The Rhino

To true Paul. Perhaps the need for end times is inherent in such people is telling of their own denied doubt in their absolute faith. The rapture would give them the end to the suffering that must be inherent in living only for what awaits in the next life, by sacrificing the one that they have now. No proof for this of course, not even sure that I believe it, just a thought.

Well I feel I may have been observing this wrong; through a feverish and panicked mindset. My Therapist says we all have primal urges within us. So then, to hide from them would be to deny that part of ourselves exists. Like hiding our heads in the sand. It is not our thoughts but our action that govern us. And though escapism can lead to unhealthy degrees of obsession, I know that I am not linked in such a way to my past times so much as I have been in the past. And though cleaving to pure thoughts is good. I have also read that resting the mind is also good. Perhaps this is what fantasy and even violence is to me... I live and work in a world where I cannot express emotion in the way my instincts tell me to. When I am punched I must remain calm and centred to diffuse the situation. My aggression must be denied in order to fight the real "bad guys" in my life, specifically the violent parts of those in my care. Aggression only begets more aggression in real life, and in order to help these people I must be strong enough to not respond as my instincts tell me too. Adrenalin highs and lows are a destructive force on the psychie when not handled naturally. However, I have also read that the cathartic theory of releasing pent up aggression may not hold much water. Aggression feeds aggression, at least in the short term. So why is it healthy for me to react by playing violent games, or escaping to a fantasy world? I believe the answer may be because its simplistic. Good fights evil in the way my instincts say it should: Fight your enemies, win and justice is served. The perfect escapism for my life. And escapism is essential (in small doses). I'm cirtainly not condoning this for anyone else. But meirly saying that for me, I think may have found some peace in the violent aspect of my personality.

If I may take this to a more basic and primal level. Forget whether computer games are actually sinful in the worst sense of the word. Are computer games, especially violent computer games beneficial to our spiritual being? I am a non violent person. I consider myself a pacifist, and never wish harm on anyone. But I am extremely entrenched in what I call geek culture: sci-fi, fantasy, action films, super heroes, computer games, books and films; with the common thread being at least some form of violent conflict. My idea of God is spiritual perfection; what I aspire to be like more and more as I grow in my life and my journey. But I've come to see a logical contradiction with the way I live my life, and what I fantasise about. I used to think fantasy was ok in all forms, but have come to understand that some things I used to fantasise about we're not beneficial to my life. I am wondering if this geek culture is the same. My subconscious reaction is NO!! As it has been and is a part of me that goes so deep I don't even know if I could change it... I've always loved knights and monsters even as a small child. But why is this if I hate violence IRL? Perhaps my base nature from the limbic system fighting against my more moral cerebral cortex. But which side of this fight should I back? Usually I celebrate my human side more as though I realise I am an animal, I know spiritually I aspire to transcend this primal nature. But should this part of me be given some leash or not? Is giving in to primal compulsion healthy? Does it take me away from, or draw me closer to God? Many main line christians think no. You should cleave to pure thoughts. And there is some biblical support to this effect. However, as with all philosophical questions, I think it paramount to consider all sides of an argument. But there is little I can find to support spiritual growth through the enjoyment of virtual violence. Any thoughts/ links are welcome. R

Hmm not sure if this is unimportant or not but its another level that came to mind linked with the rape in games idea. Though I do not know of any mainstream games that glorify rape, there are a lot of games that involve playing the bad guy, Dungeon Keeper etc. in these games you kill and torture good guys, how does everyone feel about this? In World of Warcraft, if you play as a warlock you 'steal' people's souls, I myself have played this game and gained pleasure from "being the bad guy" in fact, at times enjoyed the idea of being positively evil! So there are elements of games that glorify elements of the human psyche that are not survival instinct. That encourage violent and detestable emotions, often towards innocent victims. But is this ok? I for one don't know, but I would like to. In other aspects of my life I find I want to understand the mind of others, including people that are hated. I find the minds of psychopaths fascinating, I try to put myself in other people's shoes to understand why they draw pleasure from the things they do. A useful skill for a mental health nurse, but is it healthy?

I suppose its because they belive these chaps to have been guided by the holy spirit. It is strange that there is so much faith put into this canon yet so much division over who has the right idea of Christianity for virtualy if not all centuries since.

