Podcast #31: Nihilism, Dinosaurs, and Church Dress Codes

43 February 22, 2015 by

31_finalIn this episode of Drunk Ex-Pastors, Jason renounces Christianity and decides to try nihilism on for size (God, he has learned, is only worth worshiping if he makes our lives easy and comfortable and gives us everything we want). But don’t worry, we’re sure he’ll return to the fold. Christian then recounts a harrowing tale from Vegas involving a Scandinavian snowman on the attack, and the DXPs delve into the thorny issue of whether believers should be “against” dinosaurs, or just ignore them altogether. The discussion turns to gambling and whether it’s really as sinful as religion has portrayed it over the years. Speaking of religion, we learn in this episode what’s really behind Christian’s utter disdain for Jesus (hint: it involves wearing hats in church), which segues into a discussion of just how superficial Jason is allowed to be about people’s outward appearance. Jason is biebered by Hollywood’s portrayal of poker, while Christian is biebered by (wait for it…) hell. I know, right? Who saw that coming?

Also, speaking of outward appearance, has anyone else noticed what horrible drivers transgenders are?

43 Comments (click here to leave a comment)

  1. There is a line between basic etiquette and the desire to control others.

    Basic etiquette is to remain silent while the priest or pastor is talking, don’t interrupt or scream ‘bullshit’ even if he is presenting an obviously false sermon illustration or political characterization, don’t let your flatulence fly, and be cordial to your fellow parishioners.

    Now when it comes to a place where people are telling you how to dress, criticizing you for not singing or closing your eyes during prayer, criticizing someone because their skirt doesn’t go to the ankles, or telling a man to wear a jacket and tie next Sunday or don’t bother showing up, they’re not asking for basic human politeness or decency, they’re trying to control you and get you to conform.

    And I think you may have to try to add Christian Dinosaur girl to the podcast to be the new Christian voice now that Jason has joined the dark side. I, for one, would love to hear more about how all this ‘sciencey’ stuff is simply a conspiracy to make money and how we should go back to consulting the Urim and Thummin to find true knowledge.

  2. I am amused at how, upon the mention of the theological troubles of Hell, someone tries to redirect the inquisitor to C.S. Lewis’ Great Divorce! It’s funny for multiple reasons:
    When did protestants finally decide to reopen the canon to toss in a dash of Lewis?
    If Lewis is fine, why not the Apocrypha? At least with the Apocrypha we’d have a better fit of the prophesied Son of Man to our Christ than what we are stuck with in Daniel.
    Isn’t it simpler to question whether Hell is a complete mistake than to reconstruct it in new and “favorable” ways?Isn’t this re-director just parroting what their own pastor has tried to distract them with?
    ———
    Congregant: So Hell conceptually takes on an entirely different light when you stick with the imagery of Gehenna rather than mis-translating with Hades….

    Pastor: You bring up a great point and have a lot of good questions. Let me attempt to completely distract you by encouraging you to read C.S. Lewis and throw a little bit of that clown Ravi Zaccharias on top as homework in hopes that you won’t have the nerve to return with more questions because you’ll never read them…..
    ———
    Thanks again for discussing publicly what many fear to speak privately. Jason, I encourage you to weigh in more on wealth disparity, economic systems, and failed foreign policies. Chomsky’s the bomb.
    Total change of subject: Have either of you ever read Tolstoy’s The Kingdom of God is Within You?

  4. Brian,

    Jason, I encourage you to weigh in more on wealth disparity, economic systems, and failed foreign policies. Chomsky’s the bomb.

    We have delved into those topics here and there, but never devoted a thorough discussion to them. Maybe we will eventually, who knows?

    And yeah, Chomsky in 2016! With Bernie Sanders as his running mate!!

