Has Christianity become gentler over the years? If so, how do you feel about that?

directory

Active Member
Aug 3, 2015
56
32
35
✟7,867.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
As I read about the history of Christianity, I get a picture of a far grimmer religion than I see now. In centuries past, it wasn't the inviting, lovey-dovey (for lack of a better word) institution it is now. The focus seems to have been on God's wrath and unshakable justice, on obligation and guilt, on difficult doctrines like Hell and hard predestination, and, well, on the general awfulness of this life and the probable awfulness of the next. Catholics and protestants alike practiced that way. We have cliche images of the stern Catholic and the grim Calvinist, and there seems to have been some basis for that cliche– I don't see much talk of God's love or mercy when reading about Christianity over the centuries.

The model for Christianity up until very recently seems to be fire-and-brimstone preaching. If you've never read Jonathan Edwards's 18th-Century sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God," seek it out. It's a masterpiece of rhetoric, and it's my mental model of what Christianity used to be like. If you weren't a believer, if you thought the Bible were a fiction, you'd think of that sermon as a superb horror story. In Edwards's central image, God holds you like a loathsome spider over the pit of Hell, abhors you, and might drop you in at any moment. It's only towards the end of the sermon, after he's really drilled that image into our heads, that he gets to the business of how you might avoid the pit. Before he finishes, he addresses children– directly and explicitly– with threats of hellfire.

Which is very different from the Christianity around me now. I see a focus on God's love and mercy, on inclusiveness and positivity, on everyone and anyone's hope for salvation. I see an attempt to adapt Christianity to varying lifestyles and make it accommodate diversity. No longer an unquestionable authority or an inescapable cloud, Christianity is a hand on your shoulder, a word of kind advice, a place to go if you're lost, a friend, a family, a big smiley face. It's social, good with kids (I'm sure some of you have been to a church camp of some variety), and cheerful. I went to a Christian university, and chapel was usually a bit too sweet. The notion that my soul is in permanent mortal peril at every second, that its default state is corruption and damnation, that I don't deserve God's love, is something I picked up from musty old books, not living Christians.

That's what I see, anyway. But I'm not from a Christian family. I haven't spent much time in church, and I don't know what it was like to grow up with the religion in the 70s, 80s, or 90s. Never seen an episode of Veggie Tales, either. So I can't know for sure. Has Christianity developed from Edwards's sermon into something more cuddly?

And, perhaps more importantly, do you approve? Is modern Christianity's relative kindness (if it exists) a better way to practice the religion than in older days?
 
Last edited:

anonymous person

Well-Known Member
Jul 21, 2015
3,326
507
39
✟67,894.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
As I read about the history of Christianity, I get a picture of a far grimmer religion than I see now. In centuries past, it wasn't the inviting, lovey-dovey (for lack of a better word) institution it is now. The focus seems to have been on God's wrath and unshakable justice, on obligation and guilt, on difficult doctrines like Hell and hard predestination, and, well, on the general awfulness of this life and the probable awfulness of the next. Catholics and protestants alike practiced that way. We have cliche images of the stern Catholic and the grim Calvinist, and there seems to have been some basis for that cliche– I don't see much talk of God's love or mercy when reading about Christianity over the centuries. Nor did past adherents seem very good at loving their enemies, considering the Crusades, the persecution of protestants by the Catholic Church, American protestants' lack of qualms about holding Christian slaves, and so forth.

The model for Christianity up until very recently seems to be fire-and-brimstone preaching. If you've never read Jonathan Edwards's 18th-Century sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God," seek it out. It's a masterpiece of rhetoric, and it's my mental model of what Christianity used to be like. If you weren't a believer, if you thought the Bible were a fiction, you'd think of that sermon as a superb horror story. In Edwards's central image, God holds you like a loathsome spider over the pit of Hell, abhors you, and might drop you in at any moment. It's only towards the end of the sermon, after he's really drilled that image into our heads, that he gets to the business of how you might avoid the pit. Before he finishes, he addresses children– directly and explicitly– with threats of hellfire.

