Inspired by the second post on page three of this Pit thread
Okay, last things first, I’d like to say that I feel this thread stands on its own even if H4Ehas left. Her input is not necessarily required in this thread. In fact, I think I’m more interested in hearing comments from respected, so-called “liberal” Christians (and please, give all the wiggle-room you want to the word “liberal.”) Of course, H4E, if you are still on the Boards, chime in.
Next, I’m aware of the hypocrisy in her post, being that I can read the English language. To quote cjhoworth from the linked thread
**
HOWEVER… even though His4ever is being hypocritical… does she have a point? Polycarp, Guin, cjhoworth,et al., aren’t YOU GUYS being a little one-sided in your characterization of God? In other words, if she’s saying “Mumble blah blah God blah blah Hate yadda yadda fiery pits of Hell etc etc eternal torment,” aren’t you doing the converse, “Mumble blah blah God blah blah Love yadda yadda unconditional forgiveness etc etc eternal bliss”?
I mean, it’s not like she’s making up the Bible verses which mention condemnation, eternal judgement, Hell, etc. It’s in the Bible. How can you just ignore those bits? Or how do you reconcile them with your worldview?
If I may anticipate a retort… she’s supposed to be witnessing, so she should do so out of love and not hate. Sort of a “You catch more souls with honey than with vinegar” thing. Isn’t that a little sneaky? I mean, how does that work?
Witnessing Christian: God loves you! Potential Convert: He does? WC: Oh yes! Lots of love there! You get lots of good stuff, too! PC: Yay good stuff! Yay love! I think I’ll love God back! WC: You love the Lord with all your heart? PC: Yes! WC: And with all your soul? PC: Yes! WC: And with all your strength? PC: YES! WC: And with all your mind? PC: Praise unto Him, YES!! WC: Good thing, because if you didn’t, then you’d go to Hell. PC: Hallelu… uh, what?
A verse I’ve seen quoted about 20 times in these debates is Matthew 22:36-40, emphasis added
So, to conclude and put it another way, I think that “The Polycarp Crew” is presenting a lopsided view emphasizing the second of these two commandments, whereas His4Ever is presenting a lopsided view emphasizing the first of these commandments (particularly what happens if you ignore that greatest of commandments).
It’s hard to love someone who doesn’t love you back.
Which is not to say that God DOESN’T love people. Rather, Christians are meant to be God’s active agents in the world. We’re created “in His image and likeness” for a reason. Christians are meant to be a “light to the world.”
So when somebody shows up, acting like a jerk in the name of God…well, no wonder non-Christians reject that belief system. If God’s representatives are nuts, the man himself has no appeal.
Quix, I presented my POV on why our focus is the more proper one in response to a question by EchoKitty over in the Pit thread. I can repost that here if you like ( ::: nervously looks around for Mods holding “Crossposters will be prosecuted” signs ::: ), or somebody can quote from it here.
Granted, but I reject that stance as arrogant. I’m not a Christian, and you wouldn’t be too far off if you said that I hate God and even the concept of God, but I can certainly still love my fellow person. You can argue that by donating to charity I’m showing my love for God, but I think that’s just clever word games.
Good point, and maybe I’m being too easy on H4E, who is certainly ignorant and jerkish. But, all her lies about Catholics and Mormons aside, ignoring her sheer ignorance about the Bible she claims to uphold… she’s still got a point, IMO. A stopped clock is right twice a day and all that. Hell, even Jack Chick HIMSELF had a point when he bashed psychics in his latest tract!
I did read that, Poly, and with all due respect (which, to clarify the cliche, is a hell of a lot), it left me unsatisfied – hence this thread. You seem to be contradicting yourself… or, more likely, I’m misinterpreting you. For example, one thing that stood out to me was
**
To which I must reply – well, aren’t they? How do you decide which parts of God’s nature are superior to the other parts? You’ve obviously decided that Love is the Prime Directive in Godland. So do you excise or otherwise ignore the parts of Scripture that are difficult or impossible to reconcile with this Prime Directive?