  6. As MLKjr was inspired by Gandhi who was inspired by Tolstoy, it is a very interesting discussion of non-violence and the gospel. Tolstoy gets a little carried away early on with exploring non-violence movements and organizations in the 19th century, but the rest is pretty rich. You might appreciate it, Christian, just for how this book indirectly impacted history with India’s liberation and the Civil Rights movement in the U.S. I came across it while struggling with what I began to read as a non-violent mandate in the gospels. I’m holding out hope that it’s still okay to defend ourselves at least in a non-lethal way, but when Christians support preemptive strikes as national defense, the train has definitely derailed. Having read The Kingdom of God Is Within You got me wondering about the power behind truly following Christ’s example even in the slightest of ways. Jason, perhaps you would appreciate this. Tolstoy was an atheist Russian aristocrat; came to Jesus in his 50’s; was transformed by now despising violence, the state, materialism. Gandhi read Tolstoy’s works on the matter, thinks that maybe Christianity is something to check out; attends a church in Oxford but runs into a racist congregation; swears off the religion, but begins correspondence with Tolstoy and eventually employs/spearheads non-violent protests that win India’s independence. If a non-believer can take this teaching and produce so much fruit from it, it really must be worth looking into. I was convinced that because the Indians had put the principal to practice, it truly brought the Kingdom of God closer (at least for that moment).
    …..This is part of a whole in which I’ve been exploring what Jesus teaches the Kingdom of Heaven is and the fact that he taught (and prayed, and taught us to pray) God’s will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven.
    Utter non-violence is a conceptual struggle, as I’ve said. I still carry a torch for being able to Jackie Chan my way out situations. Wonder if Jesus didn’t Jackie Chan His way out from under the crowds when things became unfavorable. Tolstoy doesn’t think so.

  8. For the record,

    I did not say that all nonbelievers hate God. If that were true, all non believers would be defacto damned and that is not what my Church teaches. I was just trying to showcase possible scenerios in which an everlasting punishment would be just. Even if you don’t hate God today you can not say definitively that you would not hate Him in the afterlife.

    If any of these scenerios are even possible then your argument against theism ceases to be an argument and becomes an emotional delima. Ideas are not “ridiculous” just because some people have emotional problems with them.

    I would recommend just reading the cliff notes on Tolstoy. Super boring author.

    That is all.

  9. Like pretty much all Russian writers of note, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Solzhenitsyn, etc were all long winded and verbose.

    Maybe something about those long nights and too much vodka.

  10. I’m surprised neither one of you knew that the practice of covering or uncovering one’s head in church (not that I myself think it’s essential)….is based not in tradition, but on a reading of 1 Cor. 11:3-4

  11. I’m surprised neither one of you knew that the practice of covering or uncovering one’s head in church (not that I myself think it’s essential)….is based not in tradition, but on a reading of 1 Cor. 11:3-4

    True, but 1 Cor. 11:3-4 is one of those many, many passages that no longer apply to Christians, like the prohibition against tattoos, bacon, shrimp, wearing blended fabrics, and the Sermon on the Mount.

    How do we know it was a cultural passage and not really authoritative? Something something something… interpretation… something something something… freedom in Christ… something something something… uh… look, a squirrel.

    (Runs away.)

  12. Kenneth, I wasn’t referring to only you. I’ve heard that a lot, and frankly, it goes along with the whole “You’re either for me or against me” concept. You either love God or you hate him. I don’t remember singling you out, but if I did it was unintentional.

  13. Ray, it also says women should remain silent in church. Another example, to me, of the Bible being overly influenced by the culture it was written in.

  16. Kenneth,

    Ha ha about protestant problems. You RCs should make a hashtag out of that.

    You’re putting words in my mouth. There are interpretations of the “Christian God” that don’t make him out to be a monster. If your interpretation (and I believe there’s flexibility within Catholicism) is that he made a bunch of people and the majority of them he’s going to allow to be tortured for all eternity, then yes, that dude’s a monster. However, that’s just one (albeit the traditional) interpretation of the “Christian God.”

  17. It’s also the interpretation of the vast majority of Christians across most denominational lines. The wimpy interpretations never gain traction because they are so obviously out of sync with Christian scripture and Tradition.

