Exactly two months ago today I presented The Everlasting Hell Challenge which, as of yet, nobody has been able to win. A poster on the message board where I first presented the challenge asked me to, using the exact same criteria as my original challenge, try to prove Universal Reconciliation. The challenge presented to me was:
Demonstrate convincingly that the idea that "everybody has been (or eventually will be) reconciled or saved by Christ" is a much clearer teaching in Scripture than the idea that "the punishment for those who die without putting their faith in Jesus Christ alone to save them (apart from any works) is everlasting." You must not contradict any other parts of Scripture or any other of your own theological positions in order to demonstrate this.
I decided to take the challenge, and the following is what I came up with:
The easy part of this challenge is, of course, to refer to my own Everlasting Hell Challenge and note that there's nothing in Scripture that teaches that anybody who dies without putting their faith in Jesus Christ alone to save them (apart from any works) will spend eternity in torment, at least nothing that anyone has pointed out in Scripture yet anyway, so unless someone comes up with something on that front this seems to leave ET (Everlasting Torment) out of the running as an option. This leaves Annihilation and UR (Universal Reconciliation) as the only other options that I can think of.
So is there anything in Scripture that might suggest Annihilation, and if so does it seem to be a stronger argument than for UR? The only passage that I'm aware of that might suggest annihilation for those who die without putting their faith in Jesus Christ alone to save them (apart from any works) is 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9, "In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power" (King James Version). Of course when we look at that passage in a more literal translation we see it translated as, "in flaming fire, giving vengeance to those not knowing God, and to those not obeying the good news of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall suffer justice -- destruction age-during -- from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of his strength" (Young's Literal Translation), so even that passage might not support Annihilation if we go by the YLT since it seems like the destruction might only last until the end of the age (or ages) rather than forever according to that translation.
So while that seems to eliminate ET as an option, and leaves Annihilation as a possible option, we still need to consider whether Scripture suggests the idea of UR at all, and if so does it seem to point more strongly towards UR than it does towards Annihilation? To be honest I'm not even sure where to begin here, there are so many passages in Scripture that seem to indicate UR. I'll just post a few of these passages, along with my thoughts on some of them, but if you want to see a extended list (and not even necessarily an exhaustive list at that) of passages that seem to point us towards UR you can read them here: The Ultimate Redemptive Purposes of God: Scriptures Concerning the Reconciliation of All Things.
I'm going to start with a few passages from the Old Testament to show how it reveals God's attitude towards judgement:
"O give thanks to the Lord, for He is good; For His mercy endureth forever." - I Chron 16:34
"For His anger is but for a moment, His favor is for a lifetime; Weeping may last for the night, but a shout of joy comes in the morning." - Ps 30:5
[This actually seems to be a theme repeated throughout Scripture. God's judgements can be severe but His mercy and grace will always be the end result.]
"And the Lord of hosts will prepare a lavish banquet for all peoples on this mountain [Mount Zion]...and on this mountain He will swallow up the covering which is over all peoples, even the veil which is stretched over all nations. He will swallow up death for all time, and the Lord God will wipe tears away from all faces." - Is 25:6-8
[If God is going to swallow up death for all time, I would think this would include everybody who has ever died.]
"All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him." - Is 53:6
[Most Christians believe that this prophetically refers to Christ. If the iniquity of us all have fallen on Him then all of us have been forgiven.]
"For the Lord will not reject forever, for if He causes grief, then He will have compassion according to His abundant lovingkindness." - Lam 3:31-32
[Enough said. :D ]
That's enough OT for now, time to move on to the NT:
"What do you think? If any man has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go and search for the one that is straying? Thus it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones perish." - Mt 18:12,14
[I really don't think it gets much clearer than the parable of the lost sheep. I don't see how one can read or hear this parable without coming to the conclusion that the Good Shepherd will find every last one of us.]
"Jesus said, "Father forgive them; they know not what they do." - Lk 23:34
[Yes, He could have just been speaking of those who crucified Him, but if someone who committed that act gets forgiveness how could any of us not be forgiven (not to mention the fact that many Christians believe that all of us are responsible for His death)?]
