One of the questions that are answered inadequately (incoherently) by the off-the-peg mainstream religions is: What is the point of this mortal life on earth?
Why don't we go directly to Heaven? Why must we mass-through mortal life, why must so many people endure (and, sometimes, enjoy) decades of earthly existence - what may amount to decades of suffering?
Even for Christians: Why do some of us spend so-much time, effort (and, often, misery) tediously mucking-about in getting, conceived, born, growing-up, living, getting sick, maybe reproducing, getting old and dying (the whole complicated and hazardous rigmarole) - before we get to Heaven (maybe).
There are indeed ways of making sense of this, but mainstream Christianity - with it's omni-God and double-negative Jesus - is not one of them.
But do we really need (after 2000 years without!) a deep, metaphysical, theology that tells us positively what this mortal life is for, and what Jesus did, and how it fits into divine creation?
Surely it is (as Jesus seems to have said) enough to love and follow Jesus Christ to salvation?
Yes it is enough - for salvation; assuming that we can get through mortal life still wanting it, and not so corrupted as to reject the offer when it is made after our death.
Yet this world is full of ex-Christians, fake-Christians, self-identified by not-really Christians. The churches are collapsing, and those that remain "devout" are evidently on a path leading down and away from Jesus.
But meanwhile? Are we really living through mortal life just for that final decision? - or is there something we ought to be doing here and now that will contribute to that eternal resurrected life we anticipate with confidence?
Important questions - vital questions - it seems to me.
And if our society and our churches are not giving coherent answers - then what are we (personally_ going to do about it? Say "it's not my fault"? Or find answers?
(Or, is there something more important that you need to do instead?)
1 comment:
when they have to answer the question of existence here on earth, it seems to me that the theologians' answers all boil down to Adam having sinned, and then all his descendants are thrown here to suffer - and that's why we're here, all paying for the crimes of our ancestor. God, apparently, can do nothing about this except send his son to suffer and die here too, and then retrieve what was lost by his suffering and death (but why are we still coming here then?). but i think that's it, that's their answer. hidden behind it, and not very well, is a theoretically heretical proposition that God the Father is actually a bad guy, because, keeping the omni assumption, he could just save us without Jesus and without us having to suffer. instead, for some reason, he choses suffering for both ourselves and his firstborn (who is also himself of course, so I guess he is both a sadist and a masochist). since this is a very badly told story, with large plot holes, then they introduce flowery prose full of abstract symbols to attempt to hide how little sense it makes for a God of Love to do this. but this is the story they tell. it doesn't surprise me that it convinces very few. but really, all they have to do is drop the omni stuff and then the story starts to make more sense. but this is the one thing they refuse to do.
Post a Comment