    The point is, if that interpretation is true, and you think that kind of God is a monster, it fits the narrative that you complained about in your bieber. You only love God IF he does what you think is fair and good. You love God IF he treats us like robotic pets. If not, He is a monster. Fits the “with me or against me” narrative beautifully.

  18. Well, that’s changing a bit, Kenneth. Out with the old and in with the new! Conditionalism and Universalism are gaining traction. 🙂

    Anyway, it doesn’t fit the narrative. I don’t think that God exists, so I can’t hate him. If I die and stand before him and realize it was all different than I thought, why would I hate him? And why would I go on forever hating him?

  19. I wrote you guys awhile back on your contact form. No one EVER responded. Alas. But, since Jason was Eeyore through and through during this podcast, I thought I’d put this back out there since I CALLED IT. Plus, my question remains. Love you guys!

    ‘Dear Tigger and Eeyore, It has been my great pleasure to listen to all 25 of your podcasts so far. I had to binge listen to catch up, and after i finished #25, I started back at the beginning.

    Christian, my childhood sounds similar to yours, although yours may have actually been crazier. i didn’t think that was possible.

    Jason, your intellect thrills me. My husband is also very smart, and I really find a lot of stimulation (no jokes here, Christian!) in listening to smart guys. Of course, Christian, you are also very smart, as you know I hope, but those big words Jason uses are just so RAD! (seriously)

    My point is, and I do have one; I was re-listening to episode 3 today in which your Bieber was about the clueless guy on the plane who wouldn’t leave you alone. In my “flesh” (lol), I wanted to judge you for what seemed to be a lack of compassion for a man who perhaps is on the autism spectrum, or otherwise has a mental challenge of some sort.

    But, if there is anything I have realized over the past couple of years, it’s that a bunch of what I thought I knew for sure is actually up for review on a regular basis. So, no judgment. Thing is, me and my smart husband got me knocked up at about the same ages as Sarah and Abraham. (NB: self-deprecatory joke. we are not that old) This was baby number 5. Born to this mother who has planned since childhood to have ONLY an even number of children since my two sisters and I fought morning, noon, and night. Sometime I will tell you about the contrast between our rehearsals for singing trios in church and what we were like when we sang. So, first off, surprise! And ha ha for your plans!

    This dear, sweet, wonderful boy was born with Down syndrome. I think I can tell from your conversations that you do not have anyone close to you with special needs, specifically Down syndrome or autism. I really didn’t understand until our boy was born, and in the past 9 years, my understanding has broadened considerably. Even though my innate reaction would have been to judge, the reason I am writing is because I want to respond with acceptance and I would really like to hear you guys discuss the idea of whether and when compassion and kindness to such a man as your flightmate is of more importance than your comfort.

    Back when we were Christians, of course the higher value at all times and in all situations was to put the other person first no matter what. But maybe when we leave the faith, something shifts there. Like, (no almonds please, Christian) I guess my question is really what do you consider to be your foundational values as an agnostic? and Jason, as a mackerel muncher (as my dad used to say) what about you? I was most uncomfortable with you in that episode because you talked about how some people are “socially retarded.”

    I hope the cruise was so much better than I would imagine a cruise to be. Welcome back and ttfn. (Do I really have to explain that that is Tigger’s goodbye: ta ta for now). With affection, Tee-or-igger (Eeyore/Tigger split personality)

  20. Not entirely true, Universalism, as I mentioned has early support not only in certain biblical verses, but also arguably the writings of Clement, the writings of Origin, pseudopegripal works like the Apocalypse of Peter, the Alexandrian branch or school of thought. This isn’t some new idea. That it did not become the dominant branch has little bearing on whether the theology and interpretation are true. But it has existed nearly from the beginning. Arguably, the case can be made that many passages in the New Testament support the idea of an inclusive salvation.

    But, again, this is pointless to discuss further, because you hold the teachings of the Catholic Church to be unassailable and will never be swayed regardless of what arguments are presented.

