The 'coercive bargain' theory of Christianity.

[Strivax]

So, this is about what I call 'the coercive bargain' theory of Christianity. I will say from the outset, it's an idea I thoroughly reject. If you are a parent, you do not demand your children's love because you will only do good to them if they comply, and you will torment them unmercifully if they don't. Similarly, if you love God, and your neighbour, you will do good unto them because you love goodness, and need no other justification. If you need some promise of reward to get you to believe and to do good, what is left is a mere transaction. And if you believe the alternative is eternal torment, goodness is reduced to some petty, tawdry insurance policy against that. And it's counter productive. For who would really love a parent who inflicted their power thus?

Virtue, it is said. is it's own reward. Pursue it, then, for it's own sake.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[YahuahSaves]

If you are a parent, you do not demand your children's love because you will only do good to them if they comply, and you will torment them unmercifully if they don't.

I agree, but the parental analogy doesn't address the disciplinary necessity of bad behaviour. We don't discipline our children to love us, but because we love them and want them to grow up to be well-rounded, respectable adults. God does discipline (correct) us. But just like a parent who abuses their children out of insecurity, neither do I think God destines those who reject him to suffer for all eternity by fire. But the second death I do believe is God's answer to those that do.

 

[Strivax]

I take your point about discipline, which is why I recommended the pursuit of virtue for it's own sake, not for the carrot of reward or stick of punishment. Those that do so, can, I think safely forget about heaven and hell, get on with their lives, and if they do, eventually, end up in heaven, regard it as an unexpected bonus.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Larniavc]

God does discipline (correct) us.

This is simply untrue. He does not correct us. He only acts after we are dead and there is no end to our time in Hell.

We basically have to guess what he ‘wants’ and take pot luck that we are correct.

 

[YahuahSaves]

This is simply untrue. He does not correct us. He only acts after we are dead and there is no end to our time in Hell.

We basically have to guess what he ‘wants’ and take pot luck that we are correct.

The Holy Spirit draws us and convicts us of sin. He absolutely does correct us when necessary, if you've not experienced this then I hope you never have to.

We don't have to guess what he wants, the scriptures are clear and once we believe in Jesus finished work on the Cross, are baptised by water and by the Spirit, we are led by the Holy Spirit into all truth. We are not without the Lord's guiding hand.

 

[Neogaia777]

So, this is about what I call 'the coercive bargain' theory of Christianity. I will say from the outset, it's an idea I thoroughly reject. If you are a parent, you do not demand your children's love because you will only do good to them if they comply, and you will torment them unmercifully if they don't. Similarly, if you love God, and your neighbour, you will do good unto them because you love goodness, and need no other justification. If you need some promise of reward to get you to believe and to do good, what is left is a mere transaction. And if you believe the alternative is eternal torment, goodness is reduced to some petty, tawdry insurance policy against that. And it's counter productive. For who would really love a parent who inflicted their power thus?

Virtue, it is said. is it's own reward. Pursue it, then, for it's own sake.

Best wishes, Strivax.

This is about the truth that there is/was/always will be, God/gods, and that they have (always) had a very strong part in our existence and development (always), and not hardly anything else, and that we are not ever separate from it/them/that at all ever always, etc...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

People cannot all be made always more good, or only ever more increasing in good, just by the sake of the virtue of being good only, and neither can they by the fear or else reward of either heaven or hell either only, but only by a very, very great love that is reciprocated only, and this kind of love can only ever come by the perfect love of an all-knowing and all-loving and all-caring God who has to have done it first only, etc...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

God inflicts punishment in this world/life to try and cause you or make you do good, and to try and save you for the next life...

And as far as punishment in the next life goes, it is made for those who just were not ever made for anything more than just only more of this only ever at all ever, etc...

God Bless!

 

[Larniavc]

We don't have to guess what he wants, the scriptures are clear and once we believe in Jesus finished work on the Cross,

Then why do some Christians believe being gay is fine but others think it is an abomination?

 

[Larniavc]

The Holy Spirit draws us and convicts us of sin. He absolutely does correct us when necessary, if you've not experienced this then I hope you never have to.

I find this really strange. I’m an atheist and have never been corrected by God. Does that mean I have been perfect in his eyes?

 

[Strivax]

Then why do some Christians believe being gay is fine but others think it is an abomination?

We don't have to guess what he wants, the scriptures are clear and once we believe in Jesus finished work on the Cross, are baptised by water and by the Spirit, we are led by the Holy Spirit into all truth. We are not without the Lord's guiding hand.

I'm sorry, but the scriptures are far from clear. Leaving aside, for the moment, that they were largely written by Jews for Jews, a long time ago, when social norms and mores were very different, the fact they have spawned so much written commentary and theology and we still require a priestly class to explain what, exactly, they do mean, (and still they all find room to disagree) is prima facie attestation to that lack of clarity.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Neogaia777]

Sexual immorality is what is destructive to a society.