Thanks Paul. That is my current standing on this, however I can understand other people who state that killing a fictional pixelated person and saying "that's not a bad thing to do" equates to raping a computer character and saying the same. Now I would not say that playing out a rape in a game (not sure that this exists) is the same as actually raping someone, but that drawing entertainment from even a fictional duplication of such an act is not healthy for anyone. As far as the whole boxing and sport etc goes, I agree, and wrote as much in the OP about writing books (though it was a little long I know). This I think is the crux of the matter. We are neither holy nor demonic but some cross over between both extremes. Though the majority of those on this board seek to elevate themselves towards holiness is this always productive? Should the carnal, darker side be satisfied? Or wholly rejected? I know that conservative Christians would say cut out anything that removes you from Jesus. Though I have no desire to kill innocent people, splattering zombie brains over the pavement provides a satisfying release, but is this a good, neutral, or bad thing for ones spiritual development? Should we satiate guilty pleasures once in a while or is this simply giving in and purposely backing away from becoming perfect in true enlightenment. Are we afraid to fully enter that state of holiness and holding onto some part of our sin? Perhaps... Those who impart every nature of their being to God, those who are priests, monks, or just evangelical preachers don't seem to be role models I would want to aspire too. I suppose if we all become perfect we lose our sense of identity, and so the ultimate goal to become one with God becomes a fearful anticipation of the death of the self

At this point in my spiritual journey I would consider my current view on "sin" means to do wrong, or trespass against either yourself, your neighbour or the great mystery/God/higher universal perpose. I think that all people can draw from their own human experiance to understand the difference in what is right and wrong within this moral context. Views will of course be subjective as all experiance is unique, though patterns can often be found with which we can seek to draw overall (semi-)objective conclusions of a "normal" sociatal morality. With this pretext in mind I ask you, is playing computer games a sin? There are some important points to consider before you go with your gut feeling on this topic (though that doesn't mean that your intuition is wrong persay). 1. Matthew 5: 21-22, 27-28 "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother ]will be subject to judgment." "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." The definition that I ascribe to this message is that if you harbour and cultivate lustful, hateful or otherwise immoral thoughts/feelings then you might as well have committed the act itself. Though I feel actions and desires are different, so to truly create a synonymous relationship between desire and act would be to say that if you could get away with it you would do it. For example if you look at a woman and think "wow she's hot!" You're human. If you mentally undress her you may be treading on morally slippery ground that could lead to lustful thoughts and feelings, and (eventually) may lead you to the final state: If she came up to you now and asked you for sex you would cheat on your wife. It is this final state that is IMO synonymous with the act. Though it is rare that anyone may play games to act out their real life TRUE desire to murder, it could be considered an (unproven) factor towards developing an unhealthy and violent lifestyle. 2. Computer games are not real, in fact is comparing computer games to a violent novel not the same concept if one draws pleasure from the imagined act? Or does it have to do with the visual stimulus and often far higher volume of death that is found in a computer game that appeals to the carnal destructive part of our mind/soul? Furthermore does the context of the game matter? For example is GTA sinful/immoral because it at times glorifies killing innocents for money, where as dead island involves for the most part, killing zombies, though the brutal visual effects are far more... Well brutal. 3. Gaming is highly time consuming, is the loss of all that time in our lives really beneficial to our own interest, the interests of our neighbours or the interests of the universe? Does the "sinful" nature of the act depend not on the type of game or even games themselves, but rather how and why you use them, ie do yo use them to blow off steam, as a hobby, or an obsession? If games did not exist would your life be richer? Furthermore would you be materially richer? Thereby providing a greater resource for furthering our contribution to God and society? If this is the case, I suppose it raises the question: Is it permissible to spend money on our leisure activities/luxuries when so many are in poverty? And if so, how much?

My personal view on heaven and hell is that I, have no idea... I hope for universal salvation, suspect anihilation, and fear eternal damnation. On the subject of the latter I heard one guy say that hell is like God giving you eternity of your own making rather than his. Which over an eternity would become hell because we would mess up so much over an eternity because of our fallible nature, so bit by bit we would create our own torment. Trusting in God would mean an eternity getting closer to the divine, and as he knows best that would be heaven. This is the only veiw of eternal torment that has come close to making sense for a loving God, however there are still huge holes in this. 1. Why is death the end point? Why wouldn't God keep trying to reach us? 2. So God gives us free will, but the only decision that is good for us is to relinquish that free will to him? Why bother? 3. Anihilation is still the better choice if universal salvation is not an option. It also still fulfills perfect justice as destruction is an eternal punishment. Problem is, I'm just a human being, and I have no control over this, and it scares the crap outta me that damnation is even a possibility. I like life, but I would much rather have never existed than suffer eternal life in torment. Nietzsche was an idiot for saying otherwise.