  21. Hi Susan,

    I actually still have your email in my inbox. Frankly, I’ve fallen behind (since the cruise) with some of the longer emails that require more thought in a reply. I’ve been hoping to have a day where I could sit down and answer them all, but I just haven’t had the chance between work, more work, kids, and podcast. All that to say, my apologies for the late reply. Hilarious that you called us Tigger and Eeyore back in January. Ha ha!

    As far as my flightmate goes, I didn’t intend to come across as making fun of him. I was nothing but friendly with him on the plane, and sincerely so. On the podcast, I was just attempting to highlight the humor and comedy of the situation, which I don’t think is inappropriate if done in a way that isn’t mean-spirited. I hope I didn’t come across as mean-spirited.

    One of the boys on my son’s soccer team for the last 8 years has a younger brother with down syndrome. He constantly pals around with the team (of which I am the manager) and interrupts the coach’s speeches, makes farting noises, etc. Everyone loves him and treats him as part of the team. However, that doesn’t mean that his behavior isn’t funny many times and discussed at a later opportunity. Actually, his high school team has another older man with down syndrome that hangs with them all the time. At half time, he goes on the field and shoots goals while everyone in the stands cheers him on. You can tell he’s having the time of his life.

    I’ve seen numerous people with down syndrome who have understanding of how their behavior can be funny sometimes and even point that out themselves. My point is that making fun of someone and recounting how something someone did was funny are two different things to me.

    Does that make sense?

    Christian

  22. Christian wrote:
    Ray, it also says women should remain silent in church. Another example, to me, of the Bible being overly influenced by the culture it was written in.

    Ray writes:
    I wasn’t trying to justify the practice of no head coverings for men…I just was trying to say WHY the church makes a big deal of it. You guys seemed to not bring that up at all as a possible reason why the church does it.

    Anyway, that’s OK. No big deal. .

    On another note, you mentioned above that the Bible was overly influenced by the culture it was written in. Well what about the radical very counter-cultural (for the first century) verse below.

    There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:28

    Who in the first century Graeco-Roman world thought that?

    Love your podcasts.

  24. Susan,

    Thanks for your novel long comment.

    Jason, as a mackerel muncher (as my dad used to say) what about you? I was most uncomfortable with you in that episode because you talked about how some people are “socially retarded.”

    Please forgive me if that word offends you (and given your situation I wish I had been more sensitive. Back then we had maybe 17 people listening!). We talk about it in a later episode, but I take the word “retarded” as having a broader semantic range than simply “to have Down’s Syndrome.” So someone can be socially retarded (or maladjusted), or his growth can be physically retarded. Or, a piece of fabric can be flame retardant.

    Of course, I also use the word sometimes as a synonym for something that I don’t like (I do the same with “gay,” applying it to anything from tacos to the weather). That’s just the junior high boy in me who refuses to die. I’m working on it. . . .

  25. Christian and Comrade,

    If everyone on the planet is heaven bound, why has God temporarily placed us in this difficult world filled with suffering? If we are all saved no matter our actions, why go through all this mess?

    I can make sense of suffering if we have been given a free will that can choose either good or evil. Choices that would have consequences. This would explain why we must have a world governed by certain dependable laws of nature so that our actions can be carried out. A place with both disaster and joy to test our moral resolve. A world where we can either persevere or despair, have things like justice, consequences, love, hatred etc.etc. but I can make no sense out of this life if our actions and rebellion don’t even matter. What would be the point?

    “Alright kids, eternity in paradise is on the way no matter what but….. here ya go! Temporary chaos! Enjoy. Pick you up at an hour you don’t expect.”

    This view has way more logical problems than the traditional alternative.

  26. I don’t believe in a literal Adam and Eve, but the point of the Genesis narrative is that our ancestors rejected paradise and walked away from God. Humanity has a natural tendency to do that: isolate ourselves, hide from true intimacy, try to conceal who we are from one another and from God. Whether that is through fig leaves, lies, pride and judgmentalism, or actual isolation.

    The test isn’t between good and evil, per se. The test is between intimacy and isolation. Will you open yourself to the pain and suffering of others? Will you bear their burdens with them? Will you love them as Christ loves them? Or will we wall ourselves off? Ignore their pain. Focus on our own. Build our own internal hell one choice at a time?

