|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Victoria Osteen: Was it really that bad?
|
wishandaprayer
Shipmate
# 17673
|
Posted
By now, I'm sure many of you have heard the news that the Osteens are once again being criticised by much of the rest of Christendom. If you haven't heard read the summary.
My question is, is what she is saying really that bad? Don't get me wrong, over the years I have had little to no time for the Osteens, and there are many things about both of them that completely repulse me, but in this case I want to ask if, what she has said:
quote:
I just want to encourage every one of us to realize when we obey God, we're not doing it for God—I mean, that's one way to look at it—we're doing it for ourselves, because God takes pleasure when we're happy
is really so bad? Are people just enjoying a good playground style "bundle" on the whipping boys, since some of their favourites like Driscoll and Mahaney are taking a beating, or is there something I'm missing here?
I know theoretically what she is saying is incorrect - after all, Christians are to do things for god's pleasure, right?! However, the normal way people are blackmailed, sorry, convinced to become christians is with the threat of eternal torture, or the promise of living the way it was intended for you to live. So self interest is always the start point for faith, is it not? Therefore, why cannot it not be interjected as a way to maintain faith on an ongoing basis?
I know, from a christian point of view, that god is supposed to renew ones mind, etc. however, is there no saying that there isn't actually something to what she is saying - that if you buy into christian doctrine then there is an element that when you're worshipping, you're doing it for your own good as much as for the glory of god?
Posts: 94 | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
Basically, she is being criticised for daring to be honest. I mean, seriously, how many of these supposedly "God glorifying" Christians are really not out for themselves in some way? Furthermore, what sort of God is it, who actually needs our worship? Of course, God doesn't need us to worship Him (Psalm 50:12 - “If I were hungry, I would not tell you; For the world is Mine, and all its fullness.")
It is sheer hubris to suggest that God needs our worship, and it is humility to recognise our own need, and the truth of our own motivation.
Furthermore, Jesus also recognised the role of self-interest: "Love your neighbour as yourself".
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
"God wants us to be happy" is one of the more ridiculous things I've heard from a Christian leader lately. Especially at a time when many Christians are suffering persecution and death for their faith. Is happiness the outcome of their obedience, when they get thrown in jail or executed?
"Worship 'till you're happy" is one of the reasons that many Christians with mental health issues get told to just sing louder and pray harder, instead of getting the treatment that they need.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
"God wants us to be happy" is one of the more ridiculous things I've heard from a Christian leader lately. Especially at a time when many Christians are suffering persecution and death for their faith. Is happiness the outcome of their obedience, when they get thrown in jail or executed?
"Worship 'till you're happy" is one of the reasons that many Christians with mental health issues get told to just sing louder and pray harder, instead of getting the treatment that they need.
Agreed. There is a world of difference between the joy that is promised to us by Jesus and delivered by the Holy Spirit, and happiness.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
Depends how we define "happiness".
"I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly." John 10:10
Does the "abundance of life" not include a least a certain joy, satisfaction, contentment and health of mind?
[x-post with EM]
[ 01. September 2014, 13:14: Message edited by: EtymologicalEvangelical ]
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
It would have to be coherent before it could be judged to be either harmful or harmless, true or false.
This seems to have been a live comment - perhaps an off-the-cuff response to a feeling of the joy of worship. Less well-crafted than most of the posts here in Purgatory. So I wouldn't get too worked up about it.
Best wishes,
Russ
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Depends how we define "happiness".
"I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly." John 10:10
Does the "abundance of life" not include a least a certain joy, satisfaction, contentment and health of mind?
I echo the comment above - if I had the sense that she had put as much thought into her statement as you have, I might be willing to give the benefit of the doubt.
I doubt for a second that she even had in mind the many people who obey God and yet remain unhappy or become unhappy as a consequence of that obedience.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
It's not unreasonable to say that God wants us to be happy. It's not unreasonable to say that worship can bring happiness. It's not even completely unreasonable to say that it's more for our benefit than for God's (after all God doesn't need our worship).
