Varied Theology Views
John 8.32: And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. “But whose truth?”
This is a prevailing issue that has led to my faith’s demise. At the beginning of this writing, I eluded to the varying and oft opposing theological views within the umbrella of christianity. Have you ever had a question about god or the bible or religion, and asked someone—usually a pastor or similar theologian, that question? No doubt you received an answer, and that answer may have satisfied your curiosity. Or as is the case so often in my experience, that answer may have only served to cause confusion and perhaps—heaven forbid, even doubt! Did you ever take that same question to a different “bible scholar” and ask them? What answer did you get this time? I’m willing to bet—especially if you were to ask several pastors, church leaders, or bible scholars, that you would get widely varied responses and answers. And often times, those different answers totally oppose each other. One question, numerous varying answers - often polar opposite. How could this possibly be? After all, each “scholar” is going to the same bible for answers, all the while claiming to “led” by the same holy spirit. How could one bible and one god lead to such different and opposing answers? If there are so many issues that cannot be agreed upon—that are different or even opposite, all coming from the same bible, doesn’t that indeed cast a large shadow of doubt on the entire bible?
For instance—one of the most widely debated topics is that of the eternal nature of one’s salvation. Either it is eternal, is not subject to certain terms and conditions, and you cannot lose it, or it is not eternal, is subject to certain terms and conditions, and you can lose it. This seems like a rather important topic within the christian faith, wouldn’t you agree? Once someone accepts Jesus, is “born again”, is “saved”, etc., can they lose their salvation? Of course, the heart of this issue is, if someone accepts Jesus, will they be guaranteed to go to heaven, or can they still go to hell? Certainly important! I have car insurance, and I would like to know if it will cover a car accident or not, or if I do such and such, will my coverage become null and void?
Fortunately for the insured (auto insurance), there is a policy which lays out all the terms and conditions, etc. I can go to my policy to find all the answers required. Now, if only christians had the same thing—oh wait, they do: the bible. Thankfully, this will explain everything and make things perfectly clear, right? After all, what do christians say about the bible? They use a goofy acronym: basic instructions before leaving earth, they say it is their guide to life, their instruction manual, their roadmap, and that it has all the answers one would ever need for life. So, if this is true of the bible, and the topic of eternal security is such an important one, one would naturally assume that the bible clearly lays out the answer to such a vital issue. One would need a lot of imagination, it turns out, as the bible is about as clear as mud when it comes to this topic. Actually, it backs up both sides of the issue. Both camps can go to the same bible to find numerous scriptures to “prove” their point.
When I Googled “scriptures that refute eternal security”, one result was titled “200 Scriptures That Refute Eternal Security.” Another search “scriptures that support eternal security” lead to this web result, “100 Bible Verses About Eternal Security.” As you can see, the bible is very divisive on this topic—just one of many.
The following scriptures are just a few examples used by those believing in eternal security to argue their point.
John 10.28-29: I (Jesus) give them eternal life, and they shall never die. No one can snatch them away from me. What my Father has given me is greater than everything, and no one can snatch them away from the Father's care.
Romans 8.38-39: For I am certain that nothing can separate us from his love…there is nothing in all creation that will ever be able to separate us from the love of God which is ours through Christ Jesus our Lord.
Hebrews 7.25: And so he is able, now and always, to save those who come to God through him, because he lives forever to plead with God for them.
And of course, the most well-known verse in the bible, John 3.16: God loved the world this way: He gave his only Son so that everyone who believes in him will not die but will have eternal life.
And then there are, from the same bible, verses that contradict the above-mentioned ones—scripture that bears proof of the opposite side of the issue, that one can lose their salvation.
Galatians 5.4: For if you are trying to make yourselves right with God by keeping the law, you have been cut off from Christ! You have fallen away from God’s grace.
Hebrews 6.4-6: For how can those who abandon their faith be brought back to repent again? They were once in God's light; they tasted heaven's gift and received their share of the Holy Spirit; they knew from experience that God's word is good, and they had felt the powers of the coming age. And then they abandoned their faith! It is impossible to bring them back to repent again, because they are again crucifying the Son of God and exposing him to public shame.