You also state, immediately following,
I suppose this paragraph pretty much encapsulates why your post left me unsatisfied. It doesn’t seem to me that you go anywhere with your first statement. You acknowledge that God has a “stringent code of moral behavior.” So what? Where do you go from there? What are the ramifications of the existance of that moral code? It seems to me that you first acknowledge its existance, and then you ignore it.
Perhaps your thesis statement is “God’s justice and wrath and all the other anthropomorphic emotions attributed to Him are simply different expressions of His love for every [person].” But I don’t see even the possibility of wrath in your view of Christianity. You seem to have, just as H4E claimed, a very lopsided view.
At the risk of hijacking my own thread (if that’s possible), let me rephrase the question slightly (or greatly, as it were) – who do you think is going to Hell? Yes, I know, it’s not your call. I’m not asking for you to state unequivocably that Groups X, Y, and Z are going to Hell. I just want your general sentiment and, more importantly, how you came to this conclusion. Scripture, conversion story, whatever.
The reason I ask is that I’ve been, both in my head and in this thread, comparing and contrasting H4E with you, Poly, and your bretheren and… umm… sistren? The comparison I’m having the most difficulty with involves the reconciliation of God’s judgement with God’s love. I think His4Ever’s position is pretty clear – God loves you, in that you can go to Heaven… but He also judges you, insofar as if you don’t accept Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, it’s curtains for you. I’m having a harder time formulating the “liberal” Christian’s viewpoint.
I’ve thought about this issue too. The immense diversity of perspective gleaned from that one book leads me to conclude that their is no such thing as a “Christian”. That is to say that all of the people in the world who call themselves Christians do not believe the same things. There are really just a bunch of people who use the scriptures to justify their own world view. Whatever it is that they feel, hope, and pray that God is, they find passages to back them up. When passages contradict their worldview (i.e evil god plans to burn billions of us for eternity, orders rape, genocide, etc.) they find justifications.
The whole thing is like one giant rorshack test which tells us nothing about the nature of any god, but rather tells us quite a bit about the individual preaching. Commonly combined with an absolute surety that they are right (ignoring the extreme potential for human fallibility) these folks can be quite frustrating. They have a picture in their mind before they see facts, and no matter what facts they encounter they will twist them until they fit their unyielding view. This behaivior is the enemy of truth more then lies. Look for THE answer, not the answer YOU want.
Of couse, if people have to convince themselves that a magical being exists and their will be a big payoff after you die to behave in a moral and kind fashion, then I suppose it’s better off that they indulge their delusions. I have far greater respect for people who can come to this conclusion (be kind) without any promise of anything in return. The reality is no one knows what the deal is concerning a god. Humans lack the tools and scope to properly answer that question at this time. We may find the answer some day, but I suspect we will only get there by being objective and changing our worldview to fit reality, and not the other way around.
I’ll tackle heaven and hell first because it’s easiest. Disclaimer: all beliefs are strictly my own. Because the standards which have been set for us by God are impossible for human beings to meet, whether you’re using the legalisms from the Pentateuch or Christ’s big two (1. Love God. 2. Love everybody else), we’re all going to hell. Because Christ took the trouble to take on human form, complete with design flaws and other imperfections, then took on the sins of all mankind, we’re all going to heaven. We can’t make it into heaven on our own merits, and we’d be fools to try.
This brings up a hard question. Who, exactly, is “we”? I’ll be honest. I’m not sure. Certainly everyone who has accepted Christ as his or her Saviour’s included in that. Because of my own biases and experience, I have a hard time excluding anyone from salvation. I don’t think “Christ is my Saviour” should be a sort of cosmic Get Out Of Hell Free card, so, at the risk of being called a heretic, I’ll simply say I don’t know, but I would hope it would include all humankind.
