|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: What if I'm right?
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
Oh, if God created anything that wasn't lovable, it proves that he is NOT love.
Does it? Does it really? So everything and person and action in the world is lovable? Has intrinsic value such that it ought to be loved? Or God didn't create it? Or God isn't love? Do you really mean that?
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
But I believe, myself, that one of the strongest messages Christianity can send out to the world is that hedonism (or whatever the harmful self-indulgence may be) is not the way to fulfilment as a human being, but the knowledge of Christ is.
...
the gospel is one long warning that what's currency for the 'world' is not legal tender for the citizens of heaven.
... what God has called us all to is not simply to a life of painful, party-pooping self-denial (occasionally true as that may be), but a life of growing in Christ, and becoming the very people we were created to be. I can't tell you how much more that motivates me than the death-bound, be nice or otherwise, doctrines of hell-fire!
It is those who are not in relationship with their Creator who are 'missing out' and not the Christian who feels deprived because she won't give herself the same freedom to indulge in sinning, or abusing her humanity, in the same way as others.
That we often feel it's the other way round is surely human nature. I know I've felt that way often, and will continue to until I die no doubt!
Hell - even if it exists - is not to be viewed as the booby prize one doesn't get just because one decided not to screw around and to be pious and miserable instead! It is the promise of Christlike fulfilment, building and expanding our God-given humanity, leading to an authentic humanity, connected intimately to the Creator, that will last eternally, that is the reward for seeking God.
What an awesome post, Anselmina.
--------------------
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
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Anselmina ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Luke
Soli Deo Gloria
# 306
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by linzc:
quote:
Originally posted by Luke:
quote:
Originally posted by linzc:
Huh?
I agree with Sharkshooter's statement.
Yeah I think I got that bit.
I wasn't quite clear on the bit about "fluctuating in attendance to that belief" (about Satan?) and how that was part of your 'sanctification', or why a belief about Satan that made you feel you needed to say you agreed with Sharkshooter.
LOL
The Satan bit was an aside! I should have paid more attention to the structure of the post. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
Emily's Voice
Posts: 822 | From: Australia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ScaredOfGrasshoppers
Apprentice
# 6485
|
Posted
Anselmina's post hit on what I had been thinking since near the beginning of this thread. The idea that christians do the right thing because they're afraid of going to Hell is so far from the gospel message it's disturbing.
The one thing I am 100% convinced of is that my salvation is assured. God loves me, and nothing that i'll ever do will change that, no matter how horrific. There's freedom in that knowledge, it allows us to chase down those things in our life that we believe God is calling us to instead of sitting on our hands in case we screw it up. Of course we're going to screw it up, but so will everyone else, and aside from some earthly consequences, your position in relation to God and salvation hasn't changed.
Is there a Hell? Believe what you gotta believe, but don't ever let it stop you from doing that which you believe is right.
"And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God." - Micah 6:8
Work on getting this right and the fear of Hell will never be a problem.
PS. read my sig, it has relevence here too I think...
[ 04. June 2004, 01:58: Message edited by: ScaredOfGrasshoppers ]
--------------------
"It is not power that corrupts, but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it; Fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it." - Aung San Sui Kyi
Posts: 30 | From: Torquay, Australia | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ScaredOfGrasshoppers:
Anselmina's post hit on what I had been thinking since near the beginning of this thread. The idea that christians do the right thing because they're afraid of going to Hell is so far from the gospel message it's disturbing.
Why did you think that? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
I didn't say it.
--------------------
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
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Seán D:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl:
Nor do most of my family. You may be able to come up with some piece of sophistry to argue how they do, but the simple fact is they don't. The injustice of it is so obvious it's blinding.
Out of curiosity, Karl (and not because I have a going-in-hell agenda to push) would you agree that all of us have rebelled against God in some way or another and don't deserve fellowship with him? My problem with playing down the idea of sin and deserving separation from God is that is also plays down the atonement and grace. Not that I'm saying you are doing this, just that I'd be interested to know how you get around this.
Of course, you might well agree that everyone does deserve to be separated by God - but it is a long step from that to eternal hell, of course.
You get there in your final paragraph. My problem is not that I think everyone is deserving of Heaven (although there are people that I think do from what I know of them), I don't know many people who deserve Hell. It's the all or nothingness of the options presented by this OP that I have a problem with. Most people seem to be not good enough for heaven but not bad enough for Hell.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rat
Ship's Rat
# 3373
|
Posted
Well I must say that - despite the confusion I mentioned on this thread's twin, which is still not really resolved in my mind - Anselmina's post makes perfect sense to me.
--------------------
It's a matter of food and available blood. If motherhood is sacred, put your money where your mouth is. Only then can you expect the coming down to the wrecked & shimmering earth of that miracle you sing about. [Margaret Atwood]
Posts: 5285 | From: A dour region for dour folk | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
Oh, if God created anything that wasn't lovable, it proves that he is NOT love.
Does it? Does it really? So everything and person and action in the world is lovable? Has intrinsic value such that it ought to be loved? Or God didn't create it? Or God isn't love? Do you really mean that?
Person and thing, yes. Also, I can't think of a person or a thing that is completely unlovable. (Actions are usually controlled by this little thing called free will and are hence not directly the work of God).
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ScaredOfGrasshoppers
Apprentice
# 6485
|
Posted
Originally posted by Sharkshooter:
quote:
Why did you think that?
I didn't say it.
Never said you did ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
It was mentioned near the start of the thread... hold on...
