PDA

View Full Version : A beautiful dialogue.


seebs
16th August 2004, 07:20 PM
This post (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=8832377#post8832377) by the lovely Chartreuse contains a little dialogue.


God: You know the world? The one you keep using for toilet paper? I made that.
Man: ...oh.
God: Yeah. And those other humans, the ones you keep kicking when they're down? I made those.
Man: Oh. Um.
God: Uh-huh. And that self, the one you puff up and misrepresent and secretly hate? I made that too, and I really like it.
Man: I'm screwed. I suck. *sits down and cries*
God: No, I like you. I'm just saying. You keep wrecking my stuff.
Man: Um... I'm a pay for that.
God: You can't afford it.
Man: Can't you just take my sheep?
God: Fraid not.
Man: *cries harder*
God: But look, don't cry, little guy. I still like you.
Man: *wails*
God: Here's what I'm gonna do. I'm gonna write you a blank check, and then you can pay me back with it. Here, look, there's my signature and everything.
Man: *stops crying* Oo! Shiny!
God: There, take it. Write in whatever. Write in 'the whole world'.
Man: *uses blank check for toilet paper*
God: Um... yeah. Okay. Now look, I'm ripping it up. Never gonna cash this check. See? I really do still like you.
Man: Wow, God, you're the greatest! *skips away singing, to use the world for toilet paper some more*

Totally flippant, I know. That's just how it came to me. Anyway, now it looks like the question is, why'd God have to give us a blank check? Or maybe, why'd he have to rip up the check? Or maybe, why do we have to pay for the stuff we broke? Can't answer the last one without getting into the PoE, which is another discussion entirely. As for the first two, what else would people have believed? Not another Hercules; power heroes don't demonstrate anything but simple might. In this scenario, God wanted to demonstrate something more complex, and people already had a structure in place by which they could understand this thing.

This is actually somewhat different from simple scapegoating; I'm hypothesizing, here, that it wasn't humans who made a scapegoat for themselves, but God who used the human need for a scapegoat to make his point.

If what the OP really wants answered is, "If there's a debt called Sin which can be bought off, why's it balanced by a single act rather than a permanent loss?" then my little play is the closest I can get to concieving of an answer.

I love this dialogue. I love it because we have some portion of that every day. Every time we decide to atone for our sins, that's our brave little voice. "Um. I'm a pay for that." We know, somehow, that we can't quite afford it, but we have to try. That's the thing; salvation by works is impossible, because we can't afford the things we've broken... But if you didn't even want to pay for them, there would be no way forwards.

Dominus Fidelis
17th August 2004, 07:35 AM
Nice dialogue.

Treasure the Questions
17th August 2004, 09:26 AM
Hmm seebs, again I agree in part.


it wasn't humans who made a scapegoat for themselves, but God who used the human need for a scapegoat to make his point.

I rather like this angle, because I don't like the idea of a wrathful God needing to punish his Son for my sin. However, this leads me to wonder, if Jesus is my Saviour, and whether I like it or not that is one of his titles, what has he saved me from?

My main problem, though, is what you say about atonement. I thought it was Jesus who atoned for my sins and what I do is buy into that by asking God's forgiveness and doing my best to turn from my sin and live differently (i.e. repenctance).

Please understand I am not trying to say you are wrong, but I want to understand why you say what you do, and if you could be right, from my way of seeing things. I am coming out of evangelicalism, or at least its more conservative side and although the process started about 3 years ago, it is a long slow process. I'm still not totally decided if I'm a liberal evangelical, theologically or something more liberal still. I read the Post-Evanglical, but not sure that describes me, either. Still, I am sure I'm a Christian, and that's all that really matters.

Karin

Momzilla
17th August 2004, 12:09 PM
That is a great dialogue, and I think it really gets to the heart of what it means when we say that God created "heaven and earth, and all things visible and invisible."

Here's a variation, if I may be so bold, which addresses our relationship to creation and to God...