So, we’re all going to have one hell of a DopeFest in Heaven, if I’m right. Where does judgement come into this? We’re human beings. We make mistakes, especially with regard to that “Love your neighbor” business. My take on judgement is God wants us to admit we’re wrong and make amends or at least try not to do the same thing again. As an Episcopalian, I recite the confession of sins every Sunday I’m in church and the priest, acting as a stand-in for God, tells me my sins are forgiven. As an individual, I ask God for forgiveness and try not to repeat my errors, although, try as I might, I still get annoyed with tailgaters (drivers, not partyers). The ramifications of God’s code of moral behaviour are pretty much exactly what Polycarp said: we must treat all those around us with dignity, love, and respect. We don’t have to like them, but we must respect them.
If I looked for evidence of God’s wrath in the lives of people I considered sinful, I’d be sadly disappointed. Conversely, if I saw what looked like his wrath in the lives of people I considered good Christians (for example, my best friend’s husband, who had both sisters and his mother die within 18 months), I would conclude He is an unjust God. Fortunately, I don’t believe He’s that obvious. God’s justice is not mine, any more than it was Job’s. Yes, God’s wrath does exist, but if we believe that X’s house was destroyed by a tornado while Y’s house next door survived, therefore Y was a better Christian, we’re guilty of the same sort of fallacious thinking shown in the book of Job.
Getting to the specifics of my moral code, as I’ve mentioned elsewhere, I am stringently against adultery, but not against open marriages. The reason I’m against adultery is the deception causes harm to another human being. In the open marriages I’ve had a chance to observe, there is no deception and the bond between the couple is strengthened, not damaged (note that I have a very small sample to work with). Stealing, bearing false witness, not to mention murder also damages other people, therefore they are sinful. I’ve also been sinning by using harsh language to His4Ever in an attempt to harm, and I do confess that sin, to God as well as the Board.
I’ve no idea if this will help or come across as a series of cheap copouts, but it is this liberal Christian’s take on reconciling grace and judgement. Like I said, it’s not my place to decide who’s going to heaven and who’s not, nor should I worry about my own salvation. Instead, I need to, as Guinastasia would sing it, “Guard each one’s dignity and save each one’s pride.”
Interesting discussion. I think the OP has a point. It would be extremely convenient if “true religion” just happened to correspond with the tenets of liberal, multicultural democracy – too convenient.
I was struck by these two statements.
**
**
This seems to be saying that God is largely irrelevant. Everyone’s going to heaven and we ought to base our moral code on humanist philosophy rather than what the Bible or Quran or whatever actually says.
Christianity, from Genesis right through Revelation, has always been based on a system of punishment and reward. Isn’t it disingenuous – or at least willfully blind – to ignore the punishment aspect and emphasize the rewards?
Frustrating as it may be, there is no doubt in my mind that His4ever is on a mission here to save our souls. I’ve been there, done that, and bought the T-shirt. I watch **His4ever’s ** particiation here with great interest, because there is no doubt in my mind based on where I’ve been before that in her view this board is a den of iniquity that is more evil than the extremist muslim board that we’ve been introduced to a short while ago. Will she ever give up on us or will we impart a germ of influence that will cause her to rethink some of her positions. As a parent , I’m well aware that the latter will not be readily apparent, but the probability of affecting views surfacing in the future exists. My heart goes out to her, because in my mind she is a brave girl. But it hurts for me to see someone who follows the false prophet of hatred and Jack Chick is surely one, an extreme fundamentalist. Jack Chick is a charlatan. He makes money by focusing on dubious entities of evil, that as a result of biblical translation irregularities are perceived to be worthy of everlasting torture. His4ever perceives her calling to save the likes of gobear by providing the “correct” interpretation for what is in store for gobear if he does not change his ways.
While the rest of Christians at the Straightdope (I think) focus on the loving God, His4ever focuses on the just God who apparently has a mandate to punish completely beyond His control. I honestly do not know how to respond to that other than to say the omnipotent God is in full control and that we have an example of mercy and compassion to others in Jesus Christ (who is THE SAVIOUR OF ALL MEN ) as recorded in the gospels. And what is interesting to me is how the perceived "evil "people of the time as well as the "good "people of the time were addressed by Jesus.
