Theologies

[dreadnought]

To me none of the above are accurate. I do not believe a loving God wants anybody to suffer an I think he cares very much what we do and our relationship with Him. And we cannot do anything to deserve salvation.

I believe salvation is his gift to us and must be accepted as his gift given in love. When we receive that gift, we honor and love the Lord by keeping his commandments in the spirit they were given to us and not out of any sense of requirement or duty. We cannot earn salvation for all have sinned and fallen short. Salvation is a gift to be received by sinners.

I think #3 is a pretty good summation.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No, I think there is some symbolism in the Bible.

And I think there is symbolism on what you wrote. When you wrote “happiness” that symbolizes work.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

He does want us to exert the necessary effort to obey his commands.

Only obeying counts, whatever effort it costs or doesn’t. Can’t recall anyone commended for exerting “extra” effort. “There’s well done good and faithful servant” or unpleasant responses from God. “Good effort” is not a choice.

 

[dreadnought]

And I think there is symbolism on what you wrote. When you wrote “happiness” that symbolizes work.

I believe the Lord intended for there to be symbolism in the Bible. We recognize it as we get older.

 

[dreadnought]

Only obeying counts, whatever effort it costs or doesn’t. Can’t recall anyone commended for exerting “extra” effort. “There’s well done good and faithful servant” or unpleasant responses from God. “Good effort” is not a choice.

There are people who are under the impression we aren't expected to put forth effort to obey the Lord. They seem to think it's the Lord's job to do all the work.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I believe the Lord intended for there to be symbolism in the Bible. We recognize it as we get older.

Life and death are not symbols. The moon turns blood red is a symbol. Do you see the difference? I saw a beast riding out of the sea is a symbol. Jesus died is not a symbol. You are not allowed to choose what is a symbol or not based on personal preference.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

There are people who are under the impression we aren't expected to put forth effort to obey the Lord. They seem to think it's the Lord's job to do all the work.

Yes I whole heartedly agree!!!

 

[dreadnought]

Life and death are not symbols. The moon turns blood red is a symbol. Do you see the difference? I saw a beast riding out of the sea is a symbol. Jesus died is not a symbol. You are not allowed to choose what is a symbol or not based on personal preference.

No, I think they are. How else can you interpret this?:

[17] "Yet your people say, `The way of the Lord is not just'; when it is their own way that is not just.
[18] When the righteous turns from his righteousness, and commits iniquity, he shall die for it.
[19] And when the wicked turns from his wickedness, and does what is lawful and right, he shall live by it.
[20] Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not just.' O house of Israel, I will judge each of you according to his ways." Ezekiel 33:17-20 RSV

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No, I think they are.

No Jesus really died. Do you think he didn’t and it was just a symbol and didn’t really happen in the flesh?

How else can you interpret this?:

[17] "Yet your people say, `The way of the Lord is not just'; when it is their own way that is not just.
[18] When the righteous turns from his righteousness, and commits iniquity, he shall die for it.
[19] And when the wicked turns from his wickedness, and does what is lawful and right, he shall live by it.
[20] Yet you say, `The way of the Lord is not just.' O house of Israel, I will judge each of you according to his ways." Ezekiel 33:17-20 RSV

God will literally judge all people, great and small. Do you think this is just symbolic for unhappiness in life and will never happen?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No, I think there is some symbolism in the Bible.

There is symbolism in the writings of others like you. If you allow yourself to decide what is symbolism then others can decide if you’re using a symbol or metaphor too. If it’s all personal choice then we can personally choose to make your words symbols too. When you write “happiness” we can take that to be symbolic for hard work cause hard work and happiness are connected.

“As you judge, so you too will be judged.”

 

[dreadnought]

No Jesus really died. Do you think he didn’t and it was just a symbol and didn’t really happen in the flesh?

God will literally judge all people, great and small. Do you think this is just symbolic for unhappiness in life and will never happen?

You need to learn to separate symbolism from unsymbolism.

 

[dreadnought]

There is symbolism in the writings of others like you. If you allow yourself to decide what is symbolism then others can decide if you’re using a symbol or metaphor too. If it’s all personal choice then we can personally choose to make your words symbols too. When you write “happiness” we can take that to be symbolic for hard work cause hard work and happiness are connected.

