|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Will God allow anyone to go to hell?
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
Having seen the "L" insignia flashed in light over the horizon ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ...
First of all, just a caveat that most Lutherans do not treat everything, or indeed anything, that came out of Luther's mouth or off his pen as ex cathedra pronouncements.
To put the Lutheran position at its simplest, if I can dare to speak for my own tradition:
God always comes down.
God's saving action is the only thing that counts in the salvation equation...not our doing the right things, or thinking the right things about God. God's in charge of the salvation business. So it's a bit presumptuous of me to try and second-guess who is on and who is off God's bus.
That doesn't mean that wanting to do the right thing/trying to avoid the wrong thing, or that as a friend of mine puts it "trying to say the least wrong thing about God," are bad, or don't matter; but they're not not factors in justification -- they're matters of sanctification , of letting God lead oneself in a Godward direction.
Having come into this discussion at a very late date, I don't know if I've even understood/been responsive to the question. But if I understand correctly, and you're asking whether Lutherans believe that "pagan babies" and others not on the same page as us are headed for The Other Place: Salvation is a God thing. And what we know about the character of God is what we know about the character of Jesus, so being entirely dependent on the grace of God is, I think, a good place to be.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrookedCucumber
Shipmate
# 10792
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik
But if I understand correctly, and you're asking whether Lutherans believe that "pagan babies" and others not on the same page as us are headed for The Other Place: Salvation is a God thing.
Well, I suppose you have understood the question correctly; perhaps even better than I originally expressed it ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
``Salvation is a God thing'' -- I think this is another way of saying what I attributed to Calvin earlier: ``Some people are created to be saved, the rest are damned. We don't know why. Get used to it''. Or isn't it? That your version is snappier and less confrontational than mine, I accept
My argument is not that the Lutheran (or Calvinist) view is inchorent -- it's just that, given the view of God it is predicated on, I just don't see why it's a club that anybody would want to join.
I'm not trying to take a poke at you personally -- it's just that nobody else turned up
Posts: 2718 | From: East Dogpatch | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
First of all: Lutherans don't believe in double predestination. They believe that Scripture proclaims a God who wills that all should be saved. Why that, from our perspective, seems not to be the case is something we leave in the hands of God.
Secondly: We believe that God creates saving faith in an individual. (And I am going to qualify that by saying that I am not going to second-guess what someone else's God-created faith looks like.) Your question about why anyone would join the Christian "club" assumes that we "make a decision for Christ," which is not a Lutheran understanding of how becoming a Christian works. We reject decision theology.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
``Salvation is a God thing'' -- I think this is another way of saying what I attributed to Calvin earlier: ``Some people are created to be saved, the rest are damned. We don't know why. Get used to it''. Or isn't it? That your version is snappier and less confrontational than mine, I accept
I really don't follow your logic here. In what way could saying "Salvation is a God thing" be equated with ``Some people are created to be saved, the rest are damned. We don't know why. Get used to it'. Why not "All people are created to be saved, period!" That is just as consistant with LC's pithy epithet.
I think that all mainstream Protestant denominations have, at the core of their body of doctrinal baggage, the idea of salvation by grace. There are scriptures that seem to support universalism, and those which seem to support "damnationism", sometimes the very same scriptures could be interpreted either way. Neither position is incompatible with "justification by faith" when it is properly understood.
I'm not a Catholic (big C) nor am I Orthodox (big O) but I'm pretty sure that the position of those churches is also that of justification by faith, but with the "faith" understood to be that of the Church, the living communion of those alive here and now, and those alive with God in another place. It is a position which I view not without sympathy, and I think that there is some scriptural warrant for it.
[edited for clarity. Oh well, failed again]
[ 22. December 2005, 13:34: Message edited by: Jolly Jape ]
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CrookedCucumber:
quote:
A stance which is doing as much to keep me away from church as the rest of the religion put together.
What strikes me as odd is that no churchgoer I have spoken to, of any denomination, really accepts justification by faith in its pure, Calvinistic sense.
Granted. But (and with all due respect) right now I'm not trying to get to the bottom of what other Christians believe about the process of Salvation, I'm trying to get to the bottom of what God believes about it
And most all of the learned theological discourse on the matter seems to be that it's all about God - that unless God inspires your faith/worship/etc it's just another work and thus not good enough.