“evil” people today …sex trade workers/homosexuals/atheists
“evil” people of the gospels…adulterers, samaritans, tax collectors
“good, godfearing” people today… Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson Jack Chick
“good godfearing” people of the gospels…high priest, pharasees, saducees.
Truthseeker, I don’t have the privilege of saying what the punishments are, nor, to my way of thinking, does any other mortal. Adultery, is specifically mentioned in the 10 commandments, as are false witness, theft, murder, etc. The original 10 commandments are the law I acknowledge, along with and superseded by the commandment given by Christ, love your neighbor. I do believe that those who break them will be punished, but it is not for me to say what form that punishment will take.
To me, love your neighbor is an extremely tough commandment to follow in that it includes people you cannot stand, even if you have good reason. As an example, for the past few years, I’ve given up swearing at other drivers for Lent. “Swearing”, in this case, includes the use of phrases such as “idiot”, “fool”, etc. in that the intent is the same. It also includes driving in such a way that I don’t inspire others to swear at me. Doing so at any time of year is sinful, but for 40 days I try to be particularly mindful about not committing that sin in the hope that it will carry over to the remaining 325 days of the year. It’s hard. It means if someone is 6 inches off my bumper when I’m already going over the speed limit and I can’t move over a lane, I must retain a respectful attitude toward them while trying to get out of their way, when my normal attitude would be to accuse them of trying to kill me. Will God zap me if I do mutter something about “homicidal maniac”? No. Will it damage my relationship with God and my soul? Yes, and that is certainly punishment. If there are to be other punishments involved in this world or the next, that is up to God.
So, Truthseeker, what are your specific punishments for specific sins? By the way, if I’m not as clear as usual, I’m afraid my own faith is a bit clouded and shattered as well at the moment. Presumably that too will change, with God’s help.
I think what I’m trying to impart is that, if there are sins-they are of the individual-at least the ones His4ever speaks of. It is between that individual and God. It is not for I to say.
MY duties are clear.
I also get angry in that she uses the Scriptures to say things that are flat out WRONG-and that she uses Jack Chick to illustrate things. Chick is a known liar and a bearer of false witness.
Re the whole get into heaven thing: If you believe that one has to follow the Big 10 to get into heaven, doesn’t that leave those who have other gods/goddesses before Him in the lurch?
Also, why is there a Hell in the first place? Why does God not just say, “Nope. Sorry. You were wrong. Here, pick a fetus starting to develop higher brain functions and try again,”?
I am sure this is not your intention, but in any thread regarding His4Ever, this invitation will turn out to be the moral equivalent of “Come back here - I’m not done spitting on you.”
The behavior of the SDMB towards His4Ever has been, for the most part, disgraceful. I read as much of the thread to which you linked as I could stomach, and found it to be yet another distasteful example of what can happen to someone who disagrees with the orthodoxy and can be bullied.
No, I have not noticed that - not in any thread to which His4Ever has posted.
God knows she isn’t much at presenting her side of things, and God knows I don’t agree with much of it when she does. But the name-calling, and bullying, and abuse, and insults, are not coming from her.
“A sense that she is equal in dignity, and to be treated with respect”?
Sho, the statements “I think that God thinks you’re an abomination,” and “I think you’re an abomination,” are equivalent to me. His4ever has called many posters abominations here. In playground terms, she started it.
More to the point, she has shown herself to be utterly impervious to reason. If the statement “Man shall not lie with with man as he lies with woman, for it is an abomination,” settles the issue for His4ever, even with the oppertunity to talk to men who lie with men as they lie with women and note how un-abominationy they are, then she deserves the name-calling.
