My new favorite emoji!!
Hollytree keeps insisting that some philosophers support his belief that slaughtering innocent children can be fine. I have no investment in Rudolf Ottoās infallibility, but still cannot see where he calls such treatment of children righteous at all. But if Hollyās interpretation of Otto were correct, it would be irrelevant to my view that such a morality would align him with the understanding of the most pagan religions, and their approach to precious little ones. I find this less moral than the way Jesus approached infants & children.
I can answer Pipersā question!!
NOTHING makes it ok.
We are once again back in the OT and arguing about it.
Will any amount of explanation that Jesus Christ is the exact radiant expression of the Father, ever draw our eyes away from being transfixed by our misunderstanding of the OT as it describes God?
āThis is my beloved Son: listen to HIMā
3 Likes
Thanks for sharing such a straightforward example of this dogma. John and I took every seminary class together for 3 years where we were taught this assertion that slaughtering innocent children is good because āeverything God does is right.ā
It takes awhile when fundamentalism insists on ignoring Jesusā approach to realize that this circular logic is how every world religionās fundamentalisms justify every claim their tradition asserts, no matter how abysmally it violates the conscience of those who embrace love as the āone commandment which fulfills Godās entire lawā (Galatians 5:14)ā¦
1 Like
And from days ago: 
Bob, not to de rail your very cognitive posts on your view,
Letās re vamp or rephrase my point, that as man evolves, Godās way of dealing with them has done so. So you say God may not be evolving, and I can roll with that but I would say that it is possible that Godās dealings with man may well constitute a greater awareness of us humans than we ourselves have, and that God being God, there is a realization He has that how he deals with this part of creation might well ebb and flow, just like His allowance for us to progress in our spirit and intellect is growing.
Just a thought.
MM, yes I agree and assume Godās way of dealing with us would change when taking into account our changing conditions. I just donāt see what has so fundamentally changed about human nature and worth to make slaughtering innocent children wickedly immoral now if it was a righteous kind of deed in earlier days.
Bob just to be clear - youāre not saying that God has a different way of saving mankind, other than through faith and repentance?
Right, Iām not talking about what God seeks in our salvation or wholeness, but what he expects us to do in evaluating decisions about moral actions.
1 Like
That is a point, but a point from a certain frame of view. For instance, our view of childrenās rights just in the last 100 years has leapt at an incredible pace, but it took a lot for us (humanity) to get there. There are still places where children and women are treated as sub human or sub citizens. But I would argue that there is something that is in us that compels us to treat all the same, women, children men different racesā¦
I think that there can be a disconnect between the monster God who can do anything He wants at any time for His pleasure and a Father who has for what ever realized that some things have to be done at certain times with certain peoples to help humanity find itās way. As to the slaughter of innocent children, we could say he is still doing it today by allowing abortion, if you believe in such a thing. And if we look at the big scope, what the hell would be the difference if God had said, go into such and such a land and kill EVERY MAN OVER 18. I would bet there would be some of them in the land that could well be considered innocent. No offence, but not much difference from a innocent child or and innocent 19 year old.
No, I donāt take the Calvinist view, but do view God as smarter than me. (which is where the thread seems to be going)
1 Like
Would you just please once and for all explain to me how God saves mankind through faith and repentance, and saved from what?
So what is the fate of a person who does not repent and have faith?
No I will not, having done so very often.
BTW Bob agreed with me on this point of repentance and belief, as does Paidion, John as far as I know, Hermano, Cindy, I think Gabe - lots of others.
In fact, your view of mankind and its cure seems to differ from 99% of all the Christians I have read or studied. Iām not slamming your belief, whatever it is, just stating that in effect, calling all the rest of us mis-guided, pessemistic, āevangelical lemmingsā etc etc is getting kind of tiresome, without some great arguments being made for your view.
1 Like
They go to purgatory. I have this up already but Iāll share it here.