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
I seem to alternate between the hope that God is, as our more liberal brethren say, ultimately forgiving and willing to overlook my worst parts; and the fear that He is ultimately judgmental and thus I'd better keep my slate cleaner than clean if I don't want to burn.
Of course, I also worry about whether hope and fear are the right things to base my religion on, but at the moment I don't have a lot more to offer...
There were a few other comments along the way along these lines, "Just on the chance that Hell is real, shouldn't you live as best you can, just to avoid it?" OK, not exactly like that, but short of reading the whole damn thread again, that's pretty close.
I was just saying that anyone (i'm not pointing fingers sharkshooter) that is claiming to be a christian (or any other religion for that matter) for the sole purpose of avoiding hell is going to be no use to God whatsoever. The parable of the talents is useful here, the one guy that acted out of fear got squat. Actually, he got less than squat.
[ 05. June 2004, 00:22: Message edited by: ScaredOfGrasshoppers ]
Posts: 30 | From: Torquay, Australia | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ScaredOfGrasshoppers
Apprentice
# 6485
|
Posted
Originally posted by Karl:
quote:
It's the all or nothingness of the options presented by this OP that I have a problem with.
I understand that you're refering to the original post, but did you know that there is an idea that Heaven and Hell is not all there is? In fact, if you go to many of the places in the bible that people assume refer to Hell, it's quite possible that it's something else entirely.
The parable of the talents I mentioned above talks about 'the outer darkness'. Doesn't make sense to equate that with the lake of fire that the bible tells us is under the earth, does it?
Sorry, this is a tangent, not a challenge. Carry on.
--------------------
"It is not power that corrupts, but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it; Fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it." - Aung San Sui Kyi
Posts: 30 | From: Torquay, Australia | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ScaredOfGrasshoppers:
I was just saying that anyone (i'm not pointing fingers sharkshooter) that is claiming to be a christian (or any other religion for that matter) for the sole purpose of avoiding hell is going to be no use to God whatsoever. The parable of the talents is useful here, the one guy that acted out of fear got squat. Actually, he got less than squat.
So what are you saying to the person who is Christian for such a reason? That they're not going to win anyway? What then would you have them do?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
JimT
Ship'th Mythtic
# 142
|
Posted
I believe that science will one day offer the choice of immortality to those who wish it. Already, we routinely immortalize cells in tissue culture with an enzyme called telomerase. The main source of aging in higher organisms with linear chromosomes is the gradual shortening of the ends of chromosomes during replication, or copying. Telomerase restores the shortening ends. Bacteria have circular chromosomes and so have always been "immortal."
"Immortal" cells are still subject to physical destruction, but as long as there is a copy of the DNA the entire body could in theory be restored. Once we know how memory is stored in the brain electronically we could copy it to computers and restore the mind. There are already machines to read emotional states and thoughts cannot be far off.
Immortality and resurrection. Proven. Demonstratable. Available to all. No belief required in the invisible or intangible. No Final Judgement; Hell or Heaven.
How many will opt for it when it becomes available? How many would opt for it if it were available tomorrow?
Posts: 2619 | From: Now On | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
Scaredofgrasshoppers: quote:
In fact, if you go to many of the places in the bible that people assume refer to Hell, it's quite possible that it's something else entirely.
The parable of the talents I mentioned above talks about 'the outer darkness'. Doesn't make sense to equate that with the lake of fire that the bible tells us is under the earth, does it?
Sorry, this is a tangent, not a challenge. Carry on.
Au contraire!!! C'est neither! I always find it rather strange that many - I said 'many' -self-proclaimed Biblical Inerrantists aren't pulled up short by the thought that many of the things that they believe the Bible to teach inerrantly aren't actually to be found at any one place in the Bible: i.e. the Bible doesn't actually say these things. My first take on the OP - and yes, I did grasp Sharkshooter's intention - was that it looked an awful lot like a summary of things that are believed out of the Bible but aren't actually in there.
I think, for the record, that that's why the thread kept veering away from his intentions; the OP read like someone putting their own construal on what the Bible says, insisting "This actually is what the Bible says..." and asking - thread title - "What if I'm right...?" Which annoyed the karaoke out of people whose position was "Well, I read the same Bible, and I don't see this in there..."
Of course, this overlaps with Dead Horse territory, but I think it's a point well made...
Leprechaun: quote:
Does it? Does it really? So everything and person and action in the world is lovable? Has intrinsic value such that it ought to be loved?
Wee Frankie of Assisi: quote:
All creatures of our God and King
Lift up your voice and with us sing,
Alleluia! Alleluia!
Thou burning sun with golden beam,
Thou silver moon with softer gleam,
O praise Him! O praise Him!
Alleluia! Alleluia! Alleluia!
Thou rushing wind that art so strong
Ye clouds that sail in Heaven along,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Thou rising moon, in praise rejoice,
Ye lights of evening, find a voice!
Refrain
Thou flowing water, pure and clear,
Make music for thy Lord to hear,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Thou fire so masterful and bright,
That givest man both warmth and light.
Refrain
Dear mother earth, who day by day
Unfoldest blessings on our way,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
The flowers and fruits that in thee grow,
Let them His glory also show.
Refrain
And all ye men of tender heart,
Forgiving others, take your part,
O sing ye! Alleluia!
Ye who long pain and sorrow bear,
Praise God and on Him cast your care!
Refrain
And thou most kind and gentle Death,
Waiting to hush our latest breath,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Thou leadest home the child of God,
And Christ our Lord the way hath trod.
Refrain
Let all things their Creator bless,
And worship Him in humbleness,
O praise Him! Alleluia!
