Thursday, June 25, 2009
Just a Thought
If God is just, and God is merciful, but justice is not merciful, and mercy not just, then is God unjust when He is merciful, and unmerciful when He is just?
For Conscience' Sake
"Trust unto Jehovah with all thy heart, And unto thine own understanding lean not." - Proverbs 3:5 (YLT)
"hypocrites! the face of the earth and of the heaven ye have known to make proof of, but this time -- how do ye not make proof of it? 'And why, also, of yourselves, judge ye not what is righteous?" - Luke 12:56-57 (YLT)
"Come, I pray you, and we reason, saith Jehovah, If your sins are as scarlet, as snow they shall be white, If they are red as crimson, as wool they shall be!" - Isaiah 1:18 (YLT)
"and Peter and John answering unto them said, `Whether it is righteous before God to hearken to you rather than to God, judge ye;" - Acts 4:19 (YLT)
Everyone who has discussed the Christian idea of heaven and hell with someone who is not a Christian will likely have gone through the following argument.
Mike: God is loving and merciful. In fact, God is Love. However, he is also just, so you must accept his gift or face eternal punishment.
George: So... umm... your god is loving and merciful, but he's willing to throw me into an eternal, torturous prison if I do not believe in him? I'm not perfect, but I really don't think I've done anything deserving endless torture.
Mike: Well, you see, God loves us all but he cannot tolerate any wickedness. He sent his only Son to die so that you could avoid the eternal torture by believing in Him. Besides, it's not God that sends people to hell, people choose hell. So you see, He really does love you.
George: I have to say, if I was given the choice between a fiery pit and a city in the clouds, I really don't see myself choosing the former.
I'm sure it comes in many forms accompanied by many verses. I'm also sure that I have exaggerated to prove a point. But this is what I and many others were raised to believe. To argue the existance of hell or the destination of those who do not believe in Christ is to deny the scriptures and water down your faith. So we deny our reason and give way to doctrine resting firmly on the word of the scripture and the fact that we should not "lean on our own understanding". But doesn't the scripture (and nature) encourage us to use our rationality? Did Peter and John not ask the priests to judge for themselves (Acts 4:19)? Does the Lord not evoke us to reason with Him (Isaiah 1:18)? So where is the line drawn between using reason and leaning not on our own understanding?
This is not intended as an attack on church doctrine pertaining to hell (it still is, but that is not the intention). As proof, I put forth no doctrine here except the belief that eternal torture does not agree with my conscience. All I want to say is simply this: If something you have been taught troubles you, investigate. If you find contradictions in the scripture that bother you, search for the solution. Be troubled. Be fearful. Do not ignore your conscience. Do not give in to doctrine because it is easier. Trust Christ when He says those who search will find.
"hypocrites! the face of the earth and of the heaven ye have known to make proof of, but this time -- how do ye not make proof of it? 'And why, also, of yourselves, judge ye not what is righteous?" - Luke 12:56-57 (YLT)
"Come, I pray you, and we reason, saith Jehovah, If your sins are as scarlet, as snow they shall be white, If they are red as crimson, as wool they shall be!" - Isaiah 1:18 (YLT)
"and Peter and John answering unto them said, `Whether it is righteous before God to hearken to you rather than to God, judge ye;" - Acts 4:19 (YLT)
Everyone who has discussed the Christian idea of heaven and hell with someone who is not a Christian will likely have gone through the following argument.
Mike: God is loving and merciful. In fact, God is Love. However, he is also just, so you must accept his gift or face eternal punishment.
George: So... umm... your god is loving and merciful, but he's willing to throw me into an eternal, torturous prison if I do not believe in him? I'm not perfect, but I really don't think I've done anything deserving endless torture.
Mike: Well, you see, God loves us all but he cannot tolerate any wickedness. He sent his only Son to die so that you could avoid the eternal torture by believing in Him. Besides, it's not God that sends people to hell, people choose hell. So you see, He really does love you.
George: I have to say, if I was given the choice between a fiery pit and a city in the clouds, I really don't see myself choosing the former.