"The next day he [John the Baptist] saw Jesus coming to him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!"" - Jn 1:29
"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself." - Jn 12:32
[Do we believe that Christ will keep His promises?]
"So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One, the many will be made righteous. And the Law came in that the transgression might increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more!" - Rom 5:18-20
[Granted, the Bible isn't an algebra textbook, but if we were to break this passage down formulaically (assuming that the "all" and "many" in both groups refer to the same people) it would be very difficult to come to any conclusion other than UR.]
"For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will, but because of Him who subjected it in hope, that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God." - Rom 8:19-21
"For God has shut up all in disobedience that He might show mercy to all. Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!" - Rom 11:32,33
[These two passages tell us that God is ultimately responsible for the state the world is in, which means that He planned both sin and the fall, but for a reason. They also seem to indicate that His plan for causing us to suffer in this fallen world will ultimately be positive for everybody.]
"For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fulness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven. And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach." - Col 1:19-22
"Christ is all, and is in all." - Col 3:11
"Even though I [Paul] was formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent aggressor, yet I was shown mercy, because I acted ignorantly in unbelief." - I Tim 1:13
[As David Sprenger put it, If the prerequisite for mercy is ignorance and unbelief, then who will fail to qualify?]
"For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony to be borne at the proper time." - 1 Tim 2:5,6
"For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." - 1 Tim 4:10
["Especially" doesn't mean "exclusively." Please note that it also doesn't say that God is the "potential" Saviour of all men but that He simply is the Saviour of all men, and in order to be a Saviour you have to actually do some saving, hence all men are (or will be) saved.]
"In these last days He has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world." - Heb 1:2
"But now once at the consummation He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself." - Heb 9:26
[Sin isn't put away by our faith, it was put away by His sacrifice 2,000 years ago.]
"And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." - 1 John 2:2
[You knew I was going to bring this one up, didn't you? :D ]
While there are many more passages I could go over, I've probably taken up enough space here already (but check the page I referred to above for lots more). So while the Annihilation option has 1 potential passage to back it up (and depending on the translation and/or interpretation one uses one could argue quite convincingly that it doesn't even do that), I quoted 20 passages (out of many others that I didn't post) that seem to point us towards UR (and not just point towards, some of them seem to state the position quite clearly, at least when taken at face value). If we were simply going by quantity I'd say that UR wins hands down, but even after we've taken context and interpretation into consideration I would posit that UR still has much more going for it that Annihilation (and 100% more going for it than ET for non-believers, seeing as we couldn't find any passages to back that position up).
Now there is one more position we haven't covered, and that's the idea of ET for those who don't do certain works (including the work of not avoiding certain actions/inactions), which pretty much every passage traditionally used to argue for ET could easily be interpreted as saying. I've obviously left that position out since neither I, nor most other Protestants I know, believes that salvation is by works, and the challenge included the clause that you must not contradict "any other of your own theological positions in order to demonstrate" your conclusion. Also, depending on one's translation and/or interpretation, it can easily be argued that these passages are referring to an age of punishment rather than an eternity as well (check out Young's Literal Translation and see for yourself).
So I leave it to you. Zero passages supporting ET for non-believers, one passage possibly supporting Annihilation for non-believers, and twenty-plus passages supporting UR (ignoring the ten or so passages possibly supporting ET for those who don't do certain good works, depending on one's translation and/or interpretation). With all that in mind, I would ask why anybody would continue to believe that the Bible teaches that non-believers in Christ suffer everlasting torment in hell after death (apart from the fact that it's what you were taught by your church and many would suffer negative consequences from other Christians for changing their mind on this issue)? Equally, I would ask how anybody can not believe that Scripture clearly teaches Universal Reconciliation in Christ?
Demonstrate convincingly that the idea that "everybody has been (or eventually will be) reconciled or saved by Christ" is a much clearer teaching in Scripture than the idea that "the punishment for those who die without putting their faith in Jesus Christ alone to save them (apart from any works) is everlasting." You must not contradict any other parts of Scripture or any other of your own theological positions in order to demonstrate this.