Hebrews 10.26-27: For there is no longer any sacrifice that will take away sins if we purposely go on sinning after the truth has been made known to us. Instead, all that is left is to wait in fear for the coming Judgment and the fierce fire which will destroy those who oppose God!
These are just a few examples; the list of scriptures supporting both sides goes on and on. And then, you have the “conditions” that they apply to their beliefs. For instance, the eternal security side will say that no matter what, a believer cannot lose his salvation. Until a “believer” strays outside of their “comfort zone” for what is acceptable for believers. Does eternal security mean that someone can become a christian, kill someone, and still go to heaven? What about the person who accepts christ, but still lives “in sin?” Their answers betray their flimsy theology. Well, if someone is truly a christian, they wouldn’t want to commit murder. If they are a true believer, their life would change, as evidence of their true conversion. “By their fruit you shall know them.” Those who state that one can lose their salvation find their “proof” in the bible; those who state that one cannot lose their salvation also find their “proof” in the bible. And as if that isn’t enough to drive you crazy, they then add conditions, or qualifiers. The non-secure camp states that if you do certain things, you will lose your salvation. The secure camp states that if you do certain things, you never obtained salvation in the first place. Rather convenient as to their specific argument.
The list of things christians cannot agree on is a long one. The book of Revelation. Pre, mid, or post tribulation rapture? I guess it depends on whom you ask; on their preference, biases, understandings, misunderstandings, what they’ve been taught. There are probably more things over which christians disagree in the book of Revelation than the rest of the entire bible. Have you ever read the book of Revelation? I have a theory about it—I think that John, the credited author, found a large batch of “magic mushrooms”, and after consuming several of them, began having “visions”, and proceeded to write the book of Revelation, wherein he chronicled those visions. Perhaps if christians were to eat some of those same mushrooms, they would actually be able to agree on the content of the book of Revelation.
I had the unpleasant experience of sitting through a year-long ministry course called “Seminary Advantage”, a very “Baptist-like” course for pastors and ministry leaders. During that nightmare, at one point, the professor taught from the book of Revelation. He set his teachings up by stating, “Most people who teach on Revelation get their information from concordances, from other people. Me—I go directly to the holy spirit, which is where my information comes from. I know more about Revelation than anyone else.” He preceded to “teach” a bunch of ignorant, biased bullshit, taking at least seven weeks to do so.
While eternal security is certainly a major divisive issue, there are many more. I won’t go into a lot of detail over them, but will list a few of them, and will include a few short notes on some.
· Baptism: some believe it is a requirement for salvation; others do not. Also, some believe infant baptism is the way to go, while those on the opposite side of the issue believe that one should wait until they are old enough to make the decision to be baptized for themselves.
· Communion: the bread is either bread or becomes the very body of christ. The wine is either wine or becomes the very blood of christ. Each will argue vehemently his or her position on the topic.
· Baptism of the holy spirit: this one I find infuriating, because of the harm it can do to the believer. The Pentecostal branch of christianity teaches that once one gets “saved”, they must then in a second “work or act of grace” “receive” the holy spirit by baptism. They claim that the evidence of such is the speaking in tongues. If you have ever heard someone speaking in tongues, it likely scared you or at least caused you to wonder what in the hell was going on, and possibly caused you to question their sanity. According to the Pentecostals, speaking in tongues is the pinnacle of the believer’s spiritual life or condition. Without it, a believer is barely a believer. On the other hand, the church I grew up in claimed that speaking in tongues was “of the devil.” A second cousin, who is very much Pentecostal, told me that christians who don’t speak in tongues are saved (as by the skin of their teeth), but barely. They are not “true believers”, he stated in regards to non-tongues-speaking christians. Yikes! Reminds me of the Pharisee praying, “God—I thank you that I am not like other people.” Hmm…tongues—the outward sign that you are inwardly better than everyone else.