    Christ says that every man will be repaid according to his deeds. In a world without the life, example, and redemption of Christ, that is a bleak prospect. It is a world of being alone, even when surrounded by others. It is a world of fear, selfishness, greed, abuse, violence and misery. We carry Hell with us in our hearts.

    And ultimately, this is a redemption story, as Jason is fond of saying.

    Christ breaks through into our personal prison with love and a call to surrender our lives and love as He loves.

    And I don’t think He happens to stop trying to win simply because death comes to the physical body. No matter how long it takes, Christ will be victorious. Hell, in all its forms, will be destroyed, and love will win.

  27. Comraderead’s last comment here really crystallized something. What he wrote above seems a lot more “christian” and makes a lot more sense (to me) than a lot of what defenders of christianity would say.

    If I were someone who has never heard of christianity before and I read Comraderead’s words compared to a defense of christianity that is more scripturally accurate, the comment above would hold more sway by the virtue of its humanism.

  28. And ultimately, this is a redemption story, as Jason is fond of saying.

    One thing I’d like to explore in the next episode is the question of whether, if some new idea or dynamic is added to the redemptive drama that actually makes the story better, it’s justified to simply believe that new idea on that basis. Because it would be weird for us humans to be able to tell a better tale than God can.

  29. Because it would be weird for us humans to be able to tell a better tale than God can.

    Well, we can already make the Old Testament a more moral book by crossing out all the bits of the law concerned with governing slavery and writing in “Thou shalt not own people.” 😉

  30. Comrade,

    I don’t believe in a literal Adam and Eve, but the point of the Genesis narrative is that our ancestors rejected paradise and walked away from God. Humanity has a natural tendency to do that: isolate ourselves, hide from true intimacy, try to conceal who we are from one another and from God. Whether that is through fig leaves, lies, pride and judgmentalism, or actual isolation.

    What about when its through rape, murder, genocide, torture camps, pedophilia, blasphemy, adultery, sodomy, etc? You make “walking away from God” out to be some minor infraction. Besides, this still doesnt even begin to answer my challenge as to why God would create a world in which there is so much suffering if our decisions and actions (rape, murder, genocide, torture camps, etc) have no consequences.

    The test isn’t between good and evil, per se. The test is between intimacy and isolation. Will you open yourself to the pain and suffering of others? Will you bear their burdens with them? Will you love them as Christ loves them? Or will we wall ourselves off? Ignore their pain. Focus on our own. Build our own internal hell one choice at a time?

    Or will we murder innocent people, devastate our wives and tear apart our families, murder children in their wombs, etc. etc. There is no escaping the battle of good and evil. Everyone makes a choice. Everyone gets what they deserve…. or else they get unearned mercy.

    Christ says that every man will be repaid according to his deeds. In a world without the life, example, and redemption of Christ, that is a bleak prospect. It is a world of being alone, even when surrounded by others. It is a world of fear, selfishness, greed, abuse, violence and misery. We carry Hell with us in our hearts.

    But why has God allowed this world to take place in the first place? If each and every person is just going to be in heaven no matter what happens, why are we here wasting time in a temporary place of suffering? The problem of evil and suffering has just boomeranged back on you. How is it that Hitler, no matter what his choices in this life, will enjoy the same paradise as all those he slaughtered? Is that justice? The 9-11 hijackers get paradise…. and so do all of their victims! Without our choices having consequences they become insignificant. Which naturally raises the question…. why not just skip this little stint on earth?

    Christ breaks through into our personal prison with love and a call to surrender our lives and love as He loves.

    And I don’t think He happens to stop trying to win simply because death comes to the physical body. No matter how long it takes, Christ will be victorious. Hell, in all its forms, will be destroyed, and love will win.

    No matter how long it takes, Christ will eventually force you to love him. Even if you dont want to. Even if you have made it clear that you in no way desire what is good. Even if you put others through nightmarish horrible agony. Doesnt matter. Everyones all good. Just a matter of time before your brainwashing is complete.