So the only conclusion I can logically draw from that and my personal experience is that - at this stage of my life at least - God doesn't want me to be a regular churchgoer (read "Christian" for that if such is your wont). Oh well. Maybe in a few years time ...
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
Marvin: I don't understand what you mean. I'm not following. Why do you think that you're not a Christian? (If that is indeed what you think.)
It's not. I consider myself Christian, but I don't go to church on anything like a regular basis for reasons outlined more than enough above.
There are those, however, who would say that churchgoing is indivisible from Christianity, and thus anyone (like me) who doesn't attend regularly without a good excuse probably doesn't qualify. Who am I to argue with them ?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'm not trying to get to the bottom of what other Christians believe about the process of Salvation, I'm trying to get to the bottom of what God believes about it
And most all of the learned theological discourse on the matter seems to be that it's all about God - that unless God inspires your faith/worship/etc it's just another work and thus not good enough.
No question that there is a conundrum involved here. It is no easy trick to get to the heart of it.
As I understand it, the conundrum is that God has all power and we have none. So all salvation, and everything else, must be in His hands. At the same time, we are supposedly responsible for somehow turning to Him and asking to be saved. But we actually have no power to do that. But unless we do it we are damned. So it must be pre-destined, or something. Or else He actually isn't the source of all power.
My own opinion is that the problem is not really that difficult.
The solution is that although we have no power, God gives us the ability to choose, as a free gift. What we then choose is imputed to us, not because we deserve it or own it, but because He gives it to us, or allows us to have it.
From there it all works out quite easily, without either predestination or merit.
This is the only solution that, in my opinion, fits with all biblical statements on the subject.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
quote:
There are those, however, who would say that churchgoing is indivisible from Christianity, and thus anyone (like me) who doesn't attend regularly without a good excuse probably doesn't qualify. Who am I to argue with them ?
Well, I believe that Christians are called to live in community. And I also believe that our community is grounded in Word and Sacrament. I don't believe that it's impossible to be a Christian without being part of a faith community, but it's certainly much harder, and if you shun group worship you're also cutting yourself off from God's gift of the Sacrament of the Altar.
As much as the institutional Church in general drives me insane at times, I value the spiritual support a faith community -- my brick-and-mortar, face-to-face community as well as my online community. (In fact, they support me in different ways and complement one another in this regard.)
Is the issue that you are unwilling to affiliate with a particular church home because you don't feel you can "sign on the dotted line" to various line items in the church's doctrines or practices? I don't think any of us completely agree with our congregations or denominations all the time. That's okay. It's okay to say the Creeds with your fingers crossed; it's okay to disagree with some point of denominational doctrine. It's not being dishonest; it's just being human, just as institutional churches are human constructs that have their own particular flaws and foibles and strong points.
All of which is a roundabout way of saying: If I -- and I was a church dropout for several years -- can find a happy, if not perfect, church home, anyone can. They can be a good place to be.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrookedCucumber
Shipmate
# 10792
|
Posted
quote:
Originally poster by LutheranChik
First of all: Lutherans don't believe in double predestination. They believe that Scripture proclaims a God who wills that all should be saved. Why that, from our perspective, seems not to be the case is something we leave in the hands of God.
Fair enough. My understanding is that `double predestination' is something that Calvin and his supporters drew out of Luther's original statements, so I shouldn't have attributed it to Lutherans, as such
Where I remain confused is why you (Lutherans collectively, not you personally) don't seek to get to the bottom of why it appears that not all are given what it takes to be saved, when God wills that all should be saved. Is it that, at root you believe that all will be saved, but don't try to understand how or why? Or is it that you think that not all will be saved, but don't try to understand why that should be the case?
I am also intrigued by your statement that `from our perspective' it seems not to be the case that all are saved. Is there another perspective, one in which all are saved?
Posts: 2718 | From: East Dogpatch | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrookedCucumber
Shipmate
# 10792
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape
I really don't follow your logic here. In what way could saying "Salvation is a God thing" be equated with ``Some people are created to be saved, the rest are damned. We don't know why. Get used to it'. Why not "All people are created to be saved, period!" That is just as consistant with LC's pithy epithet.
I agree -- it is. So if ``All people are created to be saved, period!'', and you accept justification by faith, what happens to people who have no faith (for whatever reason)?
