, today you will hear "I follow ___" whether a man, Church, or creed just as the Corinthians were dividing themselves between followers of Paul, Peter, etc. However, whether then or now, it is clear that God is not divided between Churches or men, rather He is whole and we are divided. This also applies to Muslims and Jews, they worship God (who is yesterday, today, forever, the same). This is even true of idolizers at least in that they distort God into an image, but even the distortion has some hint of the Truth.

-Now I would like to refocus on one thing in particular,

I take to me the services which thou hast done to him. For I and he are of such different kinds that no service which is vile can be done to me, and none which is not vile can be done to him. Therefore if any man swear by Tash and keep his oath for the oath’s sake, it is by me that he has truly sworn, though he know it not, and it is I who reward him. And if any man do a cruelty in my name, then, though he says the name Aslan, it is Tash whom he serves and by Tash his deed is accepted.

. No one is good but God alone, thus how can you not serve God and do good? In other words, can you serve God and Christ without knowing it through the love of the good and true? Do you need to know the name 'Jesus Christ' to be saved by Him, or can you know him 'by a different name' so to speak?

Also,

Beloved, said the Glorious One, unless thy desire had been for me thou wouldst not have sought so long and so truly. For all find what they truly seek

As above, if one truly and legitimately seeks God, whether or not they know it or not, whether they hear of Christ by name, can they be saved? Will they find what they seek (possibly beyond death)?

Questions to consider

[This Baron of Mora]

I see there were a couple of posts between my typing (and going to dinner), so apologizes for sort of repeating part of what was said in different terms.

Additional note thereof:
"the Pharisees were great at these outward works and had tons of Biblical knowledge, but Jesus condemned them roundly for their pride!" Sort of off topic but I have to pull the red flag, pharisee pride declaring themselves better than humble men etc. is WAY different than the innate nature of 'good works' which implies and demands a humble devotion to the service of others in the name of Christ. Pharisees are really bad at 'good works' because it is for self gain etc. I'll stop there.

[Bethany J.]

The question that comes to my mind as I read your post, Baron of Mora, is, "DOES anyone seek?" I don't have The Last Battle handy (too lazy to run down a flight of stairs for it ) but based on these direct quotes you shared, I think Lewis was operating on the assumption that there are some seekers of God, who do the right thing or desire the right thing, and Lewis believes it is all the same to God even if they didn't "know the right stuff". This verse came to mind:

"God looks down from heaven on the children of man to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all fallen away; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one." - Psalm 53:2-3

One of the main points of the Gospel is that none do good (and thus we need Christ's blood to cover our iniquity). God doesn't give us "points for trying", because salvation is not OF works, no matter how hard we are trying to please God on our own.

As an aside, I feel compelled to insist that Jews and Muslims do not worship God...they worship a god of their own imagining, because they have rejected God's revealed plan of salvation. Modern-day Jews reject Christ outright, and although I admit I don't know much about Islamic theology, I know they do not believe Christ is Lord, and their religion is heavily works-based.

[This Baron of Mora]

Well I'm staying out of the 'works' business (you can see that under 'The Ecumenical Movement' for the document reconciling the two opposing doctrines of justification, the thread itself doesn't talk about it to much though).

I wholeheartedly believe Jews and Muslims believe in and worship God, not Christ unfortunately, but they do worship God the Father. The only part of the Catechism I know I agree with:

The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."

Interestingly I found the following relating to this discussion while trying to find the above quote from the Catechism, it remarks on the Jews as well as non-Christians in general:

The Church and non-Christians
839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."325

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People,326 "the first to hear the Word of God."327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ",328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."329

840 And when one considers the future, God's People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.

841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330

842 The Church's bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:

All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .331
843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332

844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:

Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.333
845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son's Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is "the world reconciled." She is that bark which "in the full sail of the Lord's cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world." According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah's ark, which alone saves from the flood.334

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

The Muslim mention reminds me of the closest example I have heard described to someone like Emeth. It was a Muslim student from Iran at Boston College. Peter Kreeft spoke about him extensively in a debate I watched online which eventually led Kreeft to write a book about the things Christians can learn from good Muslims like him. But I can't really go too detailed thereof.

[Bethany J.]

Interesting. Is this the Catholic catechism? Unfortunately I feel our creeds may be at completely opposite poles, making a discussion on this topic more difficult. Do you have any Scriptural references for the idea that Muslims and Jews worship the Creator just as followers of Christ do?