· Sanctification: this is a doctrine which deals with the believer’s progress, following their accepting christ--their becoming a believer. It describes the process wherein a christian begins to change--to look increasingly “like Jesus.” Not in physical appearance, of course (because, after all, who the hell knows what Jesus actually looked like), but rather, in actions—words, thoughts, and deeds. Within christianity, there are several varying theories of what this looks like, or how this occurs.
o Instant sanctification: this is the theory that the church I grew up in held to be true. After an altar call to “get saved”, the new believer would then need to participate in yet another altar call, this time to get “sanctified.” This would be a virtual “root canal” of the old sin nature, after which, the believer became effectively perfect and sinless, never again to commit a wretched sin. You read that correctly; they truly believed that you never sinned again, once you were “sanctified.” They were of the non-eternal security camp. If a believer did somehow manage to pull off a sin, he or she would lose their salvation entirely and would once again be headed to hell, unless they began the nightmarish process all over again; one I repeated countless (literally) times. The Pentecostal Church is another of example of instant sanctification, being completed within the believer by being “baptized” in the holy spirit, becoming “sanctified” as a result.
o Gradual sanctification: this is the process of the believer becoming gradually, yet increasingly more “like Jesus.” Sanctification is never complete in this life, and the believer won’t be perfect or sinless until the next life, where they will be complete and perfect through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross, immediately following their death. This theory does not promote the idea that the believer will be sinless in this life.
o Gradual Sanctification after death: this is a theory that some progressive christianity promotes. The believer will not become perfect instantly, nor will they reach perfection immediately following death. There will be “levels” of a purgatory-like existence, wherein the believer will be put through the “fire”—its purpose is to refine and sanctify the believer. This may take longer for some people than others, depending mostly upon the person’s level of “goodness.” Those who are less “like christ” will be in this purgatory like state longer than those who are more “like christ” at the time of their death.
· Different christian denominations: one would think having one bible and one god, or holy spirit, to instruct, teach, and guide christians, that their beliefs would be, for the most part, in agreement with each other. A study of any significance, however, will shatter that myth. And the proof—the fact that under the “umbrella” of christianity, there are or have been 10s of thousands of different denominations. What is so poignant about this fact is the reason for so many different denominations. Each has a different belief about certain theology than the majority of the others. And even more damning—each thinks they are right, that they have it all figured out. Some (many?) will look down on other denominations, going so far as to ridicule them. One god, one bible, 30-40,000 different denominations. One would assume (understandably, yet incorrectly so) that an all-knowing and all-powerful god would be able to communicate clearly with his creation regarding the religion started by his son, and how to effectively carry that religion out, without having thousands of divisions and denominations disagreeing with each other, while simultaneously proclaiming to have gotten it right.
· Different religions: why do the christians have it right? Why is their religion the “only true one?” It is unfathomable to think that one’s eternal destiny is determined by where they were born and the religion their parents practice. And even more telling is the fact that every religion believes the same thing that christians do—that their religion and their religion alone is the “one true” religion. All others need not apply (for eternal bliss, nirvana, heaven—whatever your religion prefers to call it.) I started to realize that one’s geographic location determined their eternal destiny (when I still believed in god and eternity), as opposed to a loving god—as if one’s location is more powerful than an all-powerful god. When I realized that as a christian—that I was part of the “one true” religion because of where I was born, along with my parent’s choice of religion, and that I would feel the same way about any other religion I happened to be born into, my doubts continued to grow, and even more so, christianity began to lose its luster. I began to see it as merely a circumstance of my birth, as opposed to a “one true” religion, and my belief in the god of this “one true” religion began to fade.
In addition to disagreeing, there are things in the bible that christians ignore altogether. The most poignant of those being god’s wrath and murderous, hateful nature in the old testament. The old testament clearly exhibits a god who is angry, vengeful, jealous, and homicidal, among many other stellar characteristics. The accounts of him being/doing so are far too numerous to list here. Just three examples will be sufficient to make my point.
