How Do Christians Reconcile The Following Question Regarding Their Faith?

[RedDragon94]

disobedience to God is the cause of sin

I thought that was sin.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

That's awesome they helped you, but was it the president/CEO of the company that came personally and handled everything for you, or was it from within your office? I don't know where you work, so I just used that scenario.

The CEO and HR was worried about me, as well as pretty much everyone else. I wasn't hiding my despair very well by that point. We were like family.
edit:

Hi Kelly,

I don't think so. True salvation is far from the comic book superheroes. You will know the true salvation or your superhero if you trusted and have faith in your superhero.

Thanks

There are plenty of people who exist whom I don't trust. I know them and they disappoint me. Salvation is more than butt-kissing. As John the Baptist said (more or less), "God can make butt-kissers out of rocks. Just do your job."

Because not everyone will choose to reject His message.

But God already knows who is who. That makes all this stuff just silly theatrics. Movie Glenda already knows how to get Dorothy home but would much rather put her life in danger for days on end than just tell her how to get home.

 

[lunamoth]

Hi Lunessa! Happy to see you here.

Hi Roxanne! Just having a lazy day on the couch while I recover from a cold.

These two paragraphs seem paradoxical to me in regard to theology and Christian doctrine. I'm not sure if your views in general have changed, but could you explain the origin of this exegesis? Or, are your thoughts more of an independent sort?

Exegesis as in biblical exegesis? I think Genesis is a story about the nature of humans, the nature of God, and our relationship with God. It is rich in metaphor and it describes the state of humans, which is paradoxical (we are both good and bad, beautiful and ugly, amazing and despicable) but not how we scientifically came to be. I think most people's theology is independent, but probably mine is less dogmatic than some other Christians. My views expressed in those two paragraphs reflect 1) my observations and understanding of the world as it is and 2) my belief that God is love.

These are my thoughts as well, but the "God" word still has me a bit confused. I'll wait for the definition of who you think this being is.

My question in the OP was direction at Christians who believe in the characteristics of God as I described. The Abrahamic God is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. I've read through the Bible and studied it in depth multiple times and can't imagine how anyone can come to any other conclusion than the God of the bible has all those big three "O" attributes and many more. I'm very open to hearing your definition and understanding of God and where you found the information to draw this conclusion.

I may not be back all week, though. I'm going to be very busy with work. I hope you can wait for a response!

As I said just above, my theology is shaped around the central tenet that God is love. I'm sure this tenet was formed by my religious upbringing in the Episcopal church (which was not rigorous), the beliefs of my mother, and my own musings on the matter. I have read and studied the Bible, including a four-year course that delved fairly deeply into how the Bible was written and how it has shaped our understanding of God. It was a rather academic course, and it was pretty clear that the Bible is a man-made book that tells the story of a people's developing understanding of and relationship with God, warts and all. However, that does not mean it is without value as a spiritual resource.

In the Episcopal church we talk about God using the OOO terms, but in general the question of theodicy is treated as a misguided question. As someone above said, it is not that stuff happens, it is that stuff matters, and our choices matter. When pressed on the logic, God's love never gives; it is our understanding of power that gives. It is paradoxical - love, which is completely vulnerable, is also the most powerful force in human life.

 

[Buttercup]

Exegesis as in biblical exegesis?

Yes. Specifically, I'm wondering how you've come to the conclusion that humans were not designed by God, yet you believe much of the bible is more than allegory. That seems so contradictory to me. Very interesting, but contradictory. I'm curious if there's interpretive/analytical written material that explains that concept in depth? Is that general Episcopalian doctrine, that a good chunk of the Bible is allegory? I thought y'all believed Christ was a real person who came to earth to die for our sins? That's not considered allegorical by Episcopalians, is it?

As I said just above, my theology is shaped around the central tenet that God is love.

I believe God is absolute love as well. I don't believe in the Abrahamic God as described in the bible, but I'm leaning toward thinking there's a Spirit of some sort that permeates the universe. And I think all we need to know about this God is supplied by our conscious and our conscious is also our "bible" of sorts.

In the Episcopal church we talk about God using the OOO terms, but in general the question of theodicy is treated as a misguided question. As someone above said, it is not that stuff happens, it is that stuff matters, and our choices matter. When pressed on the logic, God's love never gives; it is our understanding of power that gives. It is paradoxical - love, which is completely vulnerable, is also the most powerful force in human life.

Again, I'm just confused. So sorry. I'm don't understand how an Omniscient God creates beings with murderous tendencies. However, if this "God" you're discussing didn't design humans, then I guess he's off the hook, right?