It's been expressed rather clumsily and it may well be symptomatic of a problematic "prosperity gospel" sort of outlook. But in itself it doesn't seem so very heinously heretical. It reminds me a bit of the surprising furore Adrian Plass created by claiming that "God is nice and he likes us".
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
This seems to have been a live comment - perhaps an off-the-cuff response to a feeling of the joy of worship. Less well-crafted than most of the posts here in Purgatory. So I wouldn't get too worked up about it.
Best wishes,
Russ
Listening to the clip it's a mantra she repeats and develops so it's hardly a case of missing a word or inserting one.
Does it matter? Those who presume to teach have a high level of responsibility: some listeners accept what is said at face value, particularly in the large scale meetings such as that of the Ofsteens. Group dynamics play a part.
If it misleads people into believing that it's only their happiness that's important, then it matters. It's not the truth. If it causes others to withdraw from God because they can't make themselves happy (illness, circumstances), then it's wrong.
I can't find way of making it right, it must then be wrong and misleading.
It serves some beneficial purposes. It reminds us to avoid any semblance of evil (wrong) and to keep a guard on our tongues. If we do slip publicly, repent of it publicly and sort it out publicly. Done properly it can build trust as opposed to creating falsehood.
Have the Osteens qualified their words yet? If not, can they prove what they said to be correct?
[ 01. September 2014, 13:56: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
It reminds me a bit of the surprising furore Adrian Plass created by claiming that "God is nice and he likes us".
That's active proof of how statements from well known Christians can be misleading. Just because AP says it, it doesn't make it true.
I think I know what Plass is getting at (reassurance?) but he's actually wrong in the statement he makes. God doesn't like us - He loves us.
There's a fundamental and foundational difference.
[ 01. September 2014, 14:02: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Depends how we define "happiness".
"I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly." John 10:10
Does the "abundance of life" not include a least a certain joy, satisfaction, contentment and health of mind?
I echo the comment above - if I had the sense that she had put as much thought into her statement as you have, I might be willing to give the benefit of the doubt.
I doubt for a second that she even had in mind the many people who obey God and yet remain unhappy or become unhappy as a consequence of that obedience.
And for those of us from a less Augustinian view of divine sovereignty, even the fact that so many of the faithful suffer is not disproof of her thesis. God wants us to be happy-- the evidence of that is seen not in 2014, but in the future promises of Rev. 22. The fact that there is suffering today is not evidence that God wants us to suffer, but rather is evidence that the world is not yet as it should be and will be.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
And for those of us from a less Augustinian view of divine sovereignty, even the fact that so many of the faithful suffer is not disproof of her thesis. God wants us to be happy-- the evidence of that is seen not in 2014, but in the future promises of Rev. 22. The fact that there is suffering today is not evidence that God wants us to suffer, but rather is evidence that the world is not yet as it should be and will be.
I don't think God wants us to suffer, not in the slightest. But this is what Mrs. Osteen said:
quote:
I just want to encourage every one of us to realize when we obey God, we're not doing it for God—I mean, that's one way to look at it—we're doing it for ourselves, because God takes pleasure when we're happy
When that woman in Sudan was thrown in prison and forced to give birth while shackled because of her Christian faith, she was certainly obeying God. I have a hard time seeing how this action is one that lead primarily to her own personal happiness, rather than her obedience bringing glory to God and strengthening the faith of Christians around the world.
Obedience and worship are not primarily for our individual happiness - in fact they can lead to the opposite but have a greater and higher purpose in the long run.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
If I had 60 million dollars and lived in a 10 million dollar house - well, don't rather a lot of these rich boorish TV preacherfolk have trouble distinguishing themselves from God and their American dreams? She needs to believe crap like this to justify her life to herself. Cognitive dissonance, they call it. But it's still crap. It's the same tiresome feel good self centred nonsense.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
And for those of us from a less Augustinian view of divine sovereignty, even the fact that so many of the faithful suffer is not disproof of her thesis. God wants us to be happy-- the evidence of that is seen not in 2014, but in the future promises of Rev. 22. The fact that there is suffering today is not evidence that God wants us to suffer, but rather is evidence that the world is not yet as it should be and will be.
