"Christian" Dogma in a Nutshell

Originally posted by lukemcmullan
Would it not make more sense to say that Christian beliefs vary from Christian to Christian? Very few Christians share the exact same belief system, and there are many variations. For instance, with regards to free will, or non-Christians going to hell, or whatever.

Summing up Christian dogma "in a nutshell" is being very silly. It can't be done, ...[text shortened]... gthy.

There are no exact set beliefs for Christians. Christianity is what you make of it.

Luke, it seems you are missing the point.

Here is No1's statement:
You don't understand; all people are total scum but Jesus gives this undeserving trash the "gift of grace". We all suck and are dirtbags, but those few who sufficiently grovel before God's greatness will be rewarded and the rest will get what their evil nature has earned.

Here is a more palatable version:
Man is sinned and through the death of Christ he now has a chance at eternal life. To get that reward however, he needs Belief, baptism, faith, and good works. Evil doers will be punnished inthe day of judgment.

The 2 statements are virtually identical in meaning and form the core of all Christian sects.

Originally posted by vistesd
[b]Maybe "lying" wasn't the right word. I apologise.

No need: there was no offence taken. It is not a bad thing to be reminded that you might be deceiving yourself. With that said—

Your post seems to assume that my position—both in terms of that existential trust, and in terms of monism and monistic spiritual experience—must be either “perfect” ...[text shortened]... as his over-liking of chocolate: an enlightened being shouldn’t still have such attachments![/b]

(This is an attempt at a response to the first half of your post)

I wasn't very clear in my earlier posts. I'm really picking up from the "All shall be well" and "too much unconditional trust in God" bits. From other posts in the forum, you strike me as a "spiritual searcher" whose normative state would be one of being on a spiritual quest. It seems to me that such a state would be incompatible with the view you've expressed.

There is a difference between a man who checks to see if his wallet is still in his pocket once in a while and one who checks every 5 minutes or so. And one who is still looking for a lost wallet.

Here's another example (I believe it is one you once quoted - but in a different context):

"Such things have been revealed to me that all that I have written seems to me as so much straw. Now I await the end of my life". (St. Thomas after his "angelic" vision on 6 December 1273)

I could be completely misreading the situation. In which case, I apologise.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
(This is an attempt at a response to the first half of your post)

I wasn't very clear in my earlier posts. I'm really picking up from the "All shall be well" and "too much unconditional trust in God" bits. From other posts in the forum, you strike me as a "spiritual searcher" whose normative state would be one of being on a spiritual quest. It seem 73)

I could be completely misreading the situation. In which case, I apologise.

From other posts in the forum, you strike me as a "spiritual searcher" whose normative state would be one of being on a spiritual quest. It seems to me that such a state would be incompatible with the view you've expressed.

I think I understand. And, yes, that seems to be my normative state. But let me use a Zen metaphor (originally speaking to the issue of “sudden” versus “gradual” enlightenment)—

A man is walking through a heavy mist. Suddenly he realizes he is wet.

My expansion on that metaphor: He may not yet be soaked through to some saturation point; the saturation may continue the rest of his life. Also, given the sometimes powerful and profound nature of that experience, I see no blame if he occasionally goes and sits by a fire…

[NOTE: in Zen, the notion of a one-time, once-and-for-all satori is not normative.]

With all that said, I have to confess that I myself have sometimes fallen prey to an element of the “perfectionist” syndrome in my spiritual journey—longing to once-and-for-all “get it right,” and blaming myself for the failure of not being able to. I now view that as an error. And that takes some pressure off…

___________________________________

Re the Aquinas quote: I actually never heard the line that you have in bold, and I don’t really understand it. No one (I don’t think) knows the exact nature of Aquinas’ experience. He was about 48 years old at the time. He died in March 1274. Did he know he only had a short time to live? What did he do with his remaining time?

_____________________________________

Again, no apolgies necessary. If someone points out that I still check my wallet once in awhile, that is helpful and not unwelcome.

EDIT: I actually have to thank you for this line of questioning: it seems to have pushed me back into the mist of "slow epiphany" (the way mine normally come) this morning. I probably can't articulate anything well right now...

Originally posted by The Chess Express
You don’t understand the first thing about Christianity. People are made in God’s image. This statement alone refutes your entire summary. Reap what you sow is another one. The fact that we are born with a sin nature does not devalue us, it means that the road back to God will be as easy or difficult as we make it.

I think this thread is more a summary of how you see Christians, or the world for that matter.

This would have been my amendment as well, no1. It goes back to the schizo aspect of xianity. You are simultaneously the greatest object of the Supreme Creator's imagination and affection and the lowest, dirtiest, most worthless scum in existence. That's why Jesus had to kill himself to himself so that he could be punished for his design's perfectly anticipated failure to comply with rules that he decided upon in advance.

Go figure . . .

🙄

Originally posted by telerion
This would have been my amendment as well, no1. It goes back to the schizo aspect of xianity. You are simultaneously the greatest object of the Supreme Creator's imagination and affection and the lowest, dirtiest, most worthless scum in existence. That's why Jesus had to kill himself to himself so that he could be punished for his design's perfectly anti ...[text shortened]... ed failure to comply with rules that he decided upon in advance.

Go figure . . .

🙄

C'mon Tel. People are "scum" because they act like "scum" - you are what you do. This does not detract from the fact that God still loves us -- it's a difference in perception.

