Scripture: Luke 22:17-20 Topic: When Jesus ate with his Disciples Background: This lesson would be taught during a Sunday morning breakfast club for teenagers. Once a month the youth meet to cook breakfast and then we try to relate the lesson to food. Last time the Middle School breakfast club met a middle school student led his peers in a devotional that went through the various stories of Jesus sharing food with his disciples. This Sunday we are going to focus on one of those stories and how it relates to Easter. Opening: 1. Ask, “Have you ever helped plan a party?” a. Ask the students to share about the various things they did to prepare (send invites, decorate, blow up balloons, set the table, plan games, order food). 2. Say, “For some families, Easter is a time of celebration, a party of sorts.” a. Ask, “What does your family do to celebrate Easter?” (family gets together, we eat dinner together, Easter egg hunt, attend church se...
Comments
In other words, if salvation is understood to be the reception of some reward (which benefits a human) who otherwise did not deserve it, then questioning that definition would leave "salvation" unstable. However, salvation might not NEED to mean that, in which "salvation" might be concieved differently, and is still meaningful.
Here is what is at stake: if salvation MUST mean that a human recieves some benefit, then to question whether humans recieve some benefit in salvation would render it "without that meaning." If one thinks this is THE ONLY meaning it could have, then it is now a meaning-less concept.
So, to combat such an argument, one would have to show that salvation CAN ONLY mean the reception of "some benefit." Which, of course, entails the larger question: can words, concepts, ideas ONLY MEAN one thing.
Finally, to answer your question, as best I see how, salvation can be meaningful (even CHRISTIAN) and not be conceived in terms of human benefit. Yet, as far as I can see, the notion of "human benefit" is so ambiguous, that one could find a way to interpret benefit to connect it with salvation (even if it is no longer in a traditional way).
For instance, the "benefit" to a particular individual or community of salvation may be the very realization that we do not get any material or spiritual benefit (as we once thought) from salvation--here we have the paradox of benefitting from no benefit. So, we would have to be more specific about how we are using the terms we employ, or, at the very least, admit paradox.
What do you think? Is this related to your salvation class?