I don't think God wants us to suffer, not in the slightest. But this is what Mrs. Osteen said:
quote:
I just want to encourage every one of us to realize when we obey God, we're not doing it for God—I mean, that's one way to look at it—we're doing it for ourselves, because God takes pleasure when we're happy
When that woman in Sudan was thrown in prison and forced to give birth while shackled because of her Christian faith, she was certainly obeying God. I have a hard time seeing how this action is one that lead primarily to her own personal happiness, rather than her obedience bringing glory to God and strengthening the faith of Christians around the world.
Obedience and worship are not primarily for our individual happiness - in fact they can lead to the opposite but have a greater and higher purpose in the long run.
I don't disagree. What is it that you are saying that you think is in any way contrary to what I'm saying?
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
The fact that there is suffering today is not evidence that God wants us to suffer, but rather is evidence that the world is not yet as it should be and will be.
I was responding to this.
I never said God wants us to suffer, I said that worshipping and obeying God may lead to suffering.
It seemed that this was in response to my post but perhaps not?
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
The fact that there is suffering today is not evidence that God wants us to suffer, but rather is evidence that the world is not yet as it should be and will be.
I was responding to this.
I never said God wants us to suffer, I said that worshipping and obeying God may lead to suffering.
It seemed that this was in response to my post but perhaps not?
Yes, I am responding to your post. I am trying to figure out what it is in that statement of mine that you think is contrary to your response.
[ 01. September 2014, 15:00: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
There are two types of joy.
The first type of joy is the joy in the transient pleasures of the world, what Scripture calls "the love of the world". This joy is fleeting and all people do not share in it.
The second type of joy is the joy in the Lord, what the Psalmist calls God's people to "be joyful in the Lord, all ye lands" (Psalm 100). This joy comes from knowing that one is beloved in God, and that God takes delight in us.
The second type of joy sustains the people of God during good times and bad, during times of peace and times of persecution. It is the joy that enables people to sing and celebrate Eucharist even in times of darkness and despair.
The first type is not a "bad thing" per se, but it is fleeting, and is not what God intends his people to have "all the time."
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
There are two types of joy.
The first type of joy is the joy in the transient pleasures of the world, what Scripture calls "the love of the world". This joy is fleeting and all people do not share in it.
The second type of joy is the joy in the Lord, what the Psalmist calls God's people to "be joyful in the Lord, all ye lands" (Psalm 100). This joy comes from knowing that one is beloved in God, and that God takes delight in us.
The second type of joy sustains the people of God during good times and bad, during times of peace and times of persecution. It is the joy that enables people to sing and celebrate Eucharist even in times of darkness and despair.
The first type is not a "bad thing" per se, but it is fleeting, and is not what God intends his people to have "all the time."
Yes, exactly-- well said. Paul in particular seems to be delineating that distinction when he talks about learning the "secret of contentment" in Phil., despite enduring beatings, imprisonment, etc.
Historically I think it's fair to say the Osteens, with their prosperity gospel teaching, have had trouble making that distinction-- indeed the lack of clarity on the issue would be one of the markers of prosperity gospel. But her statements quoted here do not in and of themselves tell us one way or the other which she is talking about. As others have noted, it's not the clearest of statements-- probably said off-the-cuff.
[ 01. September 2014, 15:09: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Yes, I am responding to your post. I am trying to figure out what it is in that statement of mine that you think is contrary to your response.
Because you said that the existence of unhappy faithful doesn't disprove her "thesis."
The "thesis" I read is that the point of obedience to God is our happiness or for a positive benefit to ourselves.
The existence of unhappy faithful who are obedient absolutely disproves such a ridiculous position. Unless they just need to obey harder?
(I'm a bit touchy on this subject as someone close to me ended up on suicide watch because she had been repeatedly told that what turned out to be clinical depression, was her "not trusting God enough" and that if she did she'd be happy.)
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
I believe everything God asks us to do is for our own benefit.
