Christian salvation theology; why so complicated?

[kanicbird]

@Polycarp

that somebody is going to ask you why the sin must also be paid for.

My understanding is that God is the rightful judge, and He must do what is correct in this ‘job’, which includes insisting on repayment.

I am interested in your unorthodox theory, and for that matter what you think the orthodox answer is.

My own, slightly unorthodox view, is that sin actually physically damages the kingdom of God, that damage we have no way of repairing.

[Revenant_Threshold]

@kanicbird

My own, slightly unorthodox view, is that sin actually physically damages the kingdom of God, that damage we have no way of repairing.

Theoretically could we destroy the kingdom of God?

[badchad]

@Polycarp

Ouch. I think perhaps we’re not communicating in this instance. It was not my intent to make an assertion about what factually happens, but rather the divergence of pre-Christian Jewish thought and modern-Christian concepts on God-as-judge.

No I think were communicating just fine. The bible is pretty descriptive of god acting as any angry and vengeful judge, smiting people on earth or smiting/torturing souls in an afterlife. You’re just trying to ignore the many instances in the bible where god’s abhorrent behavior is described.

My initial assertion was that, while most moderns regard “what Christians think God will do” is sit as Supreme Judge of a cosmic criminal court, deciding whether to acquit or condemn people as “good” or “bad” – cf. every St.-Peter-at-the-Pearly-Gates joke you’ve ever heard in support of this view – the Jewish view…

Whatever, so when the OT describes smiting children you distance yourself from it by appealing to the NT as being more compassionate. When I point out that the NT is, if anything, worse, you now start looking for OT examples, the “Jewish view” to distance yourself from the NT atrocities. That’s cherry picking and it’s pretty darn obvious.

And that solidly Biblical conceptualization needs to be re-emphasized as against the Edwardsian sinners-in-the-hands-of-an-angry-God perspective.

Edwardsian? How about the Jesusian perspective:

“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” John 3:36

“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Matthew 10:28

“But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which AFTER he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.” Luke 12:5

“The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.” Matthew 13:41-42

My second issue was with the proposition that human beings are entitled to eternal life, as a matter of course. Those angry with Christianity seem to find God’s judgment as depriving them of something. But where, either in natural history or in Biblical thought, is there any assertion whatsoever that man is anything but mortal? He may be given immortality, according to God’s promises. But nowhere that I can see is there any assertion that he is automatically entitled to it.

I don’t think this is all that relevant. Most humans regard death as bad, and most have some fear of it. While nobody ever promised us life would be fair or carefree, it seems that if the universe were run by a fair and benevolent being, it would be.

I don’t disagree in the slightest. If it were in my power, I’d like to find a way to heal the hurts that so clearly fuel his anger. However, I have no more power over them than you or he. I may be wearing rose-colored glasses here, but my idea of the Divine Mercy is something strong and gentle enough to reach past the hurt given to people like Der Trihs and Valteron by Organized Religion, those purporting to act in His Name, and show them love and grant them healing of the scars His followers inflicted.

Well according to just about everything written in the bible, and particularly that said by Jesus, Der Trihs, Valteron and myself really do have it coming to us in a bad way after we die. You said you would cure this if you had the power, however, allegedly you god does have the power and chooses not to cure said hurts. That seems to indicate that you and your god have differing moral standards. But let me guess, all the verses in the bible that disagree with you don’t count, right? But the verses that agree with you, they count double, is that correct?

BTW, I find it very condescending to of you to talk about the above guys and their “hurts” causing their beliefs and behaviors. Would you like it if I said “Polycarp, I really wish that you could have accomplished more with your life, so that you wouldn’t have to place such an importance on the unconditional love of an imaginary being or hope for a better world to come in the afterlife? I truly feel sorry for you that your real life sucked so bad that you had to bolster your importance in it by claiming to have recognized the second coming of Jesus.” Cause if you don’t like me speaking like that to you, you probably shouldn’t speak that way to others.

If you think I judge Der Trihs for hating religion, farthest thing from it.

No you just worship the being that intends to torture Der Trihs. I really don’t think that puts you on any higher moral ground than if you were just judging him.

It’s the weak spot in my doctrinal system, and I’m not surprised you flagged it. All I can say is that I believe in a God who promised something of the sort, that those who followed Him would have eternal life, and that abundantly. I choose to believe that promise – but I’m aware that I’m doing it out of trust, not out of logic.

Great, so your theory has all the justification of a fictional story. That’s wonderful. So why are you trusting to believe in a god that only gives eternal life to those who follow him? What about Der Trihs. You feel bad for him but you don’t seem to concerned that your god does not feel bad for him.