I decided to take the challenge, and the following is what I came up with:
The easy part of this challenge is, of course, to refer to my own Everlasting Hell Challenge and note that there's nothing in Scripture that teaches that anybody who dies without putting their faith in Jesus Christ alone to save them (apart from any works) will spend eternity in torment, at least nothing that anyone has pointed out in Scripture yet anyway, so unless someone comes up with something on that front this seems to leave ET (Everlasting Torment) out of the running as an option. This leaves Annihilation and UR (Universal Reconciliation) as the only other options that I can think of.
So is there anything in Scripture that might suggest Annihilation, and if so does it seem to be a stronger argument than for UR? The only passage that I'm aware of that might suggest annihilation for those who die without putting their faith in Jesus Christ alone to save them (apart from any works) is 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9, "In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power" (King James Version). Of course when we look at that passage in a more literal translation we see it translated as, "in flaming fire, giving vengeance to those not knowing God, and to those not obeying the good news of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall suffer justice -- destruction age-during -- from the face of the Lord, and from the glory of his strength" (Young's Literal Translation), so even that passage might not support Annihilation if we go by the YLT since it seems like the destruction might only last until the end of the age (or ages) rather than forever according to that translation.
So while that seems to eliminate ET as an option, and leaves Annihilation as a possible option, we still need to consider whether Scripture suggests the idea of UR at all, and if so does it seem to point more strongly towards UR than it does towards Annihilation? To be honest I'm not even sure where to begin here, there are so many passages in Scripture that seem to indicate UR. I'll just post a few of these passages, along with my thoughts on some of them, but if you want to see a extended list (and not even necessarily an exhaustive list at that) of passages that seem to point us towards UR you can read them here: The Ultimate Redemptive Purposes of God: Scriptures Concerning the Reconciliation of All Things.
I'm going to start with a few passages from the Old Testament to show how it reveals God's attitude towards judgement:
"O give thanks to the Lord, for He is good; For His mercy endureth forever." - I Chron 16:34
"For His anger is but for a moment, His favor is for a lifetime; Weeping may last for the night, but a shout of joy comes in the morning." - Ps 30:5
[This actually seems to be a theme repeated throughout Scripture. God's judgements can be severe but His mercy and grace will always be the end result.]
"And the Lord of hosts will prepare a lavish banquet for all peoples on this mountain [Mount Zion]...and on this mountain He will swallow up the covering which is over all peoples, even the veil which is stretched over all nations. He will swallow up death for all time, and the Lord God will wipe tears away from all faces." - Is 25:6-8
[If God is going to swallow up death for all time, I would think this would include everybody who has ever died.]
"All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him." - Is 53:6
[Most Christians believe that this prophetically refers to Christ. If the iniquity of us all have fallen on Him then all of us have been forgiven.]
"For the Lord will not reject forever, for if He causes grief, then He will have compassion according to His abundant lovingkindness." - Lam 3:31-32
[Enough said. :D ]
That's enough OT for now, time to move on to the NT:
"What do you think? If any man has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go and search for the one that is straying? Thus it is not the will of your Father who is in heaven that one of these little ones perish." - Mt 18:12,14
[I really don't think it gets much clearer than the parable of the lost sheep. I don't see how one can read or hear this parable without coming to the conclusion that the Good Shepherd will find every last one of us.]
"Jesus said, "Father forgive them; they know not what they do." - Lk 23:34
[Yes, He could have just been speaking of those who crucified Him, but if someone who committed that act gets forgiveness how could any of us not be forgiven (not to mention the fact that many Christians believe that all of us are responsible for His death)?]
"The next day he [John the Baptist] saw Jesus coming to him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!"" - Jn 1:29
"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself." - Jn 12:32
[Do we believe that Christ will keep His promises?]