That's the ideal parent dealing with a child - parent tells child to eat the veggies because the child will grow healthier; the parent sends the child to (a safe) school instead of letting the child stay home and watch cartoons because the schooling will be valuable for the child; the parent puts up with a lot of complaint and tears because the child wants happy now and the parent is looking for the child's greater happiness long term.
God doesn't need our worship but we need to be focused on the worthiness of God if we are to grow spiritually healthier; God doesn't need our obedience to feel good about himself but we need to obey God because God's decisions are so much wiser than ours.
So in the *long term* sense yes God wants us happy.
But a person whose primary focus is his own immediate constant happiness is usually not good company, coming across as a self-centered spoiled brat or sometimes bully. "God wants me happy right now" leads to things like cheating the boss or the friends so I can have my happiness by making others absorb the costs.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
I've just watched the clip and would strongly recommend anyone trying to draw a deeper meaning from her comments to take a look first.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Yes, I am responding to your post. I am trying to figure out what it is in that statement of mine that you think is contrary to your response.
Because you said that the existence of unhappy faithful doesn't disprove her "thesis."
The "thesis" I read is that the point of obedience to God is our happiness or for a positive benefit to ourselves.
The existence of unhappy faithful who are obedient absolutely disproves such a ridiculous position. Unless they just need to obey harder?
And that was the point I was directly addressing in my post. God desires us to be happy. So pursuing happiness is a worthy goal (although Anglican Brat's prior distinction in types of happiness is useful). The fact that so many faithful Christians suffer is not, as I said, evidence that God does not desire us to be happy. Nor is it evidence that the suffering Christian "just needs to try harder" or "suck it up" (the prevalence of lament psalms would easily refute that notion). Rather, the suffering of faithful Christians is evidence that things are not yet as they should be, or as they will be. The picture of the future hope we find in Christ in Rev. 22 is one with "no tears, no death, no suffering." Obviously we're not there yet. But the fact that we long for that day is not a bad thing. It is, in fact, a holy thing-- a yearning with God and a groaning with all creation for the day when everything is set right.
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
(I'm a bit touchy on this subject as someone close to me ended up on suicide watch because she had been repeatedly told that what turned out to be clinical depression, was her "not trusting God enough" and that if she did she'd be happy.)
I am so sorry. Such teaching is prevalent in prosperity gospel, and I too have seen how much really horrific "bad fruit" results from this teaching, which is clearly contrary both to the witness of Scripture and to our experience of the world. The Osteens are associated with that sort of teaching, so it's quite probable that's what Victoria is thinking, which really is "that bad" (to the OP). I was just trying to give her the benefit of the doubt and take these particular words at face value, more for the sake of argument than anything else (never being one to pass up an opportunity to thump my own Open Theism drum).
[ 01. September 2014, 15:32: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Depends how we define "happiness".
"I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly." John 10:10
Has to be balanced alongside 1 Cor 15:19. Yes we do have life more abundantly, but in many cases this will only be realized eschatalogically.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
What the Osteens do is to promote a "Christianised" version of the American dream. In other words: the only way is up, baby. More wealth, health and happiness. Life isn't like that.
True, the car parks of many mega churches have expensive vehicles in them - but they are owned by ministry staff. Most people turn up in beat up cars.
Try pronouncing Victoria's mantra of happiness over T, now in hospital with pneumonia. A lifetime of horrific abuse, all sorts of mental health problems and physical problems deriving from the abuse. Her victory is that she is alive, happiness has come because our church has accepted her as a member. For the first time ever she has a family who love her and who care about her for who she is, irrespective of her moods, illnesses, doubt and trauma.
For her just to hold my hand as we sat in silence is a huge step.
No amount of dear rich perma smile and tan Victoria is going to change one iota of T's life. Love will - and there's no love in telling her that her goal has to be happy first off. For her it's life first off.
What the Osteen's peddle is insidious, persuasive and dangerous. Why? Because it isn't true it's a lie. And, if taken on board, it will ultimately destroy a fragile life, not enhance it.