Sorry, I feel like this is something that is obvious to everybody except me. Is it?
Posts: 2718 | From: East Dogpatch | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
Is the issue that you are unwilling to affiliate with a particular church home because you don't feel you can "sign on the dotted line" to various line items in the church's doctrines or practices?
Nope (although there are certainly some denominations for which that's how I feel!). It really is just that I don't want to go to church for the wrong reasons, and ISTM that "unless God inspires your faith/worship/etc" (as I said above) it's the wrong reason. I'm not sure God is glorified by me sitting resentfully in a pew dreaming of being back in bed...
Basically, before I can start attending regularly again I'll need a whole change of heart. And as it's widely accepted that only God can instil that change in us all I can do (and have done) is ask Him to do it and wait for the response. His move ...
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
quote:
Is it that, at root you believe that all will be saved, but don't try to understand how or why? Or is it that you think that not all will be saved, but don't try to understand why that should be the case?
I am also intrigued by your statement that `from our perspective' it seems not to be the case that all are saved. Is there another perspective, one in which all are saved?
As a pastor friend of mine likes to describe his own point of view: I'm a salvation agnostic. I trust in the God I meet in Christ, and commend everyone to the care of that God.
As far as "from my perspective," I meant that from our point of view it seems that some people have pronounced a categorical "NO" to God's grace, by both word and deed. How that plays out in the big, eternal picture -- I don't know. Personally -- this is me, not the ELCA per se -- I tend to agree with C.S. Lewis that some people will insist on existing apart from God, even as they're confronting God face to face, and that God will, with great sadness, give them their wish. On the other hand, Christian universalists like Robert Short make a case that, in the end, God's grace will triumph over even the most hardened of hearts. I've heard people argue that the "harrowing of hell" is an eternal act -- God being outside the boundaries of linear time.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
I agree -- it is. So if ``All people are created to be saved, period!'', and you accept justification by faith, what happens to people who have no faith (for whatever reason)?
Sorry, I feel like this is something that is obvious to everybody except me. Is it?
They are justified by the faith of the Church, or, for those of us who are protestants, by Jesus faith. Of course they won't accrue the same benefits in this life, and it's not a situation to be desired, but it works for me.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
quote:
Of course they won't accrue the same benefits in this life, and it's not a situation to be desired, but it works for me.
Excellent point. Salvation isn't "pie in the sky by and by." It starts here, now. Christians are already living into the reign of God.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niënna
Ship's Lotus Blossom
# 4652
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
The solution is that although we have no power, God gives us the ability to choose, as a free gift. What we then choose is imputed to us, not because we deserve it or own it, but because He gives it to us, or allows us to have it.
From there it all works out quite easily, without either predestination or merit.
This is the only solution that, in my opinion, fits with all biblical statements on the subject.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) This is exactly how I see it, too. Thanks, Freddy.
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
As far as "from my perspective," I meant that from our point of view it seems that some people have pronounced a categorical "NO" to God's grace, by both word and deed. How that plays out in the big, eternal picture -- I don't know. Personally -- this is me, not the ELCA per se -- I tend to agree with C.S. Lewis that some people will insist on existing apart from God, even as they're confronting God face to face, and that God will, with great sadness, give them their wish.
I agree with this, too.
--------------------
[Nino points a gun at Chiki]
Nino: Now... tell me. Who started the war?
Chiki: [long pause] We did.
~No Man's Land
Posts: 2298 | From: Purgatory | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
da_musicman
Shipmate
# 1018
|
Posted
Have we already covered John 3.16 onwards?
quote:
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.[g] 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."
This seems a srongly non-universalist piece of scripture. Can any Universalist type people explain it? I'm currently sturggling with this whole topic and am falling on the universalist side. Seems to me that the main theme of The Bible is God's Love. And I can't reconcile that with Hell. My earthly Dad wouldn't punish me forever for a mistake I made due to not having all the facts at hand so how can my heavenly father who is so much more loving and gracious?
Posts: 3202 | From: The Dreaming | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
My personal issue with the "penal" model of judgment is that punishment is supposed to be corrective/restorative . How is punishing someone eternally corrective or restorative? That's why the C.S. Lewis model appeals to me more: God is always ready to forgive and restore us; but some people might categorically refuse that -- even when seeing, not through a glass darkly, but face to face: "I'm telling you, get away from me." And so...God does. Sadly, I've met people -- not a lot of people, but a few -- who seem to be this adamant about it, at least on this side of the mortal coil.