Praise, praise the Father, praise the Son,
And praise the Spirit, Three in One!
Refrain
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
What if ...
Adam and Eve were real live created (sans bely button) people who sinned and caused humanity to need salvation. Old Testament people were saved by following the guidelines set out in scripture, specifically regular sacrifices for their sins. Jesus, the perfect sacrifice, died to pay the price for sin and is the only way into Heaven. Heaven is where we praise God for eternity. There is a real Hell. Satan lives there - it is not a nice place. Anyone who does not acknowledge that Jesus is Lord here on earth will endure eternity separated from God.
Have you seriously considered it? What would you do/change if you were suddenly, somehow, convinced of it? How would it affect you?
Yes, I used to believe it.
I would probably have another nervous breakdown, that is a serious, not a flippant comment.
Since ditching it, I've seen more people converted to Christ in 6 years, than the previous 16 years, when evangelism was my unofficial 'job'.
I believe Hell is a temporary separation from God IN the afterlife, or eternity, rather than a permanent separation FOR eternity.
'God is the Saviour of all men, especially those who believe.'
Anselima:
I think if someone REALLY believed the things in the OP, and took them to heart, it would lead to driven behaviour. It did with me.
Christina
Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ScaredOfGrasshoppers
Apprentice
# 6485
|
Posted
Marvin:
quote:
So what are you saying to the person who is Christian for such a reason? That they're not going to win anyway? What then would you have them do?
Think about it. If a person were in such a position, how strong would their relationship with God be? My guess? Not too strong, because they keep avoiding Him out of fear. So then you have to ask how much better that is than someone who doesn't acknowledge God at all?
My advice to this person would be to sincerely and honestly question what he/she believes. To look for real answers, and be as brutally honest with themself as they need to be until they get some. There are some things that we all know, but they are hidden under layers of insecurity and years of 'teaching'. Even to ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) read the bible and ask themself what they really see there.
Psyduck, I *think* you said what I was trying to get at.
It's always interesting when you look back at history and ask 'how could they have made those mistakes?' (the inquisition, for example) and yet people today are still of the opinion that they've got it all worked out.
Was it Nietzsche who said "The beginning of wisdom is realising that you know nothing"? Whoever it was, they were on to something...
--------------------
"It is not power that corrupts, but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it; Fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it." - Aung San Sui Kyi
Posts: 30 | From: Torquay, Australia | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
I ough to warn you Psyduck that I am unlikely to find the middle ages' Dr Dolittle a source of inspiration on this or anything else.
The point is, God loves, because he loves. It is HE who loves. But we are, as St Paul says, worthless outside of that. He sets his grace upon us not because we have value, but because he chooses to have grace on us.
You cannot possible claim that every action and person DESERVES love - that is a throughly modernistic notion, and I know your feelings on modernism. Yet God loves, because he IS love.
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013
|
Posted
Dear Lep,
I think you are over-stating what Paul says. I agree that he says our works are worthless in trying to obtain salvation by merit, but where does he say WE are worthless?
Christina
Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
Leprechaun: quote:
I ough to warn you Psyduck that I am unlikely to find the middle ages' Dr Dolittle a source of inspiration on this or anything else.
Not even as a Christian who was able to find everything lovable? Sad... ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
I ough to warn you Psyduck that I am unlikely to find the middle ages' Dr Dolittle a source of inspiration on this or anything else.
Au Contraire. He found everything lovable therefore everything was, to him, lovable, therefore everything was lovable.
quote:
The point is, God loves, because he loves. It is HE who loves. But we are, as St Paul says, worthless outside of that.
And you're still caught on the point of the same sword. If we are worthless other than that, then God deliberately creates that which is worthless for the purpose of redeeming it by his love. Think about that for a second, please.
quote:
He sets his grace upon us not because we have value, but because he chooses to have grace on us.
I won't disagree with that, but that does not mean that we don't have value.
quote:
You cannot possible claim that every action and person DESERVES love - that is a throughly modernistic notion, and I know your feelings on modernism. Yet God loves, because he IS love.
And because everything he created is inherantly lovable. If a single human (Francis of Asissi is a good example) were to find something lovable that God did not, then it would be proof positive that God was not love.
Still, in the words of Monty Python: All Things Dull and Ugly (linked due to copyright)
and the corollary, to quote Umberto Eco "IF you do your thesis on syphillis, you end up loving even hte Spirochaeta pallida."
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
And you're still caught on the point of the same sword. If we are worthless other than that, then God deliberately creates that which is worthless for the purpose of redeeming it by his love. Think about that for a second, please.
Ok.
tick tick tick.
Now. Your point?
quote:
And because everything he created is inherantly lovable. If a single human (Francis of Asissi is a good example) were to find something lovable that God did not, then it would be proof positive that God was not love.
Really? So God is not love because he hates injustice and bullying? Some people love those. God has to love racism, violence, rape to be love? There are people who love all of those things.
The fact that people love things God hates, yet he still loves them, proves even more that God is exceptionally loving and people are exceptionally wicked, and deserve nothing.
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChristinaMarie
Shipmate
# 1013
|
Posted
In Romans 3 where Paul has been translated as 'worthless' it is actually 'unprofitable'. Furthermore, he is quoting from Psal 14 and 53 which show that the Psalmist was writing about people who said that there is no God, to go ahead and do wicked things.
Jesus said we are worth more than many sparrows, and the hairs on our head are numbered.
Paul said to the Athenians that we are God's offspring - and therin lies our intrinsic worth, I believe. We are all God's offspring.
Our actions deserve punishment. God would rather us receive His mercy and Love through Christ, by grace.