Please don't take any of my statements or questions as hostile. I'm genuinely curious (again) how this all works. It's quite foreign to me and doesn't make sense at all. Lol.

 

[Yoshua]

There are plenty of people who exist whom I don't trust. I know them and they disappoint me. Salvation is more than butt-kissing. As John the Baptist said (more or less), "God can make butt-kissers out of rocks. Just do your job."

Hi Kelly,

Yes. That's part of life.

Thanks

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

By what standards are we to judge Go? The answer is none. We're not capable, or worthy to judge Him and you even less so since you don't even know Him. All you can judge is second hand perceptions of Him, and if you actually cared about accuracy you'd realize that even if you could get a measure of understanding of Him you're way too biased to ever be trusted.

If the Bible is right, then we are capable of judging God: if we really bear the consequences of eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, then we are qualified to judge good and evil.

If we're not qualified, then Christ and his sacrifice were unnecessary.

 

[Muffled]

Authority is a choice.
I choose not to turn to a god for one.

I believe He is the only one whether you choose Him or not.

 

[lunamoth]

Yes. Specifically, I'm wondering how you've come to the conclusion that humans were not designed by God, yet you believe much of the bible is more than allegory. That seems so contradictory to me. Very interesting, but contradictory.

I conclude that humans were not
'designed' because the evidence of evolution points to random processes with selective pressures. The selective pressures are themselves constrained by natural law. The randomness points to a 'wobble' that is simply part of the way our physical universe operates. Some things happen randomly, as far as we can tell.

The Bible is allegory, but also more than allegory because it is based on 1) some historical happenings, although many of those are probably bent far out of recognition from what actually happened and 2) the stories are written specifically to illustrate and teach about a particular people's experience of God. Sort of like a combination of historical fiction and family stories to pass on information about 'what Grandma was like.' It also is an evolving story and reflects what people most found important about the character of God. Sometimes you need a hero to defend you, sometimes you need a mother to nurture you, sometimes you need a judge to keep your people in line.

I'm curious if there's interpretive/analytical written material that explains that concept in depth?

Well, as I mentioned in my earlier post I took a four-yeqr course on the subject, and I do not know of any short simple books or pamphlets that can do justice to the topic; it is huge. I will say that I found it eye-opening and refreshing that this course did not try to sugar-coat things, and it took an academic approach to how the Bible was (to our best knowledge) written. For example, Genesis was far from the first book written, and a lot of redaction can be traced in how various passages of that book came to be. Some of Genesis is very old, taken from oral tradition, but even those old parts are then re-written to reflect things that were important to the redactors at the time they were written down. It is interesting that the stories are so convoluted, with the editors not worrying about making it hold together in a seamless story, but keeping many inconsistencies that, I guess to their way of thinking, reflected the greater truth or important points of the story. With respect to Genesis you could try researching the Documentary Hypothesis for a start. There are many Biblical scholars who have written extensively on this, and of course many of them also come to slightly different conclusions and may not be without bias. And, similar holds true for the New Testament, although because those works are somewhat more recent there is not so much editing/redaction in those. Those are more of a case of multiple authors or schools of disciples sharing common documents and then putting their own spin on it according to their own philosophies/audience and emphasis of the Jesus story

Is that general Episcopalian doctrine, that a good chunk of the Bible is allegory? I thought y'all believed Christ was a real person who came to earth to die for our sins? That's not considered allegorical by Episcopalians, is it?

No, the life, death and resurrection of Jesus is not considered mere allegory. The details of the Gospels may be allegorical, but the central idea that he was lived and was killed is taken as fact. The idea that he was God incarnate and was resurrected after death is taken on faith.

There is no single theory of atonement in the Episcopal church. Simply stated, the basic belief is that, somehow, through Christ's incarnation and resurrection, any gap (caused by sin) that could separate us from God was erased. We are basically free to think about it any way we wish, with the bottom line being that we believe we are in good relationship with God. My spin on atonement theology is that he did not come to earth to die, but to live. To be one with us.

I believe God is absolute love as well. I don't believe in the Abrahamic God as described in the bible, but I'm leaning toward thinking there's a Spirit of some sort that permeates the universe. And I think all we need to know about this God is supplied by our conscious and our conscious is also our "bible" of sorts.

Well, you and I are pretty much in agreement about this, it seems.

Again, I'm just confused. So sorry. I'm don't understand how an Omniscient God creates beings with murderous tendencies. However, if this "God" you're discussing didn't design humans, then I guess he's off the hook, right?