I'm sure it comes in many forms accompanied by many verses. I'm also sure that I have exaggerated to prove a point. But this is what I and many others were raised to believe. To argue the existance of hell or the destination of those who do not believe in Christ is to deny the scriptures and water down your faith. So we deny our reason and give way to doctrine resting firmly on the word of the scripture and the fact that we should not "lean on our own understanding". But doesn't the scripture (and nature) encourage us to use our rationality? Did Peter and John not ask the priests to judge for themselves (Acts 4:19)? Does the Lord not evoke us to reason with Him (Isaiah 1:18)? So where is the line drawn between using reason and leaning not on our own understanding?
This is not intended as an attack on church doctrine pertaining to hell (it still is, but that is not the intention). As proof, I put forth no doctrine here except the belief that eternal torture does not agree with my conscience. All I want to say is simply this: If something you have been taught troubles you, investigate. If you find contradictions in the scripture that bother you, search for the solution. Be troubled. Be fearful. Do not ignore your conscience. Do not give in to doctrine because it is easier. Trust Christ when He says those who search will find.
In the Beginning
"In the beginning of God's preparing the heavens and the earth -- the earth hath existed waste and void, and darkness [is] on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God fluttering on the face of the waters, and God saith, `Let light be;' and light is. And God seeth the light that [it is] good, and God separateth between the light and the darkness," - Genesis 1:1-4 (YLT)
"to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light, and from the authority of the Adversary unto God, for their receiving forgiveness of sins, and a lot among those having been sanctified, by faith that is toward me." - Acts 26:18 (YLT)
It interests me that we do not hear God say, let there be darkness. We know that darkness is simply the absense of light. If darkness is only the absense of light, is it not also the potential for light? How often do we associate light with good, and darkness with evil. If light and darkness are true representations of good and evil, they share the same properties. What then is evil, but the absense, and therefore, potential for good? If darkness does not exist and is only defined by the absense of light, can we not also say that evil does not exist in that it is only the absense of good? While not exactly a profound statement, it seems greatly overlooked. As Christians, we often see the world as a fight between good and evil when it may be better to view the world as a fight between good and potential good.
For those who wish to continually characterize people as good and evil let them ask how the good inside of themselves was created. If we were all created equal and empty, what would make someone believe that put into another's circumstance, they would behave any differently? If this is possible, it is beyond my comprehension as it is beyond cause and effect. Not that I deny that there is anything outside of causality, but to assume there is, and that because of this you are superior to another person, seems to me a dangerous assertion. Without this seemingly dangerous assertion, we are left with the fact that only by circumstance are we superior to the worst of humanity. Many people have heard and repeated the phrase, "There but by the grace of God go I" without understanding the consequence of this statement.
"to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light, and from the authority of the Adversary unto God, for their receiving forgiveness of sins, and a lot among those having been sanctified, by faith that is toward me." - Acts 26:18 (YLT)
It interests me that we do not hear God say, let there be darkness. We know that darkness is simply the absense of light. If darkness is only the absense of light, is it not also the potential for light? How often do we associate light with good, and darkness with evil. If light and darkness are true representations of good and evil, they share the same properties. What then is evil, but the absense, and therefore, potential for good? If darkness does not exist and is only defined by the absense of light, can we not also say that evil does not exist in that it is only the absense of good? While not exactly a profound statement, it seems greatly overlooked. As Christians, we often see the world as a fight between good and evil when it may be better to view the world as a fight between good and potential good.
For those who wish to continually characterize people as good and evil let them ask how the good inside of themselves was created. If we were all created equal and empty, what would make someone believe that put into another's circumstance, they would behave any differently? If this is possible, it is beyond my comprehension as it is beyond cause and effect. Not that I deny that there is anything outside of causality, but to assume there is, and that because of this you are superior to another person, seems to me a dangerous assertion. Without this seemingly dangerous assertion, we are left with the fact that only by circumstance are we superior to the worst of humanity. Many people have heard and repeated the phrase, "There but by the grace of God go I" without understanding the consequence of this statement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)