God hates our sin, but He loves us, because no matter what a person does, we are still His offspring, and we are still made in His image.
If I say, 'Christina, what you did was sinful and awful' then that can lead to a good result, if I pray about it and seek God's grace.
If I say, 'Christina, you are worthless, and wicked and bad', I go further than God does. God condemns my actions sometimes (for my own good), but He doesn't condemn me.
The latter type of thinking would lead any person to clinical depression, IMO.
Christina
Posts: 2333 | From: Oldham | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun: I am unlikely to find the middle ages' Dr Dolittle a source of inspiration
Why doesn't that surprise me? It's interesting that you hold such contempt for St. Francis, surely one of the great spiritual masters and certainly a key figure in Christianity; furthermore one that most non-Christians find admirable and attractive, one who truly seemed to echo the values of our Founder.
Your God is the God of Milton’s ‘Paradise Lost’: a self-exalting, humourless, pompous prig. You’re positing a brand of Christianity which teaches the worthlessness of humanity. A snivelling miserable little religion, kow-towing to a cruel and pompous tyrant who has incomprehensibly designed the sacrifice of his ‘Son’ to redeem a world where people die horribly all the time - and is then going to punish people who fail to see this great ‘truth’.
This is surely the Christianity of the Inquisition - because, after all, if you are right, it would be better to torture people on earth so that they might avoid the torment your loving God has designed for them. Thank God for St.Francis’s teaching which shows us that there might be more to a faith founded on Jesus of Nazareth than your narrow gospel of misery, superstition and fear.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
And you're still caught on the point of the same sword. If we are worthless other than that, then God deliberately creates that which is worthless for the purpose of redeeming it by his love. Think about that for a second, please.
Ok.
tick tick tick.
Now. Your point?
That your God is so insecure and puny that he must prove himself by deliberately creating things as flawed in order to "prove" his grace rather than just getting the job right in the first place.
Why couldn't an omnipotent omniscient being who is supposedly "Love" make his creations to be lovable or to be worthy?
quote:
quote:
And because everything he created is inherantly lovable. If a single human (Francis of Asissi is a good example) were to find something lovable that God did not, then it would be proof positive that God was not love.
Really? So God is not love because he hates injustice and bullying? Some people love those. God has to love racism, violence, rape to be love? There are people who love all of those things.
Don't make me reach for Exodus, Numbers, Judges, Samuel and Kings. There are examples of God looking positively on all the things you mention in there. (Let's wipe out the Caananites, the treatment of foreign women, the plagues etc. etc.)
Anyway, you confuse a creation with an action (or a concrete noun with either an abstract noun or a verb). "Hate the sin, Love the sinner" illustrates the difference. It is quite possible to love a paedophile, a rapist, a serial killer etc. despite knowing first or second hand what they have done.
quote:
The fact that people love things God hates, yet he still loves them, proves even more that God is exceptionally loving and people are exceptionally wicked, and deserve nothing.
There is a HUGE difference between being "Exceptionally Loving" and being "Love".
People, in your theology, deserve nothing because God made them so that they deserved nothing. Every single sin that has been committed is a direct response of God having wrought amiss when he made Adam and Eve, despite both omnipotence and omniscience. As such, the responsibility for all sin belongs to God.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
testbear
Shipmate
# 4602
|
Posted
Two things that were nagging at me:
1. I have a fatal allergic reaction to Unfiltered God.
2. What kind of a God is he if all he is, is you?
--------------------
"If you really believe what you say you believe / you wouldn't be so damn reckless with the words you speak"
Posts: 127 | From: a town where you can't smell a thing | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Qlib:
Your God is the God of Milton’s ‘Paradise Lost’: a self-exalting, humourless, pompous prig. You’re positing a brand of Christianity which teaches the worthlessness of humanity. A snivelling miserable little religion, kow-towing to a cruel and pompous tyrant who has incomprehensibly designed the sacrifice of his ‘Son’ to redeem a world where people die horribly all the time - and is then going to punish people who fail to see this great ‘truth’.
Qlib, we could play this game all day. I could say your God is a fabrication wrought out of your own head to massage your own ego, make you feel worth something, who sent his Son in a feeble attempt to get our attention and make us love him, that you whole world view is irresistibly skewed to put yourself and your middle class suburban help the poor morality at the centre, not God. That your God is nothing but the creation of a bunch of humanist scholars who wanted to deify their own preferences. That you don't obey the Bible because you don't want to but you dress it up in religious piety.
It just doesn't get us very far though, does it?
St Francis of Assisi should have kept his thoughts to share with the ickle wickle bunnies.
quote:
Thank God for St.Francis’s teaching which shows us that there might be more to a faith founded on Jesus of Nazareth than your narrow gospel of misery, superstition and fear.
You will struggle to find anyone who believes what I believe who is miserable, superstitious or fearful of God. Far from it in fact.
quote:
Justinian wrote
People, in your theology, deserve nothing because God made them so that they deserved nothing. Every single sin that has been committed is a direct response of God having wrought amiss when he made Adam and Eve, despite both omnipotence and omniscience. As such, the responsibility for all sin belongs to God.
The Apostle Paul wrote
quote:
But who are you, O man to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it "Why did you make me like this?"
Apparently, yes.
[ 05. June 2004, 14:30: Message edited by: Leprechaun ]
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
Qlib, we could play this game all day.
