The Promise

The Bible is the "Word of God".

If God didn't want us to hear his word, the Bible wouldn't exist. But he does want us to hear his word, so it does. (Assuming for a second that Christianity is right about God and so on)

He thinks it's important we know about salvation. He has shared his word with us because he offers us things - and expects things in return.
 
The Bible is the "Word of God".

If God didn't want us to hear his word, the Bible wouldn't exist. But he does want us to hear his word, so it does. (Assuming for a second that Christianity is right about God and so on)

He thinks it's important we know about salvation. He has shared his word with us because he offers us things - and expects things in return.

But god's love is not conditional on that. He loves you the same regardless, and no, he doesn't expect anyone to read the bible, profess faith, practice Christianity etc. It's just a choice you can make or not make.

From a human perspective it's weird because humans are incapable of selfless love. We confuse our desire for something in return with tainting that love and it become an expectation, that we are only loving because of that expectation. And for us humans it's probably true, but not for god.

I think the best way I can put it is like having a child. Do you have kids? I do, and I love them no matter what, it's like biological but also a choice sometimes. I can't really explain it, you just love them. At the same time I expect them to act a certain way and we try and teach them that, and I expect them to provide some sort of emotional feedback. Like it's hard to put into words but basically I expect them to love me back, and they do cus kids love their parents naturally unless the parents really screw up. And we're pretty good to them I think! But my love is not conditional on any of their behavior or any expectations I have for them. I would love them no matter what. At the same time I have expectations. That's probably as close as I can put it.


Also hell definitely exists. Jesus talked about it a ton in the gospels as a real place. But he never once said that god sends people to hell. In fact often times he says the opposite, that in the end times all will be saved, and he died for all. Hell might be empty for all we know. That's just the thing, no one knows how it works, we just try to follow Jesus's teachings and example.
 
But god's love is not conditional on that.

Let me rephrase what I said, because I agree that your conclusion follows from what I wrote.

"He has shared his word with us because he offers us things, and expect things as well"

I don't think you can get around the fact that God has expectations of us. That's what was taught to me in Catholic sunday school anyway. If God didn't have any expectations of us, he either wouldn't have released his word via the Bible, or the Bible would basically say: "And then the Lord said, do whatever you want, I don't care". But nah, God says we should do very specific things, and also shouldn't do other specific things. And those who do not follow these expectations have to pay for it one way or another.
 
The Bible is the "Word of God".

If God didn't want us to hear his word, the Bible wouldn't exist. But he does want us to hear his word, so it does. (Assuming for a second that Christianity is right about God and so on)

He thinks it's important we know about salvation. He has shared his word with us because he offers us things - and expects things in return.
Why assume what Christianity teaches? If as you put it, "The Bible is the Word of God". Is that because Christianity said so, or because God said so? God offered Christ to redeem human kind. The first thing is to acknowledge that humans need redemption. That is about all that God demands. But redemption was not forced on humans, nor expected of them. Jesus was the only human that God demanded redemption to be paid. God loves us, and of course wants us to accept that redemption, but it is not demanded. If hell is the demand, then we still have the choice to pay that demand or accept God's love.
 
I mean, I've read the Bible, a couple times.

If God didn't want anything from us, the Bible wouldn't exist.

This just isn't true. Even if we accept that Jesus is divine, there's vastly more evidence that the Bible is not the Word of God than evidence that it is. If we believe in the Adversary, then the I can definitively state that the Bible is probably the worst case of libel against God in the world.

We can snip out the teachings of Jesus if we want. He teaches a rather different story than what we see in the rest of the Bible.
 
Why assume what Christianity teaches?

I don't make any assumptions here, I am going by what I was taught by Catholic nuns and others.

If as you put it, "The Bible is the Word of God". Is that because Christianity said so, or because God said so?

I was taught that The Bible is God's communique to us. Without God's will for us to hear his word, the Bible wouldn't exist.

If hell is the demand, then we still have the choice to pay that demand or accept God's love.

Yes, God expects us to weigh this and to make a decision. If God didn't have the expectation of us to make this decision, he wouldn't have presented it to us.

I mean, there are a lot more expectations than that. Jesus himself said: "You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

He also said things like "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength." and "As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do."

These are all expectations, I don't know how you can say that they are not.

This just isn't true. Even if we accept that Jesus is divine, there's vastly more evidence that the Bible is not the Word of God than evidence that it is. If we believe in the Adversary, then the I can definitively state that the Bible is probably the worst case of libel against God in the world.

We can snip out the teachings of Jesus if we want. He teaches a rather different story than what we see in the rest of the Bible.

I mean, of course the Bible is not actually the word of God. But that is what Christianity teaches, that God has guided the creation of this book using the holy spirit, and has allowed it, via his many all-powerful means, to be curated in a specific way and to survive up until this point.
 
And those who do not follow these expectations have to pay for it one way or another.

Not true. Jesus Christ paid for it.

You're equating god's desire for us to do certain things with his love and they are separate. Again I refer you to my example about children. Parents have expectations for their kids, but they love them instinctively aside from those expectations.

But I mean it's your call if you want to think god only loves people when they do his bidding fine, no skin off my back, just saying that's not christian theology teaches.


I mean, there are a lot more expectations than that. Jesus himself said: "You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect."