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
My personal issue with the "penal" model of judgment is that punishment is supposed to be corrective/restorative . ...
Wrong.
Punishment is to punish.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
So in other words God is a vengeful sadist who likes tormenting souls for all eternity "because"?
because we sinned. Having rejected God, we must choose Him again.
God, being holy, cannot abide unholiness.
Perhaps Star Trek's matter/anti-matter problem provides insight.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Sharkshooter, you wrote, concerning the restorative nature of justice;
quote:
Wrong.
Punishment is to punish.
Which is a good and Godly thing why? Why would God want to do it to his children. Why do you think He does? An assertion is easy to make, but it shouldn't be confused with a reasoned argument, n'est-ce pas.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
quote:
because we sinned. Having rejected God, we must choose Him again.
God, being holy, cannot abide unholiness.
Perhaps Star Trek's matter/anti-matter problem provides insight.
None of your statements address the need for punishment at all.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Sorry, sharkshooter, cross posted.
quote:
because we sinned. Having rejected God, we must choose Him again.
I rather thought that He chose us, from before the beginning of the world. Your view is widely held amongst evangelicals, but, IMHO, wrong.
quote:
God, being holy, cannot abide unholiness.
Again, widely believed, but also wrong, IMHO. If Jesus is God, as I believe, why did he choose the sinful as His preferred associates, if it was such a big deal. We may have difficulty with a holy God, I don't believe He has difficulty with sinful people. In fact, Jesus shows that God embraces sin, in order to disarm it.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
God, being holy, cannot abide unholiness.
I agree precisely. Which is why when we encounter God, our sin is melted away and we are made clean, restored unto him. (Granted, sometimes that process hurts.)
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
None of your statements address the need for punishment at all.
Sin.
Clear enough?
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Sin.
Clear enough?
Not really, not at all. What makes you believe that God's response is to punish sin, rather than to forgive it. This is a particularly pertinent question in the light of Christ's teaching that we must forgive those who sin against us. Does He require of us a standard higher than that to which He Himself subscribes.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
quote:
Sin.
Clear enough?
Not really, not at all. What makes you believe that God's response is to punish sin, rather than to forgive it. ...
And why is the punishment eternal, when human sins don't necessarily have eternal effects? OliviaG
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrookedCucumber
Shipmate
# 10792
|
Posted
quote:
My personal issue with the "penal" model of judgment is that punishment is supposed to be corrective/restorative . How is punishing someone eternally corrective or restorative? That's why the C.S. Lewis model appeals to me more: God is always ready to forgive and restore us; but some people might categorically refuse that
I agree: Lewis's description of salvation is the only one I have ever heard that makes any kind of sense to me.
However, I find myself mildly surprised that a Lutheran would ascribe to Lewis's view of a limited punishment, because I just can't see that Luther would have supported Lewis at all on this. Although I take your point that not everything that Luther said or wrote is to be taken as holy writ, the Augsburg Confession of 1530 -- which I understand forms the basis of orthodox Lutheranism -- says (Art. xvii):
quote:
Also they [our Churches] teach that at the Consummation of the World Christ will appear for judgment and will raise up all the dead; He will give to the godly and elect eternal life and everlasting joys, but ungodly men and the devils He will condemn to be tormented without end. They condemn the Anabaptists, who think that there will be an end to the punishments of condemned men and devils.
The idea that punishment will ever end is specifically denounced !
I agree with you, but it seems that neither of us agree with Luther
This just brings me back to the point I made at the very beginning of my rant: the majority of observant Christians would do not ascribe to some of the most fundamental corporate views of their denominations ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Posts: 2718 | From: East Dogpatch | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
And how do inherently sinful human beings "choose God"?
Precisely.
But if we start thinking about God saving us, rather than us saving ourselves, then I think we eventually arrive at either universalism or double-predestination.
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrookedCucumber
Shipmate
# 10792
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Demas:
But if we start thinking about God saving us, rather than us saving ourselves, then I think we eventually arrive at either universalism or double-predestination.
I tend to think this is where it leads too (sort of). LC pointed out that the corporate view of the Lutheran Churches is to accept `single predestination' but not `double predestination'. But I have problems with that, even if it justified eternal damnation, which I don't think it does.