“As you judge, so you too will be judged.”

Is this not symbolism?:

He reached from on high, he took me,
he drew me out of many waters. Psalm 18:16 RSV

 

[fhansen]

You quoted Augustine who is not really an early church father as he lived later and another man who was not even close to that. That is not showing that the church taught this down through the centuries. And Augustine had some pretty off doctrine. No one says his writings were inspired.

No, and neither are anyone’s here-but that doesn’t mean that various figures down through the centuries haven’t contributed to a better understanding of the faith.

As are you. Your view is not in the writings of the early church fathers or you would have quoted them. A whole 400 years late is no longer the early church.

That was not his struggle. He never said it was. He did not pray to God to help him do "the right thing." This is really making light of his suffering especially if you think we can relate to it. Most Christians have no idea what he suffered and to pretend one does is to be disrespectful of what it meant to him.

Yes, and for some reason you’ve simply overlooked the fact that I emphasized that point myself. There are people who’ve suffered greatly, however, and the point in any case is that it’s a struggle to do the right thing in this world. And to say that doing the right thing (equivalent to doing God’s will in every case) wasn’t Jesus’s struggle in the Garden is to make light of the great agony He faced in His human flesh-and that He overcame by His love-of the Father, and of us.

Well, depends upon a lot of other factors. That is prety black and white thinking there. I think you are NOT doing the right thing at all making up the theology that has Jesus going to the cross for his own personal happiness and I do not think your conscience is seared or even close.

Well, I certainly hope not, having made up no theology independent of Christ’s Church, as you may have.

There is nothing inherently wrong with eating or sleeping or taking a little wine or telling the truth either. I can go on and on about things that are not inherently wrong. What does this get us?

You’ve been arguing that desiring happiness is somehow selfish; I’m asserting that this very desire is the healthy norm, and the real reason behind our seeking God who wants to make man happy-always has. People who’ve struggled the hardest, experiencing the most pain, often as victims of a messed up sinful world, and/or struggled with sin themselves, are generally the ones who seek and look for answers, who sincerely ask, seek, and knock, and who end up loving Him most; “those who’re forgiven much, love much”.

Fair enough. We worship Him because of the qualities of love and kindness and justice and righteousness and truth that spring from his very being, for one.

Yes, and those are all aspects of His goodness. We're enjoined to choose good over evil, and the things you listed are all the right choice.

No, again this is too black and white. EIther/or thinking. But if happiness is the goal or stated all excusing motivation, you will find that selfishness reigns. IF loving God and love man is the goal, then the other things fall into place. What actually can develop in the human heart, is that the joy of seeing someone else happier than I am brings satisfaction. This is more like the goal.

You made it black and white when you said,
"Now you want to excuse the selfishness in your position by saying only i call it selfish. But i’m pretty sure that those who live by your view are also seen as such by others who suffer under their pursuit of personal happiness. There is no pursuing your happiness as a goal without becoming selfish because the life goal justifies being so as necessary to achieve that goal. Sooner or later your happiness cannot be satisfied at the same time someone else’s is. The goal justifies choosing your happiness over others. That is selfishness pure."

And that was a good example of presumption, unnecessarily so. I agreed that happiness can be pursued selfishly- I also maintained that it’s an inherent need and desire first of all, without having anything to do with libertinism, hedonism, etc, which seems to be the direction you’re going with this. So, not black and white; the desire, itself, for happiness is normal while the various ways people pursue it can be right or wrong. The point is that man’s will is involved, and he’s motivated to seek and love God because he perceives that as the best choice for himself and God wants us to come to make that choice without forcing the issue; He wants us to develop a hunger and thirst for righteous to put it another way but often we must first learn that the wrong way is, well, the wrong way, like Prodigals. In the end to love God is the best choice but people often make wrong choices, loving lesser, created things rather than God, thinking that will gain them something, something more. Religious people sometimes won’t admit that they love material things, but it just all depends on where a person’s heart really lies, where their treasure really is. Either way we must, to one degree or another, learn of our need for God-and that lesson is never-ending; we can and should grow in that understanding.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

You need to learn to separate symbolism from unsymbolism.

There is no such word "unsymbolism." Jesus really did die, it was not a symbol or a metaphor for him having hard times.