"So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One, the many will be made righteous. And the Law came in that the transgression might increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more!" - Rom 5:18-20
[Granted, the Bible isn't an algebra textbook, but if we were to break this passage down formulaically (assuming that the "all" and "many" in both groups refer to the same people) it would be very difficult to come to any conclusion other than UR.]
"For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will, but because of Him who subjected it in hope, that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God." - Rom 8:19-21
"For God has shut up all in disobedience that He might show mercy to all. Oh the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!" - Rom 11:32,33
[These two passages tell us that God is ultimately responsible for the state the world is in, which means that He planned both sin and the fall, but for a reason. They also seem to indicate that His plan for causing us to suffer in this fallen world will ultimately be positive for everybody.]
"For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fulness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven. And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach." - Col 1:19-22
"Christ is all, and is in all." - Col 3:11
"Even though I [Paul] was formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent aggressor, yet I was shown mercy, because I acted ignorantly in unbelief." - I Tim 1:13
[As David Sprenger put it, If the prerequisite for mercy is ignorance and unbelief, then who will fail to qualify?]
"For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony to be borne at the proper time." - 1 Tim 2:5,6
"For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." - 1 Tim 4:10
["Especially" doesn't mean "exclusively." Please note that it also doesn't say that God is the "potential" Saviour of all men but that He simply is the Saviour of all men, and in order to be a Saviour you have to actually do some saving, hence all men are (or will be) saved.]
"In these last days He has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world." - Heb 1:2
"But now once at the consummation He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself." - Heb 9:26
[Sin isn't put away by our faith, it was put away by His sacrifice 2,000 years ago.]
"And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." - 1 John 2:2
[You knew I was going to bring this one up, didn't you? :D ]
While there are many more passages I could go over, I've probably taken up enough space here already (but check the page I referred to above for lots more). So while the Annihilation option has 1 potential passage to back it up (and depending on the translation and/or interpretation one uses one could argue quite convincingly that it doesn't even do that), I quoted 20 passages (out of many others that I didn't post) that seem to point us towards UR (and not just point towards, some of them seem to state the position quite clearly, at least when taken at face value). If we were simply going by quantity I'd say that UR wins hands down, but even after we've taken context and interpretation into consideration I would posit that UR still has much more going for it that Annihilation (and 100% more going for it than ET for non-believers, seeing as we couldn't find any passages to back that position up).
Now there is one more position we haven't covered, and that's the idea of ET for those who don't do certain works (including the work of not avoiding certain actions/inactions), which pretty much every passage traditionally used to argue for ET could easily be interpreted as saying. I've obviously left that position out since neither I, nor most other Protestants I know, believes that salvation is by works, and the challenge included the clause that you must not contradict "any other of your own theological positions in order to demonstrate" your conclusion. Also, depending on one's translation and/or interpretation, it can easily be argued that these passages are referring to an age of punishment rather than an eternity as well (check out Young's Literal Translation and see for yourself).
So I leave it to you. Zero passages supporting ET for non-believers, one passage possibly supporting Annihilation for non-believers, and twenty-plus passages supporting UR (ignoring the ten or so passages possibly supporting ET for those who don't do certain good works, depending on one's translation and/or interpretation). With all that in mind, I would ask why anybody would continue to believe that the Bible teaches that non-believers in Christ suffer everlasting torment in hell after death (apart from the fact that it's what you were taught by your church and many would suffer negative consequences from other Christians for changing their mind on this issue)? Equally, I would ask how anybody can not believe that Scripture clearly teaches Universal Reconciliation in Christ?
Posts
17 comments:
Until people can get beyond their great desire to judge others there will always be those who want someone to suffer, especially if they are not the someone. Great post.
Very nice. When I actively started looking for Universal Reconcilliation quotes, it's amazing how many there are in the Bible.
One of the responses to UR is that if one rejects God and Jesus's sacrifice, then God will in turn reject you. My problem with that is that the response makes God look way to human, and acting in a spurrned fashion. Given that God is all-knowing, infinite, all-loving ... would He acted much better than that?
I like how you count them up in the end, like a vote. :D
I'll have to read this carefully soon, when I have more time. It looks good ...
