MarkT

John Shelby Spong on the Terrible Texts of the Bible

The bible book

THE PROBLEM OF EVIL - C S LEWIS

Rowland Croucher wrote:

> For the one or two here who've not read C S Lewis on pain/hell in The
> Problem of Pain - here's a two-screen summary:
>
> http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/2099.htm

From the site.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> Apart from the Bible, C.S.Lewis' The Problem of Pain is the only book I can remember

> reading five times

I read it once.  I didn't think it was that much of a good argument and that it avoided the core of the classic problem.  A view also taken by Philip Yancey in "Where Is God When It Hurts?" (Zondervan:1990).  Lewis is trying to make an apology for God but it doesn't work. Lewis has made God to look like a mean evil bastard. Only Carl Jung has made any type of inroads into the problem ... and he still has no answer. (See my previous posts.)


>Lewis' later work, A Grief Observed. ...from his heart (after his wife died).

A much better work but still didn't answer the problem.

###################################################
Is god willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him god? - Epicurus (341-270 BCE)
##################################################

NO-ONE has answered this problem.

Lewis' argument leads to the conclusion that God is a mean evil bastard.  In this area Lewis is more an apologist for atheism than Christianity.


> Christianity, in a sense, creates the 'problem of pain' by postulating
> that ultimate reality is righteous and loving.

SO ... IS God righteous and loving?

If not, is such a God worthy to be worshipped?

Is a mean evil bastard of a God worth worshipping???


> The Bible asserts that 'with God all things are possible'. This must
> tacitly exclude, of course, the intrinsically impossible - you may
> attribute miracles to God, but not nonsense.

Why?  It does not logically follow if God is able to do ALL things.  ALL has NO exclusions.  It INCLUDES ALL things.


> wrong actions result where free wills operate, the possibility of
> suffering is inevitable.

That does not explain evil that results from "acts of God" or God's creation / physical laws.


>  God does not violate the aggressive person's will to strike the innocent.

If God wanted to THEN he could IF he is able to do ALL things.

That God doesn't "violate the aggressive person's will to strike the innocent" means that God has made a choice for evil to be inflicted upon the innocent.  It means that God is ABLE to stop it but God is NOT WILLING to stop it. (See my summary of Lewis' argument above and below.)

###################################################
Is he able (to stop evil) but not willing? Then he is malevolent.  - Epicurus (341-270 BCE)
##################################################


>  To ask that God's love should be content with us as we are is to ask that
> God should cease > to be God.

IF

God created us

THEN

any problem with the product is because of the maufacturer's specifications


> Because his love is a 'consuming fire' he must labour to make us truly
> lovable, and when we >are such as he can love without impediment, only
> then shall we in fact be truly happy.

Nonsense!

Jesus spoke of GRACE.

IF

God's love is conditional

THEN

grace is ruled out as it is unconditional (undeserved) love.


> Because some psychoanalysts have explained away the old Christian sense of
> sin

... and rightly so!  It is false guilt.


> the 'wrath' of God seems a barbarous doctrine


It IS a totally barbarous dogma without foundation.

If a Creator makes a creature with faults (ie the ability to sin and to never be perfect) then why is it the creature's fault and not the Creator's fault?

Don't answer with the fictitious myth of the "Fall" of mythical characters called Adanm and eve.  Even if the myth were true why should all of humanity be punished for the sins of others?  Later in the Bible (after Genesis) it says:

Deuteronomy 24:16 - "Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin."

Ezekiel 18:20 - "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself."


> We are creatures whose basic character is a horror to God

If that is true then, as those creatures made horrible by the Creator God, it must be God's fault.  We did not make ourselves.  Our basic character was made by God.


> Probably four-fifths of all human suffering derives from our misusing
> nature, or hurting other people.

Er ... no.  It does not explain evil / pain / suffering from disease, natural disasters and ageing etc.  It does not explain evil / pain / suffering from faulty DNA etc etc etc.

This is a red herring intended to divert from the main problem which is not the evil / pain / suffering inflicted by people upon people BUT ....

###################################################
Is god willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him god? - Epicurus (341-270 BCE)
##################################################

THAT is the problem!!!!!!


> We, not God, have produced racks, whips, prisons, guns and bombs.

God, not us, has created volcanic eruptions, floods, earthquakes, droughts, spontaneous bushfires, tidal waves, diseases, dangerous animals, parasites, bacteria, viruses, falling asteroids, etc etc etc ... and DEATH.  God has WILLED that 100% of his creatures die.  Is death an evil / suffering?????

###################################################
Is he able (to remove death NOW) but not willing? Then he is malevolent.  - Epicurus (341-270 BCE)
##################################################


> we are rebels against God

AND / OR ... God is a faulty Creator who created rebels as his creatures. (See above)  It is part of God's created specifications for his creatures.