How about asking them what it's all about and then inviting them to clarify or retract? If they are honest and god, then they will respond. I'm not holding my breath.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Depends how we define "happiness".
Since the Founding Document of the US involves the right to "the Pursuit of Happiness", should we surprised when someone claims they've found it? or caught it? or whatever?
Unfortunately, living in the conscious pursuit of "happiness" is almost certainly doomed to failure, because the circumstances will never seem to have ALL of the elements of happiness, just some of them. Sort of Pot o'Gold at the end of that Rainbow.
ISTM that learning to live within what you have or are is likely to bring contentment, if not bubbling happiness. The Pursuit is Sisyphean.
Here is Omid Safi on "Religion cannot promise happiness"
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
While we can criticize Osteen all we want, I suspect that many in pews of both mainline and evangelical denominations have the impression that faith is all about achieving happiness. And may I suggest that some clergy feel perfectly willing to have their parishioners labor under that mistaken notion in order to assure their continual attendance and monetary giving.
Holy Cross Day is upon us in two weeks, perhaps against this false happiness gospel, some of us could preach on the necessity of taking up one's Cross with Jesus.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
While we can criticize Osteen all we want, I suspect that many in pews of both mainline and evangelical denominations have the impression that faith is all about achieving happiness. And may I suggest that some clergy feel perfectly willing to have their parishioners labor under that mistaken notion in order to assure their continual attendance and monetary giving.
Holy Cross Day is upon us in two weeks, perhaps against this false happiness gospel, some of us could preach on the necessity of taking up one's Cross with Jesus.
Excellent point.
I would add that sometimes worship and being close to God is challenging and difficult. I wouldn't characterise that as suffering as such, but it's certainly not 'happiness'.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Holy Cross Day is upon us in two weeks, perhaps against this false happiness gospel, some of us could preach on the necessity of taking up one's Cross with Jesus.
That would be the order of the day here on a much more regular basis than just one Sunday a year.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
ExclamationMark..... ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
....and it's my turn to preach on Holy Cross Day..... ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Ian J.
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
It reminds me a bit of the surprising furore Adrian Plass created by claiming that "God is nice and he likes us".
That's active proof of how statements from well known Christians can be misleading. Just because AP says it, it doesn't make it true.
I think I know what Plass is getting at (reassurance?) but he's actually wrong in the statement he makes. God doesn't like us - He loves us.
There's a fundamental and foundational difference.
Well said. I'd add that he's not 'nice' either: not nearly as simple as that.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
jrw
Shipmate
# 18045
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
It reminds me a bit of the surprising furore Adrian Plass created by claiming that "God is nice and he likes us".
That's active proof of how statements from well known Christians can be misleading. Just because AP says it, it doesn't make it true.
I think I know what Plass is getting at (reassurance?) but he's actually wrong in the statement he makes. God doesn't like us - He loves us.
There's a fundamental and foundational difference.
Well said. I'd add that he's not 'nice' either: not nearly as simple as that.
I think we need to expand a little here.
Is there a problem in principle with the idea of God actually liking us as well as loving us?
And what exactly do you mean by 'nice'?
Posts: 522 | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
ExclamationMark.....
....and it's my turn to preach on Holy Cross Day.....
Ian J.
Well, I'll be covering something of that on Sunday morning from Jeremiah 6: 9 - 17, focussing on the ancient paths and walking (living) in the good ways.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jrw:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
It reminds me a bit of the surprising furore Adrian Plass created by claiming that "God is nice and he likes us".
That's active proof of how statements from well known Christians can be misleading. Just because AP says it, it doesn't make it true.
I think I know what Plass is getting at (reassurance?) but he's actually wrong in the statement he makes. God doesn't like us - He loves us.
There's a fundamental and foundational difference.
Well said. I'd add that he's not 'nice' either: not nearly as simple as that.
I think we need to expand a little here.
Is there a problem in principle with the idea of God actually liking us as well as loving us?
And what exactly do you mean by 'nice'?
