We Don’t Win If They Lose
Original article by Matthew Distefano , Unfundamentalist Christians
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Once a week, I meet up with my friend Michael to talk about some of the bigger ideas that seem to consume the great majority of my thoughts. Our bonfire chats generally last until 9 or 10 PM, just in time for me to catch some of the George Noory show on my way home. How can you not love a talk radio show devoted to aliens and conspiracies?
The other night, however, 1290 AM wasn’t coming in too great, so I scanned the dial and stumbled upon a voice that could only be that of a Christian preacher. I could tell because he was droning on in that breathy way pastors are wont to do— yes Jesus, yes Jesus, we praise your name, Hallelujah, yes Lord . Can you imagine talking to your spouse like that? Yes dear, yes honey, you are so lovely, oh how great you are, yes my beloved.
Gag me now.
I was just about to hit the scan button again—in hopes that I could spare myself the piety spewing forth from this fluent-in-Christianese preacher man—when he said something that stopped me dead in my tracks. He began by suggesting that Christianity contained the only truth in the world, while the secularists, the humanists, the Muslims, the LGBTQ community, the Buddhists, the Hindus, the agnostics, the atheists, the liberals, the anarchists, the communists, the socialists, the Marxists, and all the others -ists were dead wrong. Of course, what he meant to say is that premillenial-dispensationalist-conservative-Evangelicalism is correct, and everyone else is going to hell to burn forever in a lake of fire. And then, full of even greater certainty and pride, the kicker: “we know we win (and they don’t) and so that gives us hope.”
Before changing the station in disgust, I meditated on what he had said. It dawned on me that it was this very type of attitude that ruined my faith some years back when I was a part of the Evangelical church. We are the winners and that means that everyone else loses. And by loses, I mean they lose everything. They go away into the outer darkness, to cry out for their mommies and daddies, wives and husbands, and sons and daughters, only to have them never come. And we, the ones who never go to their aid—either because we don’t want to or can’t—are supposed to think of our salvation as a victory.
And this gives us hope? Hope for what? Hope that when our loved ones are lost from us for all eternity that the best heaven God could come up with would require either a hardening of our hearts or a full frontal lobotomy?
And we are so certain of this? Really? Certain? I thought we were supposed to have faith, not certainty? Isn’t certainty the opposite of faith? Where is faith needed, for example, when adding 2+2? Why, then, do we treat our faith like an equation that leaves no wiggle room?
But, though folks such as the pastor on the AM dial seem certain, it wasn’t the case for me. What if I was born in Pakistan, to a Muslim family, what of me then? Or what if I were born to a Hindu family? Why was I so lucky to be born in the United States of America, where my chances of being “elected” seemed much greater? And what if, during my childhood, a priest habitually raped me—like happened to so many in the Catholic Church—so much so that I would never touch Christianity again? Eternal hell, then? Really? And what if Christians happen to be wrong— I know, I know, not possible —and the Muslims who believe in hell for all non-Muslims are right? Are we not going to then be pleading to Allah to show more mercy than we and our God afford non-believers?
Indeed, the constant propping up of ourselves in order to prove our election, or our favor, was too much for me to handle. Day after day, the more I listened to pastor after pastor talk strictly of “us” as God’s people, the more I wanted nothing to do with it all. How could “we” be the only ones who are God’s chosen people when we all trace our roots back to Adam? How could God love Jacob (us) and literally hate Esau (them)? Given that Jacob and Esau reconcile (Gen. 33:4), how could God then tear them back apart?
I am not sure how victory is found in that theology. I am not sure what there is to celebrate if us winning requires them losing. And if that is indeed the case—I suppose it is technically possible—then I’d honestly rather concede defeat and take a long dirt nap. For truly, if I’m called to give my love freely to all of my human family, how could I bear forever losing my beloved? More intimately, how could I forever bear losing my most beloved, namely my daughter Elyse and wife Lyndsay? Again, it would require a coerced will, frontal lobotomy, or perhaps even Agent J’s mind-erasing pen.
This is not to say all of us should become Universalists. We each must work out our beliefs regarding eschatological and soteriological matters. But what I am saying is that we should hope for such a fate. How could we not, considering how the Bible talks about God reconciling all of the world to himself, Christ as the savior of all humanity, and the gates of New Jerusalem always remaining open? Are all of these claims to be taken as flippant rhetoric, hyperbole that bears no real theological weight? If that is the case, then it seems rather irresponsible of the biblical writers who said such things. Shame on them for being so reckless, so rash—because again, if we all don’t win, none of us do.
Tags
Who is online
105 visitors
The absurdity of damnation.
Absolute damnation IS absurd!
No one is condemned to hell for just being.
Adam and Eve, made a choice, if you literally believe the old testament they made a choice for all of us. (god in his infinite wisdom gave us free will after all), and since everything he does is perfect, cause he is perfect, then free will is perfect, cause god chose it for us.
So no, absolute damnation cannot be of god.
But to look at it another way, IF absolute damnation is true, then we must also have absolute forgiveness. Otherwise contemplating god as merciful is a lie.
