Maybe pleasure's not bad. But maybe when we're blinded to the source of true pleasure we seek it in other ways that are inherently selfish and detrimental to ourselves and others. And then religion equates this wrong pursuit of pleasure to the actual thing itself, and so vilifies pleasure and seeks to ban it. Then you have even those who have been introduced to the source of true pleasure incapable of actually partaking in it.
From the Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis:
"He's (God) a hedonist at heart. All those fasts and vigils and stakes and crosses are only a facade. Or only like foam on the seashore. Out at sea, out in His sea, there is pleasure, and more pleasure. He makes no secret of it; at His right hand are 'pleasures for evermore'. Ugh! I don't think He has the least inkling of that high and austere mystery to which we rise in the Miserific Vision. He's vulgar, Wormwood. He has a bourgeois mind. He has filled His world full of pleasures. There are things for humans to do all day long without His minding in the least-sleeping, washing, eating, drinking, making love, playing, praying, working. Everything has to be twisted before it's any use to us. We fight under cruel disadvantages. Nothing is naturally on our side."
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Sin, Hate, and God
So I was reading comments on a blog post regarding a clip of a Mark Driscoll sermon. Yeah, I know . . .
But anyway, there were two sides to the argument of whether or not God is capable of hate. What I found interesting is that there was a leap from "Got hates sin" to "God hates people". I think that really reveals a person's view of what sin is.
If sin is something people "do" that angers God or invokes His wrath, it's easy to equate "hating sin" with "hating the sinner". However, if sin is a disease that we are all born with, it's a whole different matter.
I hate cancer. I've lost both grandmothers to it, I've watched the brother of a friend succumb to it as a very young man. I really hate cancer. However, it would be absolutely absurd of me to state that I hate cancer patients.
Paul stated that if anyone had reason to boast of their works (put confidence in their flesh), he far more. But what good did it do him?
You can have the most perfect diet, high in all the right vitamins, lacking preservatives and additives. You can work out four hours a day, never smoke, never drink, never do drugs. Yet none of that will rid you of cancer. It is beyond your ability to fix.
If sin is a disease, something that lives within us from the moment of our birth, then God is the One who heals, restores, and rescues us from the ravages of sin. The cross is the ultimate cure, it does for us what we could never achieve by our own works.
If, however, sin is simply our undesirable actions, then it is much easier to see God as divine punisher. The cross then is simply a way for God to take out His anger on His innocent Son so that we wouldn't get the whipping we deserve.
So which is it? Is God a loving Father who hates what sin does to us and seeks to rescue and cure us? Or is He more demanding, insisting that we fall in line with His standards and commands? Is He upset with us when we fall short? Does He actively hate us when our actions aren't in line with His will?
But anyway, there were two sides to the argument of whether or not God is capable of hate. What I found interesting is that there was a leap from "Got hates sin" to "God hates people". I think that really reveals a person's view of what sin is.
If sin is something people "do" that angers God or invokes His wrath, it's easy to equate "hating sin" with "hating the sinner". However, if sin is a disease that we are all born with, it's a whole different matter.
I hate cancer. I've lost both grandmothers to it, I've watched the brother of a friend succumb to it as a very young man. I really hate cancer. However, it would be absolutely absurd of me to state that I hate cancer patients.
Paul stated that if anyone had reason to boast of their works (put confidence in their flesh), he far more. But what good did it do him?
You can have the most perfect diet, high in all the right vitamins, lacking preservatives and additives. You can work out four hours a day, never smoke, never drink, never do drugs. Yet none of that will rid you of cancer. It is beyond your ability to fix.
If sin is a disease, something that lives within us from the moment of our birth, then God is the One who heals, restores, and rescues us from the ravages of sin. The cross is the ultimate cure, it does for us what we could never achieve by our own works.
If, however, sin is simply our undesirable actions, then it is much easier to see God as divine punisher. The cross then is simply a way for God to take out His anger on His innocent Son so that we wouldn't get the whipping we deserve.
So which is it? Is God a loving Father who hates what sin does to us and seeks to rescue and cure us? Or is He more demanding, insisting that we fall in line with His standards and commands? Is He upset with us when we fall short? Does He actively hate us when our actions aren't in line with His will?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)