    No thanks.

  31. Sin is sin, not because of some esoteric violation of a standard, but because it causes harm to the sinner and to others.

    Sin can cause a breach of peace, a breach of trust, emotional damage, relationship damage, and severe pain. I have never argued that sin can have varying degrees of seriousness, but at its core, sin involves the elevation of the self above others which results in further isolation.
    The choice is not between instant automatic heaven for all or eternal hellfire for some.

    Universalism does not preclude judgment or consequences for sin. I do not know from where those consequences originate, but Christ has said that every man would be repaid according to his deeds, so I tend to believe that each one of us will experience in full the realization of all of the pain that our deeds have caused others and will suffer accordingly outside of God’s grace. For some that pain will run long and go deep.

    We will also have missed the chance to build up treasure in heaven by seeing the good things we did reflected in the lives of others.

    The problem of evil does not go away with an eternal hell. I would pose the same question to you: What of the pedophile priest who harms children, but is penitent and seeks honest repentance while his victims turn from the Church and become atheists or agnostics? Would the honestly penitent priest enter heaven while his victims are consigned to eternal torture because of the path the priest set them on?

    As to why God created this world at all? Does this need an answer that is different from any other answer that a Christian would give? He created it because He willed do to so and He allowed sin to occur because He willed it so. Perhaps as a part of the overall redemption story He wished to tell. Again, the presence or absence of an eternal torture pit does not invalidate basic Christian teaching on this topic.

    No matter how long it takes, Christ will eventually force you to love him. Even if you dont want to.

    Less like dragging you kicking and screaming to be with him and more like Dad never gives up on you and keeps calling seeing how you’re doing and if you’d like to come home now.

  32. Sin is sin, not because of some esoteric violation of a standard, but because it causes harm to the sinner and to others.

    You will have a very difficult time reconciling this idea with scripture. We find many instances of people in the bible thinking that they had sinned against God (not others) (Exodus 10:16; Joshua 7:20; Judges 10:10). Genesis 39:9 gives us a closer look at this. Joseph was being tempted to commit adultery with Potiphar’s wife. He says, “My master has withheld nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against God?” It is interesting that Joseph did not say that his sin would be against Potiphar.

    David said something similar after he had sinned with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11). When confronted with his sin, David repented in great sorrow, saying to God, “Against You and You only have I sinned” (Psalm 51:4). He had clearly sinned against Bathsheba and her husband, too, but it was the violation of God’s law that grieved David the most. Now, I would agree with you that all of our sins have the effect of isolation and hurting others… but thats not the primary problem. It’s just a side effect.

    Sin can cause a breach of peace, a breach of trust, emotional damage, relationship damage, and severe pain. I have never argued that sin can have varying degrees of seriousness, but at its core, sin involves the elevation of the self above others which results in further isolation.
    The choice is not between instant automatic heaven for all or eternal hellfire for some.

    Universalism does not preclude judgment or consequences for sin. I do not know from where those consequences originate, but Christ has said that every man would be repaid according to his deeds, so I tend to believe that each one of us will experience in full the realization of all of the pain that our deeds have caused others and will suffer accordingly outside of God’s grace. For some that pain will run long and go deep.

    Long and deep, or “forever and ever”?

    Punishment in hell is defined by the word aionios, which is the word eternal or everlasting. There are people who would like to redefine that word aionios and say, “Well, it doesn’t really mean forever.” But if you do that with hell, you’ve just done it with heaven, because the same word is used to describe both. If there is not an everlasting hell, then there is not an everlasting heaven. And I’ll go one beyond that. The same word is used to describe God. And so if there is not an everlasting hell, then there is not an everlasting heaven, nor is there an everlasting God. It is clear that God is eternal; and, therefore, that heaven is eternal, and so is hell. (John MacArthur, “A Testimony of One Surprised to Be in Hell, Part 2”)

    This is a far cry from merely “long and deep”

    The problem of evil does not go away with an eternal hell. I would pose the same question to you: What of the pedophile priest who harms children, but is penitent and seeks honest repentance while his victims turn from the Church and become atheists or agnostics? Would the honestly penitent priest enter heaven while his victims are consigned to eternal torture because of the path the priest set them on?

