Sometimes when I read blogs or boards like this I'm overwhelmed by the amount of variation in secondary Christian beliefs, and while some of those belief have what seems to me very good pedigree, with plenty of scriptural backing, I'm sometimes left wondering if sometimes we adhere to certain doctrine because it aligns with our own views about the world, rather than the other way around (we aligning ourselves to, say, scripture's worldview).
Here's an example, and this is JUST an example. I don't mean to make this the topic of the thread, and I don't mean to imply that anyone's views on the subject are wrong or are not Biblically sound. But let's take for instance the topic of hell. There are a number of views on hell that might include the view that people in hell are eternally damned by God against their will as a form of ultimate justice, and then there are those who believe that those who are in hell are in hell because they can't stand to be in God's company, and thus the doors of hell are locked from the inside, and then there are some who think that people who are in hell will eventually be drawn back to God and released from their torment, and there are some who believe that those in hell will eventually be annihilated, and their torment will cease because they will be destroyed, and then there are those who maybe have a view that combines a few from list a.) and a few from list b.), or maybe none of the above.
Now, not all of these views can in reality be true, and probably most people are going to go with what seems to have the most scriptural backing, and makes the most logical sense from what we know about God. But is it at all possible that sometimes we take the view that seems to us more likely because it aligns with our own feelings, your own presuppositions? Is it possible for the guy who believes in a more universalist version of hell to hold that view because he considers the other views too harsh, too demanding for a God of grace, and he can't imagine a God who exists who is less benevolent, less forgiving than he is? Or the guy who believes God locks up the damned and throws away the key, does he hold that view because he can't believe in a God who is any less just, any less fair than he is?
Now I don't really need an answer to the questions about hell, its just an example, and its just as likely that the universalist, and the guy who believes God throws away the key both have tremendous reasons for believing what they believe outside of their own feelings on the subject.
But my question is, is it possible that we can get stuck making God in our own image, choosing the things that we like and/or don't like, less by reason, and more on maybe a gut or emotional level? And if so, how do we stop ourselves from doing that? Or how do we temper ourselves so we don't get in the way of coming to know who God is? Is maybe an apophatic view of God important for this very reason, or does the apophatic view come with its own picking and choosing what we don't want to believe?
Your thoughts?
Here's an example, and this is JUST an example. I don't mean to make this the topic of the thread, and I don't mean to imply that anyone's views on the subject are wrong or are not Biblically sound. But let's take for instance the topic of hell. There are a number of views on hell that might include the view that people in hell are eternally damned by God against their will as a form of ultimate justice, and then there are those who believe that those who are in hell are in hell because they can't stand to be in God's company, and thus the doors of hell are locked from the inside, and then there are some who think that people who are in hell will eventually be drawn back to God and released from their torment, and there are some who believe that those in hell will eventually be annihilated, and their torment will cease because they will be destroyed, and then there are those who maybe have a view that combines a few from list a.) and a few from list b.), or maybe none of the above.
Now, not all of these views can in reality be true, and probably most people are going to go with what seems to have the most scriptural backing, and makes the most logical sense from what we know about God. But is it at all possible that sometimes we take the view that seems to us more likely because it aligns with our own feelings, your own presuppositions? Is it possible for the guy who believes in a more universalist version of hell to hold that view because he considers the other views too harsh, too demanding for a God of grace, and he can't imagine a God who exists who is less benevolent, less forgiving than he is? Or the guy who believes God locks up the damned and throws away the key, does he hold that view because he can't believe in a God who is any less just, any less fair than he is?
Now I don't really need an answer to the questions about hell, its just an example, and its just as likely that the universalist, and the guy who believes God throws away the key both have tremendous reasons for believing what they believe outside of their own feelings on the subject.
But my question is, is it possible that we can get stuck making God in our own image, choosing the things that we like and/or don't like, less by reason, and more on maybe a gut or emotional level? And if so, how do we stop ourselves from doing that? Or how do we temper ourselves so we don't get in the way of coming to know who God is? Is maybe an apophatic view of God important for this very reason, or does the apophatic view come with its own picking and choosing what we don't want to believe?
Your thoughts?
Comment