Originally posted by Halitose
C'mon Tel. People are "scum" because they act like "scum" - you are what you do. This does not detract from the fact that God still loves us -- it's a difference in perception.

What people do you hang out with? I refuse to characterize my four year old grandson as "scum" but you are free to paint your loved ones (if any) with such a brush.

Originally posted by no1marauder
What people do you hang out with? I refuse to characterize my four year old grandson as "scum" but you are free to paint your loved ones (if any) with such a brush.

Dang! Those inverted comma's! Read one post higher up and you might be enlightened, oh obtuse one.

Originally posted by Halitose
C'mon Tel. People are "scum" because they act like "scum" - you are what you do. This does not detract from the fact that God still loves us -- it's a difference in perception.

C'mon what? Everything that I said in my post is supported by scripture. As to your reply, I do not believe it is too relevant to my post as have not up to now made any statements about whether people are actually scum or not. You may feel that evidence from human action justifies such a conclusion. Personally, I think that most people do not deserve to be broadly labeled as 'scum.' At times we all do rotten things, but more often we are very caring and considerate. I suspect that you reach your conclusions via selective bias (i.e. you place far too much weight on bad human actions because you approach your observations with a negative opinion of the nature of man).

Originally posted by telerion
I suspect that you reach your conclusions via selective bias (i.e. you place far too much weight on bad human actions because you approach your observations with a negative opinion of the nature of man).

Calvinist hangover?

Originally posted by telerion
C'mon what? Everything that I said in my post is supported by scripture. As to your reply, I do not believe it is too relevant to my post as have not up to now made any statements about whether people are actually scum or not. You may feel that evidence from human action justifies such a conclusion. Personally, I think that most people do not deserve t ...[text shortened]... actions because you approach your observations with a negative opinion of the nature of man).

Everything that I said in my post is supported by scripture.

Okay. Where do you find backing for this statement:

"...the lowest, dirtiest, most worthless scum in existence."

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]Everything that I said in my post is supported by scripture.

Okay. Where do you find backing for this statement:

"...the lowest, dirtiest, most worthless scum in existence."[/b]

This is easy Hal. All I had to do to refresh my memory was troll around some Christian sites. You know the really bitter ones (e.g. Southern Baptists).

Let's see how about Psalms 14:2-3?

"The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one."

And how about this classic from Isaiah 64:6?

"But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away."

And this from Job 15:14-16.
"What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous? Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight. How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like water?"

Originally posted by telerion
This is easy Hal. All I had to do to refresh my memory was troll around some Christian sites. You know the really bitter ones (e.g. Southern Baptists).

Let's see how about Psalms 14:2-3?

"The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all tog ...[text shortened]... sight. How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like water?"

Sure. I don't deny that mankind is unrighteous, full of iniquity, filthy etc. before God. But isn't it a bit over the top to then deduce that man is "the lowest, dirtiest, most worthless scum in existence."

This is exactly why Christ came to earth -- we are bought with a price, hence we cannot be worthless.

Moreover mankind possesses the intrinsic value of being created in God's (spiritual??) image.

Originally posted by Halitose
Sure. I don't deny that mankind is unrighteous, full of iniquity, filthy etc. [b]before God. But isn't it a bit over the top to then deduce that man is "the lowest, dirtiest, most worthless scum in existence."

This is exactly why Christ came to earth -- we are bought with a price, hence we cannot be worthless.

Moreover mankind possesses the intrinsic value of being created in God's (spiritual??) image.[/b]

Before God or not, there is a consistent message throughout the entire Bible that reviles mankind. There is nothing good in us. With the exception of demons, is any other creature punished eternally in the Bible?

What you bring up though actually reinforces this split nature in xianity. While acknowledging our detestable being, it also proclaims that the greatest of all beings went as far as to have one very bad weekend to help us out. We are filth in the site of God but also set just a little lower than the angels.

It's a classic tear-'em-down-and-build-'em-back-up strategy. It happens all the time in disfunctional homes. A father, for example, verbally abuses his children and witholds affirmation. He makes them feel guilty for living, often times even for his own mistakes (fits perfectly with God actually). Then he points out all the sacrifices he makes for them. How patient he is. How they are not worthy. How they continually cause him pain. The crazy thing is that when some one tells the kids that their father is abusive, they defend him! They repeat exactly what they've been programmed to say. He is patient with us. We do not deserve him. It's subjegation and manipulation. I could never see it when I was a xian, but once I finally broke free it became so clear.

Regarding your last question, I do not believe that man possesses any intrinsic value for being created in God's image. The intrinsic value rests solely in God. Everything else is up to his whim.

Originally posted by telerion
Before God or not, there is a consistent message throughout the entire Bible that reviles mankind. There is nothing good in us. With the exception of demons, is any other creature punished eternally in the Bible?

What you bring up though actually reinforces this split nature in xianity. While acknowledging our detestable being, it also proclaims tha ...[text shortened]... God's image. The intrinsic value rests solely in God. Everything else is up to his whim.

That’s exactly what a prodigal child would say about his/her parents. 😛

Anyways, I still disagree with ya. Mankind was created with divine intention; formed with the purpose of divine romance; fell into rebellion with God and is now stuck somewhere in between -- depending on their choices in life.