Hi, just a note to say I poached the comment you made on tallskinnykiwi. I linked back to your blog Cheers
www.everyhomeachurch.blog.co.uk
Thanks y'all.
Btw, if anyone is curious and wants to read a bit more involved response to this post (along with responses to my original Everlasting Hell Challenge) from some aquaintances of mine, check out the discussion here.
Just so you are aware, I posted this in response to your comments at christian conservative's blog.
So christian heretic (could you have a more pretentious pseudonym?)
If I may paraphrase what you're saying here it's that, there is no such thing as absolute morality. Of course in saying this you are making an absolute truth claim thereby leaving yourself and your arguement with no ground to stand on.
Every one of your posts here has been one steaming pile of nonesense after another. You remind of the first year student who takes philosophy 101 and thinks he understands the human condition, until he shows up for 2nd semester and finds out that everything he learned in first semester gets thrown out the window.
Throughout your comments you argue against teaching children Christian morality in school, because you say you believe that morality is relative. Here's the problem, your argument that morality is relative leaves you with no reason to argue against anything. You're assuming that your position of moral relativity is superior. Your own comments disagree with your professed moral relativity because they assume that you know better than someone else. Furthermore, if moral relativism was actually true you would have no way of conceptualizing it. If there was no right or wrong you simply would not be able to percieve anything "objectionable". To put it another way if there was no right or wrong, it would have been impossible for us to even concieve right or wrong; just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we would never know it was dark. Darkness would be without meaning. Get it?
When asked by another commentor if you would object to your own child being sacrificed in a Satanic ritual your response was: "You've just demonstrated my point, it is "morally acceptable" to that group, hence it is relative". First of all, give me a break. If that's what you really believe than you're more than just ignorant, you're a fool. (a fool with no children I suspect) First of all this arguement proves nothing. Mathematics are abosolute, but falible, imperfect humans make mathematic mistakes all the time, does this mean that 2+2 only equals 4 sometimes? Or does it mean that mankind is subject to making errors of judgement? Further to this "argument" in India Hindus believe it is wrong to eat cows, in North America we think it's OK. This shows that morality is relative right? Wrong, Hindus believe cows house the reincarnated souls of their ancestors, therefore it's wrong to kill other people. In this we agree, it's wrong to eat Grandma!
In the same sense you seem to hold true that it is wrong to force theological or moral beliefs upon another person. In this we agree, the moral code is not prescribed it is discovered, you simply seem to prefer trial and error over instruction.
I found this comment particularily dismal: "Truth be told, Evil doesn't even exist, at least not ontologically speaking."
That's like me saying the sky isn't blue, because blue just doesn't exist.
When another commentor asserted that if you really believe in moral relativity you would have no problem with the Holocaust, you replied: Again you're confusing seeing a problem with something with something being wrong or evil. While it can't be wrong, simply because "wrong" doesn't exist. OK, YOU CLAIM TO APPRECIATE LOGIC, WELL, THAT STATEMENT IS COMPLETELY ILLOGICAL NONESENSE. If there was no wrong, or evil, there would be no issue of seeing a problem with something. The justification of the Holocaust is not just a matter of opinon! Can you grasp that concept?
An often sited delemma used to prove moral relativity is this: There are 5 people trying to survive on a life raft designed for only 4. If one person isn't thrown overboard, then everyone will die. Students often labor over this delemma, and their inability to come to an answer must prove moral relativity. But the delemma actually proves the opposite. Because there would be no dilemma if morality were relative. If morality were relative and there were no absolutes it wouldn't matter, throw everyone overboard. The reason there is a struggle is because we recognize the value of life.
The ultimate example of your illogical statements is that you want us to value your opinion, but you deny that there are values for all persons. Please explore the other side of the coin before you ever question someone elses morality, OK?
I'm not going to respond to the whole thing because this isn't the place (this might be though) and because it was just too long for me to do so at almost 1am.
So christian heretic (could you have a more pretentious pseudonym?)