Yes, we could play the game all day - but I think we'd be playing to different rules. You see, I've taken my picture of your God from what you've posted - including that IMHO rather creepy sig of yours - and from others who agree with you, such as Marvin - who sounds pretty cheesed off with the path he's chosen to walk. None of the 'whose yolk is easy and whose burden is light' from him. You, on the other hand have just made patronising assumptions about my views. Knock down liberal Aunt Sallies all day if it amuses you, but don't imagine it amounts to a coherent argument.
Let's face it, if we all really believed the ideas in the OP, it would be quite logical to kick start the Inquisition again, wouldn't it?
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Neep
Ship's Meerkat
# 5213
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
St Francis of Assisi should have kept his thoughts to share with the ickle wickle bunnies.
Thank and praise God, whoever we might all think He is, that St Francis didn't- he thought about God and His creation, was amazed at both, and recorded his thoughts in case they might inspire others.
He could tell some rabbits about how wonderful God is, but he decided to tell us instead, because we can appreciate God. This is because we are made in His image, which has implications when considering whether we have any inherent worth at all. I mean, look on eBay- you can buy loads of broken electronics because they were built to be worth something and can be restored to worthiness again: hence, they cost money. They are, in themselves, of worth.
Incidentally, I think the rabbits are coming out of all this rather badly. I saw a field of them a few days ago, and stopped to watch in delight. When God does a good job, perhaps it's sinful to ignore it.
--------------------
"Your standing days are done," I cried, "You'll rally me no more!
I don't even know which side we fought on, or what for."
Posts: 293 | From: A burrow, in England | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
The Apostle Paul wrote
quote:
But who are you, O man to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it "Why did you make me like this?"
Apparently, yes.
And quite right too! Should we genetically engineer slaves? After all, we will have formed them, so who are they to talk back to us? Should parents be able to do anything they want to their children?
Also have you ever read any of the OT? Specifically the instances where a number of the prophets rail at God for different reasons. Or even "My God, My God why hast thou forsaken me?" (And I think that by any hierarchy, the speaker of that outranks St Paul)
Oh, and you still haven't answered any of my points.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Justinian:
And quite right too! Should we genetically engineer slaves? After all, we will have formed them, so who are they to talk back to us? Should parents be able to do anything they want to their children?
All of those points depends on the most ridiculous anthropomorphism, that just doesn't carry. If WE do anything, it is still ultimately God's creation, and he can do as he pleases. All of your points rest on us being to something we "create" as God is to us. They also assume that we can argue God out of what he wills to do. Which, I believe, we can't.
quote:
Also have you ever read any of the OT? Specifically the instances where a number of the prophets rail at God for different reasons. Or even "My God, My God why hast thou forsaken me?" (And I think that by any hierarchy, the speaker of that outranks St Paul)
Indeed, although he wasn't created by God was he? Presuming you mean Jesus, or were you setting up a Psalmist vs Paul competition?
Do you have ANY respect for God? Is there any sense in which you fear him? Do you really believe the God who sent Jesus to the cross, for whatever reason cannot do as he pleases? Do you really think his thoughts cannot outweigh your thoughts?
I could try and answer some of your points - but its not my job. Its God's, and for some of them, he has chosen not to. That's his prerogative.
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
I could try and answer some of your points - but its not my job.
That's so lame. The point of Purgatory, as I take it, is to answer each others' points. Why not just say you are incapable of rational debate and stay away? Instead you choose to interact here, and part of interacting here is answering the points that others make. It is, in fact, your job, which you took on when you entered the debate.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
That's so lame. The point of Purgatory, as I take it, is to answer each others' points. Why not just say you are incapable of rational debate and stay away? Instead you choose to interact here, and part of interacting here is answering the points that others make. It is, in fact, your job, which you took on when you entered the debate.
But Mousethief, there are questions to which there are no answers. I could speculate, but why would anyone want to listen to that? (It'd be mostly drivel, as you could probably tell) On some of these issues of theodicy God tells us so much and no more, and I'm saying it is our responsibility to obey, even when we don't understand.
This is my last proof text, I promise
"The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the thing srevealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law".
In some of these things I am resigned to letting God be God. If that means I can't debate properly, so be it.
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Then I think you should have the decency to say (e.g.) "I don't know the answer to that, and am not sure any human can know" rather than "that's not my job."
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
Putting aside just for the moment whether or not it is true (or whoever is or isn't right); I have to admit I feel more comfortable about the idea of a hell as described in the picture-language of first-century Jewish tradition, than I do with some people's apparent desparation that there should exist such a place regardless of anything else alluded to in the gospel message.
And JFTR I think the first para of Lep's post to Qlib beginning 'we could play this game all day' was arguably one of the most insulting posts I've seen on this thread to date. It came across as a very sly way of saying 'what's the point of me sticking to my Bible-believing truth, when clearly you're not enough of a Bible believer yourself to listen or understand.'
But I think I'll leave Saint Francis to defend himself - no wait, he doesn't have to. I'm not into him, myself, in any big way, but an intelligent reading of his theological ideas is apologia enough ![[Razz]](tongue.gif) !
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
And JFTR I think the first para of Lep's post to Qlib beginning 'we could play this game all day' was arguably one of the most insulting posts I've seen on this thread to date. It came across as a very sly way of saying 'what's the point of me sticking to my Bible-believing truth, when clearly you're not enough of a Bible believer yourself to listen or understand.'
In which case I apologise profusely, both for that and not being clear enough to profess my own lack of ability to answer, Mousethief.
I did not mean to say what you thought Anselmina, but merely to say that it isn't profitable to this thread or anything else to insult caricatures of other people's positions. In my defence Qlib's post read to me "you must be sad miserable person without an ounce of intelligence because you have an evangelical faith."
