If the Divine is as vengefully angry, even seemingly blood-thirsty, as institutional Christianity generally portrays Him to be, is anyone — including supposed ardent followers or conservative Bible believers — truly safe or really ‘saved’? One could reasonably theorize that He’d be especially peeved by those self-professed Christians He’d (likely rightfully) deem as fake or frauds.
After all, Jesus, as God incarnate, was/is about non-violence, genuine compassion, love, charity and non-wealth. His teachings and practices epitomize so much of the primary component of socialism — do not hoard gratuitous wealth in the midst of great poverty. But, they are not practiced by a significant number of ‘Christians’, likely including many who idolize callous politicians standing for very little or nothing Jesus taught and represents.
Prominent actually-Christlike Christian leaders/voices should often strongly-emphasize what Jesus fundamentally taught and demonstrated to his followers. However strange that sounds, institutional Christianity seems to need continuous reminding. They all should consider that the Biblical Jesus would not have rolled his eyes and sighed: ‘Oh, well. I’m against what the politician stands for, but what can you do when you dislike even more his political competition?’
Too many institutional 'Christians' seem to create their Creator’s nature in their own fallible and often angry, vengeful image. That could be at least partly why the Book of Enoch, which reflects an unusually more compassionate God, concerned the angry-God theologians and scriptural decision-makers enough to omit it from most biblical canons.
.
P.S. Whether or not such concepts are Biblically supported, maybe ‘houses of worship’ were/are actually divinely meant for the parishioners — intended to be for the soul/spirit what health clinics/spas, even hospitals, are for the body and mind. And maybe the Ten Commandments were not meant to ‘obey’ in order to appease/please God but rather intended for humans’ benefit, to directly or indirectly keep people safe and healthy.
I also don't perceive God as being in singular humanoid form, let alone with gender. Nor does God need or desire to be worshipped (or perhaps even thanked) — which, at least to me, are much more traits of frail, shallow human nature.
As for Jesus, he was/is largely meant to show to people that there really was/is hope for the many — especially for young people living in today’s physical, mental and spiritual turmoil — seeing hopelessness in a fire-and-brimstone angry-God-condemnation creator requiring literal pain-filled penance/payment for sinful human behavior.
Also, maybe the Biblical books' content are more revelatory of the writers' perceptions of (their) God's nature than a fully accurate portrayal of God's actual nature?
Thanks for this helpful insight into a Pentecostal's experience and growth. Mike Clemens
If the Divine is as vengefully angry, even seemingly blood-thirsty, as institutional Christianity generally portrays Him to be, is anyone — including supposed ardent followers or conservative Bible believers — truly safe or really ‘saved’? One could reasonably theorize that He’d be especially peeved by those self-professed Christians He’d (likely rightfully) deem as fake or frauds.
After all, Jesus, as God incarnate, was/is about non-violence, genuine compassion, love, charity and non-wealth. His teachings and practices epitomize so much of the primary component of socialism — do not hoard gratuitous wealth in the midst of great poverty. But, they are not practiced by a significant number of ‘Christians’, likely including many who idolize callous politicians standing for very little or nothing Jesus taught and represents.
Prominent actually-Christlike Christian leaders/voices should often strongly-emphasize what Jesus fundamentally taught and demonstrated to his followers. However strange that sounds, institutional Christianity seems to need continuous reminding. They all should consider that the Biblical Jesus would not have rolled his eyes and sighed: ‘Oh, well. I’m against what the politician stands for, but what can you do when you dislike even more his political competition?’
Too many institutional 'Christians' seem to create their Creator’s nature in their own fallible and often angry, vengeful image. That could be at least partly why the Book of Enoch, which reflects an unusually more compassionate God, concerned the angry-God theologians and scriptural decision-makers enough to omit it from most biblical canons.
.
P.S. Whether or not such concepts are Biblically supported, maybe ‘houses of worship’ were/are actually divinely meant for the parishioners — intended to be for the soul/spirit what health clinics/spas, even hospitals, are for the body and mind. And maybe the Ten Commandments were not meant to ‘obey’ in order to appease/please God but rather intended for humans’ benefit, to directly or indirectly keep people safe and healthy.
I also don't perceive God as being in singular humanoid form, let alone with gender. Nor does God need or desire to be worshipped (or perhaps even thanked) — which, at least to me, are much more traits of frail, shallow human nature.
As for Jesus, he was/is largely meant to show to people that there really was/is hope for the many — especially for young people living in today’s physical, mental and spiritual turmoil — seeing hopelessness in a fire-and-brimstone angry-God-condemnation creator requiring literal pain-filled penance/payment for sinful human behavior.
Also, maybe the Biblical books' content are more revelatory of the writers' perceptions of (their) God's nature than a fully accurate portrayal of God's actual nature?