I have met others like you before. People who decide that they can change the meaning of the words the author used to make up their own view. They assume all written material is like poetry and you are allowed to make the meaning into whatever you want. You are somewhat different in that you acutally make up words that do not exist in the language and think you are saying something others know.

Again, you can certainly change the meaning of what the authors wrote in the bible and no one can stop your free will to do so. But if you make choices based on this twisting of the words, you will answer to God one day for having done so. We will all answer to God but twisting the words of the Bible to mean what I prefer is not going to be something everyone will have to give an answer for. This is something only some people do.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Is this not symbolism?:

He reached from on high, he took me,
he drew me out of many waters. Psalm 18:16 RSV

I did not say there is no symbolism in the Bible. The Hebrews were so used to very vivid metaphors that we westerners take too much of it literally. The example I used, the moon turns red, is a metaphor for a real event that has nothing to do with the natural satellite orbiting the earth. That is a metaphor. But you said life and death are just symbols for happiness and hard times. That is not true.

So yes you can pull out lots of symbols in the Bible but I can pull out lots of times when the words are not at all symbolic. Don't you see this?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No, and neither are anyone’s here-but that doesn’t mean that various figures down through the centuries haven’t contributed to a better understanding of the faith.

Pretty sure that is what it means. The elements requiring man to leave his beloved sin have been removed to make the faith more appealing and less costly. Today you just say "the magic words" and God is obligated to let you into heaven and worse, you do not have to do anythig like repent or confess sin or even love God or man. That is not a better understandig of the faith Jesus lived and taught but a worse one. The apostles knew it better than any theology today, no question.

Yes, and for some reason you’ve simply overlooked the fact that I emphasized that point myself. There are people who’ve suffered greatly, however, and the point in any case is that it’s a struggle to do the right thing in this world. And to say that doing the right thing (equivalent to doing God’s will in every case) wasn’t Jesus’s struggle in the Garden is to make light of the great agony He faced in His human flesh-and that He overcame by His love-of the Father, and of us.

Sorry if I overlooked an important point you presented. My apologes.

Yes it is a struggle to refuse to sin. "The right thing" is pretty vague and those whose life philosophy is "you have to do what is right for you" think the right thing is what is right for you even if it is sin. The question is right in whose eyes?

Well, I certainly hope not, having made up no theology independent of Christ’s Church, as you may have.

As I said, your elevating personal happiness does this and that you think all of the church believed as you do as your defense tells me that in your heart of hearts you know that some things appeal to you but are not in the Bible. When a man knows he knows the truth he does not have to tell others that the whole church has believed the same since 2000 years. He knows that the whole church was never 100% fully informed 100% of them and so some of them were less informed (to totally ignorant) on how God sees the matter which is the truth.

You’ve been arguing that desiring happiness is somehow selfish; I’m asserting that this very desire is the healthy norm, and the real reason behind our seeking God who wants to make man happy-always has. People who’ve struggled the hardest, experiencing the most pain, often as victims of a messed up sinful world, and/or struggled with sin themselves, are generally the ones who seek and look for answers, who sincerely ask, seek, and knock, and who end up loving Him most; “those who’re forgiven much, love much”.

God never talked to men about desiring happiness except in terms that expose it as selfishness. Jesus said seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness and then all the things you need will be added to you. Not only did he not say "seek happiness" but said the opposite. He said do not seek happiness but seek the kingdom of God and his righteousness. Anyone who has sought to do righteosuness in the face of tempation to seek personal happiness knows they are not the same. If they were, there would be no struggle.

Yes, and those are all aspects of His goodness. We're enjoined to choose good over evil, and the things you listed are all the right choice.

And when God blasts a people or man for evil? Is that good too? What about sending them to hell?

You made it black and white when you said,
"Now you want to excuse the selfishness in your position by saying only i call it selfish. But i’m pretty sure that those who live by your view are also seen as such by others who suffer under their pursuit of personal happiness. There is no pursuing your happiness as a goal without becoming selfish because the life goal justifies being so as necessary to achieve that goal. Sooner or later your happiness cannot be satisfied at the same time someone else’s is. The goal justifies choosing your happiness over others. That is selfishness pure."