This is the foundational teaching of Christianity. WE are damned or forgiven by our choices. and that is perfect, cause god gave us free will, and it is perfect.
You've made a pretty good summary of the seed.
I suppose that a temporary halfway house (purgatory) might be possible. But as I see it, it must be the person who decides when they are ready to enter into God's presence. Somebody who has been a jerk all their life might want a cooling-off period before going into that much light.
"... everyone else is going to hell to burn forever in a lake of fire."
How bad could that be? It's like a party where everyone you wouldn't want to attend isn't there. Obviously you can't burn forever, so I imagine it quickly turns into an awesome fireball fight, much like a snowball fight, or tomato fight. Meanwhile, the most boring people ever created are quarantine in a cloud somewhere, trying to make cloudballs. Win - win!
In an endless universe, there could be a place where God is represented by Islam. Why not? We know from history and scripture that God has allowed and even encouraged war (murder?). Why couldn't it be possible that Muhammad's visions were the true interpretation of divine intention?
Since everyone dies, and some under horrible, unfair, even random circumstances , who is to say that the god of humanity is not a god of death?
Religion is a creation of human beings, based on cultural and geographical factors, mixed with the innate human search for meaning.
We assume God is "good" , but the truth is God is beyond our understanding by definition.
In an endless universe, there could be a place where God is represented by Islam.
... and all the other religions, too. I find it illogical that God be constrained by any particular human school of thought.
As best I can read Jesus's message, he says that we must love God and our fellows. Full stop. That leaves a lot of free space for trying to figure out "what is God?".
God goes to great lengths to conceal itself, and never give a clue as to its expectations. As this is its want, then atheists must be its favorite people. We have the similar goal of keeping God out of the spotlight, as if it doesn't exist at all.
I have problems with BIG things like "infinity" or "omniscience". My brain must be too small.
How may we reconcile "individual free will" and "omniscient God"?
Human beings experience free will , always and every second they are alive. Do they actually have "free will" if there is an omniscient God?
I don't think it really matters, at all. What we experience is what matters.
Let's say I will walk across the street and get hit by a bus. Let's say it is "predetermined" by an all knowing God. I still experience the free will to cross that street, and I don't experience the pre-determination.
Good point. It's a quandary.
Once we have done something, how can we know if that act was our own choice, or predetermined?
If someone said toy you "you don't have free will" , what would you say? I think you would say "yes I do". Human beings always decide what they think about what happens to them. Always. We not only always experience free will, we cannot do otherwise.
I don't know, John. I don't see how anyone can "know".
If an event occurs, then "it had to happen". If the event does not occur then "it wasn't in the scheme of things"...
Am I predestined to believe that I have free will?
You have the free will to decide whether or not you have free will. Try and imagine a situation where you would be unable to choose how to react. If you were buried alive in a casket with no oxygen you would still have the free will to choose your reaction. If there is no circumstance in which we cannot express and experience our free will , how can we be said not to "have " it?
God may know what is going to happen to us, but we don't, and we ALWAYS experience free will. It is part of this existence.
John,
Slow down... If you do something, obviously you "feel" that you have decided to do it. OTOH, the deed is done, so how can you know that it was not predestined?
Bob , explain to me the mechanics of you coming to the conclusion that you have no free will. Even in reaching that conclusion you would be manifesting the experience of free will. There is no conceivable circumstance in which a human being would not experience free will, so what is the point in speculating if it "really" exists?
John,
I did not say we do not have free will. I said we cannot know whether we do or don't.
I think there is total free will and that we are judged on what we chose to do.
Perrie,
I would like to agree. There's something distasteful about predestination... about not really being free to decide.
But I don't see how we can "know", either way.
I'm not sure about "judged", though. By whom, and to what end?
Well, since I know you are a bible going guy, it clearly states that we have free will. We know good from bad and make an active choice. This choosing process can even be seen in an MRI.
As for the judging part, I was going with what I viewed as a religious theme, since religion is what teaches us about free will or not.
Not all people the criminally insane do not have the ability to decide what is good or bad.
Insane people can't, but most sociopaths and psychopaths are not insane and can, but chose not to. They let their own need for perverse pleasure to override what they know is wrong. This is clearly seen also on MRI's
Dean,
Not all people the criminally insane do not have the ability to decide what is good or bad.
Knowing the difference between good and evil is not at all the same thing as free will.
Perrie,
it clearly states that we have free will
Meh!
This is one of the (many) cases where the Bible clearly states that we have free will, and that our actions are predestined... The Bible is a delicious smörgåsbord!
This choosing process can even be seen in an MRI.
That's a pretty good argument, actually... since it gets away from our normal (subjective) perception.
As for the judging part, I was going with what I viewed as a religious theme, since religion is what teaches us about free will or not.
I'm afraid I don't understand this. Are you referring to a judgment by God? Personally, I don't think a God-is-Love would judge anything. The OT's judgmental and vengeful God is supplanted.
Bob,
I am a person of science, so I tend to lean on it more than most.
And yes I am referring to god. The god of the bible is a vengeful god. I personally don't want to believe in that kind of god, that is my personal choice.
Perrie,
The god of the bible is a vengeful god.