1. I'm not sure that single and double predestination can logically be distinguished. I am aware of serious theologians tying themselves in knots to make the distinction, but I've not found the arguments all that compelling (although that might just be my ignorance).
2. Luther frequently wrote as if he accepted double predestination. E.g., in Bondage of the Will{/i]:
``Thus God conceals His eternal mercy and loving kindness beneath eternal wrath, His righteousness beneath unrighteousness. Now, the highest degree of faith is to believe that He is merciful, though he saves so few and damns so many; to believe that He is just, though of His own will He makes us perforce proper subjects for damnation, and seems (in Erasmus' words) 'to delight in the torments of poor wretches and to be a fitter object for hate than for love.' ''
In short, I don't think that `single' predestination really gets around the problem.
It seems to me that CS Lewis's view was a form of universalism. He accepted that there could be people who simply refused to accept God, even after death, indefinitely. However, eternity is a long time, and it is not [i]eternal damnation unless God decides from the outset that it will be eternal.
Posts: 2718 | From: East Dogpatch | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
I think you find hardcore "Martin said it, I believe it, that settles it" Lutherans in about the same number that you find hardcore 5-Point Calvinists -- which is to say, not too many. In my own ELCA circles, if you read aloud the bit about Anabaptists being condemned to hell, you'd see a lot of laughing and eye-rolling. We think Anabaptists are completely wrong, of course,
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
Gaah! I hate it when I hit the wrong button!
What I was in the middle of saying: We think that Anabaptists are completely wrong, of course, but we're not rhetorically tossing them into the brimstone pit.
Martin Luther was a flawed human being in need of grace like the rest of us, but he did come up with some good ideas for reforming the Church of his time.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
precentor
Apprentice
# 10755
|
Posted
not long before he died a couple years back, i made the acquaintance of the spanish-american composer joaquin nin-culmell.
joaquin was then in his early 90s, and still fairly active and as lucid as a young man. he attended the nearby priory of st albert's in oakland (a dominican community) for daily mass. he once told me a story of a conversation he had with an old priest in the community on the topic of hell.
"father," asked joaquin, "do you believe in hell?"
the priest answered, "of course i believe in hell, for the church teaches us that it exists. but," he added, with a slight smile, " i don't believe there's anybody in there."
Posts: 8 | From: Berkeley, CA | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
CrookedCucumber
Shipmate
# 10792
|
Posted
I am agreeably surprised by the number of Christians in this forum who express heterodox views on this subject.
I thought it was just me
Posts: 2718 | From: East Dogpatch | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CrookedCucumber:
I am agreeably surprised by the number of Christians in this forum who express heterodox views on this subject.
I thought it was just me
You must be new around here.
Glad to have you around, CC.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
And how do inherently sinful human beings "choose God"?
Part of the freedom that God gives us is a balance of spiritual forces within us, so that we are always able to make a choice in the direction of God, regardless of our state.
Of course we don't have that power from ourselves.
Although we have no power, God gives us the ability to choose, as a free gift. What we then choose is imputed to us, not because we deserve it or own it, but because He gives it to us, or allows us to have it.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
And how do inherently sinful human beings "choose God"?
Which human beings would those be? God made us in Her image. We live in a fallen world of sin, but it is not inherent in who we are; it is "brought in from outside," so to speak. It is not part of how we were created.
In short, I don't buy the "inherently sinful" thing. I think it gives sin too much power. Who's in charge here? God is still God, and we are still the race of beings created in "the image and likeness of God."
[ 23. December 2005, 04:29: Message edited by: Mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
In short, I don't buy the "inherently sinful" thing. I think it gives sin too much power. Who's in charge here? God is still God, and we are still the race of beings created in "the image and likeness of God."
True. It's just that the concept of the Fall is that we have corrupted that image.
This is why God said to Noah, after the Flood:
quote:
Genesis 8.21 “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done."
But maybe there are other interpretations of what the Fall was and what it means.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Originally posted by LutheranChick:
quote:
God's saving action is the only thing that counts in the salvation equation...not our doing the right things, or thinking the right things about God. God's in charge of the salvation business. So it's a bit presumptuous of me to try and second-guess who is on and who is off God's bus.