āThe Biblical Basis for Purgatoryā is the best exegetical case for purgatory Iāve read. Not only does it exegete the many texts from the Bible but gives early church fathers who read the Bible the same way and the early saints and mystics who have experienced not only hell but purgatory. I would just depart a bit from the traditional view of purgatory and go along with Jerry Walls in that I believe that purgatory isnāt for Christians only. Itās for all those who havenāt committed the eternal sin. All blasphemies and all manner of sin will be forgiven in the past age and this age except for the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. This was a unique sin that could only be committed at the time of Jesus. Those who committed the sin crucified Jesus thereby committing the worst evil. God returned in 70 AD. to punish with torment forever and ever those who committed the eternal sin. Satan, his angels, and those that crucified Jesus.
Seeing that they committed the eternal sin then I also believe in an infinitely heinous punishment.
St. Teresa of Avila: āOn fire, and torn to piecesā
The great 16th century mystic and Doctor of the Church claims to have had this experience of hell:
āThe entrance seemed to be by a long narrow pass, like a furnace, very low, dark, and close. The ground seemed to be saturated with water, mere mud, exceedingly foul, sending forth pestilential odors, and covered with loathsome vermin. At the end was a hollow place in the wall, like a closet, and in that I saw myself confined. [ā¦]
āI felt a fire in my soul. [ā¦] My bodily sufferings were unendurable. I have undergone most painful sufferings in this lifeā¦ yet all these were as nothing in comparison with what I felt then, especially when I saw that there would be no intermission, nor any end to them. [ā¦]
āI did not see who it was that tormented me, but I felt myself on fire, and torn to pieces, as it seemed to me; and, I repeat it, this inward fire and despair are the greatest torments of all. [ā¦]
āI could neither sit nor lie down: there was no room. I was placed as it were in a hole in the wall; and those walls, terrible to look on of themselves, hemmed me in on every side. I could not breathe. There was no light, but all was thick darkness. [ā¦]
āI was so terrified by that vision ā and that terror is on me even now while I am writing ā that though it took place nearly six years ago, the natural warmth of my body is chilled by fear even now when I think of it. [ā¦]
āIt was that vision that filled me with the very great distressā¦
Cool, there is a lemming in every corner. Iām not sure how you can say you will not state your view and then be critical of the lemming thing. Your view is situated in a particular Meme, and I appreciate it and to some extent, applaud it. It is you.
My view is to open up folks to new ways of thinking about God and scripture. I welcome the opportunity to share my views. I have no corner on truth and will say that which in and of it self seems to be lacking in most theological corners.
Just a purely outside observanceā¦ Your view is both dying and will be all but extinct in the future. Iām out today, and you may well be out tomorrow.
Love you and Cheers
Yepā¦ thatās what you get when you track outside of fundamentalism.
Are you Catholic? Only Catholics (and maybe PU folks here), subscribe to purgatory. The Protestants and Eastern Orthodox, donāt agree with it.
This is discussed on the forum here:
Topic: Did the Church Fathers support the doctrine of purgatory?
Since you loosely use the term āblasphemyā against some folks here. Letās see what some sites (including Got Questions) - has to say.
https://www.gotquestions.org/blasphemy-blaspheme.html
https://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/blasphemy/
https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/168-blasphemy-what-is-this-great-sin
I find it unfair to accuse that it is God who is ādoingā whatever evils God āallowsā sinful men to choose to do. I think those who do such things are seen as the responsible party. Do you see no difference in God ordering āgo and kill everyoneā and the decisions of men to kill their own children? Iād say that God would be responsible for what God tells me to do, but not for the slaughter of abortion if I donāt believe heās told us to do that.
Of course, as I told Hollytree, I find the belief that God wants innocent children slaughtered or sacrificed consistent with the view of all pagan religions, but not with Jesusā approach to children, or my conscience. But as I told him, Iām impressed and enlightened to see the willingness of you guys to defend slaughtering children.
1 Like