So has the idea that women are spiritually inferior to men. What of it? I was asked what I personally believed, not to justify someone else’s theology.
And looking at the history and present day activities of Christian missions, I don’t see an emphasis on God sending people to hell. I see an emphasis on making the world a better place as Jesus’ representatives. But I’m sure we read different books and hang out in different places.
Judgement as eternal conscious torment is disturbing, and is sort of the reason double predestination type Calvinism is problematic to me. To borrow an example, sort of like running a puppy farm to have a steady supply of puppies to torture, but otherwise being a good guy. As to judgement and justice, it is difficult to understand, but that was covered on the cross.
I don’t know, but I hope you’d still find it troubling that your loved ones are enduring never-ending misery.
I definitely agree there is much variation in Christianity. There are also positions that one could consider orthodox. I see major problems with historical Protestant and Catholic teaching, and I’m just trying to see how people deal with them.
Well, at least we both agree ETC is troubling.
I think it’d be a rather strange hypothesis that God/Christ would find their alleged perfect righteous judgement from their full knowledge ‘troubling’. If Christians, so changed as I indicated, see things as God/Christ does why think they would be be any different?
Yeah that strikes me as pretty circular logic.
I’m not clear as to what you mean?
You could justify anything in that manner. Whatever your version of God is, must by definition, be righteous and just. “Do think I’d be upset if it turns out hell consists of hot lava - and grandma gets repeatedly dunked in it for eternity? No, if that’s what God does, then it would be just.”
I’m not making any argument that the action of sending people to eternal conscious punshment would, in fact, be just, or righteous, or good or justified.
What I am presenting is that it seems mistaken to evaluate how Christians would regard people in that situation based on how they feel in this situation when those are vastly different.
This whole nightmare of Theodicy is sort of a “Rich Man’s Problem”. Back in the old days of spiritual poverty … of Polytheism (say, like the Roman collection of Gods under the Earth and some sitting on Mount Olympus) … nobody got all bent out of shape that Zeus couldn’t prevent Earthly evils.
Nobody thought Zeus was powerful enough to prevent the world’s evils.
But as soon as we all get some real theological flash going … riding our Caddy of Monotheism … and praising the Chrome of his Infinite Love … all of a sudden we start wondering why the Great God of the Cosmos can’t stop the spark plugs from fouling and why exhaust fumes are so bothersome…
[quote=“Christy, post:123, topic:5677”]
So has the idea that women are spiritually inferior to men. What of it? I was asked what I personally believed, not to justify someone else’s theology.[/quote]
The “what of it” is that when the vast majority of Christians teach something for around 1,700 years, they shouldn’t be surprised when other people get the idea that this idea is pretty important to Christianity. You should not be at all surprised that people like Freddy realises this has historically been a dominant teaching in Christianity, because it has. No one is asking you to justify it.
Present day activities, sure. But history of Christian missions? Hell was front and center a good deal of the time. But anyway, nothing you’re saying contradicts my point; historically eternal torment has been a dominant theme in Christian theology. And the majority of Christians still believe in eternal conscious torment. In the US 58% of adults still believe in hell as a place “where people who have led bad lives and die without being sorry are eternally punished”.
We do, but I think you’re well aware that istorically eternal torment has been a dominant theme in Christian theology, and that it remains a central doctrine in many Christian denominations. Generations of Americans were raised on the kind of stuff Spurgeon taught, like this.
“You have seen the asbestos lying in the fire red hot, but when you take it out it is unconsumed. So your body will be prepared by God in such a way that it will burn for ever without being consumed; it will lie, not as you consider, in a metaphorical fire, but in actual flame…”
“thou wilt have twin hells, body and soul shall be together, each brimfull of pain, thy soul sweating in its inmost pore drops of blood, and thy body from head to foot suffused with agony; conscience, judgment, memory, all tortured, but more – thy head tormented with racking pains, thine eyes starting from their sockets with sights of blood and woe…”
I’m more disheartened than surprised. The teaching that marrying a divorced woman is adultery has been a dominant teaching in Christianity too. But if someone told me their impression was that it was pretty important to the gospel, I would question that. That was the main thing I was reacting to was the idea that eternal conscious torment is central and necessary in Christian atonement theology.
Well historically it has been, and I see plenty of evidence that it still is, especially in North America where the Reformed tradition is so strong. But fortunately a number of theologians have been gradually turning the tide over the years, so the madness should end some time in the future.
There is a difference between the prickly nature of religion at the Retail level (the protests, the mobs, the strife) . . . and what can be the more relaxed, more exploratory nature of religion in the towers of faith.
While the Churches of Dixie may have been preaching fire and brimstone with perhaps no interruption, the Unitarian or Universalist denominations took a firm grip of New England’s most spiritual people - - and dozens of churches once occupied by the zealous Pilgrims and Puritans became occupied by a completely different kind of religion.
Minority factions of many a church had to stomp across the town common and lay out the plans for their own (Congregationalist) churches … because the majority had evicted hell fire (or the Trinity) right out onto the commons!
The old joke had it’s serious side: “The Congregationalists kept the Faith … the Unitarians kept the furniture!”
I would find this discussion more rational if you were to make a clear statement of your beliefs. From what I have read, you are against a popular notion of hell as a means to torment people, and you also seem to be against Christianity, seemingly based on you understanding of hell.
I have tried to address the popular misconception by referring to “out of the Bible” descriptions which are more or less restatements of human beings inflicting great pain and anguish on other human beings. The doctrine speaks of a separation from God, and this to occur after a completely just judgment was undertaken, and everyone given an unhindered chance to respond to God.
Even belief in God is a gift from Him, and that only because of Christ - so if someone does not believe the Bible, or cannot come to some intellectual concept that appeals to them - that does not send them to hell or whatever.
GJDS has a difficult time accepting heterodox ideas of Christianity within the Big Tent.
Ever since the time of Jesus, there have been contrary views about the divinity of Jesus (was he God? Did he Become God? Was he Adoopted as God’s son?).
And there are those who would say if your views aren’t in line with the first 14 centuries of the Catholic Church, how can it be Christianity?
And yet I doubt if GJDS would require a belief in Purgatory to qualify as Christian… or that if someone got divorced … they couldn’t be Christian.
And yet the modern Christian world is wildly Swirling with rejection of Purgatory and an acceptance of divorce… even sequential divorce.
@GJDS, you are aware that there are major branches of Christianity that see Hell as either temporary or illusory?
I suppose you will never accept Unitarian Universalism as a legitimate branch, but there are other less enthusiastic branches that I think a sober-minded Christian would have to accept instead.
I wish you would speak for yourself and allow me to speak for myself.
Yep… and that’s just what I did… mentioning your name is a matter of convenience… if you were concerned about being misunderstood, your last post would have contained an explanation of my errors.
I guess we’re good to go!
Very well put, Christy! Personally, I am critical of some of the methods the Catholic church uses to prepare children for accepting moral responsibility as an adult human being, but it would be hard to beat the Act of Contrition that I was taught before receiving Christ in the Eucharist: “O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, and I detest all my sins, because I dread the loss of heaven, and the pains of hell, but most of all because they offend Thee, my God who art all-good and worthy of my love.”
Al Leo
I don’t even think of Hell. It’s a preposterous notion to take literally.
It makes much more sense that Hell is a linguistic form of imagery designed to demonstrate the vast difference in emotional fate for those who look to God … versus those who do not look to God!
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.