As I said in my previous post, I don't think we were 'designed' so much as we are a work in progress being formed into God's image. Evolution certainly does not support the idea of 'intelligent design' as those terms are generally understood. So, something else is going on. What I take on faith is that we are called, in tangible ways, to be more than mere biology and survival would dictate.

Please don't take any of my statements or questions as hostile. I'm genuinely curious (again) how this all works. It's quite foreign to me and doesn't make sense at all. Lol.

I don't take your questions as hostile at all. I think one main place where we just cant connect is that I do not see the Bible as needing to be literal fact to be informative to faith, and I don's see any problem with re-interpreting the Bible to suit my understanding of God. After all, that is pretty much what the writers/redacters of the Bible did themselves.

 

[Buttercup]

Thank you for your post, Luna, I appreciate the education. I think I may have to visit an Episcopal church.

 

[lunamoth]

Thank you for your post, Luna, I appreciate the education. I think I may have to visit an Episcopal church.

It is my pleasure, BC. If you do visit an Episcopal church, you will find beliefs almost as varied as you might find among Christians here at RF. However, we do tend to have the common core belief that God is love and we are called to take His love out into the world in tangible ways.

 

[Buttercup]

However, we do tend to have the common core belief that God is love and we are called to take His love out into the world in tangible ways.

I admire that church philosophy.

I've been to a Baptist church service several times in recent months with my youngest son, who of all my kids, is the only religious one these days. My kids attended this church all through high school. I was hoping to hear a clear, hopeful sermon about the love of Christ and suggestions regarding useful ways to express His love in our communities. Instead, after each service, I felt dirty, wicked and not worth a whole lot. All three sermons were about sin, sin and more sin and how we need the redemption of Christ. I was bored, and frankly, kind of disgusted. Nothing new to see here, folks! I go to please my son and his lovely new bride. I will probably still go on occasion, but as he gets older and more able to handle subjective criticism about the church he grew up in, I may explore some conversations in that area. He of all my children, is the hardest on himself about achievements, goals, failures, in general, and I sincerely attribute it to the church he attends. It would be such a lovely breath of fresh air to attend a church that talks about predominantly love and not overwhelmingly about sin.

 

[InChrist]

But God already knows who is who. That makes all this stuff just silly theatrics. Movie Glenda already knows how to get Dorothy home but would much rather put her life in danger for days on end than just tell her how to get home.

So if God already knows who is who should those simply be forced and not be given the opportunity to decide for themselves whether they want to spend eternity in a loving relationship with God. Sure God could just tell everyone how to get to heaven (which He has done by the way), but for the most part human nature does not like to "be told". Call it theatrics if you like, but more often that not we seem to have to learn things the hard way and go through a bunch of drama and hassle before we figure out we should have listened in the first place.

 

[lunamoth]

I admire that church philosophy.

I've been to a Baptist church service several times in recent months with my youngest son, who of all my kids, is the only religious one these days. My kids attended this church all through high school. I was hoping to hear a clear, hopeful sermon about the love of Christ and suggestions regarding useful ways to express His love in our communities. Instead, after each service, I felt dirty, wicked and not worth a whole lot. All three sermons were about sin, sin and more sin and how we need the redemption of Christ. I was bored, and frankly, kind of disgusted. Nothing new to see here, folks! I go to please my son and his lovely new bride. I will probably still go on occasion, but as he gets older and more able to handle subjective criticism about the church he grew up in, I may explore some conversations in that area. He of all my children, is the hardest on himself about achievements, goals, failures, in general, and I sincerely attribute it to the church he attends. It would be such a lovely breath of fresh air to attend a church that talks about predominantly love and not overwhelmingly about sin.

I think it would be tough if one of my kids decided to attend a church where the message was negative like that. I have to admit I've never been to a Baptist church service, although it seems like the Baptists who discuss things online are much more focused on sin than what I'm used to. My current Priest told me that he went to a Baptist church when he was a kid, but his mother switched to Episcopalian after the 'advice' she got at church when she needed to leave her abusive, alcoholic husband (basically that she should stay and stick with him in spite of the abuse).

I hope your son finds his way to not be so hard on himself. I agree that it is not helpful to hear every week how you are a sinner when you are already hard on yourself I have never once heard a sermon like that, and I find it hard to understand how people would be attracted to that.

I wanted to tell you that I was not trying to proselytize for the Episcopal Church - I just wanted to answer your questions as best I could. I do, however, hope you find peace and happiness in your journey, spiritual and otherwise.