I suspect you or Czarcasm or Der Trihs would be amenable to believing in God based on evidence satisfactory to you (individually) that He does exist and is Cosmic Good personified.

Believing in, and worshiping are two different things. Your god can kiss my ass.

And I wouldn’t expect you to do so with anything short of such evidence. But here’s the kicker: IMO, neither does He.

“Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.” John 20:29

Almost-Universalist because I believe that for free will and valid choice to be meaningful, there has to be a way for you to choose otherwise.

So you believe in free will? So what do you think are the holes in DtC’s arguments against free will. What do you think of Paul’s appeals to predestination?

I have no more insight into the Problem of Evil than anyone else…

It seems that you have far less insight into the Problem of Evil than just about every atheist on this board that see it as a pretty obvious contradiction in your belief system. Why not just accept the contradiction rather than appealing to ignorance and wild speculation?

He is powerful enough to do it. But for some reason He doesn’t.

So then you agree that god is not all good, and that he wants us to suffer?

And my personal guess as to that reason is that He expects us to clean up our own messes – humanity as a whole cleaning up the mess that humanity as a whole has made. To break out my Macchiavelli quote: “God is not willing to do everything, and thus take from us that share of glory that is rightfully ours.”

So according to you scenes like this are for our glory? Don’t you think you might just be rationalizing?

God could zap that child-molester, He could magically stop the pyroclastic cloud from the volcano from incinerating the village; He could end homophobia, cure AIDS, end poverty, you name it. But He expects us to do those things, following His lead.

First, then why doesn’t god just stop the child molestation, homophobia, volcano’s etc that he knows we are powerless to stop? Second, what’s god’s lead? Last time I heard he was allegedly causing these things (being all sovereign) rather than stopping them. Humans at least make an effort. Rather, don’t you think your god should take lessons from us?

Oh, I don’t know about that. I’m sure there are clear reports analyzing some of the modern apparitions: Lourdes, Fatima, Medugorje, etc. What I’m saying is that I think there’s a lot of BS, and a few quasi-factual incidents thrown in.

Well, I bet every single one of these reports is BS. I also bet that evidence in favor of any particular one of them is no stronger than evidence in favor of any of the herbal remedies that you think is completely BS.

Clear factual evidence of the nature of “This man was irreparably paralyzed and miraculously cured”? I don’t personally know of any that have stood up under skeptical analysis, and I’m prepared to have an open mind there – might happen, but most such reports derive from over-credulity?

Can you think of a single miracle story that you think does not derive from over-credulity?

As noted, only based in my own faith and trust, and from the nature of “soul” if you will allow that such exists: something self-aware that runs on a human brain but is not AFAWK able to be isolated from it. If “soul” is in the nature of a program – my presumption – then “salvation” must be in the nature of “making a backup” or “reprogramming for fault-tolerance redundancy.” I decline to offer a proof, because as yet I don’t have one.

So basically you are saying that what you were offering up is completely indistinguishable from a fictional account that you just happen to believe in?

First, I added that because there are those who do argue from the one error invalidates all perspective, and I felt that deserved addressing at least in passing. I surely was not pointing at you or anyone else in particular in making the point.

But do you agree with me that the presence of errors, invalidates the bible as adequate evidence to support any actual miracles?

Second: I find the miracle stories (a) difficult to believe, but (b) irrelevant except as illustrations of teachings. Luke and John were both fond of illustrating some point Jesus was making in His teachings by alongside the teaching reporting a miracle that in some way illuminates what he was saying. As for the Resurrection, the key miracle to the whole Jesus story, as I think you’d agree, I’ve said the same thing since I first began posting about it: Something happened that was a life-changing experience for the followers of the recently-crucified Jesus. The reports are extremely nebulous and inconsistent about exactly what, when, who witnessed, etc. But they generally show Him as having resumed living human form, but, so to speak, equipped with Star Trek transporter powers. He bears the wounds of the Crucifixion, walks and talks like a human being, eats fish and bread with disciples, but then He appears and disappears at will, enters into locked rooms, etc. So I think there’s a good bit of room in interpreting what the Resurrection was supposed to betoken – and that I Corinthians 15 has a significant point to make about it.

Well, a dead body rising and walking around with a spear hole in its side sure sounds like a genuine miracle to me. Do you think it was a real miracle, or do you think a natural explanation is more likely? Like say maybe; some of Jesus’ followers just made it up? If you believe that Jesus really could rise from the dead, why would you doubt that he can and did walk on water, etc?

Also you failed to answer whether you thought the bible was more of a testament to the existence of the Christian god, as the Iliad was to Zeus and co.

[kanicbird]

@Revenant Threshold

Theoretically could we destroy the kingdom of God?