    You need to explain why the problem of suffering does not destroy your own position before you just launch back on the offensive. I have already had my turn in the hot seat. Its your turn. I want a defense of suffering from the view of universalism. I can understand suffering in view of free will and God wanting a people that would freely choose Him…. I can not understand it if God never intended anyone to have the possibility of saying “no”. He will ultimately “conquer” evil and not even one person who doesn’t want anything to do with the good will be able to resist. Why wouldn’t we all just start in heaven? It’s all a fruitless exercise where justice is never served. People can live like Hitler and in many cases live long happy lives with riches, power, and an endless supply of women….. and yet, all of their victims, all of the saints, all of the Stalins and Pol Pots, all get the same judgement. Jesus says to Mao “well done my good and faithful servant” and then turns around and tells JFK “well done my good and faithful servant” and then turns around and tells JFKs assasin “well done my good and faithful servant” and then turns around and tells ISIS and Boko Haram “well done my good and faithful servant”.

    This is just nonsense.

    As to why God created this world at all? Does this need an answer that is different from any other answer that a Christian would give? He created it because He willed do to so and He allowed sin to occur because He willed it so. Perhaps as a part of the overall redemption story He wished to tell. Again, the presence or absence of an eternal torture pit does not invalidate basic Christian teaching on this topic.

    Of course it does! You have taken out the core aspect of why God willed to do so. Namely, to have a people that would freely choose to love Him.

    Less like dragging you kicking and screaming to be with him and more like Dad never gives up on you and keeps calling seeing how you’re doing and if you’d like to come home now.

    We can add this to the ever growing list of universalist assumptions with no biblical support:

    If people only had more time, they would freely choose to love God and obey His commands.

  33. You assume that either eternal punishment exists or no consequences exist at all. I have stated simply that I do not believe this to be so and have said that every man will be repaid according to his deeds. You continue to ignore that.

    That I do not find eternal punishment just, loving, or consistent with the behavior of a father does not negate the idea of punishment at all.

    Sin comes of free will. God lets the prodigals wander. Ill comes from it. Sometimes grave ills. That the son eventually will be won over by His father’s love does not invalidate his free will in leaving nor does it invalidate how long he will stay away.

    Your objections seem more akin to the elder brother in the Prodigal story. They don’t deserve the father’s love. We played by the rules and they didn’t. They don’t deserve to come home. And you’re right. They don’t deserve to come home. Neither do we.

  35. Sorry, you guys continue.

    It’s my age that makes me a bit more cranky than all you cool cats.

    Hell? Hell if I know. They say Hell is the comment box of a theology blog.

    Good thing this podcast/blog isn’t one of THOSE.

  36. What the hades are the rest of you guys blathering about?

    Not Hades. Hell. The concept that evolved from the idea of simple annihilation of early Judaism to the more complex deed oriented torments of the Zoroastrian hell to the more medieval torture chamber of Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Evangelical Christianity.

    And, no worries, I’m done talking about it and am willing to move on to a less controversial topic: the appropriate balance between individual freedom and the common good and how it should apply to the problems facing the United States.

  37. Comradedread,

    I believe Christians use Hades and Hell rather synonomously, so please, if you feel I introduced an unhelpful term, I’m here to learn.

    I mean, I could post stuff from Jason’s alma mater, their latest podcast actually touched on many things (That Fry Guy everyone seems to be discussing, kids with bone cancer, you remember, right?), or stuff on the Oscars from the podcast Men in Blazers, but instead, I like your direction:

    the appropriate balance between individual freedom and the common good and how it should apply to the problems facing the United States.

    Or we could read up in anticaption of what Jason and Christian will say with regard to how Humans could come up with a better meta narrative than what we have in the religion we know as Christianity (and from my protestant standpoint, I would confine it to Biblical Christianity).