That said, responding in kind probably wasn't all that helpful.
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
In that case, Lep, I'm happy to say that I misunderstood you. FWIW, the word 'passionate' springs to mind more readily than either 'sad' or 'miserable' with your way of discussing on this thread!
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
In the probably vain hope you will actually pay any attention to any of this:
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
All of those points depends on the most ridiculous anthropomorphism, that just doesn't carry. If WE do anything, it is still ultimately God's creation,
Thanks for blaming God for the Holocaust, the Inquisition, the Atomic Bomb and every other example of evil in this world.
quote:
and he can do as he pleases.
I don't think anyone's denying your God the physical ability to do as he pleases. This does not mean that it is right that he does so unless your only standard of morality is "Might Makes Right".
quote:
All of your points rest on us being to something we "create" as God is to us.
If not, then St Paul's analogy is meaningless.
quote:
They also assume that we can argue God out of what he wills to do.
Nonsense! I can't influence the actions of Adolf Hitler, but that doesn't stop me condemning him.
quote:
Which, I believe, we can't.
First counter-example that comes to mind from the Bible is Jonah 3- when God sees the Ninevites wearing ashes and sackcloth and repents of his decision to destroy them. There are several others.
quote:
quote:
Also have you ever read any of the OT? Specifically the instances where a number of the prophets rail at God for different reasons. Or even "My God, My God why hast thou forsaken me?" (And I think that by any hierarchy, the speaker of that outranks St Paul)
Indeed, although he wasn't created by God was he? Presuming you mean Jesus, or were you setting up a Psalmist vs Paul competition?
Jesus, of course. My point is that neither Peter, Paul nor any other human in the bible is infaliable- and even God repents a few times.
quote:
Do you have ANY respect for God?
My God, yes. If I believed in yours, the only respect I would have for him would be respect for his sheer power. None at all for his morals.
quote:
Is there any sense in which you fear him?
Of course. He's much bigger than I am, and I'd fear your God far more because he is capricious and evil. All these are good reasons for fearing entities.
quote:
Do you really believe the God who sent Jesus to the cross, for whatever reason cannot do as he pleases? Do you really think his thoughts cannot outweigh your thoughts?
I think he can do whatever he pleases that's not directly logically impossible. (I don't believe he can e.g. square the circle).
quote:
I could try and answer some of your points - but its not my job. Its God's, and for some of them, he has chosen not to. That's his prerogative.
I can't respond to that one without calling you to hell.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun: In my defence Qlib's post read to me "you must be sad miserable person without an ounce of intelligence because you have an evangelical faith."My italics
That's a defence? Reading things into my post that aren't remotely there? Or do you think I bracketed you with Milton because I think he's stupid too? Perhaps you think you're above Milton? You evidently think you are above St.Francis. Dream on.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
Leprachaun - could I try a different tack? quote:
.... there are questions to which there are no answers.
Zen koans, quantum uncertainty - I don't necessarily disagree with this... I think... But I presume you mean 'in principle' - and you really need to state your principle, or it just sounds like a rhetorical device. On what grounds are you saying that there are questions to which there are no answers? It sounds to me that you are saying that there are questions to which there are no answers because God won't give answers to them, so tough. And that's OK because it's God. It must be apparent to you that there are lots of people on these boards who aren't going to be fobbed off like that. Even by God. And you may think that that's just the arrogance of the creature towards the creator, but that's your assertion. quote:
I could speculate, but why would anyone want to listen to that?
Maybe because that's what this board, in particular, is for. quote:
(It'd be mostly drivel, as you could probably tell)
Well, give it a go. See what we all think. Except that that isn't the reason you won't speculate, is it? Because you say: quote:
On some of these issues of theodicy God tells us so much and no more, and I'm saying it is our responsibility to obey, even when we don't understand.
Don't you see how much this looks like being at the mercy of the cosmic bully? In fact, like being part of his gang, and passing on his intimidation? Don't you see that that explains at least some of the reaction you're getting?
In many ways, I admire you for struggling to accommodate your impulse to debate, right up to the point at which you seem to hear God stirring, getting angry, and telling you to stop. Let me ask you a question. What would happen if you were to push on beyond that point? Why do you think it would anger God? Why do you clearly feel that many of us do anger God by thinking and talking like this?
What's the difference between that and being intimidated by God?
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ...psyduck...:
What's the difference between that and being intimidated by God?
Psyduck, I appreciate your peacemaking approach, I really do.
This is an honest answer to your question. I am not scared of a lightning bolt if I speculate answers to these questions. I'm not scared of God.
But I respect Him. I think the universe is about Him. And so, while there are many he things he does I don't understand. I respect his right to make the rules. And I trust him that he will keep them. And in the same way I don't want to impugn the motives of people I respect (and in this case, love and owe my life to) I don't want to do that with God a thousand times more.
I think its my place. I could guess, I could rant, I could curse God and die. But I don't want to, because he satisfied his wrath by sending his son, and welcomes me warmly into his family. And in the same way I respect my dad too much to rail at him when he does things I don't like, I won't do that with God.
I'm not being holier than thou, at least not meaning to be. And I'm not scared of what God might do if I speculate. But I love and respect Him too much to guess at what he might do or why. I suppose that's the way I see myself in relationship with Him.
That's the way I feel and think. Sorry.
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grits:
I think there are those of us who are content to let God be God -- however He chooses to be.
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
In some of these things I am resigned to letting God be God. If that means I can't debate properly, so be it.
Not sure exactly what the pair of you mean by "letting God be God".