> There is a universal feeling that bad people ought to suffer

... but not eternally.  Nor should anyone suffer forever for a temporal sin.


> Pain, as God's megaphone

An infinite God who intentionally inflicts pain upon his finite creatures for no reason is evil.

If a reason cannot be found, Lewis invokes "inherited sin / original sin" and God as a punishment oriented schoolmaster of the early 20th century beating us for our own good.

"It toughens them up."

"Oh, thank you! Another beating! Just what I needed! If you don't beat me I'll think you don't love me. Beat me some more!"

What a silly argument!


> Do the beasts ...'feel'? Certainly both may react to injury but so does
> the anaesthetised human body; reaction therefore does not prove sentience.

QUE???? You must be joking!  Forget the RSPCA and torture any animal you want because they are not sentient????  Maybe the same can be said of those humans who throughout history have been classed as "less than human".  Need I mention the Jews and their treatment at the hands of the Nazis???

"They don't feel pain.  They're Jews!"


> The doctrine of hell, although barbarous to many, has the full support of
> Scripture, especially of our Lord's own words; and has always been held by
> Christendom.

Then scripture and Christendom are clearly wrong because, according to them, a finite single temporal sin will ensure that you burn FOREVER in hell. Such a punishment is totally evil beyond description.  If this is a punisment condoned by God then God is evil.  The punishment does not fit the crime.


> And it has the support of Reason: if a game is played it must
> be possible to lose it.

If life is a game then you would think that the Creator of this game would CLEARLY tell the rules to EVERY one of his creatures.  He hasn't!


> God can't condone evil

Then why has God made it possible?

###################################################
Is he able (to abolish evil NOW) but not willing? Then he is malevolent.  - Epicurus (341-270 BCE)
##################################################


> Our Lord

Which one?  Fundamentalists worship three of 'em!


> uses three symbols to describe hell - everlasting punishment (Matthew
>25:46), destruction (Matthew 10:28), and privation, exclusion, banishment
>(Matthew 22:13). The image of fire illustrates both torment and destruction
>(not annihilation - the destruction of one thing issues in the emergence of
>something else, in both worlds).

So it's quite okay for God to torture a person forever with third degree burns because the person committed one temporal sin?  The punishment does not fit the crime.


> 'I consider,' said Paul, 'that the sufferings of this present time are not
>worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed in us' (Romans 8:18).

Ah!  The ol' "pie in the sky when you die"

This is where EVERY Christian apologetic on this problem ends ... and it is a silly argument.  Notice that NONE of the above from Lewis has addressed the following ....

###################################################
Is god willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him god? - Epicurus (341-270 BCE)
##################################################

Lewis seems to suggest that God is ABLE to prevent evil / pain / suffering but is NOT WILLING to do so. That makes God malevolent.  That sums up all of Lewis' argument.  It is a God that I cannot worship EVER. The One God, Yahweh, that I worship is not a mean evil bastard.

"I (YAHWEH NOT YAHWEH'S MESSIAH), even I ( NOT YAHWEH'S MESSIAH), am he who blots out  your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no
more. " - Isaiah 43:25

"Look unto Me [YAHWEH], and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; for I [YAHWEH] am God, and there is none else [INCLUDING JESUS OF NAZARETH]." Isaiah 45:21

... something some bloke named Jesus said about grace ....

