I took it mean that you thought there was a logical contradiction in God's character; this I would have to disagree with which was why I was suggesting you were using a false assumption
I think there is a contradiction between claiming to love everyone and doing some people infinite harm. As robhu points out, the parallel with limited amounts of harm doesn't apply here (unless you're suggesting that hell is finite, but I thought that evangelicals weren't allowed to believe in Purgatory). Either God is not universally loving or he does not send people to Hell: Christians have chosen variations on those themes at various times, I think.
Christians love God in reponse to the love he has shown us.
Indeed, but my point was that love can hardly be seen as healthy when it is given under the threat of violence: it really does sound like the sort of Stockholm Syndrome stuff which Wednesday's Usenet posting talks about. Christians seem cast in the role of the beaten wife who makes excuses for her husband ("he loves me really; he's done so much for me; I deserve it").
I was thinking more along the topical news line of self-defence.
A key test for self-defence is whether it is proportionate (so you're not allowed to shoot someone who merely looks at you funny, or similar). I do believe that war can be justified sometimes, but again a key test for a just war is proportionality. In both cases, the analogy to punishment in Hell does not apply, since Hell is portrayed as an infinite punishment for a finite offence.
In conclusion then, the standard evangelical doctrine of Hell contradicts the idea that God is universally loving, and portrays God as abusive and unjust.
I do wonder whether there is anything which God could to which you would see as wrong, or whether anything he does is correct by definition.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: This year's CICCU Main Event - DIRECTION
Date: 2005-02-06 10:58 pm (UTC)I think there is a contradiction between claiming to love everyone and doing some people infinite harm. As
Christians love God in reponse to the love he has shown us.
Indeed, but my point was that love can hardly be seen as healthy when it is given under the threat of violence: it really does sound like the sort of Stockholm Syndrome stuff which Wednesday's Usenet posting talks about. Christians seem cast in the role of the beaten wife who makes excuses for her husband ("he loves me really; he's done so much for me; I deserve it").
I was thinking more along the topical news line of self-defence.
A key test for self-defence is whether it is proportionate (so you're not allowed to shoot someone who merely looks at you funny, or similar). I do believe that war can be justified sometimes, but again a key test for a just war is proportionality. In both cases, the analogy to punishment in Hell does not apply, since Hell is portrayed as an infinite punishment for a finite offence.
In conclusion then, the standard evangelical doctrine of Hell contradicts the idea that God is universally loving, and portrays God as abusive and unjust.
I do wonder whether there is anything which God could to which you would see as wrong, or whether anything he does is correct by definition.