Ask a Different Christian Philosopher a Question

[Albion]

So to put it simply...christian morality/justice is draconian?

Quite the opposite, I'd say. But with that analogy I was only trying to give "GKG" an example of a case from ordinary life where different offenses are deemed to merit the same punishment. If you want to discuss Christian morality, that would be another matter, as would the Christian concept of salvation.

 

[durangodawood]

Well, yes, and that's the way most of us would see immediately it, but the point of the parable concerns those who were hired first, later complained, and what the employer told them in response.

Yes, most of us would prefer to avoid extra toil. But the parable goes beyond that. The owner then says: “So the last will be first, and the first will be last.” Thats not merely avoiding extra toil. Its something else. What is it?

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Well, if that's your view of the matter..."thanks for sharing."

It would seem like I know the answer to the question at the end of that post.

 

[Albion]

Yes, most of us would prefer to avoid extra toil. But the parable goes beyond that. The owner then says: “So the last will be first, and the first will be last.” Thats not merely avoiding extra toil. Its something else. What is it?

I was the one who introduced that parable into the discussion in hopes that it would be helpful. if it hasn't been so, I'd suggest that we put it aside and that you continue to ask Percivale your questions as the OP invited readers to do.

 

[durangodawood]

I was the one who introduced that parable into the discussion in hopes that it would be helpful. if it hasn't been so, I'd suggest that we put it aside and that you continue to ask Percivale your questions as the OP invited readers to do.

Percivale has abandoned the thread. And the parable has that puzzling feature.

 

[Albion]

It's been two and a half days since he posted the OP. I wouldn't declare him as having "abandoned the thread" just yet.

 

[bhsmte]

Why do Christian philosophers seem to ask so many people to ask them questions?

To hear themselves talk?

 

[durangodawood]

To hear themselves talk?

Not in this case.

 

[bhsmte]

Not in this case.

I would agree. Was talking more in general terms.

The other thread on this topic, well, you can make your own conclusions about that one.

 

[Percivale]

Which idea in philosophy has done you the most personal good?

And how have become wise to how you can keep yourself from benefitting from a good philosophical idea or attitude??

Why would I keep my self from benefiting from a good idea? I can't think of a single idea that has done me most good, there are so many that each help in some small way and together help me have a more integrated life. And the very thinking about those ideas is enjoyable anyway.

 

[Percivale]

I will outline my understanding of the basic Christian idea. Then I will ask some questions about it.

All humans are imperfect.
Only perfect entities can enter true communion with God.
God wants us to be able to enter true communion with him.
Thus, he removes the imperfection through a two-step process:
1.) He takes the punishment for the imperfection upon himself;
2.) Then he each individual to believe all this and ask for forgiveness.

I guess my most basic question is: is my understanding flawed in any significant respect?
Then, assuming my understanding is generally okay, my second basic question is: what the rationale behind the two-step process that I outlined?

I ask this question because from my perspective the process seems illogical - indeed, it seems analogous to a non-sequitur. What is your understanding of it?

That's not how I would outline Christianity as I see it; indeed it looks rather illogical to me too.
I'm sure we agree that humans are imperfect.
Second, I posit that all humans are developing, either toward greater good or evil.
God is at the center of reality, and only those who are developing toward good will enjoy meeting him, yet all people will sooner or later.
God wants everyone possible to enjoy being with Him, so sent Jesus to influence more people to develop toward good, which he did in a number of ways: teaching ethics, giving a good example, starting a movement that helps turn people's lives around, and satisfying people's hang-ups about needing atonement for what they've done--worldwide people have felt the need to make sacrifices, usually animal, sometimes human; I don't know what motivates that need, but whatever it is, Jesus satisfied it by his self-sacrifice; and maybe nothing less would have gotten people past wanting to make sacrifices.
By trusting Jesus people gain the hope and motivation needed to follow his teachings and example and improve.
There's a lot of different ways I could summarize Christianity, but this one might best answer your question.

 

[bhsmte]

That's not how I would outline Christianity as I see it; indeed it looks rather illogical to me too.
I'm sure we agree that humans are imperfect.
Second, I posit that all humans are developing, either toward greater good or evil.
God is at the center of reality, and only those who are developing toward good will enjoy meeting him, yet all people will sooner or later.
God wants everyone possible to enjoy being with Him, so sent Jesus to influence more people to develop toward good, which he did in a number of ways: teaching ethics, giving a good example, starting a movement that helps turn people's lives around, and satisfying people's hang-ups about needing atonement for what they've done--worldwide people have felt the need to make sacrifices, usually animal, sometimes human; I don't know what motivates that need, but whatever it is, Jesus satisfied it by his self-sacrifice; and maybe nothing less would have gotten people past wanting to make sacrifices.
By trusting Jesus people gain the hope and motivation needed to follow his teachings and example and improve.
There's a lot of different ways I could summarize Christianity, but this one might best answer your question.

Why do you think, God sent Jesus and only allowed him to be directly exposed to a very small part of the world's population, if God desired everyone to come to know and believe in Jesus?

Doesn't sound like an equitable way to treat your creation. Could be one reason, why 2/3 of the world's population, are not Christians.

 

[Percivale]

Well if you can convince them that you're not an accessory maybe you could get some leeway but you're right. But this analogy is off because that requires two separate entities. One doing the crime, one just happened to just be there with unclear intent.



Yea and that is where your system is fatally flawed. A system where all crime is even and is easily forgiven. It makes the severity of crime meaningless and the consequences negligible. This is why Christian theocracy failed and why secularism rules nations.

Another question. Do you actually agree with this system? You as a person, separate from the religion.