50 Potential Christian Bestsellers

1. Your Best Life Now Book of Martyrs
2. I'm Totally Depraved, You're Totally Depraved
3. 40 or so Days more-or-less of Purpose
4. Bowel Thou Art Loosed - A Christian Guide to Regularity
5. Good Morning Holy Mackerel - Spirit Filled Sport Fishing With Benny Hinn
6. Baldness , True Humility - The Saga of C.J. Mahaney's Failed HairTransplant
7. Prayer of Jabez Guide to Bankruptcy
8. The Ergun Caner Coffee Table Book of Ergun Caner
9. The Power of a Praying Mantis
10. Steal This Book- Then Repent, Bring it Back, and Confess
11. Desiring Gold - Meditations on Things I Would Buy if I were Rich
12. Pretty Good People in the Hands of an Ambivalent God
13. Y3K - Countdown to Armageddon
14. The Tax Code - Secret Messages from God Hidden in Your 1040 Long Form
15. Wicked at Heart - Discovering the Not-So-Secret Secret of Everyone's Soul
16. Raptured By Mistake - Book I of the "I Should Have Been Left Behind" series
17. James White's Guide to Weasel Hunting on the Campus of Liberty University
18. The Maker's Diet II- What God Ate and How It Kept Him Healthy and Feeling Good Forever.
19. Holy Blood, Holy Grail, Holy Cow - Harry Carey's Secret Membership in Opus Dei
20. The Canadian Prophecies : Ancient Scriptures Reveal Our Neighbor to the North's Future
21. 90 Minutes in Hell - A True Story of Death and How Hell was Really Scary and How I Wanted to Get Out of There
22. Purple Like Barney - Non-Religious Thoughts on Obnoxious PBS Children's Programming
23. 12 Extraordinary Little Women - An Inspirational Look at 12 Godly Midgets' Lives
24. Velour Pelagius - Repainting the Emerging Faith
25. The Sixth Love Language - When Heartfelt Commitment Isn't Enough, Christian Techniques to Get You Out of the Dog House
26. Boise Countdown - How The Capitol of Idaho Will Play A Pivotal Roll in the Unfolding of the Millennium
27. Battlefield of the Lower Intestine - Claim Victory Over Satan and His Relentless Attacks on Your Digestive System
28. Discernment and How to Know A Good Book on it When You See One - Tim Challies
29. Veggie Tales Systematic Theology
30. For Men and Women Only - A Straightforward Guide to Stuff You Already Know
31. I Kissed Bundling Goodbye
32. The Message: Shaken-not-Stirred
33. Total Truth II: Electric Boogaloo
34. Found Again - The Baxter family reunites to extract more dollars from the Christian book buying public
35. Noing God: Tales from the Bible on How to Refuse God and Live to Tell About it
36. Outhouse - Vacationing couples are pursued by a maniac killer who lures them to a vacant outhouse which won't let them leave. The "outhouse" mirrors their own heart and souls and they must defeat the evil within

37. What's So Amazing About Grace Kelly?
38. If You Want to Walk on Water Then You Have to Be Jesus. or maybe that David Blaine guy
39. What on Earth Am I Here For and Why On Earth Do I Keep Asking Myself these Questions?
40. Having a Mary Heart in a Paul Body
41. It's Not About Me Too - Further Self-Reflections not About Me.
42. More Secret Power Within: Chuck Norris' Guide To Kickin' the Crap out of Badguys for Christ
43. Misquoting Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed Misquoting Jesus and Why
44. The Openness of God: How 5 Theologians Go to Heaven only to find it 'Closed for the Season'
45. Reimagining Jesus Until I Like What I See
46. A Generous Orthodontics - Why I Think My Fillings Will Be in Heaven
47. Even Newer Strong's Exhausting Concordance - Heavier than Ever
48. Where Would Jesus Eat and How Much Did He Tip?
49. The Way Down Diet - Lose Weight and Your Salvation
50. Capitulating: Unveiling the Mystery of Keeping Your Wife from Getting Mad at You When You Want to Run Around and Do "Wild at Heart" Kind of Guy Stuff

from http://purgatorio1.com/?cat=19

Sham Pearls For Real Swine

from Franky Schaeffer "Sham Pearls For Real Swine" ( Wolgemuth & Hyatt; Brentwood:1990) [Francis Schaeffer's son]

Sir Winston Churchill coined the phrase "sham pearls for real swine" in refernce to the Britiush public school (private prep school to Americans) he attended.  He said of the teaching there that it was a place "where sham pearls were fed to real swine". Unfortunately, the same can be said of a great deal of teaching in the Christian church concerning the arts, media and our culture in general.  p.1

Strange priorities rule the sensibilities of some Christians.  Four-letter words used in film outrage the brethren, yet routine lies in church hardly cause any comment.  Nudity on the stage, screen or canvas arouses fundamentalists to fury, yet a carnival atmosphere of debauched materialism reigns unchallenged in much of the church.  pp1-2

What past leaders would meet our standards of piety? Luther? We would find him vulgar. Shakespeare? Filthy.  Bach? Secular.  Verdi?  Catholic. Joan of Arc? Insane.  Winston Churchill?  A drunken warmonger.  George Washington? A reactionary chauvinist.  Jesus of Nazareth?  Rude, sexist, offensive, and inscrutable.  All of these would be too compolicated, too real, too human for the "nice", the timid, the shallow, the ignorant - the church.  p.2

When my father [Francis Schaeffer] expressed himself on the subject of narrow fundamentalism and evangelical attitudes toward art and culture, it was to bewail the lack of vision and harsh treatment of artists, not the "evils" of the "world". p.6

My parents [Francis and Edith Schaeffer] protected me as best they could, not from art or hard questions, but from mediocrity.  That is why we had so few contemnporary or fundamentalist books in the house. ... That is why my parents never played contemporary Christian music of the gospel variety. ... My father's favourite contemporary music was Bob Dylan songs like "Route 66" and later the Beatles' "Sergeant Pepper's" which he listened to endlessly and discussed avidly and sang along with in his terrible off-key voice upon
occasion.   p.8