I know that a lot of books were rejected in the 4th century canon but I don't know much about them, other than they were largely destroyed or lost. My question is, does anything remain from the books so many early Christians thought of as holy? If not what do we know about them? Any knowledge in this area would be greatly appreciated. R

I know that the prevailing views on this board are that the bible should not be taken literally. And often I am inclined to agree with this view point. However, I usually find that many of the passages that did not used to resonate with me do now. Unfortunately I do not have a bible with me but was wondering if anyone had insight into the concepts of wilfull sin as described in Hebrews and the meaning for their being no further sacrifice for our sins/repentance not being possible. I have heard that many put this down to just being for the Jews; letting them know that human sacrifices were no longer viable. Or that it refers to apostacy. However, I have also heard told that it simply means deliberately sinning, it cirtainly appears to be this way if you just pick the bible up and read... If this is indeed the case it makes for one of the more terrifying parts of the Bible, as almost all (if not all) have sinned to get ahead and planned sins in advance. Further to this, many Christians see lying as a sin, i had always taken the commandment about bearing false witness to mean slander. Some make allowances for lying for a good cause such as saving life. But again many lies are planned and/or uttered simply for the sake of convenience or exaggeration. Lying to save your own skin or somone else's when the lie hurts no one is another example I have up untill now thought was ok, but if it is about someone is this again bearing false witness? Sort of like the opposite to slander? Furthermore there is another passage about god hating those with a lying tongue. Does anyone have any background to this giving the passage some context maybe? Finally I want to tie these two concepts together, willful sinning and lying when taken literally would mean telling your kids that Father Christmas is real is a sin that would cause you eternal torment for which repentance was not possible. How guilty would those kids feel! Sometimes I just don't understand that smaller sins to us (as humans) have the same value to God. It not only equates murder to telling white lies, but also seems unfair that we feel differing degrees of guilt based on their effects on those around us, yet in the eyes of God amount to the same. Bit of an unfair moral compass. Which is another reason I find fundamentalism a hard pill to swallow.... But as I said at the beginning of this post, there are often things to learn even from the statements which we do not understand. Any thoughts on these subjects are welcome. I would be especially interested if anyone knows the universalist literalists view point on the passages about wilful sin and impossibility of repentance. Thanks R

Hi, quick Q. If I wanted to ask a Q&A from John Spong how would I go about that?

Perhaps I will change my perspective on God, I do not wish to insult that which I do not understand not blame it. But I guess that's the point, I don't understand a God like that.

I'm truly sorry for your loss Paul. I think it hits on another reason why I cannot accept the place either. Out of self sacrifice for what I believe is right. My brother is Gay, he makes mistakes and often expects things to go his way without trial, but I love him. I know that if I tried to change the bits I disagree with (selfishness) or the bits I don't (being gay) he would not change. Certainly not by sharing the bible with him. This is what confuses me about Christians who preach the bible to non-believers. As if it will change people's minds... I think for the most part it alienates people. What did Jesus do with sinners? He washed their feet, he was a servant to them. And that is how he was the King of Kings. Because he held everyone up, weather they repented or not. In my line of work I help people and they attack me. I don't ever judge them (I try not to at least) but try to show them a better way, or if they are not ready to accept that way I minimise the damage that they will do by caring for them (I'm a special needs care home manager). I don't love them per say but I care for them unconditionally. I love my Gay brother, and I will help him through this hard time he's going through until he can work his own way through it. After all, you can't force growth. I love my atheist half brother, my Christian mother, agnostic father, Methodist wife, my friends with tattoos my friend who had a child out of wedlock, the list goes on and on. I love them all, i love them for who they are. And I will continue to love and to help them, why should i worship a God who wants to send some or all of those i love to hell? Why would I want him to send anyone there? Even rapists and serial killers have suffered pain and loss, and virtually everyone on this planet is loved by someone. I heard a Christian woman say once that it would be ok if their loved ones ended up in eternal torment because they would be so happy in heaven. That seems awfully selfish to me. I hope your father in law finds peace and that you do too. You certainly have both helped me.

Paul says something about staying sober at all times I think.

I have had this fear for some time now, ever since I read it in the bible. On that day I frantically asked two people close to me what it meant. They told me what she thought it meant and I said "but what would you actually have to say?!" It is that franticly fear driven sentance that I regret more than anything else I have ever said in my life. Since this time I have read into the matter and found that even fundamentalists don't take this passage literally, but my question is why? Blasphemy is always easy to do against god or jesus, it can be as simple as using someone's name in vein. Why then is this different? Yours fearfully Rhino

Am I being stupid? I can't work out how to edit posts, or is this not a feature?