Not black and white but testing your view in real life. The more people pursue their own happiness in choices, the more selfish they are. This is what I have observed over the years.

Where do you see black and white in any case? I was "pretty sure" which is anything but black and white.

And that was a good example of presumption, unnecessarily so. I agreed that happiness can be pursued selfishly- I also maintained that it’s an inherent need and desire first of all, without having anything to do with libertinism, hedonism, etc, which seems to be the direction you’re going with this.

I did not say that so that is presumption. You know, if two people are eating a meal and one of them takes pretty much all of the mashed potatoes before the other has a chance to take any, that is that one pursuing his/her own happiness (selfishness) but it is not libertinism, hedonism, etc. If a couple saves up a lot of money to buy a place to live and the woman decides to spend it all on cosmetic surgery without asking if that is OK, that is not hedonism or libertinism or etc but it is her pursuing happiness.

In the end God will judge each for the ways they pursued happiness at the expense of others and ignoring those others will not be an excuse. The point is if we ask those others today, we can repent and learn to pursue their happiness too.

So, not black and white; the desire, itself, for happiness is normal while the various ways people pursue it can be right or wrong.

I guess I do not see why you do not see that some people pursue being pleasing to God not happiness. You seem to think that everyone pursues their own happiness as a life goal. I am here to tell you that this is not true. Some have more noble goals.

The point is that man’s will is involved, and he’s motivated to seek and love God because he perceives that as the best choice for himself and God wants us to come to make that choice without forcing the issue;

Then it is not love and it stinks in the eyes of God. God will not be make a means for a man's happiness. If you love because it ensures your own happiness, you do not know what love is. If a man loves God or man because it makes him happier, everyone knows it. It is not pretty.

He wants us to develop a hunger and thirst for righteous to put it another way but often we must first learn that the wrong way is, well, the wrong way, like Prodigals.

Sinning does not teach a man righteousness. It brings darkenss and a decreassed ability to resist sin next time. He does want us to hunger and thirst for righteousness, not merely our own, by the way. But I do agree with you there.

In the end to love God is the best choice but people often make wrong choices, loving lesser, created things rather than God, thinking that will gain them something, something more.

Like loving happiness more than righteousness. Very common.

Religious people sometimes won’t admit that they love material things, but it just all depends on where a person’s heart really lies, where their treasure really is. Either way we must, to one degree or another, learn of our need for God-and that lesson is never-ending; we can and should grow in that understanding.

Some people actually did learn of their need for God and do not keep relearning the same information. They learn and grow on into other matters. There are lessons that are ending as there are more lessons in the Kingdom of God. They get more interesting the farther you go. The early lessons seem like baby stuff after a while cause well, they are.

You have pretty good understanding on some matters but some of what you say sounds a lot like what I hear others say. It is a popular life philosophy, this elevating the pursuit of happiness making it the core of all other pursuits and insisting everyone is like that....this I have heard from others. I think you deserve better.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No, the goal is to repent of our sin so things don't bother us.

No, the goal is to repent of our sins so our sins don't bother others. Do you see how this philosophy of yours makes one selfish? Everything, including repenting of sins, is for the benefit of the self. Everything. Nothing is done for the benefit of others whether it helps the self or not. You would be a better person if you dumped this "everything for my happiness" view of life.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I think #3 is a pretty good summation.

The first two options you wrote are not in Christian thought. One is rather buddist and one is rather universalism. So you purposely picked out two options that no follower of Jesus thinks so that the only option that comes close is the one you like. This is rather manipulative. It is like asking "when did you stop beating your wife, last year, last month or farther back than that?"

 

[dreadnought]

No, the goal is to repent of our sins so our sins don't bother others. Do you see how this philosophy of yours makes one selfish? Everything, including repenting of sins, is for the benefit of the self. Everything. Nothing is done for the benefit of others whether it helps the self or not. You would be a better person if you dumped this "everything for my happiness" view of life.

No, we want to repent of our sin.

 

[dreadnought]

The first two options you wrote are not in Christian thought. One is rather buddist and one is rather universalism. So you purposely picked out two options that no follower of Jesus thinks so that the only option that comes close is the one you like. This is rather manipulative. It is like asking "when did you stop beating your wife, last year, last month or farther back than that?"

The first two weren't supposed to be taken seriously.