We could spray paint the holy gate so to speak, but we don’t have enough time on this earth, nor access to the Kingdom to destroy it. Plus once damage is done who’s to say it isn’t repaired right away and we are sent the bill.

[Voyager]

@kanicbird

My understanding is that God is the rightful judge, and He must do what is correct in this ‘job’, which includes insisting on repayment.

I am interested in your unorthodox theory, and for that matter what you think the

I asked this upthread already, but why is this “correct?” If God creates morality, how is he bound into making a sort of forgiveness not connected to someone dying incorrect? All I did during Yom Kippur services was to ask for repentence, directly, and it seemed to work since I’m still here. (And really well, since it still works decades after I stopped going.)

Why do you think that there is some kind of moral system greater than God? That seems to do a lot more damage to God’s kingdom than thinking that God can directly forgive and save people whenever he wants to.

[cosmosdan]

@Voyager

I asked this upthread already, but why is this “correct?” If God creates morality, how is he bound into making a sort of forgiveness not connected to someone dying incorrect? All I did during Yom Kippur services was to ask for repentence, directly, and it seemed to work since I’m still here. (And really well, since it still works decades after I stopped going.)

Why do you think that there is some kind of moral system greater than God? That seems to do a lot more damage to God’s kingdom than thinking that God can directly forgive and save people whenever he wants to.

I’d like to hear kanicbird’s answer as well. I mentioned upthread that it’s a matter of consequences for actions rather than punishment. I also think it’s a matter of surrender rather than repayment.

from Romans 8

5Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6The mind of sinful man[e] is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; 7the sinful mind[f] is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.

9You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. 10But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.

12Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. 13For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live, 14because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

[Voyager]

@cosmosdan

I’d like to hear kanicbird’s answer as well. I mentioned upthread that it’s a matter of consequences for actions rather than punishment. I also think it’s a matter of surrender rather than repayment.

from Romans 8

I’m not at all denying that the NT supports kanicbird. That’s the sales pitch - you all have b.o. (sinful nature) so you all need Ban (Jesus.) Now, certainly some people are just plain bad and piss god off. However, if all people are inherently bad, except when spiritual (as the passage seems to imply), surely some must be worse than others. Is God so inflexible that he can’t forgive the sinner of the least sin? Especially since he made us this way?

[kanicbird]

@Voyager

I asked this upthread already, but why is this “correct?” If God creates morality, how is he bound into making a sort of forgiveness not connected to someone dying incorrect?

God already has condemned the world, people of the world are condemned along with it - the decision is made already, it is the will of the Father, making exceptions would contradict His will and won’t happen.

God has offered us the opportunity if we want, to ‘transcend’ the world, through faith in Jesus, receive the Holy Spirit, and live in the Kingdom of God, not the world.

[kanicbird]

@cosmosdan

I also think it’s a matter of surrender rather than repayment.

It’s a combination of both. The Father must be repaid, we could never make that happen, but Jesus can and has, we must surrender to Jesus for Him to repay.

[cosmosdan]

@Voyager

I’m not at all denying that the NT supports kanicbird. That’s the sales pitch - you all have b.o. (sinful nature) so you all need Ban (Jesus.) Now, certainly some people are just plain bad and piss god off. However, if all people are inherently bad, except when spiritual (as the passage seems to imply), surely some must be worse than others. Is God so inflexible that he can’t forgive the sinner of the least sin? Especially since he made us this way?

I’m sorry. I wasn’t clear.

Much of the time I think the issue is discerning certain spiritual truths through the lens of our limited understanding. Even in reading the NT I consider that JC was trying to communicate with the people and culture of his day, as was Paul.

So, IMHO it’s not a matter of us being inherently bad but more a matter of clinging to false beliefs about our nature. If we cling to the limitations and fleeting qualities of the physical then we pay the consequences of that choice. If however we can surrender and tune in to the qualities of our spiritual nature we open the door to eternal possibilities. I think that also relates to the Jesus quotes listed by badchad earlier.

[Voyager]

@kanicbird

God already has condemned the world, people of the world are condemned along with it - the decision is made already, it is the will of the Father, making exceptions would contradict His will and won’t happen.

God has offered us the opportunity if we want, to ‘transcend’ the world, through faith in Jesus, receive the Holy Spirit, and live in the Kingdom of God, not the world.

So God can’t make this condemnation inoperative, in the same way he made all the old laws inoperative? Pretty feeble god you worship. Pretty nasty one also. If you just said he doesn’t feel like saving anyone except through Jesus there would be no issue, but all you are doing is asserting, without any logical argument, that God can’t do this and can’t do that.