I gotta concur with Shodan a little on this one. (Although, dude, it’s GD so try not to use f*ck.) H4E said numerous times when she first got here that she didn’t want to spend her whole time defending her view on homosexuality, and she was repeatedly called out for that view, baited to defend it, and referred to in nasty, hateful ways when she did.
She didn’t say it well perhaps, but what she said is a part of her religion. As the OP states, ignoring either part (the love or the justice) is to get an incomplete view of that religion. Perhaps the people with issues here are the people sticking their heads in the sand about the part they don’t like. Perhaps having H4E around reminded them all too well of that part of their religion they wished they could bury or rationalize away. Perhaps H4E put it right under their noses that there’s a nasty, icky part of Christianity that most people don’t like so much.
But Straight Dope and its denizens worship the god of “Tolerance”. That’s the only religion around here that’s acceptable. Of course, if “Tolerance” isn’t your religion, you don’t get treated tolerantly. You get treated the way His4ever has been. “Tolerance” around here evidently applies only if you present an acceptably popular opinion. And I quote the word to imply sarcasm, because of the fact that all the loving “tolerant” people are the first ones to be foaming at the mouth as they spit insults.
As I’ve pointed out before.
You mean “not for ME to say”, not “I”. Pet peeve.
Cite, please?
Heh. Once again, Cite, please?
No, really, Guinastasia, Cite, please?
To be honest, I’m not a big fan of Jack Chick, but that’s only because his cartoons are a bit cheesy for my taste, not because they present glaring contradictions to the bible. My fiancee says she has gotten a lot out of them, and I doubt she’s the only one. Please, humor me. Show me, with scriptural backup, how Jack Chick is a liar and bearer of false witness.
Unless, of course, you can’t…Then I’d prefer a retraction and apology.
Or is it just one of those things that “everybody knows”, like you find over here and here?
Shodan, well said, as always. I’ve liked your posts and your way of capturing the meat of a topic ever since I first noticed you.
And to Truth Seeker, RexDart, and quixotic78 - I agree with your point here completely. His4ever was verbally raped by this message board (Kirkland, MrVisible, gobear, guinastasia, vanilla, cjhoworth, to name a select few), and only because she represented an unpopular and un-PC viewpoint. Though it’s a bit weird agreeing so strongly with the people I normally debate against.
Let’s face it, kids (particularly the “Polycarp crew”) – The bible is very clear on its view of homosexuality. All the unpopular Christians see it. All the God-haters see it. The atheists see it (note that those are two separate categories). The only ones who seem not to see it are the liberal Christians, who have a repackaged “American beer” (meaning kinder, gentler, and watered-down) version of Christianity to sell, and need to reconcile their product with the text.
The so-called “fundies” (I assume that by now most of you include me under that label, though I don’t, myself) around here aren’t the ones reinterpreting the bible’s text to say what they want it to say. It’s the liberal, popular, “good Christians” who are the ones doing the picking and choosing, and the disingenuous reinterpretation. It’s funny how when somebody approaches a topic with reason, saying that the text means pretty much what it says, they are shouted down with the accusation that they are picking and choosing, whereas the Polycarp crew, for lack of a better term, seem to utterly reject any part of the bible that does not support the “everybody’s good, we’re all happy, I’m ok-you’re ok” standpoint.
Is love a fundamental and necessary component of God’s nature? Absolutely yes. The bible backs this up, and I believe it wholeheartedly. But is that all? No way. Just like you can’t summarize your mother with “she’s a good cook and she put Band-aids™ on my boo-boos,” you can’t summarize God with “oh, he’s really nice, and he loves us all, and he forgives everything that everybody does, and everybody is going to be with him in heaven, no matter what! Oh frabjous day!”
The bible speaks as much about his demand for justice and obedience as it does about his love. You can’t neglect either one.
Since Polycarp hasn’t answered yet (sorry, I’m getting tired of typing Bold tags), and since I’ve already set myself up to be the next one to get dog-piled, and since I don’t care whether the popular elements of the message board like me or hate me, I’ll take a stab at this one.