Actually, the Bible is clear that some sins are worse than others, and different people will receive greater or less punishment or reward depending what they've done. The parable of the vineyard is not about this issue. Christian theocracy failed because Christianity was not designed to be a theocracy.

 

[Albion]

EDIT: Sorry, I forgot that this thread is for questions directed to Percivale--and that is exactly what you did here, bhsmte.

I was just wondering what you suppose would have been a better way for Christ to have accomplished his mission on Earth. Had he, for example, flown around to different cultures like Superman, he would have compromised one essential ingredient in his incarnation--being, in his human nature, just like you and I.

 

[Percivale]

Why do you think, God sent Jesus and only allowed him to be directly exposed to a very small part of the world's population, if God desired everyone to come to know and believe in Jesus?

Doesn't sound like an equitable way to treat your creation. Could be one reason, why 2/3 of the world's population, are not Christians.

God seems to have a policy of not doing more than necessary, probably to preserve individual freedom and to foster the development of diversity. It's kind of like the Prime Directive on Star Trek, you familiar with that?
Also, God has all the time in the world; maybe he finds it more interesting to watch the spread of Christianity over several thousand years. He gives people lots of time too (I believe in the possibility of salvation after death).

 

[Percivale]

As God's love cures our character, we grow in true communion with Him, like how an imperfect child grows in being able to share and relate with Mom and Dan who love the child so much. So we are like the imperfect child who can have communion while not perfect, but has more and more perfect communion while the child grows with Mommy and Daddy
Correct; and He desires that we seek Him for the correction which He gives us, so we enter and grow and mature in His love making us in true communion with Him.
Jesus did die for our sins.
I offer that what you say here is more talking about first being reconciled with God > Romans 5:10 < but then comes how "we shall be saved by His life." So, yes we trust in Jesus for all He did on Calvary and ask Him to forgive us and save us.

But then comes correction > Hebrews 12:4-11, and His love's perfection > 1 John 4:17 < how His love's life cures our nature so we become more and more loving like He is > "as He is, so are we in this world."

And with this we learn how to relate with God and please Him > Matthew 11:28-30 > 1 Peter 3:4 > Colossians 3:15 > plus we learn how to relate with one another > Ephesians 4:2, 4:31-5:2, and other scriptures. So, the perfection comes with growing as family with God our Father and one another who are learning how to submit to God and relate with one another while helping one another in this.

So, no one can get into this perfection of loving, except by sharing in family loving with God and His children helping one another with this. So, it is not an individualistic, independent thing. Independence, then, can be an idol.

My opinion is you have asked a question about Christian life, versus actual philosophy. So, I have offered some things the Bible says about becoming and loving as a Christian. Oh, and your understanding, I'm willing to consider, is not flawed but learning . . . like we all will need to keep on doing I think that what understanding you have offered shows some insight, and I think your offered explanation shows an effort to get some insight . . . even though you may not agree. You have understood how Christians believe that we humans are imperfect and therefore we need God, I think you have said.

Your understanding has gotten as far as "two steps" which are I would say actually the one step of becoming reconciled with God . . . so then we can get started in real the process of true perfection in God's love; and I have offered that there is more, which I have tried to summarize in a simple and maybe logical manner, with scriptures. In case I have >

Now we can go on to a philosophical question for Percivale >

If indeed God's main focus is to adopt sinners and change them into children who are pleasing to Him like His Son Jesus (Romans 8:29), and who share love with Him and one another as family, how does this effect your outlook on life in this world? Among other things, how does this effect, or should it effect, the priorities of our attention? And how much should we be concerned about suffering and fairness, versus investing attention in learning how to relate personally, as family? How does it effect your life's view of who should be getting our love (Matthew 5:46, 1 Timothy 2:1-4), and how much personal love each other human should be getting from us?

About priorities, I don't see the conflict you suggest; concern at suffering and learning how to relate personally go together well. I would say quality rather than quantity would be a good idea for investing in people; make disciples, not just converts.

 

[bhsmte]

God seems to have a policy of not doing more than necessary, probably to preserve individual freedom and to foster the development of diversity. It's kind of like the Prime Directive on Star Trek, you familiar with that?
Also, God has all the time in the world; maybe he finds it more interesting to watch the spread of Christianity over several thousand years. He gives people lots of time too (I believe in the possibility of salvation after death).

God only found it necessary to expose Jesus to a very small part of the population and then makes it a requirement to believe in him. I would think, it would be necessary, to give all his creation equal opportunity to buy into the story. And then he sat back, and enjoyed watching who would buy in and who wouldn't, when he didn't put people on equal footing?

I find this explanation, not very satisfying.

 

[Percivale]

God only found it necessary to expose Jesus to a very small part of the population and then makes it a requirement to believe in him. I would think, it would be necessary, to give all his creation equal opportunity to buy into the story. And then he sat back, and enjoyed watching who would buy in and who wouldn't, when he didn't put people on equal footing?

I find this explanation, not very satisfying.

Apparently fairness is higher on your list of values than it is on God's. What is your political stance on redistribution? Would'nt the world be more boring if everyone was the same? Remember too that people are held responsible in proportion to how much opportunity they had.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

Another bad analogy... I think

Apparently fairness is higher on your list of values than it is on God's.

Tell me would you accept being arrested by police for not pledging allegiance to the new leader of a currently unknown island nation?

 

[bhsmte]

Apparently fairness is higher on your list of values than it is on God's. What is your political stance on redistribution? Would'nt the world be more boring if everyone was the same? Remember too that people are held responsible in proportion to how much opportunity they had.

I don't see how your analogy plays.

It seems as though, the people who were not exposed to Jesus, clearly did not have the same opportunity, yet, they are being held accountable, if they don't buy the story.