I dunno; the alternative seems to be "God is a bit of a bastard and can't stick us."
How would you explain the difference in a language that only has one word for love and like?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Just because there's a particular Sunday dedicated to it in some quarters, doesn't mean that it won't be on people's minds the rest of the year of course, ExclamationMark.
But I take your point.
Just sayin' ...
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
In fact, if we followed ancient practice then both Wednesdays (Christ's arrest and betrayal) and Fridays (Christ's death) would be days for fasting and self-denial - apart from during Christmas and for a period after Easter if I remember rightly.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
The fact that there is suffering today is not evidence that God wants us to suffer, but rather is evidence that the world is not yet as it should be and will be.
I was responding to this.
I never said God wants us to suffer, I said that worshipping and obeying God may lead to suffering.
It seemed that this was in response to my post but perhaps not?
Let us address suffering. This is more complex than you suggest.
Suffering is a fact of life. The very nature in which the world exists both physically and in our relation to it and to other humans contains suffering. God doesn't enjoy suffering in the manner of a supreme sadist, rather, is ready to suffer along with us, supporting and being present with us. However this is entirely different than desiring our material happiness, in the sense of having nice worldly goods and happy times with wealth. God is consumed with matters that are spiritual not material. If suffering brings you closer in a relationship to God then suffering is indeed a good, isn't it? It's not a good in the sense of God's enjoyment of it, but a good in the sense of its positive outcome in your spiritual development in God's service.
People cut corners with this. Because suffering exists, God is omnipotent, and the world evidently contains suffering as part of its fabric in creation, that God must intentionally have created everything, or set the universe in motion, such that this will be the way things shall be. Ergo God enjoys suffering. Which avoids the question of our free will and also the question of God's non-material focus. Any time someone says that God has granted him or her this or that, we can be assured that they want to justify something they unconsciously feel guilty about having, that they want to feel favoured among God's creatures, and that they misidentified the contingencies that have led to their gain. God is neither concerned with your material success nor your material failure. God focusses on more important things, like your spirit and your soul. Ultimately, anything that leads you closer to God is objectively a 'good', happy or sad in your personal view.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Suffering is a fact of life. The very nature in which the world exists both physically and in our relation to it and to other humans contains suffering. God doesn't enjoy suffering in the manner of a supreme sadist, rather, is ready to suffer along with us, supporting and being present with us. However this is entirely different than desiring our material happiness, in the sense of having nice worldly goods and happy times with wealth. God is consumed with matters that are spiritual not material. If suffering brings you closer in a relationship to God then suffering is indeed a good, isn't it? It's not a good in the sense of God's enjoyment of it, but a good in the sense of its positive outcome in your spiritual development in God's service.
I totally agree with this. But I don't understand why you wish to conflate "good" with "happy."
I'm not sure if you watched the clip but there's nothing in Victoria Osteen's comments that suggest she is talking about spiritual contentment or development. I'd go further - I am certain she is NOT talking about that.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Just because there's a particular Sunday dedicated to it in some quarters, doesn't mean that it won't be on people's minds the rest of the year of course, ExclamationMark.
But I take your point.
Just sayin' ...
It's either that Sunday or lots of others, even both and .... ![[Axe murder]](graemlins/lovedrops.gif)
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
There is nothing wrong with wanting a good life. People hope for a fulfilling and good career, most people hope to find someone to share their life with, and most hope for a long and healthy life.
We do no one any favors if we are not honest about our desires.
What becomes problematic, I think, if we interpret these desires as obligations on God.
I believe that part of faith is learning both that we are infinitely and passionately loved by God, and at the same time, God is radically free and wholly Other, and is under no obligation to provide us with anything.