He also said things like "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength." and "As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do."

These are all expectations, I don't know how you can say that they are not.

Yeah but it doesn't say "You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect," or else god won't love you. Which is what you seem to be implying.
 
The Bible is the "Word of God".

If God didn't want us to hear his word, the Bible wouldn't exist. But he does want us to hear his word, so it does. (Assuming for a second that Christianity is right about God and so on)

He thinks it's important we know about salvation. He has shared his word with us because he offers us things - and expects things in return.

Yeah but it's a tricky book to read. There's a surprise plot twist about 5/6 of the way through, and it turns out you have to go back and re-read everything that preceded that in light of that plot twist. When you do, your whole sense of what that God character "expects in return" is fundamentally altered. Fortunately (setting aside the little sci-fi short story appended to the end) the last 1/6th is Cliffs Notes for that rereading.
 
But I mean it's your call if you want to think god only loves people when they do his bidding

I never claimed such a thing, so you don't have to argue against it.

That said, Jesus does talk about 'an unforgiveable sin'. So, there are actual expectations.

Yeah, that's all I'm saying, that expectations exist. Whatever they may be.
 
That said, Jesus does talk about 'an unforgiveable sin'. So, there are actual expectations.

There's only one reference I could find (Mark 3:28-29) and in the context of the passage it's not about an action but about a willful rejection of god. So no I don't think that qualifies as an exception. It's not an act of sin that god can't forgive, but rather rejecting him and his spirit in whole.

The mortal sins the catholic church comes up with are kind of made up imo though based on the ten commandments. But jesus never said oh this one's worse than the other, I can't forgive that. In fact he says stuff like even the smallest sin matters like even wishing hatred towards your brother is akin to murdering him, and at the same time he forgave some of the worst people like prostitutes and cheating tax collectors and even a murderer on the cross.
 
That said, Jesus does talk about 'an unforgiveable sin'. So, there are actual expectations.
Yeah, that's all I'm saying, that expectations exist. Whatever they may be.

If one rejects the pardon, how can the pardon be of any effect? The act that is unforgivable is the rejection of redemption. Instead of God forcing you to accept, God reserves the right to not extend the offer beyond your rejection.

The expectations of the Old Testament was for the Hebrews/Jews.

The expectations of the New Testament is for those who accept the redemption of Christ. Those followers were called Christians. The religion that happened centuries later was carried out by "Christians" but the religion does not make one a race of believers. Each and every human has to decide to accept God's redemption. Once made then God expects a son of God to be like God. But you cannot do all those things if you are not a "child". The only thing that is expected is to accept a place in the family.

The family is not a race or religion. One may not be comfortable with some religions or even being religious altogether.
 
This could very well be a disagreement of the Catholic vs "Whichever sect you were brought up under" variety. Because I was brought up thinking that God expected things of us. That's why we pray every day, confess every once in a while, and participate in all the other sacraments. If God had no expectations, the sacraments would be worthless
 
If you want to be all Catholic about it, the way I see it from a not-very-far outsider(but by no means particularly informed) is that holy mother church has expectations of you, and the church is your intermediary with the divine. And as Gori hinted at earlier, knowing what is expected of you can be easier than be cut loose to deal entirely with your own expectations of yourself. The sheer powerlessness offered you in the face of the UMC interpretation of the almighty is a bit...boggling, isn't it? Just sort of flies in the face of "fairness" and "right/wrong" and all that?
 
If you want to be all Catholic about it, the way I see it from a not-very-far outsider(but by no means particularly informed) is that holy mother church has expectations of you, and the church is your intermediary with the divine.

Yes, but this intermediary has always communicated to us (i.e. us, the Catholics) that God has certain expectations of us. That's what the priests usually highlight during mass, especially during the "free style" part where the priest talks to you a bit more casually. He'll usually tell some story or read some passage and then try to relate it to some moral we're supposed to learn and how we can improve in life or whatever. It's always done in the context of God's plan or grace or whatever

So while the church does indeed have many expectations of followers, from what I remember anyway, it was drilled into our heads that God expects things of us as well - not to mention having incredibly high standards. The expectations presented us were usually of the "We expect you to do this, because that's what God wants" variety.

I actually don't remember many expectations that the church had of us that weren't "passed down" from God, aside from inconsequential/minute stuff that was bureaucratic in nature
 
Well, a Methodist minister will certainly preach to you, and that preaching is likely to involve a morality lesson that is meant to apply everyday so you can live a more loving life, or whatever, but as to The Promise: you already got that. It's done. Settled. You don't get any say in as to whether you deserve it or not. Your life was never yours in the first place.
 
but as to The Promise: you already got that. It's done. Settled. You don't get any say in as to whether you deserve it or not. Your life was never yours in the first place.

Sure, but that's not to mean that the Catholic position isn't that God expects things of me. His love might be unconditional (I disagree that it is, but let's say that it is), but there are expectations there for me to follow. That's why I have free will, right? So I can decide to give God the middle finger and start sinning or be a good Christian and fall in line with his expectations
 
I don't know Warpus. If you feel you need an intermediary, holy mother church seems happy to provide one. You can listen to her guidance. My UMC take on it is that the intermediary is entirely besides the point, but that I hope you love better for it, should you use it.
 
Back
Top Bottom