I agree with this and find it quite consistent with Scripture, but I am unable to get my head around how anyone believeing this can also believe in eternal hell. Salvation is God's business, not ours. God desires that all will be saved. So what impediment can there be to God having His way on this?
Once you remove any hint of Pelgian or semi-Pelagian thought from the salvation process, single or double predestination is the only logical conclusion. As a universalist I naturally believe that He predestines all, even the Judas, Hitler and Myra Hindley types to ultimately enjoy heavenly bliss, perhaps after a very painful awakening. But I see undiluted Calvinism as the only other possible ourcome and I am unable and unwilling to believe in such a loveless God.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
What he said.
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
It sounds nice. ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
But in my opinion it makes religion a farce, with the divine omnipotence being the only significant factor.
It denies or makes pointless much of what Jesus taught.
It is not a position that has ever been adopted by any Christian denomination. Or has it?
Maybe someone could make money starting a religion with this as a central tenet.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
da_musicman
Shipmate
# 1018
|
Posted
It may deny or make pointless much that Jesus taught but so does Damnationism .(Is there a better word for this viewpoint as this one seems loaded?) Much of this thread has been about trying to balance seemlingly contradictory ideas and verses. We may say that this dichotomy illustrates to us how we can never fully understand God and that we should be happy dealing with the uncertainty. I ,as I can only speak for myself, am more than willing to admit that I'm not sure on this. Being human though I don't cope well with uncertainty so still end up coming down on one side or the other.And that is Universalism.
As for making Religon a Farce I think not. It all depends on what the purpose of religion is. If it is to save you then yes it does render it a farce but If it is to aid you and bring you closer to God then I still believe it has a value.
Posts: 3202 | From: The Dreaming | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
Exactly.
If you do a reading of the gospels and think about all of the "condemnation" and punishment-type ideologies that come from Jesus as earthly rather than eternal, life on earth still has its value.
Perhaps Jesus came not to save those who accept him, but rather to deliver a message of incomprehensible grace and to provide a way to begin experiencing this new life TODAY. In that way, his laws were not meant to teach us how to die the right way but instead they are the best way to LIVE.
Just some thoughts.
-Digory
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:
It is not a position that has ever been adopted by any Christian denomination. Or has it?
The early Universalist Church of America adopted this position; it arose out of the calvinist (Whitefield) branch of the Methodist revival and moved to America with a preacher called John Murray.
This is the foundational document of the denomination, the Winchester Profession of 1803:
quote:
We believe that the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments contain a revelation of the character of God and of the duty, interest and final destination of mankind.
We believe that there is one God, whose nature is love, revealed in one Lord Jesus Christ, by one Holy Spirit of Grace, who will finally restore the whole family of mankind to holiness and happiness.
We believe that holiness and true happiness are inseparably connected, and that believers ought to be careful to maintain order and practice good works; for these things are good and profitable unto men.
The denomination fell into decline in the twentieth century and merged with the Unitarians to form the modern Unitarian Universalists.
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
Originally posted by Freddy:
quote:
But in my opinion it makes religion a farce, with the divine omnipotence being the only significant factor.
As is often the case this depends on whose interpretation of Jesus' teachings you follow. For example it is a perfectly sound reading of much of Jesus' teaching in Matthew to assume that He was a Jew who believed in sslvation by works. As I said earlier in this thread, most of Jesus' condemnatory teachings are entirely works related. But He introduces grace by saying, "With man it is impossible, but for God all things are possible".
The quotes from John 6 and John 12 are all about grace, where Jesus makes clear that God is the only author of our salvation. If divine omnipotence isn't the only factor then what is, unless you believe in works righteousness? The idea that God will not have His way limits His omnipotence to what is for me an unacceptable extent. If God desires my salvation then He can have it.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
If divine omnipotence isn't the only factor then what is, unless you believe in works righteousness?
Human freedom as a gift from God.
If freedom is not a real thing then the urgent demands to repentance and obedience, which are present on virtually every page of the Bible, are pointless.
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Freddy
Shipmate
# 365
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Demas:
The denomination fell into decline in the twentieth century and merged with the Unitarians to form the modern Unitarian Universalists.
Unitarian Universalism. Of course. Sorry, I forgot. ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
--------------------
"Consequently nothing is of greater importance to a person than knowing what the truth is." Swedenborg
Posts: 12845 | From: Bryn Athyn | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