... we are now, therefore, paying the dreadful price for a twentieth century brand of evangelical-fundamentalist Christianity that has regarded culture, history, worship, art, and learning as "unspiritual", thus unimportant.  ... The blind are leading the blind.  Ignorant pietistic teachers are passing on a-cultural learning to the children of ignorant parents. p.10

What my wife and I have pursued for our children is good teaching and a love of learning and culture, not ideological or theological purity on the part of our children's teachers.  p.13

"Do not offend your brother" is a bible verse often misused to intimidate the artist ...   p.28

If the Bible were a film, it would be R-rated in some parts, X-rated in others.  the Bible is notr middle class.  The Bible is not "nice".  The Bible's tone is closer to that of the late Lenny Bruce than to the hushed piety of some ministers.  p.28-29

... our reaction to disturbing trends of secularization has led to defensive Christian ghettos in education, the church and the mind.  p. 34

Looking back in history, it is easy to understand the distress Moliere must have felt when some of his "brothers" in the church plotted to have him burnt for blasphemy because he wrote a play, Le Tartuffe.  Ironically, the play itself was intended as a corrective satire to help reform the institution of the church. pp35-36

Christ deeply offended the Phasrisees, and if we are to live as good artists and good Christians, we will offend their modern descendants as well. ... Unlike the simplistic rules of fundamentalism, the true Christian life is a balancing high-wire act.  p. 49

In our times, various ideologically dedicated groups increasingly use censorship, coercion, or propaganda to limit access to ideas, literature, and the arts that they consider threatening. p.74

Censoprship, the twin brother of propaganda, is the tool of despots, of idealogues, of ayatollahs, of fantics. p.96

Pascal wrote: "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" (Pensees, Sec XIV, no. 895). Fundamentalist mischief in the arts by pious men and women has been great. p.100

Those Christians whose opinions are informed by Pietism regard life as a moralistic quest for spiritual expreience.  For Pietists, the results are unimportant if only the motivation is correct.  It is the emotional experience that concerns them, not the mind or soul.  Pietism is a process
of constantly looking inward and searching for spiritual feelings.  Pietism seeks to obey not only the Laws of God, but also a host of petty rules lifted up as "absolutes".  Content, truth and logic take second place to experience, fervor and rule keeping.  In this regard, Pietism is in perfect une with the times.  pp117-118

To the extent that churches are pietistic, they will reject, or at least be uncomfortable with, art, science, not to mention real people!  Art and science ask hard questions; real people are not all respectable. Art and science address complex problems; genuine people behave in unrespectable ways that often raise perplexing questions.  Pietists, like all tribalists,
long for cultic simplicity and easy solutions: lists of dos and don'ts.  ... The original, true, odd, creative person in such a context is a nuisance regarded with suspicion.  Pietism invents far more rules for itself than God ever mandated.  Because freedom is sometimes frightening., the pietists make their circle of life smaller, not bigger, with every successive generation. Thus life becomes narrow, ugly, strange, and cultic and ends in rejection of life just as the manicheans rejected the "flesh".  Such narrowness does not reflect well upon Christianity ... cut off from the real wporld, even real people, pietistic churches have little or no influence in the lives of
the people who are creative. pp.130-131

The first freedom is the freedom to be normal.  The follower of the Truth need not be a guilt-ridden weirdo, part of some small, seperated band of desperate Christian flagellants seeking personal holiness and spirituality by abandoning life.  p133

The follower of Truth is free to apply one standard to all things, to all reality: that is, to simply ask, "Is it true?" "Is it false?"  "Is it good?" :"Is it bad?"  "Does it work?"  "Is it excellent?"  "Is it mediocre?" ... The follower of Truth need not be a strange, mystic oddity.  He is a flesh-and-blood person - a real person who may curse when he hits his thumb while adding an extension to his kitchen, but does not blaspheme by saying "Praise the Lord," unless he means it.  pp.134-135

The follower of Truth is free to be sane. He can simply say, "I got a job as a farmhand because I needed the money."  He does not have to take God's name in vain and say, "The Lord led me to become a farnmhand."  he can give good common sense advice to his friends; he need not indulge in well meant lies and presumptuously tell them that "the Lord laid thus and so on my heart to tell you." The follower of Truth can begin a letter with "dear friend ...
How are you?"  He needn't pretend he is writing an epistle to the church at Corinth and open a letter with "Greeting Brother!  In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, can you send me your recipe for Tortellini al Pesto?"  He understands that reality - the ordinary, the simple, the straightforward - IS God's.  He does not have to be a spiritual lunatic caught up in some
permanent spasm of sneezing out religious phlegm.  p.136

"AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF DOGMATISM" - Paul Tournier