I'm sure I could think of one. :)
If I may paraphrase what you're saying here it's that, there is no such thing as absolute morality. Of course in saying this you are making an absolute truth claim thereby leaving yourself and your arguement with no ground to stand on.
You seem to be confusing "morality" with "truth," but these are two different animals. Saying there is no absolute morality is not the same thing as saying there is no absolute truth, and I never claimed that absolute truth doesn't exist.
The reason there is a struggle is because we recognize the value of life.
Or simply because we value life. Just because most humans assume that life has an inherent value doesn't mean it does. We also value little pieces of paper that we call money, but the value of these papers are also relative to how much we consider them to be worth (or how much we're told they're worth by certain people).
Every one of your posts here has been one steaming pile of nonesense after another.
You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion. I appreciate that you at least took the time to read my posts. Thanks for stopping by.
In the Concordant Literal version of the 2 Thessalonians passage, the word "eonian" is used instead of "age-during". It means, pretty much, the same thing, of course. :)
I digress a little.
Over the last few years or so I've been working out what exactly I believe. I came to the conclusion that I wasn't really sure that those who didn't convert to Christianity would spend an eternity burning in hell. In recent months, I've found blogs and sites like this that support the notion of Universal Reconciliation (or, as another site phrases it, Universal Restoration); and, in reading the correlating passages of scripture, have come to the conclusion that this is true.
I think the reason most are almost Calvinist in their thoughts about this sort of thing is because of the biases of the various translators has gone to their heads and they don't know anything else.
BTW, check this out...
http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/judgment2.htm
There's nothing relative about your belief in relativsm.
I'm going to respond to your whole post over at Prescott's blog right here as well just in case he decides to delete my comment (which I suspect he did with my response above as I had to repost it this morning over there):
The bottom line is that if you trully believe morality to be relative you have no compelling reason to disagree with anything.
Sure I do, the chemicals in my brain drive me to disagree (and, perhaps unfortunately, we're all slaves to the chemicals in our brains). But, again, don't confuse disagreeing with one's moral views with disagreeing with truth (as I said, I don't deny that truth exists, just that truth and morality are the same thing)
It's all just a matter of opinion.
Exactly (at least as far as morality goes), opinion and preference (and often fear).
You have no reason to disagree with anything that is taught in schools. Be it secular humanistic teaching in Canada or jihadist indoctrination in the Middle East, all things being relative you have no reason to favour or deplore one over the other.
As I said, my brain drives me to "disagree" (although, admittedly, "dislike" would be a more accurate term) with some "moral views." Since my own personal moral code is based on not harming others, I would push for schools to not do that, but I do realize that my view is no more "right" than anybody else's, it's just what I prefer. From a purely practical perspective, you've got to pick one if you want a functional society, but I'm not arguing that mine is "better" even if it's what I prefer.
But your comments betray your disbelief, you argue in favour of your relativism, because you believe it to be superior to other modes espoused here.
Not superior, just more logically accurate (as far as I can tell).
There's nothing relative about your belief in relativsm.
Of course not. As I said, I'm only discussing moral relativism, not absolute vs. relative truth.
And since that was all completely off topic (apologies, folks, somehow a discussion from another blog ended up here for some reason)... good stuff Shelly, and thanks for the shout out Philip.
Since I'm commenting in an un-related post, I'll post my repsonse in your "Evil doesn't Exist" post, as it seems more on topic.
Thanks Ryan. I'll try to give you a response later today. Right now I've got to do some laundry. :)
Ryan, I've posted my reply here.
Obviously you did not consider Psalms 37: "I looked for the wicked and behold they were not there" and "yet a little while and all the wicked shall be wiped away" is that nit anihilation? wahome
I can't see anything in that passage that leads me to believe that is referring to the afterlife.
Ultimate Recreation
(Fall Retreat - October 9-11, 2009)
Focusing on Paul's Gospel, and the Salvation of All
You are invited to join us at beautiful Hidden Falls Ranch in the Texas Panhandle in October for an intimate time of scriptural presentation, fellowship, and family fun!
http://www.christaslife.org/events.html
Post a Comment