It comes across to me that you are saying that you are prepared to do things if you believe that God tells you to do them - things like, say, torturing people, that in other circumstances you would call evil.
(the weaker form is that you approve of actions that you would normally call evil in the special circumstance where you believe that God does them or the person in question is doing them at God's behest. I put it in the stronger form where you are the one doing the action to try to illustrate how totally immoral this sounds to me).
Is that what you mean by this phrase ? Or am I mis-reading you entirely ? That you trust God - and your perception of God - above any moral sense you may have ?
Why would anyone decide to trust God that much ? If worship is not based on belief in God's goodness, is it not craven submission to power ?
And if your trust is indeed based on His goodness, aren't you logically bound to stop and reconsider your allegiance at the point where the apparent evilness of what He seems to be asking you to do or condone outweighs the apparent goodness which attracted you to Him in the first place ?
Russ
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
And if your trust is indeed based on His goodness, aren't you logically bound to stop and reconsider your allegiance at the point where the apparent evilness of what He seems to be asking you to do or condone outweighs the apparent goodness which attracted you to Him in the first place ?
Russ
I've been thinking about this. I think its a good question. I think it all boils down to what you think the bottom line of the universe is.
If you think it is a basic good=good bottom line (bear with me here) then of course God must abide by what is good.
But if you think the rule is "God must be seen for who is" or as one of my favourite writers puts it "the chief end of God is to glorify God" then that's different.
Why? Because me glorifying God as a creature will be different than God glorifying himself as creator. Me honouring him as obedient servant will look sometimes the same as him glorifying himself by serving us, and sometimes different. Because in some way we are like him, and in some ways not at all.
So the outcome - God glorifying himself may involve him doing things that if he were a person we would think evil. That's the nature of the world.
I realise that far from answers every question, and is far from intellectually watertight. But I think that's what I mean by "letting God be God".
It certainly means that I cannot justify doing things which, as a creature, it is not my right to do, "on God's behalf" as such. Because attempting to dethrone him, and do his job for him, is the essence of sin.
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
So the outcome - God glorifying himself may involve him doing things that if he were a person we would think evil. That's the nature of the world.
I realise that far from answers every question, and is far from intellectually watertight. But I think that's what I mean by "letting God be God".
It certainly means that I cannot justify doing things which, as a creature, it is not my right to do, "on God's behalf" as such. Because attempting to dethrone him, and do his job for him, is the essence of sin.
Um...but if "that's the nature of the world", if that's the way God is...is God worth dealing with?
Would there be any good reason, other than sheer fear of destruction, for dealing with such a being???
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
J. J. Ramsey
Shipmate
# 1174
|
Posted
Seems to me that we are hitting a wall here. I can think of a couple ways to describe the problem:
- We are not in a position to rightfully criticize the morality of the God described in the OP.
This is because the God described in the OP is really God and thus the author of morality, and any criticism of his morality is a failure of understanding on our part. - We are in a position to rightfully criticize the morality of the God described in the OP.
I suggest two reasons why this can be so:
- Morality is independent of God, and thus God can be judged against it.
- The God described in the OP is not God, and is condemned against the standard of the real God, either implicitly by a God-given inituition that suggests that something is wrong with the picture described in the OP, or explicitly by comparing the God of the OP against Scripture and/or Tradition.
--------------------
I am a rationalist. Unfortunately, this doesn't actually make me rational.
Posts: 1490 | From: Tallmadge, OH | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
philo25
Shipmate
# 5725
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GoldenKey:
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
So the outcome - God glorifying himself may involve him doing things that if he were a person we would think evil. That's the nature of the world.
I realise that far from answers every question, and is far from intellectually watertight. But I think that's what I mean by "letting God be God".
It certainly means that I cannot justify doing things which, as a creature, it is not my right to do, "on God's behalf" as such. Because attempting to dethrone him, and do his job for him, is the essence of sin.
Um...but if "that's the nature of the world", if that's the way God is...is God worth dealing with?
Would there be any good reason, other than sheer fear of destruction, for dealing with such a being???
But where is God 'evil' in the Bible? As St Paul says God sometimes gives us over to our own sin, to show us the destructiveness of sin and its consequences, as a loving warning to us. We ought to thanks God for this. I believe this is why some people will go to Hell, to show us there are consequences to sin, and indeed our fallen world is a result of Adam and Eve's sin. All this is tied in with God's Justice. In order for God to show us real love, like a good parent ought to, he ensures there is ultimate justice in his universe, and if justice isn't fulfilled on this earth (i.e. killer never gets caught) we know that the killer (non-repentant, non-believing that is) will pay the price in Hell. I feel If God didn't love us, he would let us get up to all sorts and not bother warning us about the consequences of sin for ourselves on this world, and the afterlife. Therefore I would be more fearful of a God without justice, I fear the alternative would be universal chaos.
--------------------
Genesis 29:20
So Jacob served seven years to get Rachel, but they seemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her.
Posts: 246 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
Setting Kierkegaard's famous reading aside for a moment, I find myself more and more in mind of Genesis 22 - and how it must inevitably strike us as we read it. Up to the moment he raises the knife and the angel calls, Abraham must be thinking "This seems deeply wrong - but it can't be! This is God we're talking about, and if God is God, then however bad it feels, it must be right!
The moment the angel calls from heaven, everything changes. This isn't what God wanted, after all. Something has been revealed about Abraham, yes - he was willing to let God be God, if you like - but something is revealed about God too. God does not want this, or will it.
(Gunkel's reading of this passage was that it was the narrative of the prohibition of child-sacrifice. And it's worth bearing in mind that letting God be God for Israel in the OT meant making it absolutely clear that God wasn't Moloch.)