What is problematic about the happiness Gospel isn't that it's wrong to enjoy life's blessings, or to desire good things. What's problematic is that when we get completely immersed in ourselves, in whether we get this or that, that we forget the call to solidarity and empathy with those less fortunate than ourselves. I think God doesn't want us who have many things, to forget those who have nothing.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
Well, it's a welcome to the spiritual fruit cake zone when you pay too much attention to people like the Osteens
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Well, it's a welcome to the spiritual fruit cake zone when you pay too much attention to people like the Osteens
That may be true. And because many non-Christians and non-Church people assume that folk like the Osteens speak for Christianity as a whole, they're speaking for you and me. So it's worth remembering that for a whole lot of our acquaintances, friends, relatives etc, the fruit-cake zone is precisely where we ourselves - and everyone who calls themself a Christian - are located, passport fully verified and stamped.
Therefore, it's useful to have a comeback when challenged on our fruit-cake zone ambassador status.
--------------------
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
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Suffering is a fact of life. The very nature in which the world exists both physically and in our relation to it and to other humans contains suffering. God doesn't enjoy suffering in the manner of a supreme sadist, rather, is ready to suffer along with us, supporting and being present with us. However this is entirely different than desiring our material happiness, in the sense of having nice worldly goods and happy times with wealth. God is consumed with matters that are spiritual not material. If suffering brings you closer in a relationship to God then suffering is indeed a good, isn't it? It's not a good in the sense of God's enjoyment of it, but a good in the sense of its positive outcome in your spiritual development in God's service.
I totally agree with this. But I don't understand why you wish to conflate "good" with "happy."
Really? You don't think most people like being happy and consider it good, whilst being fecked off is generally a bad experience?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Good conflated with happy is entirely different than bad being conflated with happiness or unhappiness. I frequently find happiness in bad things myself (pass the bottle please). And feeling happiness when paired with goodness is not beyond my experience, though my mother would have said rarer. The paradoxes of life are that some bad things can be rendered down such that there is good within them. And some good things can be made into bad things. Happiness is another dimension which can be about bad or good. Of course, when I was swatted* at school, they did tell me it was for my own good, thus apparently meaning a bad thing can be good, but I thought then and think today that they had it assbackward.
*it's what they called hitting us with wooden paddles for poetry poorly remembered and other similar terrible crimes
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
For me this is one of those, um, "I've heard the name Osteen before but don't know much about them, are they televangelists or something?" things, a la Mark Driscoll (and I'd never heard of Beeching).
Is this because I'm an Episcopalian or am I just really clueless?
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
HughWillRidmee
Shipmate
# 15614
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by wishandaprayer:
By now, I'm sure many of you have heard the news that the Osteens are once again being criticised by much of the rest of Christendom. If you haven't heard read the summary.
My question is, is what she is saying really that bad?
I doubt that whether it's good or bad is relevant to either the initial statement or the criticism. The Osteens are hugely successful at collecting massive amounts of money from their believers and that is in part because they tell them that god wants them to be happy and rich etc.; there are some who see that pool of pliant donors as a relatively easy target - much easier than converting and fleecing newbies. Hence BS and counter BS. Doesn't only happen in the world of religion - it happens pretty much wherever there is completion for a finite market.
--------------------
The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things.. but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them...
W. K. Clifford, "The Ethics of Belief" (1877)
Posts: 894 | From: Middle England | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
I've heard the name Osteen before but don't know much about them, are they televangelists or something?
You surf the wrong TV channels on Sunday.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Really? You don't think most people like being happy and consider it good, whilst being fecked off is generally a bad experience?
All I meant what that there is an important difference between:
"God wants what is good for you"
and
"God wants you to be happy"
As an example a few weeks ago I went to church feeling miserable about some issue, prayed with someone and had a good cry and some encouragement about it. I didn't feel "happy" that I went to church that day - I still felt sad. But it was good for me to pray with someone although I would have much preferred and probably felt happier staying home and watching silly comedies on television instead of going to church.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
If we are simply talking about the emotion of happiness, then it is not necessarily correlated with ethical behavior. A sadist might be happy when he or she inflicts pain on others, certainly I do not believe God is pleased when that occurs.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
A sadist might be happy when he or she inflicts pain on others, certainly I do not believe God is pleased when that occurs.
Well, the question of safe, sane and consensual is relevant to that matter, I believe.
(No, I'm not merely being silly or salacious here.)
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