Which is very different from the Christianity around me now. I see a focus on God's love and mercy, on inclusiveness and positivity, on everyone and anyone's hope for salvation. I see an attempt to adapt Christianity to varying lifestyles and make it accommodate diversity. No longer an unquestionable authority or an inescapable cloud, Christianity is a hand on your shoulder, a word of kind advice, a place to go if you're lost, a friend, a family, a big smiley face. It's social, good with kids (I'm sure some of you have been to a church camp of some variety), and cheerful. I went to a Christian university, and chapel was usually a bit too sweet. The notion that my soul is in permanent mortal peril at every second, that its default state is corruption and damnation, that I don't deserve God's love, is something I picked up from musty old books, not living Christians.

That's what I see, anyway. But I'm not from a Christian family. I haven't spent much time in church, and I don't know what it was like to grow up with the religion in the 70s, 80s, or 90s. Never seen an episode of Veggie Tales, either. So I can't know for sure. Has Christianity developed from Edwards's sermon into something more cuddly?

And, perhaps more importantly, do you approve? Is modern Christianity's relative kindness (if it exists) a better way to practice the religion than in older days?

I think the question is a good one, but it is also indicative of a very narrow reading of history. You made no mention of the plethora of charitable deeds done in the name of Christ over the centuries. The building of hospitals, orphanages, places of refuge, soup kitchens, rehabilitation centers, etc. You made no mention of the founding of the Salvation Army, or the efforts Christians undertook to have the barbarous practices of the Romans to be abolished. Infanticide was rampant in Rome until Christians began their tireless effort to see it done away with and outlawed. The barbarous gladiator games too. William Wilberforce spent a great deal of his life working to have slavery abolished. Jonathan Edwards' work you referenced, sadly, does not represent Edwards' true belief in a loving God that wants all men to be saved. It is often misinterpreted because it is read out of context as an example of Puritan writings and thrown into the Puritan period in many American lit books. It can be much better understood if one reads the body of his works.

I suggest you read one of his lesser known works entitled: "Charity and it's Fruits".

Christ Himself who is our example expelled the merchants and money changers from the temple after turning their tables over. He rebuked and warned the self-righteous in His day to repent and got on to people for judging others with impure motives.

Christ showed in His life, that perfect balance of charity and reproof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeStill&Know
Upvote 0

directory

Active Member
Aug 3, 2015
56
32
35
✟7,867.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
I think the question is a good one, but it is also indicative of a very narrow reading of history. You made no mention of the plethora of charitable deeds done in the name of Christ over the centuries. The building of hospitals, orphanages, places of refuge, soup kitchens, rehabilitation centers, etc. You made no mention of the founding of the Salvation Army, or the efforts Christians undertook to have the barbarous practices of the Romans to be abolished. Infanticide was rampant in Rome until Christians began their tireless effort to see it done away with and outlawed. The barbarous gladiator games too. William Wilberforce spent a great deal of his life working to have slavery abolished. Jonathan Edwards' work you referenced, sadly, does not represent Edwards' true belief in a loving God that wants all men to be saved. It is often misinterpreted because it is read out of context as an example of Puritan writings and thrown into the Puritan period in many American lit books. It can be much better understood if one reads the body of his works.

I suggest you read one of his lesser known works entitled: "Charity and it's Fruits".

Christ Himself who is our example expelled the merchants and money changers from the temple after turning their tables over. He rebuked and warned the self-righteous in His day to repent and got on to people for judging others with impure motives.

Christ showed in His life, that perfect balance of charity and reproof.
Thanks for the thoughtful answer! I really am quite uneducated on the matter, so I appreciate every morsel of insight on offer. I'll definitely look into that Edwards sermon. I admire him as a writer, so I'd love to see him in a gentler mood :)
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,339
26,779
Pacific Northwest
✟728,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
This seems to be restricting the Christian past to a few medieval Western ideas and a selection of Puritanical Calvinist ideas.