1. In Hosea 13.16, God announces the verdict following a guilty plea for the people of Samaria. In it, he declares, “The people of Samaria must bear the consequences of their guilt because they rebelled against their God. They will be killed by an invading army, their little ones dashed to death against the ground (some versions say rocks), their pregnant women ripped open by swords.” That’s right—the punishment (directed by god) is that everyone be killed. Note that not even the children—born or unborn, are spared. You are seeing that correctly—god orders the abortion of all unborn children—murder by sword. And the method to be employed to murder their infants? What else—dash them against the rocks! Holy shit? Really? Remember, this is god ordaining these murders, including the method by which they should be murdered. As you are contemplating the horrific act of dashing young children against rocks, reflect on the definition of dash. “strike or fling something— (in this case, very young children) somewhere (in this case, against rocks) with great force, especially so as to have a destructive effect; hurl”
2. In 1 Samuel 15.3, god again orders mass murder. He commands, “Go and attack the Amalekites and completely destroy everything they have. Don't leave a thing; kill all the men, women, children, and babies; the cattle, sheep, camels, and donkeys.” Once again, god orders the murders of everyone; and, once again, not even children are spared. Not even the animals. What the hell did a sheep ever do to god? And the cause of god’s wrath and his punishment? I’ll let god say it for me. From the same scripture: “Because their ancestors opposed the Israelites when they were coming from Egypt.” Notice that the ones being punished were not the ones who had committed the offense which “warranted” such horrific consequences. The ones who committed the crime were the ancestors of the ones being punished; the people being punished weren’t even alive at the time of the crime. This seems to be a common theme with god. A god who is described as loving, merciful, and forgiving appears to really hold onto a grudge. We see that here with the Amalekites, and of course, we saw that same “grudge holding” in the Garden of Eden—we are all doomed to hell because of what our ancestors did. And then we run into the problem of the new testament, where, seemingly, and suddenly, god mellows out, and through Jesus, who is purported to be anti-violence, we see the “true” god. One problem, and a big one. How to “marry” the vindictive, violence-prone, genocidal, abortion-ordering god of the OT with this mellow, loving Jesus of the NT. Paul the apostle tells us that in Jesus, we see the entirety, or the fullness of god. Colossians 2.9: “For the full content of divine nature lives in Christ.” This creates quite the conundrum for apologetics. One could hardly envision Jesus ordering mass murders and abortions, yet there it is—that dang scripture stating he represents or exhibits the full characteristics of god. Many a pathetic attempt is made in order to mesh the two together, all without any convincing or believable or even sensible arguments.
3. In Ezekiel 4, we see that god is once again pissed off at the Israelites. God was pissed at the Israelites so many times, it’s amazing they survived and still exist today. In Ezekiel 4, a conversation is taking place between god and the prophet Ezekiel. The topic at hand is god’s anger towards the Israelites and how god is going to deal with their sin. At first, god considers just wiping them out, but then comes up with a stellar, foolproof plan to deal with their sin. That plan—to have his prophet “play army” with a brick, a play wall, and an iron griddle. God tells Ezekiel to draw the city of Jerusalem on the brick, place toy walls around it, and then to place an iron griddle between himself and the makeshift “city.” He is then instructed to act out the impending doom of the battle that is coming to the Israelites, if they continue to sin. Part of god’s plan here is to have Ezekiel bear the sins of both nations—Israel and Judah. He is instructed to lie on his left side for the sins of Israel, and then on his right side for Judah—one day for each year of their sins. Those sins—390 years’ worth for Israel, and 40 years’ worth for Judah. If you’re keeping track, you’ve already figured out that this poor guy had to lie on his left side for 390 days, and then on his right side for 40 days. And it is obvious, that contrary to 1 Corinthians 13, which says god’s love “keeps no record of being wronged”, god was keeping track—apparently a very detailed record—for centuries. And of course, due to the severity of the peoples’ sins, god had to make sure Ezekiel lie there for the duration of that time. How did he do this? He tied him up, of course—what else? Ezekiel 4.8: “I will tie you up