Not exactly. The God of Abraham is a vengeful God. That God was about as far back before Jesus, as Jesus is from us. The God of Jesus is not at all the same God. The God of Jesus is love and forgiveness.
A big part of the problem with many self-styled Christians is that they worship the God of Abraham, rather than the God of Jesus.
A big part of the problem with many self-styled Christians is that they worship the God of Abraham, rather than the God of Jesus.
Sorry, they are not inseparable. God is god and the first Christians were Jews, who still very much believed in the old testament. Jesus never denounced the old testament. In fact, there was great strife between Paul and James over how to carry on.
Perrie,
Jesus never denounced the old testament.
Jesus was not a fool, and He was preaching to Jews. OTOH,
Mark 12:28-31New International Version (NIV)
One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”
“The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”
There is no commandment greater than these. That's not "denouncing", but it quite clearly is "supplanting".
Jesus was a Jew, preaching to Jews. "Denouncing" the Scriptures would have been nonsense. The Scriptures were the bedrock of the Jewish faith. Jesus's method was to "shift" from the Ten Commandments to His "One Commandment".
You are right about Paul and James... and as far as I am concerned, Paul did a great deal of damage. It was he who began to introduce all sorts of "stuff" to pollute Christ's very simple message, "Love one another".
But also being a Jew, he did not invalidate the Ten Commandments either.
IF your going to take a people out from absolute damnation under one set of rules, you have to give them another set to live by. This is why what he said was so profound.
He never invalidated the first set of rules, but deflects the damnation man will visit upon other people for failing to follow them. So what was changed?
A very powerful message, STOP damning everyone else, LOVE everyone else by following the new rules and you automatically comply with the earlier ones.
The two sets of rules are complementary in nature, not contradictory. The second set helps you comply/follow the first.
You can conceivably call the second two rules the instructions in how to simplify the manifestation of the first ten.
Excellent!!
I'd like to be able to express it so well...
It's easy when you work the golden rule back to it's source.
Do unto others as you would have them do to you.
Everyone loves their life. So love everyone else's life.
So simple a toddler can understand it.
He's changed the focus from what you should not be doing (Ten Commandments) to what you SHOULD be doing. (Love one another) without changing one single rule.
Thank you!
The age old struggle of the Ought vs the Is. Determinism vs Free Will. Christianity itself can't even determine what the "truth" is.
Steve,
Christianity itself can't even determine what the "truth" is.
True.
Nor can any other religion. Nor any philosophy. "What is 'truth'?" will continue to baffle us for a long time to come.
"What is 'truth'?" will continue to baffle us for a long time to come.
Well, Jesus said that God's word is truth. I; however, was never able to reconcile God's word as delivered in the Christian Bible to itself. How then, is it truth? Baffling indeed.
That's because the bible is Man's interpretation of Gods words. (an interpretation specifically approved by the king also may I say)
The bibles truths are either perceived or interpreted for one.
Faith comes comes into the picture from not having someone tell you what is in the bible but by asking your god and having faith that he will reveal it to you.
It is why it is referred to as a "Revealed" religion, not an arbitrary one as in an "Imposed" religion.
The King, by mandating that a bible be written, and it become the standard of belief for everyone of christian faith, turned a revealed truthful religion into a man defined (interpreted) "Imposed" religion.
A human created false spirituality/religion that I cannot follow.
That is why you cannot reconcile your faith against the words of that book.
There's a a considerable portion of the Evangelical world that seems to worship the Bible rather than God. Apparently, there's even a (mocking) word for the phenomenon: bibliolatry.
Jesus said that God's word is truth
I'm not sure that I know this text, or more likely you are paraphrasing... Could you give me chapter and verse, so I can see exactly what is meant?
God's word as delivered in the Christian Bible
Jesus is frequently quoted in the New Testament, but "God the Father" very rarely. What do you mean by "God's word"?
JOhn 17:17 2 Samuel 7:28
Presumably the Bible is God's word. At least so it was taught in various churches I was in.
Thank you. I looked at the verses. The John verse is like a lot of John: mystical and hard to understand. Samuel is Old Testament Testament. Neither quotes Jesus.
Presumably the Bible is God's word. At least so it was taught in various churches I was in.
You've put your finger on an important point. Lots of churches teach that the Bible is God's word. Of course, Jesus said nothing like that, because the Bible did not yet exist. And I don't see who, after Jesus, has had authority to declare it so.
The Bible is certainly as close as we can come to Jesus, and is in that sense "holy"... but it seems to me that declaring it to be the word of God causes more problems than it resolves.
Any one can tell you where this ideal Steve talks about came from.. (and yes it is almost universally taught in bible school)
John. 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Also:
John, 1:14 "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
The word, as I know it is the word of God, not the bible. the bible is a book printed by man and approved by a man to be the only official government connection to what and how one should worship.
So of course many would be taught that the bible was god.
The word, as I know it is the word of God, not the bible.
This is my understanding, too.
the bible is a book printed by man and approved by a man to be the only official government connection to what and how one should worship.
True... but also: the Bible was written by men desiring to approach their God. It is a collection of texts about men's developing and evolving relationship with God.