    But there I go again, not keeping it short. Anyway, thanks. If your kids are anywhere near the ages of mine, you understand the need to use one’s time wisely. There’s a time for blog comments. And there’s a time to drink scotch. Sometimes, they happen at the same time!

    Grace and peace.

  39. Comradedread,

    Haha! Last night, I think I had a few of Samuel Adams winter collection in my blog.

    Otherwise, I may have been able to safely stay in the lurkers corner of these comment boxes.

    I saw from your blog you are a westcoaster, greetings from northern part of our shared state.

    A little about me – I dialogued for several years over e-mail with a mainline Episcopalian, who also happened to teach me philosophy and calculus in high school. As more liberal and mainline than I am, as an Orthodox Presbyterian, I was able to sharpen my views in the e-mail setting with the man. It hasn’t been since those several years went by did I really start engaging seriously in theological discussion, mostly I just sit back and take in what others say.

    This is the podcast I mentioned in my previous thread:

    http://wscal.edu/resource-center/resource/wisdom-in-proverbs-part-1

    there’s more where that came from. I’m out.

    Smoke ’em if you got ’em (Jason will get that)(I actually don’t smoke),

    Andrew

  41. Comrade,

    You assume that either eternal punishment exists or no consequences exist at all. I have stated simply that I do not believe this to be so and have said that every man will be repaid according to his deeds. You continue to ignore that.

    Yes but you haven’t explained what in the world this is supposed to mean. Everyone goes to purgatory? Some people get a crappy version of heaven? You need to fill in the gaps so that you can have a position that can actually be evaluated and critiqued.

    Sin comes of free will. God lets the prodigals wander. Ill comes from it. Sometimes grave ills. That the son eventually will be won over by His father’s love does not invalidate his free will in leaving nor does it invalidate how long he will stay away.

    What kind of a loving father let’s His children be born in the wilderness before inviting them home? Wouldn’t a loving father want his newborns to start out in a nice safe place? Last i checked the prodigal son began in the fathers mansion…. not out in the world broke and suffering. How bizaar for a parent to create life only to abandon their child in a garbage can. Even more bizaar if the father fully intends to come back and pick the kid up at a later time. It’s complete arbitrary nonsense unless the children are given the radical freedom to choose between light and darkness. A choice with everlasting consequences.

    Bonus challenge: how do you make sense of this prayer by Christ

    My prayer is not for the world, but for those you have given me, because they belong to you

    Who are these people in the world not given?


    John 10:26, “But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep.”

    Matt. 25:32, “And all the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; 33 and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left.

    Who are these non-sheep? Who are these goats?

    “Your objections seem more akin to the elder brother in the Prodigal story. They don’t deserve the father’s love. We played by the rules and they didn’t. They don’t deserve to come home. And you’re right. They don’t deserve to come home. Neither do we.

    I didn’t say anything about people not deserving to come home. I am saying that THEY DIDNT come home. They lived their whole lives bucking God’s law and never showed an ounce of remorse. How in the world do they just magically appear back st the ranch against their own wishes? Is it reincarnation until they get things right? Does God torture them in purgatory all fire until they are brainwashed into submission? Is there some other life some other place where they get to choose again? This view makes no sense at all.

  43. Well, I can start throwing out verses that support the idea that everything was redeemed in Christ, starting with Romans 5:18: Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.

    John 12;32: And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

    Romans 11:32: For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

    And I could go on pulling scripture references.

    I really do not understand your continued objections on the other points, all of which I think I have answered save what I personally think punishment means. My personal opinion on the matter seems irrelevant, but I would call back to my previous statement on what kind of hell would be just and consistent with the loving character of God and the church:

    1. Hell as a place of divine punishment that is not eternal.
    2. Hell as a personal choice, self-exile and living in misery rather than accepting heaven and love and mercy.
    3. Hell as a perspective. Where the light and love of God are blinding and painful to the soul that has rejected them.

    I’ll let you have the last word on this topic because I don’t think it’s worthwhile to continue saying the same things over and over again.

Related Posts