with ropes so you won’t be able to turn from side to side until the days of your siege have been completed.” Of course, Ezekiel is going to need to eat during this time, so god instructed him to gather certain foods, some of which he would use to make bread. “But you need a fire to bake the bread”, perhaps you’re thinking. And you’d be absolutely correct. God, who has a history of coming up with stellar plans, once again, does not disappoint. The fuel for that fire to bake the bread? Human shit! (I shit you not!) Ezekiel 4.12: “While all the people are watching, bake it over a fire using dried human dung as fuel and then eat the bread.” However, Ezekiel protested. Why? He didn’t want to be defiled by eating food baked over human shit, so he devised a plan to bake the bread without becoming defiled. That plan? Use cow shit instead. He asked god if that would be okay, and in Ezekiel 4.15, god says, “All right. You may bake your bread with cow dung instead of human dung.” Whew—what a relief! I have to wonder, though, why Ezekiel protested using human shit (understandably so), but not being tied up and having to lie on one side for 390 days? How did atrophy not set in? You would think that once Ezekiel carried out god’s plan, that god’s anger would be satiated; however, that is anything but the case, as we see in the next chapter. In chapter five, god goes on to describe Israel’s fate due to his fierce anger—anger that god himself describes as “jealous” anger. Check out their fate in chapter five. In verse 8, god says, “I myself, the Sovereign Lord, am now your enemy.” That’s right, the god who told them he would never leave them, never forsake them, now tells them he is their enemy! I am reminded of the song, “I Am a Friend of God”, which declares just that…unless god declares you his enemy. Then, so much for that friendship. And their fate as a result? Verse 11: “I (god) will cut you off completely. I will show you no pity at all.” And as a result, here is what god would go on to say he would do to them: 1) I will scatter my people with the sword. 2) A fire will then spread from this remnant and destroy all of Israel. 3) I will punish you publicly while all the nations watch. Because of your detestable idols, I will punish you like I have never punished anyone before or ever will again. (Hmm…what about hell?!) 4) Parents will eat their own children, and children will eat their parents. WTF? 5) A third of your people will die in the city from disease and famine. A third of them will be slaughtered by the enemy outside the city walls. And I will scatter a third to the winds, chasing them with my sword. 6) I will turn you into a ruin, a mockery in the eyes of the surrounding nations and to all who pass by. You will become an object of mockery and taunting and horror. 7) I will shower you with the deadly arrows of famine to destroy you. The famine will become more and more severe until every crumb of food is gone. 8) And along with the famine, wild animals will attack you and rob you of your children. Disease and war will stalk your land, and I will bring the sword of the enemy against you. And then, god concludes this list of horrific punishments by saying, “I, the Lord, have spoken!” Well—holy shit!
4. While it does not involve god’s wrath, there is another incident in scripture that is noteworthy enough to be included in this list. It occurs in Genesis 30. The entire story is one of jealousy and sex, two wives and their husbands sleeping with each wife’s maid—on the order of the wife. The point of this story centers around two sisters, both of whom became Jacob’s wives. He had to work for Laban, their father, for seven years for each wife. He went on to work for him for a total of 14 years, after which time he wanted to move and be out from under working for Laban. He had made Laban very wealthy, and asked Laban if he could have some of his sheep and goats to take with him, to help him get back on his feet. He asked if he could take the sheep and goats which had speckles or spots. Laban agreed, but then reneged, sending those animals that Jacob would have had with his sons on a three-day journey so that Jacob could not have them. Jacob took matters into his own hands, finding a way to create sheep and goats that were spotted and speckled, thereby creating his own flock. From Genesis 30.37-39. “Then Jacob took some fresh branches from poplar, almond, and plane trees and peeled off strips of bark, making white streaks on them. Then he placed these peeled branches in the watering troughs where the flocks came to drink, for that was where they mated. And when they mated in front of the white-streaked branches, they gave birth to young that were streaked, speckled, and spotted.” Yeah, that’ll work! Perhaps this explains zebras and leopards. ~continues in Part Thirteen
No comments:
Post a Comment