Maybe also the collapse/destruction of traditional nuclear families, or traditional families stuctures/orders/marriages maybe as well maybe, etc.

Could also be destructive/detrimental to a society maybe as well maybe, etc, or could lead to it's collapse and not being able to stand or prosper for very much longer maybe, etc.

But I guess we'll see I guess maybe, etc.

Because we are most definitely heading there, etc.

Because that very last part is most definitely not a "maybe", etc.

God Bless!

 

[Strivax]

Sexual immorality is what is destructive to a society.

Maybe also the collapse/destruction of traditional nuclear families, or traditional families stuctures/orders/marriages maybe as well maybe, etc.

Could also be destructive/detrimental to a society maybe as well maybe, etc, could lead to it's collapse and not being able to stand or prosper for very much longer maybe, etc.

But I guess we'll see I guess maybe, etc.

Because we are most definitely heading there, etc.

Because that very last part is most definitely not a "maybe", etc.

God Bless!

Hmmmm. The thing I see as really destructive to a society is not sexual immorality - few of us are free from all vice in that regard - but the inequitable distribution of the world's wealth. We could, if we wanted, and the political will was there, live in a much fairer world. But the truth is, we don't want, and there is no such political will. The rich want to remain rich, and the poor like to think that one day, they might become rich. Net result, a world where fully one third of the population lives on less than $2 per day, while a very few are billionaires. In the pursuit of that wealth, we poison the ecosphere on which we all depend for sustenance, and have forgotten to love our neighbour as ourselves.

That wasn't why Jesus went to His cross, and it just won't do.

So, we all know this, or should by now, but prefer to avoid the issue and discuss 'sexual immorality', instead.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Neogaia777]

Hmmmm. The thing I see as really destructive to a society is not sexual immorality - few of us are free from all vice in that regard - but the inequitable distribution of the world's wealth. We could, if we wanted, and the political will was there, live in a much fairer world. But the truth is, we don't want, and there is no such political will. The rich want to remain rich, and the poor like to think that one day, they might become rich. Net result, a world where fully one third of the population lives on less than $2 per day, while a very few are billionaires. In the pursuit of that wealth, we poison the ecosphere on which we all depend for sustenance, and have forgotten to love our neighbour as ourselves.

That wasn't why Jesus went to His cross, and it just won't do.

So, we all know this, or should by now, but prefer to avoid the issue and discuss 'sexual immorality', instead.

Best wishes, Strivax.

Well, I didn't say sexual immorality was the only thing, etc, but it is one of them, etc, and maybe one that has gone hand in hand with others in the past, and maybe also now maybe, etc...

We could try to redefine it, sexual immorality, etc, but I believe we will still have to have and maintain some kind of definition of it in order to keep it from being one of the contributing factors/problems, etc...

God Bless!

J

 

[Neogaia777]

@Strivax @Larnievc

You guys were talking about the whole gay issue being right or wrong, is why I then mentioned sexual immorality, etc.

I know it's not the only problem, etc.

God Bless!

 

[Larniavc]

Sexual immorality is what is destructive to a society

Is it though? The UK and the Northern European countries are very sexually liberal and our societies don’t seem to be collapsing.

Compare that to the sexually repressive countries: who’s doing the best?

 

[Neogaia777]

Is it though? The UK and the Northern European countries are very sexually liberal and our societies don’t seem to be collapsing.

Compare that to the sexually repressive countries: who’s doing the best?

Your countries are heavily dependent on ours right now, and none of it has to do with being sexually repressive or not right now, etc...

If each was it's own sole entity, then I believe it is/this would, be a problem, etc.

But it is the chicken and the egg argument with it/this also, when it comes to the other factors that do/would contribute as well, etc.

God Bless!

 

[Strivax]

@Strivax @Larnievc

You guys were talking about the whole gay issue being right or wrong, is why I then mentioned sexual immorality, etc.

I know it's not the only problem, etc.

God Bless!

Actually, I wasn't. I'm fed up of the whole gay issue. It generates heat, not light. These days, I only post on the matter when I feel I have something factual to contribute to a thread. I do not consider my personal attitude towards gay people to be a material contribution.

Best wishes, Strivax.

 

[Neogaia777]

@Larnievc

I would be all for trying to redefine it/them, rules on sexual morality/families and conduct, etc, but I think we would have to have at least some rules on it to keep it all from turning into a literal Sodom and Gommorah, etc.

Which became about as close as you can get to a literal hell on earth with all it's supposed "sexual liberty/freedom", etc.

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

Actually, I wasn't. I'm fed up of the whole gay issue. It generates heat, not light. These days, I only post on the matter when I feel I have something factual to contribute to a thread. I do not consider my personal attitude towards gay people to be a material contribution.

Best wishes, Strivax.

Ok, sorry...?

God Bless!

J