Let's consider:

"In love did God bring the world into existence; in love is God going to bring it to that wondrous transformed state, and in love will the world be swallowed up in the great mystery of the one who has preformed all these things; in love will the whole course of the governance of creation be finally comprised." - St. Isaac the Syrian, 7th century

I always recommend people, if they are going to study Christianity, to look more broadly.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeStill&Know
Upvote 0

Sharon0110

Active Member
Nov 15, 2015
53
44
27
✟8,423.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
It seems as though there is more emphasis on the good, positive things because the hellfire and brimstone sermon just will not affect some people in this day and age. Most have already heard an earful about how terrible hell is, and how that's where they'll end up if they don't repent...to the extent that such speeches have become cliche and dull. You can only hear a threat so many times before you stop being scared of it.

So, rationally, it would make more sense to use a fresh approach that people aren't used to. One preaching about good, positivity, love and care. And that's just fine! I believe that God is loving. He loves us very much...so much so that sometimes I can't even wrap my head around how the Almighty can be so forgiving, caring and kind.

What I am not fine with is when one aspect of salvation is ignored or diluted for the sake of gaining new believers. Yes, choose whatever you will to introduce Christianity, whether hellfire or love, but make sure that both aspects are made known and represented appropriately at the end of the day. Don't represent things as if hell doesn't exist, and don't represent things as if it's all love and rainbows for absolutely everyone. Do not represent Christianity as something it is not. Especially when it comes to topics such as diversity and varying lifestyles. What I've come to realize recently is that love should not and does not equate to being passive.

There's a difference between showing Christian love and plain, simple people-pleasing. Love isn't averting your eyes from fault-it is the correction of it without malice Galatians 6:1

So basically I don't mind the shift, as long as that shift does not change what Christianity is actually about. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeStill&Know
Upvote 0

anonymous person

Well-Known Member
Jul 21, 2015
3,326
507
39
✟67,894.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Thanks for the thoughtful answer! I really am quite uneducated on the matter, so I appreciate every morsel of insight on offer. I'll definitely look into that Edwards sermon. I admire him as a writer, so I'd love to see him in a gentler mood :)
Awesome! :)
 
Upvote 0

Hospes

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 2, 2005
1,245
117
Arizona
Visit site
✟48,887.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Directory,

I think your understanding of church history sounds a bit of a hellfire-and-brimstone caricature, but I also think in my generation much of the Christian church - at least many evangelical and liberal Christians - have presented a caricature of their own: a "special moments" Christianity. To listen to many of them you'd think God has no greater purpose than to make us happy and whole. (Mind you, he does do that, but it's not his ultimate purpose.) This view sees God as more of a generous and undemanding grandpa and Santa Clause than someone that makes you want to fall before, fear, obey, and worship him. (This is more typically how people responded in the Bible to encountering God or one of his angels.)

To answer your final question: no, I do not like this belittling of God and promotion of man. I have found great satisfaction and joy in worshipping and submitting to a God that is "high and lifted up" and worthy of absolute fealty. The cuddly and soft Sunday school view of my youth is so much more lame and little.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,652
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟104,175.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Today's "lovey-dovey" Christianity is, at least in part, a reaction against the fire and brimstone preaching of sixty or seventy years ago. The trouble is that it has gone from one extreme to the other, and now all we hear about is God's love. The capacities for both love and wrath are mentioned in the Bible as being attributes of God.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Christianity has had intellectualism, hellfire, and “heart strangely warmed” throughout history. The Catholic tradition includes all three. So do all the major Protestant traditions.

Jesus, of course, said that faith is based on love of God and neighbor, but wasn’t shy about warning people of the consequences of not responding to his call, particularly int the Synoptics. John tends to emphasize love, and Paul the intellectual issues. So all three approaches are present in the NT.

The emphasis shifts from time to time. You can find plenty of movements in church history that emphasized the positive side, e.g. mysticism, pietism, Wesley.

I don’t think I’d say all American Christianity is “lovey-dovey.” It is probably tending to deemphasize hellfire at the moment, though. Perhaps it’s a reaction to revivalism. Perhaps it’s influenced by the Jesus movement of the mid 20th Cent. But responsible churches don’t let it get quite to the point of “my good buddy Jesus,” so I think you need to be a bit more specific in saying what you think is wrong.
 
Upvote 0