And there's also the point that to read Genesis thus is to give the typology its full force. Theologically we must read Genesis 22 in the light of the cross. And eevrything else too. This is really my answer to Leprechaun's quote:
But if you think the rule is "God must be seen for who is" or as one of my favourite writers puts it "the chief end of God is to glorify God" then that's different.
Why? Because me glorifying God as a creature will be different than God glorifying himself as creator. Me honouring him as obedient servant will look sometimes the same as him glorifying himself by serving us, and sometimes different. Because in some way we are like him, and in some ways not at all.
There is one absloutely characteristic way in which God is glorified in the NT - and this is it. In self giving love on the cross. God is glorified in the saving work of Christ. God is not glorified equally in saving the saved and in damning the damned. Otherwise - to speak from inside the language that I think Leprechaun is using - it would have been just as glorious for God to have folded his arms (metaphorically, of course!) and done nothing to save the world.
But such a God would not have been the God of Scripture for one very good reason. Such a God would not have been love.
You can argue that God can be good, and seem to us a monster. That good is defined by God, and whatever God chooses to be. And the same goes for morality. But where human beings of flesh and blood understand anything about love, (and there are many people, as victims and perpetrators, who don't, I acknowledge that) love always means the same thing - a passionate, self-giving, self-sacrificing concern for my welfare, and for what is good for me whether I like it or not. And damnation must always be a failure of love.
In other words, the God of the OP cannot be the God of whom I John speaks, when it states that "God is love".
You can say that ethics are grounded in God, and that God can by definition do nothing that is bad or wrong because good is "what God is". But love is relational. When God defines Godself as 'love' - which as Moltmann says is the fundamental Christian insight - God chooses to tie himself to a criterion that is not self-contained within him. He defines himself by his relation to us in Jesus Christ.
This is what the New Testament tells us. If the OP is true - all of this is a lie.
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by philo25:
But where is God 'evil' in the Bible?
In explicitely hardening Pharoah's heart to give himself a chance to show his greatness. That is not giving Pharoah over to his own sin, but actively making Pharoah sin so that he can e.g. destroy the firstborn of all Egypt and claim some shred of justification.
I could mention other incidents like the flood, after which God said "Never Again", the treatment of Job's family and the treatment the Jews were instructed to give foreigners, but the most glaring example is above.
Good job I don't believe in the literal truth of the bible.
quote:
I believe this is why some people will go to Hell, to show us there are consequences to sin, and indeed our fallen world is a result of Adam and Eve's sin.
But hell only happens in Eternity, by which point such object lessons are rendered meaningless.
quote:
All this is tied in with God's Justice. In order for God to show us real love, like a good parent ought to, he ensures there is ultimate justice in his universe, and if justice isn't fulfilled on this earth (i.e. killer never gets caught) we know that the killer (non-repentant, non-believing that is) will pay the price in Hell.
But the whole point is that Hell is not just - it is too far out of proportion with any possible crime that can be committed on earth. It is an excercise in sheer sadism.
quote:
I feel If God didn't love us, he would let us get up to all sorts and not bother warning us about the consequences of sin for ourselves on this world, and the afterlife. Therefore I would be more fearful of a God without justice, I fear the alternative would be universal chaos.
I don't. I believe that any intellegent species would have to develop at least a rudimentary notion of justice in order to get along. Anarchy is simply too unstable at a sociological level.
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Paige
Shipmate
# 2261
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ...psyduck...:
In other words, the God of the OP cannot be the God of whom I John speaks, when it states that "God is love".
This gets to my epiphany about Sharkshooter's OP---if the God of that post is the "real" God, then Jesus was not God.
Jesus died with love, forgiveness, and a deep and simple longing for his father on his lips. If Jesus WAS God, then this IS God---love, forgiveness, and the desire for union. Simple as that.
Golden Key---your posts have had particular resonance for me. I think they have addressed the "Hitler problem" quite well. Thanks.
--------------------
Sister Jackhammer of Quiet Reflection
Posts: 886 | From: Sweet Tea Land, USA | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
JJ - I don't see a wall; I see Leprechaun giving honest answers and thinking carefully about what he/she believes.
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
Because in some way we are like him, and in some ways not at all.
So the outcome - God glorifying himself may involve him doing things that if he were a person we would think evil. That's the nature of the world.
I don't see how you can mean that God is so alien that the concepts of "good" and "evil" as commonly understood cannot meaningfully be applied to Him at all. Because
a) why would anyone worship such a God ?
b) the whole of the Christian tradition tells us both that God is not totally incomprehensible - He is like a king of kings, He is like a loving father, like a good shepherd, etc. and that it is true and meaningful to apply the word "good" to Him.
So I can only conclude that you mean that we live in a universe totally controlled by a supremely powerful Being whose value system rates self-glorification higher than goodness (in the common usage of the word). Who a prudent man may collaborate with for reasons of self-preservation but no moral being can morally look up to.
But I guess you don't like that description either. Am I right in thinking that you want it both ways; you want the right to insist that He is supremely good without Him having to do anything or be anything to live up to that ?
Russ
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
So I can only conclude that you mean that we live in a universe totally controlled by a supremely powerful Being whose value system rates self-glorification higher than goodness (in the common usage of the word). Who a prudent man may collaborate with for reasons of self-preservation but no moral being can morally look up to.
I think there is an element of this in God.
If there wasn't, why would the first two commandments be all about worshipping Him, and Him alone? I think God has quite an ego .
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
