Tolstoy: The Man, The Myth, The Legend

Leo Tolstoy is easily my favorite author of all-time. While my introduction to Tolstoy has occurred only quite recently, I can state without a doubt in my mind that he has forever changed my life. Despite this influence of Tolstoy on myself and his status as one of the greatest (if not the greatest) writer of all-time, I am always surprised by others lack of knowledge of him, especially that of other Christians. Tolstoy was, for those of you who don’t know, a Christian (acknowledging  that I use this term in the loosest sense possible), and after reading “War and Peace” and its overt spiritual themes, I delved into a search of all things Tolstoy, only to come up empty time and time again. Why was it that perhaps the greatest writer of all-time was completely absent in all discussions of the Christian religion? Especially since, Christians have a knack for converting the great leaders of the past into their own image, so it is with the Founding Fathers, Abraham Lincoln, Mother Theresa, C.S. Lewis, Martin Luther, and so on. I eventually came to the conclusion that Tolstoy’s underrepresentation in Christianity, more so in the American Church, stems from his idiosyncratic views. Views that often directly opposed to what we consider modern day Christianity.

Now so what? Why should we care about some crazy Russian writer, who disregarded almost every form of orthodox Christianity? I would say it is for precisely this reason that we should pay attention to Tolstoy. Tolstoy presented a Christianity, not molded by adherence to a strict set of creeds and doctrines, but a Christianity that was raw, simple, messy and even contradictory. His religion was not one of the middle class WASP, but of the poor and illiterate, the down casted, rejects of society. All too often we, that is all Christians myself included, turn Christianity into something it’s not, a set of propositions that grant eternal life. If you believe this and this and this, then you will have eternal life. The trinity, salvation by faith alone, understanding of substitutionary atonement, the existence of Jesus, all become a pre-requisite to get right with God. Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and even Catholics, who deny these key propositions, are subject to the eternal fire of Hell, or so we say.  

You see Tolstoy’s Christianity (as far as I understand it) emphasized the distinction between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of this World. These two kingdoms were not just opposed to one another, but completely opposite in every way. The Kingdom of the World is one of force, fear, violence, where the strong subdue those underneath them, while the Kingdom of God, is love, peace, gentleness, where the strong do not rule but instead are ruled. It is in this Kingdom where the weak trample over the strong and the strong endure it, knowing that their allegiance and faith belong to God. It is in this Kingdom where the poor are truly exalted and the rich humiliated (James 1:9). Tolstoy, I’d venture, would say that it is not the mental assent to propositions that grants salvation (if he in fact believed in heaven, like I said he was fairly unorthodox in many ways), but obedience to that innate call to simplicity found within each individual. The divine conscience granted to all as the result of God creating man in His image.

What does this have to do with the poor and uneducated? Well, the poor generally are the most zealous in matters of religion, and while they are indeed granted with a strong faith (James 2:5), they are also the easiest to be led astray and the most prone to intolerance, just look at the rise of Muslim extremists for an example of this. In fact, with a WASP/conservative evangelical view of the kingdom, it is the poor and the rich who would be hurt the most on judgement day, with the poor bearing the brunt of it, since there are more of them. However, this seems to oppose the words of Jesus as well as James, where it alludes to the fact that the poor shall be the primary occupants in the Kingdom of God (James 2:8, Matt 19:24). How do we reconcile the view of salvation envisioned by many evangelicals, with the statement that the poor shall inherit the kingdom of God?

Generally, those who are less educated are also more prone to think subjectively about matters of the mind, relying heavily upon their upbringing and experience gained. At least, this is confirmed by my experience in life (I don’t really have any scientific findings to back me up on this one, but I do feel this is indeed quite evident). The reasons for this are likely due to the lack of options presented to the poor. If one is told from a young age that Islam or Christianity is the one true religion and the only way to live, then it will undoubtedly be believed wholeheartedly if no other options are presented. Now this leaves us in a conundrum as to the final destination of the poor, in terms of the common evangelical view of salvation based upon assent to logical propositions. If belief in the essentials of faith, as laid out nicely by CARM https://carm.org/essential-doctrines-of-christianity, are required to be saved, then heaven will not be a multitude of nations (Rev 7:9), but a sea of white with the occasional dot of color.

                Since this post is getting longer than I expected, I will expand upon it tomorrow. In Part two, of a simple laymen’s view of salvation, I will expand upon the ideas of works as it pertains to grace. I will also attempt to tie it all back to Tolstoy. If you stayed with me during my entire rant, then congratulations on being slightly insane, you probably should get your head checked. Anyways, I don’t really expect anyone to read this, but I am simply writing it to: A) hone my skills and B) organize my thoughts. Now, go read “War and Peace” and get your mind blown.