Randal Rauser is associate professor of historical theology at Taylor Seminary, Edmonton, Canada and was granted Taylor's first annual teaching award for Outstanding Service to Students in 2005.
July 12th, 2009 07:54 PM ET

Is how we live more important than what we believe?

I am currently reading an infuriating book: With or Without God by Gretta Vosper. Why it is infuriating is a topic for another blog post, Here I simply want to consider the subtitle: "Why the way we live is more important than what we believe."

I have asked a couple friends to comment on the subtitle and both responded as I expected: they rejected it as a false dicotomy. In their view we do not have to decide on the priority of belief or action, for both are crucial. I agree that both right belief and right action are important, but I am not convinced that one can so easily sidestep the choice. 

In order to set up the dilemma, consider for a moment two individuals that have made appearances in my previous blog posts.

The first is a Franciscan priest/theologian who had impeccable theology. He knew his Bible in intimate detail, and could pontificate at length on the Hebrew and Greek readings of the text. He likewise knew his creeds and all else that any good priest could be expected to know about the day to day governance of the church. Oh yes, and one more thing: he was an active participant in the conquistadors' brutal sixteenth century genocide of the Carribean population as he provided moral support for the Spanish barbarians that raped women and bayoneted children.  

The second is a Muslim UN soldier. During the Rwandan genocide he selflessly disregarded UN orders to stay in the safety of the compound. Instead he risked his life time and again, saving well over one hundred Tutsis from certain slaughter in the process. That is, until he was killed by bomb shrapnel.

Now the question: if you had to choose one of these legacies to be your own which one would it be? Would you choose to be the Franciscan priest with impeccable theology but a long history of complicity in moral horrors? Or would you choose to be the Muslim, desperately wrong in his theology but impeccable in his actions?

Note that this is not a false dichotomy. Rather, it is a very real and meaningful choice. And so you must choose. So which shall take priority? Shall it be belief or action?

For my money, I'll take the legacy of the Muslim any day. And in that limited sense at least, I agree that how we live is indeed more important than what we believe.

Advertisement
About this blog
An exploration of faith, knowledge, reason and doubt (with the occasional trite pop culture reference thrown in for good measure).