Why is it that so much love can be felt from certain people that they just seem to transcend what we can do as humans, could it be that all true Christians come from all faiths? its an idea I've always thought possible. Is that what the New covenant is? "All things are lawful but not all things are beneficial." "The law shall be written on their hearts" Here's to Tutu! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/comments/869947/fp/28/?icid=hp_religion_art_comment_h

And yet others believe there is a Hell... surely it is more accurate to say that we truly do not know, even if we cannot perceive that there should/could be, what do we base this on? Our superior intelligence? Surely this cannot be a fair test, as God created us all individually. As well as this, there are a lot of Fundamentalists that am sure are intelligent. I guess what I am trying to say is; it is still a gamble. However, I can console myself with the notion that I cannot hoodwink God. If I think having no children will get me off the hook will prevent me from seeing them burn in hell is again not assured. Their souls could already be waiting for birth, and could be sent to this earth regardless but to another family. And if God is vengeful it could be that my refusal to have children could land me in exactly the same position. Or perhaps I am just saying this to make myself feel better I hate being fallible sometimes

A lot of fundies say that Christians who do not listen to certain doctrine (ie sex before marriage, or homosexuality) are simply taking parts out of the bible that get in the way of their own desires. Cherry picking would be another way of putting it. I do worry that this may be the case a lot of the time. Though I feel guided by my heart, does it not also say that the heart is flawed, and should not be trusted? Of course one could argue that the fundies were lead to become fundies via their heart. Often I find that literal bible study could be idolatry, (though I still fear actually pronouncing that this is so). I often wonder if God came down from the heavens, and produced some miracle for all to see and said "actually, the bible is not written by me its written by men who were inspired by their view of what I am", that the fundies would say "that's not God, as he's disagreeing with the bible". I'm not sure, though it seems plausible to me. Is putting such blind faith in a set of books not dangerous in this way? Still if this is not the case, is it not the progressive Christian who is at fault for not having the faith to believe in Gods inspired word? It's hard to tell, and there is a lot riding on the question. It seems to me that there is either something fundamental about faith in God (and some would say the right view point on what God is), or God is not really concerned with what we believe, nor the strife that this causes us at times. I think John Spong put it well when he said we should not think of God as a man in the sky who would see things from a human perspective. Of course then one has to ask, what is Gods perspective? Of course the answer to this is un-knowable, and we can only speculate through our opinion of what the divine is. I find this worrying, as everyone's life journey is different and often painful though also it can be wonderful. I suppose God in his infinity must represent an infinite spectrum of attributes. I find this both comforting; that we will all have our place and that this place is tailored specifically for us, yet terrifying; as my subjective view on where this place is may be entirely wrong to the objective infinite and infallible Deity. The only thing I can truly find solace in is that I do not control this. It is Gods will, whether that is good for me or not. All I can do is try to be as true to my own morals and values as I can. That way whatever happens I know I will have done everything that I can.

Though this is a couple of months old I wanted to share a little of myself here. I have recently posted a similar thread. I have OCD and Depression. I've already put my fears down so I will not do that here, but they are very similar to yours. I am currently using ACT (acceptance and commitment) therapy to counter my OCD and it has been progressing fairly well. ACT uses mindfulness as a therapeutic tool which I am told is a type of meditation but can be used (with practice) at any time during your day. Mindfulness is essentially deliberately bringing yourself into the present moment and experiencing your feelings (and thoughts) as they come to pass in a non judgemental way. It takes practice, but was a great relief for me. I am told mindfulness can have a significant effect on schizophrenia. So it might be worth talking to a therapist about (most have not heard of ACT, but have heard of mindfullness) Good luck and God Bless

Though this is a couple of months old I wanted to share a little of myself here. I have recently posted a similar thread. I have OCD and Depression. I've already put my fears down so I will not do that here, but they are very similar to yours. I am currently using ACT (acceptance and commitment) therapy to counter my OCD and it has been progressing fairly well. ACT uses mindfulness as a therapeutic tool which I am told is a type of meditation but can be used (with practice) at any time during your day. Mindfulness is essentially deliberately bringing yourself into the present moment and experiencing your feelings (and thoughts) as they come to pass in a non judgemental way. It takes practice, but was a great relief for me. I am told mindfulness can have a significant effect on schizophrenia. So it might be worth talking to a therapist about (most have not heard of ACT, but have heard of mindfullness) Good luck and God Bless