[Voyager]

@cosmosdan

So, IMHO it’s not a matter of us being inherently bad but more a matter of clinging to false beliefs about our nature. If we cling to the limitations and fleeting qualities of the physical then we pay the consequences of that choice. If however we can surrender and tune in to the qualities of our spiritual nature we open the door to eternal possibilities. I think that also relates to the Jesus quotes listed by badchad earlier.

Living in California as I do, I’ll resist making cracks about spirituality. But which false beliefs are we clinging to? That we’re inherently good? That loving each other is more important than loving spirits in the sky? That there are far better ways of being good people than dedicating our lives to a third rate failed Messiah wannabe who died 2,000 years ago? That a loving god would save everyone, possibly by opening their eyes after they die, like the last act of Our Town? There are plenty of spiritually aware people out there who don’t buy into Jesus.

[kanicbird]

@Voyager

Pretty feeble god you worship. Pretty nasty one also.

You say this because you are a enemy of God and deceived by propaganda, you are blinded to the reality of God’s love and only see what God’s enemy wants you to see.

[Revenant_Threshold]

Boo. And it was all going so well.

[cosmosdan]

@kanicbird

It’s a combination of both. The Father must be repaid, we could never make that happen, but Jesus can and has, we must surrender to Jesus for Him to repay.

Sorry, I just don’t agree. I don’t see any way for the physical death of Jesus to be some sort of payment to an omnipotent and omnipresent spiritual being. IMHO that’s not what Jesus taught. Jesus taught surrender to the Holy Spirit and allowing that Spirit to teach and guide us. To seek the Kingdom within.

[cosmosdan]

@Voyager

Living in California as I do, I’ll resist making cracks about spirituality. But which false beliefs are we clinging to? That we’re inherently good? That loving each other is more important than loving spirits in the sky? That there are far better ways of being good people than dedicating our lives to a third rate failed Messiah wannabe who died 2,000 years ago? That a loving god would save everyone, possibly by opening their eyes after they die, like the last act of Our Town? There are plenty of spiritually aware people out there who don’t buy into Jesus.

Nope. My guess is that most spiritually aware people {Tom Cruise doesn’t count} understand and appreciate the teachings of Jesus even though they don’t buy into the “saved by the blood of the lamb” theology.

I was thinking along the lines of Mat 6: 19"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Keeping in mind that Jesus said the kingdom was within us.

IMHO Jesus taught that seeking to understand and live the eternal qualities of love and truth must be our treasure. Our primary desire. every day in this physical fleeting reality we are tempted to think otherwise. If dedicating our lives to him as teacher serves that purpose then fine but I don’t think it’s necessary. Hopefully in learning and growing we see ourselves as peers rather than unworthy scum.

[cosmosdan]

@kanicbird

You say this because you are a enemy of God and deceived by propaganda, you are blinded to the reality of God’s love and only see what God’s enemy wants you to see.

Which is far worse than being blinded by tradition and dogma

or is it?

" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
7They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.

[Don_t_Call_Me_Shirley]

@kanicbird

God already has condemned the world, people of the world are condemned along with it - the decision is made already, it is the will of the Father, making exceptions would contradict His will and won’t happen.

God has offered us the opportunity if we want, to ‘transcend’ the world, through faith in Jesus, receive the Holy Spirit, and live in the Kingdom of God, not the world.

You realize that these two paragraphs are contradictory, right?

In paragraph one, you state that god will not make exceptions. In paragraph two, you state that god will make an exception under certain circumstances.

[Voyager]

@kanicbird

You say this because you are a enemy of God and deceived by propaganda, you are blinded to the reality of God’s love and only see what God’s enemy wants you to see.

I guess you mean by that that I’ve read the entire Bible.

It’s hard to be an enemy of something that doesn’t appear to exist. You might as well say I’m an enemy of Sauron and Lord Voldemort. And my behavior hasn’t change a bit from when I used to believe in God (never Jesus). (Except for not going to shul.) The only reason that I don’t believe in God is that any reason for believing in the Bible is contradicted by the evidence or unsupported. I have no desire and no need to believe by faith.

I must say that my lack of faith is not weakened a bit if this is the best response you got to an actual logical problem with your belief.

[Voyager]

@cosmosdan

Nope. My guess is that most spiritually aware people {Tom Cruise doesn’t count} understand and appreciate the teachings of Jesus even though they don’t buy into the “saved by the blood of the lamb” theology.

I’ll agree with you on that. They buy into that part of the teaching of Jesus, as well as the teaching of the Buddha, of Maimonides, and some atheist philosophers also. It’s too bad that the universal message gets diluted with the exclusivity of the follow me or else message.