Who is going to hell? Well, let’s start at the top:
Satan. The pinnacle of all creation, the most beautiful and intelligent and highest ranking of all the beings ever created by God, who lived in his presence and then rebelled against him out of pride and a desire to usurp his authority, plunging the heavens and the world into war.
The angels that followed him into rebellion.
Pausing here, these angels are the reason hell was created. They knew perfection, and lived in God’s presence, and from there, chose to rebel. For a pretty good explanation of how this could happen, read the Ainulindale (first chapter of the Silmarillion, by J.R.R. Tolkien), which describes the lust and fall of Melkor.
Who else? Well, by virtue of the fact that we are all sinners, and I mean every last person who has ever lived (save one), every one of us (save one) has earned a custom made, one-way ticket to hell.
Except.
Except for the fact that those of us who have accepted the gift of salvation of God, in the person of Jesus, who was the final sacrificial lamb - the one perfect sacrifice, after thousands of years of sacrifices, that was finally good enough to wash away the sins of the world.
And except for those who have not heard of Jesus, but whom God, in his wisdom (which compares to mine in the same way that my ability to do calculus compares to that of a goat), will judge to have lived out his law written on their hearts.
And please don’t ask me how God will judge that question, because I’m not him, and I don’t presume to know his standards.
But I do believe that any who know the deal and reject it will be in a world of hurt. The bible says clearly that you will be held responsible for what you know (“From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.” - Luke 12:48) and that it is impossible for those who have known the truth and rejected it to come to repentence (hebrews 6:4-6).
Keep in mind that I’m not personally condemning anybody (though I can almost guarantee that the accusation will be made within the next 5 or so posts), just answering the question, based on my nearly 22 years of being a Christian and studying the bible.
To say that God is Love is not to water anything down. Some people don’t want love. I understand how strange this must sound, but Hell is there because God loves. Heaven wouldn’t be heaven if it were a prison, and no one is “in” Hell except by their own free choice.
[…anticipating protest…] But Heaven is this wonderful place and Hell is so horrible! Why doesn’t God make a wonderful place for those who choose Hell? Well, when you take away love, goodness, and mercy from moral perfection, what’s left? If people don’t like moral perfection, they need not bear it.
You’ll decided for yourself whenever you see Him face to face. Do you love Love? You’ll love Him. Do you love goodness? You’ll love Him. Do you love mercy? You’ll love Him. And if you don’t love those things, why should He force them on you?
Just for argument’s sake, why do people get so pissed off if God gives them this free choice? If they love love, then they love God. If they don’t love love, then why the bitching and moaning when they learn that they won’t have to endure any of it?
Well, I for one get cheesed off because God, as described in the bible:
“God does not play dice with the universe; He plays an ineffable game of His own devising, which might be compared, from the perspective of any of the other players, [ie., everybody.] to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a Dealer who won’t tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.” Terry Pratchett/Neil Gaiman, Good Omens
When I see earthquakes and plagues and cancers, I have a hard time getting the message that there is a supreme being that cares for us at all. Actions speak louder than words, and one child dying of leukemia speaks louder than any message of love from holy book.
IMHO, of course.
I have also found this an interesting thread. Libertarian: I am trying to grasp your post fully. Does the awfulness of Hell consist “merely” in the separation from the perfect love of God or is there some further torment ( such as a lake of fire) over and above that.
I understand what you’re saying. Our grandson “died” of brain cancer. But we understand that his essence is his spirit, not his cells. He is not dead at all. Feel free to have a look at Our Dawson.
Jabba
The absence of love is so horrible to me that a lake of fire hardly does it justice. But that’s just me.
Jesus taught that if He were to judge us, His judgment would be right and true. But He said that He does not judge us, but that we judge ourselves by His own essence. He said the He condemns no one, but that there are those who prefer the light and those who prefer the darkness.
He said that whatever it is that we seek, that is what we will find.