Paul. Thank you, I have read a lot on the construction of the bible after that last few days, and found this site through watching John Spongs interesting teachings. In truth I've been quite up on philosophical ideas behind the mysteries of the universe, and have done extensive (obsessive) reasurch sporadically (when my ocd is at its worst) for the last 10 years. I guess it is really the fear that I struggle with, IF I'm wrong ill spend an awfully long time (forever) regretting it. I read a similar topic on the forum a few pages back on the debate forum about the afterlife. In it the guy was worried about his wife dying, and hoping that there was an afterlife for her sake. I understand how he felt, however in my current state of mind I would gladly take anihilation upon death than even risking eternal torment. A related huge fear I have is that of having children and bringing them into a universe where hell, if it exists as the fundamental's put it across, is a real danger. Would it not be fairer to simply not bring children into such a gamble? This would of course cause my wife to hate me, but it seems terribly irresponsible at times. Sort of like going all in, in a poker game, but its not your money your using, it's your spouses... Or your children...

Hello. I'm new to this forum and to progressive Christianity. In fact I have considered myself many things over the years, including a liberal Christian. But I never seemed to get anywhere or find anyone with similar views perhaps as few consider themselves as liberal Christians, due to negative connotations, but I had no idea of the more positive progressive Christian label. In honesty I don't even know if I am a progressive Christian by use of the 8 points. I struggle with point 2, but through fear more than anything else. Recently I've been struggling immensely with my faith, not faith itself, but the fear that my version of faith is wrong. I'm plagued by thoughts that I may be headed for hell, as are 99% of people I know if fundamentalist Christians are correct. I should announce that the root of this problem is OCD for which I am reviving treatment. But with this issue I am unable to bring myself to simply dispel my thoughts as "just thoughts". I have various fears of hell. A few examples are that I don't think a loving god is conducive with hell. That I am not entirely sure that I understand why believing in Jesus and his death is necessary for my forgiveness. I don't know that I can feel regret for all my "sins" as I feel some of them were what I beloved and in some cases still believe were the most loving thing I could do. For example I had sex with my wife many times before marriage and though I understand the benefits of being with one partner only in life, I feel it was a wonderful part of our relationship. I also have the fear that I may have been possessed by a demon. I realise that this may sound silly. But many fundamentalists believe in demons and I have seen many so called exorcisms, could they all be fake? Even my pastor believes in possession but says it is a rare occurrence. I don't feel possessed I should add, but rather am afraid that one could be lying dormant in me, or acting in a way I cannot detect. I realise that this may sound crazy to rational people, but IMO this subject we know so little about, what if the fundies are right!! If we take the bible and interpret it literally it certainly is possible. There are a number of bible verses, that confound me when fundamentalists produce their arguments for being fundamentalists. I forget which they are but remember the gist of each one: beware false teachers, they may appear as angels of light but be in league with satan, you can tell who's a false teacher because they wont use scripture- that's progressive Christians in their eyes. No one comes to God except through me- why does god require us to believe in a story from 2000 years ago in order to escape eternal torture? We all deserve hell but gods mercy allows us to be saved if we accept Christ's sacrifice- why must we believe in that to accept it?? Different religions are attributed to being satanic in nature. I've even read that some people think meditation let's in evil spirits! Which is awful because its one of the only things that gives me respite from my anxiety and guilt attacks. I have had bible verses that support these claims and if they are right this is terrifying news! Firstly that people exist who think this is love. And secondly that God could actually be like this! To say it freaks me out is an understatement. My therapy is supposed to be that I don't give these thoughts any time, that I don't fuse thought to feelings. But in this case I can't bring myself to do this, as I'd rather regret a few years of hell in OCD (which i know could be my life) than an eternity in literal hell. This I'm sure is the reason why the church has done this. I'm the prime example of being scared into faith. I understand that many Christians say god doesn't send people to hell, that he gives them the choice to go themselves. Surely this could only stand though if free will remained after death? I know I have done things that I truly regret and often hate myself for, I am sorry to God and have even begged Jesus's forgiveness. But it is hard to this honestly when you only have a set of books to base your understanding on. I don't know, I know I'm rambling, but there are so many contrasting views on such an important subject. So if nothing else could you please give me advice on 1: What you believe the afterlife entails and why? 2: how you cope with guilt over sin and fear of hell? 3: do you let the fear of hell or guilt of sin overtly effect your religious views and/or your actions ? 4: how do you reconcile yourself against such confident fundamentalists such as Mark Driscol? (I don't like the guy, but his confidence that I'm likely going to hell scares the pants off me).