Well, I have to agree that there might have been a more diplomatic way of expressing that. (Ya think?)(At least he could have put a big 'S' on Satan.)
Here's what I think: Guffaws to the max (hereinafter "GTTM") isn't a proposition, it's a statement of a feeling, an emotikonal reaction, right? The closest to a sentence that it comes is, "That [or 'you'] make(s) me laugh, that idea is [ or 'you are'] risible." Who can argue with that? But who will learn theology from that? It just means,"Bad! Negative! Silly! Stupid!" It's what my 3 year old said when she didn't like something, whether or not it was good for her.
What I will learn from it is that when I struggle to express my religious commitment, something intimate and dear to me, I will be laughed at. After a while I won't take the trouble, and conversation will languish.
The "lure to hell" idea, while (carelessly? unwisely?) provocatively (to say the least) expressed, at least is a proposition: to wit: dissent from the One Church is or provides a tool for the bad guys. So when we wipe the spit off our face, we can say stuff like, "Dissent?" "One Church?" "Tool?" "bad guys?" and start doing some, ah, parsing and examining.
Another point: What I learn from my mere 275 hours of t-group was that I could choose when and how to interact from among a variety of ways, that what is appropriate for a t-group may not be appropriate for a seminar, and it's up to me which of a whole battery of commo styles I use. To me the idea of psycho therapy is to expand my range of choices and to develop my freedom to choose among them.
What I will learn from it is that when I struggle to express my religious commitment, something intimate and dear to me, I will be laughed at. After a while I won't take the trouble, and conversation will languish.
The "lure to hell" idea, while (carelessly? unwisely?) provocatively (to say the least) expressed, at least is a proposition: to wit: dissent from the One Church is or provides a tool for the bad guys. So when we wipe the spit off our face, we can say stuff like, "Dissent?" "One Church?" "Tool?" "bad guys?" and start doing some, ah, parsing and examining.
Another point: What I learn from my mere 275 hours of t-group was that I could choose when and how to interact from among a variety of ways, that what is appropriate for a t-group may not be appropriate for a seminar, and it's up to me which of a whole battery of commo styles I use. To me the idea of psycho therapy is to expand my range of choices and to develop my freedom to choose among them.
= = =
Good points.
But goodness, dawg, a roaring rauchus t-group is such FUN! LOL. Besides, without all that, the intense group hug and at the end would be far more muted and hollow! LOL.
Part of what drives me blitheringly to distractions is that such . . . seemingly unassailable assertions as:
"dissent from the One Church is or provides a tool for the bad guys."
are also inherently cheeky; prideful; authoritarian on hollow foundation; parochial to the max; smug; offensive.
AT most levels--so what. Lots of things all kinds of people believe are prideful, hazardous, offensive. So what.
But when the demeanor, tone, content, argument etc. is relentlessly that ours' don't stink but yours do . . . the overwhelming urge is to let a few more for good measure and right in the biggest, most loftily held noses.
And, at least, for my case, it is NOT just to defend my personhood [that has daily cross sessions anyway] or my philosophy or my manhood or my rights to be right or any such . . . it IS an important, to me, theological point, fact, truth:
ALL HAVE SINNED AND COME SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD. And organizations, MORE SO.
NO ONE AND NO GROUP HAS A CORNER ON GOD NOR ON GOD'S TRUTH. He hasn't allowed it. Pretending and pontificating otherwise doesn't make it so. Perhaps the Reformation, in part, was a screaming statement of that fact. This or that individual or group may have a corner on a microscopic part of God's truth--for a time. But they'd better treat it well and live it well or they will get wildly askew in no time.
And before long, a rabid atheist will be better off than the "Christians'" arrogant lukewarmness or rabid off the wall-ness.
That's one reason I think UNITY OF SPIRIT is, especially in the short term, the best and most unity we can realistically expect.
Thankfully, that is enormously awesome and powerful in and of itself. It's not to be dissmissed lightly. But it DOES require a laying down of personal notions of majors and minors and a willingness to flow with Holy Spirit's obvious majors in that setting at that moment.
I absolutely guarantee anyone reading these humble words . . . those communities which have a diversity of Christian churches coming together to pray earnestly and authentically in Love and humility for their area and our country will have far less and far less horrible disruptions from natural disasters and terrorism in the coming months and years.
Those communities where each Christian congregation is standing up on their soap box distinctives demanding that all the others bow or capitulate or defer to THEM . . . may well suffer the most--at least plenty given that judgment begins at the house of God.
I think those areas with the most political, eccleastical, moral corruption and person to person violence and abuse will have the worst of disasters and terror.
God WILL HAVE A PEOPLE. Father WILL HAVE A CHURCH UNIVERSAL WITHOUT SPOT OR WRINKLE AS A BRIDE FOR HIS SON.
And all the finger pointing and proud pontificating will quickly be seen as a stain, a horrible stinking stain of great hazard to one's relationship with God.
The wise ones will quickly flush such and ask God to cleanse, burn such out of them wholesale so that they miss out on nothing He has to offer . . . and so that they may live a bit longer in this life.
We will live to see the day when this is far from a friendly or not so friendly academic issue. It will be a life or death issue. We will treat AND FEEL toward our RC or Calvinist or Pentecostal brother AS TRUE BROTHERS AND SISTERS or we'll be outside the camp. I'm not saying it will mean loss of salvation though in some cases that may be a hazard. But outside the camp will at least mean not surviving in this life as long as might have been the plan.
God is not playing tiddldee winks. Paul didn't scribe a lot of that rich stuff about relationships as an idle after thought. We treat those verses as optional. They are not.
We will come to find out crucial God considers them. We might all do better to practice better, now.