God: Whatcha doin'?
Man: cutting down this forest.
God: the whole thing?
Man: Yup. Need the lumber.
God: What for?
Man: To build a 10,000 square foot house.
God: wow. You plan to house a lot of people, then?
Man: nah. Just me, my wife, and my two kids.
God: momentarily speechless
Man: Well, you see, I can afford it, so why shouldn't I have everything I want? After all, didn't you give us the world to do with as we pleased?
God: Well, no. Actually, you're supposed to care for it and offer it back to me.
Man: Well, I'm offering you back a house, then.
God: You're also offering back global warming, loss of habitat, pollution, selfishness, arrogance, and a whole bunch of other stuff I don't really want.
Man: Hmm, I guess you have a point. I guess I'll make the servant's quarters a little smaller. They don't really need their own rooms; they can all share. How's that?
God: umm, no. Try again.
Man: (getting angry) Oh, I get what you're after. You want me to live in a hovel and dress my kids in burlap sacks!
God: All I'm saying is, there are a lot of people in this world who would be grateful to have that much. Maybe you should think about them. Maybe you should think about how long it took me to grow these trees, and how many animals find shelter under them.
Man: Fine. I'll donate some cash to the Arbor Day folks and I'll toss some of my spare change into the Salvation Army bucket at Christmas time. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some more trees to cut.

seebs
17th August 2004, 12:51 PM
Just a clarification: The original author is "non-Christian" and can't post here for further discussion.

Anyway, what does Jesus save us from? Our sins. Not because He's got some kind of weird multiple personality disorder, and the voices in His head are telling Him to punish us, but because our sins will destroy us if we are not saved from them.

Treasure the Questions
17th August 2004, 02:53 PM
Just a clarification: The original author is "non-Christian" and can't post here for further discussion.
I hadn't realised that. With thoughts like that I wonder what's stopping her, but it's great she's willing to think about Christianity and even discuss it.

Anyway, what does Jesus save us from? Our sins. Not because He's got some kind of weird multiple personality disorder, and the voices in His head are telling Him to punish us, but because our sins will destroy us if we are not saved from them.
Yes. From the destructive power of sin. Whether that leads to hell, I'm not sure, but it can have a destructive enough effect on our lives and the lives of others as it is. I have trouble with a loving God send the people he created to hell, especially when some would have loved to got to know him better if they really knew what he was like and hadn't been told unpleasant stories about him that made him out to be quite different from the loving Father he is.

Karin

Karin

seebs
17th August 2004, 03:24 PM
I hadn't realised that. With thoughts like that I wonder what's stopping her, but it's great she's willing to think about Christianity and even discuss it.

I think a lot of it is just, well, Christians. They're not very good witnesses. Beyond that... It's the supernatural claims, and the relatively weak evidence for them... You'll notice that, if her dialogue is correct, we don't really need a savior; we need to trust that God will save us. A subtle distinction...

Yes. From the destructive power of sin. Whether that leads to hell, I'm not sure, but it can have a destructive enough effect on our lives and the lives of others as it is. I have trouble with a loving God send the people he created to hell, especially when some would have loved to got to know him better if they really knew what he was like and hadn't been told unpleasant stories about him that made him out to be quite different from the loving Father he is.

There are things marketed as "Christianity" which, if you reject them, are a sign that you are affirming and accepting God.

Bingley
19th August 2004, 07:23 AM
I have trouble with a loving God send the people he created to hell, especially when some would have loved to got to know him better if they really knew what he was like and hadn't been told unpleasant stories about him that made him out to be quite different from the loving Father he is.

Karin

Karin
That's one of the reasons I like C. S. Lewis' The Last Battle and I think there's a similar idea expressed in The Screwtape Letters. The idea that God can take your ignorance and misapprehensions into account when passing judgement. If you do good through love of Tisroc God will ascribe it to being done through love of himself. It's only if you wilfully close your ears to the truth that you'll be in trouble, because you won't be able to hear him when the time comes.

Treasure the Questions
19th August 2004, 09:38 AM
That's one of the reasons I like C. S. Lewis' The Last Battle and I think there's a similar idea expressed in The Screwtape Letters. The idea that God can take your ignorance and misapprehensions into account when passing judgement. If you do good through love of Tisroc God will ascribe it to being done through love of himself. It's only if you wilfully close your ears to the truth that you'll be in trouble, because you won't be able to hear him when the time comes.
:thumbsup:

Abiel
26th June 2007, 03:59 AM
here's another nice one

FLANDIDLYANDERS
26th June 2007, 05:26 AM
God bought into our wreckless and feckless behaviour by becoming one of us and living our lives Gods way - which wasnt as different as we tend to think. So I wonder how much dialogue God would have with us considering that God has already opted to live it with us and allowed us the space and time to learn intuitively, sometimes explicitly, ourselves.