 

[Buttercup]

I think it would be tough if one of my kids decided to attend a church where the message was negative like that. I have to admit I've never been to a Baptist church service, although it seems like the Baptists who discuss things online are much more focused on sin than what I'm used to. My current Priest told me that he went to a Baptist church when he was a kid, but his mother switched to Episcopalian after the 'advice' she got at church when she needed to leave her abusive, alcoholic husband (basically that she should stay and stick with him in spite of the abuse).

That's crazy advice, but I've seen it given before myself by pastors.

I used to think this was how all Protestant churches were - obsessively centered on sin and the redeeming blood of Christ. It wasn't until I came to RF a decade ago that I realized that it was possible to have a relationship with Jesus and not be so bogged down by heavy dogma.

I hope your son finds his way to not be so hard on himself. I agree that it is not helpful to hear every week how you are a sinner when you are already hard on yourself I have never once heard a sermon like that, and I find it hard to understand how people would be attracted to that.

This son of mine is very right brain oriented. He's the one majoring in mechanical engineering. He's a rather black and white viewpoint-type soul. Fortunately, his new bride is much less serious and filled with spunky fun. They're a good match that way. She'll snap him out of it.

I wanted to tell you that I was not trying to proselytize for the Episcopal Church - I just wanted to answer your questions as best I could. I do, however, hope you find peace and happiness in your journey, spiritual and otherwise.

Oh, I didn't take your comments that way at all. You were just contrasting beliefs for comparison. I'm still open to exploring churches, even if just for edification purposes. I've never been to a UU service either. Thanks for the happy wishes. I hope the same for you as well.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Ok. God created man. Agreed. He sent Prophets and teachers to educate man along good ways. Man chose evil. Again. ThenQuran permits ONLY self defense. Later Muslims disobeyed. God says thou shalt not kill but people kill and slaughter. But this is not the only world. Reward and punishment awaits. Why create man? God wanted us to be His lover and share His gifts and blessings with us and we will all receive them eventually.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Only if you think of God as a human, Which you guys can't seem to help but do.
What is so hard to understand about a being that you can't understand. If He's beyond you then He's beyond you, so why would you think it appropriate to keep anthropomorhizing Him and using human precepts to put Him in a box.

Speaking only for myself here, I'm happy to see God as some unknowable being we can't understand around the same time as people stop telling me what he wants.

 

[Etritonakin]

I was a devoted Christian for a very long time, 25 years or more - a Trinity believing Protestant taught that our creator God is omniscient (all-knowing) omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). This creator designed and created men and women fully and completely all by 'himself'.

What I don't understand, is if this creator purposefully designed and unleashed upon the earth a creature capable of rape and murder, why isn't 'He' to blame for these atrocities? Why would you construct a being with the potential to do so much harm to his fellow humans? What was the motive?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide. How much more so should God be held accountable for DESIGNING a creature that he KNOWS ahead of time (he's omniscient, remember) will murder a fellow human?

God's motive was to have humans master their own existence -so that they might eventually become incorruptible gods.
The present state is temporary -and the former things will eventually not be called to mind or remembered.
God gave instruction and opportunity, but was consistently rejected. It was somewhat understandable, as we were new, and lacked experience.

Without choice, one cannot be truly individual or truly creative.
The same thing which allows for awesome independent creativity allows for disobedience to necessary laws and for doing evil.
That potential existed when creative individuals were created -and we are going through a process which will remove that potential completely.

Gen 4:
6Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? 7"If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it."

1Co 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
1Co 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
1Co 15:54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

Joh 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Joh 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Rom 8:18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
Rom 8:19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
Rom 8:20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
Rom 8:21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
Rom 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

 

[MARCELLO]

I was a devoted Christian for a very long time, 25 years or more - a Trinity believing Protestant taught that our creator God is omniscient (all-knowing) omnipotent (all-powerful) and omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time). This creator designed and created men and women fully and completely all by 'himself'.

What I don't understand, is if this creator purposefully designed and unleashed upon the earth a creature capable of rape and murder, why isn't 'He' to blame for these atrocities? Why would you construct a being with the potential to do so much harm to his fellow humans? What was the motive?

If my son murdered a human and I supplied the gun knowing ahead of time he'd shoot someone, I'm held accountable for my part in the homicide. How much more so should God be held accountable for DESIGNING a creature that he KNOWS ahead of time (he's omniscient, remember) will murder a fellow human?

It is called free will. Why is it God's problem that your son murdered someone? Call police,911.